Boston Tactics: time in the bank or negative splits?

indeed...i don't plan to negative split...and the more detailed course map (just arrived in the mail) shows that the course is indeed more rolling through 16, not merely downhill...

..but the fact remains that there is a significant elevation loss from the start until mile 15 or so, followed by a stupidly steep downhill mile, and then the hills (which lead to 5 miles of downhill into the finish).

So, is the consensus that one should bank ENERGY as opposed to TIME, by running relatively even splits?

best course mapshttp://www.csurun.org/maps/BAA/i take it you got your number pick-up card and booklet in the mail.... makes me anxious to get to the p.o. after work

funkbunker wrote:

So, is the consensus that one should bank ENERGY as opposed to TIME, by running relatively even splits?

that's a reasonable way to look at it. if you run at your reasonable marathon effort, you should find yourself some seconds ahead of goal time by 16 miles.

the key is staying in control early.

yes, i got my stuff in the mail on saturday, right after my long run...it's getting hard not to obsess over this!

Thanks for the advice. I think we've reached a good conclusion here...

funkbunker wrote:

So, is the consensus that one should bank ENERGY as opposed to TIME, by running relatively even splits?

That's what I'm gonna try to do anyway. If a negative split is good enough for Cosmas N'Deti to set the (just broken) course record and win 3 in a row, it should be good enough for me I guess...

Average_Joe wrote:

I've tried that tactic. Putting "time in the bank." What a disaster. To put time in the time bank, I have to withdraw energy from the energy bank.

And the energy bank charges interest...

Well said, Joe. Just what I was getting at.

But then again, I've finished seven marathons and the only time I've felt really strong at the end, even though my legs were nearly giving out, it was all about the training: More miles, more 10- 13-mile tempo runs.

Miller man wrote:

You could look at it this way: cruise the first 15 at goal pace but at less than goal effort. That right there ought to 'bank' you some fuel for the real race. For most people, it seems to me, the marathon is about making your energy last until you get close enough to the finish to survive. Marathon pace really ought to be nearly effortless for 15 miles, even though you are burning sugar and fat. If you can use less of it to get to 15 miles than you might otherwise, you'll be well positioned to finish strong. Doesn't the idea of running even pace, hammering past people, and finishing just as you hit the wall sound better than slowing down the last several miles and desperately trying to figure out if you have enough 'banked' to make it?

In my experience with Boston, this advice (above) seems to be as good as any tactics I used. Goal pace at a less than goal pace effort for the 1st ~15 miles. Then the same effort for the next ~5 miles, expecting the time / mile to increase slightly. At just about mile 21, put the hammer down and give it all you have for the last 5 miles, knowing it has a alot of downhill. I did that in 1997 or 1998 (I forget which), and it was my best race ever (though a minute off my PR). Hit the wall about 10 metres from the finish line and literally walked across, but it was a great race.

Ahhhh, good times ... :o) ...

Goal pace at a less than goal pace effort for the 1st ~15 miles.

What does this mean?

I interpret this to mean that the first 15 miles are assisted. I don't think this is true. It is a net downhill but it's rolling, so if you think you're just going to cruise on down for 15 mi, you might be surprised (in a bad way).

I agree with the strategy above. Between the fresh tapered legs, the adrenaline, and the net downhill that first 15 can feel pretty easy at around goal pace. Yes, there are a couple of uphilly miles and you take a couple of the splits at above goal pace, but most come pretty easy at GP/sub GP. That exact strategy carried me to a PR at Boston also. Good luck, be sure to post your results.

funkbunker wrote:

indeed...i don't plan to negative split...and the more detailed course map (just arrived in the mail) shows that the course is indeed more rolling through 16, not merely downhill...

..but the fact remains that there is a significant elevation loss from the start until mile 15 or so, followed by a stupidly steep downhill mile, and then the hills (which lead to 5 miles of downhill into the finish).

"More detailed maps" in the mail are notoriously misleading. Graphic representations distort the elevation axis for visual effect. The drastic slopes you see on your map will bear no resemblance to the actual topography. All elevation maps of Boston's course should have a decal disclaimer that warns, "Elevation changes may appear more dramatic than they are."

Boston's elevation drop occurs in two places: the first 4 miles and the final 5 miles. The "rolling hills" from 5 to 15 aren't even noticeable. The drop at 15 miles to Newton Lower Falls isn't "stupidly steep" and it only drops for about a half mile. I'm not saying that this drop is harmless, because it is the first real attack on your quads. I'm just saying "stupid steep" isn't an apt description. The only steep drop of the course is after the 2nd dip past Heartbreak as you drop down past St Ignatius heading towards Cleveland Circle. You can call that one "stupid steep" if you wish. It will split your quads at the seams.

I'd say it's OK to be about a minute faster at the half than your second half, 2:10 and 2:40 alike, but ideally, like any other marathon, even pace is best. It's just that the first half of Boston is so seductive.

Respect the downhills. The race history is littered with runners coming through 20 miles in world record pace, only to be cruelly humbled on the final descent.

One of the best ways to prepare your quads for Boston (or any other marathon) is leg extension. Like Lee Haney says, "light weights." Just go to the gym a few times a weep, put the pin in the plate that feels light, and do 20-30 reps. Don't try to "feel the burn" light weights is where it's at. Just extend your legs through the full range of motion. That will make a difference.

malmo wrote:

Boston's elevation drop occurs in two places: the first 4 miles and the final 5 miles. The "rolling hills" from 5 to 15 aren't even noticeable. The drop at 15 miles to Newton Lower Falls isn't "stupidly steep" and it only drops for about a half mile. I'm not saying that this drop is harmless, because it is the first real attack on your quads. I'm just saying "stupid steep" isn't an apt description.

I think what happens to a lot of people on that downhill to Newton Lower Falls (which starts at roughly 15.5 miles) is that the long stretch from Wellesley Center to the top of this hill almost continually (and gradually) uphill. It's likely the first part of the course where many people find themselves perhaps running a bit slower than goal pace for 2 consecutive miles. You're starting to get tired and for the first time on the route you don't have really a downhill somewhere along the way to help you. So you see the split at 15 and you naturally want to get back to the fast miles.

So you perhaps don't run this downhill as gently as you could, trying to "bank more time" before Hospital Hill

I've done that anyway and I think I paid the price for it. And I of ALL people should know better:

I actually grew up in Wellesley and my house during high school is right on that hill on the marathon route, about halfway down the hill. I've run it (and the long, Hospital Hill stretch up over I-95) more times than anyone on this board. Obviously only rarely during a marathon but I'm very familiar with it. It's not really that steep at all. If you are a half-decent downhill runner, it should have almost no effect on you.

i've used that downhill as a chance to try to relax and do a bit of a shake-out. i don't try to push the pace by any means, but i will stride out a little bit - i've found if i just relax i still end up with a slightly fast split for that mile

IMO it's a good place to assess and prepare for the climbs. FWIW, i'm lucky enough to be a good downhill runner, while only an average climber

very cool to have the Boston course right out your door growing up!

another thing some folks might not pick up on, of the 5 miles of "hills," mile 19 is net downhill and should be back at goal pace, if not a tiny bit faster, while the previous 2 miles and the next 2 might be a bit slower

http://www.csurun.org/maps/BAA/BAA_hills.gif

Another factor in this stretch is that the crowd thickens, so I always find myself a bit ditracted by the noise.

The past 2 posts provide excellent advise for first timers through this stretch as does Malmo's advise to watch out on the long downhill at mile 21 (BC).