Marathon Weekend 2016

CamColt · Oct 6, 2015

I've been hesitant to jump in here, probably because I'm scared to death, but DH and I recently signed up for the Marathon/Castaway Challenge. :eek:

This is our first full and while I am somewhat overwhelmed by all this info here, it's all good and is giving me a lot to think about. We have done 2 1/2s and will do the Wine and Dine next month too, to get our Coast to Coast medals. I figure at this point that will just be a training run for us. :laughing:

Keep all the good advice coming. I look forward to hearing more over the next few months.

Waiting2goback · Oct 6, 2015

CamColt said:
I've been hesitant to jump in here, probably because I'm scared to death, but DH and I recently signed up for the Marathon/Castaway Challenge. This is our first full and while I am somewhat overwhelmed by all this info here, it's all good and is giving me a lot to think about. We have done 2 1/2s and will do the Wine and Dine next month too, to get our Coast to Coast medals. I figure at this point that will just be a training run for us.
Keep all the good advice coming. I look forward to hearing more over the next few months.

Welcome and congrats on the decision. You will be fine. Just don't be afraid to ask questions if you have them. The disboards got me through last year when I did Tower of Terror. I was scared to death and lots of nice people on here helped so much.

Optimator · Oct 7, 2015

BuckeyeBama said:
... But the reality is that the best runners in the world all run negative splits in marathons - in training and in their races.

My question is are they the best runners because they run negative splits or are they running negative splits because they are the best runners?

I'd venture that the vast majority of us recreational runners aren't typically in a position to run a marathon without some late mile drop-off if we are anywhere near our threshold pace.

I know you don't want to "bank" too much but it's darn tough for most of us to make up more than a minute or two in the second half (even under the best of circumstances).

CamColt · Oct 7, 2015

Waiting2goback said:
Welcome and congrats on the decision. You will be fine. A friend of mine just signed up yesterday as well. He is also doing Wine and Dine AND Avengers but took the leap to sign up for the full to run with me. So you won't be alone out there. There will be lots of first-timers. Just don't be afraid to ask questions if you have them. The disboards got me through last year when I did Tower of Terror. I was scared to death and lots of nice people on here helped so much.

Thanks! Its nice to see there are people as crazy as me.

derekleigh · Oct 7, 2015

Optimator said:
My question is are they the best runners because they run negative splits or are they running negative splits because they are the best runners?

I'd venture that the vast majority of us recreational runners aren't typically in a position to run a marathon without some late mile drop-off if we are anywhere near our threshold pace.

I know you don't want to "bank" too much but it's darn tough for most of us to make up more than a minute or two in the second half (even under the best of circumstances).

I think if one trained the body it negative splits would become normal. Just about al of my runs (races, training, etc) I aim for negative splits or at least finishing faster than what I started. The human body is an amazing machine that can do more than people think it can. I've run some faster times during the last few miles of half marathons than I thought I could (some sub-8:00 miles). Not really impressive and I'm no elite runner by any stretch, but with the right starting pace and early consumption of fuel, negative splits are the way to go. Even if its only a few seconds!

Barca33Runner · Oct 7, 2015

Optimator said:
My question is are they the best runners because they run negative splits or are they running negative splits because they are the best runners?

I'd venture that the vast majority of us recreational runners aren't typically in a position to run a marathon without some late mile drop-off if we are anywhere near our threshold pace.

I know you don't want to "bank" too much but it's darn tough for most of us to make up more than a minute or two in the second half (even under the best of circumstances).

The way I understand it first miles of a marathon for elite runners are just filler miles before they actually start racing. The majority of the second half of a marathon they are actually racing one another and therefore they have negative splits. Outside of a very few select marathons where they are looking for world records, Berlin being the current race of choice, elite runners are very rarely racing the clock as much as they are racing other runners. I've never run a half marathon or marathon where I actually felt I was "racing" anyone, but from what I understand it is a much different mindset. I realize many elites make money off of performance bonuses for hitting time milestones, but winning the race seems to take priority.

I have an incredibly difficult time running anything close to a negative split and I know that is not a good thing. I need to conserve energy better in my early miles and, frankly, actually have a plan of action for my races. I think it is probably the best way for most runners to run their best race.

IamTrike · Oct 7, 2015

Optimator said:
My question is are they the best runners because they run negative splits or are they running negative splits because they are the best runners?

I'd venture that the vast majority of us recreational runners aren't typically in a position to run a marathon without some late mile drop-off if we are anywhere near our threshold pace.

I know you don't want to "bank" too much but it's darn tough for most of us to make up more than a minute or two in the second half (even under the best of circumstances).

That's a really good question. I don't really know the answer. I think part of it comes from having a really strong knowledge of your own limits at a given time.

Barca33Runner said:
The way I understand it first miles of a marathon for elite runners are just filler miles before they actually start racing. The majority of the second half of a marathon they are actually racing one another and therefore they have negative splits. Outside of a very few select marathons where they are looking for world records, Berlin being the current race of choice, elite runners are very rarely racing the clock as much as they are racing other runners. I've never run a half marathon or marathon where I actually felt I was "racing" anyone, but from what I understand it is a much different mindset. I realize many elites make money off of performance bonuses for hitting time milestones, but winning the race seems to take priority.

I have an incredibly difficult time running anything close to a negative split and I know that is not a good thing. I need to conserve energy better in my early miles and, frankly, actually have a plan of action for my races. I think it is probably the best way for most runners to run their best race.

I think my biggest issue is that when I'm running negative splits, a lot of time it feels like I haven't pushed myself hard enough. I've only run about 10 marathons so I am still new and my ability is changing pretty drastically between every race. It makes it really hard to understand the right level effort for me through out the race.

IamTrike · Oct 7, 2015

On a different note than all the negative split talk, I spent last night watching inspirational running videos on youtube (woohoo for taper madness!). The Derek Redmond clip from Barcelona in 1992 still makes me tear up. As I flipped through video's I came across this one which I thought was really encouraging.

I really liked it because this guy has documented changes from 2009 to today. At the start of his journey he was only able to run the distance between 2 light posts.

You can find all his video's here

http://www.rfme.org

JClimacus · Oct 7, 2015

IamTrike said:
That's a really good question. I don't really know the answer. I think part of it comes from having a really strong knowledge of your own limits at a given time.

I think my biggest issue is that when I'm running negative splits, a lot of time it feels like I haven't pushed myself hard enough. I've only run about 10 marathons so I am still new and my ability is changing pretty drastically between every race. It makes it really hard to understand the right level effort for me through out the race.

That's the thing. I nearly always negative split half marathons and shorter. I haven't negative split either of the two marathons I've run. With the shorter distances, I have a pretty good idea where I stand physically throughout the race and can judge when and how hard to push things, so I'm running fast at the end without leaving anything in the tank at the finish line. I haven't learned to judge that yet in marathons, and I think it would be a long time before I could. Both races I felt like I was running easy through mile 20, it got harder progressively from there, and in the first marathon I crashed at mile 24 and struggled to the finish line, the second one I slowed down at mile 24 but didn't collapse. The second one I felt like I did about right, leaving it all on the course. I think you'd really have to be an elite runner, or know your own body extraordinarily well, to negative split a marathon and have nothing left in the tank at the finish. For us mortals, it's more like John says: Run at an easy pace up to mile 20, work hard from there, and hang on for dear life at the end.

JClimacus · Oct 7, 2015

IamTrike said:
In this case we trained to hit a 3:30 and so our debate is whether we run with the 3:30 or 3:35 pace group. QUOTE]
If you get tired you can always drop back to me in the 3:40 pace group.

IamTrike · Oct 7, 2015

JClimacus said:
If you get tired you can always drop back to me in the 3:40 pace group.

This pace is for Chicago. Are you going to be at Chicago too? At Disney we're just going to be enjoying the race. We'll likely be in the 4 -4:30 range.

JClimacus · Oct 7, 2015

Hey, good luck in Chicago! No, I'm not running Chicago. I'm running the Goofy and still going to try and PR the full (my PR is 3:41:35). Actually, my friend and I are going to run with the 3:40 group and still stop for some character pics and have fun. Depending on how I feel at 20 miles, I'll either back off and fun run in or go for the PR. But I'm training like I'm going to try and PR it just so I'll be in a position to give it a go if it works out that way. I know myself well enough that I'll have that 3:40 in the back of my mind no matter what I do, so I might as well prepare for it.

BuckeyeBama · Oct 7, 2015

Optimator said:
My question is are they the best runners because they run negative splits or are they running negative splits because they are the best runners?

I'd venture that the vast majority of us recreational runners aren't typically in a position to run a marathon without some late mile drop-off if we are anywhere near our threshold pace.

I know you don't want to "bank" too much but it's darn tough for most of us to make up more than a minute or two in the second half (even under the best of circumstances).

I am far from an elite runner - run 8:30-9:15 minute miles for marathon distances when well trained, and I have to work to get there. I run negative splits on almost all of my long runs, including long races. It is a matter of learning to do it - training that way.

I used to "bank time". I did so because I wasn't confident in my ability to sustain my pace, so I wanted to get out fast in case I crashed - and it actually caused me to crash. I always finished races feeling totally wiped. About 4 years ago I switched to an even pace throughout the race and felt better at the end of races. About 2 years ago I switched to negative splits. Now that I run negative splits, I feel stronger at the end of races.

ETA - not suggesting that this will work for everyone, but it has worked for a number of people that I know.

opusone · Oct 7, 2015

IamTrike said:
I think my biggest issue is that when I'm running negative splits, a lot of time it feels like I haven't pushed myself hard enough. I've only run about 10 marathons so I am still new and my ability is changing pretty drastically between every race. It makes it really hard to understand the right level effort for me through out the race.

10 is a good number of marathons... I wouldn't call yourself "new." You should already have the data you need to decide on pace group based on your previous 10 marathons.

How have you performed during the last six miles of your previous marathons? Have you (i) sped up, (ii) kept your pace, or (iii) slowed down? If you have consistently been in one category, then that should dictate your strategy for Chicago. If you have always been able to speed up, then starting in the 3:35 group makes sense; however, if you have never sped up, then starting with 3:35 doesn't make sense if you are shooting for 3:30ish finish. On the flip side, if in every one of your 10 previous marathons, you have slowed down toward the end, then even starting in the 3:30 group likely won't get you to a 3:30 finish.

For me, my marathon performance has been all over the place over the past 20+ years (from 3:12 to 4:25), but I have ALWAYS had a slower pace during the last six miles. That's just how my body works... once the legs start breaking down, I go slower even if I feel okay. Therefore, I need to start with a pace group that is faster than my goal finish time pace.

kevdad · Oct 7, 2015

Not to veer too far off the Marathon Weekend theme on negative splits - but what the heck, it's still three months away! - what I don't understand is the advantage to conserving enough energy to do negative splits vs. running at a consistently faster pace throughout, albeit not that much faster. Don't you end up at the same place? Do elite runners run negative splits because the competition at the end demands it? I'd be worried that by doing negative splits that I would leave some energy on the course in the beginning in order to run faster at the end.

opusone · Oct 7, 2015

kevdad said:
Not to veer too far off the Marathon Weekend theme on negative splits - but what the heck, it's still three months away! - what I don't understand is the advantage to conserving enough energy to do negative splits vs. running at a consistently faster pace throughout, albeit not that much faster. Don't you end up at the same place? Do elite runners run negative splits because the competition at the end demands it? I'd be worried that by doing negative splits that I would leave some energy on the course in the beginning in order to run faster at the end.

Yes, as someone mentioned above, the elite runners are in a competition with other runners, not in competition with the clock (unless they are going for a record). Therefore, they have a totally different running strategy than you or me. They are playing mind games with each other the whole way. They typically just run a fairly constant, moderate pace (moderate for them) during the first half of the marathon. In fact, they usually have rabbits which are other elite runners that will pace them in the early miles, but are not competing themselves. After this first half, then the fun begins, and they will often speed up for a mile or two to see who is still feeling good. Such that, by the last six miles, only the runners that are having a good day are left. Then, the few that are still holding back, they increase their speed to start dropping each other.

All that being said, I don't think us normal runners can learn much from the elites when it comes to marathon day strategy. For us, I think the most important thing is to know your own body based on past performance. Some folks do better reserving energy, others at a consistent pace, and still others fully knowing that their bodies will slow down regardless of their pace for the first 20 miles.

For me, I find that I do better overall time wise with the following strategy:
1. For 5k's and 10k's, I conserve energy in the early miles, such that I have slightly negative splits
2. For half marathons, I use a consistent pace throughout
3. For marathons, I always slow down at the end, so I go out at the fastest comfortable pace based on my training that I know will at least get me to the 20 mile mark without slowing down

opusone · Oct 7, 2015

One more note on elites and marathon pacing, and then I will be quiet. For the past five world records, the pacing has been pretty darn consistent throughout the marathon. Three of five, there were VERY SLIGHTLY negative splits, and the remaining two world records have been VERY SLIGHTLY positive splits. Of the five, the maximum difference between the first half time and the second half time was 33 seconds, which translates to about 2.5 seconds per mile.

So, when they are trying to beat the clock, they seem to have incredibly consistent paces throughout the race.

See the following article: http://www.runnersworld.com/newswire/what-world-records-teach-about-marathon-pacing

BuckeyeBama · Oct 7, 2015

kevdad said:
Not to veer too far off the Marathon Weekend theme on negative splits - but what the heck, it's still three months away! - what I don't understand is the advantage to conserving enough energy to do negative splits vs. running at a consistently faster pace throughout, albeit not that much faster. Don't you end up at the same place? Do elite runners run negative splits because the competition at the end demands it? I'd be worried that by doing negative splits that I would leave some energy on the course in the beginning in order to run faster at the end.

I have found that my finishing race time is improved when I train to run negative splits vs. when I used to train to run at a consistent pace. I think that the difference in training during long runs provides me with the confidence that I used to lack at the end of marathons. I believe that I will have enough left to push at the end, and that is more than half the battle. Running is a mental sport more than a physical sport once you reach a certain point.

So my finishing time has improved over the last 4 years even though I have aged (am almost 50).

IamTrike · Oct 7, 2015

JClimacus said:
Hey, good luck in Chicago! No, I'm not running Chicago. I'm running the Goofy and still going to try and PR the full (my PR is 3:41:35). Actually, my friend and I are going to run with the 3:40 group and still stop for some character pics and have fun. Depending on how I feel at 20 miles, I'll either back off and fun run in or go for the PR. But I'm training like I'm going to try and PR it just so I'll be in a position to give it a go if it works out that way. I know myself well enough that I'll have that 3:40 in the back of my mind no matter what I do, so I might as well prepare for it.

I think that's kind of where 2 of us in my group our. We started out with a goal of making 3:40 and doing it comfortably. So we picked Hanson's training plan for a 3:30 finish. We've all been doing all our runs at closer to a 3:20 or 3:25 pace. As a result now we're thinking hey we did all this work for 3:30 why don't we just go for it.

opusone said:
10 is a good number of marathons... I wouldn't call yourself "new." You should already have the data you need to decide on pace group based on your previous 10 marathons.

I think the biggest difference is the level of training I've done before this race. Running a 3:30 will be > 20 min pr. I'm quite comfortable in the 3:50 to 4 hr range. I have no idea what my body is going to be like at mile 22 of a much faster pace.

BuckeyeBama said:
I have found that my finishing race time is improved when I train to run negative splits vs. when I used to train to run at a consistent pace. I think that the difference in training during long runs provides me with the confidence that I used to lack at the end of marathons. I believe that I will have enough left to push at the end, and that is more than half the battle. Running is a mental sport more than a physical sport once you reach a certain point.

So my finishing time has improved over the last 4 years even though I have aged (am almost 50).

That's pretty awesome. Did the quality or volume of your training improve too as you adjusted to negative splits or was the rest of your training pretty much the same?

BuckeyeBama · Oct 7, 2015

IamTrike said:
That's pretty awesome. Did the quality or volume of your training improve too as you adjusted to negative splits or was the rest of your training pretty much the same?

The mileage remained the same, and my training plans have been pretty consistent for over a decade (I create them myself). The only difference is in how I run my long runs (runs longer than 8 miles). I now purposely run them for negative splits with a single goal - being able to run hard at the end.

Keep in mind that my improvements have been minor - talking about less than 3 minutes over the last 4 years. But at my age showing improvement is unusual in and of itself since I am a lifelong runner. I'll never PR a race distance again, but I can still improve my "old man" running.

The goal of running a negative split is not to produce a faster time in the second half of a race than the first. The goal is to have enough left in the tank to attack the course in the last few miles. For most runners this means finishing strong instead of in a death march. For elite runners it means that they have the ability to do what is necessary to win at the end.

Marathon Weekend 2016

Moderator

DIS Veteran

DIS Veteran

Moderator

DIS Veteran

Please excuse the crudity of this model

DIS Veteran

DIS Veteran

Mouseketeer

Mouseketeer

DIS Veteran

Mouseketeer

You are stronger than you think.

Imagineer Wanna Be

Mouseketeer

Imagineer Wanna Be

Imagineer Wanna Be

You are stronger than you think.

DIS Veteran

You are stronger than you think.

Share this page