Strategy to go sub-3 at NYC

Don't know what the rest of your training is like but I think sub-2:50 is more on par with a 1:20 half. Sub-3 should be very doable. I'm running NYC as well and shooting for somewhere in the 2:30s and found the below RunnersConnect article to be very helpful, having never run it before. The advice is to take miles 1 & 2 very controlled and then run steady but maybe not quite at goal marathon pace (or just on your higher range) until you get over the Queensboro Bridge before letting it rip. If you feel good at that point it looks like you can make up plenty of time and get back to goal pace or under.

The advice, say for someone hoping for 2:40 flat, is to be 1:21ish at halfway. So for 3:00 you would want to be 1:31 but feeling great to then come back in 1:28-29. I just think that 1:31 through halfway is gonna feel a little slow for someone with a 1:20 half but it would definitely set you up for a strong finish.

https://runnersconnect.net/new-york-city-marathon-race-strategy/

Thanks for the continued input everyone.

The one thing I DO know from running this 4 times, that I agree with many of you on, is that the second half is considerably harder than the first. Combined with the late-race fatigue that will undoubtedly set in, Queensboro and 5th Ave could take a few precious seconds per mile off my legs when I need them most.

I think my plan will be to really control myself for the first three miles and then try to settle into a 6:45ish pace, allowing myself for a little slowdown on Lafayette Ave (I know there's a tiny bit of a hill there and I don't want to fight that too much) and Queensboro Bridge. Coming off the bridge, even if I'm still feeling good, I'll cap things off at 6:40/mile up 1st Avenue and once I get up Willis Ave, I'll just do whatever it takes not to go slower than 6:52/mile. I've done the Central Park hills hundreds of times and know how to attack the little downhills on the way to the finish so once I'm past 5th Ave I feel like I'm home free.

6:45/mile is not too tough for me to maintain these days so I don't think it'll be as risky or punishing as 'putting time in the bank' usually is. I can definitely see how a better time is within reach– some who know me think I could come close to 2:50 if I really pushed it, but even if things are going better than expected by the time I reach 1st Ave, I'm going to play it safe and stick to the plan. There's always next year and I've already got my entry through time qualifier, and if I can continue to bring my Half time down (I've managed to cut it down by about 5 minutes every year since I started at 1:45, so maybe I'll run a 1:17:xx in 2018), I'll make an attempt at a more ambitious time.

I should also mention that I'm in my early 20's and am running relatively low mileage per week. My average easy run for the last few months has been 5 miles/40 minutes, which I do 3 or 4 times a week with one workout and one moderately paced long run. If I do the long run easy then I do two workouts during the week. The workouts are usually 200m-400m track repeats and a tempo. If I only get one in, it's either a tempo or 2-3 minute intervals at a hard pace.

You'll never reach potential at marathon if you don't up the training distances. I feel dumb typing that as it's so obvious!! I would say minimum 50 miles/week would see you going well under 3. If you continue to bring the Half time down, you talk of 1.17, which sounds doable for a guy your age and speed, then I can't see why you wouldn't go under 2.50 Good luck and report back. The only time I did NYC, off a 1.22 half, the hills killed me and I limped home in 3.04.

278 north to 495 to midtown tunnel. Parking will take longer than expected.

Hmmmm, just read that article you linked to. There is some decent stuff there, like the first mile being a mess pace-wise. But it ain't 'deceptively' uphill; it's just uphill. For me, the worst bit of advice concerns First Ave, which the writer says is 'all downhill'. Where this myth comes from is beyond me. Sure there's a downhill bit but the vast majority is flat with one or two drags.....

Funny how they never discuss the last real climb. This was brutal for me. 20 blocks of a steady gradient, from 101st to 81st, give or take a street. The park is rolling, which on tired legs can be a problem but not as much as the last climb I mentioned.

I probably could have trained smarter for it and if I ever do it again (any nice LetsRun people want to send me 5,000 dollars/euro??) then I'd look to add uphill in last third of Long Runs.

Go exactly 3:00 pace for first 16 and hammer the last 10. I don't see how 1:20 half cannot hit 2:55 even at NYC unless you have done no long runs.

Itziger wrote:

You'll never reach potential at marathon if you don't up the training distances. I feel dumb typing that as it's so obvious!! I would say minimum 50 miles/week would see you going well under 3. If you continue to bring the Half time down, you talk of 1.17, which sounds doable for a guy your age and speed, then I can't see why you wouldn't go under 2.50 Good luck and report back. The only time I did NYC, off a 1.22 half, the hills killed me and I limped home in 3.04.

I agree that I am nowhere near my potential in the marathon– nor do I think I am near my potential in the Half. For the past few years I've been almost intentionally sandbagging my training so I have several cards left– upping mileage, different kinds of workouts I've never implemented, etc. My strategy has always been to get as good as I can at a few specific things, race, and then approach the next goal with a little something new to put the body back into shock. I believe that if I throw everything but the kitchen sink at a goal, all that's left is the kitchen sink, and when that's through, I'll be left uninspired and frustrated with marginal improvements until I decline. My body is also somewhat fragile so I've had to build up somewhat slowly over time.

First I want to run a good marathon with what I've got. Then, when I reach this goal, I'll know that I've gotten good enough at what I know to start implementing something new to take me over a new threshold. I'm sure a lot of people could just go all in and could probably get the results I'm after in 6 months. But what I will say is that my approach has given me a great record of consistency– of the 13 Half's I've run since 2011 when I ran a 1:45, I ran a PR in every single one except my last, when I took a month-long vacation that basically threw my training out the window.

I will report back! Thanks everyone for the advice! I truly appreciate it.

Among other things this thread proves, again, is that NYC is 10x the race that Chicago is; infinitely better course, substantiall more demanding, with more spectators in almost any given mile (except maybe the Bronx) than the Chicago farce ENTIRE.

Banking time eary, btw, is the correct answer.

Save your energy for the last 6 miles. That uphill climb into Central Park is no joke. I hung my head down for 2 mins then looked back up and could still see hill. On the flip side I ran nearly a 5 min negative split. First half was conservative. Nailed the last 6 miles while everyone hit the wall and was dying. Was my first thon and came in @ 3:0X. I have gone sub 3 after that though. Took me less than a year to do so but consistent training was key.

Good Luck.

To rub sub-3 at the NYCM, you need to be in slightly better shape than "just" 2:59:59. It just is a reality, based on the course.

Probably as fast as 2:55 shape, in case you're most definitely OK splitting the race 1:27 or 1:28 first half and as slow as 1:32 or 1:33 second half.

Point is not to "bank" time, but if the absolute best you can do is 3 hours with perfect 1:30-1:30 pacing on a flat course, it's just not going to happen. So you need to be a little faster than that, and accept a small positive split.

Just look at historical results from runners in the 2:57-2:59 range at NYCM.

Adding to this...looking at historical results, you see A LOT of 1:24 to 1:26 first half for the just under 3 crowd. That's not to say it's a great way to get there, but that's how they did.

Negative splits are super rare at NYCM and likely mean you underappreciate your shape. I think 1:28/1:31 would be a terrific result. Even 1:27/1:32. Just my two cents (have run NYCM 3x and live in NYC).

I was aiming for sub 3:00 in NYC coming off of of 1:20. I think I ran 1:26 for the first half of the race, and got absolutely punished in the second half and came in totally demoralized at 3:03.

You know the course (I didn't) so you probably know what to do. Run the first half pretty conservative, maybe 1:28 or 1:29, so that youve got some legs for the second half. The bridge into Manhattan is where I first started feeling weak, but kept the wheels on up first ave. Willis Ave bridge the wheels started to falter. Barely remember the Bronx or Harlem. walk/jogged up Fifth Ave and the park. Got yanked into the med tent at the finish.

Don't do that.

That's a monumentally stupid way to pace.

How to break 3 at NYC:

1. Be in 2:55 shape

2. Run the first half in 1:30