Anglo Celtic Plate - UK and Scottish 100k Champs

Sorry the paragraphs of this blogs keep vanishing or changing, no idea why...

The short version: I finished 9th in the UK Champs and since that was a top 10 finish got a medal for that. I also finished 2nd Scottish Vet (I got another medal for that).

But check this out:

What a beauty!

Scotland won the Anglo Celtic Plate for the first time in history. It was the fastest three Scottosh runners who counted so I owe this medal to Craig Stewart (7:01), Grant Jeans (7:11) and Dave Gardiner (7:30).
I came 4th for Scotland with Paul Hart 5th but since we both were in the team we got the medal too.

Chuffed!

My race went well, but not quite as well as I had hoped (in my wild dreams I tend to have before big races). Only three weeks ago I was confident that I could run a 7:30. But the training in the last 2 - 3 weeks did not go too well and I too many injury enforced rest days. So I had lost some of that confidence. Those rest days where more or less precaution. I could have done more and run through the pain but I did not want to take a big risk since getting to the start line as healthy as possible was paramount.

The laminated race plan which I created a week or two before the race. The green zone marking the way to a 7:30 finish. Incidently I wrote that 7:42 on that sheet before the race.

So I got pretty close!

As in all my races it is always within the first seconds after the start when I know in what shape I am. And as soon as we went off on Sunday morning the 27th of March at 7am into the mist on that morning my legs felt sluggish. And they never woke up. I was over rested and over tapered and (I am sure Debs will find this amusing) probably de-trained ;-) I will however leave a more detailed analysis for later.

Since I had (sort of) committed to a 7:30 finishing time I still wanted to have a go at a 7:15 minute/mile pace or 4:30 minute/kilometre. I hoped that the high mileage I had done 3-4 weeks ago would still give me the endurance to push that to the finish. In deed I lapped the first 50k in 3:41 (even a bit too fast) but from kilometre 60 on the wheels started to come off. I did not notice this directly since my position did not change much in the field although it appeared that in particular the woman got faster and faster (since they are often the better pacers). But I just could not keep that high pace up. It was just impossible.

The second half was 20 minutes slower than the first and you can imagine that this was not quite what I had envisaged and you can guess that the second half of the race was a struggle. I went through all of the bells and whistles which come with so many Ultra Races: Why am I doing this??? I will never, ever do this again!!! EVER! 100k is just a MAD, MAD distance! SLOW DOWN, SLOW DOWN! STOP! Torture. To be honest I have to say the last section of the West Highland Way last year was a delight. - But this race was just brutal! It was all tarmac and it was pounding harder and harder and harder. It was not helping that my stomach, bowels and bladder complained and I had to take two extended toilet breaks. But enough of all the excuses. I was not the only runner in trouble or suffering. A 100k race is not like any other race (ok, 100 miles are even worse). Small issues can cost you.

It was an absolute privilege to witness the battle between Allen Smalls and Craig Stewart for the win. Both runners kept lapping me and stayed close together. And they I suppose they went through the same mind game of self discovery as I did. Only... "faster". Who would have thought that the race favourite Allen Smalls would break his 7:05 PB and still "only" finish second? We all had high expectations in Craig though but when he finished his first 100k in 7:01 winning this race it was just mind blowing.

The finishing results show how strong the field was

My pacing:
1st 50k 3:41
2nd 50k 4:01
The pacing for the first half was abviously inappropriate. Too fast. And I payed for it. But I had mentally committed to give that 7:30 a try and just could not let go (and also I had that laminated lap sheet, remember? ;-)). It is all back to the classic problem that you need to know your finishing time in advance in order to run even splits. And how do you know your finishing time in advance? And since this was my first 100k I just gave it my best shot.

I discussed this with many other runners and briefly before the race with young English runner Harry Johnston (I am almost twice his age). He came with a very impressive 3:13 50k as part of his race preparation (I cannot run near that fast) and I found his 7:20 target absolutely legitimate. However similar to me he hit the wall somewhere later in the race and lost a lot of time. But he recovered later to finish 10th. Not his A target on Sunday but I am sure he has the potential to achieve 7:20 and to be honest even faster.

I was lucky to get away with a 7:42 which is a great result for a 100k (for me anyway). And to be honest at around 80k I would have settled for any time under 8 hours. I could not have done it without Silke's support (and thanks Marco for the backup!). And there was nothing she could have done better. 10 out of 10. The venue was great. Pleasant. The 2.38k lap was fast. Almost pancake flat and I found the slight undulations rather helpful. Although I got confused with counting the laps and keeping up with pacing (based on lap splits) I don't think that caused too much trouble. Silke kept me up to date with average speed and everything I needed. And the officials were also spot on and called out runner by name and later the laps too. The organisation was perfect. Not to forget the team build up by Val!

I was spoiled by support. In particular the "West Highland Way Race Familiy" was there in great numbers cheering us on. Even from other runners on the course came support and encouragement. To name a few 50k runners (in no particular order): Jack Brown (winning the 50k title), Ian Beattie, Kate Jenkins (winning the ladies title), Neal McRitchie (all West Highland Way Race finishers), Sandra McDougall (will finish the WHW this year, no question), Gavin. Other spectators/supporters Murdo tM, Tim, Neal, Caroline, Keith, George, of course John Kynaston (check his superb race video) with Katrina, Davie Hall. Loads of more familiar faces but forgive me for not mentioning all of them.

Sadly Sharon Law dropped out. She was in sparkling shape but got stomach trouble. I hope she can get over the disappointment and will be back soon.

I got another tasteful present from the Consanis:

Thanks again to Adrian Stott and the Scottish team for having me!

Running for Scotland

Only three days to go. The 100k Anglo Celtic Plate / UK and Scottish 100km championships are getting closer and I have now started to taper. Hence there is some time to do some blogging instead. :-)

This race is of considerable importance to me since I have been selected to represent Scotland as part of the Scottish Team. I am honored and excited but also have to accept the responsibilities coming with that selection.

When Adrian Stott asked me a couple of months ago if I wanted to be considered for selection I did not hesitate to say yes. It is not just the great honor to get the oportunity to run for Scotland (I live in Scotland since 1997) but I also always wanted to run a 100k race. And not just that. For some reason I feel that I will produce a good result in such a race. It suits me. But hey, I also know that I could be completely wrong and make a mess out of the race... But let's hope not!

Me and the Scotland Vest

But there is some evidence that I probably have a good chance of a good 100k:

I actually have quite a few races which would compare to a 100k race:

The Highland Fling 2008, 2009, 2010. Only 53 miles but hilly and on rough terrain.

The Glasgow - Edinburgh Double Marathon. Only 89-90k but flat and almost a 100k.

I have added a few charts of the splits of the Glasgow-Edinburgh marathon from 2010 to show the development of my speed during the race. My plan was to run the 1st Marathon in 3:10 (which I did) and then try to keep that pace going.

The spikes pointing upwards A,C,D,E,G are showing the time lost at support stops.

B was the longer tunnel where I slowed down since there was cyclist coming the other direction.

Now there is a wee story about that downwards pointing F. Why did I speed up there?

I had a wee race with no one less than Ian Sharman. I did not know who he was at the time but boy he was so fast that I just had to let him go.

Now back to the 100k. I have taken the GEDM chart to aproximate a 100k race. see the chart below:

So what is that chart above supposed to mean?

1) I have taken the food/drink stops out since in the 100k race in Perth I will not stop to get my bumbag refilled or my bottle changed etc. I took my time in the Glasgow-Edinburgh race. But I will not have that luxury in Perth.

2) I have added 11k at a slower pace (which I find realistic enough) to make that a 100k. Altogether that would give me a 7:45 100k finish. That is of course based on my form as it was in 2010.

This year my training has been different and much more dedicated. So I would expect to run faster than that hypothetical 7:45.

So what has been different in my training?

1) Higher mileage over the Winter

2) Higher peak mileage (117 miles/week)

3) Specific training for a flat race (last year I did a lot of hill work since I focussed on the Highland Fling and West Highland Way race)

Otherwise I hope for less body weight. Certainly I will carry less kit than for the Glasgow-Edinburgh so I will be lighter.

Weekly mileage vs 7 day mileage

I have a rest day today just after completing a high mileage effort in order to peak for the 100k Celtic Plate / UK 100k champs which is now only three weeks away.

Below there is a chart of my recent daily mileage. Incidently you will see that I do not run every day. So there are quite a few 0's in the chart. I have added another column for "Last 7 days". Today and tomorrow are rest days...

What would be the most effective way to display the the training effort. In particular the state of the legs in respect of mileage etc...

If you insist on traditional methods to display the mileage for a calendar week only you will miss valuable data. The weekly mileage for a strict calendar week (Monday to Sunday) looks like this:

31/01 - 06/02: 57 miles
07/02 - 13/02: 60 miles
14/02 - 20/02: 44 miles
21/02 - 27/02: 92 miles
28/02 - 06/03: 67 miles

However if you look at the graph for the "Last 7 days" you will get a "weekly" mileage on a "daily" basis:

The graph shows actual "highs" and "lows" of mileage which then displays the actual impact / stress level of the last 7 days of training every day.

For example on the 19th of February I had only trained 42 miles for the "week" (that is the last 7 days). That also shows that I am very much at a state of rest (relatively speaking).

On the other hand on the 4th of March I have trained 117 miles for the last 7 days which is almost 3 times as much. The legs are under a lot of stress and tired accordingly. That 117 mile effort "vanishes" in the statistics if you consider a "week" only from "Monday to Sunday".

It also shows the periodisation effort more accurately. That is I did not just triple my mileage in order to peak. I only wanted to produce a peak mileage on fresh legs so I reduced the training effort before I went for a 100+ mile week.

So that's why I look at the last 7 days on a daily basis in order to assess the training impact more accurately.
And the actual peak mileage is simply the highest value from that chart. That is I have peaked at 117 miles. And that it reflects the obvious stress level. And vice versa the lows from the chart show the state the legs when they are most rested.

What do you think, does that make sense?