Turning a mule into a race horse.

yaboya1

Pacing Mule wrote: »

12 Miles today at MP 9:58 avg



Yeah - Didn't exactly mean to and I know it's not ideal

Went out aiming for 15/20 seconds per mile slower than MP but the first couple of miles were downhill so aimed for them to be a little faster. Except when I got to the flat and indeed uphills I was quite comfortable so stayed with it all the way through. Dropped it a little for mile 12 as a cooldown mile. Truth be told 11 miles were under target MP skewed by mile 12. Add in I had only 3 hours sleep last night and this was lunacy.

So I deserve a slap on the head - either that or move targets for the big day so todays run was slower than MP

I don't want to mess with your head, but I think 4:10 might well be within your grasp. You ran 20 miles @ 10:29avg a few weeks back.

10:29 - 1:00 = 9:29 x 26.2 = 4:09.

Ignore me :P

Pacing Mule

yaboya1 wrote: »

Pageant Messiah is still alive on the mentored thread.......but under a different name

I cringed reading that. I really did. Did recognise some similarities alright !

I wasn't that bad was I ????

yaboya1

Pacing Mule wrote: »

I cringed reading that. I really did. Did recognise some similarities alright !

I wasn't that bad was I ????

I only read your log from 2012 the other night and it's like history repeating itself over there in 2014 (except frighteningly, you were better trained back then!).

career move

yaboya1 wrote: »

I don't want to mess with your head, but I think 4:10 might well be within your grasp. You ran 20 miles @ 10:29avg a few weeks back.

10:29 - 1:00 = 9:29 x 26.2 = 4:09.

Ignore me :P

Just my two cents - I kind of disagree (sorry Yaboya!). I think you should stick with the 4:20 pacers and plan to move on after 20 miles. It's really going to be your first marathon and I think 4:10 might just be at the limit for you just now. You could go with them and be flat to the boards at 22 miles or you could go with the 4:20 group and be relatively comfortable all the way. I did all my MP miles for Limerick faster than MP and some of them were 20 - 25 secs faster but I was glad I stuck with the plan when the going got tough.

Pacing Mule

yaboya1 wrote: »

I don't want to mess with your head, but I think 4:10 might well be within your grasp. You ran 20 miles @ 10:29avg a few weeks back.

10:29 - 1:00 = 9:29 x 26.2 = 4:09.

Ignore me :P

Tbvh the thought crossed my mind today that I may be better off starting at back of wave 2 and sandwiched between the 4:10 and 4:20 pace groups. Less crowding at water stations and the ability to define my own pace strategy for the hills. It wasn't all out effort at all today but then again it was only 12 miles. Would 20 have been that easy etc ?

Only issue with that was that 4:20 is in wave 3 so they could be 10 minutes behind. Still it's nice to be in a position to be contemplating a relatively decent performance rather than contemplating how to get around without collapsing

yaboya1

career move wrote: »

Just my two cents - I kind of disagree (sorry Yaboya!). I think you should stick with the 4:20 pacers and plan to move on after 20 miles. It's really going to be your first marathon and I think 4:10 might just be at the limit for you just now. You could go with them and be flat to the boards at 22 miles or you could go with the 4:20 group and be relatively comfortable all the way. I did all my MP miles for Limerick faster than MP and some of them were 20 - 25 secs faster but I was glad I stuck with the plan when the going got tough.

No problem.
I did say:

yaboya1 wrote: »

Ignore me :P

Pacing Mule wrote: »

Tbvh the thought crossed my mind today that I may be better off starting at back of wave 2 and sandwiched between the 4:10 and 4:20 pace groups. Less crowding at water stations and the ability to define my own pace strategy for the hills. It wasn't all out effort at all today but then again it was only 12 miles. Would 20 have been that easy etc ?

Only issue with that was that 4:20 is in wave 3 so they could be 10 minutes behind. Still it's nice to be in a position to be contemplating a relatively decent performance rather than contemplating how to get around without collapsing

If that's the case, maybe start at the front of Wave 3 with the 4:20's. Being at the front of that wave also means you will have to deal with less congestion early than you would if you went at the very back of Wave 2.

Pacing Mule

yaboya1 wrote: »

I only read your log from 2012 the other night and it's like history repeating itself over there in 2014 (except frighteningly, you were better trained back then!).

Ha ha - yeah that's a fair summary of it. Even back then I would like to think I would have had sense enough to not try it off that base. Then again maybe not I wish him well though. If he finishes it he will be delighted with himself. I'm still proud of my finishing it in 2012 but will be a lot prouder / more satisfied this time round.

RedRunner

I said it before and I'll say it again....4:15 is your time I saw it in a dream.

Agree with C_M here. Go with 4:20s. If you still feel good at 20 then 4:15 is on. If you don't feel good then clearly 4:10 was never on. Simples.

Pacing Mule

RedRunner wrote: »

I said it before and I'll say it again....4:15 is your time I saw it in a dream.

Agree with C_M here. Go with 4:20s. If you still feel good at 20 then 4:15 is on. If you don't feel good then clearly 4:10 was never on. Simples.

But to hit 4:15 would then need the guts of a minute per mile pace increase which could leave me knackered and blown by 22

It's a complicated one. To hit your dream I reckon I would need to be at 4:17/4:18 pace all along then up it by 30 seconds if feeling strong.

But if going out at 4:20 pace you wouldn't want to be trying to be that far ahead because of the course profile.

Ah tbh no point in over thinking it. Its not like it's a sub 3 strategy or anything that really justifies it. Will just head off slightly behind 4:20 pacers. Gradually catch them to be a little ahead of 4:20 pace then see how it goes from there

RedRunner

Pacing Mule wrote: »

But to hit 4:15 would then need the guts of a minute per mile pace increase which could leave me knackered and blown by 22

It's a complicated one. To hit your dream I reckon I would need to be at 4:17/4:18 pace all along then up it by 30 seconds if feeling strong.

But if going out at 4:20 pace you wouldn't want to be trying to be that far ahead because of the course profile.

Ah tbh no point in over thinking it. Its not like it's a sub 3 strategy or anything that really justifies it. Will just head off slightly behind 4:20 pacers. Gradually catch them to be a little ahead of 4:20 pace then see how it goes from there

I'd just gradually ease it up from 18 if you could. That'll get your five mins back. It's a tricky one alright...its not like I've ever hit my own targets

wowzer

Pacing Mule wrote: »

Ah tbh no point in over thinking it. Its not like it's a sub 3 strategy or anything that really justifies it.

Don't be putting yourself down PM your strategy is just as important as a sub3 attempt or even Gary O'Hs strategy.

Just nail it down soon, get your head right and you will smash it.

Dare I say it, you have to be the front runner for next year's mentored thread ☺

Pacing Mule

wowzer wrote: »

Don't be putting yourself down PM your strategy is just as important as a sub3 attempt or even Gary O'Hs strategy.

Just nail it down soon, get your head right and you will smash it.

Dare I say it, you have to be the front runner for next year's mentored thread ☺

Thanks for the vote of confidence but I believe there's better people within the group than me and even if their wasn't once bitten twice shy comes to mind

wowzer

Pacing Mule wrote: »

Thanks for the vote of confidence but I believe there's better people within the group than me and even if their wasn't once bitten twice shy comes to mind

I hear ya PM, people may finish quicker than you but your journey to get to this point is what will set you apart from the rest. Anyway thats a discussion for another day.

Pacing Mule

Ok - so after gratefully digesting all the advice given this is what I am proposing to do on the day ...

Start near the front of wave 3 in front of the 4:20 pacers. Get ahead of the congestion at water stations and hopefully have a clear road in front.
Aim to run at 4:15 pace until bottom of phoenix park.
Allow a little drop off in pace up the park if needed staying ahead of the 4:20 group. Get back on 4:15/4:20 pace then - slowing a bit from canal up to Walkinstown.
Aim to pick up a bit of time from Terenure down to Milltown.
Hopefully if strong enough take the hill up Clonskeagh at goal pace and hit Fosters avenue looking at a 4:17/4:18 finish. If all goes well push on from there aiming to get closer to 4:15. If not too strong hang on and come in closer to 4:20.

Any feedback on that greatly appreciated but I think it's a happy compromise given the course profile.

yaboya1

Pacing Mule wrote: »

Ok - so after gratefully digesting all the advice given this is what I am proposing to do on the day ...

Start near the front of wave 3 in front of the 4:20 pacers. Get ahead of the congestion at water stations and hopefully have a clear road in front.
Aim to run at 4:15 pace until bottom of phoenix park.
Allow a little drop off in pace up the park if needed staying ahead of the 4:20 group. Get back on 4:15/4:20 pace then - slowing a bit from canal up to Walkinstown.
Aim to pick up a bit of time from Terenure down to Milltown.
Hopefully if strong enough take the hill up Clonskeagh at goal pace and hit Fosters avenue looking at a 4:17/4:18 finish. If all goes well push on from there aiming to get closer to 4:15. If not too strong hang on and come in closer to 4:20.

Any feedback on that greatly appreciated but I think it's a happy compromise given the course profile.

Sounds like a solid plan.
You've also given yourself something to occupy your mind all the way up to the 22 mile point, which I think is a big help (for anybody, not just you) as it will give you something to focus on when/if the demons appear. After Fosters Avenue, you're heading towards home so it becomes less of an issue.

MKDTH

yaboya1 wrote: »

I only read your log from 2012 the other night and it's like history repeating itself over there in 2014 (except frighteningly, you were better trained back then!).

Time will tell

Pacing Mule

MKDTH wrote: »

Time will tell

I would say it's well on it's way Can see the stubbornes oozing from you ! You need a few more dissenting voices though but plenty of time left for that.

The result is nearly a secondary consideration but you have to beat 5:36 if you want to lay down a marker !

MKDTH

Pacing Mule wrote: »

I would say it's well on it's way Can see the stubbornes oozing from you ! You need a few more dissenting voices though but plenty of time left for that.

The result is nearly a secondary consideration but you have to beat 5:36 if you want to lay down a marker !

What was your longest run going into DCM 2012?

Pacing Mule

MKDTH wrote: »

What was your longest run going into DCM 2012?

Longest run was 16 miles the week before the race series half IIRC. It was on a run after the race series half that the pain went from irritating niggle status to something that stopped me running. The rest as they say is history !

Edit: Looked it up there. I had a 15 done the week before the 16 too. Injury hit mid September and didn't run again until October. Was trying to balance off getting the miles in with a taper - sounds familiar

Pacing Mule

Pacing Mule wrote: »

I cringed reading that. I really did. Did recognise some similarities alright !

I wasn't that bad was I ????

Oh dear - Reread the old log there whilst checking out that question for MKDTH. I may have been

SamforMayo

Pacing Mule wrote: »

Oh dear - Reread the old log there whilst checking out that question for MKDTH. I may have been

No harm, you live and learn!

MKDTH

Pacing Mule wrote: »

Longest run was 16 miles the week before the race series half IIRC. It was on a run after the race series half that the pain went from irritating niggle status to something that stopped me running. The rest as they say is history !

Edit: Looked it up there. I had a 15 done the week before the 16 too. Injury hit mid September and didn't run again until October. Was trying to balance off getting the miles in with a taper - sounds familiar

And sorry to hijack your thread, but how many miles training did you get in? I'm just trying to compare. I've only managed 278 since I started running in May with 35 since returning to full training two weeks ago which I know is not enough.

Pacing Mule

MKDTH wrote: »

And sorry to hijack your thread, but how many miles training did you get in? I'm just trying to compare. I've only managed 278 since I started running in May with 35 since returning to full training two weeks ago which I know is not enough.

I don't know exactly - that was pre strava or other tracker days but I did post a training plan in May 2012 which I followed up until injury and that would have put me in or around 350 miles (from May when you started until DCM itself with around 320 done versus your 278) I had started in the January on a couch to 5k program so weekly mileage before that was quite low. They are all best guesstimate figures though.

It's not that 278 isn't enough between May and now (or my 320 at the time either) it's more about not having done enough miles before that to allow the body adapt to running the extra miles needed. From what I can tell you're a near mirror image of me in that injuries (I know yours were already there from other sports years ago) flared up because of the sudden increase in mileage. I was also doing that quite overweight too - had been at 16 stone when starting off.

At the end of the day I took a risk and got around. It wasn't pleasant but I was delighted I done it. Still am ! The advice I gave you in the mentored novices thread was from my experience. My training and circumstances weren't enough to hang on for 26 miles no matter how stubborn I was. I personally don't think you have the miles in you either to run for 26. That's no disrespect intended btw - I'd be delighted for you if you can do it yourself. I was on a walk run strategy - enforced on me from less than halfway into the race. The drag up to Walkinstown killed me off on the day. In hindsight doing that from earlier by choice would have left me fresher for the last few miles home which for me on the day were a hard painful slog.

MKDTH

Pacing Mule wrote: »

I don't know exactly - that was pre strava or other tracker days but I did post a training plan in May 2012 which I followed up until injury and that would have put me in or around 350 miles (from May when you started until DCM itself with around 320 done versus your 278) I had started in the January on a couch to 5k program so weekly mileage before that was quite low. They are all best guesstimate figures though.

It's not that 278 isn't enough between May and now (or my 320 at the time either) it's more about not having done enough miles before that to allow the body adapt to running the extra miles needed. From what I can tell you're a near mirror image of me in that injuries (I know yours were already there from other sports years ago) flared up because of the sudden increase in mileage. I was also doing that quite overweight too - had been at 16 stone when starting off.

At the end of the day I took a risk and got around. It wasn't pleasant but I was delighted I done it. Still am ! The advice I gave you in the mentored novices thread was from my experience. My training and circumstances weren't enough to hang on for 26 miles no matter how stubborn I was. I personally don't think you have the miles in you either to run for 26. That's no disrespect intended btw - I'd be delighted for you if you can do it yourself. I was on a walk run strategy - enforced on me from less than halfway into the race. The drag up to Walkinstown killed me off on the day. In hindsight doing that from earlier by choice would have left me fresher for the last few miles home which for me on the day were a hard painful slog.

Its quite hard to think what I was up to two years ago so that's understandable. I was starting from 14 stone which is heavy enough at 5ft 8.
Maybe I will try and run it all until the hills after Phoenix Park which I may walk. I assume the crowds will be biggest in the final mile so certainly want to be able to still run at that point.
Its all a learning curve, and the more information I get from the likes of yourself who have been their and done it, can only improve my mindset of what to expect.
Now I'll stop hogging your thread and let you get back to talking about which group to go out with. Would the wind be a issue if you go out in the first few from the third wave?

Pacing Mule

MKDTH wrote: »

Now I'll stop hogging your thread and let you get back to talking about which group to go out with. Would the wind be a issue if you go out in the first few from the third wave?

That's a rather excellent question and something I will need to factor in.

I imagine that 4 miles in the over exuberant wave 2 people will start dropping back but if there is a gap between the waves and I go out at 4:15 from the front of wave 3 I will certainly have less people around me to latch onto.

Pacing Mule

So I gave the above my consideration and am still happy to go out ahead of the pacers at the front of the wave. Yes I may have less shelter up the park but I will have a cleared road for the critical first few miles and will be better placed to run the racing line rather than the zig zag lunacy of the crowded starts. Add in water stations and less congestion and I'm happy to take the chance of finding a group to run with up the park at the time.

yaboya1

Pacing Mule wrote: »

So I gave the above my consideration and am still happy to go out ahead of the pacers at the front of the wave. Yes I may have less shelter up the park but I will have a cleared road for the critical first few miles and will be better placed to run the racing line rather than the zig zag lunacy of the crowded starts. Add in water stations and less congestion and I'm happy to take the chance of finding a group to run with up the park at the time.

You'll have caught plenty who started in Wave 2 that shouldn't have by the time you get to the park too. Only problem is you won't be able to draft off them, as you'll be overtaking them.

Pacing Mule

Nightmare stuff at moment. Been sick all week. That chesty cough lingered and has come back quite strongly. Most of it is nasal drip onto the chest causing the cough and nausea in the stomach but bottom line is I'm not feeling 100% at all and held off running in the hope a few days would sort it.

In the mean time - and a form of taper madness perhaps but I suspect not - my legs have started to seize up. Bottom of both feet are now sore to walk on intermittently during the day. Heel is also sore. I reckon the calves have started tightening badly again with the lack of running even though I've been trying to stretch them. I'm no expert though, could be wrong!, but I know a man who is an expert so will be off to see ecoli on Thursday to get things looked at and loosened up for the main event.

All that said I figured that I needed to get a run in this morning before I went crazy. The deal I made was that I would do a short 3 miler - get the legs going but wrapped up well and a short enough time not to cause a setback with sickness recovery. 3.1 (had to hit 5k :pac:) at 9:28 pace. Probably a bit too fast for a taper but I needed to stretch the legs out. The feet and heel had warmed up by mile 2 and have had no ill effects so far.

Depending on how I feel tomorrow may do the 8 mile that was scheduled. If I'm not up to it though that 8 mile will get shorter and shorter as the week goes on. All eyes on next Mondays prize.

SamforMayo

Think long and hard before tackling that 8 miler if you are still chesty, too much at stake at this stage.

Murph_D

Feel for you PM - in the same boat myself, no running for over a week now with chesty cough. But you've done most of the work so you don't need to obsess about getting the last few runs in. SfM is right - not worth the risk of making things worse.