After reading your post, it is clear that you are fighting who you really are. Once you come out, you will feel a whole weight off your chest. you will run better, and feel much less stress, and won't have the issues of hitting walls or anything .
Good luck my friend.
troubled wrote:
I did my research for this marathon. I did my fair share of reading and asking those who had previously run it. But most people emphasized the "don't go out too fast...it's not that hilly except for the stretch between 16-21 and even then most people run by Heartbreak Hill without even noticing it"
I should have looked at elevation charts perhaps but it's hard to go by just numbers
The readily available course profiles don't do it justice IMO. You can get a decent idea of the ups and downs, but two things really changed my perspective of the course. The first was running it last year with my dad. He insisted on running even effort to the point where he had a heart rate monitor and would not deviate from it until late in the race when it didn't matter. So we sped up and slowed down a lot, but the proof was there - he ran 3:53 and change at 70 year old, placed 7th or 8th in his division and we passed a lot of people, especially in the second half of the race. And most of them were a lot younger than him.
The second was driving the course on Sunday up until the Newton Hills. Really noticeable how many little rollers there are when the course is not filled with thousands of runners. So with these two pieces of information I went out and ran the way I thought would be best on Monday. My time wasn't stellar, but I also didn't blow up either. I thought I could run high two's and ended up with a 3:12 but I knew that with the heat (which I don't handle well) I would have to back off. But I still let gravity be my guide and sped up on the downs and backed off on the ups.
TBH is was surprised by how many people were braking on the down hills and then pushing on the uphills in the beginning because I'd pass them going down and they'd go past me going up. But a lot of them eventually faded. There's a lot of wasted energy and effort doing that.
Lowa glycogen
Or something weird with your diet? Or your expectations/pace are just completely out of line? If you were cracking at 10 K there was some horrible miscalculation with that tail and even in the heat you were either sick which is possible or something really weird or just a drastic miscalculation of your fitness those are really the only options that tail and should've made the first 10 miles Easy,,, quads/body shouldn't have noticed crap till about nine or 10 at the earliest if you actually had the fitness after that I'll bets are off but up until that point you're either sick... completely screwed up your morning nutrition hydration but I'm talking mega screwed up you should've still been fine till 10
This thread makes me feel better that I had such a similar experience to many on here. I went into this year in the best marathon shape I've ever been in, was confident that 2:35 was in reach. I even heeded the advice of everyone and went out very relaxed going through the half in 1:18 and then I just felt so bad. Legs were trashed, couldn't take in enough fluid, calves hamstrings and lower back were all cramping and spasming and the second half was a miserable death march like I've never experienced before (3:03 finish). Ended up in the med tent after blacking out after the finish...very unlike me. I qualified with a 2:39 in better weather conditions but tougher course and walked away fine from the race.
My question to you all: my body is wrecked. I have never been this sore in my entire life. I feel like I am in great shape and bumming that I didn't hit my goal time. I'd like to recover and get after a late spring/early summer marathon. Do I just give this time? I feel like I couldn't walk a mile normally much less continue training.
I went 1:15/1:19 and there is no way I could rally back for a late spring marathon (Grandma's comes to mind), and am dubious about a fall one for that matter. Legs are still absolutely trashed, although the muscle groups that feel worst have changed today (from mostly quads to mostly hamstrings and IT band). I'd be reticent to advise anyone to try to rally back, but you know your body best.
justsomerunner wrote:
This thread makes me feel better that I had such a similar experience to many on here. I went into this year in the best marathon shape I've ever been in, was confident that 2:35 was in reach. I even heeded the advice of everyone and went out very relaxed going through the half in 1:18 and then I just felt so bad. Legs were trashed, couldn't take in enough fluid, calves hamstrings and lower back were all cramping and spasming and the second half was a miserable death march like I've never experienced before (3:03 finish). Ended up in the med tent after blacking out after the finish...very unlike me. I qualified with a 2:39 in better weather conditions but tougher course and walked away fine from the race.
My question to you all: my body is wrecked. I have never been this sore in my entire life. I feel like I am in great shape and bumming that I didn't hit my goal time. I'd like to recover and get after a late spring/early summer marathon. Do I just give this time? I feel like I couldn't walk a mile normally much less continue training.
Disappointed at Boston Marathon? Have some guts and go back-to-back.
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=7847045thomson wrote:
+1 death march. One month ago ran a 1:19 HM, adjusted my goal to 3:02 before the start, felt good until mile 17 then crashed like never before. Took a ton of water (pretty much every water station, plus at least 5 bottles from the crowd), but I felt my fueling was insufficient (although it had worked well in a fall marathon).
To those who did well at Boston17: what was your fueling strategy?
On Sunday I drank 64 ozs of Gatorade and ate a large size bag of salty sourdough pretzels.
Last year 3:29, this year 3:27 = happy hobbyjogger. Also after 45 minutes into the marathon I keep one of those chew Blocks in my mouth can't stsnd the gels anymore.
I had a terrible day out there. Weather was far too warm for me. I live in SoCal but I just don't do well running long distances (over 13 miles) in temps over 60 degrees. Went out a bit slower than originally planned, drank a ton of water, still ended up dehydrated. I was feeling "off" after the first few miles and by halfway I could tell it was going to be a rough one as I was already slowing even with maintaining a steady effort. Training went well. Comparable to when I ran 3:10 in Portland last fall, but today everything was busted. Tendonitis in right ankle flared up, through off my stride and led to hip pain. I was limping by 21 and had to walk/jog in. I thoroughly studied the course and had raced and trained on it previously so it wasn't an inexperience issue. Just poor heat tolerance and a "bad day" at the worst possible time. Oh well.
I think we're all agreeing that Boston is more hilly than often advertised and that you shouldn't hold back on the downhills. Even effort is key.
The weather this year also sucked but I train in the south where we have high humidity and that didn't seem to help at mile 6. We don't have any hills here either (except for bridges if you want to count those)
I considered that maybe I screwed up my pre-race nutrition too as one poster suggested. I snacked morning of but a 10am start is not what I'm used to. Had trouble in NYC running with a friend at a much slower pace and ended up with a massive migraine due to not having eaten enough by the afternoon hours.
After running Boston I'm just amazed that Mutai was able to run a 2:03 on this course regardless of the tailwind effect.
troubled wrote:
There are hills everywhere. Even during the first 5K, you constantly go over rollers. Heck, the right onto Hereford and leading up to Boylston is a slight incline.
We call in "Mt Hereford." :)
Over-trained
troubled wrote:
Is it possible to hit the wall at mile 7?
I'm honestly very confused. I trained hard, felt like I could hold 6:40s at least until mile 16 but around mile 4 or 5 I began to really struggle with my pace. Yeah, it was hot, and the "rolling" terrain was kind of a shock but that couldn't have caused me to blow up so soon right?
Best way to describe it...My lower back tightened up. My legs shut down. I couldn't turn them over. Pace dropped steadily from 6:40s...to 7:15s...and up to the point where I was forced to walk past the halfway mark.
I jogged/walked until Heartbreak where I entered the medical tent just to make sure I wasn't dying...that's how weird this whole thing seemed to me.
Thoughts?
oboesausage wrote:
Sounds like you have no understanding of what running up or down hills even does tot eh body. Probably one of those who thinks running downhill is easy. And faster. And it would make up for your obvious lack of preparation.
Where did you qualify? On an airfield somewhere?
I admit that I thought that running downhill was faster. Can you say more about this?
Definitely not over-trained. 35mpw for 16 was, one workout each week, and a 2-week taper. If anything I'd say under-trained.
Has anyone mentioned seasonal pollen etc...allergies? There is an extensive thread here from a few years back detailing dramatic spring collapses in performance for even elites. I have run Boston 7 or so times and when it is like Monday every time at 14 or so feeling OK I look down at the watch and pace slows and slows. Legs just won't move. Inflammation in the joints. A rainy cool day never such problems. Of course also the heat Monday. I did not run Monday and got to say glad I didn't
troubled wrote:
Definitely not over-trained. 35mpw for 16 was, one workout each week, and a 2-week taper. If anything I'd say under-trained.
What did you run during your taper, 10 mpw?
My warmup/cooldowns are more than 35mpw.
Boston isn't flat, but I wouldn't call it hilly. Less than 2K feet of elevation change for the entire race. But I guess it depends on how you define a hill.
It's a PR course if you run by effort, not pace. I passed over 200 runners through the Newton hills during my 3:12 effort (a 3min PR at 50). I couldn't believe the number of runners slowing to a walk at the start of the inclines and not even trying to run up them. Weak.
The hardest part of the race is the wait at the start and then the long downhill the first few miles. That blows.
You marathoners complaining about the "hills" of Boston are a bunch of wusses. Boston is flat, and at sea level too boot.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/c4/6d/11/c46d117c902d88c3c703d5c37887ae29.jpg
Ultraboss wrote:
You marathoners complaining about the "hills" of Boston are a bunch of wusses. Boston is flat, and at sea level too boot.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/c4/6d/11/c46d117c902d88c3c703d5c37887ae29.jpg
No one is arguing Boston is the world's hilliest and hardest course. Of course Leadville is tougher. So is Mt. Everest. But who's trying to set a 26.2 mile PR there?
The point is that a bunch of us just learned that Boston's a real tough nut to crack, especially if you CAN set a PR there if you do it right, as many here are saying. That's what we're discussing
The Overexplainer wrote:
troubled wrote:I felt deceived after running this race. Everything I read and heard from other runners indicated that the first half of this race was pretty much flat and DOWNHILL. All I kept hearing was that if you go out too fast, you will pay the price later. And that the last five miles into Boston would be mostly downhill.
Bullshit. There are hills everywhere. Even during the first 5K, you constantly go over rollers. Heck, the right onto Hereford and leading up to Boylston is a slight incline.
The Newton "hills" just last longer. I think what most people call a hill is any incline lasting longer than 400 meters because that's what I started to realize along the way.
If this was true, the women wouldn't run 2:20-2:23 with regularity for the last 30+ years. It can be a hard course to master, but if you look at the list of top American marathoners nearly everyone who ever ran Boston has their fastest time AT BOSTON.
I know that Boston's course makes the race NON-rec-eligible, but my point is that it is not so hilly that it adds 10 minutes to your real potential or makes you drop out like you did.
1. Ryan Hall—2:04:58, Boston Marathon, 2011
2. Khalid Khannouchi—2:05:38, London Marathon, 2002
3. Dathan Ritzenhein—2:07:47, Chicago Marathon, 2012
4. Meb Keflezighi—2:08:37, Boston Marathon, 2014
5. Bob Kempainen—2:08:47, Boston Marathon, 1994
6. Alberto Salazar—2:08:52, Boston Marathon, 1982
7. Dick Beardsley—2:08:54, Boston Marathon, 1982
8. Abdi Abdirahman—2:08:56, Chicago Marathon, 2006
9. Greg Meyer—2:09:00, Boston Marathon, 1983
10. Bill Rodgers—2:09:27, Boston Marathon, 1979
11. Ron Tabb—2:09:31, Boston Marathon, 1983
12. David Morris—2:09:32, Chicago Marathon, 1999
13. Jerry Lawson—2:09:35, Chicago Marathon, 1997
14. Ken Martin—2:09:38, New York City Marathon, 1989
15. Alan Culpepper—2:09:41, Chicago Marathon, 2002
16. Benji Durden—2:09:57, Boston Marathon, 1983
17. Pat Petersen—2:10:04, London Marathon, 1989
18. Phil Coppess—2:10:05, Twin Cities Marathon, 1985
19. Ed Mendoza—2:10:07, Boston Marathon, 1983
20. Jeff Wells—2:10:16, Boston Marathon, 1983
21. Tony Sandoval—2:10:19, U.S. Olympic Trials (Buffalo), 1980
22. Garry Bjorklund—2:10:20, Grandma’s Marathon, 1980
23. Craig Virgin—2:10:27, Boston Marathon, 1981
24. Kirk Pfeffer—2:10:29, Fukuoka Marathon, 1980
25. Frank Shorter—2:10:30, Fukuoka Marathon, 1972
The same holds true for many non-Americans. Like Rob DeCastella and many others. And don't get me started on how many women have their best time there.
Add Galen Rupp to that list, who also set his PR at Boston.
Whyareyouhere wrote:
What did you run during your taper, 10 mpw?
My warmup/cooldowns are more than 35mpw.
I decreased the volume of the workouts mostly and took a few days off leading up to the race. Shakeout run 2 days out.
