a bit of advice please
Doner Kebab wrote (see)
meface - i understand what you say about the runners leg trying to be biking legs and before i got a bike i always thought of myself as a runner (of sorts) after analysing my results from various distances i always seem to rank higher on my bike split than my run split in my AG. With this info, coupled with what you said, would you say i had the potential to improve my biking more than my running. I really cant seem to push the bike too hard but yet get pretty good reults. If you like to look at data i can send or post my latest duathlon garmin data
In general we have the most improvements to be made in the one we have the least experience of. However we are talking %ages of improvement. So 5% improvement of swim is worth a lot less than 5% improvement of bike.
So yes in theory most gains to be made on the bike. However bigger, stronger chaps seem to be better able to put in a good bike leg. I presume because we have naturally stronger legs, and the greater mass is borne by the bike so mass isn't the issue it is on the run.
Given your stated times above 6:15 for bike and 5:30 for mara then I would suggest that the improvements for you are still on the run. A 25% improvement on the bike would have you up with the leaders at around 4:30. However a 25% improvement on the run would still only have you around the 4 hour marathon mark which would be well down in the Pro rankings!
But the run depends on a good efficient bike leg. It isn't all about the bike leg time. I did 6:02 at Regensburg and could have gone faster. My run was 4:50 with a standalone at 4:07 I was 43 minutes slower which is OK - indications are 20-30minutes slower for good runners - which I am not. You need to finish the bike leg ready for the run not ready for the pub.
OK if helps
Standalone Marathon PB 4:07:55
I did the following for the Cowman Half Ironman
Swim 00:37:58T1: 00:03:28Bike 02:48:22T2: 00:01:51Run 01:55:30
and for the Regensburg IM
Swim 01:15:16 T1: 00:08:33Bike 06:02:23 T2: 00:05:44 Run 04:50:25
I have used this for predctions and it has been pretty accurate for olympic to half ironman and also ironman apart from the run. But my run at Ironman was run two laps and then a lot more walking in the 2nd two laps
I'm a novice compared to the guys above, but you and I did Vit as a first half last year and did it in a similar time, and I also did Outlaw as my first full distance last year, so the splits might be interesting.
Vit splits were;
Swim: 00:39.45Bike: 2:43.03Run: 2:03.41Total: 5:31.59
Outlaw splits were;
Swim: 1:18Bike: 6:15Run: 4:55Total: 12:44
So my avge speed on the bike was about 15% slower at Outlaw than Vit and my run was about 20% slower at Outlaw than Vit. Its fair to say my training was light compared to yours though, and I'd never run longer than 18 miles before Outlaw, so I died on my arse at 20 miles or so, whereas you might not. You must be good for sub 12:30, mate
Personally I think it's a very decent time STIL and that is said without any patronising tones.
My HM PB is just under 1.50 and I want to get that to 1:40 by next year. I'm not sure how close I'll get before I peak (running less than a year and at 50 years old I still haven't peaked......Back of the net! lol).
I read of times in terms of 'respectability' and I'm sure 1.55 fits that bill. As long as I'm coming in with the people who actually run start to finish then I'll always be happy.
The racing snakes are a different species of human so no comparison can be made
mmmm.....not sure that the bike ride is suffered so much as delivers an excellent warm up. Last year I set 10k PB at Windsor Oly and a HM 'pace' PB at Swashbuckler! (Swash is 14m run so time adjusted to 13.1 it would have been a PB).
I have managed to beat both since in standalone events. I suppose I should pick easier running courses!
**awaits DKs new predictions**
thanks STIL - we were so close - 3 minutes and a bit of change in it. Like you my swim variable is almost nothing once i get over 800m, recently did 200 lengths continuous and at the halfway split there was 45 seconds in it. So it may have taken me a while but in the swim i am consistent. thats the good bit.
novice or not your time is perfectly acceptable - you did a full iron just before you did the vit then? wasnt the outlaw later last year or something. Do you think your quicker vit split was down to your training from the outlaw or just the shorter distance? When i was enquiring about stand alone mara times someone said that if you trained properly to complete the distance you should nt have trouble completing after the bike keg on the day. I think this is what Meface is implying - I too have ran better off the bike than a stand alone run, my running cadence seems to be higher without the concentrated effort i sometimes have to apply to get up to the 84+ mark.
After the vit 2011 i took a few weeks to get some running in and did my first mara - i never ran over 19 mile but didnt find the run bad at all really. mind you i did put in my best half mara time in the week before that 1.46 and a bit.
Meface - the race predictor is an evil program - i put my vit results in and in return it made my stomach churn - honestly, im never going to get to the target it suggests but for fun it was .....11:55. Dont think its really a goer as it only gives me 10 minutes degradation on the run, as im so close to STIL i think he is very close and maybe with the extra training I'll grab a 12:30
Visit the official Triathlete's World page
Follow Triathlete's World on Twitter
Other Natmag-Rodale Sites
About Triathlete's World