Is this race distance reasonable?



N

nospam

Guest
I have been running consistently for about 2 months and did a six mile
run this morning with no problems (though my shins are a bit sore
right now). During the week I try to run 2-3 times, usually a 2-3
miler each time.

In about 4 weeks (Nov. 20) there is a metric half-marathon in my town
that I would like to run, which equates to about 8.1 miles. Is this a
reasonable to goal if I increase my distance by a half-mile or so for
each run runing the week up to the week of the race?

Thanks.
 
I run about 6 miles a day for 6 days a week and sometime 3 miles on my "bad"
days. I'm running a half-marathon this coming saturday. I think it's about
knowing what you "can" do. If you feel your ready, then yea. No magical
equations here. But don't hurt yourself by trying to set a PR or go at it
the wrong way. Just relaz and have a good time.


"nospam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I have been running consistently for about 2 months and did a six mile
> run this morning with no problems (though my shins are a bit sore
> right now). During the week I try to run 2-3 times, usually a 2-3
> miler each time.
>
> In about 4 weeks (Nov. 20) there is a metric half-marathon in my town
> that I would like to run, which equates to about 8.1 miles. Is this a
> reasonable to goal if I increase my distance by a half-mile or so for
> each run runing the week up to the week of the race?
>
> Thanks.
 
"nospam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>I have been running consistently for about 2 months and did a six mile
> run this morning with no problems (though my shins are a bit sore
> right now). During the week I try to run 2-3 times, usually a 2-3
> miler each time.
>
> In about 4 weeks (Nov. 20) there is a metric half-marathon in my town
> that I would like to run, which equates to about 8.1 miles. Is this a
> reasonable to goal if I increase my distance by a half-mile or so for
> each run runing the week up to the week of the race?

Sure, I'd do it. Sounds like a bold plan for a complete
beginner and I would be careful; having a plan of simply
finishing on my feet without injury and being happy for
the experience.

Don't change your running plan much now. At your level,
simply getting out there on a regular basis is making you
improve at a relatively fast pace. Your half-mile increase
plan sounds okay. The shin pain is common among new
runners - avoid hills and rub them with a rolling pin at
night.

Let us know how it went! I love reading about first races.
Don't get caught up in the excitement and go out at too
fast a pace. Pretend it's one of your training runs for the
first half, pick it up a tiny bit at halfway if you feel good,
and finish smiling!

cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton ON)
www.absolutelyaccurate.com
www.allfalldown.org
 
>That's an interesting term, a metric half marathon that is 8.1 miles.

It's 13.1K. I have the race flier in front of me. (Assuming it's the
same one, in Flower Mound, north of Fort Worth -- I don't know where
nospam is, but I can't imagine *two* of these oddball events in
different cities on the same day.)

It's an interesting distance to race at. I bet the organizers wanted
*something* to set it apart from the plethora of other runs in the
area (last weekend, for instance, there were 10 5Ks on Saturday and a
few other races on Sunday).

--
Brian P. Baresch
Fort Worth, Texas, USA
Professional editing and proofreading

If you're going through hell, keep going. --Winston Churchill
 
Yep, that's it. Sorry, I didn't know that a "Metric Half-Marathon"
was not a common race.

Thanks for all of the advice. Given my slow pace, trying to win
didn't even enter my mind.


>>That's an interesting term, a metric half marathon that is 8.1 miles.
>
>It's 13.1K. I have the race flier in front of me. (Assuming it's the
>same one, in Flower Mound, north of Fort Worth -- I don't know where
>nospam is, but I can't imagine *two* of these oddball events in
>different cities on the same day.)
>
>It's an interesting distance to race at. I bet the organizers wanted
>*something* to set it apart from the plethora of other runs in the
>area (last weekend, for instance, there were 10 5Ks on Saturday and a
>few other races on Sunday).
 
<< Yep, that's it. Sorry, I didn't know that a "Metric Half-Marathon"
was not a common race. >>

What is a "Metric Half-Marathon"?
Thanks for explaining!

[By the way, it's not raining, this moment ~
Later, yes, forecasted showers,
Stormy weather, all laced
With a bunch of heather ~
Oops, forgot my sweater!]

_______
Blog, or dog? Who knows. But if you see my lost pup, please ping me!
<A
HREF="http://journals.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo">http://journal
s.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo</A>
 
<< fast a pace. Pretend it's one of your training runs for the
first half, pick it up a tiny bit at halfway if you feel good,
and finish smiling!

cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton ON) >>

Great Counsel!
Wise advice ~
An ounce of prevention,
Just a once upon
A time
Tale...

_______
Blog, or dog? Who knows. But if you see my lost pup, please ping me!
<A
HREF="http://journals.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo">http://journal
s.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo</A>
 
<< Great Counsel!
Wise advice ~
An ounce of prevention,
Just a once upon
A time
Tale...>>

Told twice.

_______
Blog, or dog? Who knows. But if you see my lost pup, please ping me!
<A
HREF="http://journals.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo">http://journal
s.aol.com/virginiaz/DreamingofLeonardo</A>
 
On 25 Oct 2004 17:23:11 GMT, [email protected]entary (Brilliant One)
wrote:

><< Yep, that's it. Sorry, I didn't know that a "Metric Half-Marathon"
>was not a common race. >>
>
>What is a "Metric Half-Marathon"?
>Thanks for explaining!
>

Since a marathon is 26.2 miles, a half-marathon is 13.1 miles
(obviously). Instead of saying miles, however, they substitute KM,
but (conveniently for us newbies), don't convert the distance. So, it
becomes 13.1 KM, or, roughly, 8.1 miles.

I'm sure there is an easier explanation, but that's all I've got.
 
nospam <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> I have been running consistently for about 2 months and did a six mile
> run this morning with no problems (though my shins are a bit sore
> right now). During the week I try to run 2-3 times, usually a 2-3
> miler each time.
>
> In about 4 weeks (Nov. 20) there is a metric half-marathon in my town
> that I would like to run, which equates to about 8.1 miles. Is this a
> reasonable to goal if I increase my distance by a half-mile or so for
> each run runing the week up to the week of the race?

Sure. I started running in late June or early July and did a
half-marathon in early October. I completed the half-marathon in just
under 2 hours, and managed without any walking. It actually felt
pretty easy. My longest run before the half-marathon was 14K, i.e.
two-thirds of the distance, which I did about 1.5 weeks before race
day. It was mainly for psychological reasons, since I figured if I
could do two-thirds of the distance, I'd manage with the remaning
third one way or another on race day. Apart from the 14K run the week
before, I did 4 or 5 10K runs in the preceding weeks, otherwise only
shorter distances of 3-7 K, about 3-4 times per week.

Since you've just done a 6 mile run without problems, I reckon you are
pretty much prepared for the 8.1 miles already, so I'm not sure you
relly need to increase your training dose. Just keeping your current
level up for the next 3-4 weeks should be sufficient (if all you want
to do is to complete the race).

Bjorn
 
Leafing through rec.running, I read Ignoramus6961's message of 25 Oct 2004:

> 8.1 miles is not a very long distance...

It depends on how you cover it. At an easy pace, it's not very long.
However, covering it as fast as you can will make it seem painfully long.
Ever run a mile as fast as you can? This is extreme toruture.

Phil M.

--
"What counts in battle is what you do once the pain sets in." -John Short,
South African coach.
 
How would a "metric" half marathon be 8.1 miles when a marathon in metric
terms is 21.1 km? That is 13.1 miles. I am confused.

If the race is 8 miles, I see now reason you could not finish it as long as
you take it easy.
"nospam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I have been running consistently for about 2 months and did a six mile
> run this morning with no problems (though my shins are a bit sore
> right now). During the week I try to run 2-3 times, usually a 2-3
> miler each time.
>
> In about 4 weeks (Nov. 20) there is a metric half-marathon in my town
> that I would like to run, which equates to about 8.1 miles. Is this a
> reasonable to goal if I increase my distance by a half-mile or so for
> each run runing the week up to the week of the race?
>
> Thanks.
 
Great, just what running needs is more confusing names for race distances.


"Brian Baresch" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >That's an interesting term, a metric half marathon that is 8.1 miles.
>
> It's 13.1K. I have the race flier in front of me. (Assuming it's the
> same one, in Flower Mound, north of Fort Worth -- I don't know where
> nospam is, but I can't imagine *two* of these oddball events in
> different cities on the same day.)
>
> It's an interesting distance to race at. I bet the organizers wanted
> *something* to set it apart from the plethora of other runs in the
> area (last weekend, for instance, there were 10 5Ks on Saturday and a
> few other races on Sunday).
>
> --
> Brian P. Baresch
> Fort Worth, Texas, USA
> Professional editing and proofreading
>
> If you're going through hell, keep going. --Winston Churchill
 
Eventually it has to happen: I agree with Ig on this one.


"Ignoramus6961" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 25 Oct 2004 19:53:52 GMT, nospam <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 25 Oct 2004 17:23:11 GMT, [email protected]entary (Brilliant One)
>> wrote:
>>
>>><< Yep, that's it. Sorry, I didn't know that a "Metric Half-Marathon"
>>>was not a common race. >>
>>>
>>>What is a "Metric Half-Marathon"?
>>>Thanks for explaining!
>>>
>>
>> Since a marathon is 26.2 miles, a half-marathon is 13.1 miles
>> (obviously). Instead of saying miles, however, they substitute KM,
>> but (conveniently for us newbies), don't convert the distance. So, it
>> becomes 13.1 KM, or, roughly, 8.1 miles.
>>
>> I'm sure there is an easier explanation, but that's all I've got.
>
> This is not directed at you, but I cannot resist.
>
> I am a little bit irked by how some race officials use the term
> "metric" to perform shenanigans and promote innumeracy, and denigrate
> the metric system by association.
>
> A metric marathon is 42,195 meters. Same as 26.2 miles.
>
> A metric half marathon is 21,097 meters, same as 13.1 miles.
>
> 13,200 meters is not "metric half marathon".
>
> What you are describing sounds more properly as "1/3 marathon".
>
> --
> Running Log: http://igor.chudov.com/weightloss/exercise.txt
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Sam" <[email protected]> wrote:

> How would a "metric" half marathon be 8.1 miles when a marathon in metric
> terms is 21.1 km? That is 13.1 miles. I am confused.
>


In cycling, a century is 100 miles and a metric century is 100 k. In
running, they're saying that a half-Marathon is 13.1 miles so a "metric"
half marathon is 13.1 k. Get it?

--Harold Buck


"I used to rock and roll all night,
and party every day.
Then it was every other day. . . ."
-Homer J. Simpson
 
>> >That's an interesting term, a metric half marathon that is 8.1 miles.

It's 13.1K. I have the race flier in front of me. (Assuming it's the same one,
in Flower Mound, north of Fort Worth -- I don't know where nospam is, but I
can't imagine *two* of these oddball events in different cities on the same
day.) <<

I ran it last year. I think they had to do some weird doubling back to
get the proper distance. I would have been just as happy if they had made it a
12K or something.

>> It's an interesting distance to race at. I bet the organizers wanted
*something* to set it apart from the plethora of other runs in the area (last
weekend, for instance, there were 10 5Ks on Saturday and a
few other races on Sunday). <<

I don't know why one of these races that are scheduled for the same day as
a jillion other races doesn't try altering the distance slightly - say a
four-miler or a five-miler - to separate themselves from the crowd.

Mike

--
 
No, I do not get it. I think it is ridiculous. A metric century makes
perfect sense as being 100km.


"Harold Buck" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "Sam" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> How would a "metric" half marathon be 8.1 miles when a marathon in metric
>> terms is 21.1 km? That is 13.1 miles. I am confused.
>>
>
>
> In cycling, a century is 100 miles and a metric century is 100 k. In
> running, they're saying that a half-Marathon is 13.1 miles so a "metric"
> half marathon is 13.1 k. Get it?
>
> --Harold Buck
>
>
> "I used to rock and roll all night,
> and party every day.
> Then it was every other day. . . ."
> -Homer J. Simpson
 
"M1ahearn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>>> >That's an interesting term, a metric half marathon that is 8.1 miles.
>
> It's 13.1K. I have the race flier in front of me. (Assuming it's the same
> one,
> in Flower Mound, north of Fort Worth -- I don't know where nospam is, but
> I
> can't imagine *two* of these oddball events in different cities on the
> same
> day.) <<
>
> I ran it last year. I think they had to do some weird doubling back
> to
> get the proper distance. I would have been just as happy if they had made
> it a
> 12K or something.
>
>>> It's an interesting distance to race at. I bet the organizers wanted
> *something* to set it apart from the plethora of other runs in the area
> (last
> weekend, for instance, there were 10 5Ks on Saturday and a
> few other races on Sunday). <<
>
> I don't know why one of these races that are scheduled for the same
> day as
> a jillion other races doesn't try altering the distance slightly - say a
> four-miler or a five-miler - to separate themselves from the crowd.
>
> Mike
>
> --

I think 8K, 5 milers and 10 milers are excellent distances as is the 15K (a
person favorite of mine).
 
"Sam" <[email protected]> wrote:

>No, I do not get it. I think it is ridiculous. A metric century makes
>perfect sense as being 100km.
>

Sam,

I think it's the same concept as "lite" beer. LOL

Mike Tennent
"IronPenguin"
 
In article <[email protected]>,
"Sam" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> "Harold Buck" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "Sam" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> How would a "metric" half marathon be 8.1 miles when a marathon in metric
> >> terms is 21.1 km? That is 13.1 miles. I am confused.
> >>
> >
> >
> > In cycling, a century is 100 miles and a metric century is 100 k. In
> > running, they're saying that a half-Marathon is 13.1 miles so a "metric"
> > half marathon is 13.1 k. Get it?
> >
> No, I do not get it. I think it is ridiculous. A metric century makes
> perfect sense as being 100km.
>

(Top-posting corrected)

I'm not saying it makes a whole lot of sense. I'm just showing you where
they got the idea: they changed "miles" to "km" and called it metric.
Everyone was shouting about how they couldn't see where they came up
with the distance, and that's how they did it.

--Harold Buck


"I used to rock and roll all night,
and party every day.
Then it was every other day. . . ."
-Homer J. Simpson
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back