So instead I present you a question:
Would you rather run a good, solid marathon (or other distance) with consistent splits, and finish at the end feeling physically spent and confident that you did a great job?
or,
Would you rather run an uneven race, with inconsistent splits and some walking, and finish feeling like you didn't give it your all and could have done better... but with a finish time five (or more) minutes faster than option 1?
First option for sure. The second one, even though you went faster, you always think you could have done even better...
ReplyDeleteFirst one for sure. Way more satisfying. The second one is pleasant, but as Carla said - it just leaves you wondering.
ReplyDeleteReally! This is fascinating.
ReplyDeleteWhat about 10 minutes faster? 15 minutes? Is there a threshold where time becomes important? (Like, if option 1 was a 5:04 marathon and option 2 was 4:59, or the same with BQ'ing, that sort of thing?)
Second one, no doubt. The second one is me listening to my body and doing what it wants to at the time. I'm a "fly by the seat of my pants" type of racer, so option 1 sounds near impossible to me anyway!
ReplyDeleteHaving never run an even race, I would gladly give up 5 minutes for that victory. Now, 15 minutes? That's a different story.
ReplyDeleteI think that if I ever ran an even, consistent marathon, I would finish much faster anyhow, so the scenario doesn't work for me.
I think if I had a finish time five minutes (or more) faster I would look back and convince myself that maybe I DID give it my all and COULDN'T have done any better. My perception about how I perform can be very much manipulated by the reality of the result. So, option 2 for me!
ReplyDeleteOption 1 for sure. My marathon in Jan was 15 minutes slower than my PR, but I *nailed* the race and ran hard the entire last mile.
ReplyDeleteActually, that is the marker for me. For a marathon, if I can run the last mile rather than walk/limp/crawl the last mile, then I succeeded, even if my time is not awesome. Same for half marathon. If I raced it well, the last mile will be one of, if not THE, fastest. That equates to successful race regardless of time.
Of course, I'm fairly slow, and not competitive. I will never BQ, and have learned that not every race is going to result in a PR.
Option 1. I'd finish that race satsified that I couldn't have done any better. With option 2, I'd be wondering how much faster I could have gone if I'd run it smartly/consistently.
ReplyDeleteFirst one for sure!
ReplyDeleteDefinitely the first one. I've finished too many races feeling like I had more to give, and I hate that feeling. I'd rather collapse across the line knowing I left it all on the course.
ReplyDeleteWow - a majority vote for the first option! I can see the appeal, but I think I expected more of us to go for the second one - faster times for the win.
ReplyDeleteFor my answer, I guess it would depend on how close/far off I was from my goal. Like, if I could PR, I don't care if I have the most inconsistent race ever - a PR is a PR. I've done both the even race and the uneven race, but I'm with Ian - my PR *was* the even race (probably not a coincidence there!).
First option! 100% first option. The second would screw with me so mentally that it wouldn't be worth the PR. The mental breakdown I would have along the way would SUCK with option #2. I love the feeling of knowing I am on pace and can push myself mentally that way.
ReplyDelete