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

Dublin Marathon 2010

Options
1…1112141617…43

Comments

  • Options
    #392
    misty floyd
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭misty floyd


    4 stars (good)
    BrokenMan wrote: »
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056052609

    didn't take long

    First bite made by a mod from the fishing forum. A little Ironic.


  • Options
    #393
    Gringo78
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,120 ✭✭✭Gringo78


    Krusty_Clown wrote: »
    Send a pm to Gringo78. He's run a couple of marathons by heart rate at this stage. He's not running DCM so probably won;t visit this thread.

    I sneakily lurk on this thread every so often to check out peoples targets...

    Yes, I'm a great believer in marathon by HR. first one I aimed for 86% MHR on a hot day but ignored it once it started to rise after halfway....bad idea! Hit the wall at 18-19 and was reduced to 8-9min miles after a 10min mile.

    Second time round 83% was the target HR with 86% as the upper limit. I was aiming for sub 3 and HR actually never rose above 83% as I stuck behind the pacer, easiest race I ever ran.

    My tips: 3:15-3:30 runner, first marathon, aim for max 82% MHR on the flat. Select a pace you are happy with, go out at that pace for first 5 miles. If HR is taking off, back off. If HR is significantly lower than 82% you have a choice - would you be satisfied with marathon finishing time at current pace or would you like to knock a few more minutes off? If you want to push things a bit then slowly increase the pace over a mole or two and gradually bring the HR up to 82%. once you're past 22miles you can start to push things higher within reason.

    On hills, allow HR to rise to maximum 85%, on downhills pace up, don't let the HR drop too low.

    Better to keep the HR more or less even for first 21-22 miles.

    Above 87% MHR I think you are probably burning glycogen to the extent that you cannot replenish fast enough to avoid running out completely by 20-21miles thus hitting the wall.

    A guy running in our sub 3 pace group in Cork reached his HM pace HR 6 miles in. He didn't back off the pace and went down like a bag of spuds at 20 miles and made it to the finish line in an ambulance....finger prick test showed almost zero glycogen left.

    If it's your first marathon, set a conservative HR target, be very careful about exceeding it and set an 'alarm bells' value cos hitting the wall really ain't pleasant. It'll take a few miles for your HR to settle in the race so concentrate on pace rather than HR for first 3 miles, only then start to believe the HR.


  • Options
    #394
    Clearlier
    Registered Users Posts: 4,454 ✭✭✭Clearlier


    3 stars (average)
    Gringo78 wrote: »
    I sneakily lurk on this thread every so often to check out peoples targets...

    Yes, I'm a great believer in marathon by HR. first one I aimed for 86% MHR on a hot day but ignored it once it started to rise after halfway....bad idea! Hit the wall at 18-19 and was reduced to 8-9min miles after a 10min mile.

    Second time round 83% was the target HR with 86% as the upper limit. I was aiming for sub 3 and HR actually never rose above 83% as I stuck behind the pacer, easiest race I ever ran.

    My tips: 3:15-3:30 runner, first marathon, aim for max 82% MHR on the flat. Select a pace you are happy with, go out at that pace for first 5 miles. If HR is taking off, back off. If HR is significantly lower than 82% you have a choice - would you be satisfied with marathon finishing time at current pace or would you like to knock a few more minutes off? If you want to push things a bit then slowly increase the pace over a mole or two and gradually bring the HR up to 82%. once you're past 22miles you can start to push things higher within reason.

    On hills, allow HR to rise to maximum 85%, on downhills pace up, don't let the HR drop too low.

    Better to keep the HR more or less even for first 21-22 miles.

    Above 87% MHR I think you are probably burning glycogen to the extent that you cannot replenish fast enough to avoid running out completely by 20-21miles thus hitting the wall.

    A guy running in our sub 3 pace group in Cork reached his HM pace HR 6 miles in. He didn't back off the pace and went down like a bag of spuds at 20 miles and made it to the finish line in an ambulance....finger prick test showed almost zero glycogen left.

    If it's your first marathon, set a conservative HR target, be very careful about exceeding it and set an 'alarm bells' value cos hitting the wall really ain't pleasant. It'll take a few miles for your HR to settle in the race so concentrate on pace rather than HR for first 3 miles, only then start to believe the HR.

    Thanks Gringo. It sounds like my idea of going out at 150 to halfway (77% MHR) might be just a little conservative then. I'll maybe do 155 (80%) to half way, let if up to 160 (82.5%) very gradually to 22 miles before letting it go a little.

    Hills can be tricky for me. In any races that I've run I've been significantly heavier than any other runner around me so I usually just keep the heart rate steady, back off the pace, let everybody go and then make most of it up on the downhills. Having read stories about trashed quads from running downhill too hard I've been thinking that I might not run quite as hard down them but keep it steady on the uphill anyway. You seem to be suggesting that pushing it a little on the downhill would be a better strategy? The difficulty with downhill running is that for me anyway there are only really two paces - controlled and letting it go.

    I'm debating whether or not to take the first 2-3 miles with my cousin who's aiming to run with the 3:15 pacing group and seeing where I am then. I ran a really comfortable 11 mile run last week at 140 HR (72%) @ 7:35 pace which put the idea in my head but I was probably as tapered as I will be for Dublin (new baby means that training has been haphazard) and the conditions were absolutely perfect (flat, no wind, nice temperature etc.) so there are arguments both ways.


  • Options
    #395
    TFBubendorfer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,340 ✭✭✭TFBubendorfer


    4 stars (good)
    Gringo78 wrote: »
    The kenyans train 1 session a week like this on the diagonals.....I think they do a massive amount of reps, almost to exhaustion.

    Then it's an interval session, not strides. The main point about strides is to run fast with good form, as Krusty said, and you will lose form if you do too many of them. For the same reason you should do long recoveries to start each stride fresh. Strides are a neuromuscular workout, not to build the cardio system.

    Obviously, some people may call an interval session with short repeats "strides", but that's not the original meaning.


  • Options
    #396
    asimonov
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,378 ✭✭✭asimonov


    TFBubendorfer wrote: »
    Then it's an interval session, not strides. The main point about strides is to run fast with good form, as Krusty said, and you will lose form if you do too many of them. For the same reason you should do long recoveries to start each stride fresh. Strides are a neuromuscular workout, not to build the cardio system.

    Obviously, some people may call an interval session with short repeats "strides", but that's not the original meaning.

    i think that gringo was just making a general link from my post about how the diagonals method works well for strides (but obviously done in the right quantity and at the end of an easy run).


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #397
    Red Belly
    Registered Users Posts: 195 ✭✭Red Belly


    firsttimer wrote: »
    Firstly I have to say thanks to this forum for lots of information in the run up to DCM - it has been great to hear what others are doing and get advice!
    Now that the long runs are over I am trying to figure out what pace is going to be realistic for dublin - my first marathon. I really want to enjoy the experience but also want to do the best I can - would LOVE sub 4 - my best half marathon is about 1.56, 10 mile race time from the Frank Duffy was 1.24 and did Athlone 3/4 in 3.05 at the weekend (Hilly!!). I have 3 19/20 milers done at the stage as LSRs. - Is sub 4 realistic or would I be better off starting slower and being happy with something like 4.15/4.30? I suppose I don't really don't want to blow up by pushing it but also don't want to do as well as I can...any thoughts?

    FWIW this will be my first marathon also and I've done 3 half marathons all a few minutes under two hours, but I was shattered at the end of all of them. I'm planning to keep my own natural comfortable pace but also plan to use the pacers to rein me in or push me on. I hope to stay between the 4:15 and 4:30 pace groups. If I'm feeling good I'll move up to but won't pass the 4:15ers, if I find the 4:30ers coming up to me I'll push on enough to stay with them.

    rb


  • Options
    #398
    RayCun
    Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    4 stars (good)
    NB. There is no 4.15 pace group


  • Options
    #399
    Red Belly
    Registered Users Posts: 195 ✭✭Red Belly


    RayCun wrote: »
    NB. There is no 4.15 pace group

    Yikes! Thanks for the heads up! At least half of my strategy can stay in place!

    rb


  • Options
    #400
    Moycullen1
    Registered Users Posts: 223 ✭✭Moycullen1


    firsttimer wrote: »
    Firstly I have to say thanks to this forum for lots of information in the run up to DCM - it has been great to hear what others are doing and get advice!
    Now that the long runs are over I am trying to figure out what pace is going to be realistic for dublin - my first marathon. I really want to enjoy the experience but also want to do the best I can - would LOVE sub 4 - my best half marathon is about 1.56, 10 mile race time from the Frank Duffy was 1.24 and did Athlone 3/4 in 3.05 at the weekend (Hilly!!). I have 3 19/20 milers done at the stage as LSRs. - Is sub 4 realistic or would I be better off starting slower and being happy with something like 4.15/4.30? I suppose I don't really don't want to blow up by pushing it but also don't want to do as well as I can...any thoughts?


    Some useful tips here:

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056051615


  • Options
    #401
    seanynova
    Registered Users Posts: 1,137 ✭✭✭seanynova


    Gringo78 wrote: »
    I sneakily lurk on this thread every so often to check out peoples targets...

    Yes, I'm a great believer in marathon by HR. first one I aimed for 86% MHR on a hot day but ignored it once it started to rise after halfway....bad idea! Hit the wall at 18-19 and was reduced to 8-9min miles after a 10min mile.

    Second time round 83% was the target HR with 86% as the upper limit. I was aiming for sub 3 and HR actually never rose above 83% as I stuck behind the pacer, easiest race I ever ran.

    My tips: 3:15-3:30 runner, first marathon, aim for max 82% MHR on the flat. Select a pace you are happy with, go out at that pace for first 5 miles. If HR is taking off, back off. If HR is significantly lower than 82% you have a choice - would you be satisfied with marathon finishing time at current pace or would you like to knock a few more minutes off? If you want to push things a bit then slowly increase the pace over a mole or two and gradually bring the HR up to 82%. once you're past 22miles you can start to push things higher within reason.

    On hills, allow HR to rise to maximum 85%, on downhills pace up, don't let the HR drop too low.

    Better to keep the HR more or less even for first 21-22 miles.

    Above 87% MHR I think you are probably burning glycogen to the extent that you cannot replenish fast enough to avoid running out completely by 20-21miles thus hitting the wall.

    A guy running in our sub 3 pace group in Cork reached his HM pace HR 6 miles in. He didn't back off the pace and went down like a bag of spuds at 20 miles and made it to the finish line in an ambulance....finger prick test showed almost zero glycogen left.

    If it's your first marathon, set a conservative HR target, be very careful about exceeding it and set an 'alarm bells' value cos hitting the wall really ain't pleasant. It'll take a few miles for your HR to settle in the race so concentrate on pace rather than HR for first 3 miles, only then start to believe the HR.

    im screwed then!
    Half MP HR is 180bpm @ 93%max and MP HR is looking like its around 170-171bpm @ 88%max!!!

    guess ill find out the hard way.........again :confused:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #402
    Gringo78
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,120 ✭✭✭Gringo78


    seanynova wrote: »
    im screwed then!
    Half MP HR is 180bpm @ 93%max and MP HR is looking like its around 170-171bpm @ 88%max!!!

    guess ill find out the hard way.........again :confused:

    Firstly the figures I gave were deliberately conservative for marathon first timers aiming for 3:30. Next marathon I will likely run 87%. Also how sure are you of your HR max? 10bpm below HM HR is a good conservative target HR, no bother to you.


  • Options
    #403
    aero2k
    Registered Users Posts: 1,585 ✭✭✭aero2k


    seanynova wrote: »
    im screwed then!
    Half MP HR is 180bpm @ 93%max and MP HR is looking like its around 170-171bpm @ 88%max!!!

    guess ill find out the hard way.........again :confused:
    Gringo78 wrote: »
    Firstly the figures I gave were deliberately conservative for marathon first timers aiming for 3:30. Next marathon I will likely run 87%. Also how sure are you of your HR max? 10bpm below HM HR is a good conservative target HR, no bother to you.

    Nothing to worry about seany, last year I had HMP HR 180 (6:30/mile) and MP HR 170 (6:49/mile) I haven't tried to check my max HR since 2001, and it was 200 then, so unlikely to be more now. Sounds like you're right on target.

    BTW I don't look at HR when I'm training or racing, I just like to look at it later to see how I'm progressing.


  • Options
    #404
    village runner
    Registered Users Posts: 1,656 ✭✭✭village runner


    Gringo78 wrote: »
    Firstly the figures I gave were deliberately conservative for marathon first timers aiming for 3:30. Next marathon I will likely run 87%. Also how sure are you of your HR max? 10bpm below HM HR is a good conservative target HR, no bother to you.

    recent Berli marathon i ran 87%.....
    Nerves had me as at very high heart rate for the first 8k.....161 odd
    All of a sudden it came down and settled at 156-159 for the nxt 19 miles......It then shot up to 106% and back down to 170......Average out at 160 but i would have ignored the first 8k. Resting heart rate that morning was 80 that eventaully went down to 50. Its 36 at lowest..........With a garmin a polar no wonder i dont remember the race....


  • Options
    #405
    seanynova
    Registered Users Posts: 1,137 ✭✭✭seanynova


    Gringo78 wrote: »
    Firstly the figures I gave were deliberately conservative for marathon first timers aiming for 3:30. Next marathon I will likely run 87%. Also how sure are you of your HR max? 10bpm below HM HR is a good conservative target HR, no bother to you.

    cheers Gringo, your right i dont really know my HRmax value but im working of the typical age profile etc.....i was very worried about my HR values before but they all seam to be in line, as in my 7:50-8:00m/m HR is 150-155bpm so its all relative to my HMP and tempo HR i guess...
    aero2k wrote: »
    Nothing to worry about seany, last year I had HMP HR 180 (6:30/mile) and MP HR 170 (6:49/mile) I haven't tried to check my max HR since 2001, and it was 200 then, so unlikely to be more now. Sounds like you're right on target.

    BTW I don't look at HR when I'm training or racing, I just like to look at it later to see how I'm progressing.

    thanks Aero, im the same now, never look at the HR on the screen(although there a is very small text of it at the top right corner of the garmin) but use it afterwards like yourself for info and comparison...

    i would have said im on target until i got injured but im not too far away....a good taper with a good nutrition & hydration strategy and ill be good for 20m anyway, the rest, well........lets just see ;)

    thanks again for the encouragement lads...


  • Options
    #406
    Badbark
    Registered Users Posts: 20 ✭Badbark


    Although many people have great success racing to HR it is definitely not for everyone. Having run 5-6 days a week with a HR monitor for over a year including 3 marathons and 3 half marathons I would now only use my HR monitor as a rough guide or to look back on afterwards. My average HR was 7-10 BPM different from the very start of the last two marathons I ran although the pace was very similar. The second of these two marathons was completed only 2 minutes faster than the first.

    There are many factors that can change your HR on one particular day so I would strongly advise anyone running there first marathon not to rely too much on HR. My HR is also always higher in a race than it is for the same pace in training due to nerves and excitement.

    Sorry, I am not trying to undermine anything that anyone else has said but I feel it’s important that marathon virgins know both sides of the argument.:)


  • Options
    #407
    aero2k
    Registered Users Posts: 1,585 ✭✭✭aero2k


    seanynova wrote: »
    never look at the HR on the screen(although there a is very small text of it at the top right corner of the garmin) but use it afterwards like yourself for info and comparison...
    ...which is one of the reasons I don't use it!
    (my eysight is fine, it's just that my arm is too short..)


  • Options
    #408
    Clearlier
    Registered Users Posts: 4,454 ✭✭✭Clearlier


    3 stars (average)
    Badbark wrote: »
    Although many people have great success racing to HR it is definitely not for everyone. Having run 5-6 days a week with a HR monitor for over a year including 3 marathons and 3 half marathons I would now only use my HR monitor as a rough guide or to look back on afterwards. My average HR was 7-10 BPM different from the very start of the last two marathons I ran although the pace was very similar. The second of these two marathons was completed only 2 minutes faster than the first.

    There are many factors that can change your HR on one particular day so I would strongly advise anyone running there first marathon not to rely too much on HR. My HR is also always higher in a race than it is for the same pace in training due to nerves and excitement.

    Sorry, I am not trying to undermine anything that anyone else has said but I feel it’s important that marathon virgins know both sides of the argument.:)

    Thanks for the comments Badbark. It's definitely worth hearing both sides of an argument.

    I think that most people have higher heart rates in racing than training. It caused me some difficulties early on in my training as I do it by heart rate too and based my Max HR off a race which meant that when it came to tempo runs in particular I was trying to hit a level that I couldn't maintain.

    I wear my HRM on almost every run as well and have spotted a number of factors that affect heart rate (both up and down) such as heat, lack of sleep, general tiredness, time of day, hydration. I'll be keeping them in mind as well as listening to how my body is responding at the start. The real value for me of a HRM is to stop me from pushing too hard too early. Once you're into a race, going well and feeling good there's a real temptation to push things on a little. I've only seen this in half marathons so far but I don't imagine that the temptation is any less in a marathon.


  • Options
    #409
    seanin4711
    Registered Users Posts: 3,105 ✭✭✭seanin4711


    hi all,
    have been following hal higdons novice 2 program for prep for the DCM but finding it very hard to pace myself and finding on the LSR's that my legs are buckled by mile 16/17.
    case in point the athlone 3/4!
    anways what can i do to try a minimise this trouble?
    could it be that i am not eating enough on the long runs?ie half way round
    Is it a matter of getting used to the distance?
    Would like to do the DCM in 4 hours but after athlone my confidence took a bit of a dent!
    I might be more concerned in enjoying the experience now!

    any kind soul got some words of wisdom for me?
    slan
    s

    PS(would still like to go under 4)!!!


  • Options
    #410
    Speedy44
    Registered Users Posts: 1,285 ✭✭✭Speedy44


    seanin4711 wrote: »
    hi all,
    have been following hal higdons novice 2 program for prep for the DCM but finding it very hard to pace myself and finding on the LSR's that my legs are buckled by mile 16/17.
    case in point the athlone 3/4!
    anways what can i do to try a minimise this trouble?
    could it be that i am not eating enough on the long runs?ie half way round
    Is it a matter of getting used to the distance?
    Would like to do the DCM in 4 hours but after athlone my confidence took a bit of a dent!
    I might be more concerned in enjoying the experience now!

    any kind soul got some words of wisdom for me?
    slan
    s

    PS(would still like to go under 4)!!!

    what pace are you doing your lsr's at? Do you eat before them, how is your sleep? All there will be factors to consider. What time did you do in Athlone?


  • Options
    #411
    Condo131
    Registered Users Posts: 1,442 ✭✭✭Condo131


    4 stars (good)
    seanin4711 wrote: »
    hi all,
    ........but finding it very hard to pace myself and finding on the LSR's that my legs are buckled by mile 16/17...............

    any kind soul got some words of wisdom for me?

    Couple of things come to mind:
    Hydration - if you're not maintaining a high level of hydration - at all times!! - you're likely to develop problems.
    Are you pushing too much? You may have speed, at shorter distances. Longer distances are a different matter. I find that *most* people's idea of LSR is *not* LSR and can often be LFR. LSR is just that - time on your feet.
    Recovery - are you getting enough?

    First marathon - this is a learning curve. Learn from it - you'll enter the next marathon far wiser and far better prepared, no matter how well you fare in your first.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #412
    plodder
    Registered Users Posts: 7,149 ✭✭✭plodder


    4 stars (good)
    Can anyone tell me was the Energise sports drink given in cups or bottles last year? Thx.


  • Options
    #413
    pdiddyw
    Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭pdiddyw


    Hi first timer..
    So just wondering if the course is the exact same as last year?
    If so is there any info on course profile.. i.e mile 1-2flat, mile 3 some uphill, mile 4-6 some down hill etc.......apologies if its already been posted but didn't see it...

    I did see a post on a uphill slope around Crumlin??
    How bad is this or how long does it go on for ..many thanks


  • Options
    #414
    RubyK
    Registered Users Posts: 3,355 ✭✭✭RubyK


    4 stars (good)
    Hey pdiddyw, I posted the same question a while back, and there are some replies. Enjoy :D
    Peckham wrote: »
    It's not exactly as flat as a pancake, but at the same time isn't too hilly either. In terms of hills, there are really two points where these come into effect:

    1) From around mile 12 to mile 13 there's a long drag up through Crumlin. It's not exactly a hill, but is an incline none the less and can be draining as it's invariably into the wind and is a bit dull in terms of scenery.

    2) Around miles 18-19 there are two inclines up to the top of Fosters Avenue that are tough because of where they come in the race. Again, not exactly problematic in themselves, but can catch people out.

    I'm certain there have been some course profiles floating around these parts - am sure someone less lazy than me will point them out.
    tunguska wrote: »
    Ignorance is bliss Rubyk...........But since you asked: The lads have already mentioned the drag from crumlin to the walkinstown roundabout and the climb at roebuck hill. But theres also a doozey of a hill when youre coming out of chapelizod, around about the 10mile mark.
    donothoponpop wrote: »
    It's a flat course (dodges rotten tomatoes thrown by amadeus and other Strawberry Half-ers;)). The worst of the hills is a slow drag from 17-19miles: steep 40m section at milltown, gradual long incline at Clonskeagh, which culminates in a steep-ish 100m before Foster's Ave. A lot of runners dislike the long Crumlin road mid-section (where the wind can be against you), and some say the ramp at 22 miles at UCD is tough (in reality, anything at 22 miles is tough).

    That's the worst parts IMHO, in general its a great course, with plenty to keep your interest. Crowds are meritorious, its certainly flat enough to be a PB-type course. Copacetic cameraderie.


  • Options
    #415
    pdiddyw
    Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭pdiddyw


    great thanks for that Rubyk


  • Options
    #416
    RayCun
    Registered Users Posts: 15,704 ✭✭✭✭RayCun


    4 stars (good)
    There's also a Garmin track of the route (with elevation) here


  • Options
    #417
    cdelboy
    Registered Users Posts: 17 ✭cdelboy


    4 stars (good)
    plodder wrote: »
    Can anyone tell me was the Energise sports drink given in cups or bottles last year? Thx.

    small bottles as far as I remember!


  • Options
    #418
    Condo131
    Registered Users Posts: 1,442 ✭✭✭Condo131


    4 stars (good)
    pdiddyw wrote: »
    ....just wondering if the course is the exact same as last year?
    Other than a change in the first mile, I understand that the course is the same as last year. This year's course map is here.

    You'll find details of last year's course here.


  • Options
    #419
    xebec
    Registered Users Posts: 3,311 ✭✭✭xebec


    Condo131 wrote: »
    Other than a change in the first mile, I understand that the course is the same as last year. This year's course map is here.

    You'll find details of last year's course here.

    Last year and this year look identical to me (and not just because you posted the same link twice :P) - what's the change in the first mile?


  • Options
    #420
    meathcountysec
    Registered Users Posts: 1,450 ✭✭✭meathcountysec


    4 stars (good)
    xebec wrote: »
    Last year and this year look identical to me (and not just because you posted the same link twice :P) - what's the change in the first mile?

    The start in Fitzwilliam heads towards Leeson Street as opposed to Holles Street


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #421
    plodder
    Registered Users Posts: 7,149 ✭✭✭plodder


    4 stars (good)
    meathcountysec wrote: »
    The start in Fitzwilliam heads towards Leeson Street as opposed to Holles Street
    That was the same last year. Up until last year it was different though ...


Advertisement