Disappointed at NYC Marathon--Should I go back-to-back?

outsiderunner wrote:

angryjohnny wrote:

What did you decide to do?

The legs are feeling good and the weather forecast looked very good (low to high 40s during the race), and so I registered last night. I wake up this morning to see BAD word in the forecast--"wind." To be precise, it says "PM wind," and so it is too early to tell exactly what will happen with the wind. The race starts at 9:00 am. That word scares me, though, as wind is a real PR-buster in a marathon. It also is tiring mentally.

I assume you're running the Potomic River Marathon. That path is somewhat sheltered. Good luck.

Just wanted to point out that the guy advocating for 22 miles at marathon pace has also totally retired from running/racing at only 49. If you want sustainable improvement and to not burnout you can't race every training run. Long runs with portions at MP, great...maybe something like 10 easy + 10MP, but don't train 22 at MP.I will agree that if your goal is 6:52 don't start the race at 6:40-6:45 and be surprised when you can't keep it up for the full distance. You have a goal for a reason...stick with that no matter how good you feel till at least halfway...maybe 20mi before cranking it down.Good luck this weekend, don't be too disappointed if you don't PR. Not every race is a PR (as you're learning).

BTW, this site says course difficulty between NYC and Richmond is -0:1:45 for a 3:05:00 NYC finish. Take into account all the standing around, plus slightly warmer temps, plus you possibly starting out too fast and 0:2:22 slower is totally reasonable. Anything inside a minute of 26.2 is noise IMO.

http://findmymarathon.com/marathon-time-conversion.php

outsiderunner wrote:

It is flat and tends toward being fast, even though it is on a trail. It is hard-packed dirt and pebbles. Overall, it is a small affair, but the course is certified.

ahhh yes...

...the new East Wyoming marathon...

I thank David, Er.., et. al. for the kind regards. I appreciate the additional input, too. This thread had been very helpful.

Yes, to be precise, I am running the Potomac River Run Marathon. I sent the RD a brief message about the weather (especially the wind), and he replied that the course is somewhat sheltered (as has been mentioned here). This made me feel better...but I have to admit that the current forecast for 26 mph winds in the DC-area makes me cringe. That would be awful. I ran Richmond in 12-15 and New York in similar winds, and it does make a difference.

In regard to the course, the race Web page says things like "totally flat" all over the place, but findmymarathon lists the course as being "mostly flat." Looking at the elevation profile, it looks more like mostly flat, especially with that little kick up at the end, from about 22 to 25 (likewise near the half point, as the course is two out-and-back loops).

http://findmymarathon.com/race-detail.php?zname=Potomac%20River%20Run%20Marathon%20

(November)

Just got back from another six-miler, and the legs feel good. Went at a similar pace (slightly slower), and my effort level felt a bit lower than last time.

Right now, my eye is on the weather. Temperatures look very good, but that wind concerns me.

All the best to everyone here...

I will keep you posted...

My new Garmin has cadence. I have worn it on my last three runs, which have been 185, 185, and 186 spm, respectively. I have read that 180+ is a very good cadence. The shoes I wore today are more of a lighter, performance shoe. What do you think?

On the long run for marathon training, McMillan recommends two different kinds. The first geared to training your body to burn fat rather than carbohydrate is a steady pace, slow run of ideally 3 - 3.5 hours. The second version her recommends he calls the Fast Finish Long Run. Here's what he says about it:

"So, a generic long run for someone who’s goal marathon pace is 7:00 per mile might be that the first 12 miles of a long run will be at 7:30 to 8:00 per mile, then the pace over the last 6 miles will average 7:00 per mile with the last couple of miles at 6:15 to 6:30 pace and the last 400 very fast."

I run that route regularly (as do many in the DC area). It is somewhat sheltered (as he said), but you will still definitely note the wind. If the wind is coming from the Northwest, as it normally does, then you will have a tailwind for the first and third quarters of the race, and a headwind for the second and fourth quarters. There is also a very slight elevation drop from west to east - I've done marathon pace workouts on that route, and MP is notably easier going east than west. So....be prepared for the last 6 or so miles to be a bit tougher than the 6 that preceded them.

This is a very small race, and I doubt you will have anyone to work with.

There are very slight "bumps" in the route when you run by each lock and the footing will change for about 50 feet from stone dust to concrete and back. The bumps aren't really anything more than an annoyance, though.

Honestly, if it's windy, I think Philly would be a better choice, as at least you should be able to find a pack to work with.

Yes, darkwave, I will probably be running alone for the whole race. I agree that Philly is a better choice, but it is a tad far for me to travel, especially since the Potomac race is close enough for me to drive there before the race (no hotel necessary).

I had been thinking it would be exactly as you have described. Hence, those last six miles, which, if the forecast remains the same, would be going directly into a headwind and uphill, too. This concerns me. I seem to be OK if I have a downhill/headwind combo, but in this race, it will be the opposite--the uphill sections will face the wind. I train in wind, but do not like it. I am a little guy, and the wind tends to beat me up.

Hoping and praying that the forecast improves...

It warms my heart that there are still old school races like this around. Still, it's a little odd. Why are there three start times? Last year there were 139 finishers but they had starts at 7, 8, and 9am. Is it because the trail is so narrow? Do you select your own start time?1 runner under 3:00; 3 total under 3:15. That's going to be a lonely marathon for you. Why would you choose this over Philly, where dozens of runners would be on the same pace as you and breaking the wind as well?

outsiderunner wrote:

I thank David, Er.., et. al. for the kind regards. I appreciate the additional input, too. This thread had been very helpful.

Yes, to be precise, I am running the Potomac River Run Marathon.

I will keep you posted...

Er... wrote:

It warms my heart that there are still old school races like this around. Still, it's a little odd. Why are there three start times? Last year there were 139 finishers but they had starts at 7, 8, and 9am. Is it because the trail is so narrow? Do you select your own start time?

1 runner under 3:00; 3 total under 3:15. That's going to be a lonely marathon for you. Why would you choose this over Philly, where dozens of runners would be on the same pace as you and breaking the wind as well?

outsiderunner wrote:

I thank David, Er.., et. al. for the kind regards. I appreciate the additional input, too. This thread had been very helpful.

Yes, to be precise, I am running the Potomac River Run Marathon.

I will keep you posted...

I know Er...I have observed the same things. It does seem as if I have made a bad choice. I selected the Potomac race for its proximity. That is it. It is also nice that the Potomac race, with its trails, should be slightly easier on my body.

Things are just not going my way lately. Perhaps the forecast will change. Winds of 25 mph would be awful. The prospect of running that solo is terrifying. When I registered, the forecast looked great.

Yes, I did select my own start time. The "competitive start" is 9:00 am, and that is what I selected. I think the earlier start times are to accommodate slower runners. I think they want to wrap-up the event by 2:00 pm or so. Yes, three start times is odd.

outsiderunner wrote:

My new Garmin has cadence. I have worn it on my last three runs, which have been 185, 185, and 186 spm, respectively. I have read that 180+ is a very good cadence. The shoes I wore today are more of a lighter, performance shoe. What do you think?

Are you asking if you should wear lighter shoes for the marathon? Or if your cadence is ok. Cadence seems fine. If the shoes haven't been tested on a long run its a risk, plus you just ran a marathon a couple weeks ago and you partially picked this course for the shock absorbing dirt. Lighter shoes may be counterproductive when considering all that. You're already at increased injury risk.

Actually, I was asking both questions.

I have worn the lighter shoes in a half-marathon (my PR, two years ago...have not run a half since). I keep them in the box (under my bed) for races. Thus, these shows have low mileage, but they are about two years old. Have run 5k to half marathon distances in them, and they have felt good. They offer a nice weight bonus over my other shoes. They probabaly have about 150-200 miles on them. They felt good in today's run.

I was figuring that the added cushion of the trail should allow me to fare well with these lighter shoes.

47, 2 marathons in 3 weeks, racing flats with 200 miles on them that you've never run more than 13 in... If you come out of this race without a setback you're more robust then me.

You may be able to get away with it on dirt but you also are eliminating your low impact advantage you were praising for this race. Other question is if this trail has rocks and if there's the potential to feel those rocks on trail in the lighter shoes. Doubt they have a skid plate like trail racers might.

Good points, David, but I note that they are not racing flats. They are performance shoes. They are Asics and have gel in the heel, but not the forefoot.

I know that your mind is made up but....

a) you did a 24 week training cycle (too long, IMHO) with a 22 mile long run at MP (too much, according to most of us here).

b) you blew up at New York, a notably hard course.

c) in the 10+ days since New York you've done a handful of runs at "marathon pace" - a very unorthodox recovery technique.

d) now you're going to run another marathon (just two weeks after NYC), with shoes you've not previously tested on a long run, on a surface you're not trained on, in a race that will be windy and isolated.

For what? A PR really doesn't seem to be in the cards here, nor does this sound like a remotely enjoyable experience in any way. An injury and burnout are nearly inevitable. If they haven't happened already.

Why, again? If you really must try another marathon soon, why not recover a few more weeks and do Rehoboth?

As you've noted before, you're 47, and so your chances to go sub-3:00 are limited. Why waste one of those few attempts you have left here?

I weigh nothing (about 125 right now) and I can get 700-800 miles out of shoes with no problem. These 300-500 mile rules are for average Americans, i.e. 200 pounds or more. I know very few people these days who are even close to my weight. Everyone is 200+, male or female. Not doing a scientific study here, but when I walk outside my door, this is what I see.

How did I blow up at New York? My legs cramped up.