Disappointed at NYC Marathon--Should I go back-to-back?

Er...thanks for the lengthy reply.

In regard to the logistical issues and hotel room, I note that I knew New York to be a tough course, and I knew, too late, about the refrigerator-less hotel room. It was too late to change my plans in regard to the hotel room. It would have set off a domino effect in regard to my plans, and so once I discerned that the room did not have this feature, I could not make a change without some serious alterations.

In regard to the NYC course--yes, it knew it to be tough, but I see things in terms of time. Figuring I was in 2:57 or so shape, I still thought 2:59 or so was doable in NYC. After the race, my wife found an on-line calculator that compares races, and she told me that NYC runs about 1:30 slower than Richmond. I am not saying something like this is perfectly accurate, but one gets an idea of what one should run. Thus, if I were in 2:57 or even 2:58 shape, I could have perhaps run sub-3:00 at New York. I think she looked for that calculator on-line because she, too, was surprised by my stagnant finish and non-PR effort.

What can I say, Er..., these things effect me. I am not a young man, and know that my "PR years" are very limited. I cannot disagree with you much, but I still believe my results should have been better. A PR would have been a decent consolation prize.

I gather that my perspective is similar to Colonel Jessup's in the film, "A Few Good Men." I am not saying I tend to be like that character, but I take a similar approach in regard to work and achievement. He says, "I can deal with the bullets, the bombs, and the blood. I don't want money, and I don't want medals." Thus, I want a "runner's respect," so to speak, a true feeling of accomplishment deep within myself, not money or people cheering me on (though seeing happy people on the sidelines does give one a mental boost in a race).

No one will remember an old guy going 3:04 at NYC. An old guy going sub-3:00 at NYC (or pretty much anywhere else) may raise an eyebrow or two.

Gotta go right now. Wish I could say more.

From the thread about Molly:

"Lanni Merchant has a PR of 2:28 and ran 2:33 at NYC. Diane Nukuri has a PR of 2:27:50 and ran 2:33 at NYC. Joyce Chepkirui has a PR of 2:24:11 and ran 2:29 at NYC. Aselefech Mergia has a PR of 2:19:31 and ran 2:33 at NYC."

If you want a runner's respect stop worrying about an arbitrary cutoff and tell people you ran NYC within a couple of minutes of your PR.

Read more:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=7840237&page=2#ixzz4PcIUo2VQ

Thanks, Er...you sound like my coach. In fact, I would enjoy going to a pub and talking runner-speak (over a burger and some steak fries) with you, angryjohnny, Les, and a few others.

I have more to say, and will keep posting. This thread has been helpful.

outsiderunner wrote:

No one will remember an old guy going 3:04 at NYC. An old guy going sub-3:00 at NYC (or pretty much anywhere else) may raise an eyebrow or two.

This is wrong. 64 guys age 45-49 ran sub 3 at NYC. Another 27 guys 50-54. 12 @ 55-59, 5 @ 60-64. Whether you ran 2:59:59 or 3:04 you were not a special snowflake that anyone was going to remember. Maybe if you were the 65 y/o from Mexico that ran 3:05. Or the 50 year old woman that flew in from Oslo, Norway and ran 2:58

Er... has some good points. After I ran a pretty rough and disappointing full marathon last spring I am taking a break from marathoning for a little while because it is a lot of work, discipline, and patience for an event that is wildly more unpredictable than shorter distances. Sometimes race day is just not your day. In a half or a 5k the time difference and pain between "your day" and "not your day" is much smaller than for a marathon, and you can jump back in the saddle and race again much sooner (see: my recent 2 halfs in 3 weeks with a PR at the second one). Even with that plan though, I'm still feeling the itch to consider another one next spring now. The marathon is a tricky and beguiling beast.

Anyway, you should be happy with your performance and learn from it. At the very least you now know you're not a fan of the destination mega-marathon scene.

A Few Good Men is my second favorite movie of all time behind A River Runs Through It, which involves my other favorite hobby, flyfishing. In fishing, some days you will absolutely kill it when you least expect it. Other days the conditions are perfect and expectations high, but you get shutout. I think those bad days are just part of paying your dues and make the good days more enjoyable. If you went out and killed every time, it would get boring. Running is the same for me.

Yes, "A Few Good Men" is one of my all-time favorites. If I see it on, I watch it. There are so many superb lines in it, and the "bad guy," Jessup, has many of them. The Jessup line I quoted has always made sense to me. We run not for a paycheck or a medal, but because of the sheer accomplishment--the joy of a job well done. I am sure there are other athletes that feel the same way, though the paychecks and fame seem to take precedence today.

I forgot to note that, while I get the point about some of the top runners being pretty far from their PRs at NYC, there are some other things to consider, too. The two people I conversed most with at the start both PRed, and not by a few seconds, either. The female PRed by four minutes, 3:05 to 3:01, and the male PRed by four minutes, 3:02 to 2:58. They must be superhuman...

Or in a race of 51,000 some are bound to PR?

Or, their former PR was soft for them?

Maybe you're just now realizing how well everything went for you in Richmond?

David S. Pumpkins wrote:

Or in a race of 51,000 some are bound to PR?

Or, their former PR was soft for them?

Maybe you're just now realizing how well everything went for you in Richmond?

Interestingly, I felt pretty so-so going into Richmond. I have some significant lower abdominal soreness, which began about four weeks prior to the race. I also had some "dead legs" about two weeks prior to the race, and that tapered off about 4-5 days before the race.

Who knows...in this bizarre realm of marathoning, perhaps my first marathon will end up being my lifelong marathon PR. Just saying this makes me feel it is truly bizarre.

outsiderunner wrote:

David S. Pumpkins wrote:

Or in a race of 51,000 some are bound to PR?

Or, their former PR was soft for them?

Maybe you're just now realizing how well everything went for you in Richmond?

Interestingly, I felt pretty so-so going into Richmond. I have some significant lower abdominal soreness, which began about four weeks prior to the race. I also had some "dead legs" about two weeks prior to the race, and that tapered off about 4-5 days before the race.

Who knows...in this bizarre realm of marathoning, perhaps my first marathon will end up being my lifelong marathon PR. Just saying this makes me feel it is truly bizarre.

You realize you were only like 3 minutes off your PR, right? It's not like you ran 3:34. The race distance is arbitrary at 42,195 meters. There's no logical reason that 3 hours is special. You're already faster than the vast majority of marathoners world wide. Be glad that you didn't have a total collapse and you managed to hold it together with a 6 min positive split.

oh please wrote:

outsiderunner wrote:

Interestingly, I felt pretty so-so going into Richmond. I have some significant lower abdominal soreness, which began about four weeks prior to the race. I also had some "dead legs" about two weeks prior to the race, and that tapered off about 4-5 days before the race.

Who knows...in this bizarre realm of marathoning, perhaps my first marathon will end up being my lifelong marathon PR. Just saying this makes me feel it is truly bizarre.

You realize you were only like 3 minutes off your PR, right? It's not like you ran 3:34. The race distance is arbitrary at 42,195 meters. There's no logical reason that 3 hours is special. You're already faster than the vast majority of marathoners world wide. Be glad that you didn't have a total collapse and you managed to hold it together with a 6 min positive split.

To be precise, I was 2:22 off of my PR. Thanks for your input, oh please. You tend to be the voice of reason. Even so, I remain somewhat dismayed. My fitness was better than at Richmond, and my body felt better, too.

Just had to get back "in the saddle again," and so I went for a lunchtime 6-miler with some hills. All things considered, my legs felt pretty good. Quads are still sore, and my legs felt rather "heavy," but I did the 6.33 miles without any issues. To let you know where I am, I think my splits were 7:38, 7:22, 7:25, 7:18, 7:22, and 6:44.

Now here is a race that sounds like it would suit me:

http://www.instantclassictrailrace.com/Race-Day-Info_2017.html

I just love the part about "no fancy expo." :-)

I wonder if that trail course would be slow, though...

Trail races are ridiculously slow in my experience. Ran my first this summer and averaged just over 8:00 per mile for 16 miles.

just understand that you ran a very good effort but encountered cramps and still ran close to your pr, but now you have very significant muscle damage from the race and need to recover entirely before beginning another easy buildup. History says that for most people it is self-defeating to run marathons in quick succession.

To the OP, I can commiserate a bit.

I vastly under-performed as well, despite what I thought was an easy 'enjoy the experience' non-PR sub-3:10 goal,. What felt like a Sunday jog early, deteriorated into unprecedented (for me) quad cramping in the latter stages and a huge positive split. I'm still assessing what went wrong, but suffice to say it happens - 42k is a long way, and so many variables can come into play on a race day.

One take away (for me anyway) is not to discount the effect of being away from home and dealing with the stressors of travel and start line logistics. As I look back on all my best performances at varying distances (both running and triathlons), virtually without exception they are local events where I can roll out of my own bed an hour or two before the gun.

Yep--roll out of my own bed an hour or two before the gun. That's the way.

I think there's also a significant race day advantage if you trained on and really know the course. This is much easier with local races.

No question. My marathon PR is in my home city, where I live a couple of blocks from the course route and run sections between kms 27-38 several times a week. That's not a coincidence.

Age 46. Had a great race at NYC on Sunday with a 2 minute negative split and my fastest marathon since Boston '11. I wasn't planning on pushing it at all and just wanted to enjoy the experience, but it was a beautiful day and I just started rolling at the half and was able to really push the hills in the park. I'm going to do an easy jog this evening but can't imagine running another marathon in 2 weeks.

You have a good base of fitness right now and perhaps could target some fast 5k/10k races late fall after an appropriate recovery and build but I don't think another marathon this year is wise. I agree with the earlier posters who pointed out that you probably left your p.r. out on your too fast training runs. I do long runs at 8:00 min pace with some m.p. at the end, but 22 at 6:50 was way too fast unless your m.p. is sub 6:00. Congratulations on a fine run. Get your weekly mileage up to 70 for your next marathon build, don't run your long runs too fast and you'll get your sub-3:00 next year.