SSE Airtricity Dublin Race Series 2017

Podge83

Unthought Known wrote: »

My daughter handed me a gel at Milltown last year. I feel so guilty now I'm sending my medal back.

Quite right too - and shame of your daughter - but I suppose she can claim she was coerced by you!!

Bananaleaf

event wrote: »

If your pinning all your hopes on a bottle of Lucozade I'd either take it with me or have people on the course with some.

Birdie Num Num wrote: »

Bordering on the ridiculous here. The poster has a point which is irrelevant to wether the race organisers know what they are doing or not and the poster wasn't necessarily suggesting carrying any water never mind a kilo.

No, the poster wasn't suggesting carrying water. But they were suggesting carrying Lucozade. Considering the argument I would say 'same difference' really

average_runner

estariol wrote: »

Well glad that works for you, most sources seem to recommend somewhere between 300-800 mls/hr (obviously intensity and temperature matter) let's not get into a back and forth looking for citations. Personally I have consumed 2 litres + many times during marathons.

The point was that if you were to carry sufficient water to complete a half marathon that could mean carrying an extra kilo, not an ideal scenario for someone targeting a pb, much better if the organisers deliver on the promised hydration at the points in the race promised.

Your water in take should of happened the day before and not on the morning of it or during it.

The water stations are there to "top you up", ie a mouth full etc.

Not having the water stations was bad form but it was only a half marathon.

davedanon

average_runner wrote: »

Your water in take should of happened the day before and not on the morning of it or during it.

The water stations are there to "top you up", ie a mouth full etc.

Not having the water stations was bad form but it was only a half marathon.

You do see an awful lot of runners with water bottles that look like they're running closer to 6-7k than a 15+ mile long run.

estariol

average_runner wrote: »

Your water in take should of happened the day before and not on the morning of it or during it.

The water stations are there to "top you up", ie a mouth full etc.

Not having the water stations was bad form but it was only a half marathon.

Wow, at the risk of getting into a back and forth 'only a half marathon' sounds a bit condescending, it's still a big deal and challenge to many runners.

Hydration and water intake is a very individual thing, personally I stay hydrated every day but still need approx 400ml an hour during effort. I don't doubt your credentials but your "top you up" scenario is very much at odds with widely accepted hydration during exercise norms.

In my races, my gels etc. strategy is according to the water/ drinks stations, so for me its a big issue.

davedanon

estariol wrote: »

Wow, at the risk of getting into a back and forth 'only a half marathon' sounds a bit condescending, it's still a big deal and challenge to many runners.

Hydration and water intake is a very individual thing, personally I stay hydrated every day but still need approx 400ml an hour during effort. I don't doubt your credentials but your "top you up" scenario is very much at odds with widely accepted hydration during exercise norms.

In my races, my gels etc. strategy is according to the water/ drinks stations, so for me its a big issue.

Widely accepted? that's news to me, I have to say.

Did you ever try and run without all the water?

Would you, just for instance, need to drink 200ml of water during a 5k race (assuming it takes 30 mins, if that's alright)?

Bananaleaf

estariol wrote: »

Wow, at the risk of getting into a back and forth 'only a half marathon' sounds a bit condescending, it's still a big deal and challenge to many runners.
.

+1 I agree that's condescending.

I've done 10k races that have had water stations.

I agree with the point that your hydration should be done the day before - absolutely. You shouldn't need to stop at ALL the water stations.

However, I think that it's a big deal when water stations that are advertised (therefore, promised) are not there.

I would imagine that a lot of people did what I did and forwent water at mile 3 under the impression that there would be some at 6.

For my first half marathon, not getting water until mile 9 was a hindrance. It makes no real difference to me in the grand scheme of things, but its never great when a water station you are expecting to be there isn't.

davedanon

Bananaleaf wrote: »

+1 I agree that's condescending.

You can read it that way if you want, but I think he's just alluding to the fact that many runners won't even consider bringing along liquids unless the run is 15+ miles, and that's down to making sure plenty is taken on board the day before.

estariol

davedanon wrote: »

Widely accepted? that's news to me, I have to say.

Did you ever try and run without all the water?

Would you, just for instance, need to drink 200ml of water during a 5k race (assuming it takes 30 mins, if that's alright)?

Yes, I have run without water and no, I would not need 200ml water during 5k. But we're talking about a half marathon, besides that is not the point that was being made. I think it best not get caught up with what I drink vs what you drink while running.

The point was that if you are a runner who wants/needs water during a race, and the organiser stipulates water/sports drinks are available at x, y & z then you should (notwithstanding Podge83's post re: AAI guidelines) be able to rely on the fluids being available.

The suggestion was that if you need water/sports drink you should not rely on organiser and carry your own (post#445).

sideswipe

estariol wrote: »

Wow, at the risk of getting into a back and forth 'only a half marathon' sounds a bit condescending, it's still a big deal and challenge to many runners.
.

Bananaleaf wrote: »

+1 I agree that's condescending.

Sometimes facts seem condescending.

It is unnecessary and counter productive to ran a marathon or half marathon with the aim of finishing fully hydrated.
It is perfectly fine, in fact preferable to finish a race dehydrated. Of course running in hot conditions changes this giving extra importance on keeping topped up, but this is rarely an issue in this country.

I remember when I first started running I used to have stomach issues- this was from training with little water and then going to races and drinking too much because it was available.

estariol

@sideswipe, opinions are not *facts* maybe you need to re-read the posts. The statement came across as condescending, though I concede that perhaps that was not posters intention.

It is unnecessary and counter productive to ran a marathon or half marathon with the aim of finishing fully hydrated.

Don't remember that being anyone's contention. The posts relate to the organisers not providing promised water stations, and the resulting suggestion that you runners should not rely on water stations, the implication being they should carry what fluids they need.

sideswipe

estariol wrote: »

@sideswipe, opinions are not *facts* maybe you need to re-read the posts. The statement came across as condescending, though I concede that perhaps that was not posters intention.

It is unnecessary and counter productive to ran a marathon or half marathon with the aim of finishing fully hydrated.

Don't remember that being anyone's contention. The posts relate to the organisers not providing promised water stations, and the resulting suggestion that you runners should not rely on water stations, the implication being they should carry what fluids they need.

I'm aware that posts related to organisers not providing hydration stations- there is no debate there- they messed up.
I am interested in the subsequent conversation about hydration in general- in a constructive way I might add. If people are thinking it necessary to drink 2 litres when running races like this, I'm just trying to point out that it is not necessary. I think some might benefit from not drinking too much. There are many cases of hyponatremia which is caused by drinking too much, this is a potentially fatal condition and is arguably as dangerous if not more so than dehydration especially in our climate.

estariol

The two litres was suggested in relation to running a full marathon potentially over the course of around 4 hours not for a half marathon.

I still maintain hydration is quite individual, I would often consume approx. 400-500mls/hour in a half or a full, especially depending on gels, bars etc. and of course temperature & humidity.

I would never advocate a hydration strategy for anyone else, but I personally would never aim to be dehydrated and the end of a race.

average_runner

estariol wrote: »

Wow, at the risk of getting into a back and forth 'only a half marathon' sounds a bit condescending, it's still a big deal and challenge to many runners.

Hydration and water intake is a very individual thing, personally I stay hydrated every day but still need approx 400ml an hour during effort. I don't doubt your credentials but your "top you up" scenario is very much at odds with widely accepted hydration during exercise norms.

In my races, my gels etc. strategy is according to the water/ drinks stations, so for me its a big issue.

I wasn't putting the half marathon down, it just some people think they need alot of water once they go over 5k, which is not true.

Running the half is a great achievement for all. Panicking over the water is an issue that shouldn't affect you in a half marathon.

average_runner

estariol wrote: »

The two litres was suggested in relation to running a full marathon potentially over the course of around 4 hours not for a half marathon.

I still maintain hydration is quite individual, I would often consume approx. 400-500mls/hour in a half or a full, especially depending on gels, bars etc. and of course temperature & humidity.

I would never advocate a hydration strategy for anyone else, but I personally would never aim to be dehydrated and the end of a race.

Now don't take offence here.

Alot of half marathon's serve the water in cups that are way less than 200ml. So for you to hit your 200ml target you would need to stop at the station, take at least 3 cups without spilling any and then run straight after??

Gels wouldn't do much for anyone in a half marathon also!

estariol

I'm not easy to offend, I usually carry a 250ml bottle in halfs from the start, if its cups I top up if it's 250 bottles i swap them out. Over the course of a half (100 mins or so) I will drink between 600-700ml.

For a full I usually adopt the same strategy. A good example in the case of EOI's events (self suficient usually 4x laps) I bring and drink 4 bottles of powerade.

As for gels in a half, 7 & 14k, for a full every 7k.

squelch666

Anyone notice the markers not accurate off by 100 meters or so and when nearing the finish the marker went from a km to 800 meters ..

Slow_Runner

squelch666 wrote: »

Anyone notice the markers not accurate off by 100 meters or so and when nearing the finish the marker went from a km to 800 meters ..

GPS watches are not accurate - nearly every race I've done the mile markers are always 50-100m further on than my watch so the mile markers I'd say were spot on. Having said that the 12 and 13 mile markers came before my watch beeped so I assume these were slightly off, my final distance on the watch was 13.09 miles - looking back at all my other HMs they come in from 13.06 - 13.21 so within range.

davedanon

Gels are specifically designed to top up the body's limited supply of glycogen (carbs) which is the fuel for marathon running. When you run out of glycogen, your body resorts to burning fat, which converts to energy far less readily. This is the famous 'hitting the wall'. Your body typically has enough glycogen for 2/2.5 hours of running at marathon pace, although people obviously try and augment this by carb-loading for race day. Taking gels during a half-marathon has no value beyond placebo, although having said that an awful lot of people I know seem to misunderstand how they work - taking them on training runs, and taking one or two before a race, etc. I'm not trying to score points here, just attempting to separate fact from misguided beliefs for the benefit of all.

estariol

davedanon wrote: »

Gels are specifically designed to top up the body's limited supply of glycogen (carbs) which is the fuel for marathon running. When you run out of glycogen, your body resorts to burning fat, which converts to energy far less readily. This is the famous 'hitting the wall'. Your body typically has enough glycogen for 2/2.5 hours of running at marathon pace, although people obviously try and augment this by carb-loading for race day. Taking gels during a half-marathon has no value beyond placebo, although having said that an awful lot of people I know seem to misunderstand how they work - taking them on training runs, and taking one or two before a race, etc. I'm not trying to score points here, just attempting to separate fact from misguided beliefs for the benefit of all.

ah really, if you spout fact without reference you are basically a troll! metabolism is so varied there is no way you can make a coverall statement like that!
What you are claiming is absolute horse sh*t! I'm beyond trying to argue this point it has moved from I need x amount of water for a half, that I expected the race to comply with to "I'm a real runner and I'll explain your race needs etc."
Are you a genuine scientist or another idiot with too many opinions!

cite high impact journals that support your ideas please, or quit painting all with the same brush....please don't conflate your so called "misguided beliefs as facts". I'm beyond the shift this has thread has taken....blah blah blah, you don't need water, blah blah you don't need gels.

davedanon

Leaving aside the fact that you're calling me a troll, for citing commonly-known running knowledge, do I need to be an actual scientist before you'll accept anything I, or anyone, says?

There's a well-known book called Advanced Marathoning, by Pete Pfitzinger and Scott Douglas, which you might profitably consult. Neither of them are scientists, to be sure, just former high-end marathoners, so you may consider their advice suspect, but an awful lot of runners' shelves hold copies.

estariol

Taking gels during a half-marathon has no value beyond placebo please post reference for this! Then we can have a meaningful discussion on this point, most runners I know rely on some sort of refueling and re-hydration strategy in a half marathon.

Quite frankly writing a book means nothing in real terms! and your pivot to 'someone wrote a book' so the debate on hydration a fueling is some how moot is beyond risible. I've seen absolute crap published in both Cell and Nature many times that absolutely begs for the peer review system to be examined

If you need gels or fluid in a half or full then where is the problem, your contention that its a placebo is totally at odds with personal experience for most runners I know.

davedanon

estariol wrote: »

Taking gels during a half-marathon has no value beyond placebo please post reference for this! Then we can have a meaningful discussion on this point, most runners I know rely on some sort of refueling and re-hydration strategy in a half marathon.

Quite frankly writing a book means nothing in real terms! and your pivot to 'someone wrote a book' so the debate on hydration a fueling is some how moot is beyond risible. I've seen absolute crap published in both Cell and Nature many times that absolutely begs for the peer review system to be examined

If you need gels or fluid in a half or full then where is the problem, your contention that its a placebo is totally at odds with personal experience for most runners I know.

I have no interest in debating the foundations of running wisdom with you. I have better things to do. You continue with your water and gel-quaffing.

ligerdub

davedanon wrote: »

Leaving aside the fact that you're calling me a troll, for citing commonly-known running knowledge, do I need to be an actual scientist before you'll accept anything I, or anyone, says?

There's a well-known book called Advanced Marathoning, by Pete Pfitzinger and Scott Douglas, which you might profitably consult. Neither of them are scientists, to be sure, just former high-end marathoners, so you may consider their advice suspect, but an awful lot of runners' shelves hold copies.

I have been reading that book, and I've not seen that advice in there. In fact I've just read a section that suggested the use of gels during long runs.

Admittedly they do say you have enough glycogen to last for X time and hitting the wall is when you run out of it etc. It also says the importance of topping up after a run.

However, I've not seen anything on there that suggests there's no need to take sugar/gels while running. In fact they stress the importance of not depleting your glycogen stores.

davedanon

ligerdub wrote: »

I have been reading that book, and I've not seen that advice in there. In fact I've just read a section that suggested the use of gels during long runs.

Admittedly they do say you have enough glycogen to last for X time and hitting the wall is when you run out of it etc. It also says the importance of topping up after a run.

However, I've not seen anything on there that suggests there's no need to take sugar/gels while running. In fact they stress the importance of not depleting your glycogen stores.

It's a while since I read it, but I'm pretty sure they advocate NOT using gels on training runs, but deliberately abstaining in order to train the body to work more efficiently without supplemental carbs.

davedanon

From memory, I recall a section, in fact, where they discuss 'fast finish' long runs, where you accelerate to MP for the last few miles, and they 'allow' the use of gels there. But for bog-standard long runs, no gels, and ideally no breakfast either. The more the body learns to do with less fuel, the better it will go on race day, when you're A) stuffed with carbs, and carrying gels for extra fuel if needed

sideswipe

estariol wrote: »

ah really, if you spout fact without reference you are basically a troll! metabolism is so varied there is no way you can make a coverall statement like that!
What you are claiming is absolute horse sh*t! I'm beyond trying to argue this point it has moved from I need x amount of water for a half, that I expected the race to comply with to "I'm a real runner and I'll explain your race needs etc."
Are you a genuine scientist or another idiot with too many opinions!

cite high impact journals that support your ideas please, or quit painting all with the same brush....please don't conflate your so called "misguided beliefs as facts". I'm beyond the shift this has thread has taken....blah blah blah, you don't need water, blah blah you don't need gels.

Wow- Personally I was interested in the hydration/fuel debate but you seem quite tetchy if anybody gives an opinion. If you need every statement backed up by peer reviews I suggest I'm not sure you're on the best website:D

Most people here are trying to be helpful. I do not have any peer reviews into gel use to link but maybe it would be a good idea to research race results from times when gels were not available- standards should have gone way up wouldn't you think? Well they haven't, non-scientific I know but it does ask some interesting question about their effectiveness.

Having said that, the bottom line is do whatever suits yourself and what you find works for you. All these things things being discussed are individual in terms of your decisions for yourself, but it may help to be open to the views of others rather than thinking people are being condescending and have an attitude of "I'm a proper runner, do what I say".

For what it's worth I always took gels during long training runs. I really wasn't sure if I was getting any benefit from them so I stopped and saved them for race day (marathons). I started running long runs on empty- the effect was I started to feel the benefit during races, I found training with gels was teaching my body to run with gels, when the better training stimulus was to run low on glycogen, teaching the body how to cope.
I did the same with caffeine, I stopped drinking it 2 weeks before a marathon, then I'd have a caffeinated gel at the 20-22 mile mark and it honestly gave me a huge lift.
I did these things after reading 'facts' online and then trying out what suited me.

average_runner

I would of used gels for my 20 mile runs, reason why? To find the one's that my stomach can handle and practice what I will do in a race.

Now regarding gels for a marathon and when to use them, it's "usually" after the 2 hour mark your body runs low on glycogen so you might need to top it up, some people do and some don't.

Now I have seen people taking gels before a 5k race and other distances, each to your own but they don't have any effect especially if your drinking a glucose drink also.

Now most gel companies and top running coaches would recommend one gel for a half as usually at half marathon pace your levels get low after 90 mins, but if you are drinking fizzy drink or glucose drink you won't need a gel.

I would never use a gel for a half but that's me. I am not a top runner just average.

If you really want the science just google it.

Unthought Known

Maybe need to start a dedicated thread for fueling strategies? This one is veering off-topic.

sideswipe

Unthought Known wrote: »

Maybe need to start a dedicated thread for fueling strategies? This one is veering off-topic.

Ah sure t'is better than talking about the traffic;)
Anyway SSE Airtricity Race Series 2017 in done- Not sure what the future holds for it? Hopefully a move back to the park for the half.

average_runner

sideswipe wrote: »

Ah sure t'is better than talking about the traffic;)
Anyway SSE Airtricity Race Series 2017 in done- Not sure what the future holds for it? Hopefully a move back to the park for the half.

Actually i would love to see the 10 miler and half marathon go back to its old dates and be a proper race series for the marathon.

The current date for the half means you can't race it a 100% as it takes 12 days to fully recover so too close to the marathon

sideswipe

average_runner wrote: »

Actually i would love to see the 10 miler and half marathon go back to its old dates and be a proper race series for the marathon.

The current date for the half means you can't race it a 100% as it takes 12 days to fully recover so too close to the marathon

Yeah good point. Think I'll head down to Charleville again, brilliant race and set up. Running a half close too the marathon is a risk though- bit of a taper and some recovery means prime training time missed.

davedanon

average_runner wrote: »

The current date for the half means you can't race it a 100% as it takes 12 days to fully recover so too close to the marathon

Who says? what are your credentials? Are you a scientist? Have you a PhD?

positron

Sad to see this thread has gone a bit err.. off track.

This was my first time taking part in SSE series - and as someone new to running, I thoroughly enjoyed it. Online registration, email communication, social media updates, race bibs in post etc all absolutely spot on. The 10k and 10m was superbly organised, plenty of marshals, nice goodies, great crowds, weather and atmosphere. The half had issues of course. But once you get in and started running, there was a mixed bag of great setup and volunteers, route combined with a bunch of issues due to various reasons. Could have been better, but overall I enjoyed it (despite waiting an hour to get in, and two hours to get out of there).

Overall I personally think it was a good thing - especially considering how much various big name corporate sponsored runs are charging (30-40 euro seems to be the going rate for 10k events in Dublin, even here in Louth). I am looking forward to doing this again next year.

Van.Bosch

positron wrote: »

Sad to see this thread has gone a bit err.. off track.

This was my first time taking part in SSE series - and as someone new to running, I thoroughly enjoyed it. Online registration, email communication, social media updates, race bibs in post etc all absolutely spot on. The 10k and 10m was superbly organised, plenty of marshals, nice goodies, great crowds, weather and atmosphere. The half had issues of course. But once you get in and started running, there was a mixed bag of great setup and volunteers, route combined with a bunch of issues due to various reasons. Could have been better, but overall I enjoyed it (despite waiting an hour to get in, and two hours to get out of there).

Overall I personally think it was a good thing - especially considering how much various big name corporate sponsored runs are charging (30-40 euro seems to be the going rate for 10k events in Dublin, even here in Louth). I am looking forward to doing this again next year.

I'd guarantee the half will be perfect next year, I've been doing the RS for about 9 years and this is the first time I'd ever heard anything negative said about any race run by these guys.

Bananaleaf

average_runner wrote: »

The current date for the half means you can't race it a 100% as it takes 12 days to fully recover so too close to the marathon

When did the half used to be on? Was it August or earlier in Sep?

average_runner

Bananaleaf wrote: »

When did the half used to be on? Was it August or earlier in Sep?

The 10 mile was on around the 15th of August and the half the first week of Sept. So you got a chance to race the half and recover.

Also the 10 mile and half used to be two laps of military hill and the Upper glen!

Now that was a tough race.

davedanon

Van.Bosch wrote: »

I'd guarantee the half will be perfect next year, I've been doing the RS for about 9 years and this is the first time I'd ever heard anything negative said about any race run by these guys.

Most likely by moving it back to the Phoenix Park. They tried to fix something that wasn't broken. Or, as the Germans say:

'Schlimmbesserung' - An improvement that makes things worse.

ligerdub

davedanon wrote:

Most likely by moving it back to the Phoenix Park. They tried to fix something that wasn't broken. Or, as the Germans say:

davedanon wrote:

'Schlimmbesserung' - An improvement that makes things worse.

The Irish have a saying for it too.....Fine Gael.

Ho ho.

davedanon

ligerdub wrote: »

The Irish have a saying for it too.....Fine Gael.

Ho ho.

Yes. Bring back Fianna Fail.

Ho ho.

Sunny Disposition

Was disgusted with the half marathon, especially as I crossed the country for it.
Very poor organisation. I made the start okay, but was standing around for ages due to the delay.
I can understand traffic problems, but the start, where everyone was put into a field, was a fiasco as well. Then the lack of water on the route was terrible, was really looking forward to getting lucozade late on but no sign.
I won't be back next year anyway, contempt shown for runners at the event.

quickbeam

Reports in on this year's HM event:

Press Release

Report

Next year's back to Phoenix Park anyway.

average_runner

The 10 miler will be earlier this year due to the pope doing a mass there around the 25th.


Back to the old date i say, which is better