Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

harder half

  • 27-10-2009 8:48pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,656 ✭✭✭


    How would people compare the first half to the second half of dcm for getting a time ??
    Lets say they were both half marathons. Which one would you be confident of having a better time ?
    Personally i think the 2nd half is easier but would like to hear other opinions


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 703 ✭✭✭lecheile


    Personally i think the 2nd half is easier but would like to hear other opinions

    [Not sure I'd agree VR.] My preference would be for the first half...

    - The elevation gain for first half is 572 feet, second half 828 feet
    - The first half is more secluded and protected from the wind (although not an issue yesterday)
    - The scenery and changes of direction in first half appeal to me more than the long straights of sceond
    - if you factor in the crowd support element, Part 1 had much more consistent support with only a few gaps

    And I ran first half 3 minutes faster than second :)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,656 ✭✭✭village runner


    lecheile wrote: »
    Not sure I'd agree VR.

    - The elevation gain for first half is 572 feet, second half 828 feet
    - The first half is more secluded and protected from the wind (although not an issue yesterday)
    - The scenery and changes of direction in first half appeal to me more than the long straights of sceond
    - if you factor in the crowd support element, Part 1 had much more consistent support with only a few gaps

    And I ran first half 3 minutes faster than second :)


    Dont want you to agree with me.
    Its really a question of whats the best way to run dublin ?
    It came from a discussion that i had with a very good runner today.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 104 ✭✭Husavik


    lecheile wrote: »
    Not sure I'd agree VR.

    - The elevation gain for first half is 572 feet, second half 828 feet
    - The first half is more secluded and protected from the wind (although not an issue yesterday)
    - The scenery and changes of direction in first half appeal to me more than the long straights of sceond
    - if you factor in the crowd support element, Part 1 had much more consistent support with only a few gaps

    And I ran first half 3 minutes faster than second :)

    Was that really the total ascent for the second half?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,441 ✭✭✭Slogger Jogger


    For me its much of a muchness - no real difference.

    If I had an issue its a personal one in that having run Dublin 6 times I really wish they'd change the route. Doing the route or virtually the same route each year is head wrecking. On that basis I won't reckon I'll run it again. Personally I'd prefer the freshness of a new route, whether its in Dublin or a.n.other location. Jaysus lads even do it counter clockwise!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,333 ✭✭✭earlyevening


    For me its much of a muchness - no real difference.

    If I had an issue its a personal one in that having run Dublin 6 times I really wish they'd change the route. Doing the route or virtually the same route each year is head wrecking. On that basis I won't reckon I'll run it again. Personally I'd prefer the freshness of a new route, whether its in Dublin or a.n.other location. Jaysus lads even do it counter clockwise!

    I actually like doing the same route. I know how I should feel at each point on the route, I know the hills, I can antisipate the next feature/hill/whatever.
    I've done it 4 times and would happily do it another 4.

    As for the other question, I think the first half is less hilly and thus easier.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 703 ✭✭✭lecheile


    Husavik wrote: »
    Was that really the total ascent for the second half?

    Elevation chart looks like this...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 144 ✭✭wizwill


    the pain is too fresh in the memory to decide, leave it with me!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,553 ✭✭✭The Davestator


    Although the 2nd half had more elevation I think that this was caused by a couple of steep climbs which you can prepare for. The first half was consistently uphill IMO and was much tougher than the 2nd


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,177 ✭✭✭aero2k


    Analysing it on the map, I'd say the second half is harder, but the long gradual drags in the first half can wear you down. It would be interesting to run the second half without having run 13.1 miles first!
    I actually like doing the same route. I know how I should feel at each point on the route, I know the hills, I can anticipate the next feature/hill/whatever.
    +1000^^^
    Knowing the hills were coming I saved a little bit for each, and knowing there was a nice flat or downhill waiting meant there was nothing to fear. I love this route as there are many points along it that have personal significance, plus it is very attractive most of the way.


Advertisement