race fuel
Options
Replies
-
I use Huma-its an energy gel made from Chia seeds. Easy to digest and not too thick like GU. Have a great race!0
-
This is just based on MY personal experience and I am by no means an expert, so take it for what it's worth:
-I generally do not fuel on my longer training runs because I feel like it gets my body more used to running in a somewhat depleted state
-I only fuel on races longer than a HM (which for me has only been full marathons) because I do not like to break my rhythm on shorter runs
-I experiment with fueling options on mid length training runs (12 miles or so) because if something doesn't agree with me I do not want it to ruin my whole long run
-For full marathons, I fuels every 5-6 miles because I have been told that if you wait too long, you have missed the whole point of fueling, which is to prevent depletion of your glycogen stores. You should continuously fuel to top them off, rather than waiting until they are almost depleted, which doesn't happen until well into the race (3+ hours).
Again, not sure that any of this is sound scientific advice, but it's what works for me personally.
0 -
Since my primary "thing" is ultra-distance triathlon, I tend to fuel way more than most runners. On any run longer than 13 or so I will bring some sort of fuel with me. When just running I will take in about 100 calories every 5 miles. During an open marathon, I tend to do the same, so I carry 4 gels with me and take them at the 5 mile marks (obviously I don't bother with anything at 25). I like for these to have caffeine as well for the added boost.
When riding in training I fuel at a rate of 300cal/hr to get my body used to consuming that much while moving. That isn't needed when just running though so for training runs I stick to about the 100-ish/hr or even less.
When racing - On the bike I carry a bottle with 1000 calories of Hammer Perpetuem which will get me through the first half of the ride. My other bottle will have about 100 calories of sports drink (lately I use Scratch). I also have a little "bento box" on the top tube of my bike that has about 800 calories stuffed in there. Usually I will try to grab another bottle of sports drink while going through an aid station. I aim to get in about 2000 calories over the course of the ride.
When I get to the run portion of an Ironman I will actually carry about 12 gels with me in a little pack and take one every 20 minutes. My that point my body is too depleted to try to function on 100cal/hour. Gotta keep it rolling at 300/hr.
Granted that is a fueling strategy for ultra-distance triathlon. For open running races that becomes way overkill.0 -
grimmeanor wrote: »I'm suspecting it is about time more than distance, but hey, I'm asking because I like to know many opinions.
I'm inclined to agree with this. The time it takes to deplete your glycogen stores almost definitely varies person to person, but I can definitely imagine someone who runs a 2:30 HM needing fuel a lot more than someone running a 1:30 HM. I also suspect that fitness level & body weight affect it too.
I should probably know this, but what do elite marathon runners do for fuel?
0 -
There is some difference between the energy stores within muscle and within the liver from person to person, and you can force more storage, but there is a baseline amount overall throughout the body. This is survival based. the central nervous system will only work with glucose; it cannot function using ketones or any other energy source. Part of this baseline amount is what is stored in muscle and liver, and I don't really know how much it varies from person to person, but it has been shown in studies to support high levels of activity from 1.5-2 hours without any real variation outside that 30 min when it comes to running. This is actually an area that has been very extensively studied.
Now, it does take more energy to move something that weighs more, obviously. But that body stores more as well, in all forms. Weight has not been shown to have an effect that on that 1.5-2 hour window in the studies I have seen.
Now, REfeuling is a different story. Protein and carb intake after a workout has been shown time and time again to increase performance even if the workout is only 45 min or whatever.0 -
I think it boils down to that there is risk involved with taking in anything while you are running. Knowing that they can safely and effectively run for 2 hours without taking in anything and have no detrimental effects on their time, many runners chose to not fuel during a shorter race.0
-
Carrieendar wrote: »I think it boils down to that there is risk involved with taking in anything while you are running. Knowing that they can safely and effectively run for 2 hours without taking in anything and have no detrimental effects on their time, many runners chose to not fuel during a shorter race.
What I bolded is key though. Many runners say they don't need to fuel for a (example) half marathon, but if you look at their times they are incapable of a negative split. If you *can* demonstrate a negative split over that distance and not take in anything, then I would say yes you don't need to take in anything.0 -
I have a problem with the consistency of gels, and I don't do caffeine. I usually put a little baggie of nuts in my pouch, and a fruit squeeze pouch or two. Powerbar makes them, but there are also several baby food companies that make them and they are all the same thing. So, I just shoot for whichever is cheaper.0
-
A year and a half ago Kimberly Mueller spoke to my running club about race fueling. Her preferred method is to have her nutrition added to her water so that she continuously is replenishing as she sips on it through a race (half or longer). For those of us who rely on gels she recommends 45 minutes; based on her recommendation I moved my gel intake from mile 8 to mile 6 of my halfs and I have had better results and felt stronger at the end of races. Kim has literally written the book on sports supplements (http://www.amazon.com/Athletes-Guide-Sports-Supplements-ebook/dp/B00C5I4VIW/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1430328441&sr=8-1&keywords=kimberly+mueller) so I listen to what she has to say.0
-
lporter229 wrote: »This is just based on MY personal experience and I am by no means an expert, so take it for what it's worth:
-I generally do not fuel on my longer training runs because I feel like it gets my body more used to running in a somewhat depleted state
-I only fuel on races longer than a HM (which for me has only been full marathons) because I do not like to break my rhythm on shorter runs
-I experiment with fueling options on mid length training runs (12 miles or so) because if something doesn't agree with me I do not want it to ruin my whole long run
-For full marathons, I fuels every 5-6 miles because I have been told that if you wait too long, you have missed the whole point of fueling, which is to prevent depletion of your glycogen stores. You should continuously fuel to top them off, rather than waiting until they are almost depleted, which doesn't happen until well into the race (3+ hours).
Again, not sure that any of this is sound scientific advice, but it's what works for me personally.
Ditto. 100% the same. Works for me too. However there is nothing wrong with fueling if you want to; the value of the psychological boost shouldn't be underplayed. I certainly felt that I was benefiting from it back when I did it but having experimented without I now know for sure I don't need it. Was a similar story with water. Used to take it with me even on a 5k plod - it was a psychological crutch. Gradually you get more comfortable.
0 -
Carrieendar wrote: »I think it boils down to that there is risk involved with taking in anything while you are running. Knowing that they can safely and effectively run for 2 hours without taking in anything and have no detrimental effects on their time, many runners chose to not fuel during a shorter race.
What I bolded is key though. Many runners say they don't need to fuel for a (example) half marathon, but if you look at their times they are incapable of a negative split. If you *can* demonstrate a negative split over that distance and not take in anything, then I would say yes you don't need to take in anything.
I would argue poor training or race strategy over the need for feul for the shorter race.
But training your body to be dependence on a blood glucose spike for performance by continually feuling on all training runs can be the problem as well. That's a problem you can't fix race day. And, if that's you, just feul and worry about it next time around!
Note the above is based on knowledge of physiology as it relates to running. I have no idea when it comes to tris
0 -
Ugh. Fuel**** not feul 0
-
I am not sure there is such a thing as a physiological adaptation to glucose spikes, but I could be wrongCarrieendar wrote: »Carrieendar wrote: »I think it boils down to that there is risk involved with taking in anything while you are running. Knowing that they can safely and effectively run for 2 hours without taking in anything and have no detrimental effects on their time, many runners chose to not fuel during a shorter race.
What I bolded is key though. Many runners say they don't need to fuel for a (example) half marathon, but if you look at their times they are incapable of a negative split. If you *can* demonstrate a negative split over that distance and not take in anything, then I would say yes you don't need to take in anything.
I would argue poor training or race strategy over the need for feul for the shorter race.
But training your body to be dependence on a blood glucose spike for performance by continually feuling on all training runs can be the problem as well. That's a problem you can't fix race day. And, if that's you, just feul and worry about it next time around!
Note the above is based on knowledge of physiology as it relates to running. I have no idea when it comes to tris
0 -
I am not sure there is such a thing as a physiological adaptation to glucose spikes, but I could be wrongCarrieendar wrote: »Carrieendar wrote: »I think it boils down to that there is risk involved with taking in anything while you are running. Knowing that they can safely and effectively run for 2 hours without taking in anything and have no detrimental effects on their time, many runners chose to not fuel during a shorter race.
What I bolded is key though. Many runners say they don't need to fuel for a (example) half marathon, but if you look at their times they are incapable of a negative split. If you *can* demonstrate a negative split over that distance and not take in anything, then I would say yes you don't need to take in anything.
I would argue poor training or race strategy over the need for feul for the shorter race.
But training your body to be dependence on a blood glucose spike for performance by continually feuling on all training runs can be the problem as well. That's a problem you can't fix race day. And, if that's you, just feul and worry about it next time around!
Note the above is based on knowledge of physiology as it relates to running. I have no idea when it comes to tris
I think at that point it's a mental adaptation for identifying whether or not your body is able to continue moving.0 -
That was my snark not coming through. Glucose spike= gel in training and, yes, your body does adapt to the amount of energy that comes in during exercise. Hence why athletes who "train low race high"have been shown to utilize more fat for fuel even in the presence of gels on race day.
edited to add: I kinda thought this was common knowledge? you deprive muscle just enough, it stores larger amounts of glycogen. The stores there, without this training, are still ample to get you through a 90 min race (or two hours depending on who you ask), but you can improve with more work.
0 -
Everything out there makes me dry mouthed and thirsty. The only exception being the chocolate flavoured Cliff shot gels or Gu or some tiny candy bars. I have exercise induced migraines and I found out that I don't have one if I get some sugars in at miles 4 and 10 during a HM distance. The best part is I feel fine at mile 4 sometimes and don't get the gel and then I'm having a crushing headache just past the 10k mark along with neck and shoulder pain. Then I'm going for the emergency ibuprofen instead. Not fun
0 -
btw....I use gels on training runs 2 hours + every other time towards the end of a training season/getting closer to race time. And I use them in races, I feel, to great effect. So I am a fan! salted caramel gu is pretty good as is peanut butter because it kinda just tastes like peanut butter.
I just dont think they benefit you during shorter stuff and they can be detrimental.0 -
OK. I get the concept then of training your body to store more glycogen by not refueling as often (or at all) on long runs. I just have never really seen any guidance on how best to do that. I guess from all I have read it seemed like it was something that might start happening as you run more. Now though, I'm not so sure.
I guess after these two halfs coming up in a few weeks I'll start running long without any refueling on training runs. So far I really only refuel on long runs, but I do what I would do on race day. Looks like I should rethink that.
This is why I like to ask these sorts of questions. 0 -
Carrie your post make it look like you are referring to the half marathon as a short race that you do not need to fuel during. Was that your intention?0
-
Yes, if you can run the half from 90 min-2 hours then taking in gels during the race is not going to make you faster. Your body has plenty of storage for that time. I can post some references if people want. Many require journal access, but if you are a university student or the like , you can access them through a library code.0
