Most Efficient Marathon Pacing?

he says the best effort results in a slightly positive split.

have to adjust to the course anyway

even "effort" is the way to go

The best way to run any race is with negative splits. It just becomes highly unlikely in a marathon because of the energy demands and the slow down in the last 10k. Basically, a 2:05-15 marathoner will have an easier time running negative splits than a marathoner slower than 2:15 because you have enough stored glycogen to carry you around 2 hours. If you run 2:30 that last half hour takes a very long time. With a marathon I think it's better to plan for a slightly posititive split of 2 minutes. So if you want to run 2:30, go out in 1:14 and finish in 1:16. If you want to run 2:22 go out in 1:10 and finish in 1:12. It's rare to run a negative split in any race and even more rare in the marathon.

Alan

Depending on how well you have prepared. It's rare for those that are unprepared, and/or have higher expectations than is their ability.

Speak for yourself.

wrong wrote:

Depending on how well you have prepared. It's rare for those that are unprepared, and/or have higher expectations than is their ability.

Speak for yourself.

I agree

Runningart2004 wrote:

The best way to run any race is with negative splits. It just becomes highly unlikely in a marathon because of the energy demands and the slow down in the last 10k. Basically, a 2:05-15 marathoner will have an easier time running negative splits than a marathoner slower than 2:15 because you have enough stored glycogen to carry you around 2 hours. If you run 2:30 that last half hour takes a very long time. With a marathon I think it's better to plan for a slightly posititive split of 2 minutes. So if you want to run 2:30, go out in 1:14 and finish in 1:16. If you want to run 2:22 go out in 1:10 and finish in 1:12. It's rare to run a negative split in any race and even more rare in the marathon.

Alan

Energy consumption is a matter of rate of burn, NOT time. Two runners weighing the same and of like efficiency will burn about the same calories whether they run 2:15 or 2:40. The faster runner just has the aerobic ability to aerobically use energy faster, and hence run faster.

The last 10K slowdown is a symptom of going out too fast...not some inevitable event. Have you ever successfully tried to run a marathon as you suggest is optimal?

I have done a few sub-2:30 races, and I must wholeheartedly disagree with you. The one where I negative split by :30 was a perfect race. The others I went out a little faster, and struggled hard at the end to pay for it. Going out fast and trying to hold on is for sprinters.

spaniel wrote:

I have done a few sub-2:30 races, and I must wholeheartedly disagree with you. The one where I negative split by :30 was a perfect race.

Spaniel,

I'm going to assume your ran a fairly level course (ie, flat). Negative splitting by :30 over 13 miles is more (in my opinion) a matter of even pacing, no? If my assumption is wrong, would you mind educating me on your execution of your race?

I'm interested to understand how you mentally managed your race from 15 miles on.

Thank you in advance...

negative splitting the race is more for confidence than anything. if you feel good at mile 20 and drop your pace by say 5-10 secs per mile your confidence will go up and you will continue to drop your pace as you pass runners who are fading after going out too hard. on the flip side, if you go out too hard and start hurting and slowing down at the end your confidence takes a hit and people tend to give up. patience is key in the marathon. the first 10 miles are bound to feel almost effortless if you train properly.