nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

The Sub 3 Support Thread

--amadeus--

Not sure if this is a viable thread or not....

There tends to be a lot of support for newbies and improver's (the two mentored DCM threads, the Tri Novice thread for example) but less of a community vibe as you move up the pace. I know a lot of us read each others logs but I'll read 10 for every one I comment in and I'm sure others are the same.

And I know that there are a few of us aiming at sub 3 this autumn. I'm taking a crack at it in Amsterdam, Village Runner and Peckham in Berlin, SunGod in Dublin. I'm sure SloggerJogger is going to take another pop at it as well having come so close. And of course we have a lot of runners who have already gone sub 3 (and faster). And the Sub 3 thread on RunnersWorld is very busy and popular.

So here we go - if it works it works, if it sinks it sinks!

And to start - I'm a little concerned about my weekly mileage. This week is pretty poor (I'll be lucky to get mid 30s) and I've been doing 40s for the last couple of weeks with the intention of doing 6 - 8 weeks of 50 - 60 mpw as teh basis of my attempt.

Do you think that's enough? What sort of mileage are you all doing and planning?

Find more posts tagged with

sub 3

Quick Links

Comments

donothoponpop

Reminder for anyone who may have missed this- ecoli will be starting a mentored sub3 training schedule for the Dublin marathon. Schedule starts next week, is 18 weeks long, with additional input from tergat, anyone interested can put their name down here.

ecoli

Gringo78 wrote: »

yet put some thought and structure into what goes before the marathon training block and you can then concentrate exclusively on the aerobic stuff during the marathon training knowing you have developed the anaerobic stuff beforehand as much as you could.

This is a point i think alot of people miss. Regardless of what training you do in an 18 week plan (or which ever one you choose) you are not going to be "at your best". Sure you may run a PB but there is still room for improvement which is why people chip away at there times. Consistency is key. Lydiard touches on this in his philosophies. He believes that the benefits you see from increase in mileage alone can be seen as far as 3 years down the line(not taking into account intervals, tempos, etc.) The idea is to train year round regardless what type of training the mileage will stand to you

Sosa

Gringo78 wrote: »

develop longer term goals.....if you want to run sub 3 in London 2011 then plan to run a 1:23 HM in Dec 2010 and a sub 30 5m in august 2010...lay down the markers that say you are most definetly sub 3 material before you actually star the marathon training and go about achieving those goals in as structured a way as you would approach the marathon training.

Spot on Gringo......3 months of shoter stuff and then 3 months of marathon specific training is the way to go.

Gringo78

smmoore79 wrote: »

From personal experience, i have to agree with Tunguska. Im building up to a marathon program which starts on the 14th June. Have got a few LSR's done in the last few weeks (9m to 10m) just to ease myself into the training plan. As a result, or coincidently my 5 mile pb has come down.

I think thats my point.....9m to 10m runs would be an essential element of 10k training anyway, therefore you were not training for 5m optimally beforehand. By increasing the length of your runs in preperation for marathon training, you improved over 5m. However, if you had just taken a 12 week advanced 10k training plan, you would have anyway increased the length of you long run.

Put it another way, there are countless threads here about which hal higdon, P&D, daniels marathon training plan to use...should I do 50mpw or 55mpw, should I do 14 or 18 weeks.....however no thought seems to go into the rest of the year, you find very few detailed threads on here on 10k training, no threads on 5k training, no threads on 10m training.....very little on HM training.....yet put some thought and structure into what goes before the marathon training block and you can then concentrate exclusively on the aerobic stuff during the marathon training knowing you have developed the anaerobic stuff beforehand as much as you could.

now if you then ratchet up the miles while training for the marathon, as Tunguska says, yes you will probably improve over 5m / 10k. But if you maintain the same amount of miles, just switch to aerobic, you will not improve over 5mile but you will hit the time McMillan had predicted for you (within a margin of error).

As Village Runner said, its all about the marathon....just realise it can all be about the marathon from about 16 weeks before you start the marathon training.

develop longer term goals.....if you want to run sub 3 in London 2011 then plan to run a 1:23 HM in Dec 2010 and a sub 30 5m in august 2010...lay down the markers that say you are most definetly sub 3 material before you actually star the marathon training and go about achieving those goals in as structured a way as you would approach the marathon training.

aero2k

Hi all,

Finally did a retrospective log and some analysis of Edinburgh - details here.

ecoli

There are two sides to this coin. First is that with marathon work you are developing your aerobic capacity. For many people running 5k-10m there biggest weakness is not there lack of speed but rather their lack of strength and as such this type of training will impact on their race performance so as Tunguska has said commonly you will see improvement in races from 5m + during marathon training (Though not always).

Gringo on the other hand brings up an interesting point. Aerobic training should be the most important thing with very little anaerobic work.The marathon is effectively 99% aerobic and as such very little need for much anaerobic work. If the anaerobic capacity is over developed you'll burn carbs way too fast and you will erode aerobic efficiency. You'll be relying on your anaerobic capacity to provide ATP. For example, a 3 hour marathoner aiming for 6:52 per mile would use about 2-3% anaerobic, on average, as they run along IF THEY OVERDEVELOPED ANAEROBIC CAPACITY (instead of just under 1%, which is ideal for a 3-hour runner).

At about 18 miles the inefficiency of using 2-3% anaerobic will catch up with a marathoner and start to cause early fatigue. By 21 miles their pace will slow by 30 or more seconds per mile. They have burned up the carbs from their legs and liver. By the end, they fall apart, running a couple minutes a mile slower than their intended pace. (this is generally i am sure there is anecdotal evidence of individual cases which argue against this)

As such i think looking for shorter distances (800m - 5k(depending on level)) should not see an improvement but distances higher than this more often than not will due to aerobic bases not being at top level in most cases.

smmoore79

tunguska wrote: »

I think a persons 5k, 5mile and 10k times shouldimprove over the course of a marathon training cycle. I think one feeds into the other. .

From personal experience, i have to agree with Tunguska. Im building up to a marathon program which starts on the 14th June. Have got a few LSR's done in the last few weeks (9m to 10m) just to ease myself into the training plan. As a result, or coincidently my 5 mile pb has come down. Without LSR's i had a pb of 28 56 achieved 2 about months ago and 29 mins 10 seconds a week or so after that. Since then I ran a new pb of 28mins 39secs 2 weeks ago, which is a good 17 secs off the old pb i did. Will be doing the Adidas 5 miler in July so time will tell if even more increased mileage knocks more time off my PB (or not!).

village runner

Sosa wrote: »

The two races Gringo is talking about are firstly in late feb i ran 28:24 in Kilmac...i was concentrating on tempos,intervals and a medium easy run every week....i ran flat out to get that time...3 weeks later i started my program and with 2 weeks to Cork i ran 28:39 on a roasting hot evening in Portlaw...i just ran that race the fastest i could go without killing myself....but i cant imagine how or why i should be better over 5m after little or no fast running done for 13 weeks....

We are not comparing like with like here. Probaly a cold feb morning on a short 5 miler v a 5 miler on scorching hot night. I ran Kilmachthomas last year and it was 20 seconds short so maybe sosa ran 5 miles faster in portlaw and as he said he didnt kill himself. Depends on everyones program. In hte 16 weeks does it really matter if your 5 milr time improves. Its all about the marathon.

tunguska

Gringo78 wrote: »

I suppose my point is, if they can only run 28min at the start of marathon training, why would they be able to run 27min 16 weeks later considering they are doing mostly endurance work? They should be dropping the VO2 type training and replacing its with longer LSR's and PMP workouts, so their shorter paces should suffer if they had been training optimally for them beforehand.

It does make sense what your saying Gringo: Concentrate on marathon specific training to run a marathon. So by the same token, if youre planing on running the 3000meters, concentrate on shorter fast stuff.
But according to what Ive read and what Ive found to be true personally, when you do the long stuff it has a positive knock on effect on your shorter races. So if you look at the 28minute 5mile example again(not Sosa!)I think even if you concentrated on marathon specific training, that person would automatically have a 27min 5 mile after 16weeks or so. The long stuff and high volume(and maybe the high volume is the key part)has a positive effect on speed or speed endurance.
Having said that though, I know a lot of people will be in agreement with you Gringo and will drop the short intense stuff like 400s in favour of marathon paced runs and Long slow runs. Personally I'll do a mix of things, do the long runs, marathon paced runs, tempo runs aswell as lots of very fast 400s. Maybe its the same difference at the end of the day though, all just different ways to skin a cat.

Sosa

tunguska wrote: »

You took me up wrong Sosa, I wasnt making any reference to you or your training. Apologies if that wasnt clear.

No hassle tunguska...i understood that you were talking general terms.
I just gave ye that info as it was relevant to me.

Krusty_Clown

Gringo78 wrote: »

I suppose my point is, if they can only run 28min at the start of marathon training, why would they be able to run 27min 16 weeks later considering they are doing mostly endurance work? They should be dropping the VO2 type training and replacing its with longer LSR's and PMP workouts, so their shorter paces should suffer if they had been training optimally for them beforehand.

If they are capable of a 27min 5 mile, they should be able to hit it prior to starting marathon training. We're talking about sub 3 here and people who are maybe struggling to get it, have missed it a few times, their times have maybe plateaued. I'm saying analyse why your shorter times are not better instead of focussing completely on the marathon training.

Of course, if your style of training is that you normally do not too much 35 weeks of the year and then ramp it up for a 16 week marathon training program, well then yeah, you could well improve all race times during the 16 weeks but thats not an optimum style of training and increases the risk of injury.

Makes sense to me. There are other variables though. Perhaps some people just benefit across the board from higher mileage, which they wouldn't bother doing if they were training for a 5 mile or 10k. Now I know that elite runners are going to be hitting 100-120+ mpw while doing dedicated 10k training. What I'm saying is that for some people taking on marathon-specific training means greater mileage, which might benefit them to the tune of faster times across a range of distances, producing better results than their event-specific training (in other words a marathon training plan may prove to be a better 10k training plan than the one they have been previously following). Gringo being the exception to every rule.

Gringo78

tunguska wrote: »

If someone ran 28mins for 5miles at the start of a marathon training cycle and they were aiming for say, 2:35 in the marathon, they'd expect that 5 mile time to be down to at least 27mins flat, 16 or so weeks later. You wouldnt expect that person to still have only a 28min(or slower) 5mile at the end of such a training cycle. Barring injury or illness of course.

I suppose my point is, if they can only run 28min at the start of marathon training, why would they be able to run 27min 16 weeks later considering they are doing mostly endurance work? They should be dropping the VO2 type training and replacing its with longer LSR's and PMP workouts, so their shorter paces should suffer if they had been training optimally for them beforehand.

If they are capable of a 27min 5 mile, they should be able to hit it prior to starting marathon training. We're talking about sub 3 here and people who are maybe struggling to get it, have missed it a few times, their times have maybe plateaued. I'm saying analyse why your shorter times are not better instead of focussing completely on the marathon training.

Of course, if your style of training is that you normally do not too much 35 weeks of the year and then ramp it up for a 16 week marathon training program, well then yeah, you could well improve all race times during the 16 weeks but thats not an optimum style of training and increases the risk of injury.

tunguska

Sosa wrote: »

The two races Gringo is talking about are firstly in late feb i ran 28:24 in Kilmac...i was concentrating on tempos,intervals and a medium easy run every week....i ran flat out to get that time...3 weeks later i started my program and with 2 weeks to Cork i ran 28:39 on a roasting hot evening in Portlaw...i just ran that race the fastest i could go without killing myself....but i cant imagine how or why i should be better over 5m after little or no fast running done for 13 weeks....

You took me up wrong Sosa, I wasnt making any reference to you or your training. Apologies if that wasnt clear.

Sosa

tunguska wrote: »

Great job in Cork Gringo and on less than 40miles/week, makes it even better. But I have to disagree with you on the above. I think a persons 5k, 5mile and 10k times shouldimprove over the course of a marathon training cycle. I think one feeds into the other. Paula Radcliffe set her 10k PB (30:01)only after becomming a marathon runner, despite being a serious athlete for a decade before she even ran her first marathon. If someone ran 28mins for 5miles at the start of a marathon training cycle and they were aiming for say, 2:35 in the marathon, they'd expect that 5 mile time to be down to at least 27mins flat, 16 or so weeks later. You wouldnt expect that person to still have only a 28min(or slower) 5mile at the end of such a training cycle. Barring injury or illness of course.

The two races Gringo is talking about are firstly in late feb i ran 28:24 in Kilmac...i was concentrating on tempos,intervals and a medium easy run every week....i ran flat out to get that time...3 weeks later i started my program and with 2 weeks to Cork i ran 28:39 on a roasting hot evening in Portlaw...i just ran that race the fastest i could go without killing myself....but i cant imagine how or why i should be better over 5m after little or no fast running done for 13 weeks....

tunguska

Gringo78 wrote: »

You shouldn't really get faster while training for a marathon (except over longer distances), in a way, the day you start marathon training, you're stuck with the 5 mile and 10k times you had. Any training you do which increases your shorter race times is either a) the wrong type of training or b) you were not in great shape beginning marathon training to begin with which would lead on to why are you attempting sub 3, would you not be better off doing 3 months of shorter race time training first, get in good shape and then hit into the marathon program?

Great job in Cork Gringo and on less than 40miles/week, makes it even better. But I have to disagree with you on the above. I think a persons 5k, 5mile and 10k times shouldimprove over the course of a marathon training cycle. I think one feeds into the other. Paula Radcliffe set her 10k PB (30:01)only after becomming a marathon runner, despite being a serious athlete for a decade before she even ran her first marathon. If someone ran 28mins for 5miles at the start of a marathon training cycle and they were aiming for say, 2:35 in the marathon, they'd expect that 5 mile time to be down to at least 27mins flat, 16 or so weeks later. You wouldnt expect that person to still have only a 28min(or slower) 5mile at the end of such a training cycle. Barring injury or illness of course.

Gringo78

donothoponpop wrote: »

:eek:I'm amazed by your result, from such (comparative) low milage. Fair play to you, it goes to show, there's no "one-size-fits-all" plan. You must have great discipline to stick to your slow LSR's.

HR monitor helped me keep it easy on the LSR's and on non-session runs. i would religiously keep it under 73% HRR. On easy non-session runs I rarely left it go above 76%HRR.

As regards the mileage, I was conservative on the target in relation to my McMillan predicted time (2:50), so hence the low mileage was ok. I would imagine there are others here who are predicted as 3:00 by McMillan and they would be confident of going under 3:10 on less mileage. Same difference really. I would imagine averaging 40mpw per week would be more ideal if you want to eke out a few more minutes. Krusty says train for a goal faster than the one you want. I would say, be capable of a goal faster than the one you want i.e if you're really borderline sub 3, why not work for 3 months first on your LT pace and shorter race times and then do a 3 month marathon specific training program.

I think too many people try to run a 1:24 HM 5 weeks before the marathon to give them the confidence of a McMillan predicted sub 3. Why not train for 3 months specifically for a half, run 1:23 and then launch into a specific marathon program? Easier said than done but if you do one marathon a year thats only 3 months training. You have another 9 months to play with. Be as smart and specific about training for the other 9 months as you are for the 3 months and it should make the marathon goal easier.

Take a read of Sosa's log....its a great program, but look at what went before it, the PB's over 4miles, 5 miles, 10miles, HM. If I remember correctly he set a 5 mile PB either very early in the marathon specific program or before even starting it. In a 5 mile race late in the marathon training he didn't get too close to that PB....because he was now concentrating on endurance & PMP. The slower 5 mile time actually showed he was training correctly in my opinion.

What you do before your marathon training starts is as important or more important. You shouldn't really get faster while training for a marathon (except over longer distances), in a way, the day you start marathon training, you're stuck with the 5 mile and 10k times you had. Any training you do which increases your shorter race times is either a) the wrong type of training or b) you were not in great shape beginning marathon training to begin with which would lead on to why are you attempting sub 3, would you not be better off doing 3 months of shorter race time training first, get in good shape and then hit into the marathon program?

Now I'm very aware there are other factors to consider - family/work or maybe you specfically want to do Dublin marathon for example. But my point is, I think 12 weeks marathon specific training (slow LSRs & Tergat PMP workouts) is plenty - I think its the 12 weeks prior to that which will define whether you will reach your goal. Also, if McMillan predicts you at 3:00 to 3:10, you better be very specific in your marathon training. If you've got a bit of leeway, well then there's room for hiccups in the training.

Lex Luther

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

Interesting reading, but here's a thought: anybody who is trying to achieve a sub3 and runs 1:29:45 to 1:30:15 is either extremely lucky, or misguided. To aim to get within 15 seconds of your goal pace after 13.1 miles, you are either extremely lucky, extremely good, or trying to force the issue by running entirely based on what your watch is telling you, and not how you feel.

Now coming from me (Garmin nerd and negative split junky advocate), that may sound like the greatest ever hypocrisy, but I also feel that if you are letting your watch entirely dictate your pace, such that you arrive at the half way point within 15 seconds of your target, then it is likely that you will have (at some point) had to run too fast, or too slow in order to hit the specific target (more or less than your body was prepared to give at a particular point in time). The goal of racing a marathon is not to run evenly throughout, but to run to the best of your ability. At times in the race you will need to run to your strength (when you feel good) and give in slightly to your weakness (when you feel tired, to rest). I still maintain that the best way to run sub3, is to train for 2:55 or better and let that be your goal.

How many runners finished 3:00 to 3:01, because they cut the margins too tight?

Hi I'm new to this thread having only come across it recently and have been scanning through the history - very interesting comments.
I'm going to try again for sub 3 in New York so its all very relevant to me.
My personal experience in relation to the above - my best time was May 2009 in Edinburgh - 3.00.04 (!!!!).
My splits were 1.30.01 / 1.30.03 !
Previous best was Dublin '08 3.03 where I had a one minute negative split.
For new york I wouldn't plan on reaching half way before 1.28 in any circumstances - no matter how good I'm feeling.
Anyway just one perspective.
LL

donothoponpop

Gringo78 wrote: »

Average: 34mpw

:eek:I'm amazed by your result, from such (comparative) low milage. Fair play to you, it goes to show, there's no "one-size-fits-all" plan. You must have great discipline to stick to your slow LSR's.

Gringo78

Wk 1|Wk 2|Wk 3|Wk 4
26.6|37.5|46.1|36.1

Wk 5|Wk 6|Wk 7|Wk 8
38.1|18.1|41.3|51.7

Wk 9|Wk 10|Wk 11|Wk 12
46.3|45.5|40.8|31.1

Wk 13|Wk 14|Wk 15|Wk 16
10.6|40.4|43.7|19.3

Wk 17|Wk 18|Wk 19|Wk 20
44|14|28.9|21.3

Wk 21|Wk 22|Wk 23|Wk 24
32.5|18.7||

Average: 34mpw

Long Runs: 8 of these, all nice and slow, quickest was 10% slower than PMP, slowest was 17% slower than PMP. No fast finishes. Had only 2 PMP miles in the very last LSR, otherwise every mile was slow and easy.

16 @ 7:49
20.1 @ 7:54
19.6 @ 7:36
17.6 @ 7:26
20.5 @ 7:50
17.2 @ 7:48
18.5 @ 7:58
15.2 @ 7:39

Tempo's: Ran these at 10m pace, 6m in length, 1 each week for first 11 weeks, then none for last 11 weeks of program

Intervals: 1 each week for first 11 weeks then none in last 11 weeks. reps were mostly 1m, 2k, 1.5m, 2m in length, generally at no faster than 5m-10k pace.

PMP Runs: 100 miles at PMP pace. These were spread over runs of various lengths 4 to 15 miles but 6 miles was the longest straight distance at PMP pace. 15 PMP sessions in total, most in the second half of the 22 week training.

All other runs were easy, 7:30-8:00 pace but generally hilly rather than flat terrain.

Fell into this plan by accident and it worked for me. Had been doing 1 session of intervals and 1 tempo session per week in preperation for Ballycotton, after ballycotton due to work/travel had to cut back a bit and decided to go with the Tergat recommended marathon specificity training....accept the pace you already have, cut out the fast tempos, interval sessions need to be longer reps and plenty of PMP miles. Ran a 60min 10 mile 11 weeks into program so had a McMillan predicted marathon of 2:50 therefore I had a bit of margin for error, but I know that by the time the marathon came around I was very comfortable running at PMP pace, it felt natural, easy and not forced. that was from all the PMP miles. I felt all the LSR's at slow pace and the easy paced other runs meant my fat burning was well developed and so I was running very efficiently and not over consuming glycogen at PMP pace.

My average mileage was 34mpw, I hope the above show that if you specifically you don't need to do huge mileage to get results. Anyone who heard Michael Herlihy speaking last saturday (Cork 09 winner in 2:30) might have been surprised to hear be only does less than 40mpw and only runs 3 days a week with no other type of training ie. no cross training, no weights, no cycling.

I should point out that 11 weeks in when I ran 60min for 10 miles, I don't think I could have run sub 3. Likewise, I wouldn't have been able to run 60min for 10 miles on monday but I was able to run sub 3. You need specificity in the training....if you're training for the marathon, train for the marathon, if you're training for a 10k, train 10k specific. Don't mix and match or you'll be compromising.

Krusty_Clown

Can't comment on Lydiard, but the goals look realistic. Chipping 15 minutes off per year sounds like a reasonable strategy, and with the 1:38 on a tough day in Connemara, you're heading in the right direction for 3:15 this year.

mithril

Declanr wrote: »

Just wanted to ask if anyone has experience of the Hill Bounding Drills, Hill Striding and Wind Drills that Lydaird Dicusses in the above book.
Also have any of you followed the Lydaird Training Schedules for your sub 3 efforts?

No experience myself but there is a thread on the Imra web site where they are discussed.
http://www.imra.ie/forum/topic/id/1996/

Declanr

Just wanted to ask if anyone has experience of the Hill Bounding Drills, Hill Striding and Wind Drills that Lydaird Dicusses in the above book.
Also have any of you followed the Lydaird Training Schedules for your sub 3 efforts?

Backround to my Running.
12-18 Club & Schools Competitive PB 10Km 34.15
18-35 A Little break was taken from the sport.
36-41 Now. I'm just finished the Conn Half PB 1.38:D, well pleased. Dublin 09' PB 3.29;), Dublin 07' 3.48:) (15 Stone smoker at the time). 13 Stone now but still smoking. I know I have to give them up guys, so please don't preach I'm getting in the neck at home all the time. I also know that if I'm serious about a sub 3, i'll have to pack them in.

Running Goals
2010
Sub 40 10Km,
Sub 3.15 Marathon
2011
Sub 3.00 Marathon
(Opinions welcome on these goals welcome).

I've given you the above info because I feel so many people ask questions here without giving proper background to where they are at in terms of weight, fitness and PB's to date.

tisnotover

Gringo78 wrote: »

Yeah, only around 1200 run Cork and the number who run close to 3hrs is really too small to make any analysis of note. Around 10 runners were +-2min of 3 hrs and of these guys who ultimately made it, 6 of the 7 ran first half faster than 1:28! However, this year, second half is easier than last year and the first 15 miles now allow for very steady running so I think times will be faster and there'll be more runners sub 3 this year.

def a flatter course this year, and should get a lot more times under and around 3mile mark. had a look at results last nite from last year, and couldn't believe the time people lost in 2nd half of race, frightening!

maybe that volcano will kick off again and block out the sun for us !!

Gringo78

tisnotover wrote: »

interesting reading Gringo, I wonder how stats for Cork compare, think only 20/30 people went sub-3 last year in the heat?

Yeah, only around 1200 run Cork and the number who run close to 3hrs is really too small to make any analysis of note. Around 10 runners were +-2min of 3 hrs and of these guys who ultimately made it, 6 of the 7 ran first half faster than 1:28! However, this year, second half is easier than last year and the first 15 miles now allow for very steady running so I think times will be faster and there'll be more runners sub 3 this year.

asimonov

meathcountysec wrote: »

Never ran a marathon, not planning to..... But as far as I see it the boys at the sharp end are racing each other not running for a time. If this involves speeding up to drop other runners and slowing down to recover they will. Totally different dynamic.

especially in championships and boston where pacers aren't allowed.

meathcountysec

mithril wrote: »

On most occasions they are doing something completely differently from me and that is trying to run faster than anyone else and win the race.
A lot of other factors come into play in this situation, you need to stay in touch with your rivals for example and cannot run at a rigidly even pace.

Never ran a marathon, not planning to..... But as far as I see it the boys at the sharp end are racing each other not running for a time. If this involves speeding up to drop other runners and slowing down to recover they will. Totally different dynamic.

theboyblunder

mithril wrote: »

When they do make an attempt to break a record, they normally aim for an even effort . The reason you don't see them staring at a Garmin is because they are following a human pace maker instead.

fair enough, but you never see the pacemaker fumbling with the garmin either

. The russian one in the LM yesterday was fluctuating 10 secs a mile at times but was being praised by the commentators.

I agree with you, even pace is easiest, but I have a feeling (cant back this up, just opinion) that a runner could go faster if (s)he was racing exclusively at constant (maximum for distance) effort regardless rather of pace/mile and then emptied the tank in the last 10-20% of the race.

Gringo78

I run my PMP miles normally like Krusty says....even effort but on the roads this translates to some miles being 7:00 pace, some being 6:30 pace, but all at my target Heart Rate. I run my LSR's also by HR, generally adjusting pace to keep HR under 145...it never ceases to amaze me how much a part wind can play. If you fail to compensate for it you will pay. I think if you try to run all miles bang on 6:50 you will put too much effort in on the uphill, into the wind miles when you should have run as slow as 7:10-7:15 maybe. And some miles you must run 6:30 cos they're with the wind or downhill.

mithril

theboyblunder wrote: »

If you look at the elite athletes, they have plenty of pace feedback during the race but I dont see them staring at garmins too much.

On most occasions they are doing something completely differently from me and that is trying to run faster than anyone else and win the race.
A lot of other factors come into play in this situation, you need to stay in touch with your rivals for example and cannot run at a rigidly even pace.

When they do make an attempt to break a record, they normally aim for an even effort . The reason you don't see them staring at a Garmin is because they are following a human pace maker instead.

christeb

I don't think there's one straight answer. In this RW vid, Ryan Hall explained his recent Boston performance. For anyone who saw it, he yoyo'ed quite a bit according to pace, as the lead pack ran faster and slower. RH kept very steady at 4'50 pace, consulting his watch often. In the end he didn't win, but posted the fastest American time on the course ever.

OK I know I shouldn't be in the s3 forum, I'll go back to AH or somewhere else now!