If you want the place to do it, the P’tit Train de Nord marathon in Quebec in is a steady -1% drop on crushed gravel.
I can report that despite a mostly tri-focused season this year, that my quads felt better towards the end than most marathons I’ve done and I came out about about 5 mins better than I thought I was reasonable for my level of fitness.
There’s def an ideal gradient for each race. For a marathon I think 1-2% is close to ideal. Keeping in mind it’s impossible to find a perfect slope for that distance, will always be some +/-
For context, a marathon is ~140,000ft, so every 1% is 1,400ft drop.
I don’t completely disagree – tried to be diplomatic in my response. I think CIM benefits from (usually) good weather, a fast course, and a devoted field chasing similar times with pace makers. While it’s a downhill course, CIM has some rollers in the front half. If you get it right @ CIM the last 10k is a gradual downhill. You’re getting favorable, runnable, miles when the race should be its hardest. CIM also attracts strong runners who want official PBs. There are a # of pace groups all the way up to OTQ times.
I do think the kind of runner who does well at CIM should be able to blast a faster marathon on a screamer of a downhill course. Altitude & downhill training are real factors that could affect someone just showing up for a Revel-type race. The serious runners I know that live in these places cannot touch their downhill times on flat courses. I just think this is worth exploring in the context of BQs. I don’t mind that the general population is getting faster. I’m not convinced courses are equal in the current structure. Marathon running is too big to do what triathlon does but I think we have 70.3/140.6 qualifying right. By default course & weather are factored in. It would really change things if you said you need X time to qualify for Worlds. Certain races would fill up immediately.
We can agree to disagree on this. I thought exactly the same as you - I really thought there should be no possibility that I’d run slower on a megadownhill marathon, but that Revel course is crazy - unrelenting downhill on you legs for 22+ miles, and it’s surprisingly steep. I’m pretty sure the overall results sort of refect this as well, you aren’t hearing of everyone setting all their PRs on that course, but you are hearing a ton of people PRing (by a lot) on CIM. I think if Revel was like a 2-3% decline, it might be consistently faster, but it’s like 4-6%, which gets really unnatural.
If you can train on that crazy downhill course though, sure, you have a shot at a big PR! I couldnt’ find any realistic scenario where I could train like that other than having a very special treadmill (most TMs decline to like 2% I think).
The data doesnt lie. Just cause you didn’t PR at revel doesn’t mean the majority did not. Maybe its the t running gods getting back at you for constantly seeking downhill races?
I think you’re actually right! I went took look up the data finally, and yes, the two fastest marathons ar Hawii Bird and REVEL Mt Charleston. CIM comes in 29. So I stand corrected - I must have had a bad day / suboptimal training for it! Happy to admit I was wrong on my n=1 on this one!
You guys seem to be pretty well clued in on all things Boston, a question for the group. I see that fast qualifier is the first week of April 2025. If you were to qualify, what Boston race does it get you in and what age group would you be in???
Like is it the age when you qualify, or your age when the actual Boston happens?
You would be qualifying for 2026, and you would be qualifying in the age group that you would be in on the day of the 2026 Boston marathon. Pretty sure, anyway!
Plus your qualifying time is good for 2 years. So I THINK (not sure) that if you age up your time still stands.