Data and the pace calculator

A little Pikes rehearsal this AM - approximately 3 miles from the start to the top of the W's.  Running waterless from my place, I simply tried to put in an effort equal to the first half hour of the Ascent.  (I note this because some folks run this "tempo" all-out, much faster than they will run it on race day)  Splits:

to Ruxton - 3:08
to Hydro - 10:03
to Barr Trail - 16:40
to "bigass rock" - 27:40
to top of W's - 33:23

The good ol' pace calculator suggests that today was not how I want to run on Pikes weekend.  A 10:03 Hydro split done properly is good for a 2:39:30, whereas a 33:23 W's split is pace befitting of a 2:46:00.  Furthermore, the 23:20 between Hydro and W's is what a well-paced 2:49 would run.

At this point, half of you already have figured out what this means, and the other half could care less.  There is a large contingent of 'naked' runners - those who believe that the Garmin is the devil.  They have no need for watches or data; they just run.  They go by feel.  They believe there is no need for all this high-tech gadgetry, that it just means you're taking yourself too seriously or missing the whole point of running.

To the Garmin-haters:  point taken, but let's agree to disagree.  I'll dedicate a whole post to ya'll soon.  Till then, brush up on your graph-reading skillz.


In the meantime, I took this away from today.  I was kind of disheartened by my slowdown on the W's.  I most definitely didn't feel like my effort was spiked to Ruxton or anything, but I definitely don't want to push the W's as hard as I did today.  If my effort was greater than what I'd like to feel on raceday and my time was slower, I can come up with a few possible reasons.

1. Possibly I'm just not in the shape I have been in previously.  Doubtful, as my previous race results suggest otherwise.
2. I could've been running on legs that were more fatigued than I expected.  Possible - I ran Elk Park 48 hours ago and yesterdays easy run felt like death on a stick.  Would that be consistent with a 2:39 pace to Hydro and 2:49 beyond?  Possibly, as the fatigue may be less pronounced on flatter terrain.
3. The calculator could be flawed.  I hate to say it, but I find that doubtful.  The Ruxton split is always in question, but I trust the Hydro and W splits.  As one who has not had recent success above timberline, I most definitely am trying to respect the clock down low.

I will get a couple more opportunities to run this same drill in the upcoming weeks.  Optimally, a 2:40 pace will be easy next time out.  If not, I have no problem adjusting my goal to a pace that does feel manageable for the full 13 miles.