General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Half Mary time - based on mcmillan running calculator Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 2
 
 
2010-04-09 4:18 PM
in reply to: #2780342

User image

Champion
8540
50002000100050025
the colony texas
Subject: RE: Half Mary time - based on mcmillan running calculator
agarose2000 - 2010-04-09 11:56 AM The Mcmillan calculators have been extensively examined on runners/marathoners forums.

They seem to work fairly well with the big IF you have put in the requisite mileage for the race distance.

The longer the race, the more the calculator "overpredicts" - apparently, the calculator works best (or was based) on runners who trained 70 miles per week of running. That's a lot of running.

When I ran 80+ miles per week, all the Mcmillan times from 5k to HM lined up perfectly. The marathon, however, was still an overconfident prediction.

For BT triathletes who are usually running under 25 (often under 20) miles per week, you really can't reliably use the Mcmillan calculator, or at best use it as a "best-case" scenario given perfect conditions and a flat/downhill course assist.



 


this makes total sense... I always wondered if there was a "magic" number of miles it was based on per week.   This is also why I like it when people that are just runners (or bikers/swimmers) post.  things make more sense


2010-04-09 11:41 PM
in reply to: #2776224

User image

Champion
5312
5000100100100
Calgary
Subject: RE: Half Mary time - based on mcmillan running calculator
Ha, using the McMillan calculator, backwards, which he says is NOT the way to use it. I am in the midst of a similar training plan, which I am now told means I have to run 70 miles a week, ha.

We shall compare results.

Good luck to us both.

New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Half Mary time - based on mcmillan running calculator Rss Feed  
 
 
of 2