Home Racing Forum 🏎

Consolidated "IMNC is now a whack distance, how do I race it??!!" Thread

Team,

Clearly, weather hasn't been very nice to WTC races for the last couple seasons and now IMNC is the latest victim, being turned into a 2.4/50/26.4 race. 

Jay and Mike have started their own "how do I race this race" threads. I thought it might be helpful to consolidate the guidance from those threads here and give my own take. 

In my experience watching how strange distances races like this unfold...or rather, situations that quickly develop where people are expecting to race an X but it suddenly becomes a Not an X race, many of the pointy end peeps will be temped to get outside the box in many ways:

  • Folks that didn't think they had a shot at...whatever...suddenly think they might so they will swim, bike, or run harder in order to capitalize on an real or perceived advantage they suddenly have.
  • Some will have a "screw it, this race is jacked, what have I got to lose, I'm just going to go for it." 

That's said, while 50 miles is a pretty short bike, compared to an Ironman, a marathon is still a marathon, and 26.4 miles is still a long way for 50 miles vs 112 miles of mistakes to express themselves. Likewise, the delta between a sensibly vs hammer-like ridden 50 miles isn't really all that much (anyone want to model for us the deltas for them between a .75, .80, and .85 IF bike on the IMNC course using Best Bike Split?)

In the end, I think it comes down to how strong of a runner you are. This would be my guidance and I've love to get WSM input here to add to/amend this if they feel that's required:

  • ADV runner = ride at .85, run 0-6 at long run AHR (will likely be a tick above their bike AHR), then run 6-~22 by dialing that up a bit, then pin it the last 4mi
  • INT = .80, pick a 0-6mi HR between bike AHR and LR AHR, then run at your long run AHR thereafter
  • BEG = .75, then normal EN IM run guidance = 0-6mi at bike AHR, then (if you're feeling good and confidence) run at long run AHR thereafter. 

 

In short, my gut is that the likely relatively small delta between riding a COULD vs SHOULD split for 50 miles can still be easily wiped out in the marathon...because it's a marathon after a 2.4mi swim and a hard-ish 50mi bike. Many other people will hammer the 50 and pay for it dearly.

 

++++++++++++

Edited to add this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jo9a5rA5z3Q

 

Thoughts and opinions?

 

Comments

  • Rich, thank you for the guidance-especially pointing out the little difference there will be between hammering it and riding conservatively. Since I'm a "just finish" participant I'm going to stick with my original race plan. Not changing it is going to save me a lot of mental machinations.
  • ...thats why he's the Coach......I think he nailed it.....!

  • Agree 100% with Coach R's words above
  • I've been paying $$ to RnP for 8 years now, so naturally, I listen to and follow what they say. To rephrase Rich's recs in ore general terms, I would first ask myself about IMNC, "Am I going in as a participant or a racer?"  

     If you're in it to do it, then Eric's train of thought is in the right direction. I'd modify the "I'm just gonna do what I;ve already planned" a little bit. Swim: no change. Bike: since this is a flat course, you can probably do just fine riding one gear harder (literally, meaning: ride in the next smaller cog) than you did in the RR. For the run, again, work it as planned with HR as the primary metric. You will probably find that running at the HR you were holding at the end of your last RR bike (that was your plan, right?) will net you a bit more speed in this truncated race. Don;t try to go for a higher HR than you had planned, but accept a faster pace if that results.

    If you;'re "in it to win it", then, again, swim as planned. Follow Rich's advice on the bike, but try the following curve to help you decide if you are ADV or INT: If you think you can do the 50 mi in about 2:15, go with the 0.85 IF (after a 20 min build up at the start). 2:30/0.8. 2:45/0.75. For the run, use RPE as your primary metric. If you don't know how or are not confident doing that, you shouldn't be "racing". You need to do a few more IMs as a participant, following the EN strategy until you're ready to throw away your watch and HR monitor (literally or figuratively)

  • Al,

    Thanks for the additional, detailed guidance, spot on as usual.

    I've added a quick video to my original post.

  • Thanks Coach R, Al and everyone else. This team never ceases to amaze. Now that I know the course (95% of the original 70.3), I plugged the 70.3 into BBS, like Coach suggested, to see the various outputs (times) from various inputs (watts). As he told us, turns out it'll take lots of matches to squeeze a few minutes. First off, because this is a point-to-point, with 34 miles into a very strong 15-25mph headwind and the last 16 with an awesome tail, this course will be SLOW. Here are the BBS results for me:

    .85 = 2:36 over 56 (maybe 5:15-20 over 50)
    .80 = 2:40
    .75 = 2:45

    BBS models this as pushing 5-10 watts above target IF on the way out into the wind (15-17mph), then about 10 below target IF watts on the return, all at 28-32 mph. This makes some sense, as it's difficult to push big watts downhill or with a big wind.

    Thus, I'm now thinking of: easing into the first 8 miles into mostly a XW, fueling up and preparing for battle. Miles 8-32 will be challenging: cold (45) and straight into a big HW. Aero trumps all. Will allow IF to go above .80, cap at .85, but will ease off if I can't do it smoothly. Skip the first AS at 22 unless I'm well into second bottle. Hammer the 16 miles home, knowing that .75-.80 may be all I can hit. AS at 37 unless I fueled up at #1. The bridge at Mile 48 is legit. Small chainring and patience will be key.

    The run is literally half this race, so wrecking the run before it starts = wrecking the race. Easy the first 6, following HR, then moving to an RPE a tick or two above original plan.
  • Nice video!! Rich - take a picture like that for your new background at home!!

    THIS is awesome response from the EN coaching team on how to deal with the race. Talk about calling an audible and dealing with a problem on the fly!

     

    @Mike Roberts - Glad you've got this under control, looking forward to seeing what you do on race day. 

    Question i have is what would your HR file look like for a standalone mary vs an IM mary? how much more than a typical IM mary should you be pushing? I think some of that was answered on your personal thread on this topic, but the statement I think Rich made (or was it Al?) about, can I keep this pace all the way to the finish has to be, can i keep this pace all the way to the finish knowing I am going to be in a dark place for the last 4-6 miles?

  • mike r.

    probably a reasonable plan.

    losing 5-9 minutes on the bike due to underpowering could be a  thing.             yes don't want to hurt your run.            but undercooking the bike can leave you out of contention.

  • Assumption: Most of us are trying to eek out the fastest finish time for a fixed, amature-training commitment (which is the entire basis for much of EN dogma). Each time I hear this lecture, makes me think the entire IM bike ride should be a chicken bucket ride (except for the kona types)... the minimal time difference between .75 and .85 is somewhat mind-blowing.

    Is there a limit to this apparent magic? Is there an amount of time spent out on the bike course when the benefit of going chicken bucket no longer assures fresher/longer lasting legs on the run?

    I think I might have a new plan for IMAZ

  • Posted By Doug Sutherland on 20 Oct 2016 08:01 PM


    Assumption: Most of us are trying to eek out the fastest finish time for a fixed, amature-training commitment (which is the entire basis for much of EN dogma). Each time I hear this lecture, makes me think the entire IM bike ride should be a chicken bucket ride (except for the kona types)... the minimal time difference between .75 and .85 is somewhat mind-blowing.



    Is there a limit to this apparent magic? Is there an amount of time spent out on the bike course when the benefit of going chicken bucket no longer assures fresher/longer lasting legs on the run?



    I think I might have a new plan for IMAZ

    You can use BBS to determine the delta between:

    • Super Easy, .67-.68
    • Sensible IM pacing, for most: .7-72
    • Maybe a bit on the hot side for some, certainly hot for many: .73-75

    Do that exercise and tell us what you come up with. Then, in my opinion, you can divide that delta by 8 = the number of miles you need to walk to give back all of that delta on the run. For example, 16' delta divided by 8 = 2 miles walking at ~18-19' pace vs continuing to run at 9-10' pace. But of course, it also depends on how strong of a runner you are, how strong of an IM athlete you are, frankly, and what your goals are. When you're racing for a Kona or podium slot, seconds and minutes do matter, but usually you have the fitness and race execution smarts to back it up. 

  • Hah - while Rich was posting the above, I was doing the calls on BBS for my most recent IM, just out of curiosity; IM MD 2 weeks ago. The #s I used (note this is for 112 miles, the race was actually 100 +/-):

    Stoopid/Could   0.78      5:14       318 TSS

    Aggressive         0.73      5:22       286 

    Conservative     0.67       5:33       250

    Bucket of C       0.62       5:43       220

    On race day, I actually did the conservative line, extrapolated to the 100 miles, and was able to successfully run the whole way. I *probably* could have done the aggressive line and still run, (I've done it somewhere between 5&10 times before). But for sure, I could not do the Stoopid line and still run. I've also tried *that* before several times, and either walked 8+ miles or DNF'd.

    For me on a flat course, the delta between BOC and Aggressive is 20 minutes. Whether you are racing for the podium, or trying to maximize your potential within the MOP,  20 minutes seems like a big deal, no? In my case, the ten minutes between 0.67 & 0.73 was the difference between 4th and 3rd, and possibly 2nd.

    My racing days seem to be over, but if you are still on the up curve of your Ironman career, after your first IM, I think there is little to no value to you to "JRA" on the bike in order to "save it for the run". If you are more than a one and done competitor, you are most likely trying to see what your ultimate potential is, and the only way to get there is to push as close as you can to the edge of the envelope, which is going for a TSS in the 280s on the bike for those riding under 6-6.5 hours. Follow the EN training plan and race execution strategy, and you will be set up for a successful run.

  • Coach Rich,

    I owe you a beer. Or 12. I think 99% of this field didn't have a clue today. I eased into the (scary) bike, then tried to hold 10-15 watts above plan watts. Not Chicken Bucket, not quite HIM. I did so blindly, regardless of slow speed (into big wind). Followed HR the first six on run, then allowed it to go 2-3 beats above plan (Z2). That may have been a bit hot, as things got rough. Because of the hills and wind, had to rely on HR more than planned. But, today, smarts/coaching trumped fitness. And I'm forever grateful that you jumped on this last second and made my race. This team rocks.

    MR
Sign In or Register to comment.