Long run pacing
Options
Replies
-
I agree with Carson re. easy run pacing - my average pace on long runs tends to be slightly faster because it takes me a few miles to ease into it. Obviously in a long run the first three warm-up miles are a smaller proportion of the whole run.0
-
Most everything that needs to be said has been said, but I want to add one other nugget. I'm of the belief that, if you have to slow down your long run to a slower pace than your easy run, you're doing your easy runs too fast. You should be able to do a long run at your easy run pace, maybe even a little bit faster.
My easy/long run pace is around 9/9:30, sometimes a little faster even, like 8:45. My marathon pace is around 7:20, my HM pace is around 6:45. You don't need to run fast all the time to run fast.
I think that's true without any other limiting factors such as heat and humidity. I do my my midweek runs around an average 9:30 pace but the last two weekends I've done my longer run at about a 9:50 pace. It's just too flipping hot to run that far without cutting back a bit. It normally takes me about 3 - 4 miles to get my pulse up to it's normal range. It's not terrible to run a couple miles with my HR over 160 hence the slightly faster pace midweek. When you have 10 miles to go and you're totally warmed up that's just a no-go when it's 82 degrees and 82% humidity. I mean it's totally possible but I'm doing this for enjoyment too and it just takes the fun out of the longer run to be that hot.
82 degrees is as cold as it gets around here in August for anyone thinking of suggesting to get up earlier. I'm starting 30 minutes before sunup at the coolest time of day.
EDIT:
To the OP, I force myself to run slower on the longer run and the last 3 miles I stop keeping track of pace and just do what feels good. That lets me do the entire thing, still get some fun, and then not be totally wiped the next day.0 -
Edit: That calculator is freaky accurate. It told me my mile time would be ~7:39, and my fastest mile so far this year is 7:37. And the 5k and 10k times are just a minute or so off from the times I've done lately. Cooooool!
Just take the marathon prediction with a grain of salt. I think the usual rule of thumb is McMillan +10-to-15 minutes for a first marathon. And that is if you trained well for the distance.
My 5K-10K-Half times all lign up.. But my marathon time is slower.
I''d suggest adding 20 minutes to the marathon prediction for a first marathon.
That much ?!? I was only 7 minutes over McMillan prediction...0 -
Edit: That calculator is freaky accurate. It told me my mile time would be ~7:39, and my fastest mile so far this year is 7:37. And the 5k and 10k times are just a minute or so off from the times I've done lately. Cooooool!
Just take the marathon prediction with a grain of salt. I think the usual rule of thumb is McMillan +10-to-15 minutes for a first marathon. And that is if you trained well for the distance.
My 5K-10K-Half times all lign up.. But my marathon time is slower.
I''d suggest adding 20 minutes to the marathon prediction for a first marathon.
That much ?!? I was only 7 minutes over McMillan prediction...
McMillan predictions come with the disclaimer 'if you've done the equivalent training for the distance'. For a marathon, that's usually going to be higher mileage than most first-time marathoners will have done, on average. It's entirely possible to hit the McMillan predicted time if you HAVE done the equivalent training (and preferably if you've got a few years of running behind you before doing your first full marathon).
(Josee - I was 9 seconds over!)0 -
McMillan is pretty close to spot-on for me from 1m to marathon.0
-
Edit: That calculator is freaky accurate. It told me my mile time would be ~7:39, and my fastest mile so far this year is 7:37. And the 5k and 10k times are just a minute or so off from the times I've done lately. Cooooool!
Just take the marathon prediction with a grain of salt. I think the usual rule of thumb is McMillan +10-to-15 minutes for a first marathon. And that is if you trained well for the distance.
My 5K-10K-Half times all lign up.. But my marathon time is slower.
I''d suggest adding 20 minutes to the marathon prediction for a first marathon.
That much ?!? I was only 7 minutes over McMillan prediction...
http://www.mcmillanrunning.com/articlePages/article/5Another estimate of your marathon time is to double your half-marathon time and add five minutes. For example, if you run 1:30:00 for a half-marathon then this method would predict that you could run 3:05:00 for a marathon. I find, however, that doubling your half-marathon and adding seven minutes is slightly more accurate for most runners.
That's my plan anyway. I'm at about 1:54 (1:50 under good conditions) for a half so I'm shooting for just under 4 hours for my first marathon. *whimper*0 -
Edit: That calculator is freaky accurate. It told me my mile time would be ~7:39, and my fastest mile so far this year is 7:37. And the 5k and 10k times are just a minute or so off from the times I've done lately. Cooooool!
Just take the marathon prediction with a grain of salt. I think the usual rule of thumb is McMillan +10-to-15 minutes for a first marathon. And that is if you trained well for the distance.
My 5K-10K-Half times all lign up.. But my marathon time is slower.
I''d suggest adding 20 minutes to the marathon prediction for a first marathon.
That much ?!? I was only 7 minutes over McMillan prediction...
McMillan predictions come with the disclaimer 'if you've done the equivalent training for the distance'. For a marathon, that's usually going to be higher mileage than most first-time marathoners will have done, on average. It's entirely possible to hit the McMillan predicted time if you HAVE done the equivalent training (and preferably if you've got a few years of running behind you before doing your first full marathon).
(Josee - I was 9 seconds over!)
Yeah, I didn't train enough (average 31 mpw on 16 weeks of training) AND I went from Couch-to-Marathon in 14 months. I'm nowhere near my potential lolEdit: That calculator is freaky accurate. It told me my mile time would be ~7:39, and my fastest mile so far this year is 7:37. And the 5k and 10k times are just a minute or so off from the times I've done lately. Cooooool!
Just take the marathon prediction with a grain of salt. I think the usual rule of thumb is McMillan +10-to-15 minutes for a first marathon. And that is if you trained well for the distance.
My 5K-10K-Half times all lign up.. But my marathon time is slower.
I''d suggest adding 20 minutes to the marathon prediction for a first marathon.
That much ?!? I was only 7 minutes over McMillan prediction...
http://www.mcmillanrunning.com/articlePages/article/5Another estimate of your marathon time is to double your half-marathon time and add five minutes. For example, if you run 1:30:00 for a half-marathon then this method would predict that you could run 3:05:00 for a marathon. I find, however, that doubling your half-marathon and adding seven minutes is slightly more accurate for most runners.
That's my plan anyway. I'm at about 1:54 (1:50 under good conditions) for a half so I'm shooting for just under 4 hours for my first marathon. *whimper*
Double half time + 5 minutes is VERY agressive. For me that would have meant: 1:45 half * 2 = 3:30 + 5 minutes = 3:35. McMillan is at 3:42 with a 1:45 half. My marathon time ending up being 3:49... So yeah, very far from double half + 5min.0 -
For the runner that goes from couch to marathon in 18 to 24 months and tops out a 40 miles per week, I think McMillan plus 20 is a good, conservative number. If they run that pace and have gas in the tank a 20, they can make up 3 to 6 minutes over the last 10K.
For the runner that has been at it for a while, I think 15 minute cushion is probably fine.
The marathon is the hardest distance to race. Early mistakes are compounded at the end. I'd rather run 2 or 3 marathons with a negative split, than try to nail McMillan on my first and blow up at 18 and death march the last 10K plus. I don't believe in the "make it up in the beginning" philosophy at all.0 -
For the runner that goes from couch to marathon in 18 to 24 months and tops out a 40 miles per week, I think McMillan plus 20 is a good, conservative number. If they run that pace and have gas in the tank a 20, they can make up 3 to 6 minutes over the last 10K.
For the runner that has been at it for a while, I think 15 minute cushion is probably fine.
The marathon is the hardest distance to race. Early mistakes are compounded at the end. I'd rather run 2 or 3 marathons with a negative split, than try to nail McMillan on my first and blow up at 18 and death march the last 10K plus. I don't believe in the "make it up in the beginning" philosophy at all.
I agree about the "make it up in the beginning" philosophy. I think it's the worst way to run/race a marathon. Which bring us back to: LEARN TO PACE YOURSELF.
0 -
I trained on a mcmillan plan and Was spot on for my first; but then again his plans are pretty crazy high mileage in comparison to others so I agree the disclaimer may need another disclaimer lol0
-
Interesting about the easy / long run thing. Mcmillan separates those paces but has an overlap in the range; I find my easys are closer to 7:55 and longs closer to 8:15 but both fall in that overlap range he gives. I had been wondering if I should slow one or the other down since I'm running them pretty much the same...but both hang out in zone 2 heart rate/conversational pace.0
-
Apparently, determining a marathon pace can be mind-boggling. It is stressing me out in a major way!0
