Another Proof of Time Question

[WVUFan]

For Goofy and Dopey, is it better to submit a half marathon or full time. I realized I haven't all out raced a half since 2011. Is it better to submit a half time of 2:06 or a full of 4:26? Thanks!

 

[Haas4Concern]

I would think the 2:06 half time, but im not sure. Either way, those are good times. I submitted a 2:36 half time for Goofy and was placed in D corral. So a 2:06 will put you in a good corral.

 

[DoctorK]

Using the McMillan calculator, a 1/2 time of 2:06 translates to a full time of 4:25:10. I don't think runDisney uses the McMillan calculator but whatever they use to calculate your actual full time will probably be pretty close to the projected time from the 2:06 half, so I wouldn't worry about it too much.

http://www.mcmillanrunning.com/index.php/calcUsage/calculate

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

2:06. Disney assumes the same pace for a half and a full. They don't use McMill, they just double your half.

 

[paxsarah]

Ooh, I'm going to piggyback on this question. Do they corral you based on your proof of time or the projected finish time you put in? I submitted my HM PR as my proof of time, but I projected my full marathon finish time to be greater than my HM x 2. Which do they use?

 

[rachlovestv]

2:06. Disney assumes the same pace for a half and a full. They don't use McMill, they just double your half.

Actually, I think they must have changed that with the new requirements. I messed up my estimated finish time when I first registered, so emailed them to update my proof of time. I have a proof of time of 2:31 for the half, and so estimated my full finish time would be 5:02. When they emailed me back confirmation, they said they couldn't give me an estimated time of 5:02 based on my proof of time. What they could give me was 5:17, which happens to line up with the McMillan pace calculator.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

Actually, I think they must have changed that with the new requirements. I messed up my estimated finish time when I first registered, so emailed them to update my proof of time. I have a proof of time of 2:31 for the half, and so estimated my full finish time would be 5:02. When they emailed me back confirmation, they said they couldn't give me an estimated time of 5:02 based on my proof of time. What they could give me was 5:17, which happens to line up with the McMillan pace calculator.

That's weird. The pace calculator assumes that you are running at least 60 miles a week. I think most Disney runners don't come close to that.

 

[DoctorK]

That's weird. The pace calculator assumes that you are running at least 60 miles a week. I think most Disney runners don't come close to that.

I don't think very many runners come close to that. I can't find that information anywhere on the McMillan site - where do you see that?

 

[paxsarah]

That's weird. The pace calculator assumes that you are running at least 60 miles a week. I think most Disney runners don't come close to that.

It's less weird than simply doubling the half marathon time, though, which is what they were doing before.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

It's less weird than simply doubling the half marathon time, though, which is what they were doing before.

That's true.

 

[John VN]

2:06. Disney assumes the same pace for a half and a full. They don't use McMill, they just double your half.

Simply doubling a half to get the full? Pretty impressive to complete a full at the same pace. Didn't seem like Disney has done that for me in the past since my full has been a corral behind the half.

 

[dewingedpixie]

That's weird. The pace calculator assumes that you are running at least 60 miles a week. I think most Disney runners don't come close to that.

I have a lot of running friends who run those miles. I'd run them but my joints wont hold through that much. I put in an average of 50-80 miles most weeks between running, swimming, and cycling though so my training though varied is time wise the same as my marathoning friends putting in 60+ miles.

 

[rachlovestv]

That's weird. The pace calculator assumes that you are running at least 60 miles a week. I think most Disney runners don't come close to that.

I'm not saying they use that exact pace calculator to figure out estimated times, I'm just pointing out the similarity between what they told me and what I personally calculated on McMillan.

Also, I've used the McMillan for a few years now to help me figure out training paces, and I've never seen anything on there saying it assumes I'm running 60 miles per week.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

I'm not saying they use that exact pace calculator to figure out estimated times, I'm just pointing out the similarity between what they told me and what I personally calculated on McMillan.

Also, I've used the McMillan for a few years now to help me figure out training paces, and I've never seen anything on there saying it assumes I'm running 60 miles per week.

If you look up any interview that he's done, he always says that his marathon equivalent predictions assume very high mileage.

 

[paxsarah]

Simply doubling a half to get the full? Pretty impressive to complete a full at the same pace. Didn't seem like Disney has done that for me in the past since my full has been a corral behind the half.

I suspect that would be a function of the full having a generally faster field than a half, rather than whatever formula they use. I know that the longer the race I compete in, the farther back in the field falls my finishing time, even if I'm equally well-trained and hitting in range of my PRs (which from 5K through HM, track each other pretty closely with McMillan).

I have a lot of running friends who run those miles. I'd run them but my joints wont hold through that much. I put in an average of 50-80 miles most weeks between running, swimming, and cycling though so my training though varied is time wise the same as my marathoning friends putting in 60+ miles.

I put in several peak weeks of 50 mpw training for the 2012 Goofy, and I certainly didn't feel that I was out of the range of normal for that race. I would expect a lot of Disney marathoners train upwards of 50-60 mpw at their peak. Regardless, something like McMillan is a way closer approximation to reality than simply doubling a HM time, and I doubt there are any reliable calculators out there that assume inadequate training when extrapolating from a HM to a full.

 

[John VN]

Some time ago I tried Galloway's Calculator and it came out very close.

http://www.jeffgalloway.com/resources/gallracepredict.html

I plugged in a MM of 8:36 speed walking with my race results being

5K-28:10.9
Half Marathon-2:11:12
Full Marathon-4:56:25 my first marathon with a stop for shoe/sock removal to check a toe bleed.

Pretty close as far as I am concerned.

The max. I have ever pounded the pavement in a week was around 38 miles and usually much less than that. My biking is first with 125 to 275+ miles a week right now and swimming 1200 to 2500 yards each swim. Once I complete IM 70.3 FL next month everything increases in preparation for IMFL in November. I am a slow and steady individual so speed workouts are few.

We each must train according to our goals and the capability of our body.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

JohnVN, I guess it just depends on your perspective. 2:11 is the equivalent of 4:35 or so.

 

[WhereInFlorida]

mymarathonpace.com has a pretty good calculator with CONSERVATIVE to AGGRESSIVE levels of prediction.