CIM vs Berlin vs Chicago. Which course is the fastest?

flatmaster wrote:

Which course is easier? wrote:

- Berlin claims to be the fastest, but honestly I thought it wasn't particularly fast or anything

- Chicago technically has less elevation gain

If you didn't think Berlin was "particularly fast" I am interested in where else it is you train and race. Winnipeg??

Berlin is incredibly flat according to the course profile and everyone who has ever run it (other than you). I watch it on TV every year and I can't recall a single shot of an up or downhill anything.

Chicago has many more turns, including right turns that guarantee you will run some extra distance. (Berlin has only gradual turns.)

The only thing that is faster is Dubai, which is flatter still with less turns. Same with the Manitoba Marathon, which I'd suggest looking into before Dubai.

OP here. I think Chicago has about 50 ft less in elevagation gain, but it's not much to begin with for both races.

That said, I think Berlin didn't feel that face this year because weather was in 70 degrees by 9:40 am.

CIM does not have 800 feet of elevation gain. Not even close. It's closer to 250:

http://mymarathonpace.com/uploads/Elevation_Profiles.pdf

.

Even New York only has 600. 800 would be an extremely hilly marathon.

CIM is definitely faster than Chicago and Berlin, unless you get a headwind. There are no "rollers." It's as close to a gradual downhill the entire way as you're going to find, but the slope is mostly gentle enough that you can hardly tell you're going down; it just makes the effort slightly but perceptibly easier. If you get excited and start running 25 seconds per mile faster than your goal pace, then sure, you'll struggle in the second half. But that's not the course beating you up; that's you running like an idiot.

As for Berlin vs. Chicago, the most important difference is the weather. Berlin's weather is incredibly reliable. Record highs around that time of year are shockingly low. Berlin also has fewer turns and much, much better crowd support (not to be underestimated as a factor, especially in the last few miles).

I've run both Berlin and Chicago and both are pancake flat. There are a few more turns in Chicago but the crowd support is much better than Berlin. The biggest difference between the two is the weather but also the road surface. In Berlin it's tarmac which is much more forgiving than the concrete in Chicago.

800 dude wrote:CIM is definitely faster than Chicago and Berlin, unless you get a headwind. There are no "rollers." It's as close to a gradual downhill the entire way as you're going to find, but the slope is mostly gentle enough that you can hardly tell you're going down; it just makes the effort slightly but perceptibly easier. If you get excited and start running 25 seconds per mile faster than your goal pace, then sure, you'll struggle in the second half. But that's not the course beating you up; that's you running like an idiot.

Have you run CIM? Or are you basing that on those diagrams?

I ran CIM two years ago (going back this year), and I definitely noted the uphills. They are not especially challenging or taxing, but they do exist.

I agree on not getting stupid and going out too fast. I've always thought that's the biggest risk of races with a reputation like CIM - people think that fast net downhill courses mean they can go out like an idiot and get away with it.

twotwentyseven wrote:

I've run both Berlin and Chicago and both are pancake flat. There are a few more turns in Chicago but the crowd support is much better than Berlin. The biggest difference between the two is the weather but also the road surface. In Berlin it's tarmac which is much more forgiving than the concrete in Chicago.

Chicago is mainly Asphalt! You really only see concrete on highways and overpasses.

Scorpion_runner wrote:

twotwentyseven wrote:

I've run both Berlin and Chicago and both are pancake flat. There are a few more turns in Chicago but the crowd support is much better than Berlin. The biggest difference between the two is the weather but also the road surface. In Berlin it's tarmac which is much more forgiving than the concrete in Chicago.

Chicago is mainly Asphalt! You really only see concrete on highways and overpasses.

Where's the 'crete runner when you need him?

While Chicago has less turns, it also has more murder victims in the streets that you need to avoid. It's kind of like a 26.2 mile steeplechase.

Chicago is faster than CIM for me.

2:28 versus 2:26 at Chicago.

I’ve run both I prefer the flatness of Chicago.

CIM isn’t flat early and you have to adjust pace almost every mile.

I prefer the crowd support and size of Chicago but CIM might have better temperatures. I like it cold so Cim might be better.

I’d say they are similar.

If you can run a time at CIM you can run it at Chicago.

A few hundred feet isn’t going to make you PR. You have to run CIM with a bit more grit early and you might have a better chance the last 10k.

I’d say whichever one you can train for you’ll run fast.

Chicago is warmer and could be windy. CIM can be windy.

Masterblaster13 wrote:

Chicago is faster than CIM for me.

2:28 versus 2:26 at Chicago.

You must not be a scientist.