Marathon runners called fat and slow.

Pross

KingstonGraham wrote:

Pross wrote:

cougie wrote:

Stupid distance. Those last 6.2 miles are so unnecessary. I'd much prefer a 20 mile Marathon.

Tell me about it, I missed that sub 4 yet again after hitting the wall hard at the 20 mile marker. Had to walk run the last 6.2 and ended up with 4.12 after being on for around 3.50. I don't get it, I used to be better at endurance events on the bike but just can't break that 18-20 mile barrier. I guess it's in keeping with my status as slightly overweight and lazy! Still a PB though so at least it's going in the right direction.

If you were aiming for 3:59, then 3:50 pace is too quick to start with. It's really hard to not go too quick at the start, when you feel good.

Last time I ran one I knew I wasn't really up to it but decided to go out at 45 min per 10k. Ended up with 3:39. I'll never know what I could have done if I'd started at 50 min 10k pace, but almost certainly quicker.

I went out hoping for 3:45-3:50 which should have been within my ability based on recent times at other distances (race predictors from my recent 5k, 10k and Half times were suggesting I should do 3:35 to 3:49 depending on which I used, I knew 3:35 was too optimistic though). With hindsight I should have just gone for 9 min / mile and then picked it up if I felt good at 20 miles. I'd say next time but my next marathon is Snowdonia (third time) and I'd be ecstatic with 4:30 there.

DeVlaeminck

I'd aim to run an even split and then judge whether to push on a bit or ease off from half way - others may differ but I can't see the point is aiming to start out slower than you'd finish. I'm assuming most people use a GPS watch to pace themselves too - gone are the days when as a rather average club runner I ran the first mile (assuming the markers were accurate) of the Ranby 10 miler at 5:20 pace - the second around 5:35 pace and the last mile just inside 8 minute miling and that was probably the hardest mile of my reasonably brief foray into running - my target was 6 mm and I ended up several minutes outside the hour.

Pross

DeVlaeminck wrote:

I'd aim to run an even split and then judge whether to push on a bit or ease off from half way - others may differ but I can't see the point is aiming to start out slower than you'd finish. I'm assuming most people use a GPS watch to pace themselves too - gone are the days when as a rather average club runner I ran the first mile (assuming the markers were accurate) of the Ranby 10 miler at 5:20 pace - the second around 5:35 pace and the last mile just inside 8 minute miling and that was probably the hardest mile of my reasonably brief foray into running - my target was 6 mm and I ended up several minutes outside the hour.

I think that's what most do intend to do, the problem is that the pace can feel so easy early on that you blow up spectacularly towards the end (as I did). A negative split seem to be the the holy grail for marathon runners chasing a time (as opposed to actually racing other athletes). My thinking on Sunday was that I didn't want to finish feeling OK and wondering 'what if' so aimed for the best pace I hoped I could achieve based on a recent half time of 1:42 - like many I was over-optimistic!

DeVlaeminck

Just looked at my old excel training log - I ran London after I'd packed up running for cycling but I had a running club entry I carried over so ran 10 miles every Monday night to prepare and the idea was to run it for the experience.

My splits were (I've just done the arithmetic in my head if it's out) : 10k 46.38, 20k 1.34.23 (47:51), half way 1.39.38, 30k 2.26.47 (52:26), 40k 3.38.03 (1 hour 11:44) Finish 3:52:24 (second half 2 hours 14 :46 ?) . So yeah it is easy to overestimate your fitness. A lot of walking in the latter stages as my quads just cramped up.

crispybug2

My method of marathon running (long time ago as it) was to find someone whose pace I felt I could comfortably match and run behind them, it worked for me!

rick_chasey

Remember Michael Woods, (pro cyclist, ex pro runner) saying how weird it was for him to go over threshold at any point that wasn't the final sprint when he first moved into cycling.

homers_double

There seems to be a lot of armchair runners in here. For the record I "ran" the Manchester marathon on the 7th of April and finished a fraction under 5hrs 30m and it's quite possibly the hardest thing I've ever done

There were people walking faster than me in the final few miles but I didn't want to walk, I came to a running event and ran it. Albeit at a dwindling pace.

As for losing weight whilst training, it didn't happen. Closer to the actual day I was running around 30 + miles per week and gaining weight because I was that hungry.

For those that have never done it, my last 6 or so miles felt like I was running on broken glass as the pain in my feet was that sharp. You won't get that sat watching slow fat people from your armchair.

If you want to, slate away https://www.strava.com/activities/2272193377

And I do consider myself fat and slow.

Pross

homers double wrote:

There seems to be a lot of armchair runners in here. For the record I "ran" the Manchester marathon on the 7th of April and finished a fraction under 5hrs 30m and it's quite possibly the hardest thing I've ever done

There were people walking faster than me in the final few miles but I didn't want to walk, I came to a running event and ran it. Albeit at a dwindling pace.

As for losing weight whilst training, it didn't happen. Closer to the actual day I was running around 30 + miles per week and gaining weight because I was that hungry.

For those that have never done it, my last 6 or so miles felt like I was running on broken glass as the pain in my feet was that sharp. You won't get that sat watching slow fat people from your armchair.

If you want to, slate away https://www.strava.com/activities/2272193377

And I do consider myself fat and slow.

Well done, Manchester was my first back in 2017, I got stomach cramps after taking a gel at 15 miles and had to walk / run the final 11 (more walk than run!). The bit at 20 miles where you are in the middle of nowhere nearly finished me mentally, if the tram had gone out that far I'd have jumped on it! I never thought I'd be pleased to see Old Trafford.

A club mate did it this year. She fell on a bottle at 5 miles and broke her arm, had it splinted and finished in about 4:07 which adds to my confusion about why I can't beat 4 hours as she's one of my regular training partners and I'm marginally quicker than her over all other distances. I always used to think I was better at endurance over speed but would also say a marathon is harder than anything I ever did on the bike including a 12 hour TT (209 miles). I actually think I'd be better in an Ultra as the terrain is usually such that it breaks your rhythm offers mini breaks.

homers_double

Oh yes, Carrington. I knew about it as a mate had run Manchester last year. I'm not going to say I was ready for it but knew it was coming so just sand to myself along that bit.

cougie

Jeez. 4.07 with a broken arm. That's bloody impressive. What can she do without injury ?

kingstongraham

cougie wrote:

Jeez. 4.07 with a broken arm. That's bloody impressive. What can she do without injury ?

21 miles of it with a broken arm, and that's including time for the medics to do their stuff? That's amazing.

webboo

I found the best way to run a marathon was to go for a swim and bike ride first. Then no one gives a toss if you end up walking.

morstar

Webboo wrote:

I found the best way to run a marathon was to go for a swim and bike ride first. Then no one gives a toss if you end up walking.

I am on the start line for my 3rd iron distance in July. 1 DNF and 1 slow finish to my name with a heck of a lot of walking. My objective this year is simply to be able to jog the marathon, if I achieve that, I will be very happy.
And yes, walking a marathon on tarmac isn't easy. I have found trail marathons at a much faster pace easier than walking a tarmac one with no terrain / pace changes.

Pross

cougie wrote:

Jeez. 4.07 with a broken arm. That's bloody impressive. What can she do without injury ?

I think her PB is around 4 hours!

Pross

morstar wrote:

Webboo wrote:

I found the best way to run a marathon was to go for a swim and bike ride first. Then no one gives a toss if you end up walking.

I am on the start line for my 3rd iron distance in July. 1 DNF and 1 slow finish to my name with a heck of a lot of walking. My objective this year is simply to be able to jog the marathon, if I achieve that, I will be very happy.
And yes, walking a marathon on tarmac isn't easy. I have found trail marathons at a much faster pace easier than walking a tarmac one with no terrain / pace changes.

I couldn't do the swim (I can swim that far but only in breast stroke, I've never been able to get my breathing right to do crawl). I might do the bike and run at Tenby long course weekend next year though.

cougie

You can breast stroke in ironman. Sadly my crawl is slower than some people's breast stroke. So choose one to follow and they'll be sighting all the way round. You won't get lost much.

Pross

Pross wrote:

cougie wrote:

Jeez. 4.07 with a broken arm. That's bloody impressive. What can she do without injury ?

I think her PB is around 4 hours!

Just realised I got it wrong, it was 4:40 (not sure where the 4:07 came from) but still impressive off someone with a 4:10 PB!

Pross

cougie wrote:

You can breast stroke in ironman. Sadly my crawl is slower than some people's breast stroke. So choose one to follow and they'll be sighting all the way round. You won't get lost much.

I've done a sprint triathlon with a 400m pool swim and even after that distance in breast stroke my legs were dead, it's such a leg focussed stroke.

webboo

morstar wrote:

Webboo wrote:

I found the best way to run a marathon was to go for a swim and bike ride first. Then no one gives a toss if you end up walking.

I am on the start line for my 3rd iron distance in July. 1 DNF and 1 slow finish to my name with a heck of a lot of walking. My objective this year is simply to be able to jog the marathon, if I achieve that, I will be very happy.
And yes, walking a marathon on tarmac isn't easy. I have found trail marathons at a much faster pace easier than walking a tarmac one with no terrain / pace changes.

I suspect that most Ironman marathons have a lot more feed stations than ordinary marathons which means you only need to run between them. Then walk through eating and drinking before jogging on to the next one. However the only downside with this strategy if you weren’t fat when you started you will be when you finish.

cougie

Continental Ironman races tend to have feed stations every kilometer. If you take on food or drink at each - your tummy won't thank you. I've made that mistake before.

robert88

When I did my 28 mile walk in under 10 hours blisters were my near downfall. Rules were, under ten hours or you weren't there. But I made it. Remember now, it was called the Great Cautley Challenge. My companions were seasoned walkers and I am a seasoned cyclist who's never been talked into doing anything so foolish again.

Matthewfalle

Cambrian Patrol with 55kg on your back plus gat in Sennybridge in October weather while still having to work while doing it

was actually quite good fun looking back on it

#bastardhard
#utterlyaddictive

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exercis ... ian_Patrol

morstar

Pross wrote:

morstar wrote:

Webboo wrote:

I found the best way to run a marathon was to go for a swim and bike ride first. Then no one gives a toss if you end up walking.

I am on the start line for my 3rd iron distance in July. 1 DNF and 1 slow finish to my name with a heck of a lot of walking. My objective this year is simply to be able to jog the marathon, if I achieve that, I will be very happy.
And yes, walking a marathon on tarmac isn't easy. I have found trail marathons at a much faster pace easier than walking a tarmac one with no terrain / pace changes.

I couldn't do the swim (I can swim that far but only in breast stroke, I've never been able to get my breathing right to do crawl). I might do the bike and run at Tenby long course weekend next year though.

I always liked the idea of an Ironman but always discounted it on the grounds of the swim. Saw a friend do one and thought 'nothing ventured, nothing gained'.
Then I started swimming. 25 metres of crawl would have me absolutely gasping for air. Turns out, it's a common thing. What I was doing was breathing both out and in when lifting my head meaning after a full length you're pretty much hyperventilating and after 2, completely fried. Start breathing out under water and the whole game changes. I'm still not great at the swim after a few years of trying but once I start putting regular sessions in, I eventually start to trouble the latter end of mid-pack obscurity.
OK cyclist means loads of overtaking but have yet to master the run off the bike at anything longer than Olympic distance which is where I have my 10K PB.

Tenby has an enormous fan base so would be a great weekend if you like the razzmatazz. Am tempted to have a go at the IM but not 100% about the sea swim. Some interesting youtube footage from around 3-4 years ago with a significant number of competitors still stood on the beach as the (big) waves crash in a good minute or two after the start.

knedlicky

I've done 6 marathons, all between 3:25 and 3:45, and, although never intentionally, achieved a negative split in 3 of them, and an even split in one. My simple intention was not to start off too quickly – one sees runners, even in 10Ks, start off too quickly and then later suffer.

I don't use a GPS watch, or in fact wear any watch, just line up at the start fairly far back (or, if we are to be assigned starting blocks based on anticipated time, enter my slowest time plus on the form). This means the mass of people ahead of and around me automatically prevents me going too fast during the first quarter, after which I've usually found my comfortable pace for the day, and which hopefully I can lift slightly over the last 3 miles or so (and apparently did so twice). Only once didn't this work well - between about 5 and 10 miles, the route was so narrow, hardly anyone could get by slower or fading runners.

I don't think performances during training runs, or in 5, 10, or 15K races on the flat, are any guide to how people will perform in a marathon. Speed and stamina are clearly two different things; I've seen this in a couple of my training partners who beat me over a flat 10K or 10-mile. In a marathon they either struggled as from about halfway (but just about kept on running), or were reduced to occasionally walking the last 5 miles. Their starting off quickly may have played a role, but I don't think it solely due to that.
I'd say the same is often true for hilly races, even ones just 10K long if they include 1000 ft of uphill, especially if cross-country races too (i.e. on grass).

morstar

I did a trail marathon where the route changes every year for a couple of years in a row. First year, after about a mile of running, we had to wait in a queue for about 5 minutes to get over a stile. After that we were all spread out and no more delays at subsequent obstacles.

Second year, I went with a conscious strategy to run harder than ideal for the first mile or two assuming the same thinning out process would occur and I could settle to a more comfortable pace.

Race starts and I'm doing about 8 minute mile pace across muddy fields which isn't at all sustainable for the entire race but I'm comfortable with for the couple of miles which I expect.

And so we find ourselves on a narrow path for 6 miles with absolutely no room for anybody to pass. 6 miles!!!!! Boy did I screw up big time. I was not going to be the prat who ruined everybody else's race by dawdling through the narrow paths so 6 miles of muddy trail running knocked out at 8 minute miles until we passed through a feed station in a village and the race then spread out into a field at which point it must have appeared that I had dropped the anchor. Still chuckle about it to date. And the best bit was the race photo's. I couldn't wait for them to come out and get a look at me in amongst all the proper runners. I was 43 at the time and out of the 8 people immediately in front or behind me, I must have been the youngest by around 20 years. My insane efforts to keep up with my fellow athletes looked like a geriatric running club.

FWIW, there are some insanely fast older runners but it was just the icing on the cake of an absurd situation.

No idea on a road marathon time. Fastest is Howgills trail marathon in 5:05 with 3,000 ft of ascent.

Chaz.Harding

To get back to the point (briefly);

I haven't read the London Marathon entry T&Cs, but I'd imagine that there's a pretty clear demand that pacing over X minute / mile is not acceptable, you'll be running under your own risk, as the same for finishing over 8 hrs / X o'clock.

If these runners can't make the times or pace, it's on them. That said, abuse from the marshals / clean up crew is unprofessional at best, and wholly unacceptable at any time.

I wouldn't call myself a runner, but I run between 40 and 60 miles a week. On Monday, I ran a trail half marathon, then 17 miles back home. I'm not a classically good runner (it took me 2hrs to do the actual event with my daysack full of gear in), but I'll make the cut offs pretty easily on most events.

My opinion; the offended by everything brigade have jumped on the this hard but missed the point somewhat. Their complaint seems to me to be "they're discriminating against fat slow runners" - well yeah, it's race... The cut off is the cut off. They have to have a pace and a finish time which they declare too slow to marshal. The real point is the personal attacks on the slower runners - that would be my stand. Ok, they're informed if they don't speed up (or can't) they're disqualified. It's a hard nosed approach, but they've only got the resources to service X time...

Good on anyone who trains to be better, fitter, stronger and faster. It's inspirational at any level to run a long endurance event.

kingstongraham

RTW-Chaz wrote:

To get back to the point (briefly);

I haven't read the London Marathon entry T&Cs, but I'd imagine that there's a pretty clear demand that pacing over X minute / mile is not acceptable, you'll be running under your own risk, as the same for finishing over 8 hrs / X o'clock.

If these runners can't make the times or pace, it's on them. That said, abuse from the marshals / clean up crew is unprofessional at best, and wholly unacceptable at any time.

T&Cs: "Competitors will only be eligible for a medal and to feature in the results in they complete the course before the official cut off time which is currently 19:00 on the day of the Event "

kingstongraham

RTW-Chaz wrote:

I wouldn't call myself a runner, but I run between 40 and 60 miles a week. On Monday, I ran a trail half marathon, then 17 miles back home.

chris_bass

RTW-Chaz wrote:

To get back to the point (briefly);

I haven't read the London Marathon entry T&Cs, but I'd imagine that there's a pretty clear demand that pacing over X minute / mile is not acceptable, you'll be running under your own risk, as the same for finishing over 8 hrs / X o'clock.

If these runners can't make the times or pace, it's on them. That said, abuse from the marshals / clean up crew is unprofessional at best, and wholly unacceptable at any time.

I wouldn't call myself a runner, but I run between 40 and 60 miles a week. On Monday, I ran a trail half marathon, then 17 miles back home. I'm not a classically good runner (it took me 2hrs to do the actual event with my daysack full of gear in), but I'll make the cut offs pretty easily on most events.

My opinion; the offended by everything brigade have jumped on the this hard but missed the point somewhat. Their complaint seems to me to be "they're discriminating against fat slow runners" - well yeah, it's race... The cut off is the cut off. They have to have a pace and a finish time which they declare too slow to marshal. The real point is the personal attacks on the slower runners - that would be my stand. Ok, they're informed if they don't speed up (or can't) they're disqualified. It's a hard nosed approach, but they've only got the resources to service X time...

Good on anyone who trains to be better, fitter, stronger and faster. It's inspirational at any level to run a long endurance event.

I have read the T&Cs and it doesn't mention anything about a certain pace you need to maintain all it says about the actual running is:

"The event which you are registering for is physically challenging and may pose a risk of discomfort, illness, injury, and even death. You need to be satisfied that you are physically capable of doing the event without undue risk to your health or life. We do not conduct health or fitness checks on entrants and the responsibility for your ability to participate in the event is with you as the participant."

basically if you die it isn't our fault!

If they make it aware that the course will need to be cleared and set out the times you need to hit in order to not be overtaken by the cleaners and make it clear they are free to complete the event but it won't be marshalled then i don't see a problem with that.

making fun of people for being slow and/or fat (regardless of whether it is true) who are actually raising money for charity is just not needed or helpful.

bompington

RTW-Chaz wrote:

To get back to the point (briefly);
[Humblebrag]

FTFY