Comments on: ‘Digital’ Marathons

By: Ben Lawson

Ben Lawson — Sun, 12 Nov 2006 02:41:44 +0000

I train with my iPod nano & Nike+ pedometer, music really adds to my enjoyment, and it’s nice to get live pace information. I ran in the Toronto Half Marathon a few weeks ago and carried them with me. I kept the volume very low, so I could easily hear and talk to people around me. It really helped me stay focused. Nice to see the run plotted out afterward too.

By: Jack

Jack — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 11:59:43 +0000

I generally wear a stopwatch when I train and race, but that’s about it. I have tried an MP3 player, but I prefer to run without it.

By: Perry

Perry — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 00:09:41 +0000

I like to run with an iPod. The first 12 marathons I did, I had no music, MP3 players or anything else. But for my next 9, I’ve gone digital. It’s just a more effective use of my time. I can run a marathon, read a book (audio) and juggle all at the same time.

I should note however, that I have taken to wearing the headphones in only 1 ear. That way I can still hear the crowds when they are around. In New York, there’s nobody on those bridges so a little music/talk helps a lot.

By: Jeanne

Jeanne — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 23:50:22 +0000

I pretty much have three paces. Very slow, slow, and a little faster. No garmin needed!

By: Funky Dung

Funky Dung — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 20:09:26 +0000

I ditch my heart monitor for a race so I can use my regular stopwatch to record splits. I’ve tried running without my Walkman and hated it. I’m just a musical guy. Silence (or near to it) drives me nuts. I don’t care how many times experienced runners tell me I’m disassociating by listening to music and should be associating instead by “listening” to my body because without music I would likely eventually give up running. People tell me I don’t really like coffee because I add so much cream and sugar and I ignore them, too. The bottom line is that you have to do what works for you. I like zoning out to tunes when I run and that hasn’t stopped me from getting a lot better in the year and half since I started. As long as it’s not a hindrance, I don’t intend to give up listening to music while running.

By: Soozan

Soozan — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 19:29:32 +0000

Ha! I ran my pr of 2:04 during a half once and made six phone calls . . . I look back now and wonder how fast I could have gone if I wasn’t on the phone the whole time!

By: Jessica

Jessica — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 18:56:16 +0000

I have mixed feeling about running hardware. During the Nike Women’s Marathon I had only my watch. I do sometimes where my ipod in races. I even considered it during that marathon. But I’d keep the volume low so I could hear the cheering, etc. Most marathons have some lonely and quiet sections and music can help. I’m not so sure about cell phone use during a race though – people can certainly get carried away with their phones.

I run with an ipod on a lot of my training runs. I use a Suunto Watch that I just bought. However, I also enjoy very much my “unplugged” runs.

Either way.. I think it’s important to not let technology be a crutch in general – and especially to our running.

By: Adeel

Adeel — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 17:56:39 +0000

Mark, I used to be just like that. I once ran an indoor 3,000 (not a marathon, 3k around a 200-metre track) with kilometre splits of 3:16, 3:44 and 3:58. I used to start workouts I couldn’t finish because I’d simply gone out way too hard. I’m sure that some people might have a “gift” for knowing what pace they’re going at, but I’m not one of them, and I think for the most part it’s experience.

Running by feel helped me get a sense of pace. I run a lot of workouts on an 850-metre loop and I can tell the difference between 2:58 and 3:01. Previously I would run some 2:50s, go to 3:15 for a while and maybe pop a 3:23 before coming home in 2:55…and it all felt the same to me.

There’s nothing a Garmin does for you that can’t be done on any sort of loop. More importantly, what do you do on a hilly race on a hot day if all you know is how to keep pace with the Garmin? The answer, of course, is that you end up listening to your body, not a gadget.

When the world’s best runners often train on courses that can’t even be measured, much less yield an accurate pace, I can’t justify the need for a Garmin.

By: Mark Iocchelli

Mark Iocchelli — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 17:35:58 +0000

Adeel, I think it’s easy to SUGGEST that someone just “figure out during training how it feels to go at a hard but sustainable pace, then aim to replicate that feeling on marathon day” but, from my perspective, it’s much harder to actually DO THAT.

I have always had an EXTREMELY difficult time figuring out the appropriate pace and effort I should be running at. I would go so far as to say this is an extremely difficult thing for many people to learn. I think some people can be as gifted at figuring out pace and effort as they can be at running fast.

In that sense, I am very sold on the use of a heart rate monitor for connecting pace with effort. It is a tool I use to make up for my inability to connect pace with effort.

In other words, the reason us mere mortals may need extra gear might have to do with our physical limitations comparted to the elites – many of whom I imagine have super fine tuned biofeedback ability.

By: Adeel

Adeel — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 16:53:14 +0000

If an MP3 player or a cell phone makes the marathon more enjoyable, that’s one thing, but the performance benefits of a Garmin 305 or a Polar 800 are negligible. I don’t think I saw a footpod on Paul Tergat’s flats yesterday. Running might be the only sport in which amateurs have more technologically advanced gear than professionals.

This is the best quote:

“Alan Culpepper, a top American marathoner who will compete in New York, feels the same way. “The problem with technology is it can get you away from your own barometer,” he said. Why not figure out during training how it feels to go at a hard but sustainable pace, then aim to replicate that feeling on marathon day?”