WHY?
I sit here now roughly 48 hours after completing the 2017 Milwaukee Lakefront Marathon and wonder "why?" Why did everything seemingly go so well in training and then on race day things just didn't feel right? What was the disconnect between the two and is there something I can learn to use going forward? After every race it's important to be reflective on the experience of the training and the race to glean new information that might be useful going forward. So, why?
Was the training an issue?
At first blush, no. I had one of my highest interval completion rates at 89%. I hit 8/14 marathon tempo workouts perfectly and 12/14 with 80% or greater success. The average pace was a 7:02 min/mile and the last 8 were a 6:59 min/mile average. The long runs were good. The hybrids were good. The faster speed runs were good. I did run the easier runs quite a bit easier than scheduled. But I was aiming to keep my HR at less than 67% HRR per Daniels recommendation (and that's what felt right in training).
If the training were the problem, then the expected result should have been a massive fade at the end of the run. Not sufficient training means I could hold the pace in the beginning but not towards the end. But in reality, I couldn't even hold pace at the beginning. In addition, previous training cycles defined as worse (65% hit rate and 1/7 weeks above 70% hit) generated better results.
There was an indicator though. The last Marathon Tempo workout:
View attachment 274417
I had originally brushed this off as just a single bad run. This tends to happen for me during the taper. So no big deal. I said it had something to do with the sudden rise in T+D over the last couple of weeks. Prior to this run the last T+D over 120 was 8/17/17. But this may have been a warning sign something was wrong.
Was the weather an issue?
At first blush, no. The T+D was 95 in Grafton, minimal wind, and minimal cloud cover. By the end of the race, there was a stiffer wind (13-25 mph) and a T+D of 113. The sun was mostly out at the end as well. But a T+D of 95-113 is certainly reasonable for a marathon. At most, maybe a 0.5% pace adjustment. The wind might add a little extra adjustment as well.
But it's important to look beyond just the raw weather data. If the course is always the same from year to year, then the relative results should be similar as well. I finished in the top 4.6% overall (106/2292). Which means if I look at previous year's 4.6% finisher we can glean an insight whether the weather was indeed worse this year than average. This is based on the idea that the population that runs the Lakefront Marathon is always the same. So a 4.6% finisher one year should be relatively equal to a 4.6% finisher another year. If there is a difference, then one year was probably different than the other by definition of "difficulty".
View attachment 274418
I was 4.6% finisher in 2017. So, as you can see the 4.6% finisher is usually around 3:09-3:12. The two outliers are the last two years (2016 and 2017). 2016 was raining (but I still hit near training pace). 2015 was near perfect conditions (cloudy, tailwind, T+D of 80-90).
So while at first blush the weather seemed fine, it is indeed possible it added a little level of difficulty that went undetected. So, it's possible this would account for about a 3-4 minute (2.2%) difference in time. So not everything, but surprisingly a bit more than expected.
If we are to assume it was a 2.2% increase from "normal" conditions, then my projected time at Mile 17 (3:07:07) would have really been a projection of 3:03:05. I chose Mile 17 because this was before I removed the blind and still was giving Marathon Tempo effort. Given the likely slow down yet to occur after Mile 17, this moves from "at first blush, no" to "probable". A 3:03:05 would have been a likely finishing time.
The question is - would the weather explain the immediate inability to hit pace either unblinded or blinded? Or would it be expected to see a general slow down trend?
Was it something new I tried this training cycle (Beet-It or RunGum)?
Unlikely as both were not being consumed during the last M Tempo run.
I felt as if the Beet-It didn't provide any extra benefits at the end of the day. It sure didn't make me feel any different. I didn't have any noticeable decrease in effort, HR, or relationship between them.
However, I did feel the RunGum was helpful. The caffeine was noticeable and I think it will be something I add to race day going forward. I will likely chew some prior to the race and then again towards the end.
Was it my nutritional diet?
In March 2017, I made another change to my diet. I tried to get away from the sugar and added in a spinach/quinoa salad at lunch instead. During the Lakefront training, I also added in a snack of almonds and 1/2 PB sandwich. But was I eating enough to support the training?
View attachment 274441
3156 total calories: 421g carbs (52%), 101g fat (29%) and 168g protein (21%).
-On days with 90+ min run I'd take an E-Gel (150 calories) and runs at 120-150 min I'd take two (300 calories).
-For weekend, long runs I'd usually have a bagel, PB, honey and banana. But I usually didn't eat the "snack". Which would be a net change of +70 calories, +52g carbs, -15g fat, +1g protein.
View attachment 274440
So, what was my normal caloric burn like?
Well MyFitnessPal estimates my BMR to be 1,722 and my Garmin estimates 2,102. So a bit of a difference.
What about normal active daily life?
View attachment 274451
So "meals consumed" is calories in. Active burn is the exercise and life calories. And either MyFitness Pal or Garmin 235 provides the BMR calculation.
The truth of the matter is this: My weight prior to Lakefront 2016 was 156. My weight leading into the last few weeks of Lakefront 2017 training was 167. When I saw this on the scale, I started to panic a bit. I "felt" a little heavier, but I certainly didn't feel that much larger. So my goal was to get back down to 163-164 pounds by race day. I did this subconsciously and consciously by becoming really busy at work and not being able to eat the snack like I had consistently for the weeks prior (thus 3156 calories became 2683 calories during the taper). In the matter of 10-12 days my weight dropped back down into the 164 range. The question is - when did I make this change? I can't say for sure. I'd venture to guess by at least 9/21 it started, but it very well could have been right before that as well. Dependent on whether you believe the MyFitnessPal BMR or Garmin BMR dictates whether I was running a calorie deficit. And possibly that calorie deficit led to a feeling of no energy and thus flat on race day. Tough to say one way or the other.
Maybe the possible calorie deficit could also explain why it felt it took so much longer to recover from certain workouts. Might explain why I felt the need to go so much slower on easy days. Might explain why I actually gained weight (160 to 167) during this training cycle because I wasn't eating enough. But why would all of these things just suddenly crest to be an issue about 10 days out from the race?
So it begs the question - why?
When I first sat down to write this and before I had researched anything, I thought the answer was going to be clearly the nutrition was the only player. I sabotaged my own race experience at the last moment because of a slight weight gain and a desire to lose some extra pounds before the race. I tried to remind myself that the number on the scale matters less (if high) then does my final race time to me. I want to feel happy and fast. Possibly, my unhealthy relationship with food from my heavier days allowed the pendulum to swing too harshly in the opposite direction to eat too little.
But the weather and comparison of previous finishers in the same area leads me to believe that it might have in fact played a role as well. I certainly felt thirsty quite quickly in this race (having a noticeable deficit in water as soon as mile 4) and my salted face might have been another sign of inappropriate balance in my body. So, a matter of a 2.2% difference in finishing time may have been because of the weather even though it seemed like reasonable conditions.
Regardless, of why... this race will stick with me for a while. It's not that I didn't do well because I certainly did (finishing in the top 4.6% with a very respectable 3:14). But it's just that everything went so well leading right up until the race. As I tell others, no single race defines you. You remember it. You learn from it. You move on from it. This is me moving on from it realizing some factors may have been within my control and others may not have been. But at the end of the day, I put together a very solid race even without my best stuff. So, the next question is - what's next?
