GFA or GFB
The advantage of having come so far on this weight loss and running journey is that I've given up believing that anything is impossible. Or, as the FLM adverts from one of the shoe companies said, Impossible is Nothing. Which one? That's going to bug me now.
Hence I'm currently very very tempted to throw caution to the wind on Sunday. I've talked a couple of times about GFA, but I think it deserves to be renamed. GFB. Go for broke.
I'm confident that I'm in sub-4 hour marathon form. I'm also confident that I'm running well, and one of the faster women I know. Everyone at running club compliments me on my progress. I don't know how much sub-4, but I've seen race time calculators consistently turn out sub 3:45 predictions. It's time to ask myself the question. Do I believe them?
On the one hand I could take the sensible option. Attach myself to the 4 hour pacers like glue, make a late burst if I have the energy and get that time starting with 3. I'm confident that barring anything cropping up on the day (tripping on water bottles, a bad reaction to energy tablets, weather etc), that I could do that.
On the other, I could test myself and see what I can do. I'll never know if I can get that GFA time unless I try. And even if I fail, what's the worst that could happen? Say I drop off the back of the pace group after 16 miles (given that they'll be running a fair bit slower than my HM pace I'm confident of making it at least that far, and the half way time of 1:52:30 would tie in with the recommendation to get there about 10 minutes slower than HM time - 1:43:04). Yes, it will be a long 10 miles to the end, but I'll still PB even if I am overtaken by the 4 hour group.
I was tempted by a third option a few days ago, to head off on my own at a pace between the two groups and see what happens, but that could be the worst of both worlds. A pace group will help me slow down in the early stages then sustain a steady pace for longer, particularly if I can find someone to chat to on the way and we can keep each other going. If my pace starts to slip when I'm on my own there won't be anyone to help me recover.
I know what the sensible thing to do is. I don't need to be told. Nice, slow, even pacing, picking up in the second half if it's going well. But the more I think about it, the more I'm tempted to take the higher risk strategy. If it blows up in my face, what damage have I done? A bit of wounded pride, a lesson learnt for Amsterdam, and the determination to get it right next time. I've thought about it, and I appreciate the risks. I wouldn't attempt it if I didn't at least think there was a 50/50 chance of completing the race at 3:45 pace, but if I don't manage it, it's not the end of the world.
This is ultimately a decision I'll make on Sunday morning. For a start, it depends whether I find the pacers at the start and whether they're in the same pen. I don't want to have to sprint at the start to catch them. It also depends how I'm feeling, what the weather's like, and my mood when I wake up. But I'm starting to actually believe that I might have it in my legs. If I feel less than 50/50 I'll take the 4 hour option. If I feel confident I'm more and more tempted to go for it.
It's more than getting a place in London. I may well do that through the ballot or the club anyway, and even if I don't there are other marathons, and other years to run London. It's something that I feel like I want to achieve so that I can draw a line under the past. One funny thing is that I've started to feel more confident about outing myself to people at running club and people on running forums since I started getting top 10% finishes in races - as though I want to prove myself as a runner before I reveal my obese little secret. If I can get the GFA time then it doesn't matter where I came from, or who I used to be, I've met an objective standard, and can be judged by that.
We'll see...
Hence I'm currently very very tempted to throw caution to the wind on Sunday. I've talked a couple of times about GFA, but I think it deserves to be renamed. GFB. Go for broke.
I'm confident that I'm in sub-4 hour marathon form. I'm also confident that I'm running well, and one of the faster women I know. Everyone at running club compliments me on my progress. I don't know how much sub-4, but I've seen race time calculators consistently turn out sub 3:45 predictions. It's time to ask myself the question. Do I believe them?
On the one hand I could take the sensible option. Attach myself to the 4 hour pacers like glue, make a late burst if I have the energy and get that time starting with 3. I'm confident that barring anything cropping up on the day (tripping on water bottles, a bad reaction to energy tablets, weather etc), that I could do that.
On the other, I could test myself and see what I can do. I'll never know if I can get that GFA time unless I try. And even if I fail, what's the worst that could happen? Say I drop off the back of the pace group after 16 miles (given that they'll be running a fair bit slower than my HM pace I'm confident of making it at least that far, and the half way time of 1:52:30 would tie in with the recommendation to get there about 10 minutes slower than HM time - 1:43:04). Yes, it will be a long 10 miles to the end, but I'll still PB even if I am overtaken by the 4 hour group.
I was tempted by a third option a few days ago, to head off on my own at a pace between the two groups and see what happens, but that could be the worst of both worlds. A pace group will help me slow down in the early stages then sustain a steady pace for longer, particularly if I can find someone to chat to on the way and we can keep each other going. If my pace starts to slip when I'm on my own there won't be anyone to help me recover.
I know what the sensible thing to do is. I don't need to be told. Nice, slow, even pacing, picking up in the second half if it's going well. But the more I think about it, the more I'm tempted to take the higher risk strategy. If it blows up in my face, what damage have I done? A bit of wounded pride, a lesson learnt for Amsterdam, and the determination to get it right next time. I've thought about it, and I appreciate the risks. I wouldn't attempt it if I didn't at least think there was a 50/50 chance of completing the race at 3:45 pace, but if I don't manage it, it's not the end of the world.
This is ultimately a decision I'll make on Sunday morning. For a start, it depends whether I find the pacers at the start and whether they're in the same pen. I don't want to have to sprint at the start to catch them. It also depends how I'm feeling, what the weather's like, and my mood when I wake up. But I'm starting to actually believe that I might have it in my legs. If I feel less than 50/50 I'll take the 4 hour option. If I feel confident I'm more and more tempted to go for it.
It's more than getting a place in London. I may well do that through the ballot or the club anyway, and even if I don't there are other marathons, and other years to run London. It's something that I feel like I want to achieve so that I can draw a line under the past. One funny thing is that I've started to feel more confident about outing myself to people at running club and people on running forums since I started getting top 10% finishes in races - as though I want to prove myself as a runner before I reveal my obese little secret. If I can get the GFA time then it doesn't matter where I came from, or who I used to be, I've met an objective standard, and can be judged by that.
We'll see...
posted by YP at 9:08 PM
1 Comments:
I strongly vote for taking the higher-risk strategy. It's well-thought-out, the odds are good, and if for some reason you're not feeling great on the actual morning you can change your mind at the last minute. But I rather have confidence that you can make that 3:45 goal!
(Have been reading here with great enjoyment since the Stumptuous blog linked a little while ago--I'm on a similar line of things myself, only not [yet!] so fast a runner, very inspiring!)
Post a Comment
<< Home