26.2: Forget negative splits?: First half by time, second half by feel
runbabarun
Posts: 89 Member
"Don’t run slower to “save energy” for the final miles, because it’s very unlikely that you will be able to make up time at that point, and don’t run faster to “put time in the bank,” as this usually results in a precipitous decline in pace after 20 miles."
I just read this by Fitzgerald on how to pace yourself during a marathon, and I was surprised. As opposed to the save some energy and run strong in the second half approach, he is saying, an even effort approach works better. He reasons that for the average runner, a drop in pace is inevitable in the second half. To be fair, he says this idea of running the first half by pace and the second by feel requires experience- but I was surprised at the carefree approach.
Also look at some of the marathon pace long runs he suggests trainees do. Pretty intense.
http://running.competitor.com/2013/08/training/the-art-and-science-of-marathon-pacing_16984/3
I just read this by Fitzgerald on how to pace yourself during a marathon, and I was surprised. As opposed to the save some energy and run strong in the second half approach, he is saying, an even effort approach works better. He reasons that for the average runner, a drop in pace is inevitable in the second half. To be fair, he says this idea of running the first half by pace and the second by feel requires experience- but I was surprised at the carefree approach.
Also look at some of the marathon pace long runs he suggests trainees do. Pretty intense.
http://running.competitor.com/2013/08/training/the-art-and-science-of-marathon-pacing_16984/3
0
Replies
-
I "sort of" used this approach for my last marathon. I went out at my goal pace, but was cautiously optimistic that I could make up time in the end and finish under goal. I was able to pull of negative splits with my last quarter being almost 30 seconds under goal and finished 6 and a half minutes under goal. I definitely was shocked, but I think the whole experienced centered around the fact that I set a "this is what I will be happy with" goal and a "this is what I think I might actually pull off" goal. When I drilled the "happy" goal into my head, it took the pressure off of worrying if I could make up any additional time. After I completed the first half feeling good, I did the second half by feel and made up way more time than I thought I could.1
-
@lporter229 That is very interesting. May I ask how many marathons did you run before that one? The reason I ask is because my PR for a half came from a similar approach after multiple, a lot more conservative attempts. In that half, after lining up with 7:00 min group, I found myself giving an easy push from mile 2 onwards and left them behind, and never looked back, cutting my PR by a long stretch. From what've been reading on full marathons, this kind of strategy seemed hard to accomplish- until I read this Fitz essay. My upcoming full in October is my first, I have been planning to take on a more conservative approach- i.e. Focus on finishing respectably first. Which I'll probably stick with, but I don't want to slow myself down too much if the gain is minimal and as I heard a blow heart marathoner say "I will hurt just the same".0
-
I do my long runs fast--not full marathon pace, but within 15-20 second per mile pace. I also try to run even miles in marathons but it does depend on the course. I feel like I am flying the first half of Boston because of the downhill. The second half, I make a deal with myself to make it through the hills and then see how I feel. I felt really good this past year and was passing tons of people the last 10k. I managed a PR and sub 3 hour marathon.1
-
-
@runbabarun - That was my third full marathon, but my first was with a friend who runs at a much slower pace than I am used to running. We finished in just under 5 hours. I am not going to discount this experience, however. It really got me to understand the feel of running a marathon. My second was my first solo attempt with a goal to finish under 4 hours. I ended up with a 3:52, but the effort actually felt a lot harder than my 3:38. I faded hard at the end, so I tried to keep that in the back of my mind for my 3rd.
For me, it is hard to compare the strategies of running a half vs. running a full. I am definitely a lot less conservative in the beginning of a half because if you push too hard, the end result is that you just end up finishing slower, where as with a full marathon the results can be disastrous due to the potential for glycogen depletion. The fear of hitting that dreaded wall is what keeps me in check. It has never actually happened to me, but I have read horror stories. I have said this before, but I feel really strongly on it. My number one key training run is the fast finish long run. It prepares you for the full marathon experience better than anything else. Also, @Wendy98 is a beast!! LOL!1 -
I think he is quite right about the even effort, but a big part of it is learning from experience how to set a realistic target pace based on feedback from your training and interim races. I often see people on forums saying that either negative splits are the 'best' way to run because they achieved their goal and felt great, or other people saying the opposite; that large positive splits are inevitable except for elites because they've always slowed down so it's 'best' to plan for that. I think in both cases those are people who've just picked a goal time they'd like to do, rather than working out seriously what's achievable for them at their current level of fitness. That's understandable if you haven't much experience and don't have the information to go on, but as you do more marathons you should get better at gauging what is possible for you and your strengths and weaknesses.
I like to plan for a time I think is realistic (based on how I feel during my training and how build-up races, especially a half marathon, have gone), then run the first half of the marathon about 1 or at the most two minutes faster than that pace. This is just in case I surprise myself by being slightly fitter, so that I can achieve a faster-than-target time, but not too fast that I destroy my chances of hitting the time I expect. In each of my last two marathons, I ran exactly the time I had told my coach I would a few weeks before, to the minute, and with a small positive split.2 -
@litsy3 I can only wish that I build that much familiarity with my abilities and limitations. The race predictor on my watch suggests a marathon pace that seems like a joke!!! I hope I'll have a better sense as I stretch the long runs. Thank you for your insight.0
-
runbabarun wrote: »"Don’t run slower to “save energy” for the final miles, because it’s very unlikely that you will be able to make up time at that point, and don’t run faster to “put time in the bank,” as this usually results in a precipitous decline in pace after 20 miles."
I just read this by Fitzgerald on how to pace yourself during a marathon, and I was surprised. As opposed to the save some energy and run strong in the second half approach, he is saying, an even effort approach works better.
You have to be aware of what you want out of the marathon. While I think Fitzgerald is correct, he is correct for an implied most important goal of finishing the marathon as fast as possible. If your most important goal is to finish in as good a physical shape as possible, the negative splits may be a better strategy.
THBS, I'm pondering exactly what type of strategy will produce the best balance between finishing fast and finishing in good physical shape. I ran Boston in 3:23:01, for an average pace of 7:45, and banged myself up pretty good. I had been trying to run a 3:15, hit the wall and had to take walking breaks, and lost 5 or 6 minutes to those breaks.
Got to thinking later, instead of running 7:10 and 7:15 early, if I'd just run 7:30 to 7:45 early I could have run a bit at 8:00 later on, got the same time result, and been in better physical shape. Yeah, 20-20 hindsight. There's a lot of stuff I think I see now that I couldn't see in real time.
Coming back to the strategy of running as even as possible for the best time, the problem is knowing exactly what pace you should be running to run even. For a first marathon, you may have a rough idea but you really don't know. After you run a couple of marathons, you may have a better idea. People who run many marathons may have a very good idea of what they can do. Elite marathon runners may be able to predict their finish times quite closely, based on how they feel, how well trained they are, what the weather is, and the nature of the course. But you will still see the occasional elite runner bonking a few hundred meters from the finish line, because he misjudged how much energy he had and went just a tiny bit too fast. (If he bonks just *after* crossing the line, that looks normal.)
I view the theory as informative for understanding, but of limited practical value in telling me what pace to set early in a marathon. I still have to figure that out based on my running experience and how well trained I am. I expect to get better at it as I run more marathons, but I wouldn't be shocked to make make a result-affecting mistake even after I run enough marathons to think I know what I'm doing.1 -
I view the theory as informative for understanding, but of limited practical value in telling me what pace to set early in a marathon. I still have to figure that out based on my running experience and how well trained I am. I expect to get better at it as I run more marathons, but I wouldn't be shocked to make make a result-affecting mistake even after I run enough marathons to think I know what I'm doing.
Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant about running the first half only about 1-2 minutes faster than target - I think that's your window for being optimistic but not affecting your result. But obviously you can't be that precise without enough experience and some luck!
By my 3rd marathon I had a pretty good idea of what was achievable, but my training had been going really well but then things started to go a bit wrong (beginning of ongoing low iron saga). I had wanted to run 2:49:xx and had really thought I might manage it, but nearer the day I realised I was probably in more like 2:52 shape (still a huge pr). however, I went out at sub-2:50 pace anyway, because, well... And then slowed in the last miles to finish in... the 2:52 I was expecting anyway. You are 100 per cent right that I would have had a much nicer time if I'd started a bit slower, dfor the exact same result. But 2 mins is not an outrageous gamble and it doesn't mess you up.
1 -
I like to target a sensible 20 mile time and try to run even splits to get there. What happens in the last 10 km is where the magic happens.
Some of the best advice I ever got from an old timer was to hit 20 at 2:15 (if you're trying to break 3:00) That gives you 45 minutes to run a 10km. If you are doing well and can hold pace, you'll run 2:57. If you are fading a bit, you've got a little slack built in. If you can't get to 20 by 2:15, you're probably not going to break 3:00.1 -
From a practical standpoint, running an even split with nothing left in the end is the "optimum." But there is the other component that Fitzgerald is also all about...fueling before the race and fueling during the race. In the end, it is all about energy management.
If you burn at too high a rate that exceeds what you have onboard to convert at a high rate and what you take in, you will eventually run out of the glycogen that you rely upon to run at a higher pace. You'll still be able to burn fat, but unless you've done a good job of training for a more effective fat burn, you're pretty much cooked at the end of the race when you run out of glycogen.
It took me until the fifth marathon to figure out the fueling aspect. But it was until the last race, that I figured out the balance between the fueling and the burn rate. I did end up with a 5-minute negative split, so I was a bit more conservative on the front half of the race than the back half. But I was also accelerating over the last 10K.2 -
lporter229 wrote: »Also, @Wendy98 is a beast!! LOL!
If by beast you mean sloth, then that describes my last few months perfectly.
2 -
This may have been the single best thread I read on MFP. I love seeing how each of you have varying strategies and Ted flags that you are wary of your depending on your approach, body type, past experiences, etc. I also love that many of these approaches are tested and fine tuned over several races, and you know what works best FOR YOU. Really great ideas and perspectives overall. Thank you, I'll put together a plan in the next 8-10 weeks and see where I end up at Wineglass.0
-
Scheduled for my first Half Marathon in September. Only other races have been 5Ks at which I've run surprisingly steady half mile splits, save for the final quarter, in which I've sped up.
My plan in the Half Marathon is to go out slightly slower than what a steady pace would be to make my goal and gradually speed up as I feel I can. This being my first, I'd rather finish well than die and have a less than pleasant experience.0
This discussion has been closed.