Runbird wrote:With his current fitness, if indeed a spring marathon is in the plans - best to strike while the iron is hot.
Normally would agree with the "strike while the iron is hot" approach, but disagree in this instance.
Take the rest of year for cross/10,000/5,000, maybe a couple of more road races and training, run the WCs (maybe at 10,000) and then debut at the Trials marathon next fall, which his half time would let him do.
Take the rest of year for cross/10,000/5,000, maybe a couple of more road races and training, run the WCs (maybe at 10,000) and then debut at the Trials marathon next fall, which his half time would let him do.[/quote]
I respectfully disagree and find myself in the Jason camp on this one. Track training will not help his marathon. Go get an A Standard while you are fit for the marathon, then you have a range of tactics available and major cred going into the Trials. That would make the Olympics a third marathon in about 15 months, an excellent plan.
A few posters have been saying the 1/2 marathon isn't an indicator of potential in the full marathon. Nothing is a perfect indicator not even previous marathons, as you can always improve dramatically or fail on your next outing. Those stating a 1/2 marathon doesn't give you a decent idea of marathon readiness are inexperienced, so what should athletes utilize the 100m?
Sorry guys, your wrong.
Go ask Renato Canova about Aerobic Fat Power.
Look at the data for an average efficiency:
Energy requirement for a 2:10 marathon= 20.62 kcal/min
energy from glycogen= 14.62 kcal/min
lipid consumption= 6.00 kcal/min
Let's quote Canova's book:
"Let us take the case of two runners having similar personal best times for the 10k and the half marathon (two events in which lipid consumption rate is not the deterring factor) and similar oxygen uptake rates, but one has a lower aerobic fat power than the other, the athlete with the lower fat consumpyion rate would not be able to keep up with the other one in a marathon race, because, if he tried to, he would use up the glycogen stores too rapidly and would suffer from glycogen depletion."
I could go on but you get the idea. The amount of fat used DOES play a significant role.
Nobby I think you are a bit off....
Beppu is before Tokyo. Beppu is February 4, I think, and Tokyo is February 18. Lake Biwa is March 4.
Sorry to hear about Takaoka's lack of fitness. I really enjoyed talking to him last year in Tokyo. He is one of the greatest Asian marathoners of all time, simply from his 2:06:16 and 3 other runs of 2:07 including his dominating win in Tokyo in 2005.
I am not in the kind of fitness that I was in last year. I am using Tokyo as a hard 33km run before Seoul on March 18.
Jason
getrealwhatsthedeal wrote:
A few posters have been saying the 1/2 marathon isn't an indicator of potential in the full marathon. Nothing is a perfect indicator not even previous marathons, as you can always improve dramatically or fail on your next outing. Those stating a 1/2 marathon doesn't give you a decent idea of marathon readiness are inexperienced, so what should athletes utilize the 100m?
There is only one "indicator" .......THE MARATHON.
Jason:
You're dead right (and I'm off); for some reason I thought Beppu was in early March. I guess for recovery purpose, Tokyo would make more sense then.
As for Takaoka, I heard somewhere that he wanted to have the national records for 5k and 10k before he moved to the marathon. In a sense, he looked at marathon as his last resort. I think he could have threatened the world record with de Costa before era of KK and Tergat and Geb came around. I guess we would never know...
Good luck at Tokyo anyways...and enjoy the race with 25000 other runners through one of the largest cities in the world! Have shabu-shabu for me!
Jason:
I was wrong with one more thing; Sato is running Beppu.
c'mon wrote:
Give the Paula Ivan thing a rest, as her "success" was probably driven by PEDs as much as by what you call courage.
image:
http://www.geocities.com/webalby1500fotos01/Paula_Ivan.jpgNgugi, despite being banned for refusing for taking a drug test, is less suspect.
You only say that because he's African. He came up with the most ridiculous excuses because he was hiding something. These days, officials in E. Africa will just claim the runner is 'away' at some village with no phone, etc. IF they even have testers show up at all. Generally, they're protected by politics.
honskonchobinnie wrote:
You only say that because he's African. He came up with the most ridiculous excuses because he was hiding something. These days, officials in E. Africa will just claim the runner is 'away' at some village with no phone, etc. IF they even have testers show up at all. Generally, they're protected by politics.
and from what font of information do you base this on?
not sure wrote:
malmo wrote:. I mean, he ran 3:42 in high school and he just looked like a little kid.
I agree. I watched him run that race and it was very impressive. People forget that it wasn't JUST Ritz and Webb that year. It was great to watch. He hung in with the big guys at Bowdoin looking like a middle schooler.
Halls always been included, Teg is the one left-out when talking about '01. It was always 'The Big 3', not the 'Dynamic Duo of Ritz and Webb'.
bad connection wrote:
Sorry guys, your wrong.
Go ask Renato Canova about Aerobic Fat Power.
Look at the data for an average efficiency:
Energy requirement for a 2:10 marathon= 20.62 kcal/min
energy from glycogen= 14.62 kcal/min
lipid consumption= 6.00 kcal/min
.
Sorry, Canova's "formula" is wrong. The human body has no idea how far the race is going to be. At 10 miles it doesn't know if it's running a 20k race or a 42k race. Lipid consumption becomes a factor late in the race, but still is a very small factor in the equation. Perhaps jtupper could shed some light here?
Halls always been included, Teg is the one left-out when talking about '01. It was always 'The Big 3', not the 'Dynamic Duo of Ritz and Webb'.
when people talked about three, you're right, he was included. However, people often stopped talking about Hall if he wasn't in peak form whereas Ritz and Webb could have two broken legs and there would still be a Ritz v. Webb thread on here within the first two pages for the longest time. Hall was a part-timer in terms of being included in the pantheon.
Regardless, does this go down as the best distance class ever at this point? Or do we still need to wait for Ritz to pop a couple more big races? Ironic that it would be him of the three that hasn't yet truly broken through (excepting one pretty good 10K).
WHat does the body not knowing whether you are running 20k or 42k have to with it?
Of course the numbers given are not constant throughout the race if that's what you are thinking.
Canova's data represents a way to express the TOTAL energy requirement and then breaks that down into the TOTAL carb and fat requirement.
Maybe I misrepresented something but some more data to back the concept up:
"Sjodin and Svedenhag (1995) observed that among elite marathon runners they studied, those with the most economic run spent .816 kcal per km and per kilogram of body weight, those with a higher running cost spent .988 kcal. Energy expenditure was on average .908..."
So for a 70kg man=
.908 kcal/kg/km X 70kg x 42.2km=2682 kcal
Using data by O'brien it can be seen that about 1500kcal comes from muscle glycogen and 400kcal from the liver glycogen.
That equals roughly 1900kcal....So how do we get that other 800kcal needed????????
Use your head.
If you want to look at it another way, RER is another way to quantify the ratio of fat to carb used. Top notch marathoners all run at an RER below 1.00 (generally in the .9x range for most). Meaning that fat is used even in the early stages.
O'Brien's figure is wrong, or you have interpreted it wrongly.
An elite 70kg runner will store more that 2500kcals of Glycogen, not 1900 that figure is way off. Also he will metablolise about 120 kcals/mile during the race, that's over 3100kcals in total.
With 2500kcals of Glycogen, that's over 600 grams, only a small percentage of fat and protein need to be oxidised.
This figure increses as the race progresses, the maximum may be 30% at some point but that is way above the average figure.
Scientician wrote:
O'Brien's figure is wrong, or you have interpreted it wrongly.
An elite 70kg runner will store more that 2500kcals of Glycogen, not 1900 that figure is way off. Also he will metablolise about 120 kcals/mile during the race, that's over 3100kcals in total.
With 2500kcals of Glycogen, that's over 600 grams, only a small percentage of fat and protein need to be oxidised.
This figure increses as the race progresses, the maximum may be 30% at some point but that is way above the average figure.
Scientician. Notice the wording used. You misread it. I said that O'brien calculated that muscle glycogen stores PROVIDE a total of about 1500kcal.
I didn't say that they that much is STORED. There is a big difference.
Ryan Hall and Mebrahtom Keflezighi due to start training together soon. With Mebrahtom confirmed for London I wish that sway Ryan's decision to run London and him and Mebrahtom work together towards sub 2:08. Mebrahtom had just 4-5 weeks of base training going into the Houston 1/2 marathon and should be ready by London.
Just wondering if Meb let Ryan go because the pace was too fast, he thought Ryan would come back, or what? Where\'s the comments from Wejo and Renato?
runningbackwards wrote:
Just wondering if Meb let Ryan go because the pace was too fast, he thought Ryan would come back, or what? Where's the comments from Wejo and Renato?
Meb ----> London
priority marathon training
bad connection wrote:
Scientician wrote:O'Brien's figure is wrong, or you have interpreted it wrongly.
An elite 70kg runner will store more that 2500kcals of Glycogen, not 1900 that figure is way off. Also he will metablolise about 120 kcals/mile during the race, that's over 3100kcals in total.
With 2500kcals of Glycogen, that's over 600 grams, only a small percentage of fat and protein need to be oxidised.
This figure increses as the race progresses, the maximum may be 30% at some point but that is way above the average figure.
Scientician. Notice the wording used. You misread it. I said that O'brien calculated that muscle glycogen stores PROVIDE a total of about 1500kcal.
I didn't say that they that much is STORED. There is a big difference.
__________________________________________________________
I still disagree though. The figures you provide are very much lower than what an elite 70kg Marathoner will utilise in the race.
My figure of more than 600gr was what I believe will be provided, since according to other studies, 700gr or more will be stored.
