How to run a fast marathon!

Yes, this is not a shoe review (obviously). Get over it.

Going into my first marathon last April, I had just come off an injury and a 1:23:27 half marathon so was not confident of running super fast but pretty sure of a sub-3 clocking. Well, the first half went quite smoothly, passing the half way point around 1:28: right on schedule. However, I was already feeling the burn. I tried and failed to stay with someone going backwards as I was but even he was too fast. As the race went on, I kept readjusting my aims: 'Come on, you've missed 2:55 but surely you can do sub-3!', then after a few more miles and another recalculation: 'Oh man, no sub-3, but just get under 3:05 and kill it at London next year' (3:05 is the London Marathon good for age qualifying time). I had to keep stopping to stretch out a spasming hamstring. I might add that stopping is a good way to get spasms and cramp so it is something of a vicious cycle that you might want to avoid. Then after readjusting to 3:10 and 3:15 and realising that that wasn't going to happen it was just a matter of getting to the finish. 3:17:10. I waited for about a month before adding it to Strava to stop people seeing it in their feed. OK, my half marathon was also disappointing and could have warned me not to try for 2:55. It is important to note that the often repeated formula of working out goal race time (t2) from previous race time (t1), goal race distance (d2) and previous race distance (d1) as such:

t2=t1*(d2/d1)^1.06

predicts 2:53:59 marathon from 1:23:27 half marathon.

We'll get onto that formula later. It was often said to me that half marathon to marathon jump is much larger than from 10k to half marathon. In my hubris I rejected it but now fully accept it. The main difference is the training. You can do a quick half marathon off 10k training. My half marathon pb at the time, 1:20:05, was without pacing and a build up race for a 10k. You cannot however, run a fast marathon off half marathon training. This was probably my downfall. For marathon, you really have to put in the miles and the desired training benefit is more about learning to deal with exhaustion rather than anything specific like improve VO2max or lactate threshold. Half marathon training is much more based around speed work.

Coming off that disappointment, I decided to give the marathon a rest and try to run under 80 minutes for the half. I started off training very slowly, with a couple of just easy running weeks. Then slowly mixing in some tempo runs which were very conservatively paced (around 19 minutes for a 5k run). I added in some very intense speed work. It became apparent slowly that I was hitting form so decided I should do a marathon after the half. It's important to have workouts to show you where you're at. It was after two workouts of 5*kilometre on a 5 minute cycles under 3:20 average that I started to realise I was hitting form. I mixed in some marathon training: long runs up to 35 km but more importantly running 6 days a week with perhaps 2 workouts based on marathon or threshold pace. Racing short distances for me is a great training tool. It has 3 major benefits, two of which are pretty unique to racing: 1) It improves you're VO2max (5k race pace is VO2max pace). 2) It makes you accustomed to racing pain. 3) It lets you know where you're fitness is. One of the races I did was a 5 miler in 27:55. This translates to 1:17:30 for the half marathon using the formula. Come half marathon day, I set off at just under 80 minute pace and feel good at 7 miles. Too good. I ran away from the group of 3 I was with almost accidentally, taking the racing line around corners. Anyone who has been in this situation knows it is very hard to slow down to let them catch back up. Anyway, there was a group 100m ahead which we were catching anyway so I decide to chase them. It felt tough but nothing too bad. Looking at the data after, it looks like I gained about a minute ahead of my goal splits over the course of 3 miles. At 10 miles I was over a minute ahead but couldn't breath properly and dropped off the back of the group I'd tried so hard to catch. At 12 miles I was only 13s up. A quick calculation shows that if you keep at the same pace, you'll miss it... Somehow I held on to come in 14s under my goal: 1:19:38.

I then signed up for the Abingdon Marathon, an event which was full up about 9 months ago but luckily I was able to buy a number from an injured runner. Wary of the doubts I had about the marathon predictor I decided to stick to sub 2:56 plan. I had 6 weeks to fit in last minute training. Common wisdom states that you should leave 4 weeks for tapering without a long run (I took long run to mean over 25k). That gave me 2 weeks of hard training. I managed 80km and lots of bike riding in those weeks with a 30k fastish long run and a 35k slowish long run. The taper was filled with lots of marathon pace and threshold pace. Two weeks out I did the Cardiff Half planning to do marathon pace which was what my brother was aiming for (so aiming between 1:27 and 1:28) and ended up being mid 1:26s (I had to beat him) which was not too bad. It was great practice for gels (one at 6 and 12 miles) and a great confidence booster. Come marathon day, I followed my plan: gel at 6, 12, 18 (although I did need some jelly babies at around 21 to keep myself going) and going through half way in 1:28 as before but much more relaxed. I had planned to speed up after half way to get a cushion but ultimately I wasn't feeling it. I did speed up, but it came much later at around 18 miles. I came home in 2:53:50 so a negative split which is not bad. I was convinced that was the fastest I could have done it.

So all well and good except there is still that pesky formula saying I should be running 2:46 based on half marathon. I am not the only one to have a slower than predicted marathon time. I know a 1:20-2:56 guy and a 1:21-2:54 guy. I don't know anyone who is not elite who ran as fast as the predictions say. I read an article after the race here: http://www.fetcheveryone.com/cms-37     which advocates for a power of 1.15 when it comes to half to full conversion instead of 1.06 based off experienced long distance runners' times. There is also an ability factor too (i.e. elites will run relatively better in the marathon than non elites). Interestingly the page predicts my time to be 2:53:45- 5s off!

Adidas Takumi Sen Boost- The World's Best Shoe on Paper? Review

The Adidas Takumi Sen Boost caught my gaze a few months back when it was released alongside the very heavy (323g) and overhyped Ultra Boost. So far, it is the lightest shoe to come out of the Boost range (170g). Unfortunately almost no-one has heard of this potentially brilliant shoe (Except perhaps Alistair Brownlee at Yokohama- see below). Interestingly, no-one at London was wearing them as far as I could see (Kipsang, Kimetto, Mutai, Mutai were all wearing Adios Boost 2).

Alistair Brownlee sports the new Takumi Sen Boost, Gomez has the Ekiden (Japenese theme?)

So, while I think its lack of wearing among the elite marathoners for now might have let it down, I think that Adidas really haven't been pushing this model (certainly compared to the Adios or the Ultra Boost) and that has really made it invisible.

Why haven't I bought it yet? Well, I'm waiting for the price in the UK to come down from £100+ and since this *unpopular* shoe hasn't really been very fluid in pricing terms. However, I am a fan of theory and by my reckoning, this model has all the right stats to suggest it will be a success:

A study by Jason Franz, Corbyn Wierzbinski, and Rodger Kram at the University of Colorado showed that every 100g of running shoe increases VO2 by 1%.

A team at University of Calgary headed by Jay Worobets found that identical shoes apart from midsole (Adidas Boost vs EVA) differed in VO2 by 1% in favour of the Boost on treadmill and ground. The shoe was not given however the mechanical properties of the Boost (globular structure polyurethane) back this up- a running warehouse rep has confirmed the material to have the best 'energy return' of all the midsole materials.

So, we know that shaving 100g off and using Boost EACH give you 1% lower oxygen consumption (about equivalent to 1% performance). What else is there to give this shoe the edge?

When I first use the Adiprene Adios 2 (the pre-boost one) I really liked how stiff it was. Whether this is placebolic nonsense or not I don't know, but I felt that the 'pop' really helped and offset some of that weight (210g). By all accounts, this is also a fairly stiff shoe (as is common with all Adidas shoes really). According to research published in 2006 by Jean-Pierre Roy and Darren Stefanyshyn, a running shoe should be stiff but not so much as a sprint spike (sorry for being fairly numberless with this, but we will use it qualitatively later, you'll see...) so given that this shoe is usually described as 'stiff for a racing flat' (racing flats are usually flexible) you'd think this would fit the bill.

So, given that this is the lightest Boost shoe, how light would you need to make a shoe to give the same performance? Well, since a 100g loss gives the same 1% benefit, we'll go with 70g!!!! The lightest running shoe on the market at the moment is the Wave Universe 5 at 79g which I happen to own and have reviewed: http://runshoereviews.blogspot.com/2014/11/mizuno-wave-universe-5-review.html .

Since the shoe also has good stiffness, all the evidence points to this being the best shoe for short distances, but since it is also a little heavier, they've snuck some extra cushioning in there for those last miles (my calves hated me after a HM in the Universe 5s) and so Adidas markets this as a marathon shoe for faster people so this could be the best shoe for sub-ultra distances all.

Keep an eye out for the full review of the Adidas Takumi Sen Boost when I buy it (come on sportshoes.com, get that price down!) and perhaps sooner a successful life extension of the fragile Mizuno Universe 5s.

It should also be noted they have a 6mm drop- at the lower end of acceptable for fast people in a marathon.

Like, share, comment any questions or request.

Follow me on google+

All the best,

Hart

Boosting of Takumi Sen! - Adidas Takumi Sen 3

As yet, I have not had any Boost material under my feet- This is because I have not purchased any rather expensive and heavy Boost shoes, however I have researched this material online and done some squishing of my friend's Supernova Glide Boosts. It is noticeably more 'squishy' than the Adiprene which was the flagship foam of Adidas before the Boost.

Since I was put off by the weight of the Boost shoes (Adios is the lightest at 8oz- 227g). This would be the heaviest shoe I have used since I started running seriously. I then looked around for Adidas' lightest shoes:

Hagio 2:            6.1 oz (173g) and 17-12 stack

Adios 2:            7.8 oz (221g) and 24-15 stack- I currently own these and plan to use for marathon

Takumi Sen:     6.1 oz (173g) and 25-19 stack

6.1 oz seems like a fairly acceptably light weight. While I don't really like a 6mm or 5mm drop, I could live with it. My preference of these three would be the Takumi Sen since more cushioning for the same weight (as the Hagio) will increase efficiency apparently. However, I would really like that famous 1% oxygen use reduction with Boost. The Hagio seems to have been discontinued so I was really looking forward to a Boosted Takumi Sen- This might even make these shoes less rare as Adidas like to push their Boost shoes.

Shoe

The Takumi Sen 3 has many of the same characteristics as the original:

Stack: 22.5-16.5 =6mm drop
Weight: 6.1 oz (173g)

It also has the Torsion system which is in my Adios 2s and I really think is a great addition to any shoe- It gives a gradually changing stiffness getting stiffer closer to the heel which also is reported to make running more efficient.

Given the cushioning, energy return of the Boost, torsion system and fairly lightweight nature of the shoe, I suspect it could be faster than the Mizuno Universe! I suspect this because during last summer I often found myself using my 175g Adidas XCS4 spikes over the Universe on the track and these didn't have Boost, didn't have a lot of cushioning and are rather low on the market in Adidas terms.

So...

So, I will try to purchase these at some point and do a review- probably at least when people actually start selling them but I will probably wait until my Mizuno Universes resemble sandals with a holey sole. I'm looking forward to the tight forefoot and bouncy feel of all my previous Adidas shoes. I might even push them to a marathon if they feel soft enough.

Some negatives?

While I predict these will be great shoes, I would ideally like a rand of some sort to stop these popping out at the sides like all my 'dead' have (cause of death) because I'm sure that like the Adios, the sole will hold out like a boss.

Please follow, +1, comment, etc.

Until next review, adieu.