The Wineglass
Marathon earlier this month was going to be a low-key race for me, a warm-up of sorts for my debut running of the Boston Marathon
(2018). I’d last run Wineglass in 2013. That was still in the early years
of my "serious" marathon training, and I made all the mistakes of a
novice. The wall? Oh, yea, I didn’t even wait for Mile 20. I'd already crashed
into that shortly before the half way point, followed by a long and painfully slow
death march to the finish. My time was some 43 minutes slower than my current
PR (3:55). The Wineglass course is BQ-friendly. So, with the benefit of being
four years running-wiser, I was confident, though I was planning to take it
easy, of finishing with a good time, perhaps under 4:00.
Then came
the "Notice of Non-Acceptance" from the Boston
Athletics Association (BAA). With that, Wineglass 2017 all of a sudden
became the first of my qualifying races for Boston 2019.
Now, I
could have stayed with my original plan and still gone for the sub-4:00 (9:10
pace), to guarantee my entry to Boston 2019 (for which my threshold qualifying
time is 4:10). But, still rather annoyed with the rejection by BAA, I decided to
go for a new PR (sub-3:55; 8:58 pace).
The Wineglass course is point-to-point, starting from
couple miles northeast of Bath and finishing on W. Market St. in downtown
Corning, NY. The course generally parallels I-86. The following is the
Wineglass route mapped by my new toy, TomTom Spark 3 Cardio. It was my first use in a race. (30-second
review: Not very fancy but pretty full-featured, compared with my old watch.
Especially appreciate the new battery that holds a charge long enough for a
marathon and more. Fast acquisition of GPS fix. Still exploring all the
features.)
Over the
past two plus weeks since the race, I’ve rerun it many times in my mind--what I
might have done differently and whether I really had to slow down so much over
the final five miles. But, I’ve no regrets about my decision to go for the PR.
Training for Wineglass had generally gone well, despite the hot and humid
weather for most of the 16 weeks. Of course, in a marathon, once a decision has
been made at the start, one is committed for the rest of the race—there’s no
backing out. By the time a decision turns out not to be a good one, it’s too
late!
I crossed
the finish line at 4:11:20. "Every marathon is an act of faith" that
"can humble you." At the start line, I acted on that faith--that my
training should enable me to go for the PR. For almost 21 miles, I was on track
and felt strong. But, just like that, coming out of the water stop shortly
before the end of Mile 21, the quads muscles said no, not today. Those last
five miles were humbling. And, my time is not even a BQ. Back to the drawing
board.
Here’s
the pace chart for Wineglass 2017 and, for comparison, that for Wineglass 2013
and Pocono 2016 (where I’d run my current PR). Three
different outcomes but all illustrate why an even pace—that is sustainable—gets
one to the finish line the fastest. All three runs, for the first 12 miles,
were at around the 8:58 pace for a 3:55 finish. But, as the chart shows, if the
early pace can’t be sustained, the slowing down in the later miles is very
costly. The banked time in the early miles soon gets overtaken by the run on
the bank (!). The starting pace for Wineglass 2017 was sustained much longer
(almost to the end of Mile 21), thus the 27-minute improvement over Wineglass
2013. Still, the slowing down and periodic walking over the last five miles
probably costed me at least 10 minutes, relative to if I’d run a 12-second
slower 9:10 pace (for a 4:00 finish). Those 12 extra seconds might have enabled
a sustained pace much past Mile 21. Of course, I don’t know that for sure. But,
again, I’ve no regrets.
I have,
however, been thinking a lot about the various factors related to pace, in part
because of the challenging weather I’d trained through prior to Wineglass. I’ll
come back to this in later posts. Here, I summarize the four factors that stood
out for me during this training cycle.
1.
Temperature – This was mostly not a factor for Wineglass, given the almost
ideal weather for the race (began in the 40s and finished in the 50s; ~no wind).
But, it was the most memorable during training. Here’s the pace chart for three
of the training long runs, with September 10th being the last one
before the three-week taper to Wineglass. The ending temperature of each run is
indicated. Although each later run was “two weeks fitter,” the temperature
effect was clearly dominant.
2.
Breathing/stride rhythm – This came up during one of my Tuesday hill repeats
workouts. For 75-second repeats, I counted to 115, 2 strides per count. I
noticed that a repeat was a few seconds faster by counting through (1, 2, 3, …,
115) than by counting by 10s (1, 2, 3, …, 10; 2, 2, 3, …, 10; 3, 2, 3, …, 10;
…). Perhaps there was a subtle effect on breathing (?). During Wineglass, I
counted through, which, in addition, helped with the mental aspect (taking the
mind off the fatigue).
3.
Carbohydrate sensing - I'm still testing the results of studies that showed how rinsing the mouth with a
carbohydrate solution without swallowing affected performance (e.g., Chambers et al. (2009). During pre-Wineglass training, I began to hang on to each
gel packet after consumption and periodically sweeten my mouth with the small
amount that always gets left behind in the packet. (Hope my dentist doesn’t see
this!) I tried a variation of this during Wineglass, by consuming the gel a
little bit at a time over distance, rather than all at once.
4. State
of mind – This is perhaps the most important factor but also the most difficult
to effect changes. If I could no-running run and, thus, be not as aware of fatigue, a
faster pace might be possible. I did also try this during Wineglass. Still, over
those last five miles, I really thought I could not sustained the 8:58 pace. And
yet--and yet--when I knew the finish line was just less than half a mile away, on
Bridge St. over the Chemung River and before that final left turn onto W.
Market St., I somehow could speed up and hold on to that pace all the way to
the finish line.
As for the race itself, my previous report for Wineglass 2013 had provided some
details. Wineglass is a great race all around, including the impressive
logistics of the bus shuttles to the start line; ample (16!) water/Gatorade
stations, three with gels; well-prepared and smiling volunteers; enthusiastic
spectators, especially where the course winds through the several towns along
the way (e.g., Savona, Campbell); downtown Corning finish on W. Market St.; and
well-stocked finish line food (great vegetarian chili!). Free parking was
plentiful at the bus shuttle pickup point. The race expo was at the Corning
Museum of Glass, which was very fitting, given the unique glass finisher’s
medal. The bottle of champagne with accompanying wineglass was a nice inclusion
in the race swag. As one of the many spectator signs said, “Run now; wine
later!” The biggest change/improvement this year, compared with 2013, was the stay-warm
tent at the start, along with garages opened courtesy of the Steuben County Highway
Shop. Because getting all the runners via the shuttles to the start took some
time, having a sheltered place to wait, especially for those (like me) who took
the early buses, made a big difference.
So,
back to the drawing board. For Boston 2019, I'm planning on two more marathons
during the first half of next year: (1) B & A Trail Marathon on an asphalt
“rails to trails” bike and running path and (2) Pocono Marathon. I'll be training
for a 5-minute PR, at 8:47 pace (for 3:50), which I feel is realistically
doable. For Boston 2019, that would be 20 minutes under my threshold BQ time
and put me in the first group to submit applications. I don't want to leave
anything to chance!
