-
No, but the only reason for not running it in the reverse direction is because the rolling hills in the first half of the race would be pretty difficult if it were for the entire second half of the race. I suspect that every single person that calls CIM a joke has NEVER ACTUALLY RUN THE MARATHON COURSE officially. Go run it and you'll see. It's a fast course but for reasons others have stated. It is not a sure thing. Didn't feel like a net downhill course when I ran it in 2015 (like Sage). I will say the course is interesting though because the first half is constant rollers the entire time so you're never.....bored lol
-
Everyone mentioning the rolling hills seems to be forgetting that you go faster on downhills and can negate the loss of pace on the uphill. More downhills than uphills can make a big difference.
-
The first mile is fast. Nice flat downhill. The next 15 miles are rolling and next10 are mostly flat with some gentle rollers. Get a headwind and you are done.
CIM is not a super fast course. But one people go to run fast on. Look at the winning times. No one has broke 2:10. -
vivalarepublica wrote:
Everyone mentioning the rolling hills seems to be forgetting that you go faster on downhills and can negate the loss of pace on the uphill. More downhills than uphills can make a big difference.
An uphill has more negative effect than a downhill has positive effect. From my experience, 3 miles of downhill offsets 2 miles of equivalent grade uphill. It's not like cycling where dowhill is free speed, on foot you still have to work for it. -
Jimmy21 wrote:
I wish i had known this. I thought the bag was just to put your trinkets from the expo in. I didn't bring it. I thought my ride would be at the finish, he wasnt. I had to wait an hout in 2" split shorts and a singlet for an hour while my body was having trouble regulating temperature from the race. That was about as brutal as the end of the race
They didn't give you a "space" blanket? I mean in Boston, they weren't prepared, made you walk a long ways to get one, but you still got one, eventually. -
OTQer wrote:
I ran an OTQ at CIM last year and this year chose another flat (legal) marathon. I had better workouts last year in my build up and worked in a pack the whole race. This year I soloed my fall marathon in much worse conditions and was about 2 minutes slower than last year at CIM. The course is no faster than any pancake flat marathon but a pack of 50 guys working together (competition, mental factor, and drafting) plus perfect weather is easily worth a few minutes. Same thing would happen if 150 US runners shooting for an OTQ showed up to Chicago next year and had perfect weather. Turns out CIM gives the best odds for the combination of fast course, perfect weather, and good competition. The drop is worth maybe a minute but the small climbs negate most if not all that gain. It's definitely not 4%.
P.S. The vaporfly's are not worth 4% either (I haven't raced in them though)
**Great job on the OTQ! As an elite runner then what do you train and race in? Height/Weight? -
Rolling Hills wrote:
Jimmy21 wrote:
I wish i had known this. I thought the bag was just to put your trinkets from the expo in. I didn't bring it. I thought my ride would be at the finish, he wasnt. I had to wait an hout in 2" split shorts and a singlet for an hour while my body was having trouble regulating temperature from the race. That was about as brutal as the end of the race
They didn't give you a "space" blanket? I mean in Boston, they weren't prepared, made you walk a long ways to get one, but you still got one, eventually.
They gave out these oversized jackets of some cheap material that had about the same effectiveness as a space blanket. I was given one about 10 seconds after finishing. A swarm of volunteers descended on me and one of them had the jackets. I guess it's possible to slip through the cracks, unfortunately. -
S. Canaday wrote:
I ran CIM in 2015. Missed an OTQ and ran a positive split 2:19:52 but placed pretty well (it wasn't a USATF champs year).
I think it had rained that night and the road was wet...the temp was okay but there might have been a little wind. I probably went out a little too fast (the OTQ standard was 2:18:00 at the time of the race). Thought it was a fair course.
I think the past 2 years you've got super fast times at CIM because of the USATF Champs depth (the big pack),
but also the weather was been darn near perfect. The temperatures looked really good (cool but not too cold).
Then the wind factor. Looking at the almanac from last year there was a 0-1mph wind during the race...essentially "no wind."
This year (and those there could correct me if I am wrong) there might have been a 2-3mph tailwind part of the way....so basically "no wind to favorable"
The rolling hills make it a "legit course" although it is certainly faster than Boston (in terms of the net downhill and how it plays out)...I think the main reason these courses aren't IAAF is because they are point-to-point and you can get a monster tailwind the whole way.
This. I also ran it in 2015 and can confirm it is was not at all as easy as I expected. You have to be wary of the first half and plan on a significant negative split to run it well. The climbs in the first half negate any advantage of the downhills. And the last 10-12 miles are essentially flat, not downhill. I tried to even-split it, but blew up and ran 6 min slower than I had at Grandmas, even though I went through halfway less than a minute faster. -
And every joker talking about how it’s a legit course probably has their 2-3 min pr in it
Plus the excuse of the US championships is dumb. When LA was the US champs did it produce the same extreme number of OTQs. -
The fact that no one has broken 2:10 is not indicative of whether CIM is a fast course or not. Men US marathoning is just not competitive internationally (except Rupp).
I personally find the idea of a PR on a downhill (and potentially windy) point-to-point course disturbing. To me, it cannot count as a PR and indicating it as a PR may be a sign of low moral standards. Not as bad as doping, but already a red flag. Bigger than wearing than Vaporfly 4% (what I would personally not do).
To sum up, I think that downhill courses should be avoided by serious runners. Yes, even Boston. -
OTQer wrote:
I ran an OTQ at CIM last year and this year chose another flat (legal) marathon. I had better workouts last year in my build up and worked in a pack the whole race. This year I soloed my fall marathon in much worse conditions and was about 2 minutes slower than last year at CIM. The course is no faster than any pancake flat marathon but a pack of 50 guys working together (competition, mental factor, and drafting) plus perfect weather is easily worth a few minutes. Same thing would happen if 150 US runners shooting for an OTQ showed up to Chicago next year and had perfect weather. Turns out CIM gives the best odds for the combination of fast course, perfect weather, and good competition. The drop is worth maybe a minute but the small climbs negate most if not all that gain. It's definitely not 4%.
P.S. The vaporfly's are not worth 4% either (I haven't raced in them though)
/thread
People just seem bitter that they haven't caught CIM in the last couple of years. Perfect weather. No wind. Good mindset going in to go after common goals. Huge fields and pacers to go after the standards. All of the 2:18-22 guys and 2:44-46 women sign up for this race and pack up. It's not that surprising why so many OTQs come from here. If everyone went to Chicago and had the same weather we'd see a similar result. This years Chicago was 60, muggy, rainy, etc. CIM is becoming THE place to get your OTQ. If you've run it, you know it rolls in the front half. The last 10k are perfect because you have a slight downhill when you're most tired. I feel like the front half keeps it honest enough to compare to a course that is perfectly flat. Chicago has exactly zero hills. You do have to climb a little at CIM and, yeah you get more downhill, but I've always felt going uphill brings you back farther than going downhill gains you at the same effort. It's more or less a wash. -
Ghhhi wrote:
And every joker talking about how it’s a legit course probably has their 2-3 min pr in it
Plus the excuse of the US championships is dumb. When LA was the US champs did it produce the same extreme number of OTQs.
No one considers the LA marathon to be a speedy course thus LA wouldn't produce the same extreme OTQs. C'mon guy. -
Blew up in 2015 wrote:
S. Canaday wrote:
I ran CIM in 2015. Missed an OTQ and ran a positive split 2:19:52 but placed pretty well (it wasn't a USATF champs year).
I think it had rained that night and the road was wet...the temp was okay but there might have been a little wind. I probably went out a little too fast (the OTQ standard was 2:18:00 at the time of the race). Thought it was a fair course.
I think the past 2 years you've got super fast times at CIM because of the USATF Champs depth (the big pack),
but also the weather was been darn near perfect. The temperatures looked really good (cool but not too cold).
Then the wind factor. Looking at the almanac from last year there was a 0-1mph wind during the race...essentially "no wind."
This year (and those there could correct me if I am wrong) there might have been a 2-3mph tailwind part of the way....so basically "no wind to favorable"
The rolling hills make it a "legit course" although it is certainly faster than Boston (in terms of the net downhill and how it plays out)...I think the main reason these courses aren't IAAF is because they are point-to-point and you can get a monster tailwind the whole way.
This. I also ran it in 2015 and can confirm it is was not at all as easy as I expected. You have to be wary of the first half and plan on a significant negative split to run it well. The climbs in the first half negate any advantage of the downhills. And the last 10-12 miles are essentially flat, not downhill. I tried to even-split it, but blew up and ran 6 min slower than I had at Grandmas, even though I went through halfway less than a minute faster.
The last half of the race has almost 100 ft elevation loss. Barely noticeable to the naked eye, but it makes a difference during the toughest part of a marathon. I often look at the elevation data on my runs and it shows a clear pattern in pace based on gradual elevation changes that are barely noticeable. I don't know why people can't admit this. -
CIM finisher wrote:
Rolling Hills wrote:
Jimmy21 wrote:
I wish i had known this. I thought the bag was just to put your trinkets from the expo in. I didn't bring it. I thought my ride would be at the finish, he wasnt. I had to wait an hout in 2" split shorts and a singlet for an hour while my body was having trouble regulating temperature from the race. That was about as brutal as the end of the race
They didn't give you a "space" blanket? I mean in Boston, they weren't prepared, made you walk a long ways to get one, but you still got one, eventually.
They gave out these oversized jackets of some cheap material that had about the same effectiveness as a space blanket. I was given one about 10 seconds after finishing. A swarm of volunteers descended on me and one of them had the jackets. I guess it's possible to slip through the cracks, unfortunately.
I got one of those. Then i went to medical because i was cramping and couldnt stand. They gave me a space blanket. Then i went and sat on the steps of the capitol. Even with those two things, i was still shivering uncontrollably. Some fat lady offered to cuddle me. I almost took her up on it. She did look warm -
Hey guys,
OTQ'd yesterday. Previous poster who got the time pretty much already said this but since there still seems to be a lot of hate over the course, here's my 2 cents.
I've run 2:20 a few times at regional marathons, usually winning by 5 minutes and not having bottles/anybody to run with. Fun tempo efforts but kind of hard to push myself all alone. The biggest thing that led to my PR yesterday was running with a group of 20ish guys for almost the whole race. Went out with the "OTQ" group that was running a little too fast, 68:26 at the half. Every aid station guys would pass water, Maurten, etc. It was the first race I have ever done that felt more like a group effort than a "race" like Boston/NYC etc. When guys dropped off the pack, almost every time one of us would say "come on man, 5 miles, get back here with us!". I started to hit some mental low points and was able to maintain my pace by just forcing myself to stick with the group of guys I had shared about 20 miles with already. This was huge. Yeah the last 10k is awesome, but I averaged the same pace for the last 10k of Boston a few years ago.
When you get 100 guys who have been practicing trials pace for months (most former Division 1 athletes with low/sub 14 5k PRs), willing to go out at PR pace, and working together instead of against each other, yeah a bunch are going to run a good time in favorable weather. Find it kinda stupid in the same week we get threads like "why can't American marathoning be deep like it was in the 70s and 80s!" and then people upset a bunch of people ran good times. -
Congratulations..! My only question ...would you run the course in the opposite direction..? I won’t wait for you to answer; NO would be your answer. The course runs down hill thus its an aided course. Again congratulations a lifetime best I bet and lifetime accomplishment.
-
vivalarepublica wrote:
Blew up in 2015 wrote:
S. Canaday wrote:
I ran CIM in 2015. Missed an OTQ and ran a positive split 2:19:52 but placed pretty well (it wasn't a USATF champs year).
I think it had rained that night and the road was wet...the temp was okay but there might have been a little wind. I probably went out a little too fast (the OTQ standard was 2:18:00 at the time of the race). Thought it was a fair course.
I think the past 2 years you've got super fast times at CIM because of the USATF Champs depth (the big pack),
but also the weather was been darn near perfect. The temperatures looked really good (cool but not too cold).
Then the wind factor. Looking at the almanac from last year there was a 0-1mph wind during the race...essentially "no wind."
This year (and those there could correct me if I am wrong) there might have been a 2-3mph tailwind part of the way....so basically "no wind to favorable"
The rolling hills make it a "legit course" although it is certainly faster than Boston (in terms of the net downhill and how it plays out)...I think the main reason these courses aren't IAAF is because they are point-to-point and you can get a monster tailwind the whole way.
This. I also ran it in 2015 and can confirm it is was not at all as easy as I expected. You have to be wary of the first half and plan on a significant negative split to run it well. The climbs in the first half negate any advantage of the downhills. And the last 10-12 miles are essentially flat, not downhill. I tried to even-split it, but blew up and ran 6 min slower than I had at Grandmas, even though I went through halfway less than a minute faster.
The last half of the race has almost 100 ft elevation loss. Barely noticeable to the naked eye, but it makes a difference during the toughest part of a marathon. I often look at the elevation data on my runs and it shows a clear pattern in pace based on gradual elevation changes that are barely noticeable. I don't know why people can't admit this.
100' over 13 miles (69,000+'). That works out to an average drop of ~7' per mile or ~0.14% drop.
Think about it, son. -
OTQer wrote:
I ran an OTQ at CIM last year and this year chose another flat (legal) marathon. I had better workouts last year in my build up and worked in a pack the whole race. This year I soloed my fall marathon in much worse conditions and was about 2 minutes slower than last year at CIM. The course is no faster than any pancake flat marathon but a pack of 50 guys working together (competition, mental factor, and drafting) plus perfect weather is easily worth a few minutes. Same thing would happen if 150 US runners shooting for an OTQ showed up to Chicago next year and had perfect weather. Turns out CIM gives the best odds for the combination of fast course, perfect weather, and good competition. The drop is worth maybe a minute but the small climbs negate most if not all that gain. It's definitely not 4%.
P.S. The vaporfly's are not worth 4% either (I haven't raced in them though)
This is right on. Its the competition and getting all those guys together. I ran CIM yesterday for the first time. I think it is a fast course but no faster than a flat course. I've run Grandma's and think that course is faster. The uphills on CIM are deceptively tough when you look at an elevation map.
The benefit was I had guys to run with the entire way. I had a group of at least 6 and up to 20 until around mile 20. Even when that pack broke up I always had someone within 100yards in front of me, usually 50 to the finish. That made a huge difference. No race I've ever run beside the trials had that depth of guys in the 2:15-19 range. In reality probably half the US guys with ability in that range were on the line yesterday. -
In response to your opposite direction question: Would I run a marathon with a net elevation gain of ~1000ft? Sure. I've run races with 16,000ft of climbing. Would it be a little slower? Yeah, duh. So all marathons must be either uphill or 100% flat to be non-aided? Let's just have the trials and every marathon in Nebraska, folks.
-
vivalarepublica wrote:
Blew up in 2015 wrote:
S. Canaday wrote:
I ran CIM in 2015. Missed an OTQ and ran a positive split 2:19:52 but placed pretty well (it wasn't a USATF champs year).
I think it had rained that night and the road was wet...the temp was okay but there might have been a little wind. I probably went out a little too fast (the OTQ standard was 2:18:00 at the time of the race). Thought it was a fair course.
I think the past 2 years you've got super fast times at CIM because of the USATF Champs depth (the big pack),
but also the weather was been darn near perfect. The temperatures looked really good (cool but not too cold).
Then the wind factor. Looking at the almanac from last year there was a 0-1mph wind during the race...essentially "no wind."
This year (and those there could correct me if I am wrong) there might have been a 2-3mph tailwind part of the way....so basically "no wind to favorable"
The rolling hills make it a "legit course" although it is certainly faster than Boston (in terms of the net downhill and how it plays out)...I think the main reason these courses aren't IAAF is because they are point-to-point and you can get a monster tailwind the whole way.
This. I also ran it in 2015 and can confirm it is was not at all as easy as I expected. You have to be wary of the first half and plan on a significant negative split to run it well. The climbs in the first half negate any advantage of the downhills. And the last 10-12 miles are essentially flat, not downhill. I tried to even-split it, but blew up and ran 6 min slower than I had at Grandmas, even though I went through halfway less than a minute faster.
The last half of the race has almost 100 ft elevation loss. Barely noticeable to the naked eye, but it makes a difference during the toughest part of a marathon. I often look at the elevation data on my runs and it shows a clear pattern in pace based on gradual elevation changes that are barely noticeable. I don't know why people can't admit this.
please tell me: what do you think is the ratio of “time lost on an uphill” to “time gained on a downhill”? Do you think it is 1:1?
It isn’t.
It is greater than one. You lose more time going up the hill than you gain going down the hill.
Do you understand how a “net downhill” course can be slower than a flat course? Or do you still think that every net downhill course is faster than a flat course?
