The Runner's Taboo - Romancing the Positive Split
The positive split. You hear it all the time around running circles in hushed tones, a seeming taboo approached with the same derision and mistrust as one would give the Illuminati. What's so wrong with it? Why do people view it with so much disdain? Let us take a closer look.
Eat my dust, I'll see you later!
- Newbie
In plain and simple terms, a positive split entails that one would be running the first half of the race faster the second . C'mon, admit it. How may times have you see the relatively newbie-looking runner blast off from the starting gun, and you mutter "that won't last long" or something along those lines. Let's face it. There's an almost universal streak of vitriol against positive split runners. I always wondered why. If we are to continue using the boxing style analogy, the positive split would be the unorthodox, hard hitting puncher who is relying on that one big knockout blow to seal the match. It is most closely associated with being new and being amateur. Why is that the case?
Under the Hood
Most experts and experienced runners I know would recommend negative splits when running a marathon. Apparently, there are several things going on under your body's bonnet while running a positive split that you need to know :
1. You consume your glycogen deposits faster, meaning you'll be depending on fat far earlier in a race. As you may or may not know, this is far less efficient means of getting energy.
2. You hit your lactate threshold way too early, meaning you'll spend the majority of the race running anaerobically ( read: not good), meaning you'll hit the dreaded wall much earlier than usual (read: not good at all)
3. You'll have less margin of error to work around in case you overestimate your abilities on race day (happens a lot)
What the Experts Say
The experts aren't too crazy about it either. Running legend Sebastian Coe said in his book Better Training for Distance Runners that "deviating from your mean race pace by as little as +or - 2 % is metabolically more costly than remaining within this window" . In his book The Lore of Running, Tim Noakes categorically stated that "you should never listen to those who advocate running faster in the first half so you will have time to cushion your reduced pace in the second half. In fact, your fast pace in the first half is the very reason for your fade in the second half. It is always better to run the second half faster. It gives you the impression that your are faster than you really are.
Bordering on the Controversial : My Take
Okay, so the positive split was all but butchered by every Tom, Dick, Harry, and even Jane out there. However, as those who have raced with me know, I have a contrarian view on the matter. I have tried to neg split several times, and each and every time it hit me square on the jaw.Case in point - Botak Paa-Tibayan 21k. I had told myself at the time, okay why don't we try this negative split thing since it's a longer distance and everyone recos it anyway.
So I ran the first 10k in 55:30, at a pace that is very tame in comparison to what I usually do. So no positive split there. So what happened? Did I break records? Nah. I totally discomombulated over the 2nd half. I had a finish time of 2:14, way off the sub-2 hour finish that I was targeting. At the time that I was supposed to pick up the pace, at the time where my bountiful glycogen deposits and lack of anaerobic effort should have reaped benefits, I had nothing more to give. I tried in vain to speed up, the best I could muster was a 6:30 effort, and even that I couldn't sustain. I felt like I would die at the finish line. So what went wrong? Why didn't the famed negative split work for me?
Nope, it didnt work.
It's a mental thing
So what happened? I'm guessing it's a mental thing. Perhaps I have a weird psychological makeup. Believe it or not, each and every race that I have run on a positive split led me to setting a new PR. I have honestly no idea why. As we know, the race is just as much mental as it is physical. Once you mind starts playing games with you, you're screwed.
As for myself, I always felt more comfortable being ahead and hanging on to a lead rather than coming back from behind. I'd rather race the first half and make the second half a blood and guts game. I do a lot better from a position of control. Specially when there an inclines during the second half, coupled with the Manila heat I am unable to gain any sort of major ground. I would rather steel myself and hang on. Thus it boils down to :
1. You're tired, it's hot, your legs are killing you and you're protecting a lead
OR
2. You're tired, it's hot, your legs are killing you and you're clawing your way from behind.
Obviously, I choose the former. Mr. Coe said that even a 2% deviation from your intended race pace (if you start aggresively) will extract a "big cost" from your race. So why doesn't it work for me? Is it the debilitating Manila heat? Is that the "unintended variable" caveat that he put in when he wrote it?
I just really want to know.
Your thoughts and comments please?
Let the debates begin.
Well said, well written. I was surprised to read at the last part of your blog that you dont know why negative split doesn't work. Made me smile.
Am not theoretical. But i think, the theory behind the positive split that's working so well for you is due to 2 main factor.
1. Your old heavy weight is now lighter. Less load on your feet and knee, the better! The Faster!
2. You were able to build-up your endurance, hence, the strength.
Not to mention your good attitude towards pushing yourself to run hard, all goes well with you.
A salute to the Gingerbreadman!
I think that you don't have enough base as of the moment. You have the speed that could catapult you to run shorter races in less time but you lack the ability to run long and bring you further. Develop a good base first through endurance trainings (long runs) and the speed will follow. You should have enough legs for the second phase of your run to achieve the negative split.
Use the tempo and hills during your long runs. Run comfortably. Negate the LSD, it produces long slow runners (Sebastian Coe).
I haven't really checked kung saan split ako. =)
But I think i'm leaning towards the positive split. Have to work more on my endurance to completely remove brisk walking in races though.
Luis, though my last 10K provided a positive split (22:47 / 23:30 - 46:17), I'm still convinced that the negative split is best. The recent course I ran had a tougher grade in the second half (two hills) versus the first (flat to downhill). It was my best 10K in four years.
On Tuesday, I ran a 47:04 - 10K on a flat course with a group where I had negative splits
(23:40 / 23:24). It felt just as tiring as the 10K race in May.
Luis (and to the responses), it may be something that you may have to experiment with. I'm sensing that most of my career, the positive split worked a little better. However, it doesn't work that way for everyone.
Coach, thank you very much for the kind words :) I am still hoping to build the right kind of endurance to sustain it for longer distances. Thank you!
Idol Vener, agreed I still lack the base needed to sustain a good pace for long runs. I am working hard on it, hitting the hills and working on my tempo. I have also been trying to avoid the LSD in the truest sense, picking up the pace although its... hard :) Thank you for the wonderful advice sir, I am extremely fortunate to cull inputs from a highly seasoned runner such as yourself.
Thanks for the inputs Wayne! I seem to feel the same, for the negative split runs (or at least those I tried), I felt just as tired. And always, the positive split races always registered the better times. I am leaning towards the paradigm that you can get away with it for shorter races (just because the fallout wouldn't be that noticeable) vis-a-vis longer ones. However, my last long race I was highly encouraged by my 5:32 (8:36/mi) pace over a 10 miler two Sundays ago. I had gone out of that race with a 4:50 - 5:15 pace over the first 3km, as opposed to the 4:20 - 4:30 start I usually have. I felt great during the race, given that it was a tough uphill course. I was excited to see that if I maintain that same pace for just 5k more, I would be hitting my sub- 2 hour half marathon target. I felt that I still had something left in the tank. Is this an indicator that the negative split is better for longer races? Once again, thanks for the great insights Wayne, I'm really learning a lot here.
Rod, I think most of us naman ata when we start we veer towards the positive split. Pero as I am researching more into this, even a mere differential of seconds on your pace hits you exponentially later on. I'm thinking that we should just put more training into it, as idol Vener said we should really build a solid base, that's our foundation later on eh. :)
Hi Luis,
I don't have a strong opinion about Positive or Negative splits or whatever strategy is best. In fact I don't think there is one strategy that works best for all. What I'm saying is it doesn't matter, as long as you use the strategy that best works for you. So if positive split gives you PR, then go for it. :)
In my case, I'm not really into negative or positive splits. I normally start and finish pretty much at the same speed throughout the course. That works for me, but It doesn't necessarily mean it will work for all. But you can try that also. :)
hey luis, great blog! as a newbie runner, i learned so many new things in this entry, and the comments are equally informative thanks bro!
jetpaiso.blogspot.com
ako i would alway go for a positive split kasi nadrain pa rin ako in the middle of the race so give my best shot na agad!
Newbie runners like us might go for positive split. But as we build endurance needed for longer distance, negative split might be the next best thing. I tried negative split on Mizuno Run but at the end, I was just so tired to run faster. So probably, I need to build a solid base first and revisit negative split in the future :)
Sam
The Running Ninja
www.therunningninja.com
Hey!
I just noticed you now have your own domain. Congrats! Now next move is to switch over to wordpress.com. Hehehe!
Cheers!
Sam
aba! own domain na nga! nakanaman! =)
Hi Taki! Congratulations on your top-20 finish at Mizuno by the way.I reckon your ability the run a dead even split for the entire race is a testament to your superior conditioning and what I assume is a very solid base. Thanks for the inputs man and thanks for dropping by!
Hi Jet! Glad you liked it! That's the objective, it's a knowledge-sharing process amongst people with a common passion so we could all be better at our chosen sport :)Thanks for dropping by man.
Argo, pakundisyon lang dapat para di mashado sharp ung fade sa huli, as was suggested earlier in the thread :) Kayang kaya mo yan hehe :)
Thanks Sam, I agree that is a completely valid assertion. Just do what works for you now and with training hopefully the conditioning would follow :)
Yeah hehe got my own domain na! Wordpress, hmmmm :)
Luis,
Very well said, very nice sequel to the previous topic. I also have the same expreience, I gain my PR's using positive splits. I have tried doing negative splits several times, and my strategy was to pick-up my pace as I cross the halfway mark of the race. But just like you, at the point when my mind says "it's time! bring it on!", I have nothing more to give. I am not running out of breath, but my legs feels heavy already and cannot go for longer and faster strides.
I agree that part of it is a mental thing, but I also think that since we are new to running, we really haven't developed the "base" to sustain the leg power and endurance required to perform the negative split. We really haven't notice this since we usually run short distances (5,10,21K). Our youth power, and mental toughness are already enough to sustain us in these distances with great finish.
Nevertheless, I look forward to running a full marathon using the Negative Split, hopefully someday. =P
Thanks for the well-crafted reply Ed, very nice! (nalingat ako kala ko di ikaw haha) Yes I agree, once we develop a sufficient base, hopefully we can run longer distances in the negative split. I totally agree that our youth and mental resolve have been so far carrying us to within our goals in these short races. But in order to get to the next level we need to continue training! More training!
Good luck to us Ed. As one of the guys who was with you when you first hit sub-60, I hope to be there as well on your first full mary. Nice! :)
Edu, serious ang comment mo nanibago rin ako. Hehe. But the comment is insightful and valid.
Luis, I plan to run the Milo marathon on positive split. The strategy is on account of weather alone. The heat will force me to do positive split. If weather is cool and consistent, I will normally go for even or negative split. However,the faster early pace I will follow will not be less than a minute of my current comfortably hard race pace. Anything faster than that will sap my energy reserve for the second half.
Go Boss Rix! You can do it! We believe! With the mileage buildup and tempo training, I am positive you can pull it off. Sheer will baby! Haha.
Luis,
I know what you feel as I am the exact same one.
However, in the recent past I've been able to negative split. Try it. Let's do it together - Gold Loop? ;)
The way I see it is a positive split approach may bring about new heights. For example, you are targetting a 50min 10k. A positive splitter would target the first 5k in 24 min or so. Assuming he hits his first 5k target, and has a 'good day' and is able to do an even split, he PRs at 48 (Much faster than 50). A negative splitter would have gone out in 26 or so, and even with a 24, would have only hit 50.
My 2 cents...
Thanks for the inputs Javy! I actually bring the same mindset to the races, at t=least the shorter ones I run. It's like pushing yourself to the limit during the first half, and hoping that your conditioning and mental toughness would at least let you hold on during the 2nd. Has worked so far, although I am not yet at a level where I could sustain it for distances upwards of 21k. More training :)
Hey we could try this negative split thing at Gold Loop, do you always train after work?
Luis,
My runs are M-W-F. Most often its there at Gold Loop :) Sure let's give it a shot :)
"Negate the LSD, it produces long slow runners (Sebastian Coe)." -Run Unlimited <--Hehehe! I like this one! :) I also agree on the need for an increased base.
"Your game is only as good as your practice," was a mantra I picked up during my collegiate varsity days. Perhaps you can't expect a negative split to work for you on race day if you don't do negative splits during your training runs. Just another 2 cents... :)
See you around bro!
Javy, sure why not! You're pretty easy to spot haha. See you man!
I agree Doc Eric, very nice input from a running legend hehe. So that's what I'm doing. Negate the LSD amnd building my base :) I did 65 last week, hope to do more this week. :) Thanks for dropping by hehehe :)
Negative split worked for me during the last 3 Half-Mary's I joined (KOTR,Condura,Greenfield). I was still able to sprint fore-foot near the finish line. I guess the hill fartleks helped me alot with this. :)
I tend to do positive split for shorter races like what happened with the last Mizuno race which I initially planned to do a negative split. I guess I pressured myself to do positive since I was aiming for a PR. :)
Monster MOn, I tend to lean towards the same thing. For the 16k Earth Run, after looking at my Garmin Data the second half was marginally faster than the first. Hmmm.......