Smart Marathon

Even pacing is great for those of us just running for time, but the 2:08 marathon crowd is trying to win. Goofy stuff in the middle of the race might give them a victory even though it leads to a slightly slower overall pace.

Because it is not a time trial. They want to win the big money, cars, etc...

michael j fox wrote:

Even pacing is great for those of us just running for time, but the 2:08 marathon crowd is trying to win. Goofy stuff in the middle of the race might give them a victory even though it leads to a slightly slower overall pace.

Don't you think running the fastest time you can would give you the greatest chance of winning?

Not always. Especially if the other guy is fater than you.

Doug E. wrote:

Not always. Especially if the other guy is fater than you.

How would an uneven pace help you beat someone who is faster. the uneven pace would bother him less than you since its closer to your max than his.

The reason that more runners don't run a marathon like Sell does is that they are not mentally tough enough. Its easier mentally to just follow the pack and let someone else dictate the pace. It takes a very disciplined, mentally strong runner to run an even pace for 35k and leave the racing till the last 7k. Most runners aren't up to that task.

The level of marathoning today is such that there are a large number of guys who can run a pace that would be close to winning for a good portion of the distance. What the mid- or late-race surges serve to do is separate the pretenders from the contenders - it's a lot easier to key off and use tactics on half a dozen guys rather than 3 times that number.

Look at NYCM this year (although the pace was unusually slow for the first half). There were 28 guys in the lead pack coming into Manhattan. Ramaala threw down a surge on First Ave., and almost instantly it was down to 8. He (and everyone else) knew the winner was coming from that group, but the mistake was they all thought dos Santos was just hanging on after the cutdown surge, and would fall off later.

There is a lot to be said for training for a certain time, for that is where an elite runner's best chance for money lies. All the big races offer significant bonuses for certain times. These bonuses aren't qualified, as far as I know, by the number of runners who reach them. That is, if 3 or 8 athletes go under 2:09, each of them still gets the stipulated money. Compare that with going for a place bonus. Only one person gets 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc. Which is the easier, more predictable goal to train for? The time bonus. Of course, you go for the placing, if you can. With the really top runners there may be other, private incentives/contracts to urge them into the top 3.

To prepare, the athlete must know which category makes the most sense for him/her. The time or placing category. If you are going for the top placing, then it would seem that preparing for surging and pace changes makes sense. I think this was a key insight of Frank Shorter, back in the day. He used track tactics in the marathon. If the time bonus offers the most likely return for your training investment then practice even/energy optimal pacing strategies.