Are positive splits the way to go?

Racing Flat

I would always have been a supporter of negative splits for all race distances, but someone sent me this yesterday, a bit of food for thought. Don't know where it came for or how robust the research was but anyway...


The surest way to blow a 5-K is to start too fast. But just how fast is too fast?

Researchers from the University of New Hampshire examined the effect of different pacing strategies on 5-K performance. Their subjects were 11 female runners from the school's cross-country team, who trained an average of 35 miles per week and had 5-K PRs ranging from 18 to 21 minutes. After running two 5-K time trials to establish a baseline pace, the subjects then completed three more 5-Ks using decidedly different pacing strategies: The subjects ran the first mile of each race either equal to, three percent faster, or six percent faster than their established baseline pace per mile. After the first mile, the subjects could change their pace to finish as quickly as possible.

The results surprised everyone familiar with the go-out-easy approach. Eight of the 11 women ran their best 5-K times (averaging 20:39) when they ran the first mile six percent faster than their baseline pace. The other three subjects posted their best times (20:52) going out three percent faster than baseline pace. The even-paced runners produced the slowest times, averaging 21:11. The faster-starting women did slow down more during the race, but the even-paced runners simply couldn't make up the time lost in a slower start.

So how is it that these runners achieved their best times by logging their first mile a seemingly suicidal 26 seconds faster than their predicted 5-K pace? According to the study, at the end of the first mile, the even-paced runners were at only 78 percent of their VO2 max, an effort level more akin to a tempo run than a 5-K race--below their potential. The three-percent and six-percent faster starts put the subjects at 82 and 83 percent of VO2 max after the first mile, which is closer to the intensity you'd expect from an experienced runner racing the first mile of a 5-K.

So should we all go out as fast as possible in every race? Not exactly. Moderately trained runners may benefit from a faster start because they're probably not starting fast enough in the first place. The researchers suggest that their study findings are probably most applicable to competitive open and master's division runners, not elites who already know how best to push themselves right from the gun or beginners who totally lack a sense of pacing. And even competitive runners shouldn't try the go-out-fast strategy in longer races, when other variables become more important than first-mile pace--like, say, finishing another 25.2 miles.

Racing Flat

Would be interested to hear your experiences of this. My race strategy has always been to work out my goal time, e.g. 10mins for 3k, = 80secs per lap. Therefore, I try to do 80secs for each lap. But would I be better off doing 75 secs for the first few laps and trying to hang on, based on the finding below that even though I'd slow down, my finish time would still be better?

The reason I've always tried to run negative or even splits is probably because that's what most runners/coaches/books say. But I also remeber the National half marathon Champs a few years ago, going out at the perfect pace for my goal time. Being a National Champs most people went off way too fast. So I was going past people at 3 miles who I knew I'd be beating by 10mins, and in the whole race I went past maybe a hundred people and after the first mile not a single runner went past me. And it was such an enjoyable experience that I've tried to stick with it by and large. Have I just not been pushing myself enough???

Hate the thought of being dead on my feet for the whole race which may happen if I go out too fast...

cfitz

That's very interesting reading. Do you have a link to it anywhere online?

I ran my current 3k pb at fairly steady pace. My 5k pb was probably fairly quick through the first mile, I definitely slowed a bit over the last 2k.

I sometimes think that (whatever about running even mile splits over 5k), demanding your body produce even 400m splits over 5k might not be a brilliant idea. If for some reason you're struggling on lap 5 then maybe the effort taken to hit your desired split might have a negative effect whereas you could more than make up for it on lap 8 perhaps without as strenuous an effort. I'd be interested to learn more...

TheRoadRunner

Thanks for highlighting that report.

For anything under 4 miles I usually go out relatively hard and try and hang on. As the saying goes go as hard as you can for as long as you can:D.

I might go through the first mile 15-20 seconds quicker than my target pace. I find it hard to pick up the pace when I tire, but can more or less maintain a faster pace. I think its psychological on my part.

Anything over 5 miles I usually try to pace with even splits.

Racing Flat

cfitz wrote: »

That's very interesting reading. Do you have a link to it anywhere online?

Sorry, no, but I'll chase down the fellow who sent it to me...

Racing Flat

cfitz wrote: »

I'd be interested to learn more...

I suppose if you look at the 5 and 10k world records, they are usually paced and run at a very even pace save for the last lap, when bekele blasts off. But maybe that's because the whole race is at 82-83% VO2 max pace as above, and those runners can mainatin this for the whole race at the same speed. Maybe less talented runners can only maintain 82-83% for the whole race, by starting faster and then slowing down?

RoyMcC

I guess the only way to test the theory is to give it a blast, once anyway, and see what happens.

Certainly my Half Mara PB was set after a faster than planned start where I decided, instead of slowing down, to try to hang on to it for as long as possible. I was passed by plenty of people late on as I treaded water - not as enjoyable at that stage, but the time was pleasing.

geoff29

great post!

yeh - i'm still struggling to figure out things like this. I do 2/3 dedicated 5k runs/week and I'm still unsure whats best exactly. A few times I've purposely gone for a 'slow' run only to come in 20 seconds behind my p.b - yet feeling as if I've used half the energy!

Like RoadRunner, when I'm doing a 5k race I always go out hard and just try to hang on to whoever's doing well. I think my body is quite a long way behind my head!! I long for the day when I can comfortably stay with the leaders and control the pace!!! Flying Pigs come to mind!

geoff29

btw - I think that the psychological factor would be huge for people like me who are many minutes off record pace, but when it comes to the professionals and record holders - surely that side wouldn't make such a huge difference?

Abhainn

Interesting also

If course is relatively flat anything up to 10k I would attempt to just go marginally slower than goal pace or first 25% of the race. The first mile or so is always a little tough so I just hold back a little. If I were to go out hard then I would be afraid I'd collapse later.
I try and finish strong.

For longer distances up to marathon I would just run 5 secs or so ahead of goal pace for first 25% again. This worked for me greatly in the DM last year. Ran nearly even splits then and passed loads from mile 20 to the finish. Perhaps only a handful passed me.

Racing Flat

geoff29 wrote: »

yeh - i'm still struggling to figure out things like this. I do 2/3 dedicated 5k runs/week and I'm still unsure whats best exactly. A few times I've purposely gone for a 'slow' run only to come in 20 seconds behind my p.b - yet feeling as if I've used half the energy!

Like RoadRunner, when I'm doing a 5k race I always go out hard and just try to hang on to whoever's doing well. I think my body is quite a long way behind my head!! I long for the day when I can comfortably stay with the leaders and control the pace!!! Flying Pigs come to mind!

Why are you trying to run a pb 3 times a week? Or have I misinterpreted?

Racing Flat

Sometimes I think, once you're fukced you're fukced. So if going for 30mins for 5mile you might go out at 6.00 pace. After 5mins you're fairly wrecked but you hold the pace. But if I went out at 6.10 or 5.50 pace I'd also be wrecked, so maybe it is worth going out that bit faster? Have a time trial next week, might have to give it a go.

cfitz

Racing Flat wrote: »

Sometimes I think, once you're fukced you're fukced. So if going for 30mins for 5mile you might go out at 6.00 pace. After 5mins you're fairly wrecked but you hold the pace. But if I went out at 6.10 or 5.50 pace I'd also be wrecked, so maybe it is worth going out that bit faster? Have a time trial next week, might have to give it a go.

I've often felt that way too! But perhaps if you understand the science well enough and you understand your body well enough you'd know how to find the pace just below that line where you're gonna blow up. I figure it's all a science, I just don't know enough yet...

Racing Flat

The other thing, is you often get what you go for. I note your PB for 10k is 33.59. i bet your pre-race target was to break 34.00? I wonder if your target had been 33.47, would you have ran 33.46? Read somewhere (I know, I read a lot) that if we simply set our targets higher, but still realistic we'd run faster.

geoff29

Racing Flat wrote: »

Why are you trying to run a pb 3 times a week? Or have I misinterpreted?

lol - no no, I do the 5k because its a handy run near me - I have certain time contraints :mad: but as I am still improving - I certainly try to improve my time every 2/3 weeks. I just meant that if say I'm running at the end of a day and am jacked, I often purposely try to run slow - i.e, I'm trying to get fresh air more than set a time, and I'll start out slow and just keep a very comfortable pace - I find that at the end I feel absolutely fine - and yet my time would be only 20-30s off my p.b - and then I wonder is all the huge effort I put into a p.b worth it?!

At the end of any p.b. I am always seriously screwed - collapse time you know?

But then conversely, I agree with you that sometimes it doesnt seem to matter to me whether I'm running 5:50 or 6:10 - I feel screwed either way, so I take the 'might as well push' it approach for races.

At the Docklands Run I did my quickest 8k in 29:45(?) or so - and that was 8k of me in absolute bits to the extent that people running beside me were glancing over to see who was doing such heavy breathing! Did an 8k a few weeks before that in 31 mins - and I was exactly the same. But I went out hard in those.

I wonder if I'd taken my 'I'll go slow' approach would it have been a lot easier?

geoff29

Racing Flat wrote: »

The other thing, is you often get what you go for. I note your PB for 10k is 33.59...

Well, I'm going to hang up my runners!!!

Seriously impressive times!!!!!

33:59.. That is unreal.

shels4ever

Great Post this is something that i've been looking at at the moment. With the 2 mile races. I think it depends on your level and abiliet to hurt yourself.

If i run a fast first mile (50%) of the race this will be too much for me to hold for the second and i love about 10-15 seconds on the second mile. I've run within the same time 3 times for a 2 mile race 2 with negitive splits and one with positive.

However all my PB's were run with the premis that I go out as fast as possible and hang on, It's my natural way and i find it hard at the start of a race not to compete befofe used to eb at teh top end of the field.

I would think a competitive mindset it is easier to hold someone off then catch someone in a race, I know the feeling of someone just behind you can really drive you on, But looking at a 30m gap to the person in front you can tend to focus on the people behind . This will result in a drop in pace if you are not been caught.

At the moment if i'm at the back of a group i have to get to the front if i dont I run the risk of been dropped.

All in all its great study,

shels4ever

@ geoff29 you should try to mix yoru runs between tempo runs, slow longer runs and speedwork, it seems to be the best way, did you ever join a club? I*'ve ben going with this for the last 4 week and really starting to show in my trainign / recovery.

token56

This is very interesting indeed. When I think back to all my best times in race and pb's I do run harder at the start and try to hang in their. Although whenever I have been training I was told being constitent is the most important thing. But i suppose in training you are never supposed to push it the same way you would in a race, I wonder what the longer term consequences would be if in all your hard session you pushed hard at the start and try to hold on for the rest. I imagine you would get fairly run down fairly quickly.

Also i dont think in speed sessions pushing hard for the first few intervals and holding on would work over a long term basis.

shels4ever

Tell you what i'm racing on tuesday and i'll start of as fast as possible and see how it goes...

Racing Flat

token56 wrote: »

But i suppose in training you are never supposed to push it the same way you would in a race, I wonder what the longer term consequences would be if in all your hard session you pushed hard at the start and try to hold on for the rest. I imagine you would get fairly run down fairly quickly.

Also i dont think in speed sessions pushing hard for the first few intervals and holding on would work over a long term basis.

Maybe, but at the same time, anyone who's ever run the National Novice cross country race (6k) knows that it starts off incredibly fast, and then evens out to race pace. For a race like that I would be aiming for around 5.40/mile. But to start at that pace, you'd be so far behind, and as it's relatively short it's be hard enough to catch up. So this year, I decided to go out a little faster. I probably went out at around 5.20 pace, but within 200m I was in the last pack, probably 30-40m behind the next pack. I would have slowed than to my race pace and passed a few runners, but I was so far back from the start, I never got back in touch. Plus in the last km I was slowed practically to a walk with a stitch, probably paying the price for the early pace. So this year I think I will try and tailor my training a little towrads this, maybe do the first few mins of a tempo run really fast to mimic race conditions, or do the first interval extra fast, but you're right in that you probably couldn't do too much of this. I'd love to do well in that race. It's so bloody painful. I know someone who won a few 5ks close enough to 15mins and he barely made the top 40. Frightening. Break into the top 100 and i'll be delighted.

Racing Flat

shels4ever wrote: »

Tell you what i'm racing on tuesday and i'll start of as fast as possible and see how it goes...

Now, don't be going out as fast as possible! Just maybe rank up the discomfort levels a notch or two. You still want something left in the tank.

shels4ever

I know i'm not going to go at a 100 m sprint pace, At the moment an even split for me would be 7:37 , (nothing to you i know)

I could go out at 7:00 or 7:10 and see how it goes, last week was 7:40 is and i was holding back but did tire, but this week i wont be training on monday.

Racing Flat

Will be interesting. The key might be for you to hit 82-83% VO2max. I'm not exactly sure what they mean by this. But VO2 max pace is supposed to be close to 3000m race pace. For me that would be 5.20/mile, so 82-83% of this would probably be slower than my race pace of 5.30-5.40 for 5-10k. So maybe they just mean 82-83% actual VO2max rather than pace at VO2max

I've got some graphs of my VO2 max etc which I'll look at later and see if I can work it out and do a trial myself.

Can't wait to see the results of your single case study shels.

shels4ever

Well I till be good for me, i'm playing around with training methods /recovery at the moment but its all good fun. I think there is a section in the book i just bough on V02MAX too i'll have a look tonight and let you know if there is anythinhg else there.

dna_leri

Racing Flat wrote: »

Moderately trained runners may benefit from a faster start because they're probably not starting fast enough in the first place. The researchers suggest that their study findings are probably most applicable to competitive open and master's division runners, not elites who already know how best to push themselves right from the gun or beginners who totally lack a sense of pacing.

I think the point above is well made. For the wide range between beginners and elites, we may benefit from positive splits in shorter races.

In a recent 10K where I knew the second half was going to be hillier, I made a deliberate attempt at a positive split and although I struggled a bit in the 3rd qtr, ended up well ahead of my target finish time.

I will be trying it again in my next 5K-10K race with a bit more confidence.

cfitz

Racing Flat wrote: »

The other thing, is you often get what you go for. I note your PB for 10k is 33.59. i bet your pre-race target was to break 34.00? I wonder if your target had been 33.47, would you have ran 33.46? Read somewhere (I know, I read a lot) that if we simply set our targets higher, but still realistic we'd run faster.

I can't remember exactly whether I had a target time or not. I remember not feeling like I had a great race but then being quite happy when I saw my time in the results. It was a big race with a quality field, I think that helped me, I finished in the forties.

I like that theory about setting our targets higher - I'd say that's true. I think if you set a PB early in the season it might be easier to set high targets and achieve them.

geoff29

shels4ever wrote: »

@ geoff29 you should try to mix yoru runs between tempo runs, slow longer runs and speedwork, it seems to be the best way, did you ever join a club? I*'ve ben going with this for the last 4 week and really starting to show in my trainign / recovery.

Yeh I do stuff like that - some of you lads mentioned the 800m interval stuff and I've been doing that - must do more though. Would love to be able to manage your 1500m interval stuff you mentioned in your old log. That's fantastic! Also - though I've only done it twice now, I want to start doing a proper long run every Sunday prob.

Work is a pain for the next few weeks, and I'd signed myself up to tag rugby left right and center months ago so have that on too. That's my excuse for not joining a club! Tingle and you guys also suggested I join a club a while ago but for the next few months it just isn't practical.

the other thing is - I know my times arent 33:59 for 10k (hopefully 35 one day) - but I'm doing the fastest times I've ever done in my life right now for every distance, and it's only really since feb/march that I've been going hard and trying to do times. So as it is, I'll just see where I can get to. Still in my mid-20s so there's time

Re the club though, as I mentioned in the other thread (i think?), not exactly happy with my stride. When I sprint at say 80-90% im very comfortable physically - feels like my entire body is remaining suspended in air without any up and down impact/shock to the legs etc. I need to convert that into my long distance stuff because I really stuffed my legs in May to the point that I could barely walk a few times.

Apologies - I went off topic there!!

geoff29

shels4ever wrote: »

Tell you what i'm racing on tuesday and i'll start of as fast as possible and see how it goes...

yeh def should try doing 7 first lap and then try and hold on?

I was tampted to go out fast on tues with the leaders but didnt feel like I had it in me (I didn't!!). Might try it again..

bo-sco

It's equal effort you should be aiming for, not equal splits. The reason you run the first mile faster is that you're starting from a low heart rate and it takes most of the first mile to get up to the rate you'll be running at for the race. This applies to shorter races like 5k up to 10k. It obviously doesn't apply to longer events like the marathon where the first mile is quite insignificant over the course of the race. I set my PB for 5 miles in the Sportsworld 5 mile classic recently, 27.30 which is 5.30 avg per mile. I ran the first mile in 5.15 though and took it from there.

Having said that, I do find that a lot of runners start too fast. It was a mistake I used to make all the time when I started racing. Now the amount of guys I find who are beside me after a mile but who I'll finish 2 or 3 minutes ahead of by the end of a 5 mile or 10k race is unreal.

Squirrel

I do 800s so for me negative splits are the way to go. When my PB was 2:00, I did 61/59, when it was 1:58 I did 60/58, now at 1:53 I did 57/56. I can see the point of going out hard for a longer race and hanging on, but for me it just doesn'twork over the 8. The last time I did positive splits I did 57/67 2 years ago. Was 2 seconds short of my pb and it was because I went out far too hard.

shels4ever

Nice PB there , Was Thinking more on this topic today during my run. I came up with two ideas. Basically it depends what you want to get from a particular race .

So i came up with 2 ideas.
1. If you want to place well in the race (even win) you will need to stay with the leading group so would result in a faster first section of a race.(maybe not all the time )
2. Running for a time, in this case even splits could be the way to go . But in this case you would have to be able to ignore all the runners around you . I know

anyway just somethings that came to mind during my long run,

Racing Flat

Did my own positive splits experiment tonight by default. Went off too fast, was feeling fine, thinking I was doiong about 5.40 pace, but went through first mile of 5 mile race in 5.28. Went through half way in 13.55. Second time round did mile in 5.30, so delighted that I was holding pace, but lost about 30secs between 3.5 and 4.5miles. Finished in pb around 28.20, so I think it worked out okay for me, ie even though I lost 25secs in second half, still got pb.

geoff29

great pb there Racing Flat! You're 90s ahead of me - funnily enough when I did my pb, my splits were very similar to yours, proportionally I mean (not time which were all obviously slower!). not sure on the exact splits but I know I was a lot slower on the last 2 miles so was a bit angry (i'd gone out too fast) - but still happy with the time like you!

So, is that a good approach then? How were you at the end - were you able to come home strong or were you hanging on?

Racing Flat

came home strong, but I always do. Just seem to be able to kick hard at the end.

shels4ever

Cool thats a nice PB . I think it depends on your level totally , my fitness isnt at a level i should be racing yet, but getting better. One i can get 5-6 weeks of 40 miles a week i'll have a shot at a 5 mile race.

Abhainn

Racing Flat wrote: »

Did my own positive splits experiment tonight by default. Went off too fast, was feeling fine, thinking I was doiong about 5.40 pace, but went through first mile of 5 mile race in 5.28. Went through half way in 13.55. Second time round did mile in 5.30, so delighted that I was holding pace, but lost about 30secs between 3.5 and 4.5miles. Finished in pb around 28.20, so I think it worked out okay for me, ie even though I lost 25secs in second half, still got pb.

Fantastic running RF.Well done What was your PB previous?
I couldn't ever keep with you for one of those miles!
My best ever mile was 5:31 when I was planning the GAA about 12 years ago.Haven't tried for a mile PB since
5 mile race in May I got a 31:12 but would probably get into the sub 31 now. Your nicely on target for that sub 3hr Berlin marathon alright

Racing Flat

Abhainn wrote: »

What was your PB previous?

I had one freakish 28.30 about 2 years ago, but other than that my last 4 have been 29.00, 29.05, 29.02, 29.15, so happy that last night was a good run, but the real test will come with some of the longer races coming up. Thanks.

shels4ever

what race was on last night?

Racing Flat

It was in England

shels4ever

Ok i've a 5 mile race this sat and after a horrible star to the year I was jsut about able to break 50 misn ( horrible time i know).

I'm now running the 2 mile in 15:30 but have been sick this week and oly run once. Going on all the calculators i should get around the 5 mile in 43 mins, which would be ok , but i'm thinking of going out at 8 min mile pace, I would think i can at least get to 3 mile in sub 24 or colse to it.

What do you think, I dont think i'd lose that much time over between 3 and 5 but it will depend on the health. #

So do i give it a lash and try to hold on or accept that i'll run 42 mins and go out at 8:30 pace.

RoyMcC

Don't give anything a lash unless you're sure you're healthy. Save the positive split experiment for another time

shels4ever

Yep good idea i think, I'm going to rest for another day or 2 will mean i've missed a full weeks training for the first time this year .

If i'm not upto it on Friday I prob wont run at all .

superjosh9

is this the adidas run?

If you've already paid, I say do run - but run easy. Just read some of this thread and it sounds like you've been going well this year! A week off may well be a good thing for recovery.

But then again, only if you feel well!!

shels4ever

Yep thats the race, Going well enough so far, have been doing a good bit but need to step up the tempo / speedwork in a week or 2 . Base mileage is ok now capable of getting around 9-10 miles. Speed is coming back very slowly but i'm in now, hurry still on targed to be sub 40 by the end of the year which will be on plan.

T runner

Hi Shels, am doing the race on saturday aswell.
I have a possible tip for between miles 3 and 5. I was having trouble in 5ks. At around the 3k mark I would start to hurt and tend to slow. Someone told me then that everyone feels that way and the trick was not to slow. The best way to do this he said is to try and put in a hard K between 3-4 and then hangon and keep the legs turning over for the last one.
Im going to try it on saturday with miles 3-4 even though I havent run an exact 5 mile race before. Up until mile 3 Im going to go hard enough and try and stay with a group which makes things a lot easier (and duck out of the wind.;)
I think Its also good to have a plan for the part of the race where you will hurt (miles 3-5) as this means you can concentrate on the plan ( and your running) which increases your sense of control and seems to reduce the perceived pain a bit.

shels4ever

That sounds about right ven for the 2 mile races i've been doing jsut after the 1.25 mile make i found it hard for about 600 m but then recovered. Just need to push it a little . I weel see how the week gose would like to get a run or 2 in before, nothin major jsut to streach out. Gettingout of the wind i a hard thing for me been 6'2 i usually have lads ducking in behind me .,

Racing Flat

shels4ever wrote: »

Ok i've a 5 mile race this sat and after a horrible star to the year I was jsut about able to break 50 misn ( horrible time i know).

I'm now running the 2 mile in 15:30 but have been sick this week and oly run once. Going on all the calculators i should get around the 5 mile in 43 mins, which would be ok , but i'm thinking of going out at 8 min mile pace, I would think i can at least get to 3 mile in sub 24 or colse to it.

What do you think, I dont think i'd lose that much time over between 3 and 5 but it will depend on the health. #

So do i give it a lash and try to hold on or accept that i'll run 42 mins and go out at 8:30 pace.

The course for this race tends to be downhill for first half and uphill for second half (although I haven't seen this years course yet), so 'effort' rather than 'pace' may be a better guide

TheRoadRunner

Racing Flat wrote: »

The course for this race tends to be downhill for first half and uphill for second half (although I haven't seen this years course yet), so 'effort' rather than 'pace' may be a better guide

yeah its a tough little course. But any race run on the roads of the phoenix park tends to be. A couple of years ago I went off like the clappers and paid for it the last mile.

Looking forward to this myself. Have been going really well in training and this will give me an indicator on where I'm really at fitness wise. Planning on doing some other races in the coming weeks also. Will definitely run to effort instead of mile splits (although I will keep my eye on them).

copacetic

course this year isn't too bad. but still quite a drop in first half of second mile and climb back up from chapelizod gate up the upper glen road to turn up furze road. It's certainly one to take it as you see it rather than plan in advance. I like the races in the park though. Usually there is a stampede at the start and from end of mile one you are basically streaming past people all the way to the end, especially on the downhills and uphills, helps you keep going I have found.

Haven't pre entered yet, as not sure I want to race, might prefer to get a good long run in on the Sunday. Will decide tomorrow I think.

bo-sco

I've entered, looking forward to it. Haven't run this race before. I expect it will be very crowded?