advertisement


The runners' thread...

Status
Not open for further replies.
The race is chipped. I was thinking there might be an advantage to starting at the very back and building momentum and confidence as I pass other runners, but I think I'll press to get to the front of my group and push on at my pace from there instead, which hopefully, will be of a similar if not better pace than some of the runners from the group that will have been set off ten minutes before mine. Come to think of it, if I can get to the very front at the very start, I could have relatively clean air for quite a while as long as there aren't a lot of sharks in my pack or sloths in the pack ahead.

Okay, race positioning sorted :)
 
Each to their own! I got a PB (97mins) so it works for me.. :)
I usually run right at the edge of the road anyway, tends to be a bit clearer at the start, but I typically do that throughout.
This was a smaller race so not really getting in the way of anyone (I hope!).
 
robs said:
4 marathons, many halfs, a few shorter...
why is it odd?
Click to expand...

Well, I tend to think that you need to run about 10 to 20 seconds a mile slower than race pace for the first3-5 miles in a half. The field tends to overtake you. Then slowly come up to race pace and in the last third start to pick off people.

I also agree that getting in the way of faster runners is not cool as a slower runner.
 
windhoek said:
Here's a question for anyone who's tackled a 10K, or any race with the aim of putting in a maximum effort-performance: if you've been allocated to a starting position that's slower than your actual pace, should you start at the back of the slower group and overtake when it inevitably thins out, or should you start at the very front of the slower group so you can merge with the faster group asap?

I signed up thinking my time might be closer to 90 minutes than 60 and now find myself allocated to set off in the slowest group, but now that I've got a bit fitter and a bit faster, I'm 90% sure I can crack 60 minutes. Heck, the audacious part of me thinks I just might crack 50 minutes!
Click to expand...

In my massive experience of one 10k, lol: With the more modest paces such as us in the 60 min hopeful crowd it really is not going to make a big difference to your time or effort where you start with chip timing. There may be a little crowding at the start but at our pace you will find space and running companions easily just a few hundred meters in.
 
cutting42 said:
In my massive experience of one 10k, lol: With the more modest paces such as us in the 60 min hopeful crowd it really is not going to make a big difference to your time or effort where you start with chip timing. There may be a little crowding at the start but at our pace you will find space and running companions easily just a few hundred meters in.
Click to expand...

The voice of reason has spoken, perhaps I'll find myself running in a group of a few hundred within a few minutes instead of a few thousand as will be the case within a few seconds of starting ;)
 
Here's the running form video I watched recently that's formed the basis of my running technique.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
windhoek said:
Here's a question for anyone who's tackled a 10K, or any race with the aim of putting in a maximum effort-performance: if you've been allocated to a starting position that's slower than your actual pace, should you start at the back of the slower group and overtake when it inevitably thins out, or should you start at the very front of the slower group so you can merge with the faster group asap?

I signed up thinking my time might be closer to 90 minutes than 60 and now find myself allocated to set off in the slowest group, but now that I've got a bit fitter and a bit faster, I'm 90% sure I can crack 60 minutes. Heck, the audacious part of me thinks I just might crack 50 minutes!
Click to expand...

In all the events I've done so far a lot of people have set off far too fast at the start. I did the London Winter 10K in Feb this year and decided I'd be happy with anything under the hour so paced myself for that right from that start which meant that loads of people in my starting group went out a lot quicker than me, but I then passed them later in the race when they slowed (or even ended up walking) while I just plugged away at my usual pace.

Having said that I was in a group that were down as expecting to be in the 55-60 minute range (which is where I finished) so if you are in a 90 minute group I'd either position myself at the start of that - or even wiggle my way into setting off with one of the faster groups.
 
windhoek said:
The voice of reason has spoken, perhaps I'll find myself running in a group of a few hundred within a few minutes instead of a few thousand as will be the case within a few seconds of starting ;)
Click to expand...

Not sure if you mentioned but which 10k are you doing this weekend? I am doing the Shoreditch 10k next Sunday.
 
I'm doing it in Glasgow and might just run home afterwards as the finish line is only about three miles from where I live... might being the operative word! I wish you all the best for yours though :)
 
Race Day tomorrow and I can't wait. It looks like being a very wet and windy race which is a bummer as I've only run in dry weather or in the drizzle at most. Not ideal so I doubt I'll get under 50 minutes, but I'll give it my all no matter what. At the end of the day, I'll be happy with anywhere under 60 minutes.

Once the race is over, I'll be coming home asap to watch the Malaysian GP and from next week, probably not before Wednesday, I'll begin to build up my aerobic base again and see if I can gradually move up to between 20-25 miles a week; about 15 miles a week was my typical amount prior to getting a knee injury in training (I ran downhill too fast) and tapering for the race.

I'll let you know how it goes tomorrow. One more sleep to go :)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-41448084
 
windhoek,

If it's going to chuck it down I'd recommend vaseline on the nipples and anywhere else subject to chafing including feet. Best of luck and let us know how it went!

Ian
 
windhoek said:
Here's a question for anyone who's tackled a 10K, or any race with the aim of putting in a maximum effort-performance: if you've been allocated to a starting position that's slower than your actual pace, should you start at the back of the slower group and overtake when it inevitably thins out, or should you start at the very front of the slower group so you can merge with the faster group asap?
Click to expand...

I used to get as close to the start line as I could whatever my allocated place. Many people claim all sorts of fictional race times on their entry form.
 
windhoek said:
Race Day tomorrow and I can't wait. It looks like being a very wet and windy race which is a bummer as I've only run in dry weather or in the drizzle at most. Not ideal so I doubt I'll get under 50 minutes, but I'll give it my all no matter what. At the end of the day, I'll be happy with anywhere under 60 minutes.

Once the race is over, I'll be coming home asap to watch the Malaysian GP and from next week, probably not before Wednesday, I'll begin to build up my aerobic base again and see if I can gradually move up to between 20-25 miles a week; about 15 miles a week was my typical amount prior to getting a knee injury in training (I ran downhill too fast) and tapering for the race.

I'll let you know how it goes tomorrow. One more sleep to go :)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-41448084
Click to expand...

Hopefully you will be tucked up in bed by now but have a great run later today. I still have a week to go to mine but did a decent PB at Parkrun Sat morning of 29.04 and was feeling great so very hopeful for getting under the hour myself.

A taper week for me and got my race top today with number and timing chip.
 
I'm back home after running the Great Scottish Run 10K. I've had a shower, ate a small a packet of fruit pastels (or something like that) and drank some fluids. I'm now relaxing and listening to Young Americans as I type because I think Somebody Up There Likes Me as I ran an as yet unverified time of 47.51 - a real balls to the wall-effort if I don't mind saying so myself!

I reckon I could have run close to 45.00, however, but I got bogged down in traffic as I couldn't get to the front of the slow group at the start and there were a few pinch points along the route that meant I had to wait till the road opened up before picking up the pace again. I mean no disrespect to anyone who ran 45.00 or less, of course. I respect the effort no matter what time anyone achieved.

On the theme of pace, the first 1K was slow - something like 6.48 - but as I say it was difficult to get into clean air and besides, the race starts on a hill. Also on the theme of pace, I used my metronome to pace myself throughout the race at 180SPM. There were a lot of times when I simply couldn't hear it, but when I could I stuck with it. It was a great tool as it helped me progress at a steady pace, traffic permitting, and ensure I was all but spent bar a final sprint at the finish. I upped the pace to 182 SPM when I was in the last kilometre and as I say, I was all but spent when I crossed the line. Interestingly, I heard someone say, 'That guy's cheating,' but I don't see how using a metronome is any different from checking splits with a watch, and what's more, there was a 60 Minutes Marker runner running at 6KM pace to let runners know if they're ahead of behind the 60 minute mark. Anyway, the metronome was a great help and I'd use it again.

Thanks for the encouragement and I wish you all well when your next race comes up :)

Now it's time to get cooking and watch the Malaysian Grand Prix... my invisible six-pack is starting to get hungry :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top