Print Page - Marathon GU Question

GUI = Graphical User Interface. I wish I could use one, instead of having to run it myself.

But I'm assuming you mean "Gu". Yes, I usually take two gels during a marathon, 1/3 and 2/3 of the way through the race. Anything shorter than a marathon, I do not take food, since fueling isn't an issue for races shorter than 2 hrs. I also try to take sports drink instead of water, for both the carbs and the electrolytes.

I never use GU. Two reasons. One - one time I tried and ended up with the worst marathon finish since coming to the US. Two, I do not feel like reading the labels of the stuff they hand out to make sure it has no caffeine.

I've been thinking on my fuel experiences and observations, and a rather radical thought occurred to me. If you are planning to run under 2:20 and fuel intake during the race makes a difference, you've blown it already. It could help you run 2:30 and maybe even 2:28 instead of 2:35-2:40, but if you can run sub-2:20 at all you'll be able to do it with no mid-race carb intake. If you run out of fuel while on pace for 2:20, there is no refueling that could save your race to the point of reaching the target. This is because you can only go that fast off fats and blood sugar. Probably the fastest anybody could run with no muscle glycogen is 5:40 per mile.

I might be off on the 2:20 threshold number, and it might vary from runner to runner - it could be anywhere from 2:15 to 2:30. But the basic idea is that really fast marathon times are achieved primarily off muscle glycogen with maybe only the last 3 miles run off blood sugar. Which you normally would have enough of to coast for 3 miles if you had to even with no fuel intake.

If somebody knows a whole lot about rates of blood sugar absorption/metabolism in the muscle vs fat vs how the three (muscle glycogen, blood glucose, and fat) interplay and has some insights on those the ideas, feel free to share.

I always take GU. Usually 2 but have taken 3. The new Roctane stuff from the GU brand is great. You have to find the flavor that works for you. Once while running the Teton Dam marathon I took some different flavor at mile 18 and barfed all over in front of an aid station with a bunch of high school girls. They were screaming... I was bugged because no one likes to puke during a race.
But long story short you really need the energy during a marathon and GU is a easy way to refuel. Practice with it first...

I don't know how people can gag down the GU. I tried that in my last marathon, and it was pretty nasty stuff. Maybe I just got the wrong flavor, but the thought of it sliding down my throat still makes me want to gag.

I've been experimenting with gummies that are made by the same companies that make the gels. They taste much better to me and are less messy.

I have taken gels (Gu, PowerBar Gel, HammerGel, etc) at all of my marathons. I average about 3-4 but have taken as many as 6 (PF Chang's) when I was really crashing. Usually 3 works for me along with the Powerade on the course to help with fuel management.

The trick in taking the gels is a visualization thing...think of chocolate flavored ones as if they are frosting, straberry/banana as yogurt...helped me a lot!

I find they are easier and less messy than the gummies as I had problem trying to chew and choke down the gummies while running hard and having the remants stick to my teeth was annoying.

I generally take 3 gels for a marathon (one for a half) - but keep an extra close, just in case of an emergency.

The PowerGels are pretty liquid and less sticky, they have electrolytes in them, and I have even taken them without water in a pinch (here in the desert) ... and the ones with caffeine are clearly marked on the package.

I usually take two gels (right now I prefer the Cliff brand chocolate flavor) like Jeff said just think of it as candy. Worst experience I had with gels was at Boston, it was my second marathon ever and I had like six gels, way too many had stomach problems much of the race. I've also used the Sport Beans which I thought tasted great, but a little difficult to open and eat while running fast (the first few times I dropped more beans on the ground than I got in my mouth) Which brings up another point. In my experience, it is always better to slow down a bit and get the proper fluids and gels, whatever works for you rather than trying to blow through the aid station.

Actually, I don't think the really fast runners use gels at all... but I know a lot of runners with times around 4hrs plus use gels (friends from my club etc.). I guess they're just on there feet for less time and so don't need gels... it is an interesting topic, though... from personal experience, I've tried running 27km on water only, but find I am pretty exhausted at the end... but when I use electrolytes halfway, I don't get the exhaustion afterwards... I guess it's just a matter of training... I hope to rely less and less on the electrolytes and gels as my fitness increases... i think this will happen only over time.

I should preface my question a little. I had some success this year "weening" myself on hydration during runs. I believe it helped me immensely during my marathon. I still took water and sports drink, but only one quick gulp of either/or (I know many things factor into your hydration needs during the race, but I still thought it would help). In regards to sport gels, I'm not sure how much they have helped me during marathons. I've been slower the last 5-10K of almost all my marathons with or without gel. I have not hit the "wall" since my first marathon in 2003, its just the last part of the race is always difficult (and probably should be).

We hear all the time that over 2 hours of running that you need energy replacement, but I wanted to know from the fast, local, elite guys/gals if they actually do it. The responses have been great. It seems most do and this will push me to modify my training to try and get 1-2 gels down during a marathon.

I can do a hard near all out 20 untapered with nothing and no fuel/hydration issues if I am in good shape, and I eat well the three days prior. Which is one reason I am wondering if carb intake is necessary for a sub-2:15 if you have it in you that day at all. In 2003 I ran TOU off soymilk, oats, and bananas mix for fuel. I think I had three very small bottles at 10, 13, and 16 if I remember right. Also some water at 23. Same deal in St. George two weeks later. The times were 2:27:46 and 2:24:47. I believe the TOU time to be the highest quality marathon I had ever run.

At the time I thought my drink was meeting my fuel needs. Now after some other experiences I am thinking I simply did not have a whole lot of fuel needs for most of the race. I ran the glycogen levels down pretty low, but never so low that I could not break 6:06 on a rolling terrain. But being not quite in as good of a shape running a slower pace I run them down much quicker, so I have to take whatever I can get to avoid a complete disaster in the last 8 miles.

I was not big on them and still remember my first, back then it was PowerGel experience. It went horrible and I choked on it. However, once it kicked in I had no problems at all and had a great second wind...

To answer your question most of my marathons I've taken 4 and my last half I took some as well. This marathon I'm taking a page out of Jeff's book and going up to 6.

To get them down I take them over a half mile. I'll open them and only put a little in my mouth at a time. Chewing it to help swallow. I also practice. Whenever I do a training run more than 15 miles I will take one at 5, 10, and 15 miles to get my stomach used to it. But here's the funny part on a 14 mile training run I don't take any food...

I agree in part with Sasha's previous comment. Well trained athletes have increased muscle lipid and glycogen stores. But I don't think that they are enough for a marathon. Something during the race is needed. If the sugar and electrolytes in the sports drink are enough I'm not sure. But the Gus haven't hurt me so I'll keep giving them a go...

Adam - not enough for a 2:35 marathon, but likely enough for a sub-2:10. Some examples of fast marathons with no or inadequate refueling I know of:

* Demetrio Cabanillas ran his DesNews course record of 2:16 taking nothing except water - no wall.
* Mike Kirk ran 2:29 in Ogden with nothing except water - no wall.
* I ran 2:27 in Top Of Utah taking a mix of soymilk and bananas ground in a blender three times - maybe half a cup each time. The same "refueling" strategy worked two weeks later in St. George when I ran 2:24, and in Salt Lake 2004 when I ran 2:30. In all three marathons I had no miles slower than 6:06. However, then it stopped working. Because it did not do a whole lot of refueling, but appeared successful when I was fit enough to not need any.

Unfortunately I do not have a whole lot of data on refueling in sub-2:10 marathons. But my gut feeling is that we are going to find a whole lot more cases when a sub-2:10 marathon was done with no fuel intake. At least I know that if you told me to just floor it for 2 hours and 10 minutes with no fuel after a taper I might fade a little in the last couple of miles, but I would not be jogging.

Of course, part of the problem is that when the opportunity to refuel is there a runner will usually take it even if he does not need it. So it would take some work to prove my hypothesis.

My experiences with refueling during the race. It has only been beneficial when the pace drops to slower than 6:30. It can bring it up from 7:10 to 6:20. But it can never take it to sub-6:00. So in other words it keeps a bad race from becoming really bad.

http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/haile-gebrselassie-and-sports-drinks-62

Some more info. Haile has run 2:06:35 in London in 2002 with no carb drinks. The article of course is claiming that with carb drinks he would have run faster. But this is debatable. He has run faster in his career - 2:03:59, and probably with carb drinks, but London is probably a minute slower than Berlin, and he was fighting competition rather than being led by pacers. Plus by 2008 he was more familiar with the marathon distance and better trained for it. So if carb drinks helped him at all it was no more than 1:30 by the most pro carb-drink leaning estimates.

Again - in case somebody was not reading carefully - my argument is not that carb refueling is useless, but that it becomes less and less significant to the point of being unnecessary as your marathon gets faster, and I suspect that that point is somewhere between 2:15 and 2:30 depending on the runner.

Quote

Again - in case somebody was not reading carefully - my argument is not that carb refueling is useless, but that it becomes less and less significant to the point of being unnecessary as your marathon gets faster, and I suspect that that point is somewhere between 2:15 and 2:30 depending on the runner.

Seems fair. The better trained your body and the less time on the course, the fewer calories/hydration you need. I can run a 1/2 marathon without any drink if I wanted, but I don't think many 2:45 1/2 marathon runners would want to try a similar feat.

Of course, I still drink sports drink at every 1/2 marathon aid station.

I talked to Demetrio Cabanillas during the bus ride at St. George. He said he ran 30 sub-2:20 marathons, including a 2:13 in New York (not a fast course by any means, so probably worth around 2:10 in Berlin), with no carb intake during the race. Only water.

With a track PR of only 13:55 in the 5000 I consider 2:13 in New York marathon-optimized. So no argument - he really could have done better and he blew up because he took no carbs. No, he could only have done better by increasing his 5 K speed. Endurance-wise it was perfect.

Some more info from him:

I asked him - runner A trains at 6 miles a day 5 days a week, 20 miles on the sixth. Runner B 10 miles a day six days a week. Which one will do better in the marathon assuming equal ability? He said runner A will have psychological advantage, but runner B will be physically stronger.

How many speed workouts a week is optimal? Two is plenty.

I am nowhere near a sub 3 anything marathoner, but I did want to respond to this. I do believe that it is obviously very important to be physically stronger, but when running the marathon, the psychological side is a very key part of the race. You can very easily take yourself out of a race mentally if you are nervous, having bathroom issues, aches and pains or are running even a tad slower than you anticipated. I was told when I first started training for my first marathon, which I did for charity, that running the marathon is 20% physical and 80% mental. Now, that may have been a bit of an exaggeration, but there is something to it. Maybe the psychological part is different when you have a natural ability/ gift to run fast, which I do not have. Those of you that are elite runners would obviously be able to answer that better than I.

To a certain extent the 80% psychological/ 20% physical is true. Especially for a slower runner. I would dare say that for 90% of people who do not break 5:00 it is 80% psychological. I have gone back to the middle and back of the pack to pace people in races and have noticed a trend. The slower the runner the more his pace varies. Pace variations could be caused by something weird like a fluctuating blood sugar, but more commonly they are caused by a cycle of not being willing to endure the pain, then recovering a bit, becoming more motivated, pushing again, and back to the start of the cycle. Faster runners are often faster because they have learned to overcome such cycles and are able to push the entire race having the confidence that their body has sufficient protection against damage and they do not have the ability to truly run it into the ground.

It would be an interesting experiment to approach a group of people who naturally (without any knowledge of the experiment and the possibility of participation) get to the first half in 2:30 and tell them that they will get $1000 for every mile on pace for 2:00 second half regardless of what happens afterwards, and an additional $100,000 if their entire second half is under 2:00. My prediction is that almost everybody will earn at least $1000 for the first mile, and more than 40% will go home with at least $5000 cash.

However, if you approach the people who reached the first half in 1:15 with an offer of $10,000 for each mile on pace for 1:00 second half, and $1 billion for making it through the entire second half in 1:00, your money will be very safe.

Interesting comments, Sasha. I have literally taken that approach. On last year's marathon, I was able to convince myself that every mile below 7:28 would earn me $1,000 and if I finished below 3:15, I would get a grand prize of $1 million. Between doing constant math and focussing on a "prize", it seemed to keep my mind motivated and focussed. Sounds crazy, yet I think it can give you a minute or two. Having run a 4:12 marathon a 1 1/2 years ago, I think my change in pace had much more to do with less fitness. I was only really prepared for a half marathon.

I know that the coach of Grinnell College (an Olympic trial caliber athlete himself), always focused on applied sports psychology with his team. We never beat them the three years I ran cross country against them. I'm not saying that was the only reason but talking to some of the teammates made it sound like it did help. It involved a lot of mental image work of how you were going to feel on the course etc. Definitely something worth looking into and additional evidence for the mental aspect of our sport.

Fast Running Blog

General Category => Running => Topic started by: MarkP_ on September 15, 2009, 11:34:04 am