Countdown to CIM

That whole "BQ may not get you into the race" development of the past few years seems pretty demoralizing to me, and I wish they came up with a different way of dealing with it. So I understand your fear/frustration.

There are two options that could work at CIM, depending on your temperament.

1. Start with the 4:00 pace group and use them to ease through the hills in the first half of the course, then leave them behind and cruise in to your goal time. This is a course you can negative split, and if you start a little slower, it'll let you drop the hammer in the last 5 or 6 miles that are relatively flat.

2. Start with the 3:50 pace group. Stick with them through the hills and accept that you may fade a bit toward the end, but not lose as much as you think thanks to the relative flatness of the last 5 or 6 miles.

The last time I ran CIM, I started with the 3:50 group, knowing it was pushing well beyond my original sub-4 goal. I held on for about 18 miles before fading, but I didn't fade much as I feared and finished just under 3:53. It remains my best, most satisfying race, even though I took a few minutes off my PR the next year.

You can do this.

ounce wrote:Not trying to add to your woes, but do you factor in to your pace the added time for running the course long?

Yup, very aware. That's why I'm doing all of my MP runs slightly faster than goal pace.

Mark B wrote:That whole "BQ may not get you into the race" development of the past few years seems pretty demoralizing to me, and I wish they came up with a different way of dealing with it. So I understand your fear/frustration.

There are two options that could work at CIM, depending on your temperament.

1. Start with the 4:00 pace group and use them to ease through the hills in the first half of the course, then leave them behind and cruise in to your goal time. This is a course you can negative split, and if you start a little slower, it'll let you drop the hammer in the last 5 or 6 miles that are relatively flat.

2. Start with the 3:50 pace group. Stick with them through the hills and accept that you may fade a bit toward the end, but not lose as much as you think thanks to the relative flatness of the last 5 or 6 miles.

The last time I ran CIM, I started with the 3:50 group, knowing it was pushing well beyond my original sub-4 goal. I held on for about 18 miles before fading, but I didn't fade much as I feared and finished just under 3:53. It remains my best, most satisfying race, even though I took a few minutes off my PR the next year.

You can do this.

Unfortunately there is no 3:50 pace group. 3:45 is just too fast for me so I guess I'll start with the 3:55 group for maybe the first 5 miles and then pick it up by 10 seconds or so.

I get what they are doing, but I had no idea it went from just over a minute under to almost 2-1/2 minutes under. Imagine running 2 minutes under and thinking you're in only to find out when you register a few months later that you didn't. Part of me would be happy to just run a BQ time, but to miss getting in would be frustrating. The really frustrating thing is you won't know if your time is good enough until next Septembers' registration...

Good week for me:

Mon - 7.2 easy
Tues - 9.1 w/ 3x2 miles @ 8:30
Wed - off
Thurs - 11.1 w/ 9 @ MP 8:45
Fri - 5.9 easy
Sat - 6.8 easy
Sun - 17 long

Week: 57

Saturdays run put me at 229 for the month of October and I had never come close to 200 before. I think somewhere around 180-185 was my previous high. Todays run went really well and I actually had to keep pulling back as my pace kept creeping a little too fast. Supposed to run 9:30's and ran a couple in the 8:50's with an average of 9:20. About 15.5 miles in my left knee (the one I've had 3 surgeries on) starting hurting pretty bad. Walked a minute, tried again and had to walk again. Thought about calling it a day and walking home but tried one more time. No pain and ran into a couple of friends and wound up tacking on another mile with them with no issues. Go figure....

Sounds like training is coming along quite nicely Tim.

I missed out on the conversation about pacing groups.  I also struggle with the wisdom of having a pacing group that is trying for a BQ time that really doesn't qualify you for Boston.  I'm surprised some of the events aren't scheduling groups a few minutes faster that the actual BQ times.  I know it's just a guess as to how much faster you actually need to run to gain entry.  If I were trying for a BQ and thought it was within my ability I'd try for a 5 minute buffer and would enjoy a pacing group that was doing the same.  That strategy might backfire though...

I actually emailed the 3:55 pacers and they said they will run about 15 seconds under. That obviously won't get me in so my plan now is to run the first 4 or 5 miles with them to make sure I start easy and then pick it up by 10-12 seconds a mile for the rest of the run. It would have been nice to hang with some good pacers for the entire run but right now I'm just hoping for some nice cool and dry weather.

Sorry, Tim as someone who does the occasional pacing gig, we generally aim for 15-30 sec under the posted goal time. I guess it is because no one really knows what time will get you into Boston these days (sorry) but the general rule if thumb is to shoot for 5 minutes under.  When I do pace a group that is for a BQ time, I usually remind the remaining runners who are with me at 20 miles what is at stake and then again at 23.

Good plan to stick with the pacer and then break away in the latter part of the race.

Michele,

I knew they would be targeting just under the posted time as I have paced several HM's myself. It is just interesting that CIM lists their pacers at BQ times but we all know you have to run faster.

I am REALLY glad I found out now that it moved to 2:28 under for next year as I was expecting that anything under 3:53 would be golden. I spoke with one of the pacers today and he told me he had a friend that ran 2:19 under recently and figured he was in no problem - missed by 8 seconds.

I just read that they will not be changing standards for 2017 as the window for qualifying has begun - so that is good. What I can't find is: If I were to run more than 5:00 under, does that 'guarantee' I get in?

Tim C wrote:Michele,

I knew they would be targeting just under the posted time as I have paced several HM's myself.  It is just interesting that CIM lists their pacers at BQ times but we all know you have to run faster.

I am REALLY glad I found out now that it moved to 2:28 under for next year as I was expecting that anything under 3:53 would be golden.  I spoke with one of the pacers today and he told me he had a friend that ran 2:19 under recently and figured he was in no problem - missed by 8 seconds.  

I just read that they will not be changing standards for 2017 as the window for qualifying has begun - so that is good.  What I can't find is:  If I were to run more than 5:00 under, does that 'guarantee' I get in?

Yes, I would say that 5 min under probably gives you that guarantee.  Something else to think of is that it has been a bit warm on the east coast and midwest this fall for racing.  Chicago was warm, NY was warm, MC was warm - so that cuts down on the numbers of qualifiers too.  I think I hit one of the only good weekends at Columbus where it was 30F at the start - lol.

Michele \"1L" Keane wrote:

Tim C wrote:Michele,

I knew they would be targeting just under the posted time as I have paced several HM's myself.  It is just interesting that CIM lists their pacers at BQ times but we all know you have to run faster.

I am REALLY glad I found out now that it moved to 2:28 under for next year as I was expecting that anything under 3:53 would be golden.  I spoke with one of the pacers today and he told me he had a friend that ran 2:19 under recently and figured he was in no problem - missed by 8 seconds.  

I just read that they will not be changing standards for 2017 as the window for qualifying has begun - so that is good.  What I can't find is:  If I were to run more than 5:00 under, does that 'guarantee' I get in?

Yes, I would say that 5 min under probably gives you that guarantee.  Something else to think of is that it has been a bit warm on the east coast and midwest this fall for racing.  Chicago was warm, NY was warm, MC was warm - so that cuts down on the numbers of qualifiers too.  I think I hit one of the only good weekends at Columbus where it was 30F at the start - lol.

So you're saying that 5 min under would most likely be good enough but still no guarantee? I was kind of reading it as though any one at the -20, then -10 and then -5 get in and only if it's not filled do they let the others register, at which point they tale the fastest of those...

Oh well, -5 should be good enough and that's what I'm going to target. I may be able to go faster but don't want to risk a complete blowup if I can help it. I also have to remember, if I don't qualify next month, there are other races and life will go on...

I think 5 min under is good enough and should be a lock; however, I do know that this time folks who were 3-4 min under waited with baited breath.  I think if you are 5+ under, you are guaranteed.

I hated that other blog title and just now realized you can change it...  

Another good week in the books:

Mon - 5.1 easy
Tue - 8.8 w/ 2x3 mi @ 8:30
Wed - off
Thu - 11 w/ 9 @ 8:42 MP
Fri - 5.2 easy
Sat - 8.1 easy
Sun - 10.2 @ 9:25

Week - 48.4

4 weeks to race day.

Tim C wrote:I hated that other blog title and just now realized you can change it...  

Another good week in the books:

Mon - 5.1 easy
Tue - 8.8 w/ 2x3 mi @ 8:30
Wed - off
Thu - 11 w/ 9 @ 8:42 MP
Fri - 5.2 easy
Sat - 8.1 easy
Sun - 10.2 @ 9:25

Week - 48.4

4 weeks to race day.

I like your new title. Good attitude!

Oops! Looks like it doesn't stick. Hm. Well, at least we know the new title.

Mark B wrote:

Tim C wrote:I hated that other blog title and just now realized you can change it...  

Another good week in the books:

Mon - 5.1 easy
Tue - 8.8 w/ 2x3 mi @ 8:30
Wed - off
Thu - 11 w/ 9 @ 8:42 MP
Fri - 5.2 easy
Sat - 8.1 easy
Sun - 10.2 @ 9:25

Week - 48.4

4 weeks to race day.

I like your new title. Good attitude!

Oops! Looks like it doesn't stick. Hm. Well, at least we know the new title.

Yup, noticed the same thing... oh well...

Tim C wrote:

Mark B wrote:

Tim C wrote:I hated that other blog title and just now realized you can change it...  

Another good week in the books:

Mon - 5.1 easy
Tue - 8.8 w/ 2x3 mi @ 8:30
Wed - off
Thu - 11 w/ 9 @ 8:42 MP
Fri - 5.2 easy
Sat - 8.1 easy
Sun - 10.2 @ 9:25

Week - 48.4

4 weeks to race day.

I like your new title. Good attitude!

Oops! Looks like it doesn't stick. Hm. Well, at least we know the new title.

Yup, noticed the same thing... oh well...

Well, that's okay. It just requires you/us to reaffirm the NEW title every time.

Mark B wrote:

Tim C wrote:

Mark B wrote:

Tim C wrote:I hated that other blog title and just now realized you can change it...  

Another good week in the books:

Mon - 5.1 easy
Tue - 8.8 w/ 2x3 mi @ 8:30
Wed - off
Thu - 11 w/ 9 @ 8:42 MP
Fri - 5.2 easy
Sat - 8.1 easy
Sun - 10.2 @ 9:25

Week - 48.4

4 weeks to race day.

I like your new title. Good attitude!

Oops! Looks like it doesn't stick. Hm. Well, at least we know the new title.

Yup, noticed the same thing... oh well...

Well, that's okay. It just requires you/us to reaffirm the NEW title every time.

I like the way you think...  

Love the new title and the new attitude!

Enjoy the countdown...

12 miles this morning.  After an easy 1 mile warm-up my plan was to run 8:40-8:45, slightly faster than goal pace.  would up running the 11 at 8:39 and had to keep throttling back some.  These mid-week sorta long MP runs are interesting....  The last couple of weeks I've noticed that the first mile or 2 at MP seemed a little hard at first - like doing 10 at this pace was going to be tough.  Then each mile gets easier and easier and I wind up feeling stronger at the end than I do early on....

I'll take it...

You poor thing.  I guess getting stronger as it goes along is just something you'll have to suffer through.

Chiming in on your plan - don't make a serious move until after the huge drop/rise from Fair Oaks to Carmichael (~12mi).  After that, it's gentle rollers until ~mile 20 then pancake flat the last 10k.  Just my 2 cents.

Mike MacLellan wrote:Chiming in on your plan - don't make a serious move until after the huge drop/rise from Fair Oaks to Carmichael (~12mi).  After that, it's gentle rollers until ~mile 20 then pancake flat the last 10k.  Just my 2 cents.

Thanks for stopping by Mike.  And thanks for the tip.  Any other thoughts on the course are appreciated.

I figure this will be my first cool weather marathon as my 4 previous were all either moderate or warm.  Just praying for no rain on race day.

One other thing I'm not sure I mentioned before. If you're expecting a metronome-steady pace in the hillier first half (or so) of CIM, you will be surprised. The pace teams tend to slow slightly on the uphills and make up the difference on the downhills. It actually helps prevent stale legs, but it can be a shock if you aren't expecting it.

Mark B wrote:One other thing I'm not sure I mentioned before. If you're expecting a metronome-steady pace in the hillier first half (or so) of CIM, you will be surprised. The pace teams tend to slow slightly on the uphills and make up the difference on the downhills. It actually helps prevent stale legs, but it can be a shock if you aren't expecting it.

I'd heard that and I'm not sure how to handle. On rolling stuff I generally do not slow down on uphills nor do I speed up much on the downhills. Right or wrong, that's just pretty much what I do. It may not be too much of an issue though as I'm only planning on running with the 3:55 group for 3-4 miles and then picking things up a little from there.

Race is 3 weeks from today and another good week is in the books.

Mon - 7 easy
Tue - 10 w/ 3x2 @ MP - 15
Wed - off
Thu - 12 @ MP 8:39
Fri - 6 easy
Sat - 8 easy trail run
Sun - 18 long 9:13

61 miles for the week, which is a new high for me.  Nice thing is the legs feel great - I never would have dreamed I could feel this good after logging that many miles in one week.  Today was my last long run, which was scheduled to be 16 but I felt good at the 12 mile turnaround point so I added another mile there, which added 2 to get me over 60...  I admit it - I kind of wanted to see my weeks total start with a '6'  

I have a couple of 12 mile MP runs to go and then just some easy miles till race day.

Great job making it to taper! And congrats on the "6"

Nice work, Tim.  Now if you feel tired in these next two weeks, do not be afraid to take an extra day off or lessen the mileage.  When I got to where you are, I was listening hard to my body and I backed off in a couple of runs and cut back on my gym time (eliminating the weight work in the last week and a half).  Also resist the urge to run faster than your prescribed paces i.e. do not leave your race in training and run those MP miles too fast - keep them at the 8:50 or so that you need to run.  Resist, resist, resist!!!!!