Co-Flounder wrote:
An easy course and you complaining. Five weeks since your last marathon, That's not a big deal. There's nothing going on NYC or Boston post race. What do you want for post race love? Didn't enough townsfolk give you admiration for wearing your medal as you strutted around town?
No it was 'hard' anonymous Letsrun posters like you who's approval I just desperately sought. When do you think I'll be as hardcore as you. Never?
I can think of one guy I know personally who has run CIM and who has a PR from a different course.
Look at the crossover from Boston this spring which had a tailwind. Everyone seemed to run 4 minutes faster today at CIM. Boston has the competition, the crowd support, the water stops, etc.
I ran the course for the first time this year as well. The net downhill argument is silly: Boston is more downhill but in my mind, a more difficult course.
I didn’t find the downhill though to be that crazy. There were probably 3 downhills that I thought were very down, but there are rollers. No, they aren’t hills, and they can’t compare to NYC or Boston. But enough to say that if you trained on dead flat land your entire cycle, you will not do well.
I’d also say just because you ran a PR doesn’t make it illegitimate. That’s a weird way to look at results. You should run faster than NYC, especially at your pace, where things can get really crowded in NYC. I’m not critiquing you for being slow like other typical LRC posters, but more that the closer you get to 3+, the worse your experience will be on any major marathon.
It’s also weird to criticize the post race experience and the crowd support. Not sure what you were expecting. CIM bills itself as a place you go to run fast, not where you go for crowd support (that’s what Boston/NYC are for).
CIM logistics are SO much better than other races that have that number of people. I loved just rolling off the bus, using the port-a-potty, and heading to the line.
If there is one critique of the whole thing, I do agree on the corrals. With how popular this race is getting for people going for fast times, you can’t let people self-seed. I know CIM is trying to keep that “small race” feel, but it’s not that anymore and they should have a time requirement corral for something like a sub 3 corral.
Cim Runner wrote:
I ran the course for the first time this year as well. The net downhill argument is silly: Boston is more downhill but in my mind, a more difficult course.
I didn’t find the downhill though to be that crazy. There were probably 3 downhills that I thought were very down, but there are rollers. No, they aren’t hills, and they can’t compare to NYC or Boston. But enough to say that if you trained on dead flat land your entire cycle, you will not do well.
I’d also say just because you ran a PR doesn’t make it illegitimate. That’s a weird way to look at results. You should run faster than NYC, especially at your pace, where things can get really crowded in NYC. I’m not critiquing you for being slow like other typical LRC posters, but more that the closer you get to 3+, the worse your experience will be on any major marathon.
It’s also weird to criticize the post race experience and the crowd support. Not sure what you were expecting. CIM bills itself as a place you go to run fast, not where you go for crowd support (that’s what Boston/NYC are for).
CIM logistics are SO much better than other races that have that number of people. I loved just rolling off the bus, using the port-a-potty, and heading to the line.
If there is one critique of the whole thing, I do agree on the corrals. With how popular this race is getting for people going for fast times, you can’t let people self-seed. I know CIM is trying to keep that “small race” feel, but it’s not that anymore and they should have a time requirement corral for something like a sub 3 corral.
How many times do I have to repeat this? My argument is not *I ran a PR so it's an easy course*.
My argument is: I ran NYC 5 weeks ago, in an average time for a hobby jogger (3:05). Five weeks is not enough time to significantly improve in the 'thon so its roughly an apples-to-downhill-apples comparison and CIM is WAY faster/easier, even than a flat course like NYC.
It's nice that they let people stay on the bus but CIM can't compare to more scenic races. It's ugly and boring and overcrowded by people trying for race speeds 30-45 min outside their ability.
Just Average wrote:
Cim Runner wrote:
I ran the course for the first time this year as well. The net downhill argument is silly: Boston is more downhill but in my mind, a more difficult course.
I didn’t find the downhill though to be that crazy. There were probably 3 downhills that I thought were very down, but there are rollers. No, they aren’t hills, and they can’t compare to NYC or Boston. But enough to say that if you trained on dead flat land your entire cycle, you will not do well.
I’d also say just because you ran a PR doesn’t make it illegitimate. That’s a weird way to look at results. You should run faster than NYC, especially at your pace, where things can get really crowded in NYC. I’m not critiquing you for being slow like other typical LRC posters, but more that the closer you get to 3+, the worse your experience will be on any major marathon.
It’s also weird to criticize the post race experience and the crowd support. Not sure what you were expecting. CIM bills itself as a place you go to run fast, not where you go for crowd support (that’s what Boston/NYC are for).
CIM logistics are SO much better than other races that have that number of people. I loved just rolling off the bus, using the port-a-potty, and heading to the line.
If there is one critique of the whole thing, I do agree on the corrals. With how popular this race is getting for people going for fast times, you can’t let people self-seed. I know CIM is trying to keep that “small race” feel, but it’s not that anymore and they should have a time requirement corral for something like a sub 3 corral.
How many times do I have to repeat this? My argument is not *I ran a PR so it's an easy course*.
My argument is: I ran NYC 5 weeks ago, in an average time for a hobby jogger (3:05). Five weeks is not enough time to significantly improve in the 'thon so its roughly an apples-to-downhill-apples comparison and CIM is WAY faster/easier, even than a flat course like NYC.
It's nice that they let people stay on the bus but CIM can't compare to more scenic races. It's ugly and boring and overcrowded by people trying for race speeds 30-45 min outside their ability.
Even than a flat course like Chicago, not NYC.
Just Average wrote:
Cim Runner wrote:
I ran the course for the first time this year as well. The net downhill argument is silly: Boston is more downhill but in my mind, a more difficult course.
I didn’t find the downhill though to be that crazy. There were probably 3 downhills that I thought were very down, but there are rollers. No, they aren’t hills, and they can’t compare to NYC or Boston. But enough to say that if you trained on dead flat land your entire cycle, you will not do well.
I’d also say just because you ran a PR doesn’t make it illegitimate. That’s a weird way to look at results. You should run faster than NYC, especially at your pace, where things can get really crowded in NYC. I’m not critiquing you for being slow like other typical LRC posters, but more that the closer you get to 3+, the worse your experience will be on any major marathon.
It’s also weird to criticize the post race experience and the crowd support. Not sure what you were expecting. CIM bills itself as a place you go to run fast, not where you go for crowd support (that’s what Boston/NYC are for).
CIM logistics are SO much better than other races that have that number of people. I loved just rolling off the bus, using the port-a-potty, and heading to the line.
If there is one critique of the whole thing, I do agree on the corrals. With how popular this race is getting for people going for fast times, you can’t let people self-seed. I know CIM is trying to keep that “small race” feel, but it’s not that anymore and they should have a time requirement corral for something like a sub 3 corral.
How many times do I have to repeat this? My argument is not *I ran a PR so it's an easy course*.
My argument is: I ran NYC 5 weeks ago, in an average time for a hobby jogger (3:05). Five weeks is not enough time to significantly improve in the 'thon so its roughly an apples-to-downhill-apples comparison and CIM is WAY faster/easier, even than a flat course like NYC.
It's nice that they let people stay on the bus but CIM can't compare to more scenic races. It's ugly and boring and overcrowded by people trying for race speeds 30-45 min outside their ability.
I think all your proving with your 5 weeks later thing I run a time that's faster means you don't understand training... Like maybe you are more rested for CIM, maybe New York was a great workout for CIM because the rest of your training sucks... Using the excuse of being 5 weeks after means nothing without knowing your training. Basically it sounds like you don't know how to coach yourself and using that lack of understanding to prove your point. I will say from personal experience Houston was much easier than CIM. But I had better weather and I love in flatlands so I'm more adapted to that. Some people are better at running downhills and uphills they may do better at CIM..
Also why has no one mentioned Grandma's many friends think it's much easier than CIM also point to point. I think the biggest issue with CIM or grandma or even Boston is on a perfect weather day with a strong tail wind times get insanely faster... Faster than an "cheater shoes" y'all talk about. Ref: see Boston 2011
animaxcg wrote:
Just Average wrote:
How many times do I have to repeat this? My argument is not *I ran a PR so it's an easy course*.
My argument is: I ran NYC 5 weeks ago, in an average time for a hobby jogger (3:05). Five weeks is not enough time to significantly improve in the 'thon so its roughly an apples-to-downhill-apples comparison and CIM is WAY faster/easier, even than a flat course like NYC.
It's nice that they let people stay on the bus but CIM can't compare to more scenic races. It's ugly and boring and overcrowded by people trying for race speeds 30-45 min outside their ability.
I think all your proving with your 5 weeks later thing I run a time that's faster means you don't understand training... Like maybe you are more rested for CIM, maybe New York was a great workout for CIM because the rest of your training sucks... Using the excuse of being 5 weeks after means nothing without knowing your training. Basically it sounds like you don't know how to coach yourself and using that lack of understanding to prove your point. I will say from personal experience Houston was much easier than CIM. But I had better weather and I love in flatlands so I'm more adapted to that. Some people are better at running downhills and uphills they may do better at CIM..
Also why has no one mentioned Grandma's many friends think it's much easier than CIM also point to point. I think the biggest issue with CIM or grandma or even Boston is on a perfect weather day with a strong tail wind times get insanely faster... Faster than an "cheater shoes" y'all talk about. Ref: see Boston 2011
Lol yes if only we were all as smart as you! Gosh, why are we all so stupid and don't know training? Probably because we haven't been gifted with enough of your wisdom. Please, Olympic gold medalist -- tell us how training would make CIM not a fast course. That totally makes sense!!!
I have friends who say Grandma’s and Houston are easier than CIM. They set their PR at CIM. CIM advertises itself as a downhill marathon. They aren’t trying to deny its advantage yet everyone who goes to run it with their next%s does.
Just Average wrote:
animaxcg wrote:
I think all your proving with your 5 weeks later thing I run a time that's faster means you don't understand training... Like maybe you are more rested for CIM, maybe New York was a great workout for CIM because the rest of your training sucks... Using the excuse of being 5 weeks after means nothing without knowing your training. Basically it sounds like you don't know how to coach yourself and using that lack of understanding to prove your point. I will say from personal experience Houston was much easier than CIM. But I had better weather and I love in flatlands so I'm more adapted to that. Some people are better at running downhills and uphills they may do better at CIM..
Also why has no one mentioned Grandma's many friends think it's much easier than CIM also point to point. I think the biggest issue with CIM or grandma or even Boston is on a perfect weather day with a strong tail wind times get insanely faster... Faster than an "cheater shoes" y'all talk about. Ref: see Boston 2011
Lol yes if only we were all as smart as you! Gosh, why are we all so stupid and don't know training? Probably because we haven't been gifted with enough of your wisdom. Please, Olympic gold medalist -- tell us how training would make CIM not a fast course. That totally makes sense!!!
People have already discussed this topic extensively. You decided to make a new thread about it because you think the data you are bringing (that one runner, you, ran 3:05 NYC then 2:55 CIM 5 weeks later) is so significant. But it's not.
Lots of Vaporfly-wearing 2:18 CIM men on this thread are offended.
Great way to pretend you belong with real OTQs. Try running 27:59 or 13:20 or 3:37 lol
You also set nearly a 35 minute PR at New York. And you had to wait around in cold weather for several hours before the start, had a very crowded field, and you set a PR on a positive split style course (which shows you could have run faster with more efficient pacing). It's no surprise that you ran faster at CIM.
And in your NYC race photos, you are hamming it up for the camera in nearly every photo. It seemed more like a long run at a moderate effort opposed to a real marathon race where you're going after the clock.
I have no problem stating that CIM is 3-5 minutes faster than NYC for a three hour marathoner. With your improvement rate, you could very well run 2:50 in your next marathon. Would that mean CIM is slow?
My friend who went from 2:27 to 2:20, ran his 2:27 at CIM. I had another guy I coached who tried to break 2:30 for a few years. For four years in a row, he ran Boston and would either run CIM or a flat fall course. He ran very similar times at CIM and on the flat courses.
And it's ironic that you call CIM the Vaporfly of marathon courses when you wear the Vaporflys!
How many of the US Elite/Sub Elite guys/women who ran Chicago this year ran faster there, than they did at CIM in either of the past 2 years?
Get a grip wrote:
Just Average wrote:
Lol yes if only we were all as smart as you! Gosh, why are we all so stupid and don't know training? Probably because we haven't been gifted with enough of your wisdom. Please, Olympic gold medalist -- tell us how training would make CIM not a fast course. That totally makes sense!!!
People have already discussed this topic extensively. You decided to make a new thread about it because you think the data you are bringing (that one runner, you, ran 3:05 NYC then 2:55 CIM 5 weeks later) is so significant. But it's not.
Right-- training has also been discussed on this board many times, why bother discussing that either, huh?
Sorry you are so intellectually exhausted with the topic of the CIM course but maybe instead of whining you could just...not care and not post in the thread?
SouthernFriedRealist wrote:
You also set nearly a 35 minute PR at New York. And you had to wait around in cold weather for several hours before the start, had a very crowded field, and you set a PR on a positive split style course (which shows you could have run faster with more efficient pacing). It's no surprise that you ran faster at CIM.
And in your NYC race photos, you are hamming it up for the camera in nearly every photo. It seemed more like a long run at a moderate effort opposed to a real marathon race where you're going after the clock.
I have no problem stating that CIM is 3-5 minutes faster than NYC for a three hour marathoner. With your improvement rate, you could very well run 2:50 in your next marathon. Would that mean CIM is slow?
My friend who went from 2:27 to 2:20, ran his 2:27 at CIM. I had another guy I coached who tried to break 2:30 for a few years. For four years in a row, he ran Boston and would either run CIM or a flat fall course. He ran very similar times at CIM and on the flat courses.
And it's ironic that you call CIM the Vaporfly of marathon courses when you wear the Vaporflys!
Lol stalker much? Going to take me out to dinner next? Are you the same poster in the other thread saying the reporter who got her ass smacked had it coming?
Where how why and when did I complain about wearing Vaporflys? Is that anywhere in any of my threads? No. If I was scared about people looking me up I wouldn't post my race times or use a registered name here. Creepy tho that you spent your day looking up photos of me.
You just came on here like a diva with flawed logic. I was looking for evidence to support my claim.
It should be faster if you are prepared for the hills.
A lot of people are not, though.
SouthernFriedRealist wrote:
You just came on here like a diva with flawed logic. I was looking for evidence to support my claim.
Lol. OK. Well, definitely spending hours looking me up and staring at photos of me is the best way to argue your point, not, say, engage with my ideas.
And thanks for filling in the "lack of creepy stalkers" gap here at Letsrun. We were definitely short on those. Phew.
+8.0 +California Int'l (Sacramento CA/USA
+82.8 +New York City (NY/USA)
So 90s difference for "elite runners". Double that if you like for ~3:00.
The OP didn't mention if they wore VFs either race. Those shoes probably would help more for CIM.
Apples to Apples wrote:
When I ran CIM my GPS said the grade adjusted pace would have been 17 seconds slower than a perfectly flat course. I haven't run Chicago but would guess they are pretty similar. It's obviously faster than New York, but the 10 minute difference is mostly from you just running a better race today.
This feels like the most objective way to compare the courses. Comparisons like "person X ran faster at Grandma's than CIM" or "person Y ran faster at CIM than Chicago" are way too noisy.
I ran much faster at CIM than Grandma's this year. I think it was an easier course, but I also in much better shape at CIM...there are always other factors at play.
YMMV wrote:
https://www.arrs.run/TB_Mara.htm+8.0 +California Int'l (Sacramento CA/USA
+82.8 +New York City (NY/USA)
So 90s difference for "elite runners". Double that if you like for ~3:00.
The OP didn't mention if they wore VFs either race. Those shoes probably would help more for CIM.
Ran in the same exact pair for both NYC and CIM.