Is the course flat or is it slightly downhill? There seems to be a few guys running times there that are faster than they have ever approached on the track.
Is the course flat or is it slightly downhill? There seems to be a few guys running times there that are faster than they have ever approached on the track.
dsfdsaf wrote:
Is the course flat or is it slightly downhill? There seems to be a few guys running times there that are faster than they have ever approached on the track.
Not sure how it falls out net, but there is a slight but material uphill in the second 400, then a slight but material downhill afterwards.
I think people run fast in the race because there are no tactical considerations - you don't have to worry about positioning because there are no turns. You just run full speed all the time.
It's like the comparison between swimming and running. There are no positioning issues in swimming, so they regularly set world records in championship competition. but in track because of the curves, championship racing is almost always slow.
The other reason is mental - you can see the finish after about half way, which is a huge mental boost. And just when you feel tired at 1k, you get a nice downhill to push you in the back.
Leo said something about hitting the downhill at the end. And it's a road race. There's always going to be some kind of incline.
According to this post, it is [-18, +24, -31, -5] feet elevation per quarter mile: http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=3230827
Citizen Runner wrote:
According to this post, it is [-18, +24, -31, -5] feet elevation per quarter mile:
Sounds about right. IMHO the slight net downhill cancels out the fact it is hilly.
agip wrote:
I think people run fast in the race because there are no tactical considerations
Except for the Pros of course. They run a rather tactical race. But yeah, everyone else is just trying to go as fast as they can.
NYCRunner wrote:
agip wrote:I think people run fast in the race because there are no tactical considerations
Except for the Pros of course. They run a rather tactical race. But yeah, everyone else is just trying to go as fast as they can.
point taken, but I'd argue that the pro race is much less tactical than a track race, just because positioning isn't that important. They may key off other guys, but they don't have to get out fast, they don't have to run in lane 2,etc.
Come to think of it, just the fact that noone has to run in lane 2 makes a second or two difference. I would bet that in a typical 1500 on the track most people run 1510 meters or so - that is worth a second or two right there.
agip wrote:
point taken, but I'd argue that the pro race is much less tactical than a track race, just because positioning isn't that important. They may key off other guys, but they don't have to get out fast, they don't have to run in lane 2,etc.
Come to think of it, just the fact that noone has to run in lane 2 makes a second or two difference. I would bet that in a typical 1500 on the track most people run 1510 meters or so - that is worth a second or two right there.
Yep. I am pretty sure that on a good day with the right pacers, someone like HEG could have broken the WR on that course.
The course has a net 9.2m elevation loss (29.5 feet).
David Monti, Professional Athletes Consultant
New York Road Runners
It rises and falls slightly in 2 spots, but overall I felt it was about even. In spite of the fast times, it is generally run like a tactical race. Sidney Maree is one of the few guys to run it all out from beginning to end.
Citizen Runner wrote:
According to this post, it is [-18, +24, -31, -5] feet elevation per quarter mile:
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=3230827
Really?!?!? That much up and down? That seems a bit much. To go up 24 feet in a quarter mile, imagine being on a track and you start, then you go up 24 feet in one lap, that's taller than a typical two story building, and then you go down 31 feet!, that just seems like too much, that course is pretty darn flat.