As always some great tips Goran! So much more fun to be a chaser than being the one chased throughout a race. Passing is more fun than being passed. It takes a lot of discipline to run negative splits, but it's certainly worth it.
I heard a tip for cycling time trials if you don't have power meter, but it can be used for running as well: The first third should feel easy, like you you could be faster, but don't be. The second third should be like a solid effort. The third third should be like use everything you left in the tank. This should result in an even or even negative split.
I'm now a perennial negative splitter, possibly to a fault. I was a positive splitter when running in school competitively on cross country and track teams. Once I picked up running seriously again in now in my 30s it clicked it was better to enjoy the race if I split negatively. As you said, Goran, it is not as painful and someone else already mentioned in the comments, it's more fun to be the chaser and also gives me more energy to catch the next person. I'm rarely passed and stay passed by a person during a race. I just got a 10k personal best 3 days ago of 46:41 in a road race running the first 5 miles in 7:30-7:45/mile, let myself go that last mile and ran a 7:03. In kilometers that's about 4:45/kilometer for the first 8 kilometers and 4:25/kilometer for the last 2 kilometers. I realize I could have run 10 to 20 seconds faster overall if I would have split more evenly or only slightly negatively, but that would not have been as fun to me. If the pain factor is overriding the fun factor, it's not worth it to me. As a runner, I love pain of course but only to a certain threshold. Realize my strategy of splitting that negatively is better suited for a casual runner like me. My strategy is run tempo for the first 60%-80% of a road race, and then gradually accelerate until finish. For a pro or semi-pro it's better to split evenly or only slightly negatively depending on distance and competition.
Great advice. At my first marathon last month I managed to get a negative split. Did the first half in 1h56 and the second half in 1h51. My fastest km was at 38k. It really makes a difference when you start a little bit slower.
I've been running 5ks every few months for about a year. All were with positive splits - just going out hard and trying to hold on. This video convinced me to try purposefully for run more even splits - I'll try it on December 10th. Current PR 21:16.
I failed miserably at the negative split attempt. To be honest I forgot that plan at my next race. The split was so positive that I think I'll really make an effort to negative split and hopefully break 20 next time. I ran 6:15, 6:50, 6:45 for 20:27. I ran cross country in high school so that probably helps! I also run outside of races of course :)@@him050
i definitely have this problem. Whatever I do, I always underestimate how fast I can go out and often negative split by 10-20 seconds. Only at the very end of the season have i learned about myself enough to know what is a good pace to get out at. Great advice!
I believe this strategy helped me excel in my first half marathon one week ago. With only 12weeks of training and no prior running experience I managed to hit a PR of 1:40:25. I felt super strong over the second half of the race as I ran the 1st half 5-10sec slower than my goal race pace.
Last April I ran Boston with a pretty massive negative split and although it came far from resulting in a PR, it was incredibly satisfying and enjoyable to pass literally thousands of people in the second half and for the the whole run to feel easy and controlled.
Yep, same for me haha no matter if youre a fast or slow runner, if you overdo a negative split you WILL be passing a lot of people during the second half and it gives a pretty solid boost to me. Like its not the greatest strategy but it does feel good.
So true about suffering if you go out too hard. For what still stands as my 5K PR, I was aiming for 6:25 miles to get around 20. The first mile was in 6:14, and I suffered the rest of the way and ended up at 20:34.7.
I totally agree, i have only manged to do a negative split (5km) once getting around my personal best time of 23 min and it felt great. So much better than the other runs with a similar time.
On shorter races it's probably easier because you get stuck in traffic at the beginning if you are not quite at the front and you don't have that much distance to be able to make up for that slow start on the first split 😄 Especially if you are not that fast, like I am 😅
I recently ran a 5K and focused entirely on pacing a negative split after your previous video. I accomplished my goal of each mile slightly faster and shockingly had a PR time.
As a runner just getting out of highschool I think by far the most important tip is #4. Normally in races I’d start in the bottom third but by the time I’d finish I’d be in the top third by just focusing on the back of the head of the person in front of me. Given these were 5ks and also in highschool where people have less experience, but it was still a strong strategy that I’d use to even split or try to get a nice bell curve
I absolutely KNOW that you are right Göran... guilty!!! I dunno if it requires more discipline, experience or patience ... I've only done 4 race marathons (and my first two 50k ultras this year) and each marathon I've gotten a huge PB, and yet I always go out way to fast, even getting a HM PB 3 times and the last time even a 10k PB!! I think I just don't have enough experience yet to genuinely know what time to aim for and pace it accordingly, I just go at a pace that feels relatively comfy for the first half and then try to hang on for dear life!! As you say Göran, it's certainly not fun nor enjoyable after about 27-28km, just pure suffering, which then absolutely terrifies me for the next race!! Still, I got my second 24min PB last time out!! 😃😁😆🥰
I don't think it is necessarily about experience but rather confidence.I have had the same issue. One point he does not cover is that you have to train at race pace. You gotta learn to feel confident at that speed in training, even if it feels a bit slow.
What I noticed over the years -you kind of have to consider the sorroundings of a race when preparingf for a big race. When I do race simulations, I always start way faster then my goal pace to adjust to the fact that you somtimes have to run your way through a crowd until you are in spot where you can run your steady pace for the rest of the race. I also sometimes feel that (non-elite, but ambitious) prepare their body well for a race (80% zone 2, 20% zone 5 e.g.), but not really their mind. If you run a 21k you're most probably are not running in Zone 2 or Zone 5, but Zone 3-4. You should be familiar with how that feels in order to be race-ready
It depends on who you are and where you're coming from. The world record holders run, what? 200-300 km a week? I have a full-time job that is very physical. I can barely exceed 60 km a week, otherwise I don't recover properly. And I'm a new runner. I ran a sub-3h40 marathon (I'm 44 years old), I planned it knowing what pace I could easily sustain for 25-30 km before inevitably slowing down. Everything went exactly like I had planned. I know that no matter how slow I try to run the first half, I'm not going to be able to accelerate for the second half. Especially if I am not able to fully taper/recover/rest before the marathon. By the way I have strong legs, strong joints, good cardio, I do regular interval training sessions and plenty long runs. Last month I ran a sub-20' 5k and a sub-19' 5k two weeks apart, and last weekend I ran 50 km, followed by 20 km the next morning, without problem (it was a special event). So no problem running. But a negative-split marathon? I'm sure that is not for me...
Sometimes in races there can be groups that have about the same speed as myself, at least for the first few kilometers. But a lot of times they do a positive split. In a 5K/10 would you recommend following them in that case? because it has some benefits to shelter from the wind etc..
first! (sorry) Kiptum's negative split on the marathon is insane. I am running my first marathon next year and hoping I can stick to a nice negative split based pacing plan.
@@goranwinblad Thanks! Pased on my current PB's (5-10k distance) calculators tell me I could hit 3:15. But given the distance is new to me, both training mileage and the race itself, I'm thinking of being more conservative and heading out at 3:30 pace. The goal is to get a decent time but most importantly finish in a good way. I don't want my first marathon to be my last. Your videos have really helped me in my running journey since picking it up last year. I never expected to enjoy it as much as I do. The simple pleasure of running is fantastic.
I also wonder if you’re aware of any research where significant numbers of ordinary runners have been paced several times at randomly faster and slower first halves of a half marathon, and their final times correlated to their split. It wouldn’t be very difficult to do, and would be a whole lot better than the armchair analysis of most “studies”. Andy Couldwell (can’t do it with my friends, as there’s nowhere remotely flat to try it out)
... and by extension a lot of people could probably enhance their performance AND their experience by not thinking of the activity as a race. Have fun. Don't blow up
Eh, negative splits are overrated as a race strategy for anybody but sub-elite to elite runners. The optimal negative split is getting faster by just a few seconds per mile over the course of a race. It is too nuanced and subtle for most of us. Instead people attempting a negative split will end up sandbagging the first half of their race which is better than blowing up but still not reaching full potential. Just keep it simple and run an even pace.
@@pearljam_1 Yes, let's take a look at the experts. Kelvin Kiptum, well regarded for his skill in running negative splits, ran Chicago in 60:48 for his first half and 59:47 for his second half. So the second half of his race was 1.6% faster than his first half. You'll find similar numbers for top performances at other distances. That's the OPTIMAL negative split - a mere 1-2% difference between the first and second half of a race. You need a lot of skill and nuance to clock this sort of difference in pace when running all out. And all this is for a less than 1% improvement in final race time versus running even splits! Typically, when negative splits are recommended to amateur runners, what is really being recommended is to sandbag the first half of the race to prevent blowing up in the second half. But this is not an OPTIMAL strategy - it is just a strategy to ensure completion. If you're running the first half of your race more than 1-2% slower than the second half, you're simply leaving something on the table. Unless you have hundreds of miles of experience running near race pace, you probably don't have the pacing skills to pull off a truly optimal negative split. And if you do, you're probably not getting your running advice from RUclips 😉
@@understAanding an elite runner has little variance in race times regardless. An amateur has plenty. Logically that means that applying various known strategies will help an amateur far more than it would a trained elite athlete. You continue to make the assumption that the optimal negative split differential for an elite runner is also optimal for an amateur, and second, that an amateur is not capable of looking at his or her watch for split times based on a target total race time. I’m pretty sure of two things - the concept of negative splits is not rocket science and you are certainly not the authority on it. Other people may want to try this strategy and they don’t need you telling them it’s only for elites. Just zip it.
@@pearljam_1 "These basics of marathon physiology indicate that the best strategy for the marathon is relatively even pacing. If you run much faster than your overall race pace for part of the race, then you’ll use more glycogen than necessary and will likely start to accumulate lactate. If you run much slower than your overall race pace for part of the race, then you’ll need to make up for this lapse by running faster than the most efficient pace for another portion of the race. The optimal pacing strategy, then, is to run nearly even splits, taking into account the idiosyncrasies of the course you’ll be running" - Pfitzinger/Douglas, Advanced Marathoning chapter 6 "An even pace usually is the best approach." - Hal Higdon And Jack Daniels has nothing in his books suggesting negative splits. Go argue your point with them.
@@understAanding Ah - the old ignoratio elenchi. First it was “the optimal race is negative splits” and now it’s “the optimal race is even splits” while citing dudes who ran 50+ years ago. Bro you got me rollin. Just stop.
As always some great tips Goran! So much more fun to be a chaser than being the one chased throughout a race. Passing is more fun than being passed. It takes a lot of discipline to run negative splits, but it's certainly worth it.
I heard a tip for cycling time trials if you don't have power meter, but it can be used for running as well:
The first third should feel easy, like you you could be faster, but don't be.
The second third should be like a solid effort.
The third third should be like use everything you left in the tank.
This should result in an even or even negative split.
I'm now a perennial negative splitter, possibly to a fault. I was a positive splitter when running in school competitively on cross country and track teams. Once I picked up running seriously again in now in my 30s it clicked it was better to enjoy the race if I split negatively. As you said, Goran, it is not as painful and someone else already mentioned in the comments, it's more fun to be the chaser and also gives me more energy to catch the next person. I'm rarely passed and stay passed by a person during a race.
I just got a 10k personal best 3 days ago of 46:41 in a road race running the first 5 miles in 7:30-7:45/mile, let myself go that last mile and ran a 7:03. In kilometers that's about 4:45/kilometer for the first 8 kilometers and 4:25/kilometer for the last 2 kilometers. I realize I could have run 10 to 20 seconds faster overall if I would have split more evenly or only slightly negatively, but that would not have been as fun to me. If the pain factor is overriding the fun factor, it's not worth it to me. As a runner, I love pain of course but only to a certain threshold. Realize my strategy of splitting that negatively is better suited for a casual runner like me. My strategy is run tempo for the first 60%-80% of a road race, and then gradually accelerate until finish. For a pro or semi-pro it's better to split evenly or only slightly negatively depending on distance and competition.
Wow! 🎉 Thanks for another great video Göran! 😊
Thank you! 😃
Great advice. At my first marathon last month I managed to get a negative split. Did the first half in 1h56 and the second half in 1h51. My fastest km was at 38k. It really makes a difference when you start a little bit slower.
I've been running 5ks every few months for about a year. All were with positive splits - just going out hard and trying to hold on. This video convinced me to try purposefully for run more even splits - I'll try it on December 10th. Current PR 21:16.
You only run every few months and for only a year and that’s your 5k time?! That is absolutely rapid! How did trying the negative split go?
I failed miserably at the negative split attempt. To be honest I forgot that plan at my next race. The split was so positive that I think I'll really make an effort to negative split and hopefully break 20 next time. I ran 6:15, 6:50, 6:45 for 20:27. I ran cross country in high school so that probably helps! I also run outside of races of course :)@@him050
I can do this so very wrong and I always feel it at the end. Thank you for sharing the tips and knowledge, something I really need to work on ❤
i definitely have this problem. Whatever I do, I always underestimate how fast I can go out and often negative split by 10-20 seconds. Only at the very end of the season have i learned about myself enough to know what is a good pace to get out at. Great advice!
I believe this strategy helped me excel in my first half marathon one week ago. With only 12weeks of training and no prior running experience I managed to hit a PR of 1:40:25. I felt super strong over the second half of the race as I ran the 1st half 5-10sec slower than my goal race pace.
This guy is so good.
Thanks Goran, outstanding of course.
Great video Göran!
Thanks 😊
Last April I ran Boston with a pretty massive negative split and although it came far from resulting in a PR, it was incredibly satisfying and enjoyable to pass literally thousands of people in the second half and for the the whole run to feel easy and controlled.
Yep, same for me haha no matter if youre a fast or slow runner, if you overdo a negative split you WILL be passing a lot of people during the second half and it gives a pretty solid boost to me. Like its not the greatest strategy but it does feel good.
So true about suffering if you go out too hard. For what still stands as my 5K PR, I was aiming for 6:25 miles to get around 20. The first mile was in 6:14, and I suffered the rest of the way and ended up at 20:34.7.
2:25 thats my hometown in the UK! So many races here though, i shouldn't be surprised 😂
Lots of times us amateurs run a negative split on long races because of race congestion over the first couple miles. That skews the data.
I totally agree, i have only manged to do a negative split (5km) once getting around my personal best time of 23 min and it felt great. So much better than the other runs with a similar time.
On shorter races it's probably easier because you get stuck in traffic at the beginning if you are not quite at the front and you don't have that much distance to be able to make up for that slow start on the first split 😄
Especially if you are not that fast, like I am 😅
That’s true but also then it’s important to not go to hard once it’s starting to open up a bit 😊
I love your video and insightful comments
I’ve always known to do this. But I’ve only actually done it once. The time I did, I PR’d. It is a good feeling.
Danke für das Video!
I recently ran a 5K and focused entirely on pacing a negative split after your previous video. I accomplished my goal of each mile slightly faster and shockingly had a PR time.
From my experience a 5K is run at a maximum speed. All race, as its so short. Its the way to get a PR.
If you can maintain one pace then yes@@dididubalier2196
As a runner just getting out of highschool I think by far the most important tip is #4. Normally in races I’d start in the bottom third but by the time I’d finish I’d be in the top third by just focusing on the back of the head of the person in front of me. Given these were 5ks and also in highschool where people have less experience, but it was still a strong strategy that I’d use to even split or try to get a nice bell curve
I absolutely KNOW that you are right Göran... guilty!!! I dunno if it requires more discipline, experience or patience ... I've only done 4 race marathons (and my first two 50k ultras this year) and each marathon I've gotten a huge PB, and yet I always go out way to fast, even getting a HM PB 3 times and the last time even a 10k PB!! I think I just don't have enough experience yet to genuinely know what time to aim for and pace it accordingly, I just go at a pace that feels relatively comfy for the first half and then try to hang on for dear life!! As you say Göran, it's certainly not fun nor enjoyable after about 27-28km, just pure suffering, which then absolutely terrifies me for the next race!! Still, I got my second 24min PB last time out!! 😃😁😆🥰
I don't think it is necessarily about experience but rather confidence.I have had the same issue. One point he does not cover is that you have to train at race pace. You gotta learn to feel confident at that speed in training, even if it feels a bit slow.
@@FjFk-gi6kh You know, that is exactly it!! I was thinking about exactly that after I commented ... yes, and thanks for confirming that!!
do you recomend negative splits for 3 kilometres in 12 or under minutes? or just maitain 4:00 or faster trough out the whole race?
Goran, having come to a halt on icy roads this morning, I wonder what sort of shoes you’re using in icy and snow.
What I noticed over the years -you kind of have to consider the sorroundings of a race when preparingf for a big race. When I do race simulations, I always start way faster then my goal pace to adjust to the fact that you somtimes have to run your way through a crowd until you are in spot where you can run your steady pace for the rest of the race. I also sometimes feel that (non-elite, but ambitious) prepare their body well for a race (80% zone 2, 20% zone 5 e.g.), but not really their mind. If you run a 21k you're most probably are not running in Zone 2 or Zone 5, but Zone 3-4. You should be familiar with how that feels in order to be race-ready
It depends on who you are and where you're coming from. The world record holders run, what? 200-300 km a week? I have a full-time job that is very physical. I can barely exceed 60 km a week, otherwise I don't recover properly. And I'm a new runner. I ran a sub-3h40 marathon (I'm 44 years old), I planned it knowing what pace I could easily sustain for 25-30 km before inevitably slowing down. Everything went exactly like I had planned. I know that no matter how slow I try to run the first half, I'm not going to be able to accelerate for the second half. Especially if I am not able to fully taper/recover/rest before the marathon. By the way I have strong legs, strong joints, good cardio, I do regular interval training sessions and plenty long runs. Last month I ran a sub-20' 5k and a sub-19' 5k two weeks apart, and last weekend I ran 50 km, followed by 20 km the next morning, without problem (it was a special event). So no problem running. But a negative-split marathon? I'm sure that is not for me...
Jag skulle vilja betala dig för att skriva ett träningsprogram till mig (dubbel tröskel). Gör så sådant och hur kommer jag i kontakt med dig?
For me it isn't the pace, but feeding at the right time, so I can actually keep the pace :D
Sometimes in races there can be groups that have about the same speed as myself, at least for the first few kilometers.
But a lot of times they do a positive split.
In a 5K/10 would you recommend following them in that case? because it has some benefits to shelter from the wind etc..
he yeeted that paper
Surely it depends on the course also? Hills vs flats etc
About negative splitting on long-run workouts, how important is it to keep some kms in the end to cool down? Or can one finish strong and stop?
Does anyone know what happened to the runner at 00:08 in the intro?
Your thumbnails are hilarious. 😬😅
Hey, Göran Winblad. I have a question: how do I find out what limits me now, endurance or strength/speed?
first!
(sorry)
Kiptum's negative split on the marathon is insane. I am running my first marathon next year and hoping I can stick to a nice negative split based pacing plan.
Good luck on your marathon preparations then! 😊
@@goranwinblad Thanks! Pased on my current PB's (5-10k distance) calculators tell me I could hit 3:15. But given the distance is new to me, both training mileage and the race itself, I'm thinking of being more conservative and heading out at 3:30 pace. The goal is to get a decent time but most importantly finish in a good way. I don't want my first marathon to be my last.
Your videos have really helped me in my running journey since picking it up last year. I never expected to enjoy it as much as I do. The simple pleasure of running is fantastic.
Its been 2 years since you tried the 3000 meters under 10 minutes maybe have a go?
sweet
I also wonder if you’re aware of any research where significant numbers of ordinary runners have been paced several times at randomly faster and slower first halves of a half marathon, and their final times correlated to their split. It wouldn’t be very difficult to do, and would be a whole lot better than the armchair analysis of most “studies”. Andy Couldwell (can’t do it with my friends, as there’s nowhere remotely flat to try it out)
... and by extension a lot of people could probably enhance their performance AND their experience by not thinking of the activity as a race. Have fun. Don't blow up
Eh, negative splits are overrated as a race strategy for anybody but sub-elite to elite runners. The optimal negative split is getting faster by just a few seconds per mile over the course of a race. It is too nuanced and subtle for most of us. Instead people attempting a negative split will end up sandbagging the first half of their race which is better than blowing up but still not reaching full potential. Just keep it simple and run an even pace.
I get the feeling you are trying to make a generalization based on your own experience. I’d leave this one to the experts.
@@pearljam_1 Yes, let's take a look at the experts. Kelvin Kiptum, well regarded for his skill in running negative splits, ran Chicago in 60:48 for his first half and 59:47 for his second half. So the second half of his race was 1.6% faster than his first half. You'll find similar numbers for top performances at other distances. That's the OPTIMAL negative split - a mere 1-2% difference between the first and second half of a race. You need a lot of skill and nuance to clock this sort of difference in pace when running all out. And all this is for a less than 1% improvement in final race time versus running even splits!
Typically, when negative splits are recommended to amateur runners, what is really being recommended is to sandbag the first half of the race to prevent blowing up in the second half. But this is not an OPTIMAL strategy - it is just a strategy to ensure completion. If you're running the first half of your race more than 1-2% slower than the second half, you're simply leaving something on the table.
Unless you have hundreds of miles of experience running near race pace, you probably don't have the pacing skills to pull off a truly optimal negative split. And if you do, you're probably not getting your running advice from RUclips 😉
@@understAanding an elite runner has little variance in race times regardless. An amateur has plenty. Logically that means that applying various known strategies will help an amateur far more than it would a trained elite athlete. You continue to make the assumption that the optimal negative split differential for an elite runner is also optimal for an amateur, and second, that an amateur is not capable of looking at his or her watch for split times based on a target total race time.
I’m pretty sure of two things - the concept of negative splits is not rocket science and you are certainly not the authority on it.
Other people may want to try this strategy and they don’t need you telling them it’s only for elites. Just zip it.
@@pearljam_1
"These basics of marathon physiology indicate that the best strategy for the marathon is relatively even pacing. If you run much faster than your overall race pace for part of the race, then you’ll use more glycogen than necessary and will likely start to accumulate lactate. If you run much slower than your overall race pace for part of the race, then you’ll need to make up for this lapse by running faster than the most efficient pace for another portion of the race. The optimal pacing strategy, then, is to run nearly even splits, taking into account the idiosyncrasies of the course you’ll be running"
- Pfitzinger/Douglas, Advanced Marathoning chapter 6
"An even pace usually is the best approach." - Hal Higdon
And Jack Daniels has nothing in his books suggesting negative splits.
Go argue your point with them.
@@understAanding Ah - the old ignoratio elenchi. First it was “the optimal race is negative splits” and now it’s “the optimal race is even splits” while citing dudes who ran 50+ years ago. Bro you got me rollin. Just stop.
I wish you could give a bit more informative titles
*Second* 🇮🇩
Hi, New runner here and ex cyclist.... What about something like a stryd pod to help pacing?