Negative splitting a marathon?

Of the 9 marathons I have run, the 2 negative splits I ran were both on the only times I trained using the Hansons marathon training plan. Give it a shot.

For my marathon PR I was a 1:15 faster over the second half. At Boston I was 8 seconds slower on the second half. For my PR race, I ran with the pace group whose goal time was 5 minutes slower than what I wanted to run. I left them around mile 15. Worked out well. Nothing charges you up more than passing people in the last miles of a marathon - really gives you a lift.

You can and should try to negative split. Train for it and it should be easy. I think the biggest problem is simply going out too fast early in the marathon. After the long months of training, then a couple of weeks of tapering, your MP feels so damn slow the first few miles. It is very tempting to go just a little bit faster. You have to resist the urge. Find someone to talk to, relax, do some sightseeing early on.

At the halfway point you should still feel fresh. At 20, you get down to business and start running. If all goes well your last mile should be the fastest. If you pull it off successfully you will be dead tired but very satisfied with the results.

Beats the hell out of the death march that comes from going out to fast.

This discussion came up once. I looked at the results from Chicago one year with the top 100 finishers, few of them negative split. Most had a very slight (few seconds) positive split. The only rise in the course is pretty late so maybe that was it or just fatigue.

I think for the marathon at the halfway point you are probably still feeling great. The danger there, to me, is that you get cocky and start to pick it up too soon.

I would aim for staying right on pace through 20 and then if you feel something more in the tank, go from there. It is cliche, but the 20 mile point is really about the halfway point in some aspects.

Even splits seems to be the best approach for most people, but you sound like you are disciplined enough to hold back. I would say if you like to close hard, make sure you do sufficient long runs over 20 miles, maybe even up to 24 miles 4 weeks prior and practice building in some surges of 6-12 miles during your long runs. Some guys are going to say that "24" is not necessary, but if you want to avoid blowing up, you have to get used to the distance. It sounds like you are in the 3:00 - 3:30 range (Boston qual?) so getting used to running hard after after you are out of fuel (2hrs?) is important.

I would try to do 4-6 long runs over 20 miles from now until Philly and for each one start with easy to moderate pace for 8-12 miles then close at Half Marathon pace or slightly faster than Marathon pace for 6,8,10 maybe even 12 miles during the long run (depending on length), with the last few miles moderate-easy. This will get you used to picking the pace up when you are tired, and not blowing yourself up when you hit 20 miles.

Philly is probably not too bad for negative splits, Boston will be much tougher to pull off.

Did Geb Run positive or negative splits on his WR?

and what exactly is the cut-off for Boston?

Run. Train. Stay healthy.

Quit being a tool!

Thanks for all the input guys. It seems like I can try and run negative splits. I'm not planning on trying to go too negative. Maybe start out with the 3:20 pace group and move up some time around half way. And for the person that was asking, I'm 26 so my Boston qualifying time is sub-3:11.

Negative splits is a good goal for a first marathon. Might help avoid the rookie mistake of going out too quickly. I did a negative in my first marathon - definitely the least painful marathon I ran, but also my slowest by a little bit.

In 48 marathons the only time I ran a negative split was at the 2003 Forest of Nicene Marks Trail Marathon in California where I ran 1:40 and then 1:28. But... the first half is 2,500 feet up the mountain and the last half you race back down! In my 2:22:34 PR at Marine Corps I ran splits of 1:09:50 and 1:12:44. In my next best marathon 2:23:51 at Rocket City I ran 1:11:30 and 1:12:21. In 2006 at Boston at age 48 I thought I was in about 2:50 shape and went out in 1:25:40. I was very strong over the hills and the last 10k and finished in 1:26:05 for a 2:51:45. It was my tenth time racing the Boston Marathon, so I was comfortable on the course and knew what to expect. For most good runners a slowdown of two to three minutes happens even in their best marathon efforts. If you are a Boston novice, I would suggest going out 5-10 seconds per mile slower than your goal pace, running strong through the hills and then leaving mental energy to concentrate the last five miles. Good luck!

boston hopeful wrote:

Thanks for all the input guys. It seems like I can try and run negative splits. I'm not planning on trying to go too negative. Maybe start out with the 3:20 pace group and move up some time around half way. And for the person that was asking, I'm 26 so my Boston qualifying time is sub-3:11.

Going from 3:20 to sub 3:11 might be a bit too extreme. Negative splitting a marathon is very tough to do if you are inexperienced. I would go out at your goal pace and just take it easy on the hills on the first half of the course (there are two big hills). Then, when you get to the Schuylkill you can pick it up a little (+5 sec a mi). Too big of a negative split can put you in a tough spot. Having to pick it up by a lot (10+ sec per mile) when you are starting to break down can be a good way to end up gallowalking the last 6 mi.

I think your own goals are important here.

If you just want to run a qualifying time then ok.

If you are trying to run as fast as you can then I don't think negative splits is an indicator of that. Aiming for even splits is probably better if that is your goal. My old coach reckoned that if your second half was within 2 minutes of your first half then this was a probable indicator that you were beginning to tail off but it hadn't got too bad yet!

Even running close to even splits will mean you will be passing people from 10 miles on. Just keep your head up, looking down the road & reel them in! Make sure if you are running with a pacing group they are running to your plan. Keep your running relaxed and your own plans flexible so that if something doesn't happen in the race that you wanted to, it isn't a big deal. Good luck.

I think it's harder to negative split a marathon than many other races. At least it is harder to do so while still coming close to your potential.

The difference is that in the marathon, hitting the wall becomes an issue. When the muscles run out of glycogen, you lost time dramatically. There's no backing off to recover later. When you hit the wall, you're done.

The marathon is a weird event. As Bill Rodgers said, "It can humble you."

I would stick with what you know. Ignore a pace group. You can't rely on them actually running the desired pace anyway.

I just read Advanced Marathoning by Phitzinger/Sullivan. In it they argue elites should slightly negative split but for most it's best to SLIGHTLY positive split. I'm trying to qualify for Boston too (I need 3:20) at Kiawah in December. Tentatively I'm aiming for 1:39:30ish for the half and hope I can stay even throughout. I ran negative splits at Marine Corps last year but it was my first Marathon and I probably took it too easy the first half (no real goal except sub 3:50). I went 1:51 & change 1:50 & change, but I bonked at mile 24 and walked twice. This speaks to the poster above who advised not to go out too slow and try to make up too much time on the back. If you want to run 3:10 my limited knowlegde tells me to go out close to that pace for the first half, don't run with the 3:20 group (us slow old guys).

Funny, i am trying to to run 3:19 at Kiawah. I might just sit on you for 26 miles and then kick it in over the last .2...

See you out there... I'll be the one wearing a speedo.

A speedo might be "ballsy" in December. I am hopeing for good weather though. I think the risk with this races is rainy/windy/cold weather. Are you hunting a pace group? I might find the 3:20 pace group and hang, we'll kick some arse, then race the last mile, I think your speedo will scare me to victory!

Figure Fold wrote:

Funny, i am trying to to run 3:19 at Kiawah. I might just sit on you for 26 miles and then kick it in over the last .2...

See you out there... I'll be the one wearing a speedo.

In my second marathon and the first I tried to carbo-load I ran negative splits (and dropped by PR by 41 minutes; okay I only did a 3:52 in my first marathon caused by walking the last two miles after a 3:30 pace). So going from 3:20 to 3:11 is reasonable, if you train properly and load those carbos.

boston hopeful wrote:

I'm training for the Philly marathon (with the hope of qualifying for Boston) and wanted to hear people's experiences with trying to negative split. In high school and college, I always ran negative splits in races and run that way on all my runs. I'm just worried that for such a long race, planning on negative splitting is a bad idea because so much can go wrong in the later stages of the race. Should I stick with what I know and go out slightly slower or should I run with a pace group and try and run as even as possible? Any advice or anecdotes would be much appreciated.

It depends on your mindset as a runner. It is most important in marathoning. There have been races where I have almost instantly hit the wall when it has become clear that I cannot mathematically reach my goal finishing time. Maybe, I'm just not as mentally tough as I should be.

Some folks are buoyed by passing late mile markers knowing that they are slightly ahead of goal pace, so they tend to go out a little faster in the first half and hope to hang on.

I do best when I hold back, feel good at the halfway point and know I can turn the second half into a hard tempo run.

The passing of other runners and the increased pace energizes me. I've run splits like 1:32/1:28(Chicago), 1:34/1:30(Philly) and 1:31/1:28 at Austin. Some of the first half times were slower because I simply did not feel so great but it worked out because I ended up going faster later in the race. Ironically, my best race had splits of 1:27/1:30 but that was simply an excess of early adrenaline.

Your taper and an easy pace can get you to 13.1 feeling like a loaded gun and the long tempo/marathon pace runs can allow you to take off later.

You can pick it up at any point that suits you. I think of it as 'spotting the course' a certain number of miles or minutes, meaning that I might say I'm spotting the course the first hour or the first 8 miles and if I feel fresh, I will pick it up.

As an aside, the last several miles of the Chicago course are run due north along the Lake which slows almost everyone's pace in the second half.

OP:

In april I ran a ~5 minute negative split (1:30, 1:25). The final 8 miles were amazing. I was running FAST and passing everybody. But, I had a nagging question. Did my fast finish indicate that I underperformed?

This forces the question about risk: Do you like running with (or without) RISK?

1) Safe Run = slow start, fast finish. You will feel good about negative split, but probably won't max out your potential performance on this day.

2) Risky Run = even start and finish. By going out fast(er) and holding you, you risk the edge. You either get a peak performance time...or you blowup and crawl home a slow time.

True masters of the sport of running are able to balance 1 and 2 for optimal performance.