EPT8 Weeks till Marathon - Page 2
| Blogs > h3r1n6 |
NeverGG
United Kingdom5399 Posts
| ||
|
JeeJee
Canada5652 Posts
On August 07 2009 09:11 h3r1n6 wrote: 3 km 11:23, not really relevant here though 10 km 43:30 Do the math yourself  . I can give you a HM time in two weeks.I want to get that 10 km below 40. In fact, the next goal after the marathon will probably be the local easter run, which is 10,5km on a course with some light hills, below 40 minutes. The problem with all these training logs is, that I can't fill in everything. I don't know the exact length if I go for 40 minutes, which is the required field though. I could look up the track on a route planer, but thats bothersome everytime, since I mix it up a lot, and some of the ways through the forest aren't even in there. Guessing the actual length of the course doesn't really work well either. about logs.. actually i don't use that log at all :p personally i use mapmyrun.com where (if i am doing a new route) i map out and get the distance (b/c i run by time exclusively), then plug it into my custom excel sheet which i've made as easy as can be: it looks like this, + Show Spoiler [screenshot] + ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/Ob9HI.jpg) no fields are mandatory really, just will have some missing points in the graphs im actually pretty proud of it haha, although there's still a lot i want to fix. .but all i have to do is enter the values, click a button and graphs are auto updated, auto-warns me if my shoes are close to worn out, etc. as for math.. + Show Spoiler [math] + i'll take that math remark as an invitation :p theory's always fun especially since i like to think that my approach is a bit more accurate than plugging in numbers into mcmilllan HM time would be much more useful but i can make do with a 10k ^^ note: the following relies on assumptions about your training which can likely be wrong aaaand i had to use babelfish for that german program haha first lets calculate your general miles per week: (i picked week 5 as a moderate week from that training program) 55km and 100 minutes of running at like.. easy pace, which ill just go ahead and assume is 5:30/km, giving another 18km for a total of 73km = 45mpw, which (courtesy of BrianW) makes your 10k factor around 5.2, thus.. 43.5*5.2=3:46 assuming good conditions (like 50*/50%) and pacing on race day. since you're aiming for a 10k below 40 i shall also assume that's an old 10k time thus rendering my math pretty useless (as that's no indication of your current condition!) xD so i dont even know why i put this at all lol | ||
|
G0dly
United States450 Posts
| ||
|
h3r1n6
Iceland2039 Posts
On August 07 2009 10:19 JeeJee wrote: about logs.. actually i don't use that log at all :p personally i use mapmyrun.com where (if i am doing a new route) i map out and get the distance (b/c i run by time exclusively), then plug it into my custom excel sheet which i've made as easy as can be: it looks like this, + Show Spoiler [screenshot] + no fields are mandatory really, just will have some missing points in the graphs im actually pretty proud of it haha, although there's still a lot i want to fix. .but all i have to do is enter the values, click a button and graphs are auto updated, auto-warns me if my shoes are close to worn out, etc. as for math.. + Show Spoiler [math] + i'll take that math remark as an invitation :p theory's always fun especially since i like to think that my approach is a bit more accurate than plugging in numbers into mcmilllan HM time would be much more useful but i can make do with a 10k ^^ note: the following relies on assumptions about your training which can likely be wrong aaaand i had to use babelfish for that german program haha first lets calculate your general miles per week: (i picked week 5 as a moderate week from that training program) 55km and 100 minutes of running at like.. easy pace, which ill just go ahead and assume is 5:30/km, giving another 18km for a total of 73km = 45mpw, which (courtesy of BrianW) makes your 10k factor around 5.2, thus.. 43.5*5.2=3:46 assuming good conditions (like 50*/50%) and pacing on race day. since you're aiming for a 10k below 40 i shall also assume that's an old 10k time thus rendering my math pretty useless (as that's no indication of your current condition!) xD so i dont even know why i put this at all lol So that translates to a marathon time of 3:46 according to your calculations? That German page has an online calculator, which says 43:30 would be a 3:23 time for Marathon. I don't know how either calculation works, nor the process of thought behind it, but I don't really think they are of much use, other than a rough estimate. I don't really bother taking training times and my pulse watch is broken, so I am kind of running in the dark. I'll have a hm time after week 6, that means sunday in two weeks | ||
|
50bani
Romania480 Posts
My advice to you would be to try and break 38 minutes for 10k, and if you fail to do so, then quit! You are a sunday jogger, not an athlete, by the look of things so far. You have no business running marathons. | ||
|
h3r1n6
Iceland2039 Posts
| ||
|
JeeJee
Canada5652 Posts
On August 07 2009 21:07 h3r1n6 wrote: So that translates to a marathon time of 3:46 according to your calculations? That German page has an online calculator, which says 43:30 would be a 3:23 time for Marathon. I don't know how either calculation works, nor the process of thought behind it, but I don't really think they are of much use, other than a rough estimate. I don't really bother taking training times and my pulse watch is broken, so I am kind of running in the dark. I'll have a hm time after week 6, that means sunday in two weeks yes, if you trained roughly the same intensity as you did for the 10k and ran it under similarly stressful conditions, at the time when you ran a 43:30 you'd run about 3:46. if it was a while ago, this would not be representative of your current (hopefully improved) condition, meaning you are likely to run faster. a 43:30 equated to a 3:23 is using a fairly common multiplier in online calculators, which is 4.67 (i.e. 43.5 * 4.67 = 3:23). there is a problem with this -- it assumes a highly trained runner. the post quoted below is the method i currently use (and it seems to be more accurate, by all accounts, than simply using online calculators. ymmv of course) I think a race provides a more reliable measure than trying to compare training (although this can be done too). The longer the race the better. And using the RW calculator blindly is probably not a great thing, unless the race is longer than 10 miles. 5k's are unreliable, but I'd convert it to a 10k time then use a factor based on what the person mileage is. I never posted the results of my survey on marathon to 10k ratio versus mileage. Of course, there are variations among people, but considering the mileage helps reduce the variation. Here's what I came up with based on the survey: 30-35mpw: 5.5 40mpw: 5.0-5.3 55 mpw: 4.9 60 mpw: 4.75-4.85 70 mpw: 4.70-4.80 80-100 mpw: 4.55-4.65 Depending on how long a person has been running and how many marathons they've run, you can choose the slightly higher or lower values for a given mileage. The RW calculator gives 4.67, the world class runners varied for 4.55-4.8. But the 4.55 people never really tried to excel in the 10k, and the 4.8 people only gave the marathon one to two shots. A RW survey of 2,000 readers gave a number closer to 5.0. I would guess the average mileage of these readers was about 45 mpw. I wonder if they even thought to include that in their survey? I don't have that article. edit: also it is easier to finish the marathon in 2:30 than in 3:00! lol. | ||
|
h3r1n6
Iceland2039 Posts
| ||
|
JeeJee
Canada5652 Posts
either way, the HM time will be far more telling, just use a standard 2.11 multiplier to convert to a full marathon time, HM is long enough where that should be fairly accurate good luck on your HM, keep up with your training ^_^ wait a minute, i'm missing something here you're not racing the HM are you? you're running it at marathon pace? or are you actually planning to go all out | ||
|
h3r1n6
Iceland2039 Posts
| ||
|
Zidane
United States1686 Posts
| ||
|
foeffa
Belgium2115 Posts
| ||
|
h3r1n6
Iceland2039 Posts
I just did the all out test on half marathon distance, in a time of 1:39:52. Now taking the 2.11 multiplier from JeeJee, this would equal a marathon time of 3:30:43. That is a bit above my goal. I've got to keep pushing myself. | ||
|
JeeJee
Canada5652 Posts
i wouldn't be too worried, looks like (assuming proper pacing and good conditions on raceday) you'll hit your sub-3:30, since a time-trial, while better than nothing, is not as good as the effort you can put in on raceday (ymmv of course, but for me solo timetrials definitely produce worse results than actual races.. can't really replicate the atmosphere ).either way, keep up with your training, follow through with a proper taper in the last ~3 weeks or whatever the plan has you doing, and you'll be fine! | ||
| ||
