I've heard people say that a dead flat race like Chicago would be about 3 minutes faster than TCM, everything else being equal. That sounds like a bit much to be.
Anyone with experience on both courses have an opinion?
I've heard people say that a dead flat race like Chicago would be about 3 minutes faster than TCM, everything else being equal. That sounds like a bit much to be.
Anyone with experience on both courses have an opinion?
Ran Chicago in '09 - missed goal by 11 minutes.
Ran TCM in '10 - missed goal by 13 minutes.
Using this very sophisticated methodology, 3 minutes seems reasonable.
Ran both at different levels of fitness so I can't compare times. That said, I think the TC course is materially more difficult than Chicago. The only thing Chicago has approximating a hill is the turn on to Roosevelt at the very end (200 meters at most). TC has several rolling hills around the lakes and parkway, a steep uphill around mile 20 and a gradual uphill for 2-3 miles along Summit Ave towards the end of the race. 3 minutes seems low to me but the times from various elites would support your view.
I'd estimate 2 to 3 minutes. I was slightly injured when I ran TC, but based on what my friends ran (we're all from Chicago), I'd say that's about right. I don't think TC was especially hard, but that stretch up Summit is going to slow you down, period.
Just for you.
Looks to be about 1.5 minutes with normal weather or about a minute for the course.
ETA: The Chicago course faster, but since it is cooler in Minneapolis, TC can be faster. Chicago = warm/muggy.
Ahem! wrote:
ETA: The Chicago course faster, but since it is cooler in Minneapolis, TC can be faster. Chicago = warm/muggy.
Thus me adding "all else being equal".
Thanks for the replies though, sounds 3 minutes might not be all that far off.
I've done each twice (never in the same year). I'd go with 1-2 minutes as reasonable.