Looking for some advice on poor performance in first 140.6

I am having trouble figuring out what went wrong last week at Rev3 Cedar Point (my first 140.6).

I have a complete race report posted on my blog here: http://pain-endurance-character-hope.blogspot.com/

Basically, I swam extremely comfortably for a 1:16:xx. I nailed my very conservative 0.68 IF within 1 W on the bike (VI of only 1.03) for a 5:07:xx. And, I ran on target through 10 miles, and then had to walk/shuffle it in. I wanted to run a 3:30:00 and “ran” a 4:31:00. I don’t think it was a matter of nutrition/hydration. I think I executed well in that regard and never felt like I was “bonking” from lack of calories, water, or electrolytes (which I have felt before). I can’t really figure out what it was. I just couldn’t run. It wasn’t simply a matter of sucking it up, I literally could not run. My legs killed.

Did I just whimp out? Was 3:30:00 too optimistic on the marathon? FWIW, I have run 2 sub-3:00:00 marathons and actually ran a 3:06:09 just yesterday (exactly 1 week post-Rev3 Cedar Point) because I was pissed with how poorly I ran in the 140.6 and didn’t want to “waste” the training.

Any insight is much appreciated.

Didn’t read your blog, but if you did 112 miles in 5:07:xx, that’s a pretty solid bike split. Maybe you went too hard on the bike???

I’ll preface this by saying I don’t do tri, but I had 2 ideas:

  1. You overestimated your FTP and your .68 was more like .75+.

  2. You over/under tapered. The run was obviously well below your capabilities, when my performance =/= fitness level, I either came into it tired or so well rested that my body didn’t have that “rhythm.”

-Physiojoe

FTP wasn’t over-estimated. It was based off of a 40 km TT ~3 weeks prior to race day (with a freshly zeroed powertap on both the TT and race day).

I put a lot of thought into my taper from previous racing experience and feel like it was appropriate. I’ll comment more on this later when I have more time, but I felt great leading up to the race.

You are being a bit too negative. Your first time out in a ridiculously long event. You don’t have a reference to compare it too. You finished, good job!

When I see this mystery problem it is usually lack of calories.

I notice you didn’t have any numbers in your report of how much you ate and drank. This is often an indicator though not always. Ask yourself how many calories you actually got in. Also consider your power target, just because you picked a number and hit it doesn’t mean it was the right target. Your big brick int eh week prior was in cool temperatures by your own account. Was it the same temp on race day? These types of things show up late in the run, not necessarily in the beginning, unless you really blew it. So just because you hit your number, don’t be so sure that the power output you picked was correct.

Also you say your heart rate was under control as things started to go south. This is another rule O thumb. Heart rate is the same or low and pace is deteriorating, you are low on calories. Heart rate is high and pace is deteriorating, then it is heat and dehydration. In Iron distance you can also get both at different times.

Also, lack of calories will definitely make your legs hurt more. When depleted everything is worse, your legs hurt more, your neck bothers you more on the bike, your mental state deteriorates, you can tolerate less pain etc. All that stuff goes to hell.

You don’t have numbers on calories for the run either, the early parts of the run are very important in terms of getting in the calories.

And lastly, your account of the big brick, the bike was done on a cool morning and you had to dig deep at 15 miles into it. Please consider this. On that day, you had skipped the ride, ridden 80% of the bike and then not quite 2/3rds of the run and you are saying how hard it was at the end of the run.

I think there is the disconnect, at those distances you shouldn’t have been deteriorating, you should have been holding relatively steady. Of course relatively is a big word.

That’s the hard thing to do, we go out and do big workouts and figure well I made it through a 6 hour brick I am all set. But that’s not necessarily true, on race day you’d have another 4ish hours to go. So it’s not just that you did the race prep bricks, it’s that the race prep bricks kinda need to go with flying colors. If you finish it but you are struggling for the last mile of your race prep brick, then you need to adjust something.

The answer is there, review your race file and the race files of your big workouts leading into it and you’ll find the answer.

It’s a long hot day - and while it sounds like you busted your ass training and put in a lot of good work, you can never really
prepare for the racing your first IM. Given your natural abilities I’m sure you’ll be sub-10 soon.

I wear compression for any run over 13 miles it makes a huge difference in leg fatigue as the miles add up. You proved how effective
it can be in the recent mary.

I’d also consider electrolytes - anytime I get a ‘mysterious weakness’ on a workout or race, I usually trace it back to electrolytes. Even with
electrolyte drinks, I supplement with 1-2 caplets an hour and I am always amazed what a difference it makes.

.

Did I just whimp out? Was 3:30:00 too optimistic on the marathon? FWIW, I have run 2 sub-3:00:00 marathons and actually ran a 3:06:09 just yesterday (exactly 1 week post-Rev3 Cedar Point) because I was pissed with how poorly I ran in the 140.6 and didn’t want to “waste” the training.

This is a red-flag of some form for me. If you had an optimal performance at your IM, there is no way that you could run a marathon the week after - best-case scenario IM’s that have you swimming, cycling and in particular running to optimal performance should leave you wrecked for several weeks!!

Something is amiss here in your back-ground, your training or what really went on on race day at Rev3.

Did I just whimp out? Was 3:30:00 too optimistic on the marathon? FWIW, I have run 2 sub-3:00:00 marathons and actually ran a 3:06:09 just yesterday (exactly 1 week post-Rev3 Cedar Point) because I was pissed with how poorly I ran in the 140.6 and didn’t want to “waste” the training.

This is a red-flag of some form for me. If you had an optimal performance at your IM, there is no way that you could run a marathon the week after - best-case scenario IM’s that have you swimming, cycling and in particular running to optimal performance should leave you wrecked for several weeks!!

Something is amiss here in your back-ground, your training or what really went on on race day at Rev3.

while i wouldn’t want to run a Marathon yesterday… i could have gotten through it. perhaps even did a similar time as the OP. i did the same Cedar Point race as him. the bike course was as easy as a 112mile bike ride could get i suppose.

my first thoughts is he over biked, regardless of perceived effort.

i didn’t look at the true ‘base’ the OP has but i’m guessing this isn’t too far into his triathlon career. it takes years to develop the ‘resistance to fatigue’ needed to run a good marry after the preceding two events.

nothing new here. It happens all the time people think their IM marathon is gonna be an hour faster than it actually turns out to be. It’s really different from a stand alone marathon.

I just did my first one in Louisville and agree. O even cramped for a few miles so I probably didn’t have an optimal performance. I was sore for a few weeks and still tired even after that. My friend who was injured and couldn’t run as hard, recovered a lot faster.

You are being a bit too negative. Your first time out in a ridiculously long event. You don’t have a reference to compare it too. You finished, good job!

Completely agree. #1 goal of first IM is finishing.

How many of your long runs were on a treadmill?

Ben,

How many grams of CHO did you consume during the whole bike portion of the race and how much do you weigh?
Also, how about an estimation of your consumption on the run. I know that will be a tougher one to come up with.

Hugh

Most likely insufficient nutrition/hydration on the bike. I didn’t read your report and don’t know how much you weigh but you should have been shooting for 300-500cal/hr on the bike. If your bike pacing was appropriate (and it sounds like it was) going +30min on your open marathon split should have been reasonable if you got the nutrition right and didn’t go out to fast the first few miles. Did you do any race rehearsal rides - 100+ miles @ goal IF then run off the bike? Did that intensity feel comfortable?

How was your race rehearsal 3 weeks out 85 miles/15 miles different than race day?

Weather? Power? nutrition? hydration?

How was your race rehearsal 3 weeks out 85 miles/15 miles different than race day?

Weather? Power? nutrition? hydration?

+1
most important question by far (but I’d make it 2/85/10). Or another way to put it: do you have any way of knowing that you didn’t perform to 100% of what you were capable of?

I’m definitely interested in what answer you come up with. I just did my first IM, (IMC) and had a very similar experience with similar fitness. Was on track for a sub 10 off the bike but bonked super hard at mile 10ish on the run. My goal run was 3:20-3:30 as well, and just like you I’ve run sub 3 marathons, but after bonking hard at mile 10 I only managed a 4:11 with a terrible terrible second half split (run/walk).

After about 3 weeks of searching for answers I have come to the realization that I did not eat enough on the start of the run. That plus the 95+ degree heat pretty much slaughtered me. What did you eat on the bike (cal/hour) and what did you eat on the run before you bonked?

You didn’t have the fitness level to be at that effort for 140 miles, doesn’t matter what some bike computer says
.

It was based off of a 40 km TT ~3 weeks prior to race day (with a freshly zeroed powertap on both the TT and race day).

Lots of people make this mistake. This should be one of the data points you look at in determining your target wattage, not the determining data point.