Progress

Back when we started this blog, we made some predictions on our expected and hope for times. As part of a semi-regular stocktake, tune in after the jump to see how things are shaping up.


Before we go any further, let me remind you of my original predictions of my performance:

Swim: 90 Minutes
T1:10 Minutes
Bike:  7.5 Hours
T2: 10 Minutes
Marathon: 6 Hours
Grand Total: 15 hrs 20 minutes

These predictions were based on little more than notions and fantasy. However, now I have some races under my belt I can use this data to get more accurate predictions.

There is a slight problem though, we can't just increase the times by the increase in distance to get a fair estimation. We wouldn't expect Usain Bolt to run a Marathon in just over 67 minutes because he can run 100metres in 9.58 seconds. So I've been doing some research on ways to predict future times, which take into account fatigue

One of the first formula I found was Peter Riegel's, which is shown below:

T₂=T₁×(D₂÷D₁)^1.06

Don't fret, its pretty simple. To get your predicted time, divide your new distance by your previous distance, raise that to the power of 1.06 and then multiply the whole thing by your original time.  Let's take my last Half results and work out a predictions for a full marathon.

 So 2 hrs 20 minutes 29 seconds and change it into seconds so we've just one number, 8429 seconds.
D2 is 42.2 K, D1 is 21.1k

T₂=8429×(42.2÷21.1)^1.06

^{T₂=8429×(2)1.06}                   

^{T₂=8429 × 2.08}                   

^{T₂=17574.465                     .}

^{So based on Swansea Half, my predicted  time is 17574 seconds (rounding to nearest whole second) or in a more accessible version, 4 hours 52 minutes 54 Seconds. A time I would be happy with and much better than my original prediction.}

^{But, and its a big but,  this does not take into account that the Marathon will be occurring after a swim and a bike. We could apply this formula to the swim and the bike but while it will give us some idea, it is designed for running.}

<sup>This article , also by Reigel looked promising, but I can't work out how to use it for predictions and seems to be a comparison equation once results are already in. If you can figure it out, let me know in the comments.

I have however now completed an Olympic distance Triathlon, so using those figures should be more useful in making new predictions. For the sake of ease, I'm just going to double transition times, as I may want to spend more prep time on a longer race.

I'll save you all the maths again, but below is my new predicted times based on Liverpool Olympic Triathlon. (I've keep transitions as 10 minutes, really just to keep my sums a bit easier.)

Swim: 1 hour 55 Minutes
Transition: 10 Minutes
Bike: 8 Hours 18 Minutes
Transition: 10 Minutes
Run 4 Hour 59 Minutes
Total Time: 15 hours 32 Minutes</sup>

So still an Ironman qualifying time all round, but not as fast as previously predicted but only slower by about 12 minutes. I've also spent far too long on a graph to show this, which to be honest is a bit ropey. Due to how I've done the axes if the line is above the blue cut off line then its all good. (You may have to click on the picture and blow it up to see it properly)

If you haven't go back and look at the graph again, and again, and just once more as its taken me far longer than it should have done, a ridiculous amount of time.

Now none of this is set in stone but current performance certainly bodes well for the Ironman next year. Just remember as Niels Bohr said "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future."