Tuesday, September 30, 2008

10 k revisited

Well, that was some great race math on my part. Miles 1-4 (if that was the mile marker) in 20:47 is 6:56 pace, not 6:36 (19:47 is 6:36 pace). Would you believe I got a perfect score on my math SAT? Anyway, 6:31 for mile 1, 6:56 for miles 1-4, and 6:47 for the last 2.2 is fairly believable. This would have to be the race that my Garmin dies.

That being said, I checked the results from the most recent 10k (certified) I could think of and found some people who ran both. He are the matches:

28 Sep, 10 Aug
36:59, 35:54
47:58, 46:01
50:08, 48:08
51:49, 50:41
52:27, 54:50
54:47, 51:51

As you can see, everybody except one was over a minute slower at my race. I don't think that the course was long though. It was 64 deg/59 dp on 10 Aug believe it or not and it was 71 deg/67 dp on Sunday.

I almost think I need to do another race before the marathon to gain some confidence, but I don't want to jeopardize too many more long runs to do it. If I keep my mileage up and my weight down, I think I've got it. The latter is the tough part. I've lost a couple of pounds and am about 2 pounds from my spring marathon weight. I'd like to get at least a couple below that though.

Did 9.3 miles this morning. ~35'' easy, 25'' moderate, and 18'' easy. I worked the uphills to get the heart rate up because my quads are trashed. That's never happened to me in a 10k. Usually it's my hamstring with short races.

No comments: