General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

undertrained marathon strategy?

Started by Ronald H. Nicho · · Last activity · 56 posts · 2,516 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
7 June 2004
Last activity
12 June 2004
Original author
Ronald H. Nicho
Posts
56
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
2,516
Views / 30 days
0

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

Showing posts 1–20 of 56
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. What's the best strategy for a basically fit but severely
    undertrained runner (say a 10 mi/wk fitness runner) to
    complete a marathon in the best time possible, assuming the
    course time limits allow, and assuming that time-on-feet
    isn't the limiter? (e.g. a hiker who can do multi-day
    backpack trips at altitude, a swing/lindy/ballroom dancer
    who does all day and/or all week dance camps, or someone
    who's job includes spending almost an entire day standing
    and walking, etc.)

    What formula should one use to estimate ones finishing time,
    given only a VO2 max from a fairly short distance, 5k or
    less, plus ones average miles/week fitness running?

    I assume that trying to run the entire marathon will most
    likely result in an injury or DNF for such a low milage
    runner; and that furthermore an even or negative split
    strategy will still result in the best time.

    So would the best strategy be to:

    1) forget running shoes, put on the well-tested hiking boots
    and plan on hiking the whole thing (but without the heavy
    backpack, yeah!).

    2) walk the first 20 or so miles, then discard sweats, and
    try to
    run the last 5k or 10k. (obvious negative split strategy)

    3) walk the first half, then run every other (or 3rd) mile
    of the last half. (perhaps a better negative split
    strategy?)

    4) run every 3rd or 4th or 5th mile from the very beginning.

    5) run N00 meters out of every mile from the very beginning.
    (pseudo-"Gallowalk" strategy?)

    6) or?

    IMHO. YMMV.
    --
    Ron Nicholson rhn AT nicholson DOT com
    nicholson.comrhn #include
    <canonical.disclaimer> // only my own opinions, etc.

  2. Quoted message said:

    What's the best strategy for a basically fit but severely
    undertrained runner (say a 10 mi/wk fitness runner) to
    complete a marathon in the best time possible

    When you run your 10 mi/wk at what pace do you run? In what
    size chunks are your individual runs?

    If you've been doing something like two 5-mile runs a week,
    you can jog a marathon at your usual pace plus, say, 2
    min/mile or thereabouts, I should think. I think you'll get
    more out of the event to try and jog the entire distance, no
    matter how slowly, than to deliberately plan to walk.
    Certainly your results would be more instructive for the
    future that way.

  3. On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 23:12:49 +0000 (UTC), [email hidden] (Ronald

    H. Nicholson Jr.) said:

    What's the best strategy for a basically fit but severely
    undertrained runner (say a 10 mi/wk fitness runner) to
    complete a marathon in the best time possible, assuming the
    course time limits allow, and assuming that time-on-feet
    isn't the limiter?

    [snip]

    Quoted message said:

    So would the best strategy be to:

    [snip]

    Quoted message said:

    5) or?

    6) pick a marathon a year or so from now, train for it
    and run it.

    Quoted message said:

    IMHO. YMMV.

    HTH. HAND.

  4. Ronald H. Nicholson Jr. said:

    What's the best strategy for a basically fit but severely
    undertrained runner (say a 10 mi/wk fitness runner) to
    complete a marathon in the best time possible, assuming
    the course time limits allow, and assuming that time-on-
    feet isn't the limiter? (e.g. a hiker who can do multi-day
    backpack trips at altitude, a swing/lindy/ballroom dancer
    who does all day and/or all week dance camps, or someone
    who's job includes spending almost an entire day standing
    and walking, etc.)

    You didn't say if it was a trail or road marathon. If road
    marathon, then all of your above activities may mean little
    in terms of conditioning your feet to run / walk / crawl
    for 26.2 miles on asphalt - the same motion, again and
    again and again.

    Quoted message said:


    What formula should one use to estimate ones finishing
    time, given only a VO2 max from a fairly short distance,
    5k or less, plus ones average miles/week fitness running?

    ouija board 😉 I'd take your hiking times as the best
    estimators, but it may depend on how many miles you hiked in
    a day. Hopefully, that would be the worst case scenario, but
    if you try to run/walk too fast too early, that may be an
    underestimate.

    Quoted message said:


    I assume that trying to run the entire marathon will most
    likely result in an injury or DNF for such a low milage
    runner; and that furthermore an even or negative split
    strategy will still result in the best time.

    So would the best strategy be to:

    1) forget running shoes, put on the well-tested hiking
    boots and plan on hiking the whole thing (but without
    the heavy backpack, yeah!).

    Depending upon how your feet like running shoes or hiking
    boots on roads / trails, I'd pick the most appropriate foot
    wear. FWIW, I've had some foot problems, where they still
    don't like asphalt at all. For awhile I was hiking up hills
    (3000 ft ones) in hiking boots, then using running shoes to
    hike down (that's what my feet liked at the time). Now,
    after a lot of strengthening exercises, I'm using my running
    shoes for all my hiking (including bushwhacking) and
    running. The place where I was bushwhacking could've been
    the location of an orienteering control, so I was testing
    (while I was actually working).

    Quoted message said:


    2) walk the first 20 or so miles, then discard sweats, and
    try to
    run the last 5k or 10k. (obvious negative split
    strategy)

    3) walk the first half, then run every other (or 3rd) mile
    of the last half. (perhaps a better negative split
    strategy?)

    3) run every 3rd or 4th or 5th mile from the very
    beginning.

    3) run N00 meters out of every mile from the very
    beginning. (pseudo-"Gallowalk" strategy?)

    5) or?

    Given those restrictions, I think I would run / walk it in
    running shoes, alternating from the start. Since you seem
    more experienced on trails than roads, I'd probably lean
    toward a trail marathon, since that might be kinder to your
    feet - assuming you have ankle strength. Run / walk for me
    usually involves hills or obstacles that are easier to
    negotiate while walking, so this makes more sense than
    fixed intervals. If doing fixed intervals on a road
    marathon, I'm guessing the alternating from the beginning
    will provide more rest for the different muscles, so
    provide more efficient pace. I would base it on time or
    obstacles, rather than distance simply because it's easier
    to keep track of time than distance. You can drink / eat
    during the walk breaks.

    Even though you do a lot of hiking, don't underestimate the
    difference between roadways - hard, uniform - compared with
    trails - softer (except where rocky), more variation. Also,
    if you go without high-top hiking boots, your ankles might
    need more strengthening for running shoes (but may not make
    a difference on roads).

    But, like Joe Positive, I would have to wonder why you would
    want to do that, esp. if you were doing a road, rather than
    trail, marathon. I know I always hated it when some of the
    trails I backpacked on back east followed roads for awhile.
    I'd train for a couple years before doing a marathon. OTOH,
    if you're supporting someone or a charity or whatever, I can
    understand, but would think it would be beneficial to try to
    increase time on legs while running.

    Dot

    --
    "Success is different things to different people" -Bernd
    Heinrich in Racing the Antelope

  5. "Ronald H. Nicholson Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    What's the best strategy for a basically fit but severely
    undertrained runner (say a 10 mi/wk fitness runner) to
    complete a marathon in the best time possible, assuming
    the course time limits allow, and


    assuming

    Quoted message said:

    that time-on-feet isn't the limiter?

    Motivation for this? Need a shirt? Find one that encourages
    walkers which would most likely be a fund raiser and have a
    nice walk and likely have people with the same abilities
    and company.

    Better yet find a 12 hour race and move forward until you
    hit 26.2 and quit. This type of event is much more sensible
    than walking a marathon.

    Quoted message said:

    What formula should one use to estimate ones finishing
    time, given only a VO2 max from a fairly short distance,
    5k or less, plus ones average miles/week fitness running?

    Formula? Find the one with the longest/slowest clock.

    Quoted message said:

    1) forget running shoes, put on the well-tested hiking
    boots and plan on hiking the whole thing (but without
    the heavy backpack, yeah!).

    Ask your feet.

    Quoted message said:


    2) walk the first 20 or so miles, then discard sweats, and
    try to
    run the last 5k or 10k. (obvious negative split
    strategy)

    Are the sweats some added variable for this bizarre
    strawman?

    Quoted message said:


    3) walk the first half, then run every other (or 3rd) mile
    of the last half. (perhaps a better negative split
    strategy?)

    3) run every 3rd or 4th or 5th mile from the very
    beginning.

    3) run N00 meters out of every mile from the very
    beginning. (pseudo-"Gallowalk" strategy?)

    5) or?


    Mambo every fourth yard. Ballroom every second. Dance the
    marathon away.

    You wouldn't be trolling us would you?

    -DougF

  6. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Ronald H. Nicholson Jr. said:

    What's the best strategy for a basically fit but severely
    undertrained runner (say a 10 mi/wk fitness runner) to
    complete a marathon in the best time possible, assuming the
    course time limits allow, and assuming that time-on-feet
    isn't the limiter? (e.g. a hiker who can do multi-day
    backpack trips at altitude, a swing/lindy/ballroom dancer
    who does all day and/or all week dance camps, or someone
    who's job includes spending almost an entire day standing
    and walking, etc.)

    What formula should one use to estimate ones finishing
    time, given only a VO2 max from a fairly short distance, 5k
    or less, plus ones average miles/week fitness running?

    VO2 max is irrelevant in this situation. It's of
    questionable value for marathon time prediction, and
    only rises to the level of questionable (from absurd)
    if the training base is adequate. At 10 mpw run as
    'fitness running', the VO2max can't be used to predict
    even a 5k time.

    No other formulae make sense at all either. They all
    assume that you have done decent running training.

    For a severely undertrained runner, I'd say: Don't do it.

    For a well-trained walker/hiker, I'd say to walk/hike it.
    On the basis of no training, but youthful (mid 20's)
    stupidity I walked marathon distance, with a relaxed
    picnic lunch in the park at our turnaround point, in about
    8 hours. Bad shoes, and because it was slower than my pace
    I accumulated some non-meritorious muscle soreness. Bit of
    discomfort that passed in a day or two. But that's all.

    Quoted message said:

    5) or?

    Walk briskly through the first 26 miles, run the last
    385 yards.

    Train to run a marathon next year.

    I'm a big fan of letting people decide their own goals,
    and then helping them figure out how to get there. But I'm
    a bigger fan of not getting injured. Aside from the
    (in)famous Matt Mahoney, 10 mpw is just not enough to
    approach running a marathon without significant
    expectation of injury.

    Two anecdotes: Few years ago a girl (late teens, early
    20's) finished a marathon in 5:30 or so on the basis of
    about 15 mpw (and that may all have been in a single run)
    and 'some' soccer. I know this because she stopped in the
    medical tent I was volunteering at -- at mile 5. I'm
    pretty sure that she didn't have a whole lot of fun over
    the next 21 miles, or the days after. She definitely
    wasn't running well (form) by mile 5.

    Last fall I ran a severely under-prepared marathon. Peak
    weekly mileage was a hair under 30. This is nothing I'd
    ever recommend to anyone else, and having done it, I'll
    never do it again. I did get in 2 20 mile runs, and
    several over 2 hours, and figured, correctly, that the
    long runs would get me to the finish line. But the
    training being that marginal left me in serious threat
    from less than ideal conditions. We got them, so I wound
    up spending the last 10k in seriously unhappy condition.
    (OTOH, I did find that I can walk 10k in under 90 minutes,
    even with a 20 mile 'warmup' running. yay?) Even in my
    case, where I had a much better training base, and a lot
    more experience, it was impossible to estimate ahead of
    time what sort of time I'd be able to do. (I tried, and
    asked the group. Nobody could figure out much except that
    we all agreed it was delusional to use my race times from
    shorter races as predictors.)

    If you want to race for time, you have to train for the race
    you're
    doing. If you're doing 10 mpw, you're not trained for racing
    a marathon.
    If you _must_ 'do' a marathon, screw the time and just cover
    the course.

    --
    Robert Grumbine radix.net~bobg Science faqs and
    amateur activities notes and links. Sagredo (Galileo
    Galilei) "You present these recondite matters with too much
    evidence and ease; this great facility makes them less
    appreciated than they would be had they been presented in a
    more abstruse manner." Two New Sciences

  7. Your training doesn't give you enough information to predict
    what you can
    do.

    If you have exceptional talent, you can run a marathon on 10
    mpw -- my cousin did a 3:45 at LA on 10 mpw at age 30, but
    he ran fast in training, and was a state class wrestler and
    is very strong and mentally tough. I'd bet on him being able
    to run under 2:40 if he got into shape.

    For mortals, I'd suggest a test (although it will mess up
    your 10 mpw!):

    Try to cover 18 miles in some pattern of walk/jog, e.g., 5
    on, 5 off. If you can do it, I'd bet on you completing the
    marathon at a slightly slower average pace. If you survive
    this workout, you'll also be better prepared to complete
    the big one.

    -- Dan

    "Ronald H. Nicholson Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote in
    message "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    What's the best strategy for a basically fit but severely
    undertrained runner (say a 10 mi/wk fitness runner) to
    complete a marathon in the best time possible, assuming
    the course time limits allow, and assuming that time-on-
    feet isn't the limiter? (e.g. a hiker who can do multi-day
    backpack trips at altitude, a swing/lindy/ballroom dancer
    who does all day and/or all week dance camps, or someone
    who's job includes spending almost an entire day standing
    and walking, etc.)

    What formula should one use to estimate ones finishing
    time, given only a VO2 max from a fairly short distance,
    5k or less, plus ones average miles/week fitness running?

    I assume that trying to run the entire marathon will most
    likely result in an injury or DNF for such a low milage
    runner; and that furthermore an even or negative split
    strategy will still result in the best time.

    So would the best strategy be to:

    1) forget running shoes, put on the well-tested hiking
    boots and plan on hiking the whole thing (but without
    the heavy backpack, yeah!).

    2) walk the first 20 or so miles, then discard sweats, and
    try to
    run the last 5k or 10k. (obvious negative split
    strategy)

    3) walk the first half, then run every other (or 3rd) mile
    of the last half. (perhaps a better negative split
    strategy?)

    3) run every 3rd or 4th or 5th mile from the very
    beginning.

    3) run N00 meters out of every mile from the very
    beginning. (pseudo-"Gallowalk" strategy?)

    5) or?

    IMHO. YMMV.
    --
    Ron Nicholson rhn AT nicholson DOT com
    nicholson.comrhn #include
    <canonical.disclaimer> // only my own opinions, etc.

  8. In article <[email hidden]>,

    joe positive said:

    6) pick a marathon a year or so from now, train for it and
    run it.

    A) The goal is to complete a marathon in the best
    possible time and in accordance with the official
    rules, not to run one.

    B) The rules for most marathons (even the Olympics AFAIK) do
    not require that one run the entire distance.

    C) I have yet to see a 10 mi/wk training plan suitable for
    running an entire marathon safely.

    IMHO. YMMV.
    --
    Ron Nicholson rhn AT nicholson DOT com
    nicholson.comrhn #include
    <canonical.disclaimer> // only my own opinions, etc.

  9. In article <[email hidden]>,

    TopCounsel said:
    Quoted message said:

    What's the best strategy for a basically fit but severely
    undertrained runner (say a 10 mi/wk fitness runner) to
    complete a marathon in the best time possible

    If you've been doing something like two 5-mile runs a week,
    you can jog a marathon at your usual pace plus, say, 2
    min/mile or thereabouts, I should think. I think you'll get
    more out of the event to try and jog the entire distance,
    no matter how slowly, than to deliberately plan to walk.

    Does anyone here agree with this??? This sounds more like a
    strategy guaranteed to cause the participant to blow up
    somewhere after running around 10 or 12 miles and perhaps
    barely make it walking to the halfway point.

    I was thinking more in the other direction: e.g. the small
    amount of running training would allow someone to maybe try
    an average pace 1 or 2
    min/mile faster than their long distance walking speed by
    mixing in short segments of running. (again, assuming
    that time-on-feet isn't the limitation).

    IMHO. YMMV.
    --
    Ron Nicholson rhn AT nicholson DOT com
    nicholson.comrhn #include
    <canonical.disclaimer> // only my own opinions, etc.

  10. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Robert Grumbine said:

    In article <[email hidden]>, Ronald H.

    Nicholson Jr. said:

    What's the best strategy for a basically fit but severely
    undertrained runner (say a 10 mi/wk fitness runner) to
    complete a marathon in the best time possible, assuming
    the course time limits allow, and assuming that time-on-
    feet isn't the limiter?

    Quoted message said:

    VO2 max is irrelevant in this situation.

    Sounds reasonable.

    Quoted message said:

    For a well-trained walker/hiker, I'd say to walk/hike it.
    On the basis of no training, but youthful (mid 20's)
    stupidity I walked marathon distance, with a relaxed
    picnic lunch in the park at our turnaround point, in
    about 8 hours.

    Thanks. An actual data point.

    Quoted message said:

    ... so I wound up spending the last 10k in seriously
    unhappy condition. (OTOH, I did find that I can walk 10k
    in under 90 minutes, even with a 20 mile 'warmup'
    running. yay?)

    Would you have been happier if you planned in advance and
    did the 10k (or longer) walk before the 20 mile
    "cooldown" run?

    IMHO. YMMV.
    --
    Ron Nicholson rhn AT nicholson DOT com
    nicholson.comrhn #include
    <canonical.disclaimer> // only my own opinions, etc.

  11. Ronald H. Nicholson Jr. said:

    In article <[email hidden]>,

    joe positive said:

    6) pick a marathon a year or so from now, train for it and
    run it.

    A) The goal is to complete a marathon in the best possible
    time and in accordance with the official rules, not to
    run one.

    One of the rules is closing time of the course. Many are in
    the 5-6hour range. On 10miles per week, and no other
    information, I would not be surprised the runner finishing
    in 8hours or more. Good reason to suggest more training and
    running it NEXT year.

    Quoted message said:


    B) The rules for most marathons (even the Olympics AFAIK)
    do not require that one run the entire distance.

    So if the runner is really determnined to try, I'd agree
    that a run/walk approach is better.

    Quoted message said:


    C) I have yet to see a 10 mi/wk training plan suitable for
    running an entire marathon safely.

    You got that right!

    Quoted message said:

    IMHO. YMMV.

    --
    Ed Prochak running faqs.orgrunning faq
    netiquette psg.comemily.html
    --
    "Two roads diverged in a wood and I
    I took the one less travelled by
    and that has made all the difference."
    robert frost

  12. On Sat, 5 Jun 2004 01:22:16 +0000 (UTC), [email hidden] (Ronald

    H. Nicholson Jr.) said:

    In article <[email hidden]>,

    joe positive said:

    6) pick a marathon a year or so from now, train for it and
    run it.

    A) The goal is to complete a marathon in the best possible
    time and in accordance with the official rules, not to
    run one.

    Why? Despite the semi-snarkiness of my original post
    (shoulda put a smiley there, I know), I'm not trying to rag
    on you but am genuinely curious why someone would want to
    "go" (somehow - walking/jogging/running/clomping in hiking
    boots) 26.2 miles in a situation where just about everyone
    else is trying to run that distance as best they can. Is it
    because the particular race has sentimental value? Are you
    "going" in order to pace or support someone who has trained
    for the race and is trying to run it in a certain time? Are
    you just trying to see if you can complete a marathon race
    any way you can before they close the course? I just can't
    imagine a worse way to spend 7 or 8 hours (in my humble
    opinion; your mileage may vary).

  13. Ronald H. Nicholson Jr. said:

    In article <[email hidden]>,

    TopCounsel said:
    Quoted message said:

    What's the best strategy for a basically fit but severely
    undertrained runner (say a 10 mi/wk fitness runner) to
    complete a marathon in the best time possible

    If you've been doing something like two 5-mile runs a
    week, you can jog a marathon at your usual pace plus, say,
    2 min/mile or thereabouts, I should think. I think you'll
    get more out of the event to try and jog the entire
    distance, no matter how slowly, than to deliberately plan
    to walk.

    Does anyone here agree with this??? This sounds more like
    a strategy guaranteed to cause the participant to blow up
    somewhere after running around 10 or 12 miles and perhaps
    barely make it walking to the halfway point.

    Depends on who the participant is. I wouldn't recommend
    testing this theory, though there are certainly some who
    would pass such a test.

    Cheers,
    --
    Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflord

  14. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Ronald H. Nicholson Jr. said:

    In article <[email hidden]>, Robert

    Grumbine said:

    In article <[email hidden]>, Ronald H.

    Nicholson Jr. said:

    What's the best strategy for a basically fit but severely
    undertrained runner (say a 10 mi/wk fitness runner) to
    complete a marathon in the best time possible, assuming
    the course time limits allow, and assuming that time-on-
    feet isn't the limiter?

    Quoted message said:

    VO2 max is irrelevant in this situation.

    Sounds reasonable.

    Quoted message said:

    For a well-trained walker/hiker, I'd say to walk/hike
    it. On the basis of no training, but youthful (mid 20's)
    stupidity I walked marathon distance, with a relaxed
    picnic lunch in the park at our turnaround point, in
    about 8 hours.

    Thanks. An actual data point.

    Not really. Or at least, not a _useful_ data point. It's
    what happened that day, on my 'training', and
    circumstances, with my particular talents and weaknesses.
    You're not me.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    ... so I wound up spending the last 10k in seriously
    unhappy condition. (OTOH, I did find that I can walk 10k
    in under 90 minutes, even with a 20 mile 'warmup'
    running. yay?)

    Would you have been happier if you planned in advance and
    did the 10k (or longer) walk before the 20 mile
    "cooldown" run?

    No. The only solution, and the one I'd have taken if
    I'd known then what I know now, is to not do an
    undertrained marathon.

    Apparently you're going to do (or at least start) this
    marathon come hell or high water. That's your call. Given
    that you don't have the training for one, nobody can make
    any sort of prediction that's of any use for any purpose.
    The range is anything from
    2:45, finishing strong, to DNF with serious knee and hip
    problems, hospitalization for hypo- or hypernatremia, and
    permanent skeletal and neurological damage. The odds favor
    being closer to the latter than the former. The more
    obstinately you pursue a time for the marathon on your non-
    training, the more likely the latter becomes.
    --
    Robert Grumbine radix.net~bobg Science faqs and
    amateur activities notes and links. Sagredo (Galileo
    Galilei) "You present these recondite matters with too much
    evidence and ease; this great facility makes them less
    appreciated than they would be had they been presented in a
    more abstruse manner." Two New Sciences

  15. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Ed Prochak said:
    Ronald H. Nicholson Jr. said:

    A) The goal is to complete a marathon in the best
    possible time and in accordance with the official
    rules, not to run one.

    One of the rules is closing time of the course. Many are in
    the 5-6hour range. On 10miles per week, and no other
    information, I would not be surprised the runner finishing
    in 8hours or more.

    There are several marathons listed with 7, 8 and even 10
    hour course limits.

    If 10 miles/week of actual running might be sufficient for
    an 8 hour marathon course limit, how many average miles/week
    of running would be the minimum to finish safely given a 5
    or 7 hour course limit? (again, assuming that time-on-feet
    is not a problem).

    IMHO. YMMV.
    --
    Ron Nicholson rhn AT nicholson DOT com
    nicholson.comrhn #include
    <canonical.disclaimer> // only my own opinions, etc.

  16. In article <[email hidden]>,

    joe positive said:
    Quoted message said:

    A) The goal is to complete a marathon in the best possible
    time and in accordance with the official rules, not to
    run one.

    Why? Despite the semi-snarkiness of my original post
    (shoulda put a smiley there, I know), I'm not trying to rag
    on you but am genuinely curious why someone would want to
    "go" (somehow - walking/jogging/running/clomping in hiking
    boots) 26.2 miles in a situation where just about everyone
    else is trying to run that distance as best they can.

    It makes far more sense to me to turn this around. Why, for
    a non-NCAA & non-Olympic caliber runner, would anyone want
    to train long & hard, well over what's required for good
    cardio fitness, to run continuously at some pace well off
    the world record (even in age category)?

    Far more people in the San Francisco Bay Area turn out for
    the Bay to Breakers 12k parade (complete with costumed
    walkers, Elvis impersonators, naked joggers, mixed in with a
    few actual world class runners) than show up at any of the
    local flat 5k races where "serious" runners are more likely
    to turn in a fast time. So, around here, there seem to be
    many more people interested in participating or finishing a
    big event than merely running it for time (and the polite
    costumed strollers start in back, out of the way of the
    runners...)

    Some years I walk it, some years I run it. And unlike when I
    go hiking up over some mountain pass for multiple days
    carrying a full pack and bear resistant cannisters to take
    some photos similar to the postcards one could have
    purchased at the ranger station by the parking lot, when one
    finishes Bay-to-Breakers one earns a t-shirt.

    If one finishes a marathon, one gets a t-shirt. :^)

    IMHO. YMMV.
    --
    Ron Nicholson rhn AT nicholson DOT com
    nicholson.comrhn #include
    <canonical.disclaimer> // only my own opinions, etc.

  17. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Donovan Rebbechi said:

    Who cares if it's world record pace or not ? Some of us
    like running fast. Most of us are happy to compete with
    ourselves, and not with the worlds best.

    If you do take it upon yourself to do what it takes to run
    fast (though maybe not wr pace), perhaps you'll understand
    why many of us like to run fast. Until then, we may as well
    amuse ourselves by explaining colors to the blind.

    Exactly. Speedy runners have their motivations. And so do
    slow walkers. And hikers. Neither set of motivations might
    be understood by the other group. If you want to understand,
    talk to people who've done all of the above. Even then,
    you'll find people with all sorts of different motivations.

    Moot point.

    My original question wasn't why. Is was how to... (given
    constraints)

    IMHO. YMMV.
    --
    Ron Nicholson rhn AT nicholson DOT com
    nicholson.comrhn #include
    <canonical.disclaimer> // only my own opinions, etc.

  18. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Robert Grumbine said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    On the basis of no training, but youthful (mid 20's)
    stupidity I walked marathon distance, with a relaxed
    picnic lunch in the park at our turnaround point, in
    about 8 hours.

    Thanks. An actual data point.

    Not really. Or at least, not a _useful_ data point.

    All data points have variance. That doesn't make them
    useless, just statistical in application (once you get
    enough of them).

    How fast could you have walked/run a 10k at that age?

    Invalidly extrapolating from:

    Quoted message said:

    users.erols.compredict
    ing_a_marathon.htm

    Milage Ratio(marathon/10k) 55 mpw 4.9 35 mpw 5.5 15 mpw 6.1
    (estimate) mpw 6.55 (estimate)

    So if you did no no training but were in shape to walk a
    10k at 5 mph:
    6.55 * 75 = 491, which is a bit over an 8 hour marathon.

    IMHO. YMMV.
    --
    Ron Nicholson rhn AT nicholson DOT com
    nicholson.comrhn #include
    <canonical.disclaimer> // only my own opinions, etc.

  19. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Ronald H. Nicholson Jr. said:

    In article <[email hidden]>, Robert

    Grumbine said:
    Quoted message said:

    >On the basis of no training, but youthful (mid 20's)
    >stupidity I walked marathon distance, with a relaxed
    >picnic lunch in the park at our turnaround point, in
    >about 8 hours.

    Thanks. An actual data point.

    Not really. Or at least, not a _useful_ data point.

    All data points have variance. That doesn't make them
    useless, just statistical in application (once you get
    enough of them).

    Dot has addressed this.

    Quoted message said:

    How fast could you have walked/run a 10k at that age?

    Invalidly extrapolating from:

    It's an invalid extrapolation. Doesn't matter what
    your result
    is. GIGO. It's also invalid because I did not cover the
    distance as fast as I could. (Recall that lunch in
    the park.)

    GIGO, for the youngsters, is an old computer term. GIGO =
    Garbage In = Garbage Out.

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    users.erols.compredic
    ting_a_marathon.htm

    Milage Ratio(marathon/10k) 55 mpw 4.9 35 mpw 5.5 15 mpw 6.1
    (estimate) mpw 6.55 (estimate)

    Those aren't estimates. They're numbers you pulled from
    thin air, with no physiological, statistical, or
    experiential justification whatever. You're entitled to
    your delusions, but I do feel honor-bound to point them
    out as you're heading towards causing yourself injury
    based on them.

    Worse, you might snare other innocent people into doing
    egregiously underprepared marathons and injure _them_.

    --
    Robert Grumbine radix.net~bobg Science faqs and
    amateur activities notes and links. Sagredo (Galileo
    Galilei) "You present these recondite matters with too much
    evidence and ease; this great facility makes them less
    appreciated than they would be had they been presented in a
    more abstruse manner." Two New Sciences

  20. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Robert Grumbine said:

    In article <[email hidden]>, Ronald H.

    Nicholson Jr. said:


    Invalidly extrapolating from:

    It's an invalid extrapolation.

    That's what I said. Until we get enough data points (note
    that I used the plural), the hypothesis remains untested.

    IMHO. YMMV.
    --
    Ron Nicholson rhn AT nicholson DOT com
    nicholson.comrhn #include
    <canonical.disclaimer> // only my own opinions, etc.

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.