3M half marathon suprising results

Hearld's "PRs" for the half marathon and full marathon were both on downhill Austin courses. He was a fine runner (and, I am told, a fine person as well), but -- as far as I am aware -- never came anywhere near the 2:12+ and sub-63 that he ran on those downhill Austin courses. I'm not saying that he couldn't have. I'm merely observing that, as far as I know, he never did.

It's funny that some of the people who run these races actually care about the accuracy of the course length, yet have no problem with several hundred feet in elevation drop. A drop of three hundred feet is probably equivalent to at least six or seven times that distance in decreased course length over a half marathon. To care about accuracy of length, without accounting for elevation drop, seems to be an act of self-delusion at the very least. To proclaim a "PR" on a course like 3M is, to my eyes, very similar to proclaiming a "PR" on a course that is known to be short.

I think that the organizers of these fake-PR races deserve some criticism. They pander to their customers' desire to feel better about themselves and their running accomplishments by setting these events up and promoting the courses as "PR-friendly." I think that the organizers of these events degrade the sport.

I realize that my views on this topic aren't real popular, but I can live with that. It's not as though I spend my days and nights fretting about downhill courses. I certainly don't spend as much time fretting about them as others spend seeking them out.

oldguy wrote:

It's not as though I spend my days and nights fretting about downhill courses. I certainly don't spend as much time fretting about them as others spend seeking them out.

Bullsh i t Alert!

You are the loudest whiner about this course each and every stinking year! Death, Taxes, and oldguy feeling good about himself. Happens every year!!

"To proclaim a "PR" on a course like 3M is, to my eyes, very similar to proclaiming a "PR" on a course that is known to be short"

How about all those chumps who ran 47's and 48's at Papa John's (even 46 and change for D. Browne!!)?

oldguy wrote:

To proclaim a "PR" on a course like 3M is, to my eyes, very similar to proclaiming a "PR" on a course that is known to be short.

How about all those chumps who ran 47's and 48's at Papa John's (even 46 and change for D. Browne!!)?

oldguy wrote:

I realize that my views on this topic aren't real popular, but I can live with that. It's not as though I spend my days and nights fretting about downhill courses. I certainly don't spend as much time fretting about them as others spend seeking them out.

Ok dude you've made your point about 5,000 times in this thread; yet you keep on posting the same thing over and over. Thanks for posting.

So, are you saying you never run races or workouts that are not on loop courses, on the track or whatever equalizes out the ups and downs, the downwind with the headwind. Hey, it's fun to run a good time, and I don't think anyone who runs fast on a downhill/downwind type course thinks that it accurately reflects what their actual ability is. But the courses are there and if you are too much of a purist to run them, then chill, and leave them to us that enjoy it and have fun doing so.

I also ran 3M and was plesantly suprised by my time. I started slowly due to the congestion at the start but got to cranking 6:40-6:30's with my last mile in 6:10. I haven't raced much lately so I wasn't sure what time to expect but this was faster than I could have hoped for. What is your take on the time difference between this course vs. a flat(er)one? I'm just curious because I'm planning on running Freescale in a few weeks and wanted some benchmark to gage what pace I should shoot for.

So should all road races be run on the track? Why do we have road races anyway. I'm sure if someone runs a PR in Austin they know it's going to be a fast course and a PR they'll likely never see on another course. So, what's the big deal? Should all course be either completely flat or completely West Virginia hilly? Why not just have staggered time trials and forget about actual "racing". Why do people run Chicago? That's right, to run fast. Why do people run New York or Boston? That's right...to race regardless of time. You people get way to bent out of shape over the same handful of races year after year. It was a race. Someone won, others lost, some ran PRs. Such is the way of things.

Alan

Runningart2004 wrote:

So should all road races be run on the track? Why do we have road races anyway. I'm sure if someone runs a PR in Austin they know it's going to be a fast course and a PR they'll likely never see on another course. So, what's the big deal? Should all course be either completely flat or completely West Virginia hilly? Why not just have staggered time trials and forget about actual "racing". Why do people run Chicago? That's right, to run fast. Why do people run New York or Boston? That's right...to race regardless of time. You people get way to bent out of shape over the same handful of races year after year. It was a race. Someone won, others lost, some ran PRs. Such is the way of things.

Alan

Alan,

You're spot on the money. One can go back at least 2 years ago on this website and he complains the entire week about this race.

Runningart2004 wrote:

So should all road races be run on the track?

Of course not. Just don't advertise them as something they're not. You don't need to pretend that a race is a legitimate 10k or half-marathon in order to get big fields and great competition. Look at the Falmouth Road Race, which gets thousands of participants each year, with great competition (much better than 3M), even though the distance of the race has always been random and uncertain. Most people in mega-races don't particularly care about their times or course measurements. The people who seek out downhill courses of specified lengths seem generally to be faster than average, but less than elite runners who want to pad their running resumes with faux PRs. I certainly understand the desire to inflate accomplishment, but I don't think that course organizers should be catering to that desire.

what "chumps" are you referring?

You're wrong about who cares about how fast a course is. The average Joe/Jill is the 3M markets to. That's why they show the graph of the 3M race as looking like a run down a mountain. These are also the people who pay the bills and provide the money for the benefactor of this race for charity. The number of elite/faster than average runners is so small that the races need to attract more runners.

The average Joe/Jill does care about what their time is and whether or not they run a PR. I work at a running store and the majority of our customers are just average runners, but they DO care about their times. I had a conversation recently with my Dr. and we were talking about EPO and other performance enhancements. He commented about how even himself as a 55 min. 10k'er was concerned about drinking caffeine, and other things to make himself faster. It's just human nature to want to excell, so no matter what level we are at we all want to do better.

Those that don't are the majority of people on welfare and looking to the Government as their "master".

Thanks old guy Austin does what I do at all my races in colorado springs eg the paddy day race where I had an irish man measure for me. I wonder why that course a few years ago produced such a fast time and the winner was ranked in the UK 5km road rankings that year. Oh by the way what about my down hill race the 10km classic I never hear you "moan" about how fast everybody runs in that race. I think your an old man that hates anything Texas and the fact that even on a fast course such as 3m you would never have run faster than 1.12.

bbb wrote:

what "chumps" are you referring?

"chumps"= users of 10 mile PRs of 47:00-48:30 at old Papa John's course known to short on their running resumes and for bragging rights.

I'll back up oldguy every year this topic arises. To answer the question as what are race organizers supposed to do?: Follow the freakin rules laid out by the RRCA in accordance with USATF.

Is it that hard to get the start line within x amount of miles/km of the start?

There are flat, fast, CERTIFIED courses out there people. I do not even care about a time or someone else's time if the race was run on a non-certified course.

It makes me laugh when reading through the posts when people say things like: "I was suprised at how good I felt or how even my pacing was, blah, blah, blah."

I hope you feel good running a race downhill!

This was a certified course. Ass..

I agree that many people care about their times in a race, and I agree that the organizers of a race like 3M market their race to (among others) people who are looking for fast times on measured courses. I also agree that many people want to excel. But there is a difference between giving people the opportunity to excel and giving people the opportunity to pretend that they've done something that they haven't.

I'm still waiting to hear another point of view about the psychological disconnect of those who insist on record-quality horizontal course measurements while seeking out vertical course measurements that are as far away from record quality as possible.

oldguy wrote:

I agree that many people care about their times in a race, and I agree that the organizers of a race like 3M market their race to (among others) people who are looking for fast times on measured courses. I also agree that many people want to excel. But there is a difference between giving people the opportunity to excel and giving people the opportunity to pretend that they've done something that they haven't.

I'm still waiting to hear another point of view about the psychological disconnect of those who insist on record-quality horizontal course measurements while seeking out vertical course measurements that are as far away from record quality as possible.

What I don't get is how it factors into to your day to day life. Why do you get bent out of shape on this yearly? I can understand if YOU don't like it, but why do you go thru the motion of this discussion every year?

oldguy wrote:

Anyone who would list his or her time on this course as a half-marathon PR is a fraud.

Strong words indeed!!