should time - IMWI
I got a question. new to power, and not sure about what my time at IMWI will be to calculate the TSS.
my previous halves (3 total) have ranged in the 2:43-2:47 bike splits (mostly flat courses) followed by a 2:05-2:10 HM
the people I ride with think I will be off the bike around 5:45, but I think they're being generous. I think more along the lines of 6. Is there anyway to be able to know this, considering I have not done an IM in the past? thanks
-hb
0
Comments
Did you get a power meter? How did the test with it go? Did you do a race rehearsal last weekend? The rehearsal should give you a rough idea about time but race conditions (high winds or heat) on the day can change that.
My SWAG is that you'll ride somewhere between 6:00 and 6:15 if you want to have a decent run. In 2004, I did a couple of halves in the 2:30 - 2:45 range and rode 6:01 at Wisconsin en route to a "so-so" marathon. Had I backed off a little and added about 5-10 minutes to my time, I bet I'd have had a better run. FYI, I was running the HIM half-marathons between 1:55 and 2:00 at that time, too.
Hasan,
Some background, my last HIM bike split was a 2:35 at Kansas 70.3 which is decently hilly, my garmin recorded 2,700 ft/climb for the half. My run was a 1:40 at that race (4:58 overall), which I think could have been better but I cooked the bike a little too much. Looking at your run splits, I would assume those are all pre-EN HIM's, the run splits sound to me like you rode quite a bit harder than EN guidance would suggest.
I have/had the same question about my IMWI bike split really and I was pretty humbled by riding the course this past weekend. I rode the course for the IMWI camp back in July and came in at about 6 hours with a 5:30 moving time with a lot of sightseeing and stopping. I realized after looking at the file though that my Garmin messed up decent chunk of the data so was not sure I could entierly trust it. Went out and rode this weekend, this time at actual Race Rehersal pacing and again had a very difficult time extracting my finish time from the data. I had to stop about 6-10 times between chain drops and other mechanicals, plus I paused my garmin after getting stopped at my 3rd red light in a row in Verona and forgot to un-pause it for another 15 minutes or so. I had been targeting a 5:30 projected finish but at the 5:30 mark I think I was only at about 105 miles, hard to tell due to the lapse in recording. On one hand, I'm sincerely hoping that my race day goes much better than this weekend, but I'm still expecting some stopping to pee and for special needs bags that will of course be counted into my overall time.
Anyway, the gist is that after this weekend I am now targeting a 5:45-5:50 split rather than a 5:30. I think I definitely *could* ride IMW in 5:30 by paying no attention to EN guidance, but it's very difficult to keep under budget watts out there on all the hills, it's tough course in general. I think a *should* split of 6 or maybe a bit over sounds more reasonable for you, there are times when I think I'll come in closer to 6 myself.
Also, what is your w/kg as that will be a good indicator on a course like IMWI? I would not use a flat HIM for any sort of comparison to IMWI. HIM is a totally different beast.
Personally I think you have a lot to loose by being overly agressive ... if you feel comfortable with 6 hours...plan your zones and everything for a 6:10 since it is your first Ironman. If you feel awesome go a little harder in the last hour, or better yet, save it and cursh the marathon when everyone else walking and bragging about their 5:30 bike ride.
In the early days of EN, there was little fretting over and little talking about actual finish times. Discussion centered around being focused and riding smart the EN way. What the bike/run/ finish time is is a function of the conditions of the day, your execution, and the unforseen. If it's brutally hot, you will have to adjust down making the day slower, if it's perfect weather then execution and predicted watts is what you go after. I know lots of different people have come to the team in and things evolve. But focusing on a finish time in any of the disciplines can booger execution faster than anything. I always piss people off when post stuff like this, but in my early days in EN there were such consistently smart and well-executed races by some very talented athletes. And there was little to no talk of times--even with the folks who went to Kona. Changing the mindset and re-focusing on your execution is where the money is. Just sayin'...
Trevor, I know that, but don't let the time thing mess with your head too much is all I'm saying--and saying it to you, me, and everyone else. If time goes north of what is "predicted," that can be mentally draining when we acutally might be doing things perfectly given the day at hand. Those of us who have raced with EN for years now might have trouble explaining it in words, cuz you kinda have to live it, as you now know. But if we all stick to our x% of FT, execute the proper IF, it all falls into place--split times included. Focusing on your execution, what you can control, OODA all day long is is very mentally empowering, and it sets you up for the best outcome.
Still don't think I'm entirely saying this clearly....just don't want people to fret and waste energy. We have done so much work, have so much more knowledge than the average schmo out there, and we have the best guidance around on how to execute.
I will add one more thought. I think that IM Wisc course has the most potential for danger. With all the turns and all the hills, you have to ride smart. Sure, smart and fast are the best, but smart will work out the best for you no matter how fast you are going to go.-----TG
My point here is not to let the "should" vs "could" decision become a goal target for the bike. It's meant to help yoiu establish your gears, that's all.
first of all, thanks for the prompt replies. i'm honestly lost, and that's why I asked this question
so, to start things off, this being my first IM, I really want to enjoy it.... I am not shooting to break any records here, or to qualify. I just want to have a solid IM: swim, bike and RUN (not walk).
did only 1 RR (work commitments), which was kinda messy, but managed to finish 110 on the course in about 605. That being said, I was pacing off HR (136 for the first 1/2 and 140 for the second 1/2 was my average). I ran, felt ok at the end of the run, and hit all the times comfortably - for me that was an acheivement. I mean, I don't expect to sit on my butt my entire life and then be the fastest runner in less than a year; but hey - I'm happy where i'm at now.
@ Jeff and Nemo - power meter en route from cali, yes did RR, and I'm probably gonna pace off that 605 - so shooting for 610; I will throw away this number after doing the calculations
@Matt - approx 610 on the IMWI course; W/kg is 250 W (you did the calc) for 84 kg. so 2.94 W/kg (indoor watts - -testing again on wednesday outdoors - you did the maths for me)
@Steve and Jennifer, I'm with you on that one - 610 is what i'll prpobably use. As hard as it is, I WILL be conservative....
@Linda and Trevor - I'm just asking about expected for the exact reason of seeing where to dial myself in on the table, to calculate my TSS. I went through the power webinar overnight, and that was the primary reason I asked, in there, it mentioned to shout out your HIM numbers and people canhelp you guesstimate your IM finish time?!?!?
Now, I'm kinda wishing i took some of my friends' offers on lending me their PT for the weekend.... That would've made life soooooo much easier, but then again, I had no outdoor FTP to go off. so here's my plan and tell me if it's crazy - I know rich thinks I'm crazy for even thinking of starting power 3 wks prior, but i think it will help me:
1. get outdoor FTP
2. use power pacing, with a conservative should time - ?610-620, and use that for my calc.
I honestly can't see the har, of using power instead of HR. I did a pretty decent job of holding a VERY steady heart rate on RR. I couldn't even believe myself. I was climbing the hills SMART (EN-style), and my heart rate was even dropping!!!
thoughts? comments? criticisms?
all are welcome ;-)
THANKS
Hasan, coming late to this party, but I still have a few thoughts, based on your reply.
1. Regarding using a power meter for the first time in the 2-3 weeks leading up to an IM, and in the IM. There are many truths in IM lore, and one is don't fiddle with or change you equipment just before (within 6-8 weeks of) the race. Like: don't get a new saddle. Don't change your bike fit. Don't try out a new brand of running shoe. Etc. I think the same applies in spades to a PM. You have invested a lot of time and (sub-consicous) learning in how to pace with the data you currently have: HR and RPE. A PM will mess up those internal pathways just as surely as a different pair of shoes will mess with your running stride. Save it for next time. MANY MANY people, myself included, have had very successful IMs following EN racing strategies without knowing the first thing about power.
2. If you were able to do a 6:05 for 110 miles on the IM WI course, AND HAD A GOOD RUN AFTERWARDS, go with that for your time. It makes sense to me given your HIM effort (I know, Matt, there's little comparison, but it certainly seems in the ball park). If you're feeling nervous, go with 6:10. If you have aero goodies like wheel covers and helmet you didn't use in the RR, you'll get a little boost during the race. Also, you'll get a little boost from the small but very real draft effect of having 100's of people in front of you on the course. And, of course, you'll be fresher from your taper. 5:45 is certainly a time you could do ... but not run very far. And 6:20 + would really leave something on the table, no matter how fast you might be able to run.
My 2¢.
As usual I agree with Al and Nemo. You just will not have enough experience using the thing and data to be able to pace right with it. There will be enough to worry about. I would still collect the data just pace using what you know and are comfortable with.
As for predicted split based on RR's, not sure what that is worth. On the one hand it is hard to comprehend ending a 112 mile ride and not knowing how long it took, like exactly how long, how many watts etc. On the other hand my RR's have always been a lot slower than pace on race day. Further, there is a massive difference between 5:30 and 5:50, even 10 minutes would make a big difference in what happens later.
Food for thought - NO ONE at Moo ran faster than 3 hours last year and only 56 ran under 3:30, only 117 ran under 3:45 and only 220 ran under 4 hours. That INCLUDES the pros. There were 2176 run splits. 8:10:35 was the slowest FWIW.
As for the bike: 182 rode faster than 5:30, 375 rode under 5:45 and 688 rode under 6 hours.
First thing that stands out is that if you want to ride 5:30 you had better be a stud. Further, there were a hell of a lot of people who rode sub 6 and had no business doing so as only about a third of them ran under 4 hours. IMO if you are not going to run under 4 hours you really have no business riding sub 6 on a hilly course with a flat run.
Even with just this snapshot of data [and I bet doing the analysis of all the races the last few years would be the same] there is a ton of poor execution here. Much better off standing down on the bike and going faster on the run. Will be a more enjoyable day for as well. Anyone who has ever been out there walking/shuffling during the IM "run' can attest, it does not hurt less, it just sucks and takes longer.
@ Nemo - I have a powertap sitting in my living room this very moment. A friend dropped it off last night. Mine gets in on Wednesday.
@ Chris - Unfortunately, under no circumstances will I come close to running a 4hr marathon. did i mention my cDOT is 37!!! yes, you read that right - I just can't run!!!! my PR for a marathon was 4:40, and I executed and paced very well in heat (95 heat index in MADISON) in May. I've come a ong way since then, and my honest GOAL for IM, is not just to finish, is to RUN the whole race. I'm not worried about my finish time; I just want to enjoy my first IRONMAN. I promise if you see me at any point in that race, I will have smile on my face
REAL BIG SMILE
@ Al - thanks for input. It's kinda starting to sink in. I will not use the powertap, or maybe just use, but not guide off it. However, for race day, I doubt that i will be doing faster than 6:10. It's kinda sad, I had a STELLAR RR. It went just perfect, in every manner. pacing, focus, nutrition, sleep the night before (not too much). So I doubt that i will have that perfect of a race. I am pretty optimistic though that i can execute. Now my only problem is I will be getting out of the water, and that has been a problem for me in the past. I have cramped on every swim @ the 2 miles mark, and in my last 2 HIM, had some GI issues for the first couple of miles coming out of the water. for race day, I think I'll go with internal powertap, over HR, after going through some info on the HR in the power webinars. It sounds like HR is not that accurate, and can throw you off in one direction or the other - is that true?
thanks. this has been great. don't know what to do without you folks..
Hasam,
I would 100% use the power tap during the race. At a minimum it prevents you from being a bone head on the hills, the countless hills. You may not have your gearing dialed for the opportunity to pace using the powertap or time to learn riding steady. You will be able to prevent the huge spikes which will nuke your run.
I'd say you'll be off the course 6:15'ish.
If you want a reference point, my ouput from last year. 148 lbs on race day. Aero goodies, stopped riding in aero on Irish Lane on the way back into Madison. Ready to be done, mentally checking out.
Entire workout (157 watts):
Duration: 5:57:56
Work: 3375 kJ
TSS: 273.1 (intensity factor 0.677)
Norm Power: 167
VI: 1.06
Pw:HR: n/a
Pa:HR: n/a
Distance: 113.196 mi
Hasan - more detail on why I don't think it's a good idea to look at the power data during your race. The numbers will always be bouncing around, even on the flats. Getting a "feel" for that variability, and what your actual power is as you are climbing a hill takes a lot of time spent just looking at the thing and correlating that internally with what you already know about perceived effort level (and, to a much lesser degree, HR data, with its inherent lag). You've got enough to worry about getting ready for all the logistics of the race, tapering, traveling, etc etc to add this novelty to your life. I'll repeat: you have learned what specific effort levels feel like during the course of your IM training with EN, and you're smart enough to know how to modulate that effort to keep it as even as possible going up and down hills. That's what you've been training yourself to do for the last however many weeks and months. Don't mess up that brain training you've done by inserting a new variable so late in the game. Unless your brain is a lot more plastic than mine!
I know there are a lot of opinions against it here, but I'm going to respectfully play devil's advocate (along with Hayes).
I agree that for many (maybe even most) people, starting to use a PM a few weeks for the race is just silly, and possibly detrimental. However, I do have personal experience that contradicts this. I finally got my PM less than a month before IMCdA this year. I did do all the studying (forums, power webinar, Training & Racing w/power book, joule and powertap user manuals, etc) in the weeks before I actually had the PM. I was able to do my last RR with the PM, so that really did help. I feel like the PM was incredibly valuable on race day, and helped me execute the bike extremely well on an unfamiliar course.
I think if you have a very analytical mind, and are interested in intricate details, and feel like you'd benefit from (loads of) objective data, then I would absolutely practice with the PM in the next few weeks and use it during the race if it seems to work well for you. Yes, it takes a bit of getting used to the continuously changing numbers, but some brains are good at assimilating that information and summarizing/averaging it over short periods.
So, Hasan, I think that if you are aware of some of the potential complications (learning a new tool when you should be relaxing during taper, doing an ftp test with less than 3 weeks to go, etc), and if you think your brain can process the information in a beneficial way, I certainly think it's a great idea to at least try it out during the next couple of weeks and use that experience to determine whether or not to use it during the race. HR and RPE are still a great backup, and it's nice to have another (more objective) measure of effort.
I have to agree with Al & Michele on this one. At the least, I think you need 6 months of training with power, before you race with it as a metric. Less than 3 weeks out and I think it will only add unnecessary chatter to your mental focus.
Actually, you're agreeing with Al and nearly everyone else *except* Michele.
I re-read my post, and realized that if you just skim it, it's easy to get the impression that I suggest Hasan not start using the PM so close to race day. But that's not my opinion at all, as long as he understands what he's getting used to and thinks his analytical brain is up for the challenge.