Lets study The Fade

Righto, I want real world IM marathon Fade Data. All of `em too, not just cherry picking the ones you got right. First half, second half, total time and course details. Don't be shy. Time for the runners to brag and the crap pacers to man up with their disasters.

I want to see what the real Fade Factor is for your weekend warrior. I know everyone targets the 3:30 Golden Fleece (with the exception of the gazelles; Glenn, CEM, Harris et al) but they don't grow on trees.

I will start and as you can see they are ordinary so there is no excuses not to put them up.

1) 2.01, 2.28, 4.29 Port 07
2) 1.54, 2.19, 4.13 WA 08

A solid 22% for both when rounded but too small a study group.

Blouses

I have been googling the results and can't find mine with splits. Where did you get them? WIl be an interesting topic for sure.

Sheik Al E Hriken, round numbers will suffice for the exercise. Mine came from memory but I am always calculating splits and paces when running. Can't help it.

Bummer. I have no idea of the splits. IM OZ/Busso just have the total times listed. Would have been good to look at.

At Port if I remember correctly I went throught the first lap under 2.55 pace (if I remember correctly) I didn't have any idea of my pace until I completed the lap and remember thinking "Well you are not Patrick Vernay so this could get messy" LOL. I was chasing a mate who was 10mins up the road after after he rode under 5hrs inc transition. I was taking just over 3.30 a lap from him until he cramped near the end of the 2nd lap. If he hadn't it was gonna be epic for the finish. The 2nd lap wasn't too bad and I was just over 3hr pace. 3rd lap I was in front and took a few easy aid stations but was hurting alot. And as most know ran a 3.09. I reckon its the first lap that cost me a sub 3 and costs most others faster run times (thats the lesson). I now really rely on my Garmin (bought it after the race) to not overpace early. This overpacing isn't just a problem for triathletes I have seen MANY people do it running races time and time again.

Alex R wrote:Bummer. I have no idea of the splits. IM OZ/Busso just have the total times listed. Would have been good to look at.

Sheesh Alex you of all people I woulda thought you'd be all over this

http://ironman.com/events/ironman/westernaustralia/?show=tracker&rid=129&year=2007

me - only IM - IM OZ 08

first half 1.50.23 (approx)
second half 2.10.56 (approx)

total 4.01.19

I thought I would run around 3.40...

about 18.6% fade for me

Alex, for you at IMOZ 08

6.21.41 off bike

8.10.53 at 17.86k

9.06.28 at 24.78k
(av pace between these two 8.02)
Approx time for halfway add 26.02
8.36.55 therefore 1st half 2.15.14
Finish 10.53.58
2nd half
2.17.03

Sooo…
1st half 2.15.14
Second half 2.17.03
Almost even splits! (yes I understand your issues on this day…)

Thanks Aidan. Glad I got someone willing to play. Come on, don't be shy.

Aidan R wrote:Alex, for you at IMOZ 08


Sooo…
1st half 2.15.14
Second half 2.17.03
Almost even splits! (yes I understand your issues on this day…)

Hey, thanks mate. The middle 20km of that was where all the time was lost. First 5km and last 5km were OK.

IMWA 2007

21.1km in 1:45:56
21.1km in 1:58:04
That adds up to 3:45 even but the actual was 15 seconds faster at 3:44:45

Very close to 12% fade

I would say this one was well executed on the bike as I paced it to a pre set plan.

One that is worth looking at is my 2007 Port IM. This was my most enjoyable race by far, and the run went like this.....


21.1km 2:12
21.1km 2:12
That adds up to 4:24 but actual was 4:25.

Even split nearly to the second.....

So 3 of my 4 IMS have seen (I did not included the first one as it will have an enormous fade as it was a walk from 30km which is what 6 weeks training will do for you).....

Fade
0%
1%
12%

The fastest was the one with 12% fade. The fastest bike was the one with 12% fade. The fastest run was the one with 12% fade.

Go buy a power meter.....

More fade data based on Ironmanlive Athlete Tracker info:

Me
IMOZ 2008 = 4:08:53 (total time 10:55)
1st half = 1:56:16
2nd half = 2:12:37
difference = 16:20
fade = 14.05%

Me
IMOZ 2007 = 4:14:18 (total time 11:21)
1st half = 2:03:46
2nd half = 2:10:32
difference = 6:46
fade = 5.47%

Mrs C
IMOZ 2008 = 3:23:19 (total time 9:50)
1st half = 1:33:55
2nd half = 1:49:24
difference = 15:28
fade = 16.47%

Surprised by the extent of this fade, but the first half was a smokin time and the only people in front of her were Kate Major and Chrissie and she wasn't about to catch them.

Mrs C
IMOZ 2007 = 3:38:46 (total time 10:29)
1st half = 1:43:31
2nd half = 1:55:15
difference = 11:44
fade = 11.15%

Mrs C
IMOZ 2006 = 3:39.36 (total time 10:22)
1st half = 1:44:27
2nd half = 1:55:09
difference = 10:43
fade = 10.26%

The key to a (relatively) fast IM run - go 'fast' early because it is going to get ugly later anyway ???

Thanks Todd. C'mon Rogerio, you have a few races under your belt. Harris.

IM OZ 2007
21km: 2:07hrs
42km: 2.11 hrs
Total: 4.18 Hrs

IM NZ 2009
21km: 1.52
42km: 1.55
total: 3.47

How are you working out the fade?

In your case the fade is hardly worth worrying about!

2007 = 3.15%

2009 = 2.67%

Julie H wrote:IM OZ 2007
21km: 2:07hrs
42km: 2.11 hrs
Total: 4.18 Hrs

IM NZ 2009
21km: 1.52
42km: 1.55
total: 3.47

How are you working out the fade?

Awesome pacing Julie. You must have been happy with those.

I was taking the difference btw the two halves and dividing it by the mins of the first half,. eg for your first, 4/127 = 3%.

I reckon 3% would be about perfect because a neg split may show you have been a little too conservative and left some time out there.

Thanks Mick, yes was happy with those. I find once I start at a pace I stick to it, I suppose that is a good thing to be able to do.

Port 08
21.1K: 2.16
42.2K: 2.25
Total: 4.41
Fade: 6.62%
Expected time: 4.30

Port 09
21.1K: 2.08
42.2K: 2.19
Total: 4.27
Fade: 8.59%
Expected time: 4.15

Stand alone Marathon GC 07
21.1K: 1.37
42.2K: 1.49
Total: 3.26
Fade: 12.37%
Expected time: 3.15

My pacing is not the best as you can see, but I'm still learning in this sport. Oh, & I know my IM run times are fairly soft as well. I will hopefully rectify that next year.

Clarkey

I suppose I should have asked what expected time was as well. That would have put them all in more perspective. Thanks Clarkey for posting yours.