After a lot of careful thought I think I have found the best Half for me! Mick was spot on about Wokingham being a good PB course as he has said in the past because of reasons below but what is the next best???
It is not just about the speed of the course, it is also important that there are plenty of fast runners when going for a PB. I think Wokingham is an excellent course but the next best is probably going to be a course like Bath or Reading.
I have likely missed out on Bath so I have booked a place at Reading. The timing is better than Wokingham as it will give me more time to prepare plus the field and course seem pretty decent with many 80% PB ratings on Runners World!
The information below is from 2013 but I think it gives a good clue. The finish in the Madejski Stadium sounds awesome!
Sub 75 minute race chart below.
http://i.picresize.com/UiaOThe reasons I believe more runners = better
I think there are two reasons that having more runners around you is better if you are trying to achieve a particular time goal (and once again, there is not a linear relationship here: I have seen the runners filling the road at around four and a half hour pace in the London marathon and I accept that if you are in the race at that pace, there are too many people and you are actually hindered from running faster).
The first is physical. There is not doubt that a strong wind is not our friend when it comes to running fast times. The first year I ran the Cambridge half marathon I worked hard after a couple of miles to close the gap to a group of four runners in front of me. Once I was there, the group worked really well together, taking turns on the front. In that group was the first lady – Holly Rush – who was given very loud and strict instructions to stay in that group and shelter from the head wind as much as possible by her coach, Martin Rush, who was on the pavement at a number of points as we passed by.
I have experienced exactly the same in many races myself – the London marathon this year was made much tougher by the fact that as I hit mile 22 there was no one around me and there was a distinct breeze into my face along the Embankment. A better chance came in the Bristol half this year, when after about 7 miles I ended up in a group with two other runners and we worked together into the head wind along the Portway back into town. Without that shelter, I would definitely have not managed 78 minutes two weeks after a 100km mountain race and the weekend after 80 minutes at the Run To The Beat.
I also think that there is a huge psychological advantage to running in a group. If everyone in the group get it right, each person can allow the group to pull them along for a while, relaxing and simply following the feet, letting someone else take responsibility for the pacing and sharing the responsibility.
This sort of pacing benefit was brought home to me at the Wokingham half marathon last year. In that race there was a veritable peloton of runners, all clicking off the miles at sub-75 minute pace. Working together, sharing the pacing and sheltering each other from the wind. It was a perfect example of a group working together and the results show the effect that grouping had with the following times posted:
74:02… 74:08… 74:09… 74:13… 74:15…
74:18… 74:18… 74:33… 74:35… 74:38…
74:41… 74:41… 74:43… 74:53… 74:53…
I realise of course that there are factors that come into play here. Some of the races are big events and by the very fact that they have tens or thousands of runners, there is a good chance that there will be fast runners. But that is not always the case: in the Royal Parks half marathon last year – on a flat course, in good conditions – there were exactly 5 runners under 75 minutes – that is 0.042% of the 11,764 finishers. Compare that to Wokingham 2013 where 1.74% of the field finished under 75 minutes and Reading where 0.62% achieved the same time. Admittedly these are not big numbers, but in the case of Reading that was 80 runners out of a field almost exactly the same size as the Royal Parks.
It should also be noted that I have not taken into account any weather conditions or course profile.
But I think that the reality is that if you are looking to run a fast half marathon, you will have a much, much better chance if you run one of the three races where there are the most other runners trying to do the same. For runners further down the field, there doesn’t seem to be any benefit from running in the bigger races, indeed the opposite is probably true, but once you are looking to run 1 hour 30 minutes or faster, the Bath, Reading and Great North Run races are simply the best.
Appendix:
Here are the races that are in the chart above:
Reading (79 runners under 75 minutes)
Great North Run (64)
Bath (63)
Bristol (48)
Wokingham (47)
Peterborough (37)
Cardiff (32)
Birmingham (31)
Nottingham (31)
Wilmslow (31)
Gosport (25)
Fleet (22)
Glasgow (22)
Paddock Wood (18)
Inverness (16)
Llanwddyn (16)
St Leonards On Sea (16)
Alloa (12)
Edinburgh (12)
Worksop (12)
Chester (11)
Helsby (11)
Liverpool (11)
York (11)
Sheffield (10)
Tunbridge Wells (10)
Cambridge (9)
Llanelli (8) My PB set here!
http://simonfreeman.co.u...-want-to-run-fast-times/There have been numerous changes to the Reading course over the duration of its nine year organisational span which has resulted in a fast and flat route and an amazing finish in the magnificent Madejski Stadium.
The Reading Half Marathon not only takes in the highlights of the centre of Reading where you will experience huge crowd support but also still passes through the beautiful grounds of the University campus. The race culminates in a finish rarely found outside an Olympic stadium with over 15,000 people cheering you into the stadium and over the finish line. So whether you run for fun, run to stay fit, run for a club, or run professionally the Reading Half Marathon has the organisational capability, friendliness and reputation that are all second to none.
http://www.readinghalfmarathon.com/