To gel or not to gel? That is the question

JohnnyCrash

Hi guys,I didn't want to dig up an old thread but would like your opinions on this. Am currently thinking on doing Limerick marathon and am wondering about fuelling.Ive done DCM the last 2 years and have taken gels. I used them in training for both. This year I set out to see if I could do without them and am going well so far. I can comfortably do 15 miles without anything,water included. Ive done 18 miles,water only and yesterday did a 20 miler with water at 5,10 and 15 miles and a pkt of fruit pastilles. Pre run breakfast was a bowl of porridge,tea and 2 toasts with jam. Avg pace for this run was 8.19 but finished strong with 2x7.40's. My question is this: Should I be able to do the marathon gel free or would I be as well to bring a couple with me for the latter stages of it and if so,when would be the best time to take them? Cheers in advance

SamforMayo

Is there a particular reason you want to do without them? I hate gels but saw them as an necessary evil and I learnt during DCM that while I could tolerate sweets etc on lSR there was no way I would have been able to tolerate them during marathon. As for when to take the gels I followed advice on here and took them early on like at mile 4,8,12 and 18. Hopefully some of the more experienced people can give more advice.

rainbow kirby

If they worked for you, take the fruit pastilles. A bit less messy than gels and relatively easy to stash.

JohnnyCrash

SamforMayo wrote: »

Is there a particular reason you want to do without them? I hate gels but saw them as an necessary evil and I learnt during DCM that while I could tolerate sweets etc on lSR there was no way I would have been able to tolerate them during marathon. As for when to take the gels I followed advice on here and took them early on like at mile 4,8,12 and 18. Hopefully some of the more experienced people can give more advice.

The only reason im trying without them is to see if they are absolutely necessary and thus far I seem to be able to do quite well without them.It might be a different story for the last 6 miles:eek: so maybe I need only take a gel or 2 to get me through?

JohnnyCrash

rainbow kirby wrote: »

If they worked for you, take the fruit pastilles. A bit less messy than gels and relatively easy to stash.

I suppose another couple of 20's will let me know;)

menoscemo

JohnnyCrash wrote: »

The only reason im trying without them is to see if they are absolutely necessary and thus far I seem to be able to do quite well without them.It might be a different story for the last 6 miles:eek: so maybe I need only take a gel or 2 to get me through?

The problem is unless you are doing all your long runs at Marathon pace you'll never know if you can store enough glycogen to get you through 26.2 at your best possible pace.
I'd tend to take a few Gels early in the marathon. If you wait until 'you need them' then:
a) it is too late
b) Likelihood is you won't be able to stomach them.
Taking gels early means you 'save' your Glycogen for when you most need, your body has time to process and store/use the sugar and also ensures that you can stomach the gels.

SamforMayo

JohnnyCrash wrote: »

The only reason im trying without them is to see if they are absolutely necessary and thus far I seem to be able to do quite well without them.It might be a different story for the last 6 miles:eek: so maybe I need only take a gel or 2 to get me through?

Well since you know you can take the gels ok you could take a few with you as back up and see how you feel.

JohnnyCrash

menoscemo wrote: »

The problem is unless you are doing all your long runs at Marathon pace you'll never know if you can store enough glycogen to get you through 26.2 at your best possible pace.
I'd tend to take a few Gels early in the marathon. If you wait until 'you need them' then:
a) it is too late
b) Likelihood is you won't be able to stomach them.
Taking gels early means you 'save' your Glycogen for when you most need, your body has time to process and store/use the sugar and also ensures that you can stomach the gels.

What would you suggest?

menoscemo

JohnnyCrash wrote: »

What would you suggest?

Take one as you cross the startline, another at first or second waterstation and go from there. While you can stomach the gels they certainly won't do you any harm, once you don't feel like taking them any more you can be content that you already have x00 calories consumed.

HelenAnne

JohnnyCrash wrote: »

I suppose another couple of 20's will let me know;)

They mightn't! I was afraid to take gels as I thought they might make me feel sick. I did all my long runs with just water and the occasional jelly sweet (I wasn't taking the sweets at pre-decided intervals, just when I felt peckish). I moved on to Honey Stinger sweets just before the marathon, and while they were really easy to eat, I think maybe I wasn't eating enough of them as I really felt weak in the last few miles of the marathon. I don't think I'd realized how much harder it would be to run 26.2 miles at race pace on water and a few sweets as it had been fine for 20s etc in training.

If I do another marathon I think I'll give gels a go. I'm fine without them i half marathons etc, but I think maybe the marathon was just a bit too far (for me)!

opus

I ran the Clonakilty marathon with a friend last Dec and as an experiment didn't have anything apart from water during the race. Expected something to happen in the latter stages of the run but finished with no ill effects. For the Tralee marathon two weeks ago, I ran it around 20 mins faster than Clon so brought along two of those Naked bars but just ate one of them in the end.

Used to be that I had problems running more than 16 miles without some snack but I slowly increased the mileage so maybe just got used to it. My current thinking is to tackle the ultra in Conn similarly with some sort of seedy bar in my pocket and see what happens.

JohnnyCrash

So what i need to know is,if i reckon ill need fuel for the last 6,when would i need to take it for it to take effect? Would like to not have to take gels unnecessarily

Alf. A. Male

JohnnyCrash wrote: »

Would like to not have to take gels unnecessarily

Why? What negative side effect do you think you'll suffer? They're cheap, easily available and save a potential race-ruining crash. They may be overkill for shorter races, but having read the thread I'm none the wiser as to why you would train so hard to maximise raceday performance, then plan to eliminate a simple support to getting the best out of yourself on the day. It's your race and all, so do what you feel best, but I can't help wondering if you've thought it through.

menoscemo

opus wrote: »

I ran the Clonakilty marathon with a friend last Dec and as an experiment didn't have anything apart from water during the race. Expected something to happen in the latter stages of the run but finished with no ill effects. For the Tralee marathon two weeks ago, I ran it around 20 mins faster than Clon so brought along two of those Naked bars but just ate one of them in the end.

Used to be that I had problems running more than 16 miles without some snack but I slowly increased the mileage so maybe just got used to it. My current thinking is to tackle the ultra in Conn similarly with some sort of seedy bar in my pocket and see what happens.

I have paced and jogged marathons before without taking any gels or food.

The question is would you 'race' a marathon without gels? there is a huge difference between racing and pacing/running. You burn a lot more glycogen when racing.

RayCun

Echoing the above, why are you trying to avoid gels?
If they make you sick, don't take them
If you're training for ultra events and want to avoid taking on glycogen in shorter distances, don't take them
But if you can take them without any negative effects, why not?

TFBubendorfer

menoscemo wrote: »

I have paced and jogged marathons before without taking any gels or food.

The question is would you 'race' a marathon without gels? there is a huge difference between racing and pacing/running. You burn a lot more glycogen when racing.

I've paced a few marathons without gels and did not have a problem.

I ran 3:07 in the Tralee marathon last week and didn't take a gel there either, but had two or three bottles of the sports drink they handed out at some of the aid stations and felt perfectly fine. In fact I ran the second half a minute faster than the first one.

If I do take gels I'm generally fine with normal gels but isogels (the ones that don't require you to take them with water) always give me stomach cramps. Plenty of other runners swear by isogels. That's why you should always try things out in training beforehand, you never know in advance how your body is going to react.

plodder

Gels are absorbed slowly - faster than other forms of food, but still quite slowly. 30-60 g of sugar per hour is what I've heard. So, that suggests you should spread them out over the whole race, starting as early as possible. I've also read that after ten minutes of exercise, absorbed sugar is sent straight to working muscles. So, again that would suggest the first water station might be the time to take your first one. But, don't take too many overall, as any excess that can't be absorbed will (at best) just sit in your stomach. I suspect that's what happens to a lot of people who say gels don't agree with them. Oh, and experiment with different flavours/brands. After a few of the same type in a race, sometimes the taste can be fairly vile.

Enduro

RayCun wrote: »

If you're training for ultra events and want to avoid taking on glycogen in shorter distances, don't take them

It's not just ultras. I've raced and won plenty of races (including marathons) without taking gels, or feeling the need to take them.

They're definitely a handy thing to have for bonk recovery (but it is always more effective to manage your race so as not to bonk in the first place, obviously). But they are absolutely not necessary. How did all those older lads manage to race marathons (faster than current runners in the Irish case) before the gel industry was invented? How many Gels did John Tracey use when setting the Irish record?

Good enough reasons not to use them as far as I'm concerned are (a) they taste gack (b) they're expensive (c) they're not necessary. (I'm not saying that you shouldn't take them, btw, just that there is no need to).

RayCun

But you (because I knew you would post to say you don't take gels :pac: ) are training for longer distances when you run marathons. So you don't want to mess with your fat-adaptation by necking a load of sugar during a race, in either gel or fruit pastille form.
The OP is only running a marathon, he doesn't have to consider the effects of gels on his ability to run ultras.

(yes, Treacy et al ran without gels, and without garmins, and Zatopek trained in army boots, and Bannister ran only a few miles a week. We can admire their achievements without being compelled to copy their methods)

JohnnyCrash

Alf. A. Male wrote: »

Why? What negative side effect do you think you'll suffer? They're cheap, easily available and save a potential race-ruining crash. They may be overkill for shorter races, but having read the thread I'm none the wiser as to why you would train so hard to maximise raceday performance, then plan to eliminate a simple support to getting the best out of yourself on the day. It's your race and all, so do what you feel best, but I can't help wondering if you've thought it through.

I know I wont suffer any side effects as ive used gels in my last 2 marathons.On reading something somewhere,could possibly be on boards here,about some who use them,some who don't,i decided to try training without them.To date,I can honestly say that im getting on as well,if not a little better,without them as opposed to with them.
On the racing,ill be hoping for sub 3.30 so,to some of you guys,that would be a jog:D

menoscemo

JohnnyCrash wrote: »

I know I wont suffer any side effects as ive used gels in my last 2 marathons.On reading something somewhere,could possibly be on boards here,about some who use them,some who don't,i decided to try training without them.To date,I can honestly say that im getting on as well,if not a little better,without them as opposed to with them.
On the racing,ill be hoping for sub 3.30 so,to some of you guys,that would be a jog:D

Like yourself I never take gels in training, but for me that's not a reason not to take them in a raced marathon.
Once you know which gels you like there is no need to experiment taking them in training and it is good to train your body to burn as much fat as possible.

But if I am going to dedicate my training for 4-6 months to race one single marathon then personally I am going to try to everything possible to ensure a good result. For me one of those things is taking a few gels to try to ensure I don't bonk. I generally only buy about 15-20 gels once every year and never use more than that in an entire year.

bambergbike

menoscemo wrote: »

I generally only buy about 15-20 gels once every year and never use more than that in an entire year.

Entirely for marathon running? Or with some taken over shorter distances as well? I'm about to start building towards a 24 km hilly trails race in June (just hills, no big mountains) and find myself wondering if I should plan to consume food/gels or just bring along an emergency reserve to be used if and when I feel I need it.

sideswipe

Enduro wrote: »

It's not just ultras. I've raced and won plenty of races (including marathons) without taking gels, or feeling the need to take them.

They're definitely a handy thing to have for bonk recovery (but it is always more effective to manage your race so as not to bonk in the first place, obviously). But they are absolutely not necessary. How did all those older lads manage to race marathons (faster than current runners in the Irish case) before the gel industry was invented? How many Gels did John Tracey use when setting the Irish record?

Good enough reasons not to use them as far as I'm concerned are (a) they taste gack (b) they're expensive (c) they're not necessary. (I'm not saying that you shouldn't take them, btw, just that there is no need to).

This reminds me of a Marathon Talk interview with Bill Adcocks (2:10 in 1968) that aired a couple of weeks back.
When asked what food he'd used during races he replied 'I wasn't going on a picnic':D
He went on to talk about how food was sometimes scarce enough with rationing and yet the times being achieved were so much better, by more runners back then.

I have tried the no gel approach for training without being brave enough to chance it for a goal marathon. The problem I have with gels is that the boost is so short lived and I end up feeling exaggerated highs and lows because of the sugar rush.
Still not sure if I'd chance rocking up for a marathon without something in my pocket.

menoscemo

bambergbike wrote: »

Entirely for marathon running? Or with some taken over shorter distances as well? I'm about to start building towards a 24 km hilly trails race in June (just hills, no big mountains) and find myself wondering if I should plan to consume food/gels or just bring along an emergency reserve to be used if and when I feel I need it.

I would maybe race 2 marathons a year and pace a few more. Maybe take 5-6 on a raced marathon and carry 1 or 2 if pacing (never generally take them pacing though as i don't feel I need them). I'd never take them in a shorter race or run unless i was experimenting with a new gel (sometimes you get a free one in a goodie bag).

Enduro

RayCun wrote: »

But you (because I knew you would post to say you don't take gels :pac: ) are training for longer distances when you run marathons. So you don't want to mess with your fat-adaptation by necking a load of sugar during a race, in either gel or fruit pastille form.
The OP is only running a marathon, he doesn't have to consider the effects of gels on his ability to run ultras.

(yes, Treacy et al ran without gels, and without garmins, and Zatopek trained in army boots, and Bannister ran only a few miles a week. We can admire their achievements without being compelled to copy their methods)

And I knew that you knew that

You're undersestimating my competitive streak... if I thought that taking gels in shorter races would improve my performance (and especially if I thought it would help me win) then I'd use them in shorter races. I just don't think that they do. (I'd just regard them as a possible waste of time, literally, as in loosing a few seconds dealing with getting them, openeing them and consuming them).

Enduro

bambergbike wrote: »

Entirely for marathon running? Or with some taken over shorter distances as well? I'm about to start building towards a 24 km hilly trails race in June (just hills, no big mountains) and find myself wondering if I should plan to consume food/gels or just bring along an emergency reserve to be used if and when I feel I need it.

Which race is that? How long are you thinking it will take you? Will you be doing the race for the fastest possible time, or to complete it comfortably? Have you needed to use gels for any races in the past?

Krusty_Clown

Enduro wrote: »

How did all those older lads manage to race marathons (faster than current runners in the Irish case) before the gel industry was invented?

Fig rolls.

RayCun

RayCun wrote: »

(yes, Treacy et al ran without gels, and without garmins, and Zatopek trained in army boots, and Bannister ran only a few miles a week. We can admire their achievements without being compelled to copy their methods)

I wouldn't mind copying their times!

plodder

The top guys don't need to be taking gels anyway. It's easier for them to use their own sports drinks pre-placed at feeding stations. Gels are more a convenience for the masses when all you can be sure of getting is water.

BeepBeep!

sideswipe wrote: »

I have tried the no gel approach for training without being brave enough to chance it for a goal marathon. The problem I have with gels is that the boost is so short lived and I end up feeling exaggerated highs and lows because of the sugar rush.
Still not sure if I'd chance rocking up for a marathon without something in my pocket.

This is my problem too! Currently trying different gels to see if I can get a more evenly sustained boost. May have to go down the line of some sort of food,ie raisins to see how they work.

cloudatlas

What about bringing some natural sources like raisins, dried fruit, cereal or pretzels in a small bag.

overpronator

plodder wrote: »

The top guys don't need to be taking gels anyway. It's easier for them to use their own sports drinks pre-placed at feeding stations. Gels are more a convenience for the masses when all you can be sure of getting is water.

Alot of elites will have gels mixed in with water or sports drink at their stations for convenience

JohnnyCrash

cloudatlas wrote: »

What about bringing some natural sources like raisins, dried fruit, cereal or pretzels in a small bag.

I would imagine that kind of stuff would be dry and hard to swallow?

bambergbike

cloudatlas wrote: »

What about bringing some natural sources like raisins, dried fruit, cereal or pretzels in a small bag.

I haven't tried this while running yet, but one of the things I often have in a baggie in my jersey pocket on long cycles is a few lumps of crystallized ginger. It's sort of semi-natural - it's full of bog-standard ordinary sugar, but not completely empty of things that are good for you. Specifically, ginger it good for settling/preventing upset stomachs.

opus

menoscemo wrote: »

The question is would you 'race' a marathon without gels? there is a huge difference between racing and pacing/running. You burn a lot more glycogen when racing.

Not sure tbh, Clon was an experiment just for my own interest. I've two more marathons to run in the next few months which I'll aim to run a bit faster than Clon so will try at least one without anything again just to see what happens. This may end badly of course

RayCun wrote: »

Echoing the above, why are you trying to avoid gels?
If they make you sick, don't take them
If you're training for ultra events and want to avoid taking on glycogen in shorter distances, don't take them
But if you can take them without any negative effects, why not?

Not particularly trying to avoid them rather trying to see if I actually need them or not. They don't make me sick or anything like that & I've certainly took them when I got my best marathon times.

martyboy48

DCM'13 was .my first marathon and I didn't take gels. Doing connemara in couple of weeks and won't take any. As for DCM 14 I don't know yet.
Its not that I'm against them, I just liked enduros thinking on it, and I don't want to be a slave to them where I would be in a panic if I didn't have a y.. will probably take them in the future just to see how they go...

chavezychavez

I was totally against Gels when I started running and used Glucose Barley sweets to suck on as runs progressed.
They were all fine on LSR's but in marathons once I hit around the 23 mile mark, no amount of them could help.
Started using a combination of High5 IsoGels at various stages of a run coupled with half a Zero tablet in every bottle of water, and things have improved dramatically. Was able to get over the line in Tralee a few weeks ago with no bonk issues.
I may be overusing energy items, but I want to enjoy my runs, not to go out a mission to self flagulate. If I want to do endurance penance, I'll do the Croach Patrick barefoot climb

TRR

Enduro wrote: »

They're definitely a handy thing to have for bonk recovery (but it is always more effective to manage your race so as not to bonk in the first place, obviously). But they are absolutely not necessary. How did all those older lads manage to race marathons (faster than current runners in the Irish case) before the gel industry was invented? How many Gels did John Tracey use when setting the Irish record?

The flip side of that is that the current worlds best take on lots of carbs in their drinks and even gels. Maybe we should be asking how fast would John Tracey have ran with a gel strategy?

cloudatlas

There are so many gels on the market the industry has created a need for them. I'm just not sure that eating well before and during the race whilst keeping hydrated wouldn't be good enough. It seems that the industry has created solutions for problems we didn't have... they've given us gels, special drinks, trainers with chunky heels.

inigo

cloudatlas wrote: »

There are so many gels on the market the industry has created a need for them. I'm just not sure that eating well before and during the race whilst keeping hydrated wouldn't be good enough. It seems that the industry has created solutions for problems we didn't have... they've given us gels, special drinks, trainers with chunky heels.

Mmm, that sounds a bit like the hydration story of Tim Noakes vs Gatorade... From Noakes' book "Challenging Beliefs", which by the way I found to be an excellent read.

cloudatlas

inigo wrote: »

Mmm, that sounds a bit like the hydration story of Tim Noakes vs Gatorade... From Noakes' book "Challenging Beliefs", which by the way I found to be an excellent read.

Sounds like something I should read.

opus

opus wrote: »

Not sure tbh, Clon was an experiment just for my own interest. I've two more marathons to run in the next few months which I'll aim to run a bit faster than Clon so will try at least one without anything again just to see what happens. This may end badly of course

Ran the EOI marathon in Lusk last Sat again with nothing but water & bit faster than Clon (~15 mins). Faded a bit towards the end but not sure if that was the after affects of the Connultra 13 days earlier or cause I ate nothing. Have the Limerick marathon coming up in two weeks time so will see how it goes there.

opus

Just remembered this thread from last year, got through the Boston marathon last Monday with no gels although I did have two with me in case of dire emergency

Didn't drink anything either but that was due to the conditions more than anything else I'd guess as never felt thirsty at any stage.

libelula

Can I ask if you found the rest of the day any more difficult after not using any nutrition on the run? Often I find if I do a long run/cycle without anything, I might get through it alright but suffer with headaches/severe lack of energy for the day no matter how well I eat afterwards.
Anything like that happen to you?

Well done on Boston, I'd say it's an unreal feeling

George Chinaglia

You could almost say it's.....







More than a feeling

dintbo

George Chinaglia wrote: »

You could almost say it's.....







More than a feeling

BOOM!!!!!

ger664

The opposite to Opus I took 4 GU as follows 15mins before the off Mile 3, 10 & 16. I dont really tolerate them that well (anyone who saw me afterwards in the pub can testify to that). Not sure if they really made a difference on the day but I didnt want to risk it. Would love to try (risk) not taking them at some point just to see what happens.

opus

libelula wrote: »

Can I ask if you found the rest of the day any more difficult after not using any nutrition on the run? Often I find if I do a long run/cycle without anything, I might get through it alright but suffer with headaches/severe lack of energy for the day no matter how well I eat afterwards.
Anything like that happen to you?

Well done on Boston, I'd say it's an unreal feeling

Didn't notice anything special to be honest (apart from the slight risk of hypothermia on the walk to get the gear bag!). Felt fine once I'd changed & warmed up a bit. We did have a not inconsiderable amount of pizza washed down with some sweet sweet beer afterwards in a local hostelry

Btw I'm not saying this is the right or wrong thing to do nutrition wise on a marathon, it's just what seems to work ok for me. Your mileage might vary!

As Ger mentioned he did have some issues afterwards for the opposite reason.

wrstan

Did you train specifically to run without nutrition, or did you just decide on the day to see how it went?

If you were training specifically without any nutrition It would be great to hear your reflections on it.

Thanks

wrstan

Sorry Opus, just read back through the older posts in the thread. Well done on Boston.