Thanks BouldeRunner! That makes sense - relax, move up gradually as gaps open, and settle into pace as the race spreads out.
Thanks BouldeRunner! That makes sense - relax, move up gradually as gaps open, and settle into pace as the race spreads out.
W1C4'er wrote:
Similar to biogen's question: I'm a first time Bostoner, and ran 2:58 to put me in Corral 4. I'm looking to run around 2:45, but realize that's about 30sec/mile faster than the BQ pace for me and the folks I'll be with at the start. Factoring in the crowding as well, I'm a bit worried that I'll have trouble running anything near 6:20-30 pace for the first few miles.
Should I just suck it up and assume I'll have to run 6:50-7min pace for the first 2-3 miles and try to make up the time later, or is it reasonable to expect folks in Corral 4 to start faster than their seed paces and spread out fast enough to be able to run 6:20-30 pace pretty quickly?
Thanks!
I saw a runner on Strava that ran 6:30 pace for first few miles from corral 6. Finished well under that pace.
BouldeRunner wrote:
I should have addressed that to W1C4er, sorry. Biogen could probably extrapolate between the two, to figure out what is reasonable and releaxed out of Corral 2.
Huge difference between corral 2 and 4. Corral 2 cut off is around 2:53, 6:30 pace. Corral 4 is 2:58, 6:50 pace. Corral 2 runners will be in shape. Worst case, you'd be at 6:20 pace to start, which could do you good. By mile 3, you'll be fine at 6:05-6:10 or less.
http://web.archive.org/web/20170927050330/http://community.runnersworld.com/fileSendAction/fcType/0/fcOid/176669196633159228/filePointer/176669196633159276/fodoid/176669196633159264/imageType/LARGE/inlineImage/true/Boston%2520Marathon%2520-%25202017%2520Corral%2520Qualifying%2520Times.jpgbiogen wrote:
Can one comfortably run 6:05-6:10 for the first 4 miles from wave 1 corral 2? I've read that most people go out too fast, so I assume it'll be fine.
Also how's the congestion at the aid stations for the first half at a 2:45 pace? I plan on drinking a lot of Gatorade...
2:45 is 6:18 pace. Walking compared to 6:05. If you plan to bank time with the 6:05-6:10 pace, that's not a good idea.
Qualified with a low 2:53, ended up in corral 3 (2XXX number). Last ran in 2009 when I qualified with a 2:59 and was also in corral 3, so times have gotten considerably faster.
At least in 2009 (it's been a while), I don't recall any real issues at the start even in corral 3. I went through the half right around 1:24/1:25 don't recall too much traffic. I think I ran around a 6:30-6:40 for the first couple of miles, it was tight. Yes, there are a lot of runners, but everyone is seeded you are not going to be surrounded by slugs. I don't think I ever heard anyone complain that they ruined their race by running the first 5K of a marathon at less than goal pace.
Someone correct me if I am remembering this wrong, but I seem to recall they left a rope or something across each corral right up until the start. So instead of 8000 runners all bunching up, there was a little gap between each corral. All the runners in each corral were bunched at the front of the corral, but there was like 10-20 yards of space before the rope to the next corral and they didn't pull the rope until the corral ahead was moving (or just about to). Maybe they don't do this, but this would make the start much smoother by providing just a little space to create a better flow.
bogey55 wrote:
Same wave and corral, but I hope to pass many runners. Goal 2:59:59. 1:23 half.
Same wave and corral in 2017 with only about 15 seconds to spare with my BQ of 3:10.xx. I was happy to make it into the first wave for my first Boston race at my age of 50+. I used the same BQ this year and was happy to see I was bumped back to wave 2 corral 1. I started at the very back of corral 8 in 2017. I was one of the last out because I forgot to tie my shoes up tighter for the race until the runners in corral 8 started moving forward and because I was in no hurry to work my way through the crowd. This allowed me to learn forward on the opening hill and let it carry it forward at a fast pace for the first 1K of the race. Then for the next 6 to 8 miles I carryfully worked my way through the crowd trying to avoid running extra distance, tiring myself out early, or tripping up with other runners. No one in the back in corral 8 can easily run as fast as they may like until later in the race due to the crowd. That is why I was happy to be moved to corral 1 of wave 2 this year. I want to experience what it may be like to have fewer runners hampering my desired pacing. Unfortunately I have an upper hamstring tendon injury I have been training through for months so do not expect to run near my BQ time or my time last year at Boston. I will just be happy to finish the race and would be thrilled to just BQ once again even if it is much slower than 3:10.
medium_pace wrote:
Qualified with a low 2:53, ended up in corral 3 (2XXX number). Last ran in 2009 when I qualified with a 2:59 and was also in corral 3, so times have gotten considerably faster.
Yes they have. In 2010 and 2011 I was in corral 1 with a mid-2:52. (Now, in my 60’s, all the way back to 2/7.)
medium_pace wrote:
Qualified with a low 2:53, ended up in corral 3 (2XXX number). Last ran in 2009 when I qualified with a 2:59 and was also in corral 3, so times have gotten considerably faster.
.
indeed. my BQ time is 1 second slower for this year than it was for last year... my number is 250 higher
Don't bank time on the downhills wrote:
biogen wrote:
Can one comfortably run 6:05-6:10 for the first 4 miles from wave 1 corral 2? I've read that most people go out too fast, so I assume it'll be fine.
Also how's the congestion at the aid stations for the first half at a 2:45 pace? I plan on drinking a lot of Gatorade...
2:45 is 6:18 pace. Walking compared to 6:05. If you plan to bank time with the 6:05-6:10 pace, that's not a good idea.
A few things:
I think on a flat course I'm in ~2:42 shape, so 6:05-6:10 on downhills isn't super stressful.
The first 4 mile net elevation drops are -130, -40, -55, and -85. At 1.8 seconds per mile per 10 feet equivalents, that's 23s, 7s, 10s, 15s pace drops for respective equivalents. I threw out 6:05-6:10 as what I think is a compromise between taking full advantage of the hills and taking no advantage. I feel like it makes sense to take at least some advantage.
Also I've been getting in a fair amount of downhill training and at this point, it doesn't beat me up too badly (running 6+ miles on a downhill treadmill at ~6 flat pace (over 1000 ft elevation drop in 40 min!)). I completely agree that the key is to take it relaxed with a high cadence and I won't be dodging even if that means going slower than I'd like.
That all being said, I might just try to set a split ceiling of 6:20 or something and try to hit 6:10-6:20 for the first 16. Give some back on the uphills and get it back in the last downhills. I can't decide.
This all assumes great weather of course.
biogen wrote:
Don't bank time on the downhills wrote:
2:45 is 6:18 pace. Walking compared to 6:05. If you plan to bank time with the 6:05-6:10 pace, that's not a good idea.
A few things:
I think on a flat course I'm in ~2:42 shape, so 6:05-6:10 on downhills isn't super stressful.
The first 4 mile net elevation drops are -130, -40, -55, and -85. At 1.8 seconds per mile per 10 feet equivalents, that's 23s, 7s, 10s, 15s pace drops for respective equivalents. I threw out 6:05-6:10 as what I think is a compromise between taking full advantage of the hills and taking no advantage. I feel like it makes sense to take at least some advantage.
Also I've been getting in a fair amount of downhill training and at this point, it doesn't beat me up too badly (running 6+ miles on a downhill treadmill at ~6 flat pace (over 1000 ft elevation drop in 40 min!)). I completely agree that the key is to take it relaxed with a high cadence and I won't be dodging even if that means going slower than I'd like.
That all being said, I might just try to set a split ceiling of 6:20 or something and try to hit 6:10-6:20 for the first 16. Give some back on the uphills and get it back in the last downhills. I can't decide.
This all assumes great weather of course.
You are way overthinking this. Just go out easy the first two miles. MP plus 15-20 secs if that feels right. Then let the race come to you. It will work out fine and you will know what to do when you are out there. As long as you don’t blow it miles 1 and 2.
I would highly discourage anyone from trying to "take advantage" of the first three downhill miles. Those three early miles are a get rich quick scheme, and we know how they all end up. I recommend running them slower than goal pace in spite of the downhill. I have yet to hear any stories of someone saying, "I wish Id put more time in the bank on those early downhills." Resign yourself to running 1-2 minutes slower than you would be capable of on a flat course, lose 20-30 seconds on miles 1-3 and another minute plus on 17-21. Your quads will thank you running through brookline when you see people walking backwards.
BouldeRunner wrote:
I would highly discourage anyone from trying to "take advantage" of the first three downhill miles. Those three early miles are a get rich quick scheme, and we know how they all end up. I recommend running them slower than goal pace in spite of the downhill. I have yet to hear any stories of someone saying, "I wish Id put more time in the bank on those early downhills." Resign yourself to running 1-2 minutes slower than you would be capable of on a flat course, lose 20-30 seconds on miles 1-3 and another minute plus on 17-21. Your quads will thank you running through brookline when you see people walking backwards.
Exactly! Though I’d say you can lose more than 30 seconds in the first 3 miles.
A couple of times I ran 2:56 after going out at 7:00 pace.
Negativesplitter wrote:
Exactly! Though I’d say you can lose more than 30 seconds in the first 3 miles.
A couple of times I ran 2:56 after going out at 7:00 pace.
Seriously. If you go out _50_ seconds too slow in the first mile, that's 2 seconds per mile to make up over the rest of the course. That's nothing.
I'm looking to run something just over 3 hours, and am starting in 1/8. I was psyched to be in 1/8 - I can just start in the very back and not get pushed out too fast.
darkwave wrote:
Negativesplitter wrote:
Exactly! Though I’d say you can lose more than 30 seconds in the first 3 miles.
A couple of times I ran 2:56 after going out at 7:00 pace.
Seriously. If you go out _50_ seconds too slow in the first mile, that's 2 seconds per mile to make up over the rest of the course. That's nothing.
I'm looking to run something just over 3 hours, and am starting in 1/8. I was psyched to be in 1/8 - I can just start in the very back and not get pushed out too fast.
It occurs to me: Why are we giving all this good info to our competitors?!
BouldeRunner wrote:
I would highly discourage anyone from trying to "take advantage" of the first three downhill miles. Those three early miles are a get rich quick scheme, and we know how they all end up. I recommend running them slower than goal pace in spite of the downhill. I have yet to hear any stories of someone saying, "I wish Id put more time in the bank on those early downhills." Resign yourself to running 1-2 minutes slower than you would be capable of on a flat course, lose 20-30 seconds on miles 1-3 and another minute plus on 17-21. Your quads will thank you running through brookline when you see people walking backwards.
Reposting because it cannot be repeated enough. Truth.
The water/Gatorade stations can be congested though for those starting in 1/8 and who run faster than most of the runners in the lower corrals. The number of portable toilets is scarce and can be a problem for somebody in corral 8 working his way up. As great a race that it is, Boston is cheap when it comes to supplying toilets along the course. The only solution is to pray to God that you don't need one during the 122nd running of the Boston Marathon.
Negativesplitter wrote:
23-timer wrote:
so you plan to run 9 or 10 min faster than your BQ from corral 8? good luck with that
That can definitely be done. It can actually be helpful to be forced to go out a bit slow. You still won’t negative split the race believe me.
Boston is a GREAT course to negative split.
Run the first 15 miles at 5 seconds per miles faster than goal marathon pace. (75 seconds saved up.)
Run the next six miles at 13 seconds per mile slower than goal marathon pace. (78 seconds down, back to even.)
You will then arrive at mile 21 right knowing that it is downhill from there and know exactly how much you are smashing your goal by.
That's what I did, anyway.
Always crashing in the same car wrote:
The water/Gatorade stations can be congested though for those starting in 1/8 and who run faster than most of the runners in the lower corrals. The number of portable toilets is scarce and can be a problem for somebody in corral 8 working his way up. As great a race that it is, Boston is cheap when it comes to supplying toilets along the course. The only solution is to pray to God that you don't need one during the 122nd running of the Boston Marathon.
Wouldn't it be a bigger problem for Wave #2 and up? They mostly need the toilets for 3:10+ runners. Runners 3:10 and lower will stop only under emergency situations, and for the most part have this aspect figured out.
not many port-a-loos on the Boston course.Boston is stunningly cheap when it comes to loos.
Ian_32 wrote:
not many port-a-loos on the Boston course.Boston is stunningly cheap when it comes to loos.
Crap. Is it an issue for wave 1 corral 1 or wave 1 corral 2?
