You didn't run it dipsh*t wrote:
No one under 2:10 wrote:
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.
There was no wind. It was 41 degrees. They ran many uphills as well. The net difference in the grade is not that big. They ran with their own legs. To sum up, you're jealous.
reed wrote:
4.5% wrote:
I don't know if other people had similar experiences, but I ran in vaporflys yesterday and my quads were destroyed in the hills and I thought I was going to have to drop out around 18-19. Then as soon as I hit the flatness of the last 5 miles my legs felt fine. So I don't know how much vaporflys actually help on hills.
FWIW I ran Chicago in vaporflys 2 months ago and my legs felt amazing the whole race and I could definitely feel the (4%) difference from other racing flats.
you seem very undertrained for any sort of hills. the last 5 miles aren't significantly different from miles 13-21, and there is basically one hill (a bridge) after mile 13.
I'll add my name to the HUGE list of people who have run CIM and think it's a fair course if there's no tailwind.
I'm from Sacramento and am very familiar with the course. I've run it in '15, '16, and '17, though only really raced it in 2016 when I ran 2:32, my current PR. I have run no other "fast" marathons other than Boston this year to compare times with.
My thoughts echo what some others who ran have said. The course is fast, but the weather in the last 4 years has been incredible and the competition was top-notch for 2:13-2:25 guys and 2:40-2:50 women since it was made the US champs course. next year will not be a US champs but I think the reputation it's built will still draw out lots of fast runners next year, although most likely fewer guys under 2:16 and fewer women under 2:40.
the people saying that the net 320 feet of downhill trumps everything else are idiots. a race could climb 15000 feet and then drop 15320 feet and it's not going to be a fast course. now obviously there's a point of inflection where the amount of climbing equals out the net 320', and I really believe that it's close to what CIM has (680' up, 1000' down roughly). A couple years ago I made a thread offering a spreadsheet that I made to CIM hopefuls, with precise mile splits accounting for every hill of the course, for any goal time. I made this using Strava's formulas for calculating grade-adjusted pace. the result I got at the end of my calcs said that a 6:00/mi "effort" on the CIM course, with zero wind, would result in running 5:59.0-5:59.5/mi. So basically I believe that CIM is 13 to 26 seconds (for a 2:37 marathon) FASTER than a perfectly flat course. now, if you add in the fact that your quads get a little beat up from the early downhills (the same reason why Boston feels hard), it probably gets even closer to that perfectly flat course. The results from my analysis also showed that an even split is the best way to run CIM, or to at least be within 15 seconds of an even split.
one last thing - regarding the benefit of drafting. I believe that for a runner running 4:00 mile pace, you're supposed to run about a half second faster behind a rabbit (per 400m lap) than you would solo. so if you are in the OTQ group the entire way and never lead or fall behind too much, that adds up to about 100 seconds of aid at 4min pace, which due to physics would be a little less at 5:00/mi and even less the slower you go (not a linear impact, as it's based on V^2).
OTQer wrote:
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.
Cosmo Seinfeld wrote:
You didn't run it dipsh*t wrote:
No one under 2:10 wrote:
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.
There was no wind. It was 41 degrees. They ran many uphills as well. The net difference in the grade is not that big. They ran with their own legs. To sum up, you're jealous.
THIS!!!! 30-45 seconds max. I've run it 3 times. It's very rolling and anyone who's ACTUALLY ran it understands that. Many are those who haven't raced it and as the poster said, are jealous.
No wind and great competition.
CIM Race Director Eli Asch wrote:
Our strong field featuring a mix of savvy veterans and talented debutants is poised and ready to take advantage of CIM’s famously fast ‘downhill to downtown’ course while chasing times, titles, and a piece of our nearly $150,000 championship prize purse.
Mike Deren wrote:
I’ll throw some more fuel on the fire. I’m counting only 9 turns on CIMs course. Compare this to other marathons like Chicago that have many more right angle turns. This will impact you in two ways: unlikely to hit the tangents perfectly and momentum is lost. This is also a reason why tracks are quicker than roads.
A supplemental thought is that this course is perfect for the benefits of the vaporfly.
You have to be pretty dense to not recognize that the attributes of CIM’s course and environment produces a faster time than the average fast marathon.
That being said I think it’s terrific to see all of the athletes OTQing this year. It’s great for the sport. If I had spent all of those hours training and knew I was within 5 minutes of the standard, I would definitely travel out to Sacramento for a shot.
N. Pennington wrote:
Is CIM the vaporfly of marathons? I would venture to say that would be reserved for Rotterdam, Chicago and Berlin.
Granted CIM has a net course downhill layout it is not what I consider a fast course, too many ups and downs. I was 4th there in 2007 in 2:19:35 and the top American. That same time might have placed me around 60th this year with the incredible depth of runners. Whether it is CIM, Chicago or any other marathon it is still going to come down to overall fitness and getting the marathon right which takes runners time to do. We like the success, we don't look too fondly on the failures. People bash the world's top runners here all the time. For example, Bekele gets bashed for his DNF's yet has run the third fastest time in world history for the marathon (2:03:03). That man is never running for slow times.
I trained for 10 years after the 2007 CIM and the fastest I went was a 5th place at the 2011 Monumental Indianapolis Marathon in 2:26:42 (including an emergency porta john stop). Indy is flat as a pancake. I only got the marathon right twice and failed miserably (to my standards) most of the others. I think what Sage wrote was spot on if you get a great day, low wind and big group you will run great times at CIM. It was perfect all the years I ran on the CIM course, weather is always nice (most years). Most importantly, a perfect taper and just getting that 26.2 mile distance right. Anyone who has run a marathon knows it is VERY difficult to replicate a perfect run.
In 2007 there were only about 7 of us in the lead pack (mostly Kenyans) through 18 miles. We passed the half in 1:07:09 and were still together through 20 miles (1:44:05) minus a couple that fell off the pace. If you are fit and are in a group it isn't going to matter what course it is, you'll be ready to run very fast because you did the work. That being said, you can also be very, very fit and fail miserably at the distance, also what makes it a good challenge. I look at races where I just didn't get it right like Columbus, Chicago (and others) and would rank them as the Vaporfly courses, perfectly flat, great competition, great weather. CIM does have some downhill but has many rolling hills that you absolutely must be able to sustain a hard pace over if you are going to break the 2:20, even 2:25 barriers on, respectfully. I can assure having broken sub-2:20 there is no room to slow down if you are wanting to break that barrier, hills or flat. Again, it is going to come down to you having to maintain the pace. Have you trained in such a way to adapt i.e. clear lactic acid faster than it is building up, in training?
Best piece of advice I ever got was always be harder on yourself in training than you ever will be in the race. You should test your absolute upper limits in training so that when you get to the race, if you are fortunate enough to do it perfectly once in your running career, react to any speeds, any surges, anything the lead packs throws at you. It is a great feeling to do that but also remember the failed attempts because it is part of the success formula.
Kipchoge proved to us what the human body is capable of in Italy. He had the pace car, drinks, pacers but bottom line up front as we say in the military, he still had to maintain that pace. That man held 4:35 pace regardless. 2:00:25 is the world standard. 2:01:39 second.
Kudos to all those that finished this past weekend and most importantly were healthy. These times really mean little compared to our health. You'll remember the experience, the guys that you were pushing and were pushing you. For me the three men I owe my PR to are John Gathoga, Charles Bedley and Laban Moiben.
Nate
www.rundreamachieve.com
Yes - I ran it in 2016, and again today. The elevation map is not representative of the course. It rolls and rolls and rolls.
As others have said, it's fast because people come here TO run fast - power of numbers. And the solid chance of good weather helps. Plus, the race is just set up to run fast in so many other ways with all the little things - easy bag check, tons of toilets, warm buses to wait on.
Chief Justice Kavanaugh wrote:
Yes - I ran it in 2016, and again today. The elevation map is not representative of the course. It rolls and rolls and rolls.
As others have said, it's fast because people come here TO run fast - power of numbers. And the solid chance of good weather helps. Plus, the race is just set up to run fast in so many other ways with all the little things - easy bag check, tons of toilets, warm buses to wait on.
Why not run from downtown to Folsom then tough guy?
N. Pennington wrote:
CIM is not a fast course. What makes CIM "fast" is being in great shape and being able to withstand a fast pace for a very long time. It means nothing to hold marathon pace for 16 or 20 miles, did you do it the entire way? The course can be flat, downhill or a mixture of them both which CIM is. The difference is being able to sustain pace for the entire distance. FITNESS is what makes a marathon course fast. Chicago is fast. CIM is fast. Rotterdam is fast...IF you are well-prepared.
"He never ran even close to his time at CIM...not even within 5 min" - haha thank you Fish. I can live life never getting even close to my 2:19 PR. Who said I was done? I'm only 42 lol. It is a time that is not that easy to run so appreciate the comment. Feel free to reach out to me at [email protected] if you ever need any support or help.
CrazySlowRunner wrote:
I'm going to run CIM next year, and I fully expect a PR, since I consider it a fast course, and because of the down hill.
I don't understand why people need to get defensive about this fact.
Using actual data wrote:
Strava's grade-adjusted pace puts CIM at about 10-25 seconds slower than a perfectly flat course based on the data from people who ran this year. That seems like the most objective way to evaluate this that I have seen so far.
