Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Options
Sub 10:00...
The materials in this website are in no way intended to replace the professional medical care, advice, diagnosis or treatment of a doctor, qualified personal trainer, therapist, dietitian or nutritionist Runners's World, Part of the Hearst UK well-being network © Copyright 2017
Comments
Just wondering....
He's 35-39 I think. Old enough that he can leave it a few years and go in the OAPs AG....
My dismount ended up being a track dismount, which got a few "oooh"s but didn't make the footage! Going for a swim at lunch myself. I actually slipped over 70kg for the first time since March this year (slap up eating in Dubai and Spain) and before that it was pre-Christmas! Diet starts Saturday....
She's just hit me with a counter proposal which is to go for 70.3 world champs, which would be interesting. I love the challenge of the full distance but half is probably my best distance and I really enjoy those races as it does feel like a race rather than the slog a full can become.
Just got back from the knee specialist, who rather boringly recommended rest and no running rather than waving a magic wand and fixing my knee... Might listen to him this time though as I'm determined that I will have a winter of running behind me for next IM race - I hate cycling in the cold and spent most Sunday mornings last winter in a freezing cold garage, covered in sweat on the turbo rather than being outdoors running. I'm sure it helped my bike improve but it was miserable!
Well get your knee sorted and join me in Mallorca! I'm going for a shot at it next year but the calendar is filling up fast...
Yep definitely get the knee sorted!!
I'm thinking I may do my first winter season of cross country running through the winter perhaps. I know I need to become a much stronger cyclist but winter cycle training definitely sounds less fun than cross country running.
Looking more and more like IMUK for me next year... i have next year and the yaer after before I move to 30-34 so looking at maybe a KQ shot.
I've got three more years in this AG.... will take me that long to get close!
Chatted to a German chap after IMA this year who finished 19th in the 35-39 AG with a time of... 9 hours 17!
OK so it's a quick course but the thought made me a little sick.
My swimming at full distance, with little training, is consistently between 1:07 - 1:15.
My quickest bike is 5:45 (off back of 4-5 hours of unstructured training per week & including two flats).
My weakness (& significantly so) is my running and the consistent issue of stabbing gut pains (which I've not yet sussed).
I am confident I can turn out at IMA next year and deliver circa 1hr swim and with some good training (& no flats) 5:15-5:20 bike but I am curious to know what you guys feel you need to be delivering (time wise) in a stand alone Marathon before you can feel realistically confident of going sub 10 hrs on a 140.6?
The maths is similar to mine. An hour in the swim, 10 mins in transition and 5:20 bike gives you 3:30 to run the marathon. The trick is to start the marathon with something in the tank - no use killing it to ride 5:20 and have nothing. (For me, this was more marginal - I certainly wasn't on empty, but I'd let bike fitness slide away a little and lack of long rides meant it took more than I thought out of me. But I gave myself a shot and couldn't convert!)
In April I ran 1:29 for a HM PB. In June I ran 1:31 in a HIM. My marathon PB is years old but stands at 3:22. I'd be confident that I could dip under 3:10 in a marathon with the correct training for a few weeks on my current fitness, so a 3:30 marathon isn't out of this world unrealistic. I think that's roughly where you need to be. But like I said, if you're riding at 85% FTP to achieve the bike split, you better be a damn strong runner (which you say you're not) to convert.
It's a tough nut, and whilst I (think I) know roughly how to, I haven't cracked it yet.
I ran a 3:13 marathon in march with little marathon training and no long runs due to injury - would probably have been a 3:10 if it wasn't for the cobbles of Rome. I'm a much faster runner at shorter distances though and have never conerted well into a fast marathon time as I've never properly trained for one - I managed 16:54 in parkrun the weekend before my Ironman
At IM Nice about 9 weeks later I ran 3:23, still without any long runs (think I did 1 x 17 miles at very easy pace 3 weeks out). Finished the race in 10:25 including puncture and a crash, so probably closer to 10:15 on a tough bike course... think a sub 10 is now achievable with more bike training and more run training... and could probably shave a few minutes off my 1:08 swim
Maybe not sub 10 at IMUK though from what I hear about the course... but then again looking at IMUK results this year the Kona roll down went to 6th (from 3 slots) which was 10:27... so sub 10 may not be the main aim this year
That's a relatively pointless question. You're not running a standalone marathon. You need to be able to run a sub-3:30 (based on your other maths), off the back of the swim and bike. What you can do without those two previously is neither here nor there, on the day.
Oh, and I do love the attitude that you totally could qualify, but you're not going to bother.... !!
I'm presuming your second post wasn't directed at me Flyaway, as there wasn't even a hint of that in my post. So returning to my "relatively pointless remark", I am trying to establish a barometer from GB and TE in their pursuit of sub 10. For your thought bank, I don't find information gathering pointless.
The straight facts are that I am a shite runner (this is largely poor running form and a little too much excess weight) and, importantly, my training has always been pretty unstructured, focussed on distance and endurance rather than performance enhancement.
Where I am heading with this is to establish whether I should be busting a nut to get myself in the region of a 3:30 standalone Marathon (which I'd need to deliver on the day), 'm likely around a 3:45 at the moment, or indeed if the fitness gains and extra time that could be shaved off my bike are a more time efficient investment in my training.
It bothers me that I've had to justify my enquiry to you Flyaway but I'm grateful to TE & GB for feedback.
Standalone marathon is obviously a very strong indicator of your ironman run.. you know you won't run faster than that anyway! I'd guess you would run between 10-30% slower on race day depending on how well you can run off the bike. Based on those numbers I've randomly picked out of the air, a 3:30 runner would run about 3:50-4:15 making sub 10 very difficult.
I'm biased as running is probably my strongest but I'd expect a standalone marathon in the region of 3 hours to be confident of breaking 10 hours.
Robbie - no, that wasnt directed at you. It was also honest amusement.
I also agree that you have absolutely no need to justify your enquiry to me. I am amused that feedback from two people who are yet to achieve their goal has satisfied you, but if you're happy, that's probably all that matters. I'm quite sure that engaging with me around my point, and how you might go about working towards your aim would have been a worthless exercise, so it's just as well neither of us can be bothered.
PRW, I think that running training may well get you more gains at this stage than shaving time off on the bike or swim. But don't worry about a standalone marathon: some shorter stuff to get your basic speed improved and endurance stuff more focussed on running off the bike.
Standalone marathon can be an indicator of IM run, but only if you've already done one (the marathon) and trained. Training specifically to get your marathon time down isn't the best way to train for an IM run.
GB at the top of the page is a case in point - he's clearly got a lot of basic speed as his parkrun time shows, and he's done the training to run off the bike. His standalone marathon looks out of kilter to that - most sub 17 parkrunners could probably look at something around 2:45 for a marathon, but that might take a lot of specific training that wouldn't help his bike or swim.
Bear in mind that even 'shite' runners (as you describe yourself) can convert well to IM, if they're trained for it. Equally, many faster runners don't convert as well. Pacing the IM leg sensibly is hugely important. As an unfortunate example, I once started the run at Roth needing 3:10 for sub 10, and having run 2:35 a few months earlier I was confident I'd be OK. Too confident as it turned out - first 10k at 2:45 pace (to be fair I had no watch or km markers) turned into cramp at 30k and a 3:13 finish. Lesson: don't run like a numpty. And if you're going to run like a numpty, swim quicker than 1:24.
Agreed, but you're not going to run a marathon PB unless you only run a marathon in IM. Not that there's anything wrong with that. I think that "x hour y minute marathon fitness" is a commonly [but not necessarily correctly] employed marker for run fitness, this being "Runner's World" after all.
As above. You need to run 3:30 on the day if you want to swim 1:00, bike 5:20 and go under 10:00. If you can't run 3:30 standalone, you're not going to do that. How you address that is up to you, as responses here have suggested.
And don't get bothered. This is the internet.
I don't think I will ever get near 1:00 for the swim, but tell myself I make up for the 5 or so minutes that I would be slower by smashing out a transition... 1:10 for swim and T1/2... think I could just about do that in a small transition
Which is why I said "if you want to swim an hour". And that's mostly the point - there's so many ways to do it (including swimming 1:24!) that it's entirely conjecture.
Yep.... a perfect 1:05, 5:20, 3:20 would leave me with a comfortable 15 minutes for transition and a sub 10
... but it's no good playing whatifs and maybes... time to get out there and do it. Don't know if IMUK is the place to do so based on the fact that barely anybody in my a/g did this year, but it's not the main aim
Also when are you coming for your bike box and gin? I might soon drink it!
This weekend? Dropping you an email.
The honest fact is, I am a 11:45 IMer. That should have been 11 hours, had it not been for a couple of flats on the bike and some gut issues on run, which I have to figure out as a separate matter to training.
The reality is I'm pretty gluttonous (especially where wet carbs are involved) and to get anywhere near 10 hours would involve some wholesale changes in my training and diet. Something I'm trying to convince myself to do, with a quick Marathon towards the end of the year possibly being a goal and in turn benchmark for IM time next year.
I have seen numerous threads about how stand alone marathon times might be extrapolated to IM runs and appreciate there are a huge number of factors involved.
GB and TE both turned out, in my mind, pretty impressive times this year and although in weight and frame terms you're both comparative racing snakes, I was curious to see where we might differ and whether the hindrances in my running might be where the wheels come off (it likely will be).
I'm quite happy to give and take shtick on t'internet, after all, that and porn is what it was created for (regardless of what Google are trying to have us believe).
So... I intend not to hijack this thread again until function thresholds (about 12-14 pints) and training peaks (the speed bump at the end of my road in Suffolk) are in my common vernacular.
FWIW though, I do think I'd qualify but then I am a glass half full type of person that believes in my own ability to train to achieve a goal. In this instance I fell a bit short but feel I trained to the best of my ability and with some constraints in terms of injury and a pretty full on time at work. I'd have taken 10:16 6 weeks out when I was running less than 10 miles a week...
It's a decent question you ask though. I'm a 2:45 marathoner (when I was a proper runner that is) and haven't yet translated that running history into a decent triathlon run in the three that I've done (1 x 1/2 IM and 2 x full). I'd hope that 3:30 should be really straightforward but I didn't manage it on Sunday. I suppose that's the challenge of the full distance race, anyone can go hard on the bike!
Haven't found the roll down but here's the times needed this year, I've only got to knock 3 or so hours off
http://www.220triathlon.com/news/revealed--the-ironman-uk-athletes-who-qualified-for-kona/8935.html
Thanks Symes, interesting reading.
The M30-34 is a tough old group isn't it? Someone in that age category had to be an hour quicker than someone in the M18-25 age cat - just shows that it's a sport for the middle aged!
A sex change is my best chance
It'd probably be less painful than a 9:45 finish!