Pacing

thebouldwhacker

Hey all, thinking of doing my first marathon, where/how do I find out about identifying a good pace for me?

Thanks a mill

ecoli

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

Hey all, thinking of doing my first marathon, where/how do I find out about identifying a good pace for me?

Thanks a mill

have you done any sort of races before? usually these can be indicators of what level you are at. being your first however i feel put more importance on finishing and enjoying it. Your second and third if you hope to do them will probably be put more emphasis on time

thebouldwhacker

Hey ecoli

I cycle a lot (on & off road) and would have a good base level of fitness, I ran the Ballycotton 10mile this year just under 100 mins (with very little training and was off cigs a few weeks), I did a few cycles this year (non competitive) & will be doing Gael Force. (I know cycling fitness doesn’t transfer, I’m just talking about cardio fitness)

I'm 36, 15 stone, trim enough, very determined and even if I have to crawl I will finish what I start. I dont want to be in a situation where I under or over estimate my ability. I have a very annoying habit of over doing it so if I'm gonna train I need to have a plan and pace targets would be important to my psyc

Thanks for the reply

kennyb3

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

Hey ecoli

I cycle a lot (on & off road) and would have a good base level of fitness, I ran the Ballycotton 10mile this year just under 100 mins (with very little training and was off cigs a few weeks), I did a few cycles this year (non competitive) & will be doing Gael Force. (I know cycling fitness doesn’t transfer, I’m just talking about cardio fitness)

I'm 36, 15 stone, trim enough, very determined and even if I have to crawl I will finish what I start. I dont want to be in a situation where I under or over estimate my ability. I have a very annoying habit of over doing it so if I'm gonna train I need to have a plan and pace targets would be important to my psyc

Thanks for the reply

do a few races along the way, maybe a five miler and you can use a mcmillan calculator from there. type hal higdon into google and you ll get plenty of different plans

Rusty Cogs 08

If you've raced over a set distance then drop it in here and it will give you a 'guide' as to your capabilities for other races (including the marathon)

http://www.mcmillanrunning.com/mcmillanrunningcalculator.htm

e.g 100' 10 miler equates to a 4H40M marathon

ecoli

Given your time in the Ballycotton 10 allowing in for a full training schedule coming up the the marathon (if Dublin is your target) i say you should target between 4.20 and 4.30
Given this i would say that your runs would be optimal at around 11.30 mile pace. My advise for the first month would be start off with half hour runs and build a base adding mileage for this phase after this you can look to incorporate other forms of training, fartlek or interval etc. You can find many different training schedules on the internet or other Boards posters
Word of warning from what you were saying about yourself i would reccommend taking things slow if you push yourself to quick too soon it will just lead to injury.
Also to save on joint problem try to gt as much of your training on grass or other soft surfaces ( athleast 60% of overall mileage)
Hope this helps and the best of luck with it

Lila

I find this McMillan calculator is very accurate mcmillanrunning.com/mcmillanrunningcalculator.htm (so long as you do the training of course!)

Your 10 mile race time of ~ 1hr 40mins predicts a marathon time of about 4hrs 40mins. That's a pace of 10mins 42secs per mile. However, that's just one race result so you should enter a few races as you prepare for the marathon to assess how you're improving.

Good luck!

Burgman

Well done on giving up the cigarettes. You say you are 15 stone and "trim enough". Nevertheless, I would suggest losing a couple of stone. Unless you are well over six feet tall, you are a good bit overweight.

If you can get into a regular training routine, you should be able to shed a bit of weight as well as develop stamina and speed, so your expected times will improve too. In addition, you will lower the risk of injury. Enter a few races to monitor your progress.

Don't worry too much about your marathon target time - finishing your first marathon comfortably is an unbeatable feeling that you will always remember. Why not train consistently then aim for 4.30/4.40 and enjoy it.

thebouldwhacker

Burgman wrote: »

I would suggest losing a couple of stone.

I'm 6'3" and I'm under 15stone...I could drop a few lbs but I still have a real world life, if I dropped a few stone I'd be put away:D

Thanks for all the replies, now for the tough part... telling my gf shes gonna become a runners widow, shes dubious enough over my cycling.....:D

Rusty Cogs 08

In fairness (if this is any use to your OH), running is cheaper and requires less of your time (away from her). It's also better for that 'trim' physic of yours.

thebouldwhacker

Hey, whats wrong with the word 'trim'??

I think its good,

I'm not over weight, I dont have a six pack, (I work in an office ffs) I exercise, I take care of what I eat, I'm........ trim:D:D

Rusty Cogs 08

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

I'm not over weight, I dont have a six pack, (I work in an office ffs) I exercise, I take care of what I eat, I'm........ trim:D:D

Computer says...

http://www.nhlbisupport.com/bmi/

..no. :rolleyes:

thebouldwhacker

Rusty Cogs 08 wrote: »

Computer says...

http://www.nhlbisupport.com/bmi/

..no. :rolleyes:

BMI?

BMI says he is overweight, BMI is the greatest tabloid B.S. ever pawned on us:)

Rusty Cogs 08

I don't think he got that physique sitting at his desk though.

OK, BMI is way to broad to be applied in every situation. It's not going to be true for athletes with a large muscle mass such as rugby players, rowers, sprinters, boxers etc.

If you don't have or need large muscle mass I'd say you'd easily lose a stone if you caught the running bug and would feel and look better for it.

jlang

Don't worry about the weight. If you do a full marathon programme you'll probably lose some weight whether you want to or not. At 6ft3, 15 stone isn't big but it would be big for a fast or regular runner. Just as with cycling, there's plenty of thin whippets but many normal sized people too. Runners are in general lighter than the general population but there are many stories (here) of fast guys who weren't skinny to start and many who won't ever be skinny or indeed fast.

Anyway, you asked about pacing and given you've a tough target to get up to your first 26 miles in a few months, I'd say be conservative and aim to finish at not much faster than your long-run pace (which you'll establish and get comfortable with over the next few weeks and months).

thebouldwhacker

Rusty Cogs 08 wrote: »

I'd say you'd easily lose a stone if you caught the running bug and would feel and look better for it.

What an odd comment....

No offence but I feel great already, and while many would disagree I look pretty good too.
Thanks for your suggestion but no I would not easily lose a stone, I was 13 stone for years when I was younger and looked scrawny and drawn.
The only reason I'm posting here is because I just can not run 26 odd miles at the moment, I will, but I certainly don't need to lose weight to do it or to make myself feel better...
I'm not a pro athlete, I'm strong, well built (trim:D) in good shape and fit. I am very happy at 15 stone, I have a 34 waist, 36 instep, I can cycle from dawn till dusk at pace, I can bench press most of my friends, climb any mountain range in this country and bike all day through any forest. I try to work manual labour at least 2 weekends a month and you (even though you have no idea what i look like) are the first person that ever suggested that I lose weight, all based on the BMI scale with is as accurate as the horoscope in The Sun


Like I said, what an odd comment?

GoHardOrGoHome

Go on theBouldWhacker! I'd be of the scrawny (is he ill?) variety of runner and I think runners get to thinking that fairly thin is normal. So I don't think people were saying you're fat. Also, a lot of the time when somebody who weighs 15 stone starts running they *are* carrying excess weight (and aren't 6'3"). You're already fit and active so this doesn't apply to you.

Just by running regularly you'll probably burn off a couple of kilograms of fat. I'm about 65kg and I've been told that I should try to maintain my weight but alter my composition. i.e. lose 1.5 kg of fat and put on 1.5 kg of lean muscle.

You're right about the BMI being a fairly useless measure. I haven't done my research tonight but I'm pretty sure the BMI scale was created in the early 50s when the general population had a fairly calorie restricted diet. It pretty much rates any type of muscular sports person as overweight or obese.

When you do start running more and more regularly I would weigh myself weekly to make sure you don't lose muscle that you don't want to lose. I know a guy who does a lot of upper body weights because he doesn't want his body to start using these muscles as a source of fuel. He's an ultra runner though so different rules apply to them!

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

What an odd comment....

No offence but I feel great already, and while many would disagree I look pretty good too.
Thanks for your suggestion but no I would not easily lose a stone, I was 13 stone for years when I was younger and looked scrawny and drawn.
The only reason I'm posting here is because I just can not run 26 odd miles at the moment, I will, but I certainly don't need to lose weight to do it or to make myself feel better...
I'm not a pro athlete, I'm strong, well built (trim:D) in good shape and fit. I am very happy at 15 stone, I have a 34 waist, 36 instep, I can cycle from dawn till dusk at pace, I can bench press most of my friends, climb any mountain range in this country and bike all day through any forest. I try to work manual labour at least 2 weekends a month and you (even though you have no idea what i look like) are the first person that ever suggested that I lose weight, all based on the BMI scale with is as accurate as the horoscope in The Sun


Like I said, what an odd comment?

spaceylou

sorry to hyjack but I didn't want to start another thread about pacing when there is one on the go.....does the McMillan calculator take into account training or is it more that more or less if on day x you did time a in a 10k chances are on the same day you could have done time b in a 10mile or time c in a marathon etc?

I have a 10k next week and I am aiming for sub 60mins but based on my last 8k race or a even quicker 8k training time done two weeks ago mcmillan reckons I'll be over the hour....how accurate is it really? I don't wanta go out too fast and be dieing at the end so trying to figure out the pace to go at...

thebouldwhacker

Work away spacey:)

@rusty, sorry mate a bit snappy last night, no offence taken or ment:o

I'm sure I'll lose a few kgs in the process but it isnt and wont be my aim, while 15stone is a lot of whacker to be hauling around it just means I'll have to get those legs working!

Thanks for all the replies

(I'm gonna sit on the next person who tells me to lose weight)

Lila

spaceylou wrote: »

sorry to hyjack but I didn't want to start another thread about pacing when there is one on the go.....does the McMillan calculator take into account training or is it more that more or less if on day x you did time a in a 10k chances are on the same day you could have done time b in a 10mile or time c in a marathon etc?

I have a 10k next week and I am aiming for sub 60mins but based on my last 8k race or a even quicker 8k training time done two weeks ago mcmillan reckons I'll be over the hour....how accurate is it really? I don't wanta go out too fast and be dieing at the end so trying to figure out the pace to go at...

I find it very accurate for the longer distances (10 mile & over) but less so for 5km, 5mi & 10km. According to McMillan I should be faster than I am over the shorter distances but it's bang on over the rest.

--amadeus--

spaceylou wrote: »

does the McMillan calculator take into account training or is it more that more or less if on day x you did time a in a 10k chances are on the same day you could have done time b in a 10mile or time c in a marathon etc?

Not exactly - there is a world of difference between running a 10k and a 10 miler and even more so from (eg) 5k to marathon. McMillan talks about equivalent performances. In other words if you had done the appropriate training in the preceding weeks / months and ran at the same intensity your performance would have been x.

It's mostly accurate over most distances for most people but it's based on averages so it won't be 100%. For example some people are just better over longer distances so will go faster in marathons than the 10k predictor says.

As for bodyweight BMI is rough and ready but for teh bulk of the population it's an adequate measure simply because it's simple and easy to understand. For people who train it loses value for no other reason than because muscle weighs more than fat.

However for people like the OP there are choices to be made. Anything above the waist is dead weight when you run so all that climbing and bench pressing builds muscle that will ultimately slow you down. What I think RC was getting at is that if you wanted to maximise your speed / performance over endurance distances then losing some of teh upper body muscle would help. However not everyone is as single minded as that and a lot of people prefer not to sacrifice tone for performance, personal thing.

aero2k

--amadeus-- wrote: »

However for people like the OP there are choices to be made. Anything above the waist is dead weight when you run so all that climbing and bench pressing builds muscle that will ultimately slow you down. What I think RC was getting at is that if you wanted to maximise your speed / performance over endurance distances then losing some of teh upper body muscle would help. However not everyone is as single minded as that and a lot of people prefer not to sacrifice tone for performance, personal thing.

+1. As an extreme example, when the Tour de France visited Dublin in '98, I remember being shocked by how well developed the cyclist's legs were compared to their generally scrawny upper bodies. As for looking better I think it depends on who's looking. When I returned to competitive cycling in my mid 30's I dropped from 79 to 67 kg (I'm 5' 11"). All my cycling buddies told me how well I looked while my more sedentary friends and family thought I was dying. OP I never made any attempt to lose the weight, other than trying to avoid eating tons of rubbish. It was just a natural result of a combination of my genetic make-up and an intensive training program. I do feel a lot better when I'm lighter, but that might be just me.
Why not just run, eat healthily, rest well, and see what happens?

thebouldwhacker

One of the lads over in cycling described arms as the things that keep your jaw off the handle bars:D

I used live near the curragh and would cross paths with the jockies there from time to time, while they may be the envy of all Irish jiockies to me they looked like they were born in a bottle to keep their size and weight down. Everyone to their own i guess:)

Why not just run, eat healthily, rest well, and see what happens?

Yep, that pretty much sums it up for me:)

thebouldwhacker

I ment to attach this too:D:cool:

Running Bing

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

What an odd comment....

No offence but I feel great already, and while many would disagree I look pretty good too.
Thanks for your suggestion but no I would not easily lose a stone, I was 13 stone for years when I was younger and looked scrawny and drawn.
The only reason I'm posting here is because I just can not run 26 odd miles at the moment, I will, but I certainly don't need to lose weight to do it or to make myself feel better...
I'm not a pro athlete, I'm strong, well built (trim:D) in good shape and fit. I am very happy at 15 stone, I have a 34 waist, 36 instep, I can cycle from dawn till dusk at pace, I can bench press most of my friends, climb any mountain range in this country and bike all day through any forest. I try to work manual labour at least 2 weekends a month and you (even though you have no idea what i look like) are the first person that ever suggested that I lose weight, all based on the BMI scale with is as accurate as the horoscope in The Sun


Like I said, what an odd comment?

To be fair to Rusty its not an odd comment at all. This is an athletics board, you asked about performance in a race and somebody made a more than reasonable comment that as you train you naturally lose weight and feel better for it.

BMI may not be accurate if your in the gym 6 days a week, pumping ridiculous weights and eating large quantities of protein to get a bodybuilders body but as Amadeus says for most people it is bang on.

I dont think this comes down to aesthetics or even the way you feel about yourself, the simple fact is if you lose weight you will run better and do your body (i.e. your joints) much less harm.

thebouldwhacker

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

@rusty, sorry mate a bit snappy last night, no offence taken or ment:o

I'm sure I'll lose a few kgs in the process but it isnt and wont be my aim, while 15stone is a lot of whacker to be hauling around it just means I'll have to get those legs working!

?

Rusty Cogs 08

Well the essence of my posts have been pretty well expounded upon by amadeus, aero2k and Running Bing. When I said you should 'feel' better a stone lighter I meant that if endurance running is something you want to get into, you'll feel better doing it at 14 rather than 15 stone. I didn't mean to insinuate that you'll feel better emotionally (self worth, whatever). If you think that at 6'3" and 13 stone you looked 'scrawny' then that's probably more to do with your perception of what a healthy person of that height should look like. From your physical pursuits outside of running, I'm guessing the weight you've put on since then has been more muscle than fat. This fact was unknown to me when you first posted. It seems you are fit and healthy at 15 stone.

However, if I posted on a weight-lifting forum expressing a desire to achieve commendable results in the gym and then stated that I was 6'2", 79kg and had an 11" bicep curl I'd imagine that some posters would perceive me as being 'scrawny' and if I wanted to make real progress I should bulk up. I wouldn't take offence at this as they wouldn't realise the fitness that running has given me. Nor may they care as I came on the site enquiring about lifting weights, a discipline they are interested in and advised me accordingly.

So, to conclude, I'm not 'telling' you to lose weight but if you want to improve your times, run with less chance of injury and as a result, enjoy your distance running more you will most likely do so at a lower weight.

thebouldwhacker

thebouldwhacker wrote: »

Hey all, thinking of doing my first marathon, where/how do I find out about identifying a good pace for me?

Thanks a mill

This was my OP

If you've raced over a set distance then drop it in here and it will give you a 'guide' as to your capabilities for other races (including the marathon)

http://www.mcmillanrunning.com/mcmil...calculator.htm

e.g 100' 10 miler equates to a 4H40M marathon

I was happy after this post but yet I started getting weight advise!

I was just asking for a pacing tool not weight/performance/diet/nutrition advise. I jumped a bit with my response but tbh it was pretty obvious that I wasnt a couch potato. I am very happy with my weight but I think this thread kinda turned into a bashing esp when two posters told me I need to lose weight though they had no idea of my situation.

if I posted on a weight-lifting forum expressing a desire to achieve commendable results in the gym

I didn't, I asked for a pacing tool to find out what my pace should be, not how to improve anything.

I have posted in ART many times over the past year+, I am not here to argue but chucking out advise about weight to people 'willy nilly' is never a good idea.

I apologised for my earlier reply, I have gotten the info I was looking for, thank you very much for that, can we not leave it at that?

Rusty Cogs 08

No problem. Let us know how it works out for you (mcmillan pacing).

hot to trot

Can I hop in here too with a pacing question. I recently did a half marathon ( last week) in 1;56. I will be doing the Dublin 5 M on saturday next :eek:. Im more of a long distance plodder rather than a shorter speedy thing, so I am not sure what pace I should be aiming for .I dont want to start off at a faster pace and burn out toward the end but as my 5 miles runs are usually easy runs I havent a clue what to aim at. Any ideas?

WhitestBoyAlive

Bandwagon>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
*Jump*

I've only been running seriously 5-6 months. Ran way better than i thought i could

10 k - 43:02

Been training for a half and mcmillian puts it 1:36
This Sound like madness to me??

Krusty_Clown

Well, McMillan times are based on the premise that you go out and actually train appropriately (consistent with your previous training) for the distance that you got the calculation for. So, of course you can run a 1:36 half marathon...as long as you've put in the training..