Ran a 10k - Official Thread (10 Viewers)

[SFBayDuck]

Great report! I'm glad you had such a positive experience! It's funny about the crowd support. It's nice but sometimes it's too much for me. Around mile 17 or so I remember a stretch that had no cheering spectators and no cowbell. All you could hear were the runners footsteps. The quiet was wonderful!

You should hit the trails then! I spent a good 30%-40% of the 11 1/2 hours of my race Saturday without another runner in sight.

 

[gruecd]

Great Report Chief!!! Congrats!

Who had next year's Chicago Marathon in the betting pool on Chief's next Marathon?

I think it's even worse than that. His marathon retirement lasted less that 48 hours. That might be a record around here.

This race changed me.

It's been a rough couple of years with work and just life in general - trying to figure out what is next. This was one of those things that 3 years ago I would NEVER do. Never in a million years. It just wasn't me. Didn't fit my personality and I was slipping into an area that was getting scary both physically and mentally. Never did I think stepping out the door for my first run three years ago would lead me to here.

I felt more alive Sunday and yesterday than I have in many, many years. Almost like something inside of me just finally let go. It's hard to explain really. But can't wait to see what happens now.

Wow, this is great.

Super inspiring, Chief. I'm proud of you and super happy for you.

 

[gruecd]

Hey, Juxt. I'm late to the game, but I wanted to make sure that I congraulated you on your sub-3. Awesome accomplishment. Wecome to the club.

P.S. You, me, and tri really need to meet up this fall sometime for a run/race!

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Those were some sensational race reports. Great job, Juxt and Chief.

Chief, you can definitely crack 4:00 with another year under your belt. For most people, the second marathon is much easier than the first (well, the training anyway) and you can knock a boatload of time off your result. Focus on staying healthy and running a good number of maintenance miles so that you're ready to roll when spring gets here.

 

[Hang 10]

Some cooler temps and my sinus infection finally in the rearview mirror, had a nice little MLR this morning. Ran 13.35 @ 7:56 (158). Probably going to take the rest of the week easy as my canceled half marathon was rescheduled for Sunday. The forecast looks good. Low 50's and sunny.

 

[Juxtatarot]

Hey, Juxt. I'm late to the game, but I wanted to make sure that I congraulated you on your sub-3. Awesome accomplishment. Wecome to the club.

P.S. You, me, and tri really need to meet up this fall sometime for a run/race!

Thanks! I'm pretty open in November. Also perhaps a tune-up race for you two training for Boston might work. There is the Chi-town Half along the lake late March that Tri-man and I have run before.

 

[Nigel]

Had never clicked on the Strava "fly by" link until I did so yesterday...kind of a fun timewaster. Especially for races where there were other people you know running.

Also kind of creepy to be able to identify the hot chick I see running on the bike path every morning...and see where she lives. Will definitely make sure my daughter uses the private option if/when she starts using it.

 

[Hang 10]

Had never clicked on the Strava "fly by" link until I did so yesterday...kind of a fun timewaster. Especially for races where there were other people you know running.

Also kind of creepy to be able to identify the hot chick I see running on the bike path every morning...and see where she lives. Will definitely make sure my daughter uses the private option if/when she starts using it.

Yeah, the first time I saw the flyby feature was one a guy a know posted a screen grab from us crossing paths on facebook. And yeah, it's awesome for races. I uploaded my 50K from last year and there was quite a few strava guys and gals on there. Pretty cool watching people jockey for position over the course of 31 miles.

 

[Hang 10]

Anyone remember Steve's half marathon/marathon race predictor formula?

 

[MAC_32]

Freakin' Strava. Crushed today's run and wanted to see the data, but while my timer was running it never picked up my route. I wanted to see what I could do in 40 minutes at HM effort and if it wasn't 6 miles it was very close, but now I'll never know.

 

[tri-man 47]

Anyone remember Steve's half marathon/marathon race predictor formula?

I've stored his original post:

[SIZE=10.5pt]"I saw this come up in another forum as well and did an analysis to debunk this rule. I have been convinced for years that this only applies to the truly elite or truly sub-elite that are extremely slow-twitched, or just people who sandbagged their HMs. I also came up with a simple but slightly more realistic conversation ratio - just divide your full-marathon by half-marathon. (or multiply your HM by 2.15-2.20, see results below)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 1:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] The fastest marathoners ever:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Haile Gebrselassie - 58:55 / 2:03:59 (2.104)[/SIZE]

Geoff Mutai - 58:58 / 2:03:02*/2:04:15 (2.086 / 2.107, *Boston 2012, not WR eligible)

Patrick Makau - 58:52 / 2:03:38 (2.100)

Wilson Kipsang - 58:59 / 2:03:23 (2.092)

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 2:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] The fastest American marathoners currently:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Meb keflezighi - 61:00 / 2:09:08 (2.117) [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Dathan Ritzenhein - 60:00 / 2:07:47 (2.130)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Ryan Hall - 59:43 / 2:04:53*/2:06:17 (2.091 / 2.115)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Abdi Abdirahman - 61:07 / 2:08:56 (2.110)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 3:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] A bunch of 2:20-2:40 friends/rivals:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]1) 65:45 / 2:21:30 (2.152)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]2) 68:57 / 2:29:54 (2.174)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]3) 69:01 / 2:27:30 (2.138)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]4) 70:54 / 2:31:00 (2.130)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]5) 71:30 / 2:31:00 (2.111)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]6) 75:30 / 2:44 (2.172)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]7) 78:30 / 2:48:30 (2.146) [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 4:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] A few samples from this thread:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]1) Juxt - 86 / 3:06 (2.16)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]2) Gruecd -87:01 / 2:59:48 (2.07) *Sandbagged the half for sure*[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]3) Ned - 92:53 / 3:09:02 (2.17)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]4) pbm – 1:28:12 / 3:07:23 (2.124)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]5) Tri - 91:32 / 3:33:29 (2.33)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]6) Worrier - 1:42 / 4:02 (2.37)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]I think a few things I am seeing is that the ratio is impacted a lot by overall training mileage, and whether you were destined to be a marathoner in the first place. I do believe that most people with sufficient training and optimal pacing can get their ratio down to the 2.15-2.25 range. (unfortunately that converts to about 13.5-22.5 min for the average 90-min half guy)."[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Tri note: Juxt's data needs to be updated, but I believe his ratio is about the same as shown here. And eta: This was a response to the oft-stated common of using HM+10 minutes as a marathon estimate (hence Steve's note about adding 13.5-22.5 minutes).[/SIZE]

 

[2Young2BBald]

Freakin' Strava. Crushed today's run and wanted to see the data, but while my timer was running it never picked up my route. I wanted to see what I could do in 40 minutes at HM effort and if it wasn't 6 miles it was very close, but now I'll never know.

Why not plot it on MapMyRun? http://www.mapmyrun.com/

 

[Sand]

Around mile 17 or so I remember a stretch that had no cheering spectators and no cowbell. All you could hear were the runners footsteps. The quiet was wonderful!

As a (generally useless) note one of my very favorite race memories was at the beginning of a 10k race a group of 1500 or so runners went through a corridor of tall buildings and all you could hear for a few minutes were reverberations of thousands of footsteps. No cheers, no talking, no abstract noise, just footsteps. It was pretty awesome.

On my end still struggling with tendonitis/pulled tendon in my ankle, but still plugging away on the bike. I did get new trail shoes yesterday, so still hoping to get some running in this winter. If not first thing I'm aiming for next year is the Skyway Epic - 60 mile MTB race - 7000ft. of climbing. Only 15 miles is single track, so I may be able to not marry a tree or two. Even the fastest riders only go 13mph or so. After that definitely Mt. Evans is on the list.

 

[Hang 10]

Anyone remember Steve's half marathon/marathon race predictor formula?

I've stored his original post:

[SIZE=10.5pt]"I saw this come up in another forum as well and did an analysis to debunk this rule. I have been convinced for years that this only applies to the truly elite or truly sub-elite that are extremely slow-twitched, or just people who sandbagged their HMs. I also came up with a simple but slightly more realistic conversation ratio - just divide your full-marathon by half-marathon. (or multiply your HM by 2.15-2.20, see results below)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 1:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] The fastest marathoners ever:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Haile Gebrselassie - 58:55 / 2:03:59 (2.104)[/SIZE]

Geoff Mutai - 58:58 / 2:03:02*/2:04:15 (2.086 / 2.107, *Boston 2012, not WR eligible)

Patrick Makau - 58:52 / 2:03:38 (2.100)

Wilson Kipsang - 58:59 / 2:03:23 (2.092)

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 2:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] The fastest American marathoners currently:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Meb keflezighi - 61:00 / 2:09:08 (2.117) [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Dathan Ritzenhein - 60:00 / 2:07:47 (2.130)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Ryan Hall - 59:43 / 2:04:53*/2:06:17 (2.091 / 2.115)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Abdi Abdirahman - 61:07 / 2:08:56 (2.110)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 3:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] A bunch of 2:20-2:40 friends/rivals:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]1) 65:45 / 2:21:30 (2.152)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]2) 68:57 / 2:29:54 (2.174)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]3) 69:01 / 2:27:30 (2.138)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]4) 70:54 / 2:31:00 (2.130)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]5) 71:30 / 2:31:00 (2.111)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]6) 75:30 / 2:44 (2.172)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]7) 78:30 / 2:48:30 (2.146) [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 4:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] A few samples from this thread:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]1) Juxt - 86 / 3:06 (2.16)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]2) Gruecd -87:01 / 2:59:48 (2.07) *Sandbagged the half for sure*[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]3) Ned - 92:53 / 3:09:02 (2.17)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]4) pbm – 1:28:12 / 3:07:23 (2.124)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]5) Tri - 91:32 / 3:33:29 (2.33)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]6) Worrier - 1:42 / 4:02 (2.37)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]I think a few things I am seeing is that the ratio is impacted a lot by overall training mileage, and whether you were destined to be a marathoner in the first place. I do believe that most people with sufficient training and optimal pacing can get their ratio down to the 2.15-2.25 range. (unfortunately that converts to about 13.5-22.5 min for the average 90-min half guy)."[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Tri note: Juxt's data needs to be updated, but I believe his ratio is about the same as shown here. And eta: This was a response to the oft-stated common of using HM+10 minutes as a marathon estimate (hence Steve's note about adding 13.5-22.5 minutes).[/SIZE]

So basically, if I'm reading this right, I need to run around an 88 minute half this weekend to have a legit shot a <3:10? That would be if I used the 2:15 factor.

Also, I don't think Ned's times are right either. I believe he ran a 87 minute half before his BQ.

 

[Juxtatarot]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Tri note: Juxt's data needs to be updated, but I believe his ratio is about the same as shown here. And eta: This was a response to the oft-stated common of using HM+10 minutes as a marathon estimate (hence Steve's note about adding 13.5-22.5 minutes).[/SIZE]

178.33/82.7= 2.156

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Interesting. My numbers are 1:41:09 / 3:45:30 (2.23)

That suggests that I don't have a whole more to squeeze out of the full at my current level of fitness, which jibes with my subjective experience.

 

[MAC_32]

Freakin' Strava. Crushed today's run and wanted to see the data, but while my timer was running it never picked up my route. I wanted to see what I could do in 40 minutes at HM effort and if it wasn't 6 miles it was very close, but now I'll never know.

Why not plot it on MapMyRun? http://www.mapmyrun.com/

It was rainy and there was a lot of traffic, so I missed a lot of intersections and had to cross the street halfway through the block at driveways. That's how I was able to ballpark 5.9, but not remembering exactly where I turned I don't know if I was closer to 5.7 or 6.1. I also really wanted to see my splits. I felt like I maintained a 6:50-6:55 give or take for the first 4 then picked it up the last 2 miles, but wanted the confirmation from Strava.

 

[MAC_32]

Anyone remember Steve's half marathon/marathon race predictor formula?

I've stored his original post:

[SIZE=10.5pt]"I saw this come up in another forum as well and did an analysis to debunk this rule. I have been convinced for years that this only applies to the truly elite or truly sub-elite that are extremely slow-twitched, or just people who sandbagged their HMs. I also came up with a simple but slightly more realistic conversation ratio - just divide your full-marathon by half-marathon. (or multiply your HM by 2.15-2.20, see results below)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 1:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] The fastest marathoners ever:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Haile Gebrselassie - 58:55 / 2:03:59 (2.104)[/SIZE]

Geoff Mutai - 58:58 / 2:03:02*/2:04:15 (2.086 / 2.107, *Boston 2012, not WR eligible)

Patrick Makau - 58:52 / 2:03:38 (2.100)

Wilson Kipsang - 58:59 / 2:03:23 (2.092)

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 2:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] The fastest American marathoners currently:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Meb keflezighi - 61:00 / 2:09:08 (2.117) [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Dathan Ritzenhein - 60:00 / 2:07:47 (2.130)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Ryan Hall - 59:43 / 2:04:53*/2:06:17 (2.091 / 2.115)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Abdi Abdirahman - 61:07 / 2:08:56 (2.110)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 3:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] A bunch of 2:20-2:40 friends/rivals:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]1) 65:45 / 2:21:30 (2.152)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]2) 68:57 / 2:29:54 (2.174)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]3) 69:01 / 2:27:30 (2.138)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]4) 70:54 / 2:31:00 (2.130)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]5) 71:30 / 2:31:00 (2.111)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]6) 75:30 / 2:44 (2.172)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]7) 78:30 / 2:48:30 (2.146) [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 4:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] A few samples from this thread:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]1) Juxt - 86 / 3:06 (2.16)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]2) Gruecd -87:01 / 2:59:48 (2.07) *Sandbagged the half for sure*[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]3) Ned - 92:53 / 3:09:02 (2.17)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]4) pbm – 1:28:12 / 3:07:23 (2.124)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]5) Tri - 91:32 / 3:33:29 (2.33)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]6) Worrier - 1:42 / 4:02 (2.37)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]I think a few things I am seeing is that the ratio is impacted a lot by overall training mileage, and whether you were destined to be a marathoner in the first place. I do believe that most people with sufficient training and optimal pacing can get their ratio down to the 2.15-2.25 range. (unfortunately that converts to about 13.5-22.5 min for the average 90-min half guy)."[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Tri note: Juxt's data needs to be updated, but I believe his ratio is about the same as shown here. And eta: This was a response to the oft-stated common of using HM+10 minutes as a marathon estimate (hence Steve's note about adding 13.5-22.5 minutes).[/SIZE]

So basically, if I'm reading this right, I need to run around an 88 minute half this weekend to have a legit shot a <3:10? That would be if I used the 2:15 factor.

Also, I don't think Ned's times are right either. I believe he ran a 87 minute half before his BQ.

This is apparently why I wrote down in my notebook don't even think about a BQ until you get your half under 87 and are on the other side of 35. I had forgotten where and why I had written this down, but this must be it.

 

[Hang 10]

Anyone remember Steve's half marathon/marathon race predictor formula?

I've stored his original post:

[SIZE=10.5pt]"I saw this come up in another forum as well and did an analysis to debunk this rule. I have been convinced for years that this only applies to the truly elite or truly sub-elite that are extremely slow-twitched, or just people who sandbagged their HMs. I also came up with a simple but slightly more realistic conversation ratio - just divide your full-marathon by half-marathon. (or multiply your HM by 2.15-2.20, see results below)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 1:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] The fastest marathoners ever:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Haile Gebrselassie - 58:55 / 2:03:59 (2.104)[/SIZE]

Geoff Mutai - 58:58 / 2:03:02*/2:04:15 (2.086 / 2.107, *Boston 2012, not WR eligible)

Patrick Makau - 58:52 / 2:03:38 (2.100)

Wilson Kipsang - 58:59 / 2:03:23 (2.092)

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 2:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] The fastest American marathoners currently:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Meb keflezighi - 61:00 / 2:09:08 (2.117) [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Dathan Ritzenhein - 60:00 / 2:07:47 (2.130)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Ryan Hall - 59:43 / 2:04:53*/2:06:17 (2.091 / 2.115)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Abdi Abdirahman - 61:07 / 2:08:56 (2.110)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 3:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] A bunch of 2:20-2:40 friends/rivals:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]1) 65:45 / 2:21:30 (2.152)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]2) 68:57 / 2:29:54 (2.174)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]3) 69:01 / 2:27:30 (2.138)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]4) 70:54 / 2:31:00 (2.130)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]5) 71:30 / 2:31:00 (2.111)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]6) 75:30 / 2:44 (2.172)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]7) 78:30 / 2:48:30 (2.146) [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 4:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] A few samples from this thread:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]1) Juxt - 86 / 3:06 (2.16)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]2) Gruecd -87:01 / 2:59:48 (2.07) *Sandbagged the half for sure*[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]3) Ned - 92:53 / 3:09:02 (2.17)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]4) pbm – 1:28:12 / 3:07:23 (2.124)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]5) Tri - 91:32 / 3:33:29 (2.33)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]6) Worrier - 1:42 / 4:02 (2.37)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]I think a few things I am seeing is that the ratio is impacted a lot by overall training mileage, and whether you were destined to be a marathoner in the first place. I do believe that most people with sufficient training and optimal pacing can get their ratio down to the 2.15-2.25 range. (unfortunately that converts to about 13.5-22.5 min for the average 90-min half guy)."[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Tri note: Juxt's data needs to be updated, but I believe his ratio is about the same as shown here. And eta: This was a response to the oft-stated common of using HM+10 minutes as a marathon estimate (hence Steve's note about adding 13.5-22.5 minutes).[/SIZE]

So basically, if I'm reading this right, I need to run around an 88 minute half this weekend to have a legit shot a <3:10? That would be if I used the 2:15 factor.

Also, I don't think Ned's times are right either. I believe he ran a 87 minute half before his BQ.

This is apparently why I wrote down in my notebook don't even think about a BQ until you get your half under 87 and are on the other side of 35. I had forgotten where and why I had written this down, but this must be it.

Yeah, the formula makes sense to me. Most guys I know that are around my age that have BQ'd have all run a half in 88 minutes or better. Got another friend who's half PR is 89 minutes (like mine) and he's attempted and failed a sub 3:10 marathon like 8 times. That's why I'd LOVE to improve on my PR this weekend. Would be a big confidence booster going into next month. Or maybe the opposite...

 

[ThreeThousand]

Well, I'm back from Louisville and 2 days into my new job. Full race report to come later when I have time, but the quick overview was a decent swim, very hilly bike, flat run. Awful transition times got me to an 11:17 finish. Still in recovery mode - stairs are currently my worst enemy.

 

[FUBAR]

Anyone remember Steve's half marathon/marathon race predictor formula?

I've stored his original post:

[SIZE=10.5pt]"I saw this come up in another forum as well and did an analysis to debunk this rule. I have been convinced for years that this only applies to the truly elite or truly sub-elite that are extremely slow-twitched, or just people who sandbagged their HMs. I also came up with a simple but slightly more realistic conversation ratio - just divide your full-marathon by half-marathon. (or multiply your HM by 2.15-2.20, see results below)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 1:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] The fastest marathoners ever:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Haile Gebrselassie - 58:55 / 2:03:59 (2.104)[/SIZE]

Geoff Mutai - 58:58 / 2:03:02*/2:04:15 (2.086 / 2.107, *Boston 2012, not WR eligible)

Patrick Makau - 58:52 / 2:03:38 (2.100)

Wilson Kipsang - 58:59 / 2:03:23 (2.092)

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 2:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] The fastest American marathoners currently:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Meb keflezighi - 61:00 / 2:09:08 (2.117) [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Dathan Ritzenhein - 60:00 / 2:07:47 (2.130)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Ryan Hall - 59:43 / 2:04:53*/2:06:17 (2.091 / 2.115)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Abdi Abdirahman - 61:07 / 2:08:56 (2.110)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 3:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] A bunch of 2:20-2:40 friends/rivals:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]1) 65:45 / 2:21:30 (2.152)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]2) 68:57 / 2:29:54 (2.174)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]3) 69:01 / 2:27:30 (2.138)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]4) 70:54 / 2:31:00 (2.130)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]5) 71:30 / 2:31:00 (2.111)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]6) 75:30 / 2:44 (2.172)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]7) 78:30 / 2:48:30 (2.146) [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 4:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] A few samples from this thread:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]1) Juxt - 86 / 3:06 (2.16)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]2) Gruecd -87:01 / 2:59:48 (2.07) *Sandbagged the half for sure*[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]3) Ned - 92:53 / 3:09:02 (2.17)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]4) pbm – 1:28:12 / 3:07:23 (2.124)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]5) Tri - 91:32 / 3:33:29 (2.33)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]6) Worrier - 1:42 / 4:02 (2.37)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]I think a few things I am seeing is that the ratio is impacted a lot by overall training mileage, and whether you were destined to be a marathoner in the first place. I do believe that most people with sufficient training and optimal pacing can get their ratio down to the 2.15-2.25 range. (unfortunately that converts to about 13.5-22.5 min for the average 90-min half guy)."[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Tri note: Juxt's data needs to be updated, but I believe his ratio is about the same as shown here. And eta: This was a response to the oft-stated common of using HM+10 minutes as a marathon estimate (hence Steve's note about adding 13.5-22.5 minutes).[/SIZE]

So basically, if I'm reading this right, I need to run around an 88 minute half this weekend to have a legit shot a <3:10? That would be if I used the 2:15 factor.

Also, I don't think Ned's times are right either. I believe he ran a 87 minute half before his BQ.

This is apparently why I wrote down in my notebook don't even think about a BQ until you get your half under 87 and are on the other side of 35. I had forgotten where and why I had written this down, but this must be it.

Yeah, the formula makes sense to me. Most guys I know that are around my age that have BQ'd have all run a half in 88 minutes or better. Got another friend who's half PR is 89 minutes (like mine) and he's attempted and failed a sub 3:10 marathon like 8 times. That's why I'd LOVE to improve on my PR this weekend. Would be a big confidence booster going into next month. Or maybe the opposite...

sounds like all you have to do is decrease the ratio.

 

[FUBAR]

Note to self: doing squats for the first time in 2 weeks, two days before your 2 mile "race" was a bad idea.

APFT tomorrow.

 

[gruecd]

Hey, Juxt. I'm late to the game, but I wanted to make sure that I congraulated you on your sub-3. Awesome accomplishment. Wecome to the club.

P.S. You, me, and tri really need to meet up this fall sometime for a run/race!

Thanks! I'm pretty open in November. Also perhaps a tune-up race for you two training for Boston might work. There is the Chi-town Half along the lake late March that Tri-man and I have run before.

What about this one in Crystal Lake on November 8? http://healthbridgefitness.com/events/northwest-trail-run/

 

[Sand]

Well, I'm back from Louisville and 2 days into my new job. Full race report to come later when I have time, but the quick overview was a decent swim, very hilly bike, flat run. Awful transition times got me to an 11:17 finish. Still in recovery mode - stairs are currently my worst enemy.

11:17 is just effing smoking.

 

[tri-man 47]

Well, I'm back from Louisville and 2 days into my new job. Full race report to come later when I have time, but the quick overview was a decent swim, very hilly bike, flat run. Awful transition times got me to an 11:17 finish. Still in recovery mode - stairs are currently my worst enemy.

11:17 is just effing smoking.

Agreed!!!!!

 

[Nigel]

Very impressive 3K, congrats

 

[BassNBrew]

Well, I'm back from Louisville and 2 days into my new job. Full race report to come later when I have time, but the quick overview was a decent swim, very hilly bike, flat run. Awful transition times got me to an 11:17 finish. Still in recovery mode - stairs are currently my worst enemy.

11:17 is just effing smoking.

 

[tri-man 47]

Hey, Juxt. I'm late to the game, but I wanted to make sure that I congraulated you on your sub-3. Awesome accomplishment. Wecome to the club.

P.S. You, me, and tri really need to meet up this fall sometime for a run/race!

Thanks! I'm pretty open in November. Also perhaps a tune-up race for you two training for Boston might work. There is the Chi-town Half along the lake late March that Tri-man and I have run before.

What about this one in Crystal Lake on November 8? http://healthbridgefitness.com/events/northwest-trail-run/

I like that! The Naperville HM and marathon are also that day, but the HM is a CARA circuit race, so it will be a big, crowded field. The above should be a rather casual affair, which is fine with me. It's also an easy drive down for you, gruecd. Juxt, what ya think?

 

[FUBAR]

Well, I'm back from Louisville and 2 days into my new job. Full race report to come later when I have time, but the quick overview was a decent swim, very hilly bike, flat run. Awful transition times got me to an 11:17 finish. Still in recovery mode - stairs are currently my worst enemy.

11:17 is just effing smoking.

Yep. Especially in Louisville.

One of the guys I used to swim with was doing awesome but crashed on the bike. He ended up finishing but over 13 hours, after a 57 minute swim. He wrecked his shoulder, bad ### that he even finished.

 

[Juxtatarot]

Hey, Juxt. I'm late to the game, but I wanted to make sure that I congraulated you on your sub-3. Awesome accomplishment. Wecome to the club.

P.S. You, me, and tri really need to meet up this fall sometime for a run/race!

Thanks! I'm pretty open in November. Also perhaps a tune-up race for you two training for Boston might work. There is the Chi-town Half along the lake late March that Tri-man and I have run before.

What about this one in Crystal Lake on November 8? http://healthbridgefitness.com/events/northwest-trail-run/

I like that! The Naperville HM and marathon are also that day, but the HM is a CARA circuit race, so it will be a big, crowded field. The above should be a rather casual affair, which is fine with me. It's also an easy drive down for you, gruecd. Juxt, what ya think?

Sure, I'm in. I assume the 10 miler?

 

[tri-man 47]

That's my assumption.

Hey, brony ...join the fun?

 

[Juxtatarot]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Tri note: Juxt's data needs to be updated, but I believe his ratio is about the same as shown here. And eta: This was a response to the oft-stated common of using HM+10 minutes as a marathon estimate (hence Steve's note about adding 13.5-22.5 minutes).[/SIZE]

178.33/82.7= 2.156

I've often run a September half marathon followed by an October marathon. My ratios over the years are as follows:

2015 1:22:36 2:58:20 2.16

2014 1:24:53 3:04:18 2.17

2012 1:27:46 3:05:26 2.11

2011 1:35:13 3:28:00 2.16

Even though I've been on the lower side of Steve's 2.15-2.25 ratio, I was able to maintain pace the whole way through on all the half marathons. However, I bonked and slowed the last few miles (at least) on all these marathons losing anywhere from a minute to over 5 minutes. I'll probably never know exactly why I fade -- is it training related, nutrition/hydration, or simply trying to run a more aggressive pace than I can handle? Anyway, my guess is that I probably should be able to run marathons with a ratio below 2.15. I'm not sure what my point is in all this but I guess I don't want Hang 10 and others to view 2.15 as some type of best case scenario. (By the way, I don't think Steve was suggesting that in the first place).

 

[Ned]

Juxt - Congrats on the sub 3!!!! For as unpredictable as the marathon can be, this was about as much of a lock as you can get! Glad your huge training cycle paid off for you.

ChiefD - Awesome story, brother! It sounds like Chicago turned you from a guy trying to run into a runner. Welcome to the club, GB.

SteelCurtain - You're such an inspiration to me. I'm super impressed you were able to pull this off with virtually no training.

Steve - I'm curious how the race went for you. When's attempt #3? I know things will line up for you soon. It just has to...

Nigel - You've been kicking some serious ### this year. Can't wait to see what you can do for the HM.

Duck - UGH, I saw your FB post and cringed. You're an animal for gutting that out (no pun).

ThreeThousand - Congrats dude! I can't fully comprehend what you guy's do, but I do know enough to be super impressed with that time. Wow!

--------------------

On my end, I've been disconnected from the world doing some camping over the weekend and then bow hunting the past 3 days. I hadn't run for 4 days straight so I took a long lunch from hunting and did 9mi with 6x hill intervals. Ooof that was painful! Of course after that I managed to arrow a huge doe last night. Between the hard workout and then dragging that fat momma out of the thickest stuff I've ever hunted :X

 

[Ned]

Anyone remember Steve's half marathon/marathon race predictor formula?

I've stored his original post:

"I saw this come up in another forum as well and did an analysis to debunk this rule. I have been convinced for years that this only applies to the truly elite or truly sub-elite that are extremely slow-twitched, or just people who sandbagged their HMs. I also came up with a simple but slightly more realistic conversation ratio - just divide your full-marathon by half-marathon. (or multiply your HM by 2.15-2.20, see results below)

Group 1: The fastest marathoners ever:

Haile Gebrselassie - 58:55 / 2:03:59 (2.104)

Geoff Mutai - 58:58 / 2:03:02*/2:04:15 (2.086 / 2.107, *Boston 2012, not WR eligible)

Patrick Makau - 58:52 / 2:03:38 (2.100)

Wilson Kipsang - 58:59 / 2:03:23 (2.092)

Group 2: The fastest American marathoners currently:

Meb keflezighi - 61:00 / 2:09:08 (2.117)

Dathan Ritzenhein - 60:00 / 2:07:47 (2.130)

Ryan Hall - 59:43 / 2:04:53*/2:06:17 (2.091 / 2.115)

Abdi Abdirahman - 61:07 / 2:08:56 (2.110)

Group 3: A bunch of 2:20-2:40 friends/rivals:

1) 65:45 / 2:21:30 (2.152)

2) 68:57 / 2:29:54 (2.174)

3) 69:01 / 2:27:30 (2.138)

4) 70:54 / 2:31:00 (2.130)

5) 71:30 / 2:31:00 (2.111)

6) 75:30 / 2:44 (2.172)

7) 78:30 / 2:48:30 (2.146)

Group 4: A few samples from this thread:

1) Juxt - 86 / 3:06 (2.16)

2) Gruecd -87:01 / 2:59:48 (2.07) *Sandbagged the half for sure*

3) Ned - 92:53 / 3:09:02 (2.17)

4) pbm – 1:28:12 / 3:07:23 (2.124)

5) Tri - 91:32 / 3:33:29 (2.33)

6) Worrier - 1:42 / 4:02 (2.37)

I think a few things I am seeing is that the ratio is impacted a lot by overall training mileage, and whether you were destined to be a marathoner in the first place. I do believe that most people with sufficient training and optimal pacing can get their ratio down to the 2.15-2.25 range. (unfortunately that converts to about 13.5-22.5 min for the average 90-min half guy)."

Tri note: Juxt's data needs to be updated, but I believe his ratio is about the same as shown here. And eta: This was a response to the oft-stated common of using HM+10 minutes as a marathon estimate (hence Steve's note about adding 13.5-22.5 minutes).

So basically, if I'm reading this right, I need to run around an 88 minute half this weekend to have a legit shot a <3:10? That would be if I used the 2:15 factor.

Also, I don't think Ned's times are right either. I believe he ran a 87 minute half before his BQ.

This is apparently why I wrote down in my notebook don't even think about a BQ until you get your half under 87 and are on the other side of 35. I had forgotten where and why I had written this down, but this must be it.

Yeah, the formula makes sense to me. Most guys I know that are around my age that have BQ'd have all run a half in 88 minutes or better. Got another friend who's half PR is 89 minutes (like mine) and he's attempted and failed a sub 3:10 marathon like 8 times. That's why I'd LOVE to improve on my PR this weekend. Would be a big confidence booster going into next month. Or maybe the opposite...

I think you're right. I ran 1:27:10 3 weeks before the 3:09:02 (2.169 ratio). Unless you're just an absolute endurance monster like gruecd, I think you need to be in that sub 88 range in order to break 3:10.

 

[Nigel]

Tri note: Juxt's data needs to be updated, but I believe his ratio is about the same as shown here. And eta: This was a response to the oft-stated common of using HM+10 minutes as a marathon estimate (hence Steve's note about adding 13.5-22.5 minutes).

178.33/82.7= 2.156

I've often run a September half marathon followed by an October marathon. My ratios over the years are as follows:

2015 1:22:36 2:58:20 2.16

2014 1:24:53 3:04:18 2.17

2012 1:27:46 3:05:26 2.11

2011 1:35:13 3:28:00 2.16

Even though I've been on the lower side of Steve's 2.15-2.25 ratio, I was able to maintain pace the whole way through on all the half marathons. However, I bonked and slowed the last few miles (at least) on all these marathons losing anywhere from a minute to over 5 minutes. I'll probably never know exactly why I fade -- is it training related, nutrition/hydration, or simply trying to run a more aggressive pace than I can handle? Anyway, my guess is that I probably should be able to run marathons with a ratio below 2.15. I'm not sure what my point is in all this but I guess I don't want Hang 10 and others to view 2.15 as some type of best case scenario. (By the way, I don't think Steve was suggesting that in the first place).

We're you running marathons before 2011? What did you differently between 2011 and 2012 to make such a huge leap?

 

[Hang 10]

Anyone remember Steve's half marathon/marathon race predictor formula?

I've stored his original post:

"I saw this come up in another forum as well and did an analysis to debunk this rule. I have been convinced for years that this only applies to the truly elite or truly sub-elite that are extremely slow-twitched, or just people who sandbagged their HMs. I also came up with a simple but slightly more realistic conversation ratio - just divide your full-marathon by half-marathon. (or multiply your HM by 2.15-2.20, see results below)

Group 1: The fastest marathoners ever:

Haile Gebrselassie - 58:55 / 2:03:59 (2.104)

Geoff Mutai - 58:58 / 2:03:02*/2:04:15 (2.086 / 2.107, *Boston 2012, not WR eligible)

Patrick Makau - 58:52 / 2:03:38 (2.100)

Wilson Kipsang - 58:59 / 2:03:23 (2.092)

Group 2: The fastest American marathoners currently:

Meb keflezighi - 61:00 / 2:09:08 (2.117)

Dathan Ritzenhein - 60:00 / 2:07:47 (2.130)

Ryan Hall - 59:43 / 2:04:53*/2:06:17 (2.091 / 2.115)

Abdi Abdirahman - 61:07 / 2:08:56 (2.110)

Group 3: A bunch of 2:20-2:40 friends/rivals:

1) 65:45 / 2:21:30 (2.152)

2) 68:57 / 2:29:54 (2.174)

3) 69:01 / 2:27:30 (2.138)

4) 70:54 / 2:31:00 (2.130)

5) 71:30 / 2:31:00 (2.111)

6) 75:30 / 2:44 (2.172)

7) 78:30 / 2:48:30 (2.146)

Group 4: A few samples from this thread:

1) Juxt - 86 / 3:06 (2.16)

2) Gruecd -87:01 / 2:59:48 (2.07) *Sandbagged the half for sure*

3) Ned - 92:53 / 3:09:02 (2.17)

4) pbm – 1:28:12 / 3:07:23 (2.124)

5) Tri - 91:32 / 3:33:29 (2.33)

6) Worrier - 1:42 / 4:02 (2.37)

I think a few things I am seeing is that the ratio is impacted a lot by overall training mileage, and whether you were destined to be a marathoner in the first place. I do believe that most people with sufficient training and optimal pacing can get their ratio down to the 2.15-2.25 range. (unfortunately that converts to about 13.5-22.5 min for the average 90-min half guy)."

Tri note: Juxt's data needs to be updated, but I believe his ratio is about the same as shown here. And eta: This was a response to the oft-stated common of using HM+10 minutes as a marathon estimate (hence Steve's note about adding 13.5-22.5 minutes).

So basically, if I'm reading this right, I need to run around an 88 minute half this weekend to have a legit shot a <3:10? That would be if I used the 2:15 factor.

Also, I don't think Ned's times are right either. I believe he ran a 87 minute half before his BQ.

This is apparently why I wrote down in my notebook don't even think about a BQ until you get your half under 87 and are on the other side of 35. I had forgotten where and why I had written this down, but this must be it.

Yeah, the formula makes sense to me. Most guys I know that are around my age that have BQ'd have all run a half in 88 minutes or better. Got another friend who's half PR is 89 minutes (like mine) and he's attempted and failed a sub 3:10 marathon like 8 times. That's why I'd LOVE to improve on my PR this weekend. Would be a big confidence booster going into next month. Or maybe the opposite...

I think you're right. I ran 1:27:10 3 weeks before the 3:09:02 (2.169 ratio). Unless you're just an absolute endurance monster like gruecd, I think you need to be in that sub 88 range in order to break 3:10.

Here's what I was thinking...

If I were to be able to run a 6:45 pace for a half (1:28:30), then it doesn't seem too unreasonable to be able to run a 7:15 for a full. 30 seconds seems like a nice cushion, right?

ETA: Mind you, this half will not be after a full taper week. Really just a couple of easy days before hand.

 

[Ned]

Ehh, everyone's different so who knows. It's not out of the realm to put down a 2.147 (3:09:59/1:28:30). Only one way to find out, though

FWIW - I never fully tapered for my tune-ups; just a few easy days from Wed/Thur on. I think you'll be fine. Plus didn't you take it easy the week before too?

 

[FUBAR]

Finished first in the race today

Alright, so it was just the Army - APFT, 2 mile. 12:12 according to my watch, I think the official time was 12:10. Felt smooth and could have gone another 1.1 at roughly the same pace.

But, I've gained 7 lbs in the last 6 months.

That's funny - its the exact time I ran in the AF 2 miler during bootcamp. I can still vividly remember that morning.What time gets you a perfect score? I'm assuming you didn't go all out because that's all you need.

13:38 is max for the run in my age group. (37-39)

this was roughly the 20th APFT in a row I maxed. not bragging, it's just not difficult.

and again. My whole team passed, but I don't think anyone else maxed.

Don't like the out and back course, but 6:05 out, 6:10 back. 12:15 total.

I now weigh 180 lbs, which is the heaviest I've been since 2012 in Afghanistan where I was lifting and trying to get stronger and bigger.

I need to find a 5k to get an official sub 20. mcmillan predicts my time as 20:01, pretty sure I'd beat that.

Also a 3:15 marathon. and a 1:32 half, which is surprisingly close

 

[Hang 10]

Ehh, everyone's different so who knows. It's not out of the realm to put down a 2.147 (3:09:59/1:28:30). Only one way to find out, though

FWIW - I never fully tapered for my tune-ups; just a few easy days from Wed/Thur on. I think you'll be fine. Plus didn't you take it easy the week before too?

Easy might be the wrong word for it. Spent most of my taper week sick and suffering through a horrible patch of weather. Once the race got canceled I ramped my mileage back up mid week. Ended up having one of the worst long runs of my life. Finally feeling better though.

I don't want to put too much pressure on this race but I'm getting the feeling that I've got a better than 50/50 shot at a PR.

 

[Hang 10]

Finished first in the race today

Alright, so it was just the Army - APFT, 2 mile. 12:12 according to my watch, I think the official time was 12:10. Felt smooth and could have gone another 1.1 at roughly the same pace.

But, I've gained 7 lbs in the last 6 months.

That's funny - its the exact time I ran in the AF 2 miler during bootcamp. I can still vividly remember that morning.What time gets you a perfect score? I'm assuming you didn't go all out because that's all you need.

13:38 is max for the run in my age group. (37-39)

this was roughly the 20th APFT in a row I maxed. not bragging, it's just not difficult.

and again. My whole team passed, but I don't think anyone else maxed.

Don't like the out and back course, but 6:05 out, 6:10 back. 12:15 total.

I now weigh 180 lbs, which is the heaviest I've been since 2012 in Afghanistan where I was lifting and trying to get stronger and bigger.

I need to find a 5k to get an official sub 20. mcmillan predicts my time as 20:01, pretty sure I'd beat that.

Also a 3:15 marathon. and a 1:32 half, which is surprisingly close

Yeah, if you can run 2 miles in just over 12 minutes, it seems like you'd be a lock to sub 20 a 5K....that is unless you completely fall apart at the end.

 

[worrierking]

Anyone remember Steve's half marathon/marathon race predictor formula?

I've stored his original post:

[SIZE=10.5pt]"I saw this come up in another forum as well and did an analysis to debunk this rule. I have been convinced for years that this only applies to the truly elite or truly sub-elite that are extremely slow-twitched, or just people who sandbagged their HMs. I also came up with a simple but slightly more realistic conversation ratio - just divide your full-marathon by half-marathon. (or multiply your HM by 2.15-2.20, see results below)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 1:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] The fastest marathoners ever:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Haile Gebrselassie - 58:55 / 2:03:59 (2.104)[/SIZE]

Geoff Mutai - 58:58 / 2:03:02*/2:04:15 (2.086 / 2.107, *Boston 2012, not WR eligible)

Patrick Makau - 58:52 / 2:03:38 (2.100)

Wilson Kipsang - 58:59 / 2:03:23 (2.092)

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 2:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] The fastest American marathoners currently:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Meb keflezighi - 61:00 / 2:09:08 (2.117) [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Dathan Ritzenhein - 60:00 / 2:07:47 (2.130)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Ryan Hall - 59:43 / 2:04:53*/2:06:17 (2.091 / 2.115)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Abdi Abdirahman - 61:07 / 2:08:56 (2.110)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 3:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] A bunch of 2:20-2:40 friends/rivals:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]1) 65:45 / 2:21:30 (2.152)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]2) 68:57 / 2:29:54 (2.174)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]3) 69:01 / 2:27:30 (2.138)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]4) 70:54 / 2:31:00 (2.130)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]5) 71:30 / 2:31:00 (2.111)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]6) 75:30 / 2:44 (2.172)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]7) 78:30 / 2:48:30 (2.146) [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Group 4:[/SIZE][SIZE=10.5pt] A few samples from this thread:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]1) Juxt - 86 / 3:06 (2.16)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]2) Gruecd -87:01 / 2:59:48 (2.07) *Sandbagged the half for sure*[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]3) Ned - 92:53 / 3:09:02 (2.17)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]4) pbm – 1:28:12 / 3:07:23 (2.124)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]5) Tri - 91:32 / 3:33:29 (2.33)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]6) Worrier - 1:42 / 4:02 (2.37)[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]I think a few things I am seeing is that the ratio is impacted a lot by overall training mileage, and whether you were destined to be a marathoner in the first place. I do believe that most people with sufficient training and optimal pacing can get their ratio down to the 2.15-2.25 range. (unfortunately that converts to about 13.5-22.5 min for the average 90-min half guy)."[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Tri note: Juxt's data needs to be updated, but I believe his ratio is about the same as shown here. And eta: This was a response to the oft-stated common of using HM+10 minutes as a marathon estimate (hence Steve's note about adding 13.5-22.5 minutes).[/SIZE]

All I have to say is that this is the only time in my life I have been on a list with [SIZE=10.5pt]Haile Gebrselassie, Ryan Hall and Meb.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]I believe the ratio gets a bit higher with slower runners, for a variety of reasons. I was very well-trained when I ran the 4:02, averaging over 60 mpw for the last few months and peaking in the low 70s. [/SIZE]

 

[Juxtatarot]

Tri note: Juxt's data needs to be updated, but I believe his ratio is about the same as shown here. And eta: This was a response to the oft-stated common of using HM+10 minutes as a marathon estimate (hence Steve's note about adding 13.5-22.5 minutes).

178.33/82.7= 2.156

I've often run a September half marathon followed by an October marathon. My ratios over the years are as follows:

2015 1:22:36 2:58:20 2.16

2014 1:24:53 3:04:18 2.17

2012 1:27:46 3:05:26 2.11

2011 1:35:13 3:28:00 2.16

Even though I've been on the lower side of Steve's 2.15-2.25 ratio, I was able to maintain pace the whole way through on all the half marathons. However, I bonked and slowed the last few miles (at least) on all these marathons losing anywhere from a minute to over 5 minutes. I'll probably never know exactly why I fade -- is it training related, nutrition/hydration, or simply trying to run a more aggressive pace than I can handle? Anyway, my guess is that I probably should be able to run marathons with a ratio below 2.15. I'm not sure what my point is in all this but I guess I don't want Hang 10 and others to view 2.15 as some type of best case scenario. (By the way, I don't think Steve was suggesting that in the first place).

We're you running marathons before 2011? What did you differently between 2011 and 2012 to make such a huge leap?

First marathon in 2008 (3:50), one in 2009 (3:26), two in 2010 (3:31 & 3:41 - second one was hot and my training was subpar). Marathon was also hot in 2011 so I would have run a little better if it were cooler. I also ran a spring 2012 marathon (3:08). The first time I ever followed a schedule was for the 2011 race (one of the Higdon schedules) and I followed Pfitz 18/55 for the spring 2012 and Pfitz 12/55 (IIRC) for fall 2012. I think the more consistent, structured training made a big difference. Plus, I started religiously following this thread and posting here in 2012 which taught me a lot.

 

[Brony]

That's my assumption.

Hey, brony ...join the fun?

Yeah man, my calendar is open that day. I may not do the 10 miler, but 5K is certainly in play. Pencil me in.

 

[Juxtatarot]

That's my assumption.

Hey, brony ...join the fun?

Yeah man, my calendar is open that day. I may not do the 10 miler, but 5K is certainly in play. Pencil me in.

Looks like it's 5 miles, not a 5K.

 

[gruecd]

Sure, I'm in. I assume the 10 miler?

Yupp. That's the plan! Honestly just planning on running for fun...not really "racing," per se.

Unless you're just an absolute endurance monster like gruecd, I think you need to be in that sub 88 range in order to break 3:10.

Yeah, I don't think I was anywhere close to sub-88 when I first broke 3:10. I'm not sure I'd even broken 90 minutes.

Yeah man, my calendar is open that day. I may not do the 10 miler, but 5K is certainly in play. Pencil me in.

I think it's either 5-mile or 10-miler. Doesn't look like 5K is an option.

 

[Brony]

I don't care. I'm just going to stop at 5K.

Poor reading on my part. Should be good to do 5 miles.

 

[ChiefD]

Went out yesterday for a slow 3.1 miles. Oof. Body ain't ready yet.

 

[pbm107]

Tri note: Juxt's data needs to be updated, but I believe his ratio is about the same as shown here. And eta: This was a response to the oft-stated common of using HM+10 minutes as a marathon estimate (hence Steve's note about adding 13.5-22.5 minutes).

178.33/82.7= 2.156

I've often run a September half marathon followed by an October marathon. My ratios over the years are as follows:

2015 1:22:36 2:58:20 2.16

2014 1:24:53 3:04:18 2.17

2012 1:27:46 3:05:26 2.11

2011 1:35:13 3:28:00 2.16

Even though I've been on the lower side of Steve's 2.15-2.25 ratio, I was able to maintain pace the whole way through on all the half marathons. However, I bonked and slowed the last few miles (at least) on all these marathons losing anywhere from a minute to over 5 minutes. I'll probably never know exactly why I fade -- is it training related, nutrition/hydration, or simply trying to run a more aggressive pace than I can handle? Anyway, my guess is that I probably should be able to run marathons with a ratio below 2.15. I'm not sure what my point is in all this but I guess I don't want Hang 10 and others to view 2.15 as some type of best case scenario. (By the way, I don't think Steve was suggesting that in the first place).

We're you running marathons before 2011? What did you differently between 2011 and 2012 to make such a huge leap?

First marathon in 2008 (3:50), one in 2009 (3:26), two in 2010 (3:31 & 3:41 - second one was hot and my training was subpar). Marathon was also hot in 2011 so I would have run a little better if it were cooler. I also ran a spring 2012 marathon (3:08). The first time I ever followed a schedule was for the 2011 race (one of the Higdon schedules) and I followed Pfitz 18/55 for the spring 2012 and Pfitz 12/55 (IIRC) for fall 2012. I think the more consistent, structured training made a big difference. Plus, I started religiously following this thread and posting here in 2012 which taught me a lot.

Do you keep track of your yearly mileage totals? It would be cool to see how your mileage increased over the years as you improved.

 

[Ned]

Went out yesterday for a slow 3.1 miles. Oof. Body ain't ready yet.

this is the worst part about the marathon. At least for me.

 

[Juxtatarot]

Went out yesterday for a slow 3.1 miles. Oof. Body ain't ready yet.

I'm waiting until Saturday.