Untamed Runner

One area that all runners have to deal with in their training and racing is unexpected changes or circumstances. If my warm-up routine gets changed because the parking logistics of the race are more challenging than I planned on, my first reaction is not to roll with it, it’s, “Crap. That messes up my plan.”

However, in a few cases where my pre-race plans have not gone exactly how I laid them out, things have still turned out well, or even better than I expected. Still, it takes some mental adjustment.

Since it’s impossible to control every circumstance out there (illness during training, bad traffic going to the race, etc.) it’s important to be prepared for the unexpected. How the heck can we do that? I don’t have a perfect answer but I have an idea I’m going to try out over the next few months.

For my training for the winter/early spring, I have a set number of miles I want to log per week and certain types of workouts I want to include. However, one day per week I’m doing a “Wild Card” and on that day, I’m going to blindly draw a workout from three or four different ones. All of them will be within the same type of difficulty. It might be five miles at an average pace, or a two-mile threshold, or a speed workout that has one-third to one-half the number of reps I would do for a full one. While I will have designed and picked the workouts that I’m choosing from, by not knowing exactly what I’ll do until the day of the workout, I think it will help acclimate my brain and body to unexpected race day or training surprises. A full evaluation to follow sometime later…

The Dry Creek Striders traditionally do a Super Bowl Time Trial on Super Bowl Sunday and this year, we continued that. We decided on a two-mile run at the Mead High School track for early this morning. Three of us were able to make it and we had varying expectations. Collin was relatively tapered and looking for a solid predictor of his time expectations for the season. DJ was not as tapered but had been incorporating speed work into his training. I’ve just started my formal training and was coming in after a tough week of training mileage.

Before diving into the results of that and moving solidly into 2026, there are a few notable team results from 2025 to highlight.  All of us tried carbon-plated shoes for the first time and our times were very good with them. While that’s a small sample size, so far they lived up to their reputation. I tried a new event, the 3000M, on a track. DJ ensured that we kept our interstate racing alive as he competed in two races in Florida. Collin earned the team’s 50th individual win this past fall. And, we notched our second-ever podium sweep in March at the Lucky Brew 5K in Windsor.

Onto 2026. For the Super Bowl time trial, we met at 8:00 with an expected start time of 8:30, factoring in a warm-up run, stretching, etc. The order of finish really isn’t doubt. The big questions are what our times look like against our expectations. Our reactions to our results ranged from “meh” to enthused. I came in on weary legs and my time reflected that, so it wasn’t a big surprise. DJ finished within the realm of his expectations. Collin came in faster than his predicted time.

As an added bonus, since this year is Super Bowl LX, we did a 60M dash after the two-mile. None of us are or ever have been sprinters and the results pretty much reflected what you would expect from three distance runners who just finished a two-mile, have no starting blocks, and possess zero sprinting experience. But, we each earned a personal best (it had to be since we’d never done one before) and it was fun.

We’re still sorting out the beginning of the 2026 race schedule and will keep that updated on our team page.

We’re now fully into holiday season which often means busier schedules, more gatherings, and possible travels. This also can mean that it’s more challenging to keep up training miles. I’ve posted several times in the past on different ways to adapt to the season in ways that can allow you to maintain some semblance of fitness without overly taxing your schedule. Instead of rewriting them, I’ve linked to them below. The first is a general overview of ways to adjust schedules and expectations; the second is a bit on making yourself visible in dark conditions; the third is a brief tip on how to adjust to brutally cold temperatures.

I’ll reinforce one point from the third post, which is to carry an extra piece of headgear on longer runs in cold weather. The other day, I almost didn’t. It was in the low twenties and I was planning on eight miles at a moderately fast clip. I figured that if I could finish in an hour or so and if I was moving fast, I wouldn’t need it. Thank goodness I did carry an extra headwrap because when I went through mile six and the breeze picked up, my soaked-through hat was doing far more harm than good and the fresh, dry headwrap felt wonderful.

https://untamedrunner.com/index.php/2024/11/19/holiday-training/

https://untamedrunner.com/index.php/2021/12/11/holiday-schedules/ 

https://untamedrunner.com/index.php/2025/03/05/winter-running-or-summer-in-reverse/

This isn’t a direct sequel to my last post, it simply happens that I had additional new experiences since that time. On Sunday, I raced a 1600M at a new track meet that was announced recently by the Boulder Road Runners. Though I hadn’t planned on racing until early September, the meet occurred near my house and was inexpensive by race standards. My expectations were low since this event wasn’t on my radar, but I couldn’t reconcile turning down a meet with those two factors.

How was this new territory? The race was at 5:00 on a Sunday evening, which is unusual. I’m 99.9% sure I’d never raced on a Sunday evening. There are plenty of races on Sunday mornings where I’ve competed and I’ve done evening races, just not in combination. It wasn’t a radically new experience, but it was a “first” for my running portfolio.

The other new experience was the temperature at the start of the race and an effect from it. It was in the low 90s with the sun beating down. Readers of my blog are well-aware that I enjoy running in the heat and this temperature was still far-off of my personal record of running in 105.8 degrees. It was basically tied for the hottest race I’d competed in, which was 91 degrees during a nighttime 5K in Phoenix, AZ. The key word there is nighttime.

500 meters into this race, my throat went to parched dry and raspy. I was stunned. I’d experienced this in hot weather running before, but never until I was much further into the run. This didn’t happen at all in Phoenix. I came up some possibilities for why it occurred.

Most of us are well-aware of the difference between being in the sun versus shade on a hot day. There were patchy clouds around race time but for the duration of the 1600, it was all sun with nothing blocking it. The bigger factor, I think, was the intensity of the race. On a long run in hot weather, I may be going at a per-mile pace of anywhere from 8-minute-something to very high 6-minute-something. On Sunday, my final time was 5:52. I was pushing my body at a higher level, trying to suck in more oxygen than I normally would, and that likely caused some of the drying out. It’s true that I wasn’t going much slower in Phoenix (roughly 6:10 mile pace) but it is slower and I go back to the sun intensity. Also, on a long run in hot weather I’ll carry fluids, which obviously staves off the dry throat factor.

The photo at the top of the blog is post-race from Sunday and I’m holding up my third-place prize: a microwavable “Beast Mode Breakfast” meal. It ranks among the more unusual prizes I’ve taken home. It was much easier to prepare than the frozen turkey I won from one race, and just slightly more time-consuming to prepare than the bundt cake I won at a different one.

Over the past few years, I’ve run at several local “all-comers” track meets in the area, mainly at those hosted by the Boulder Road Runners running group. The meets are exceptionally well-organized and fun. They offer athletes of all ages and talent levels to compete in a variety of events, ranging from the 100M to the 5000M for running, and field events including jumps and the javelin.

The event offerings change among the different meets so a couple of them may have the mile run (1609M) while others feature the “metric mile” or the 1500M. One this summer even offered the 3000M.

The 1500M (3.75 laps on a 400M track) and 3000M (7.5 laps on a 400M track) are common events at professional track meets. They’re less common at US events. I’d done the 1500M at one of the meets in the summer of 2024 but wanted to give it another go as I realized my pacing strategy needed a major tweak. I had never competed in a 3000M and opted into for that, too. That was the new territory.

The old territory came with my doing both events in the same evening, separated by roughly 90 minutes. However, I hadn’t done a “double” in competition since my high school track days where that’s common, and I was very rusty on how to handle that. I didn’t want to coast in the 1500M, the first event, and only preserve my legs for the 3000M, and I also didn’t want to get to that race with my legs and energy sapped from the first one. How to plot my pace to maximize my times in both?

I took my most recent 5000M time, adjusted the pace down a bit for the 4500M total I would actually be racing plus the 90-minute break, and came up with what I felt were reasonable times. Suspense saver–I ran a few seconds faster than both of my predictions so I think I had the math right. After the 1500M, I still felt fairly good. Following the 3000M, I was toast–nothing left.

The second challenge was what to do between the races. I settled on running a slow half-mile right after the 1500M, followed by resting for a bit, then doing another half-mile-plus re-warm-up for the 3000M. Given how I felt and how the races played out, that worked for me.

Since I’d never done a 3000M, my strategy was to go out at the pace I was 99% sure I could hold for the first 3.5 laps, then just go with however I was feeling. I’ve noticed in a two-mile (3218M, or roughly eight laps) that my brain is stuck on 5000M mode until I get to lap five, when I realize I’m over half-way done, which creates a pleasant mental boost. In the 3000M, on lap three I was having serious doubts about my pace. I think this was partly due to my doubling up on events and then similar to the two-mile, as I entered the final four laps, my brain shifted.

The tweak for the 1500M? The first time I ran it, I calculated my time for the first 300M, followed by my 400M splits after that. My rationale was simple. The 1500M starts 100M around the track from the eventual finish line and I figured it would be easier to use that as my main marker. It’s important to note that many track athletes think in terms of 400M splits for events that are multiple laps.

The reality was that when I started with a 300M split, my mid-race math got wobbly. I don’t know that it greatly impacted my time but when you’re making adjustments in that short of a race, you don’t want to be too far off. This time, I switched to thinking in terms of even 400M splits for my first three laps, using the start line as my marker, and then going all-out for the final 300M. That worked much better.

I don’t know how often I’ll seek out more doubles as they present a challenge. Besides the physical part, when you can’t really go 100% for the first event and then you know you’re already a little depleted for the second, there is the question in the back of my mind, “How much faster could I have gone?” On the other hand, it’s fun to have two possibilities of success, or a situation where you can have a great first or second event, helping to erase any disappointment from another one.

Following my last post, Faith Kipyegon ran a 4:06.91 in her sub-4 attempt, leaving many to believe that it could be some time before a female breaks the four-minute barrier in the mile. Part of the rationale is that many factors were set up in her favor yet she got about .75 seconds closer to 4:00. At that level, that’s still a commendable amount of time. And that’s the point. If nearly seven more seconds need to be shaved off, that’s a ton.

How long will it take for sub-4 mile by a female to happen? This post does not suggest an answer but there are a couple of interesting numbers to consider.

The women’s ratified mile world record is 4:07.64 and the 800M record is 1:53.28. Using 800M splits, the difference is 9.3%. (If you’re curious, the men’s mile world record is 3:43.13 while the 800M record is 1:40.91. Using 800M splits, the difference is 10.7%.)

Using 9.3%, the women’s 800M world record would need to be basically 1:50 to convert to a 3:59 mile. Over the last twenty-eight years, the men’s 800M record has been broken four times but by a total of .81 seconds, or basically four-fifths of one second. The women’s record has stood since 1983 so there’s not a more recent set of time drops to consider. Either way, we’re talking fractions of seconds in races of these lengths, not multiple seconds.

Aside from the significant time drop that would be needed, there are fewer instances to compete in the mile because many events, including the Olympics, use the 1500M, also known as the “metric mile.” Often in professional races, there is less emphasis on time and more on tactics as the competitors are aiming to win the race, instead of gassing themselves too early on a record attempt. This means that even when there are mile races, there’s no guarantee that the mile record is the focus.

Barring a breakthrough, generational talent, with the smaller number of mile race opportunities, it may be a while before we see a woman go under 4:00 in the mile.

All that being said, it’s interesting and commendable of Nike to hold an event like that. It’s also admirable for an athlete to take that on. While I’m sure Kipyegon was well-paid for the attempt, that is a lot of pressure to bring on yourself for a tough attempt.

Sources used:

800 metres world record progression – Wikipedia

Breaking barriers: A timeline of men’s and women’s mile records | AP News

LetsRun.com: The Home Of Running – LetsRun.com

On 26 June, Nike is sponsoring an event where Faith Kipyegon, the current women’s world record holder for the mile (1609M) and 1500M, will make a dedicated attempt to be the first woman to run a mile in under four minutes.

Similar to the sub-2:00 marathon attempts for Eliud Kipchoge, Nike is doing a few things to maximize Kipyegon’s chances of breaking this barrier, including specially designed clothes and shoes, and a group of pacers.

Will she break the mark? Her current world record for the mile stands at 4:07.64 so she needs to run 7.65 seconds faster in order to break 4:00. When someone is already that fast at that distance, 7.65 seconds is a lot of time. Specifically, it’s a little over 3% faster.

The ratified world record when Kipchoge ran the Ineos 1:59 Challenge was his own 2:01:39. To go under two hours, he needed to run about 1.4% faster.

Kipyegon’s 1500M world record time is 3:49.04. She would need to cover the remaining 109M in 10.95 seconds to break 4:00. Usain Bolt’s world record 100M time is 9.58 seconds, which translates to a 10.44 109M time. That is not a time that a distance runner is currently capable of at the end of a grueling mile.

The clothing and shoes that Nike has designed will certainly be helpful. On the other hand, since she’s been at a world-class level for several years and wearing exceptionally good gear and shoes, I would question how much more of a boost these items will be compared to what she’s been wearing already.

That also leads to the question of her maximum speed. Given that she’s a seasoned runner and not someone in their early twenties who just shocked the world with a 4:07, it’s hard to imagine that there could be a significant jump in her time. On the other hand, Cole Hocker PB’d by nearly 3 seconds in the 1500M at the Olympics in Paris. He is younger but that was a massive jump given his experience and the distance.

The one factor that could help her the most is the total distance. I pointed out prior to the Ineos 1:59 Challenge that Kipchoge’s biggest advantage was not having to run one step more than 26.2 miles. His course was precise. It’s possible to run only 26.2 on a world major course but that is the absolute minimum, meaning that if you veer off for a water bottle, as they do, or run slightly off of one tangent, you’re adding distance.

Kipyegon’s world records came during races and in those, staying exactly on the inside line of the track is going to be challenging, if not impossible. This means that every time you go off the inside line, you’re adding distance. 50M represents just over 7.5 seconds in a four-minute mile. Did she add that much in her prior attempt? Even if she added just 25M, then she would need to find around four more seconds to go under 4:00.

A non-tangible factor in Kipyegon’s favor is delivering top performances at key times. Winning three straight Olympic gold medals in the same individual track event is extraordinary. She’s obviously a highly talented runner but stringing together gold medals calls for delivering a high-level effort at a very specific time and place when you’re facing many of the world’s best. History suggests she’s able to deliver a world class performance when needed and that works in her favor.

I think it would be great to see Kipyegon break 4:00 in the mile and I hope she does. If I had to put money on it, I would say that she’ll run in the 4:03 to 4:04 range, which is still a massive drop at that level. Even if she does not break the mark, if she can get down to 4:03 or even 4:02, that makes the barrier much more approachable to future athletes. Shaving .5 to .75 seconds off of each lap is difficult, but easier to comprehend than two. We’ll know more on Wednesday. It will be possible to watch it and information about that is here.

Sources used:

American Cole Hocker stuns with Olympic gold in men’s 1,500 meters, upsets Ingebrigsten and Kerr – CBS News

Eliud Kipchoge Breaks Two-Hour Marathon Barrier – INEOS 1:59 Challenge

Faith Kipyegon breaks her own world record in 1,500 meters | AP News

Faith Kipyegon Wins Third Straight Olympic 1500-Meter Gold Medal

How Usain Bolt Ran 9.58 Seconds: Breaking Down the Fastest 100-Meter Record in History

Kipyegon tries to become 1st woman to break 4-minute mile | AP News

Nike, Faith Kipyegon ready attempt at fabled 4-minute barrier – oregonlive.com

I bought a pair of carbon-plated running shoes, the Saucony Endorphin Elite 2. I’ve written about carbon-plate technology on this blog but only from an observation and research perspective, not from direct use.

For several years, I resisted the urge to purchase shoes with this technology. It seemed like a luxury-level expense for my ego, as opposed to my being on the cusp of an all-time personal best and seeing if the potential extra return from the plates could get me there. However, the technology is prevalent and being used by many runners. Not only might it possibly help me achieve a faster time, I also wanted to see what the shoes felt like and what the differences were between them and traditional trainers and flats.

I considered a few different options among carbon-plated shoes but there were two main reasons I chose Saucony. I’m a heel-striker and the shape of the Endorphin Elite seemed best-suited to that. Also, I’ve liked Saucony in the past.

When I put them on, they were unlike anything I’ve ever worn. For starters, the weight is absurdly light. Each shoe is 7.43 ounces. My current trainers, the Asics GT-2000, weigh 9.65 ounces. Two-plus ounces doesn’t sound like a lot, but the difference can be felt, and it is a 23% weight difference. Those Asics are relatively light and my prior trainers, the Brooks Adrenaline, weigh in at 10.26 ounces. The weight of the Saucony shoes is particularly remarkable since they can be used for longer races.

They also, to me, felt nearly wobbly as the flex/bounce factor from the carbon plates is intense. When I took them on a test run, initially I wasn’t sure I could handle tight turns without wiping out. However, a mile or so into the run, I got more comfortable with them and for me, they were fine on all turns.

I bought the shoes with the hope I could use them for the Bolder Boulder, the famous Memorial Day 10K. With the amount of bounce, I was 50-50 on wearing them, primarily concerned about creating some strange injury, but since everything had gone fine in my 30-minute test run, I decided to roll the dice and use them.

As I’ve noted in the past, carbon plates are supposed to return a higher level of your energy, thus making you faster and, in theory, keeping you a little fresher.

My goal time for Bolder Boulder was 42:50. This would requalify me for the AB starting wave for the 2026 race. (Technically the qualifying mark is 43:00 but they do sometimes change these time standards so I wanted some cushion.) Based on my training, I knew that it would be close on whether I achieved this time. If the shoes reduced my time by 1% to 4%, the amount that some shoes say they can cut, that would help considerably.

Generally, my legs felt good during the race. However, I accumulated fatigue during the race and between 5K to 6K, I was questioning whether I would make the mark as I was about 15 seconds off. Bolder Boulder is a net uphill race but much of the climbing is in the first four miles. There is then significant descent from around 7K to almost the 9K mark. I was counting on that stretch to make up some time.

By 7K, my time was in decent shape and I was able to push through the final 3K to come in at 42:24.

I think it’s clear that the shoes helped. Not only did I run at the faster end of what I reasonably expected, my legs felt better in the later stages of the race than they have in a while. To put it a different way, I often can push/kick towards the end of a race but in these, I felt I was still pushing with intensity.

To be clear, I still very much felt the effects of the race when I was done and the next day-they don’t help with recovery-but even though Bolder Boulder was one experiment, I’d say the technology works.

My next race is a 10K, or 6.2 miles, and I thought that it could be beneficial and at least interesting to plan my splits by every one kilometer instead of per mile. During workouts, on my Garmin watch face I see three pieces of data: accumulated distance on the top, elapsed time in the middle, and my pace at the bottom. When I hit a pre-determined auto-split (usually every mile), the watch briefly switches to a screen showing my time for that split and the total time of the run, before going back to the main data screen. My watch has two settings that measure in meters/kilometers instead of miles.

One is a “Track” setting, meaning it’s optimal to use when running on the track. In this one, the watch measures my distance in meters during the workout and logs it that way, but on my weekly mileage compilation on the home watch face, it automatically adds the workout in the converted mileage. This seemed like the best option since I wouldn’t have to change settings on the watch at a higher level. Two other helpful features in the Track setting are that as you’re running, it adds your accumulated distance 10M at a time on the distance calculator so it’s easy to follow. In other words, if you’re 235 meters into a lap, it shows 235. It also has a more granular pace setting to show your speed. Instead of the per-mile pace always showing as a time ending in 5 or 0 (7:50, 7:45, etc.) it will show times between the 5s and 0s. But, I ran into a problem. The watch’s auto-split options in the Track setting are 1600M, 800M, and 400M. Since none of these are 1000M, this wasn’t going to work for my 10K plan.

The next option was to change the entire watch’s setting to metric. The good news is that when the watch is in metric, it defaults to 1000M or 1K auto-splits, which is perfect for what I’m doing. But, I made this change several days before the race and I’m glad I did so because it doesn’t show the data the same way as the Track setting.

The distance calculator still looks like the one in the imperial setting, or as it’s called in the watch, “Statute.” In other words, unlike the Track setting where 90 meters would show as the whole number 90, when the watch is all-metric, the screen shows .09. Once you get to 500 meters, it shows as .5. When you’ve been using the watch in the Statute setting for years, .5 in my mind means a half mile but of course 500 meters is 304.5 meters short of a half mile.

The pace calculator at the bottom is calculating speed per kilometer. You can imagine that I was pretty excited when I was taking a moderately paced run and the pace showed as 4:45. I can’t run a 4:45 mile right now and I quickly realized that was not my actual pace. 4:45 per kilometer translates to a 7:36 mile. Additionally, the pace setting stays on 5s and 0s (4:45, 4:50, etc.) and doesn’t carry over the more specific pace setting like it does in Track.

All that said, it’s helpful to be able to make the switch. I’m not sure that I’ll be 100% adapted to these differences by race day, but the practice helps. And, I hope this outline helps you if you decide to adjust the settings.

One final note. If you switch from statute to miles and vice versa, it automatically converts the weekly distance total on the watch face for you. It does not change the distance units for previously recorded runs on the calendar. Whatever you used to record the run, it stays that unit.

The London Marathon starts in less than 48 hours and aside from Eliud Kipchoge giving the course another shot, the big storyline is Jacob Kiplimo, the current half-marathon world record holder, making his marathon debut. For the purposes of this post, there are three numbers that I’m focused on: 56:42, 5.2%, and 4%. 56:42 is Kiplimo’s time in the half-marathon. I’ll get to the second two numbers momentarily.

Kipchoge proved in 2019 that covering 26.2 miles in under two hours is possible. The question since then has been whether someone can do that in a race and thus have a ratified time of under two hours.

London will be Kiplimo’s first marathon. Just because somene is an exceptionally good half-marathon racer does not guarantee they’ll succeed at 26.2. Winning one of the world’s fastest races in a first attempt is daunting in itself. Doing so in a world-record time is even tougher. Achiving a time that some still question as being attainable? That’s a third layer of difficulty. In that vein, and because the temperatures could be a tad bit on the warm side on Sunday, I will not predict a sub-two finishing time. But, the numbers may be there for him, even if it not on Sunday.

Haile Gebrsellasie, the distance GOAT in my mind, held a marathon personal best of 2:03:59 and a half-marathon personal best of 58:55. His marathon time is basically two 1:02 half splits, which are 5.2% slower than his half-marathon personal best. Shalane Flanagan, one of the U.S.A.’s greatest distance runners, held a marathon personal best of 2:21:14 and a half-marathon personal best of 1:07:51. Her fastest marathon splits into 1:10:37 per half, or 4% slower than her half-marathon personal best.

If you take Kiplimo’s 56:42, add 5.2%, and then multiply that by two, you get 1:59:17 over 26.2. If you use the same formula but plug in Flanagan’s 4%, you get 1:57:56. In fact, Kiplimo could run almost 6% slower (5.8% to be exact) to achieve a 1:59:59.

Many factors will impact finishing times on race day: weather, the pacers, how the athlete reacts to other runners, their own preparation, and how they are feeling. Kipchoge, one of the most consistent performers of all time, started running marathons in 2013, solidified himself as a major force in 2015, and didn’t get his first marathon world record until the fall of 2018. That’s all to say that the odds of Kiplimo cruising through the finish line in one-something are low. Could he do it eventually? The numbers suggest it’s in his favor.

Sources used:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haile_Gebrselassie

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shalane_Flanagan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliud_Kipchoge

https://www.letsrun.com/