Sub 3h15

1104710481050105210531632

Comments

  • Good training runs by Gul, Birch, Lorenzo and Ant

    Great racing Jools, OO and PMJ

    Yikes Poacher, 3 marathons in a month, I like your style. Good luck!

    I ran my first ever 5 mile road race today and was very pleased with about 28:5x for third place overall and first old fart. I was targeting sub 30 but felt strong throughout and managed to increase my pace every mile. I missed hitting my Garmin at the very start so I’m looking forward to the official chip results to ensure I did indeed go sub 29.

  • Great 5-milers from OO and BB. My next race is a similar distance (8.43kms) - I'll be pleased if I can do anyhwere near as well.

    Re-reading my earlier post, I think I may have been a bit uncharitable. My point was that as positive as inclusiveness is in many ways, it may also have contributed to people accepting relative mediocrity as good enough. This will only be apparent at elite level, though. The thing is, I don't think it helps anyone to big up something which doesn't warrant such high praise.

    My own more-than-mediocre offerings are put well into perspective by the likes of AR, TR, BB,  Jase, Steve Way etc. But at least my better efforts are the result of putting more hard work in. That's what I like about running, that it's a very honest sport for the most part. 

    So people waltzing round the office and posting pics on FB going "Yay me!" showing off their finisher's medal at VLM after doing a 6:30 marathon just irritates me, sorry.

  • Ant, I agree with your sentiment and it is tough that there are not enough words to describe all forms of forwards propulsion. Some people race, some run, others jog. There is no clear barrier between such and it is hard to put one down. In the olden days my coach used to say "if you can't run sub hour for 10 you are not a runner" and I used to buy into that, but as you grow older you realise that such is a little naive and sexist as well so you need to look at WAVA gradings etc and then it all gets mucky.

    Suffice to say, my finishers medal is not the same as a 6:30 effort, whatever they look like and feel. You can't negative split if your first half is over 2 hours and there are only two sub-X hour targets for the marathon: sub-2 and sub-3. Sub-4 is not a target.

  • Philip_M_Jones wrote (see)

    You can't negative split if your first half is over 2 hours and there are only two sub-X hour targets for the marathon: sub-2 and sub-3. Sub-4 is not a target.

    PMJ - I understand the sentiment but I don't agree with the above. I might be missing something but why can't someone have a target of sub-4? For someone doing their first marathon with a HM PB based on 9 min miles (i.e. just under 2 hours) I'd say that it was a stretching target to aim for sub-4 that they should be justifiably proud of getting. Mrs L will be doing her first marathon in the spring with a target of 4:45 and for her getting that will be every bit as praiseworthy as me finally going sub 3:10.

    Ditto someone for whom simply completing a marathon is an achievement, they should feel proud about spending six and a half hours on their feet and making it to the finish line in one piece. 

    Ant - I'm not sure that our underperformance at an elite level vs the Japanese is as a result of overly praising people of lesser athletic ability. I think the beauty of running is that it is so inclusive and as such the achievements of anyone setting themselves a goal that for them is a tough one should be applauded. 

    Whether anything justifies waltzing round the office is another question. image

    I'll jump off my soap box now.

    Thoroughly enjoyable XC race this morning - more sandy than muddy underfoot and not too many hills. I felt pretty good all the way round so hoping to beat last year's time and position (15th). No sign of the results yet.

  • Lorenzo - Agreed, but only as long as the goal is one you have to work hard to achieve. Otherwise it would be like me going to a gymnastics competition, doing a forward roll (badly) and then expecting hearty congratulations off everybody.

     

  • MsEMsE ✭✭✭

    Just don't come over here, Ant, and see how much the locals like to high-five their 60 minute 5Ks while wearing tutus.

    Seriously though, all efforts are to be applauded, as long as they are, you know, proper efforts be it a 6 hour marathon or 2:30 marathon.

  • OO54OO54 ✭✭✭

    I often scan the finishers at the parkrun and it never ceases to impress me how the back markers get the same sense of achievment when they cross the line as the leaders. Quite humbling actually as I'm usually long gone when slow runners finish a race. But I do know what you mean Ant, at our level it's hard to get their perspective. 

     Anyway we need people running 4 and 6 hour marathons to make our WAVA ratings look so good image

  • Lorenzo wrote (see)

    PMJ - I understand the sentiment but I don't agree with the above. I might be missing something but why can't someone have a target of sub-4?

    Firstly this is all a bit tongue in cheek and fuelled by a nice bottle of red but also there is, in my opinion, some sort of absolute. If we transfer the argument to income, then take someone on minimum wage, £6,31 an hour. If you asked them what they would target then would they say £6.32 an hour, or £10, or £20? What they truly target is not always going to be achievable and that is what a target is.

    I am not trying to belittle the 4 hour runner but say that there is some difference between what goals people set for themselves and what is a true target. I have a few friends who are aiming to run sub-60 10ks but that is not their true target.

  • To be fair, Ant, a picture of the forward roll would make a change from seeing you drinking beer in the bath image 

     

  • Another nice Sub40 Jools. and plenty of mileage being racked up on the thread already.

    It was an experience walking through New York on the Monday following the Marathon. Everyone from visitor to business person in suit were wearing their medals. Sure is a different culture.

    November stats 140 miles run, 56 rowed. 1 marathon run.

    First week of the Hanson plan completed, getting my run frequency up to 6 days, all easy miles. 19 more weeks of sticking to a plan to go.

  • PMJ - good 7 days however you count it.
    Ant - nice fast finish there.
    OO - well done on the team prize.
    Badbark - cracking race and impressive time - progressive pace too!
    A work colleague worked really hard, battling back from an achilles injury to finally get his sub 4 marathon at London this year. And what's wrong with 6 hour marathons ?image
    AR - good start to the Hanson training.
    6 miles @ 9:14 m/m plus 10 short sprints up a subway slope!

  • hmmm I don't think that any of us have the right to decide what a worthy target is for someone else.  I'd be a bit peeved if a 2:10 marathoner told me that my long term sub3 aspiration wasn't a real target and that I'm only a "proper runner" if I can go sub 2:20.  Whether you are a "runner" a "marathoner", a "jogger" or whatever is about how you see yourself not how someone else decides to judge you - and it is ALWAYS a faster runner looking behind him or her that seems to want to do the judging of others and not themselves. 

    Bigges running week for quite a while for me, 18 miles.

  • If you carefully read what people are saying then you can see that what I am saying is right. People say "I want to complete the marathon without walking". That is their target, or they say "I want to run my first marathon". The time rounded to the nearest whole hour is a convenience thing.

    If you were asked to draw a curve of finishers versus time for VLM, then most of us would draw a classic bell curve, so at the 2.0x end you would have a few finishers, then more at 2.1x and more and more to a peak and then a tail off to the slower end.

    If you look at the real stats, e.g. http://foot4ward.co.uk/2011/05/03/more-marathon-statistics/, then you can see that although the overall shape is a bell curve, there are spikes and a real noticeable one at 4 hours. A lot of people try and go under 4 hours and surprisingly a lot of them make it. As the curve really is a bell curve then we can assume a lot of these are sandbaggers and could easily go faster than 4 hours. You can also see a bunch of sub-3 sandbaggers and even a sub 3:15 packimage

  • AbbersAbbers ✭✭✭

    More good running, rowing, drinking and discussion! As usual, catching up after the weekend always takes a while...

    Always someone faster, always someone slower. As long as the enjoyment is there for the individual, does the time matter?

    10 for me early on Saturday morning, all at 8:xx. Another 10 planned for lunch today.

  • This is an interesting discussion on marathon time aspirations. It’s a pity we can’t see the HR percentage of maximum for every runner. I think this would give a good indication of how hard each person was working to achieve their time. I’m sure there are many 4 hour marathon runners working harder than sub 3 hour runners etc.

    My official chip time for the 5 mile race yesterday was given at 28:47 which is 5:45 pace. This now means my 5 mile race pace is 4 seconds faster than my 5k PB pace! image 

  • Wow, that's impressive Badbark (and means you need to do a 5k soon image)

  • Badbark wrote (see)

    This now means my 5 mile race pace is 4 seconds faster than my 5k PB pace! image 

    Time to find a 5k and cash in!

  • Great minds think alike, PMJ

  • Yep, Jools and PMJ I plan on a Parkrun in 2 weeks as I've a XC next Saturday.

    I did go the whole beetroot juice, caffeine and mini taper before yesterdays race that I don't usually do before Parkrun's. I think I might have to do all this to fully realise my 5k potential.  

  • AbbersAbbers ✭✭✭

    BB, terrific time.

    9.5 for me at lunch in a rather more sedate 1h13, which is something like 7.40mm. Steady rather than easy.

  • Top Pacey stuff Badbark

    Under the weather so no running for me after saturdays 12 miler, which is great as I start Paris P&D training today with a rest day. Going to follow the 55-70 this time to try and make the run a little more controlled for a similar result.

  • TRTR ✭✭✭

    .....I liked the bit where PMJ said that if you read it again then you'll see he's right......that made me smile.

    BB - good leg speed, shows more improvement is possible over 26.2.

    I always wonder to myself that the folks further down the field dont look like they're trying very hard, but I also take my hat off to anyone that is off the sofa doing some exercise. Some folks join running clubs for the social part of it, not to smack themselves silly trying to run 10M in 60mins (or whaterver other target). One of my friends trained for VLM and did ~4hrs the other year and he was outside for a long time on some of his 20M training runs, I wouldnt have done it.
    I'm talk to folks on the way to the VLM expo and on the train after the race etc to ask folks about their hopes/preparation etc or how they did after, but I'm very careful to never mention how fast I ran or hope to run etc I dont want them to compare apples and oranges. 

     

  • I have run 2 4hour marathon - trail marathons on hilly routes as a training runs.  My goal was anyway fun and TOF rather than performance.  I don't mind a long days running anyway. Depends on the goal really.

    'Total Abs' class this lunchtime followed by treadmill run at 5% for 20min and the last 10 flat at HMP.

  • OO54OO54 ✭✭✭

    Great running Badbark, compared to my 33, but it was on sand. Good luck with the parkrun, see if you can beat my 17:40 pb.

    A point well made TR- I also like talking to runners at VLM, GNR etc. Their achievements mean a lot to them too.

    Went for a steady recovery run tonight along the lake in Nyon, but felt great so gave it a good blast. No more races this year so focusing on reversing my dip in form in the parkrun.     

  • Just as my mojo was returning I seem to be coming down with some kind of lurgy. It hasn't come out fully yet, but my left ear is completely blocked and my throat feels weird and full of catarrh. Clearly sleeping until 10am on Saturday and almost midday on Sunday was not enough to banish it. I blame work. There's a cold doing the rounds.

  • Interesting debate re marathon times etc. What struck me most when I did my first mara VLM this year was the sheer diversity of runners and that's what makes running a unique sport.

    BB - Great 5 mile pace! Sub 18 5k with a bit in hand defo on the cards all things being equal.image

    First run tonight since 5k on Thursday, time constraints meant I could only do 2.5 miles at 6:4x pace, felt very fresh and easy. Looks like any thoughts of doing any sort of decent mileage are on hold for a few more weeks. I will be focusing on speed mainly and want to nail a decent mile time. Never done a flat out mile before and given Thursdays 1st was 6:01 I would hope to be able to go a fair bit quicker than that. Anyone on here done a specific mile tme trial before?

  • BB - Really impressive.

    Gerard - Don't miss out on this next summer!

  • Ant - Looks good, thanks for this! Did you participate this year? Drilled down on the results and saw this?????

    Mick Jagger 00:04:36

    87.3%

    Really keen to utilise the track more and it's exactly a mile from my door!

  • MsEMsE ✭✭✭

    GM - I saw Sir Mick in concert a few years back and he is blooming fit for an old geezer.  Even if he did take a shed load of drugs in his day.

  • Badbark - it'll be interesting to see what you can do at parkrun.
    Abbers - getting some good mileage in the bank.
    TR - most considerate.
    Speedy - sorry to hear you're feeling under the weather.
    GM - good luck with the flat out mile - I've done the Magic Mile a couple of times now and this year managed 5:32.
    Taking my recovery week early so that I have a couple of weeks hard training before easing up over the Christmas period. So treated myself to some intervals this morning - nothing silly, but just to remind my legs what fast feels like. So 6 x 200m in 38, 36, 37, 35, 35, 34.

Sign In or Register to comment.