These numbers look very accurate. Bang on for me in the 1/2 and full IM distance.
Steve,
Al, question for you, I’m having a spirited debate with a buddy of mine and I was wondering if you consider an IM run at closer to 80% FT to be “good”? Or do you think it is a “great” run?
IMHO an IM run at closer to 80% FT is a “great” run.
And do you consider IM runs at 75% FT to be “good” or more “ok”?
I believe that anything better than 75% FT is a “good” run at AG level.
Ale,
Nice charts. It looks like I was just a bit slower than your slower predicted time for my first IM (even though I passed 600 people). I hope this merely means I have room for improvement once I get more lifetime training under my belt.
Do you have any idea how %FT and %MaxHR relate during an IM run. For a standalone run they are pretty close, but I'd expect you'd see significant cardiac drift during an IM. I believe my HR was around 80% even though I ran slower than your 75% FT column.
Ale,
Do you have any idea how %FT and %MaxHR relate during an IM run. For a standalone run they are pretty close, but I’d expect you’d see significant cardiac drift during an IM. I believe my HR was around 80% even though I ran slower than your 75% FT column.
Barry, my experience also is that %FTHR are pretty close with %FTPace at training, on race day running at 76/77% FTPace HR was around 82/83% FTHR ( run by PE & Pace but monitored HR).
Other IM athletes have tell me similar HR behavior but I haven’t found any general relationship.
Thanks very much for the charts, they are very well done. Now I just have to figure out what the hell VDOT is.
-C
Those are eerily accurate for me!
Thanks very much for the charts, they are very well done. Now I just have to figure out what the hell VDOT is.
-C
VDOT is an adjusted V02max (which may or may not match a laboratory-generated V02max), which tells you how you might race for other distances (in the row, associated with the same VDOT), and also tells you how first to perform different types of training
More info: http://coacheseducation.com/...k-daniels-nov-00.htm
gonna drag this way up to the top…
Anybody have any thoughts on why this table seems accurate up to a point, and then seems to break down when you start to look at things like
Macca’s 2:42, or TheSergio’s 2:4Xs?
Or are those two both capable of 2:19s?
The other side of the coin is, a while back Gordo posted on his site his VDOT over time, and back in '04 when he ran a 2:46 his VDOT at the time was appearntly only 62 which doesn’t line up with his 2:46 or whatever.
Is this just another example of things getting wacky at the top end of the spectrum, or do they just run that hard? Personally I’d imagine it’s a bit of both, but curious on other peoples thoughts…
At least part of the story may be, the less time spent running, the higher the percentage of threshold one
should be able to maintain. A 4 hour marthoner can’t maintain as high a percentage of threshold as a
2:50 stud as they are grinding it out for more than an hour longer.
Hugh
I don’t mean this as a knock on Gordo in any way, but he does have a history of vastly underestimating his open run potential.
And Sergio is an awesome runner, but I’m not sure I would bet on him to do a 1:04 half marathon.
I do think things can get a bit weird at the top end of the scale. On the other hand, the VDOT table itself is eerily accurate for top level runners. Us mortals generally look at the predicted marathon time from our 10k or half and think “no way”, but it seems like many 27 minute 10k guys are bang on their predicted marathon time. I guess it’s all down to specific prep.
I don’t mean this as a knock on Gordo in any way, but he does have a history of vastly underestimating his open run potential.
And Sergio is an awesome runner, but I’m not sure I would bet on him to do a 1:04 half marathon.
I do think things can get a bit weird at the top end of the scale. On the other hand, the VDOT table itself is eerily accurate for top level runners. Us mortals generally look at the predicted marathon time from our 10k or half and think “no way”, but it seems like many 27 minute 10k guys are bang on their predicted marathon time. I guess it’s all down to specific prep.
Completely agree that things often get out of whack at the top. 80-20 rule applies here.
Also, regarding Gordo, he’s also been one who touts you don’t need much top-end speed to run well at IM. Saying that he was a vdot 62 when he ran 2:4x supports that belief quite well. Sure, there’s certainly some amount of truth to that statement but, like MuffinTop said, he’s also known for vastly understating his open run potential.
EDIT: Hmmm… I just realized I responded to a year-old thread. Never mind…
Thanks, Chris
This is a very old thread.
Anyone still have the table that used to sit in this thread created by Ale Martinez. It was HIM and IM run predictor using Daniels VDOT and open run times.
Thanks.
outstanding, thanks!
can you walk us through how to read the table a bit?
outstanding, thanks!
can you walk us through how to read the table a bit?
It’s pretty simple to use. Take your recent time for an open 5k/10k/half marathon and follow that line across to see what times would be equivalent for your current fitness in the triathlon race distances. For 70.3 and IM it gives a high and low range. I’ve found these times to be very accurate (on a good race day in triathlon) to my open 5k/10k level.
FT pace is your functional threshold, the pace you can hold for an hour. You will notice the pace of FT on this table is between open 10k and open half marathon pace.
Curious - could this be used in reverse? Meaning take a recent IM or 70.3 run split, and see what that would ‘equate’ to in an Open race setting.
Curious - could this be used in reverse? Meaning take a recent IM or 70.3 run split, and see what that would ‘equate’ to in an Open race setting.
Sure. I would think at worst, you’d go faster in a open than predicted, but it all depends on the swim/bike fitness/performance in the tri.
outstanding, thanks!
can you walk us through how to read the table a bit?
It’s pretty simple to use. Take your recent time for an open 5k/10k/half marathon and follow that line across to see what times would be equivalent for your current fitness in the triathlon race distances. For 70.3 and IM it gives a high and low range. I’ve found these times to be very accurate (on a good race day in triathlon) to my open 5k/10k level.
FT pace is your functional threshold, the pace you can hold for an hour. You will notice the pace of FT on this table is between open 10k and open half marathon pace.
thanks - was curious about the ranges. so the assumption here is that a reasonably-prepared athlete on a ‘normal’ course should be able to hold ~90 to 95% of FT for the run in a half ironman?
I agree on the fact that it depends on how your swim/bike fitness is. I’ve also found that I need to be around 82% or so on the bike to execute a good run. If I go near or above 85% then the run takes a bigger hit. The general rule I follow is that your HIM run should be around 4-6 min slower than your open half run time - if you pace things correctly and swim and bike within your fitness level.
.