Why are people trying to knock minutes off their PBs.

21 to 27 of 27 messages
27/09/2012 at 16:30

Not without a quick pharmaceutical stop halfway round anyway.

27/09/2012 at 16:35
skotty wrote (see)

i thought his times were pretty good?

i wouldn't expect him to be straight in there challenging the kenyans at the head of the field.

All relative I suppose.  He certainly got his times down to what would be considered pretty impressive in layman's terms, but I remember all the crap some people were spouting when he first announced his intention to run a marathon.  Oh, his VO2 max is 80-something ridiculous, therefore according to my chart he should be running about 2:01.  Sort of ignoring the fact that he weighed about 13 stone at the time and may not have managed to get 56,032 running miles in his legs.

27/09/2012 at 17:52
PhilPub wrote (see)

Are there WAVA tables for fat bastards?  2:43:52 at 12st 2lbs must be up there, surely?

How on earth could anyone who is THAT heavy do a 2:43  Surely 95%+

I'm a new, novice runner and recently entered the world of running events. Initially its very reasonable to target chunks off your PB's being on a steep curve of improvement. In addition  a lot of the published / online  plans would also encourage this - as a novice you tend to rely on them. I picked up a 1:45 plan not knowing how I would fair, did better, picked up a 1:30plan ...  Now I tend to think and plan myself, so wouldn't immediately plan on a 1:20

At some point you have to accept that smaller targets are going to be the norm. My half marathon is down to 1 or 2 mins improvement, my marathon hoping for a 10min improvement if I had a perfect day. Having more experience with the HM, I probably have thought through a realistic target in a way I'm not capable of with the marathon. 

Edited: 27/09/2012 at 17:53
27/09/2012 at 18:07
PhilPub wrote (see)
skotty wrote (see)

i thought his times were pretty good?

i wouldn't expect him to be straight in there challenging the kenyans at the head of the field.

All relative I suppose.  He certainly got his times down to what would be considered pretty impressive in layman's terms, but I remember all the crap some people were spouting when he first announced his intention to run a marathon.  Oh, his VO2 max is 80-something ridiculous, therefore according to my chart he should be running about 2:01.  Sort of ignoring the fact that he weighed about 13 stone at the time and may not have managed to get 56,032 running miles in his legs.

I remember that thread. Idiots reckoning that he was capable of matching the top in the world, at a completely different sport, one that he'd hardly had any experience of.

His times showed how bonkers that was.

27/09/2012 at 22:10
skotty wrote (see)

i thought his times were pretty good?

i wouldn't expect him to be straight in there challenging the kenyans at the head of the field.

Just to echo what a few others have said. Yes his times would be considered excellent for an intermediate club level runner. But Armstrong was clearly a supreme world class athlete with a ridiculous VO2 max and a scarily low resting heart beat.

His times clearly indicate that cycling fitness doesn't quite transfer that well to running....not in an elite sense at least.

27/09/2012 at 22:31
Chasing times is just an easy way for others to relate to how you are doing and a measure of your success. Obviously age graded would be better but a lot of people don't understand it. There are also some times that are accepted as being "good" eg GFA for London or qualifying for Boston, sub 40 10k, sub 1:30 HM - next level would be sub 3, 35 min, 1:20 etc etc
Blisters    pirate
28/09/2012 at 01:39

JN2 funny that, I don’t actually ascribe to the bigger frame argument. Taller, yes, bigger, no. I did my 2x sub 3’s at age 48. I was beaten by 2 seconds by James Cracknell who was carrying an extra 2” in height and 3 stone.

 

Millsy, well spotted on the training/speed relationship. Have you also spotted the less closely linked relationship? The older you get, the easier you get broken?

 

Phil Pub I’m totally with you there, with a minor exception. Only a runner would call a six footer at 12 stone 2lb a fat bastard!

 

EGGY, 5 hours on the feet is a bliddy long time and huge respect for anyone who does that. Be strong. You may not believe it but taking 15 minutes off your current marathon time is possible. And then the next 15. One colleague was a definite back of the pack and she’s run over 100 marathons now. I helped her run a pb4:30I think, but I’ll never be in her league, despite my focus on speed. Horses for courses.

 

Lance? He targeted Zero to sub 3 in one attempt. He needed two goes if I recall. He acknowledged that it was a tough challenge. Getting into the sub 3 club certainly gets a cachet with other “athletes”. I remain impressed with J Cracknell, Nell McAndrew and Tony Audenshaw. People who are allocated “celeb” stataus, yet just get on with proper training and JFDI. Their pbs speak volumes. A pleasure to be near you guys.


We'd love you to add a comment! Please login or take half a minute to register as a free member
21 to 27 of 27 messages
Previously bookmarked threads are now visible in "Followed Threads". You can also manage notifications on these threads from the "Forum Settings" section of your profile settings page to prevent being sent an email when a reply is made.
Forum Jump  

RW Forums