MLC writes "I'll tell by how much you might lower your HalfM time if you lose 25 pounds."

Twenty five pounds! Dear me! (Mon Dieu!).

Seriously (boy, the thought of losing 25 pounds rattled me!) how can an 'equation' (which, by definition, is pure number, no experience) come up with a possible race result if, for example, you were to lose X pounds? It's my experience that you'll cut your chrono if you train to run faster (and you WILL lose weight in the process) and not by any other rmeans (although, good days happen!).

Even more, seriously, the time on the clock is not the important factor; satisfaction is (or, as Bo Didley said it, "it's not the ship, honey, it's the waves...").

Hi Coureur,

Yep, I said it. Will power and enthusiasm can only take you so far. For someone endowed with natural ability like yourself, it provides the foundation for success. Add on top of that passion, diet (I read you Chemistry workshop of formula you imbibe) along with a strict training program (Mr. I have to do hill repeats so I can't meet you guys at Hurley's :P and you have a recipe for success. Place in the oven at 350 F and presto!

If only we could all be like yourself

Plodding along

TB

------------------
Running to eat guilt free

Hi everyone,

SInce numbers are de rigeur for today's thread I came across this site and was wondering what your thoughts were about it's accuracy:

http://mcmillanrunning.com/Running%20University/Article%201/calculator3.htm[/URL" target="_blank">

Lemme know,

TB

------------------
Running to eat guilt free

In recent articles they say that the runners high isn't true and I have a tendency to beleive what they say! But I have to admit that today I felt something. Since I started running seriously I never had to stop for so long (35 days in total!). I finally started back, I did a 6km in 30min. It felt so great, not as good as sex but real close ! So I guess that the runners high is only a perception that can't be prooven physicaly! The run was confortable, the only down side was that my heartrate was a bit high for the pace and distance. I guess it's going to take a few trainings before it comes back to normal!

------------------
"The courage is not to finish, the miracle is to have the courage to start". John Bingham

Hi Omni,

Congratulations on what is literally the first step of a thousand steps. You'll be back in top form in no time flat. Looking forward to running with you.

TB

quote:<HR>Originally posted by Turtleboy:

http://mcmillanrunning.com/Running%20University/Article%201/calculator3.htm[/URL" target="_blank">

[/B]<HR>

Thanks for this link !
It's great to have an overview of what my half marathon time could be.

------------------
Only those who risk going too far can possibly find out how far they can go

TB: The MacMillan calculator is a classic chart that is amazingly accurate, provided you've trained properly for the requisite distance. That means that you've done the speed work necessary for the shorter distances (3-10 K), or that you've done the mileage necessary for the longer distances. Otherwise, you'll fall short of the times. It is a fascinating indicator of talent (at specific distances), training likes\dislikes, and potential. A great tool for "weak-spot" training.

Omni: regardless of whether you call it "runner's high", "being in the zone", or anything else, it does exist. It's difficult to measure because of how unpredictable it is and how hard it is to reproduce "on-demand", but it's there. A combination of being on a good\great day in terms of performance, an inspiring environment, proper distance, and just the right intensity.

For the other's concerned about weight... The idea isn't about losing 25 lbs or more. Rather, it is about potential times, at the same training and effort, if you were at those weights. Fact of the matter is, weight is a critically negative component in running, and this predominant factor becomes even more important as the distances increase. One can no more be a world-class marathon runner at 200 lbs than being a world-class rower at 125 lbs. In the past 45 years, the great British-Australian Derek Clayton has been the only top 10 (world) marathon runner over 135 lbs, and at around 160 lbs, he is considered the best pound-for-pound marathoner in history. And for his incredible training regimen, he also has suffered more injuries and surgeries than most small cities.

While you still have some 190-200 pounders hit 18 minutes in the 5 K, and sub-40 in the 10 K, running performances of heavier athletes, no matter how lean or how in shape, are far from international standards. In fact marathon runners (male) have an almost impossible time running better in minutes than their weight in pounds. For example, a 150 lbs male could run a marathon in 150 minutes (2:30 h), but a 200 lbs male could only aim for a potential best of 200 minutes (3:20 h). A thread I ran last year in CR showed that out of several dozen experienced runners, only one had run faster than his weight (and by barely a couple of minutes).

Imposed limits? Of course, each one of us can do whatever we want with these limits... but there is also a dose of reality to consider, and weight is a huge reality in running. So Chops' little game is a fascinating one to play, in fact, to get a better idea of what we could achieve with our talent and training if our body was different. And it is a much more accurate reflection of how we compare than measuring ourselves to world records without any other consideration.

Have fun...

Mars