Marathon time translation?
2949
Member
1368 days
Anton posted 2 years ago.
I'm anywhere from 45 minutes to an hour different. Usually closer to the hour slower for the IM Mary over the regular kind.
"What would life be if we had no courage to attempt anything?" - Vincent Van Gogh
My Blog: http://agingsuperhero.blogspot.com
494
Member
1691 days
trainDaBrain posted 2 years ago.
Hmmm, mine was nearly the same. 20 minutes longer on my IM time than my single marathon time. My first marathon was Big Sur (slightly hilly) and my IM marathon was done in the Sacramento Valley, very flat.
Although there were a couple overpasses... I remember those very clearly. Funny how the things that are normally insignificant (like overpasses) become points of ill memory later. :)
I seriously think that if I had done my marathon (by itself) in the same area as I did my IM, the results would have been much different. There would have been a greater discrepancy between times (greater than 20 min).
That's my experience. Hope it helps.
57
Member
1392 days
toseen posted 2 years ago.
Mine as well. I was 52 minutes slower on my IM time but I think I had too much left in my tank at the end of the IM.
"Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss you will land among the stars.", Les Brown
4495
Member
1644 days
kylie posted 2 years ago.
Oddly enough I was over 20 minutes faster in my IM maration than my marathon alone. Nutrition might have played a part, but I think in a big part it was the adrenaline and mindset of the IM vs those of the run. Oh, and for some reason, I find I often run better off a bike than just running these days.
2949
Member
1368 days
Anton posted 2 years ago.
I suspect that there is no formula...
Everyone is different....what is true for some is not true for others...and too, genetics plays a part.
"What would life be if we had no courage to attempt anything?" - Vincent Van Gogh
My Blog: http://agingsuperhero.blogspot.com
12
Member
915 days
KirkLarkin posted 2 years ago.
I usually run better after cycling. So, my bricks or usually fast and my last half iron time was 5 minutes slower than my best half marathon time.
33
Member
1449 days
tmcneney posted 2 years ago.
I did some unofficial anaylsis - looking at IM marathon times then looking up those folks at marathonguide.com to see if they had done any marathons in the past 2-3 years - now there are a lot of factors that i would never know - were they running with a friend, were they just having fun, did they train more/less for the marathon or the IM, conditions of both races etc, but after looking at about 20 people the avg is righ about 40min give or take. What does all of this mean - nothing, of course, except you could estimate your IM marathon time if you wanted to but that assumes your nutrition is right on and you pace properly on the bike...anyway, thanks for the comments.
494
Member
1691 days
trainDaBrain posted 2 years ago.
Thanks for asking the question. There's something there, but to pull out something statistically significant, the study, at first thought, would be emmense.
Studying human performance is all about getting comfortable with a moving target. When did the marathoner do the marathon? How much training/recovery time elapsed between marathon and ironman?
The fitness industry does a great job of bridging the gap between couch potatoe and average athlete. But then there are questions like these where there aren't solid answers, yet. Once the average joe steps onto the moving sidewalk of tri's and longer endurance events, a whole new set of questions pop-up.
For those that have done both a regular marathon and an Ironman, have you seen any correlation in times between the two marathons? Assuming your nutrition is right and you pace correctly, have you seen your marathon time go up by 30min, 40min, 50min on average? Just curious....