General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Negative splits ... ad nauseum

Started by steve common · · Last activity · 3 posts · 271 views

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
15 November 2004
Last activity
16 November 2004
Original author
steve common
Posts
3
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
271
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–3 of 3
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. I made a silly mistake in being astonished at the few negative splits in
    the NYM field. Seems this is not unusual at all.

    I just loaded the whole of the 2002 La Rochelle marathon results into
    OpenOffice. The conditions were in the high 60s (end of November) by the
    time I arrived and probably got hotter afterwards, race is flat and is
    two identical loops in town (at seaside, no skyscrapers).

    For 4770 finishers who had HM splits recorded :

    winning time 2h17 (1'17" neg split)
    last arrival 5h17
    median 3h44 (av 3h45)

    Under 2h30 21 (cumulative)
    2h45 73
    3h00 335
    3h15 803
    3h30 1599
    4h00 3317
    4h30 4327

    Exactly even splits 1 (we can thus conclude that even splits is
    a very poor race strategy, teehee :-D

    True neg splits 414
    Less than 1 mins positive 513 (includes neg splits)
    Less than 2 mins positive 702
    Less than 3 mins positive 908
    Less than 4 mins positive 1113

    av split 12:10
    median split 9:44

    In the first 300, 17 negative splits (cf NYM=6), some big positives too
    (up to 24'😉. The absolute best pacing was done by the runner at the
    201st place, in 2:55:09 official, 2:55:00 chip <bfg>

    Of course none of this proves anything but it kept me occupied :-)

  2. steve common said:

    I made a silly mistake in being astonished at the few negative splits in
    the NYM field. Seems this is not unusual at all.

    Both races had temps over 60, this may have been a factor. I bet most people
    would still run positive even under ideal conditions though. My guess would
    be that most people overestimate their ability, and also underestimate how much
    the heat will slow them down. I suspect that among runners who have a big time
    goal in mind, there's even a denial response to warm weather -- I know that
    there were some who stubbornly started Boston last year (85F) at their (already
    ambitious) goal pace.

    Cheers,
    --
    Donovan Rebbechi
    http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

  3. "steve common" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Of course none of this proves anything but it kept me occupied :-)

    Steve, if I didn't know you better I'd be telling you to get a life :-).

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.