Pace Calculations
No exercise today. But I did stick my recent (and slightly disappointing) five mile race time into the McMillan calculator which told me that a 3:45 marathon is currently within my grasp. If I had managed to shave that extra minute from miles three and four - a stretch, but something that I’m willing to posit considering my injury and the hilly course - it puts me at 3:39. That’s pretty cool, especially considering that I think I’ve still got some improving to do this season that’s not purely distance releated.
My quota for spring is to get a very solid sub-four time. My stretch goal of 3:36 was set back when I was lamenting my MCL sprain, which gave me a sky-high target to shoot for in my training. I’m beginning to think that its not quite as impossible as it seems at times, especially considering the favorable marathon course and the slower hilly races leading up to it. Will I hit it? Who knows. Maybe not. But if my goal was a sure thing, it wouldn’t be much of a challenge now would it?
Popularity: 2%
Nov 30th 2004
1:54 PM
How accurate do you think are the paces you get from the McMillan calculator? Do you plan your training based on them?
I’m asking because it is precisely because of the McMillan calculator that I’m trying to slow down my pace in practically all of my runs, short and long. However, as I mentioned, I’m find it very hard to slow down that much.
It might be, of course, that the data I plugged into the calculator is wrong. Since I haven’t participated in any race, what I did was taking my time from a run I did three or four weeks ago. That day I ran as fast as I could for 6km. I completed the run in 30 minutes sharp. This means a 25 minute 5K. With that data the recommended paces from the McMillan are very very slow.
In any case, I already wrote my letter to Santa Claus and I’m pretty sure I’ll get a Heart Rate Monitor for Christmas along with my winter running gear. It seems to me that heart rate is a more accurate guide than the McMillan formula. What do you think?
Nov 30th 2004
2:04 PM
Yes, I would agree that this is within your grasp, especialy since your times now put you at sub-four, even without adjustments. If you are making speed improvements between now and then, you’ve got smooth sailing to your goal.
I was looking at your race list and let me say that’s ALOT of races! Do you mesh those into the training or are they extra? How do you plan those with marathon training?
Nov 30th 2004
2:38 PM
Rafael - you certainly shouldn’t be doing your flat out speed on all or even most of your runs. I mean, you can, but you won’t get the maximum training potential out of them.
By running some of your miles easy, you can recover strength and let your body heal the microtrauma that makes it stronger. By adding in speedwork - faster than your target pace - you improve your anerobic capability and greatly enhance your maximum speed. By doing long, slow runs push your lactate threshold out without forcing your system to handle more than it can comfortably take - letting you run further, more often.
The question is simply whether you want the fastest workouts or the biggest improvement over time.
One more point to make - my long runs are usually done at a 9:15-9:30 pace. Before my recent half marathon, the fastest I’d gone at my long race-pace (8:20) was six miles. Even so, I finished the course with an 8:41 pace, the last six of which averaged 8:08 (faster than my training pace). Slower training doesn’t mean slower racing!
Jon - most of those races are part of the distance challenge - http://www.austindistancechallenge.com/ - a series leading up to and including the Freescale marathon. The turkey trot and resolution run are my own idea. I worked for quite a while to get my weekend long/pace runs to mesh in with the races, especially the 30k a month before the marathon and the half two weeks before. And no, an 18 mile race isn’t extra in my book by any stretch of the imagination!
Dec 1st 2004
10:01 PM
Interesting. I was thinking about setting goals today, and sorta froze when I was thinking about where I want to be in 90 days. I’m torn between a realistic goal, and an optimistic one. So it’s really useful to me to see how you’re doing it.
Damn, you’re fast. Could I borrow some of that, please?
Dec 2nd 2004
9:05 AM
vj: As you can probably guess, my advice on the goals would be to set both. Give yourself a very attainable quota to meet, and allow yourself to be disappointed if you don’t hit it - but not if you do. Set 2 or 3 goals above your quota - realistic, optimistic, and unbelivable. At least, that’s how I do it.