Thanks for the video. In 2022 my best 5k time was 18:35 which is 3:43/km pace. When I did Hyrox my average time for runs 2-7 was 4:36 so significantly slower than 5k pace. I've not done a marathon but would estimate 4:36/km is in the ball park of my marathon pace.
Jade Skillen also has an interesting video about this. "The danger Zone In Your Hyrox Race". Basicly she states you need to avoid going full on anaerobic in the first part. Because that way you burn through your "fuel" before the end of the race. And i think she really has a point. The hyrox simulation i did where i was just starting slow, because i wanted to just run the race but not wreck myself for the rest of the weekend, became my fastest time. And for most people the transitions between running and excersizes will get your heart rate to spike. So i think this is a good strategy. Start slow, so you keep your heart rate low and than build up the race so you can blast through the wall balls in the end haha.
My first race was Pro in Miami 2019. I made the mistake of going out too hot. Looked at HR monitor on the ski. 177 - WUH OH!!! Still Managed to squeak out AG win but it was horrible! Went back to the drawing board, started each of the next races walking the first 100 meters to avoid getting dragged along and forced a slow pace on the first couple runs. Waaaaaayyyy better! My run times were indeed around HM times. Gearing up for Chicago doubles in November - looking forward to lighter loads and half reps 😊 Thanks for the content!
As always a very good analysis of the topic Greg and I really like the way you approach this. I agree not starting to fast is important - you have to be patient to a certain extent. On the other hand, if you know what you have in the tank you should use the fuel because it is unlikely that you will run the 6th, 7th or 8th run faster than the first one. Approaching it from the 5K PB is a valid option. Question though: Why are you not testing your 8k PB ? Doing a test run in training will certainly help in the beginning. I did so before my first race and must say it was helpful. Taking split times during the race I also found helpful, but how do you figure out how long lap 1 and 8 are - if you say in most races (if not all) these distances are different ...?
I guess just 8km isnt a typical number that people will have raced so hard for them to know where theyre at for that without testing. Of course they could test it but with many people slower than their 10km anyway, Im not sure how valuable a test it would be as the stations change everything anyway. I think most people would be slower than their straight out 8km time in reality. With the runs 1 and 8 I estimate it based on the floor plan. If I assume the floor plan is to scale, and that each run is 1km then its fairly easy to make an estimate (i.e. if its a 2 lap course, 500m per lap, and then I judge how far the start is from the roxzone out). Lap 8 is a bit different - as the distance in the roxzone to the wall balls is added on to run time, as oposed to roxzone time. That doesnt really matter at the end of the day, you essentially probably pace the laps similar to how you have throughout the race (or just go (almost) as hard as you can by then) but for the purposes of analysing race data it does make a difference.
@@roxlyfe Thanks for the video. Do you happen to know why for lap 8 the distance in the roxzone to the wall balls is included in the 'Running 8' time? It'd seem more natural to end 'Running 8' as you enter the roxzone and include the time from the roxzone to the wall balls in the roxzone time. I was curious about this and emailed Hyrox about it but never got a response.
@@njpetrie19 No, I dont know, and I agree with you. Its only something I noticed after one race where I was quite proud of how consistently Id managed to run all my runs during the race, only to see that run 8 looked a lot longer! I think it confuses people too - I think they think the lunges ruins their run more than it really does! But no sorry, Ive never been able to find out why they do it like that either.
Yep run at hr. But honestly you shouod be able to maintain 85% max heart for 1 hour with some decent training. But you have to be conscious on the 8 stations you will get lactic build up-
This is bad use of statistics. When you do well and you can hold your pace, you will be more consistent. Everyone tries to be consistent, but not everyone can be all the time. So, if you're not consistent, you will do worse and will not end up on the podium. Nobody does significantly better than their raceplan (nobody thinking they will run 5min splits will suddenly run 3,5 minute splits), so the statistics will always show that less consistency will result in a worse result. If you do bad, you will be less consistent. If you're less consistent, you will do bad. I feel like you just mix causation and correlation and made a video. If I run 10 minute splits, I can be very consistent. However, I will still do bad. So, a good result is not just a result of consistency. I feel like there's way more correlation than you imply as to causation.
Thanks for the video. In 2022 my best 5k time was 18:35 which is 3:43/km pace. When I did Hyrox my average time for runs 2-7 was 4:36 so significantly slower than 5k pace. I've not done a marathon but would estimate 4:36/km is in the ball park of my marathon pace.
Jade Skillen also has an interesting video about this. "The danger Zone In Your Hyrox Race". Basicly she states you need to avoid going full on anaerobic in the first part. Because that way you burn through your "fuel" before the end of the race.
And i think she really has a point. The hyrox simulation i did where i was just starting slow, because i wanted to just run the race but not wreck myself for the rest of the weekend, became my fastest time. And for most people the transitions between running and excersizes will get your heart rate to spike. So i think this is a good strategy. Start slow, so you keep your heart rate low and than build up the race so you can blast through the wall balls in the end haha.
Great times. Thank you!
My first race was Pro in Miami 2019. I made the mistake of going out too hot. Looked at HR monitor on the ski. 177 - WUH OH!!! Still
Managed to squeak out AG win but it was horrible!
Went back to the drawing board, started each of the next races walking the first 100 meters to avoid getting dragged along and forced a slow pace on the first couple runs.
Waaaaaayyyy better!
My run times were indeed around HM times.
Gearing up for Chicago doubles in November - looking forward to lighter loads and half reps 😊
Thanks for the content!
Ouch - 177 that early in the race must have hurt haaa!! Well done still getting the win!! Thanks for watching - I may see you in Chicago!
Such valuable info! Thanks!! Looking foward to track mine for my first!
Thank you...and GOOD LUCK!!!
First time Hyroxer (experienced triathlete) and ran in between my 10k and half marathon pace.
Thank you!
That can be such a big difference, say between 3:30 and 4:05
@@u3962521 just a guide, gotta do what feels good for you
I sit somewhere between my 10km and HM splits.
Half marathon pace is pretty close for me
As always a very good analysis of the topic Greg and I really like the way you approach this. I agree not starting to fast is important - you have to be patient to a certain extent. On the other hand, if you know what you have in the tank you should use the fuel because it is unlikely that you will run the 6th, 7th or 8th run faster than the first one. Approaching it from the 5K PB is a valid option. Question though: Why are you not testing your 8k PB ? Doing a test run in training will certainly help in the beginning. I did so before my first race and must say it was helpful. Taking split times during the race I also found helpful, but how do you figure out how long lap 1 and 8 are - if you say in most races (if not all) these distances are different ...?
I guess just 8km isnt a typical number that people will have raced so hard for them to know where theyre at for that without testing. Of course they could test it but with many people slower than their 10km anyway, Im not sure how valuable a test it would be as the stations change everything anyway. I think most people would be slower than their straight out 8km time in reality. With the runs 1 and 8 I estimate it based on the floor plan. If I assume the floor plan is to scale, and that each run is 1km then its fairly easy to make an estimate (i.e. if its a 2 lap course, 500m per lap, and then I judge how far the start is from the roxzone out). Lap 8 is a bit different - as the distance in the roxzone to the wall balls is added on to run time, as oposed to roxzone time. That doesnt really matter at the end of the day, you essentially probably pace the laps similar to how you have throughout the race (or just go (almost) as hard as you can by then) but for the purposes of analysing race data it does make a difference.
@@roxlyfe Thanks for the video. Do you happen to know why for lap 8 the distance in the roxzone to the wall balls is included in the 'Running 8' time? It'd seem more natural to end 'Running 8' as you enter the roxzone and include the time from the roxzone to the wall balls in the roxzone time. I was curious about this and emailed Hyrox about it but never got a response.
@@njpetrie19 No, I dont know, and I agree with you. Its only something I noticed after one race where I was quite proud of how consistently Id managed to run all my runs during the race, only to see that run 8 looked a lot longer! I think it confuses people too - I think they think the lunges ruins their run more than it really does! But no sorry, Ive never been able to find out why they do it like that either.
Yep run at hr. But honestly you shouod be able to maintain 85% max heart for 1 hour with some decent training. But you have to be conscious on the 8 stations you will get lactic build up-
This is bad use of statistics. When you do well and you can hold your pace, you will be more consistent. Everyone tries to be consistent, but not everyone can be all the time. So, if you're not consistent, you will do worse and will not end up on the podium. Nobody does significantly better than their raceplan (nobody thinking they will run 5min splits will suddenly run 3,5 minute splits), so the statistics will always show that less consistency will result in a worse result.
If you do bad, you will be less consistent.
If you're less consistent, you will do bad.
I feel like you just mix causation and correlation and made a video.
If I run 10 minute splits, I can be very consistent. However, I will still do bad. So, a good result is not just a result of consistency. I feel like there's way more correlation than you imply as to causation.