Slow Chump wrote:
Here is my Half Marthon PR. Could I run faster if I ran different splits? I ran a negative split in this race, and felt great until the last mile (but mile 13 is always going to hurt, right?). I feel I left a little out there, definitely a faster time in me.
What should/could I have done differently?
1 6:54.5
2 6:46.0
3 6:42.8
4 6:37.5
5 6:33.8
6 6:24.8
7 6:21.4
8 6:23.9
9 6:17.9
10 6:24.3
11 6:23.8
12 6:23.2
13 6:36.8
14 1:00.0
Finish 1:25:51
I don't agree to other posters who say you did perfectly. I think it's one of the worst pacings I have ever seen for a flat fast course. I split my long runs more evenly and cover half in about the same time as yours.
I think the difference between the fastest and slowest miles in your case are way too large (more than 30 seconds). Also you have started way too slow. The fact that you ran fastest mile at mile 9 in 6:18 and generally cruised in mid 6:2x tells that you could easily started in 6:30-6:35 and held that pace with slight nevative of about 0.5-1 sec per mile.
It's generally considered good to negative split but we are talking about few seconds difference per 10k. When I ran my last HM few years ago (77:3x) I also negative split the second half but the difference between fastest and slowest mile (except for the last mile) was no more than 5 seconds.