10-15 minutes slow depending on how I rate the diffculty of my shorter races. I don't think this calculator puts enough emphasis on weekly mileage.
If this calculator is spot on for you, I would bet that you're leaving plenty on the table with training.
I guess I'm the only runner that it had a too fast of a prediction?
It was about 10 minutes too fast based on my 5k and half marathon prior to the marathon.
Collin wrote:Oh and for what it's worth, my experience has been that Jundo (ventolin's calculator) is probably the best.
It works for Paula, but she was drafted around to 2"15
Calculation from tables on malmo's site gives
28'00 = 61'18 = 2"09'12
27'00 = 59'12 = 2"04'57
the 2"02'57wr
( run on berlin which is not 100% flat )
= 26'31
58'16
the M wr is now intrinsically better than 1/2M
For me it was about a minute slow. Then put in what would happen if I dropped 2 min off my half marathon time, 1 minute off my 5 mile time and added 10 miles a week and it said I'd run 1:36...
Clean Slate wrote:
Says the research is based on miles/week and time from shorter races.
My conversions for recent marathons were way off.
What say you?
I went into it now and put in my times from my two recent races:
42:29 10k and 1:32:24 13.1--it gave me 3:22:26 (right now)...that sounds about right. RW over-predicted me to a 3:12. Both hilly, hot courses (selected from dropdown menu).
The good point about it is if you train based on the slower standard and try to beat it, you won't go out too fast if you run the actual marathon because you used too-optimistic times and params!
I put in 52 mpw average (normal block in a given summer) as well.
8-12 minutes slow for me. I used mileage and times from 35 years ago when I was in PR shape. Slate predicts 2:55 while I actually ran 2:45, 2:47, and 2:43 in my three marathons that year. Interestingly, the Slate calculator also gives the Runner's World prediction as 2:45, almost right on the nose.