Just curious what you take is. I have a friend who went 4:45 for 245th place at Eagleman yesterday. I looked at similar results from people who did Wisconsin last year and, barring any disasters or radical changes in fitness I’m thinking 11:45 ± 30 minutes (depending on weather) for ~450th place sounds pretty reasonable.
Any thoughts?
Just curious what you take is. I have a friend who went 4:45 for 245th place at Eagleman yesterday. I looked at similar results from people who did Wisconsin last year and, barring any disasters or radical changes in fitness I’m thinking 11:45 ± 30 minutes (depending on weather) for ~450th place sounds pretty reasonable.
Any thoughts?
based on the eagleman time (4:45), your prediction of 11:45 is too slow.
based on the eagleman time (4:45), your prediction of 11:45 is too slow.
I figured 11:15 under perfect conditions (like Eagleman), +:30 for bad race execution, & +:30 for bad weather (like the last two years). So, 11:15 to 12:15.
I did a 4:45 half last year (not Eagleman), and went just under 11:00 at IMOO.
Couple of questions first:
If it is a yes on first question an 11:45 is very reasonable
If it is yes to hills (and experienced IMer) then an 11:15 or faster is also reasonable.
Better on flats. yes, 1st IM.
Can you even predict IM times based on 1/2 times? I don’t think so.
Is Eagleman a similar course? Hilly? Both the bike and parts of the run are hilly at IMWI.
~Matt
Can you even predict IM times based on 1/2 times? I don’t think so.
No. But you should be able to get a relative range. For example, if your half is in 4:45 you probably won’t break 9:30 in the full (get it?).
I found some people who finished close at the same race and then looked at their IMo performance last year. The biggest thing I’m looking for, really, is how much slower to expect the bike pace to be.
I’ve seen people use the 2X + 1 rule ALOT and it’s about as close as you’ll ever get. I think it works well for any IM time from around 10 hrs to 13 or 14. Sub 10 its high and above 14 it seems low. IOW assuming similar course, similar conditions, proper training for the IM distance and similar race execution your IMWI time would be 10:30. Then again if Eagleman was pancake flat and IMWI is 95+ or 50 and rainy all bets are off.
~Matt
Sure…you can predict anything based on 1/2 times but that doesn’t mean $hit 
Seriously though, 11:30-12 seems reasonable assuming good conditions and appropriate pacing. IM is much less forgiving of pacing and nutrition mistakes. You can almost fake your way through a 1/2 if something goes wrong. Miscalculate on a full IM and you’ve got a long walk to the finish line.
Can you even predict IM times based on 1/2 times? I don’t think so.
OK - here is my 2 cents and my results…and I am better suited for flats than hills.
I went 4:56 last year at Racine (flat bike and run) with a 2:35 bike split and a 1:40 run split. I had a perfect race. I left nothing on the course.
I went 12:05 at Wiscosin 7 weeks later. 6:05 bike and 4:20 run. I did the bike at a crazy low HR to prepare for the marathon. I ran/walked from mile 18 to 22 on the run…but otherwise raced a very smart race. I was on pace for ~11:50 - 11:55 before walking up that hill at mile 18!
What were your friend’s splits at Eagleman? It’s a pretty fast course right?
If he is a better biker than runner (like me)…I would put him around 11:30 range. If he is as strong on the bike as the run…possibly 11:15. Best case.
Barry-
Have you seen this?
I’ve found it to be pretty accurate as long you’re honest with it.
For comparison’s sake, in 2003, I did 4:55 at Eagleman, and then did IMLP as my first IM six weeks later and finished in 11:33. The weather conditions were favorable both days, i.e. overcast and not too warm - actually it was pouring buckets of rain for much of the day at IMLP that year - one could say those are unfavorable conditions, but once we were already wet, the rain didn’t matter and it beat the heck out of trying to battle electrolyte depletion as would be the case on a hot day.