Rollercoaster
I've had some up days, like today, and some down days in the last week or so. I was able to get a 14 miler in today, feeling pretty good. I had to stop once to stretch out at around five miles, but otherwise the run was uneventful.
I'm finding that it takes me a solid half hour to prepare for a run since starting up again. Usually fifteen minutes of biking and fifteen minutes of stretching. Hopefully this will get less and less shortly, because it is a pain in the ass.
I was a little bit disappointed to see that this would have been a good year to run TCM in terms of placing. The first sub-2:30 was 27th place, and 2:39:19 was 50th. I had set a time goal of 2:29:xx and a place goal of top 30. Obviously, it's ridiculous to talk about any of this not having run the race, but it cool to look at the way things worked out and see that if I had achieved either, I would have acheived both.
Anyway, I can put that behind me now and look forward to the next goal. As I was on my run today, I thought about my plans for 2007. I haven't given up on running faster in shorter distances, so I'm thinking I will run a spring marathon and then use that fitness toward a summer of shorter races, trying to set myself up for a peak 5k and 10k.
Sounds nice. We'll see what happens.
I'm finding that it takes me a solid half hour to prepare for a run since starting up again. Usually fifteen minutes of biking and fifteen minutes of stretching. Hopefully this will get less and less shortly, because it is a pain in the ass.
I was a little bit disappointed to see that this would have been a good year to run TCM in terms of placing. The first sub-2:30 was 27th place, and 2:39:19 was 50th. I had set a time goal of 2:29:xx and a place goal of top 30. Obviously, it's ridiculous to talk about any of this not having run the race, but it cool to look at the way things worked out and see that if I had achieved either, I would have acheived both.
Anyway, I can put that behind me now and look forward to the next goal. As I was on my run today, I thought about my plans for 2007. I haven't given up on running faster in shorter distances, so I'm thinking I will run a spring marathon and then use that fitness toward a summer of shorter races, trying to set myself up for a peak 5k and 10k.
Sounds nice. We'll see what happens.
posted at 8:22 PM [+]
5 Comments:
I like your last line. "We'll see what happens." I'm looking at the Vancouver Marathon which is about the same time as the Fargo Marathon. I want to sign up, but a lot can happen between now and then.
http://www.letsrun.com/2006/collegesuck.php
good read... maybe you already read it but...
"This would have been a good year to run TCM in terms of placing."
Actually I think it means that the conditions were tough. Zeke mentioned as much in his blog.
Thomas, I disagree. I think an accurate measurement of the toughness of the conditions would be to look back at the winning times over the last few years. If you do that, you will see that the winner this year also won the race last year... but his time was almost 5 minutes faster this year and was very comparable to winning times from the two years prior to that. The conditions were not a factor, it was simply a good year to place well at TCM for those that were prepared to do so.
Thanks for the comments. I really don't have any great training to talk about, so thanks for starting an argument to keep things lively, Thomas.
Here is a spreadsheet detailing the last seven years of results for sub-2:30 male finishers. I've added in some other columns that may add to the discussion, including some info relevant to my contention about placing high.
You're entitled to take Zeke's word for it, Thomas, but that's always a bit too subjective for my tastes. He is a Twins fan after all (Oh SNAP!). The start temp was 48, and the finishing temp was 63 and cloudy, which is only five degrees to the warm side of ideal. I would call those excellent (near ideal) conditions for a marathon.
As far as what the results show, 2003 appears to have been the sweet spot as far as placing high relative to getting under 2:30, but in general it looks pretty consistent, regardless of conditions, that if you sneak under 2:30, you will likely sneak under 30th place.
So my statement about it being a good year to place high with a 2:29 is fundamentally flawed because every year is a good year.
Provided you get to the start line.
Post a Comment
<< Home