Race pace
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller | Reply |
2014-04-03 10:30 AM |
1 | Subject: Race pace My average pace for the half IM run leg by itself in training (21.1km) is 7mins per km. I can hold this and still feel ok at end on fresh legs. Can I expect to use this as my race pace in the half ironman tri run from the start, or should I start slower? Thanks for any feed back on this. |
|
2014-04-03 2:36 PM in reply to: thomasfowler |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Race pace I would not use my training paces to set a target You should take a race result (10k, 21k, marathon) and get your VDOT The use the following table to get a target HIM run time If you are properly trained and you pace the bike properly, you should be able to hit these numbers Properly trained and proper bike pacing are two huge discussions in themselves. |
2014-04-03 2:48 PM in reply to: thomasfowler |
Veteran 434 Apex, NC | Subject: RE: Race pace The short answer is no. Not unless you ran the open HM at a very easy pace. You will get many different answers of varying complexity. One simple rule of thumb thrown around is to add at least 10 minutes to your open HM time. |
2014-04-03 3:47 PM in reply to: marcag |
Veteran 1677 Houston, Texas | Subject: RE: Race pace Marc, does that table exist for those of us who might have VDOT's lower than 40? |
2014-04-03 3:50 PM in reply to: ligersandtions |
Extreme Veteran 2261 Ridgeland, Mississippi | Subject: RE: Race pace Originally posted by ligersandtions Marc, does that table exist for those of us who might have VDOT's lower than 40? I'm not Marc, but yes
and for paces: |
2014-04-03 3:51 PM in reply to: thomasfowler |
Not a Coach 11473 Media, PA | Subject: RE: Race pace If that is your typical easy or moderate-easy training pace, then there is a good chance you can do a bit better than that in the HIM (assuming you are well trained and paced appropriately across all 3 sports). In general, targeting your open marathon pace (if you know it) is a reasonable goal for a well-executed HIM run. |
|
2014-04-03 3:52 PM in reply to: 0 |
Seattle | Subject: RE: Race pace Originally posted by msteiner Originally posted by ligersandtions Marc, does that table exist for those of us who might have VDOT's lower than 40? I'm not Marc, but yes
and for paces: Although that's not showing how the VDOT related to IM/HIM pacing though. Which I find really cool! Edited by Asalzwed 2014-04-03 3:53 PM |
2014-04-03 4:04 PM in reply to: 0 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Race pace Originally posted by ligersandtions Marc, does that table exist for those of us who might have VDOT's lower than 40? I have never seen it for under 40, but you can guess it by looking at the trend, it looks like the mid point for a HIM time is about 4 VDOTs lower So if your VDOT is 50, look at the HM time for a VDOT of 46 and that is about the HIM run time. The Jack Daniel's site does VDOTs lower than 40. Make sense ? Edited by marcag 2014-04-03 4:05 PM |
2014-04-03 4:07 PM in reply to: Asalzwed |
Extreme Veteran 2261 Ridgeland, Mississippi | Subject: RE: Race pace Originally posted by Asalzwed Originally posted by msteiner Originally posted by ligersandtions Marc, does that table exist for those of us who might have VDOT's lower than 40? I'm not Marc, but yes
and for paces: Although that's not showing how the VDOT related to IM/HIM pacing though. Which I find really cool! Doh! You're right. I'll get back on my bike now... |
2014-04-03 5:29 PM in reply to: msteiner |
Veteran 2842 Austin, Texas | Subject: RE: Race pace I need to geek ups on VDOT, for sure. Quick question - does the number depend at all on weight, or pace without regard to BMI? Thanks. Matt |
2014-04-03 5:53 PM in reply to: 0 |
Seattle | Subject: RE: Race pace Originally posted by mcmanusclan5 I need to geek ups on VDOT, for sure. Quick question - does the number depend at all on weight, or pace without regard to BMI? Thanks. Matt VDOT = pseudo VO2Max and is determined by the result of a recent competition (so a race done at race pace or "all out") then that effort can determine other equivalent efforts at different distances and training paces (much like Mcmillan.)
Read Daniels Running Formula thank me later
Oh and no, it's not gender/age/weight graded. Edited by Asalzwed 2014-04-03 6:07 PM |
|
2014-04-03 6:18 PM in reply to: mcmanusclan5 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Race pace Originally posted by mcmanusclan5 I need to geek ups on VDOT, for sure. Quick question - does the number depend at all on weight, or pace without regard to BMI? Thanks. Matt If you want to really geek it up, you can figure out what CSS on the swim W/kg on the bike VDOT on the run is required to KQ. You can get pretty close..... |
2014-04-03 8:18 PM in reply to: marcag |
1055 | Subject: RE: Race pace I feel like that chart assumes a rather high miles per week base and quite a bit of muscular endurance that many triathletes just won't have since we split our time three ways. I can run a 19 min 5k, but there is no way I'm running a sub 40 10k and my best marry is 3:27 which is nearly 23 minutes slower than the chart suggests I am capable of. |
2014-04-03 8:36 PM in reply to: ziggie204 |
Veteran 2842 Austin, Texas | Subject: RE: Race pace Originally posted by ziggie204 I feel like that chart assumes a rather high miles per week base and quite a bit of muscular endurance that many triathletes just won't have since we split our time three ways. I can run a 19 min 5k, but there is no way I'm running a sub 40 10k and my best marry is 3:27 which is nearly 23 minutes slower than the chart suggests I am capable of. Very good point - I think this is true of many of the running predictors (they assume muscular endurance fitting for any and every distance). However, most of them will state that using, for instance, a 5k to predict a HM requires that the person be equivalently trained for the longer distance (McMillan says almost exactly that), so they give fair warning. I think you're spot on with the muscular endurance bit, although that is true of anyone - not just triathletes (we just have a good excuse - or two!). It was true of me last season for a couple HM's and also my first HIM, as I didn't have as big a base running. This year, my "short" distance paces (5k, 10k are definitely endurance events, but you know what I mean) are about the same as last year, but I've been able to hold my predicted HM pace longer - and it's now close to what was predicted last year. We'll see about what that means in a tri... Wouldn't hold for a full mary for me unless I did a lot more mileage, but that's why all these predictors should be taken with a grain of salt. What I REALLY like about the VDOT chart that Marc posted is that you can use a HM race and see a prediction for a HM tri (or other equivalent distances). It answers an orthogonal - and more interesting to triathletes, of course - question to "How fast can I run a HM based on my fastest mile" and the first time I'd seen it presented that way/that well. Although, in the end, muscular endurance in the other sports will also matter - as does race strategy and execution - so grains of salt probably still advised (if you overcook the bike, you're not going to see a time within 4 points or dots or whatever of your stand alone VDOT!). Good stuff! Matt PS - Marc and Salty, I'll thank you now. I really have to read up (and am thinking about the fools errand of calculating those KQ numbers - not for use so much as for fun to see!). |
2014-04-04 6:16 AM in reply to: ziggie204 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Race pace Originally posted by ziggie204 I feel like that chart assumes a rather high miles per week base and quite a bit of muscular endurance that many triathletes just won't have since we split our time three ways. I can run a 19 min 5k, but there is no way I'm running a sub 40 10k and my best marry is 3:27 which is nearly 23 minutes slower than the chart suggests I am capable of. You are correct, and to quote myself Originally posted by marcag If you are properly trained and you pace the bike properly, you should be able to hit these numbers Properly trained and proper bike pacing are two huge discussions in themselves. Properly trained is a difficult thing to quantify. There is one online coaching vendor has described the concept of "critical volume", the volume you need to achieve for each of the 3 tri sports. It works out to about 14-15 hours at peek for a HIM, which I agree many people do not have time to hit so you have to make compromises. I believe they claim you need to hit about 30mpw on the run for HIM. I believe quantifying a proper load is more complex than that but i do agree with your point that you cannot predict a HIM run based on a 5k performance. |
2014-04-04 10:43 AM in reply to: marcag |
Veteran 2842 Austin, Texas | Subject: RE: Race pace Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by ziggie204 I feel like that chart assumes a rather high miles per week base and quite a bit of muscular endurance that many triathletes just won't have since we split our time three ways. I can run a 19 min 5k, but there is no way I'm running a sub 40 10k and my best marry is 3:27 which is nearly 23 minutes slower than the chart suggests I am capable of. You are correct, and to quote myself Originally posted by marcag If you are properly trained and you pace the bike properly, you should be able to hit these numbers Properly trained and proper bike pacing are two huge discussions in themselves. Properly trained is a difficult thing to quantify. There is one online coaching vendor has described the concept of "critical volume", the volume you need to achieve for each of the 3 tri sports. It works out to about 14-15 hours at peek for a HIM, which I agree many people do not have time to hit so you have to make compromises. I believe they claim you need to hit about 30mpw on the run for HIM. I believe quantifying a proper load is more complex than that but i do agree with your point that you cannot predict a HIM run based on a 5k performance. Out of curiosity, do you know the critical volume numbers they predict for the other two offhand? I think I'm there on the run, and likely close on the swim (if I had to guess), but I'd predict way off on the bike. Just wondering (if it's not too much of a hi-jack!). Thanks Matt |
|
2014-04-04 11:21 AM in reply to: mcmanusclan5 |
Master 10208 Northern IL | Subject: RE: Race pace Originally posted by mcmanusclan5 Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by ziggie204 I feel like that chart assumes a rather high miles per week base and quite a bit of muscular endurance that many triathletes just won't have since we split our time three ways. I can run a 19 min 5k, but there is no way I'm running a sub 40 10k and my best marry is 3:27 which is nearly 23 minutes slower than the chart suggests I am capable of. You are correct, and to quote myself Originally posted by marcag If you are properly trained and you pace the bike properly, you should be able to hit these numbers Properly trained and proper bike pacing are two huge discussions in themselves. Properly trained is a difficult thing to quantify. There is one online coaching vendor has described the concept of "critical volume", the volume you need to achieve for each of the 3 tri sports. It works out to about 14-15 hours at peek for a HIM, which I agree many people do not have time to hit so you have to make compromises. I believe they claim you need to hit about 30mpw on the run for HIM. I believe quantifying a proper load is more complex than that but i do agree with your point that you cannot predict a HIM run based on a 5k performance. Out of curiosity, do you know the critical volume numbers they predict for the other two offhand? I think I'm there on the run, and likely close on the swim (if I had to guess), but I'd predict way off on the bike. Just wondering (if it's not too much of a hi-jack!). Thanks Matt Look here. It's also important to understand what this info is and is not. It's this guy's idea of how much volume is needed to attain a certain speed curve. Kind of like the marathon potential based off of 5k or 10k times. Why did it fall short? Because the run volume may not have been enough to match up with what Daniels or McMillan think is an ideal decay of pace as the distance increases. This is NOT to say that these are the volumes people should shoot for in all situations. Short course pros easily blow the doors off this as they go way over what's needed for their events. They want to go as fast as possible, so do much more than what this says is necessary for the durability aspect. |