1:39:44. Apologies to anyone who was treated to my un-British shouty self-congratulating at the finish but the sub-1:40 was only secured via a sizeable negative split and a near-sprinted last mile. Never hurt myself like that before. Felt like the crowd got worse, not better, as I started in the middle of Zone C and was consistently balked on John Reid Road trying to hold a target split that should have been comfortable for people in that zone and further ahead.
Back next year, 10kgs lighter and with a better strategy...
Thanks all. Less than flat out 10 mile last night at 1:40 HM pace has given me the confidence to push on. To be honest I'm still finding the limits of this new pace - gone from 8:20 to 7:40 in 6 weeks - so will probably go out at 1:40 pace and see what happens.
doing GNR. Was really struggling to make headway in training which was mostly 8 - 11 mile hilly trail runs, until last couple of weeks - times have just fallen away. Last weekend a very comfortable 46:15 10k on trail and 9 miles at 7:55 pace on road, today a flat out parkrun at 20:44
I know the 5k pace ought to mean well under 1:40 for a HM but I am 6'2 and have a BMI of 28. Plus prior to running I was a rower so power/lactate tolerance on short efforts has never been an issue. I feel like the standard pace prediction formula assumes a low 20s BMI and high level of aerobic fitness, because that's the typical profile in running.
Should I just be confident and go charging after a 1:37 in 3 weeks time? Or have other s found that being an atypical shape for a runner means a bias towards shorter distances?
next year I might try and fix this by losing some weight...
Slightly worried at getting a zone C race number. Put down 1:45 - would be disappointed to be more than a minute off it - but now worried I will be in the way. Had expected to be in D or E. is it possible/ advisable to tactically shuffle backwards?