ThatAverageRunner wrote:
30 miler today @ 5:43 pace. 2200ft elevation. Ran pretty even pace considering the elevation profile.
That's a big effing run.
ThatAverageRunner wrote:
30 miler today @ 5:43 pace. 2200ft elevation. Ran pretty even pace considering the elevation profile.
That's a big effing run.
Solid run in distance and pace. 2200’ over 30mi is just a 1.4% avg incline. Shouldn’t be much of a factor for any elite or sub elite to cruise through.
Forest Gump here wrote:
Let's wait and see what he runs in Atlanta.
The training was good if he produces a decent Marathon there. Sub 2: 16 or so.
If he doesn't his training was crap.
Yes, I'm curious to see. He's definitely taking a different approach than is typical. Extremely high volume, and it seems like many over-distance type runs.
I think I'd agree with you, if he ran around 2:15 or so I'd say his training worked out well. 2:15 - 2:20 ish would be kinda "meh"...could be the training but it's also easy to have a bad race.
npurdy1112 wrote:
Solid run in distance and pace. 2200’ over 30mi is just a 1.4% avg incline. Shouldn’t be much of a factor for any elite or sub elite to cruise through.
It's also at between 3k and 4k feet, so significant altitude.
No, it's not ridiculously hilly...but you can't look at hills that way. 30 mi out and back run that gains 1100' evenly the first 15M is very different from a run with lots of sharper hills. Jim's run basically starts with a 4M climb, then has some moderate rolling hills, and then ends with a descent.
I certainly wouldn't call it mountain running, but that's lots of 4-8% in there. I know over that sort of terrain I'm about 3%-5% slower. Walmsley certainly runs hills better than me so call it 3%, and let's say 2% for altitude. That's something akin to a 5:25-5:30 effort for 30M....it's solid.
As other posters were saying, it depends on how hard that was for him.
Anything slower than 2:11.30 I would consider a disappointment. Particularly after that double session mid week. Imagine if it were some random Japanese guy doing this crazy training. Everyone would be predicting sub 2:10. But ya'll have no faith in Jimbo
Smoochie Wallace wrote:
Anything slower than 2:11.30 I would consider a disappointment. Particularly after that double session mid week. Imagine if it were some random Japanese guy doing this crazy training. Everyone would be predicting sub 2:10. But ya'll have no faith in Jimbo
If this were London or Chicago...yes. But this is a hilly, non paced course where warm weather can be a factor.
I'd still like to see some sustained chunk of running at or around 5:00 pace as well.
LM wrote:
It's also at between 3k and 4k feet, so significant altitude.
Between 3k and 4K feet is not significant altitude. You’ll hardly notice a difference at that.
bdjdihejsjd wrote:
LM wrote:
It's also at between 3k and 4k feet, so significant altitude.
Between 3k and 4K feet is not significant altitude. You’ll hardly notice a difference at that.
As someone who lives at 7k feet, there is a noticeable performance jump from 7k -> 4k and then again from 4k -> sea level. It's a solid 5% for me...you don't really notice that just doing easy runs, but you sure as heck notice it on harder or track efforts.