TACTICAL BEHAVIOUR OF HIGH-LEVEL MALE MARATHON RUNNERS

AUTHORS
Accepted Article
García-Manso JM1, Martínez-Patiño MJ2 de la Paz L3, Valverde T4 *,
1 Juan Manuel García-Manso (jgarciamanso@gmail.com)
Department of Physical Education. University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain.
2 Maria José Martínez-Patiño (mjpatino@uvigo.es)
Department of Specific Didactics. University of Vigo, Spain.
3 Lázaro de la Paz Arencibia (accion@uccfd.cu)
Universidad de Ciencias de la Cultura Física y el Deporte Manuel Fajardo. Cuba
4 Teresa Valverde Esteve (Teresa.valverde@uv.es) * Corresponding author
Department of Didactics of Music, Visual and Body Expression. University of Valencia, Spain.

This article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been
through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to
differences between this version and the Version of Record. Please cite this article as doi:
10.1111/SMS.13873
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved
 DR TERESA VALVERDE-ESTEVE (Orcid ID : 0000-0002-8712-9872)
Accepted Article
Article type : Review Article

TACTICAL BEHAVIOUR OF HIGH-LEVEL MALE MARATHON RUNNERS

ABSTRACT

This study analyses the strategy used by the best male runners who participated in one of the
major city marathons (Frankfurt Marathon, 2008 to 2018), the all-time performances
<2:04:00, the male world records achieved during the 21st century and the Nike Breaking2
Project and INEOS 1:59 Challenge (total = 235 races). The races of the best runners in the
Frankfurt Marathon (top 10) were analysed (n=110 runners, range: 2:03:42-2:14:05 hours);
the runners were divided into two groups according to the tactical used. The pace of Group A
(stable pace) remained steady throughout the race, while in Group B (decrease in running
speed towards the end of the race) a moderate, but significant drop in speed was detected (p ≤
.001), starting from halfway through the race and getting sharper from the 30th kilometre (30-
35 km = 1.6%, p ≤0.001 - 35-40 km = 4.3%, p ≤ .001 - 40-42.195 km: 3.9%, p ≤ .001, total =
≈10%). In the races in which the world record is achieved, the running speed tends to be
steady and relatively conservative during the first stretch of the race, increasing smoothly in
the second half and achieving a significant increase in the last 2195 metres of the race (p =
.016, ES=1.14). Among all the possible strategies, running at a steady pace throughout the
race seems the most effective option, especially when priority is given to time rather than
position (i.e. world records and best all-time races).

Keywords: marathon, pacing strategy, male elite runners,

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

 INTRODUCTION
Accepted Article
Since the marathon race was incorporated into the calendar of the Olympic Games (Athens
1896),1 we observe year after year, as is the case with other long distance races (ultra
marathons, trail running, etc.), that the number of organised events increases (≈500
marathons / year). Likewise, the number of participants of all genders, ages and performance
levels in marathons or longer races has been increasing significantly in the 21st century.2

Understanding the factors that limit marathon performance is important if we want to

guarantee success in the race and minimise the risks in such a demanding event.
Environmental factors (temperature, humidity, wind), profile of the route, race schedule,
number of participants, drafting, the level of the participants, etc., are external to the athlete
but are important to achieve the desired time.3-5 Other aspects such as the type and volume of
training or experience in the event,6 body size,7 the development of the oxygen delivery
system,8 reserves and efficient utilisation of energy substrates (glycogen and fats),9 running
economy,10 efficiency in the mechanisms of thermoregulation,11 adequate hydration,12 etc. are
specific to each athlete and especially important for the final result.

All these elements affect the athletes differently depending on their objectives. Certainly,
each athlete’s interests are not the same. While some seek victory (contenders), others simply
seek to beat their personal best or to meet the challenge of finishing the race (finishers). To
achieve their goals, each athlete adopts specific race strategies to avoid fatigue before
reaching the finishing line.13 Pace or pacing strategy can be defined as the competitive
strategy used by an athlete in terms of managing running speed, work distribution and energy
expenditure adequately in order to achieve the goal proposed in each case.14

The race strategies of the world’s best marathon runners have changed in recent years.
Previously, athletes used to start faster than they do now and, consequently, their speed used
to decrease, sometimes drastically, in the second half of the race.15

Despite the way that running a marathon can change significantly from one athlete to another
13,16
among high-level runners, it is accepted that there are three strategies that tend to be the
most commonly used to run a marathon efficiently: 1) running at a steady speed throughout
the race; 2) keeping to a steady speed in the first part of the race and subsequently slowing
down slightly as the race progresses; 3) gradually increasing the speed up to the end of the
race. The choice depends on the runner’s experience, training status and level of

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

 performance. In this paper, we will evaluate whether these strategies are used by the best
male runners (contenders) who participated in one of the most important marathons in the
world (Frankfurt Marathon: IAAF Gold Label Road Races), the 19 best all-time records and
Accepted Article
the male world records achieved since 1998.

METHODOLOGY
Sample

We analysed the running speed used in different races at the highest international level:
Frankfurt Marathon 2008 to 2018 (n =110); men’s world records achieved in the 21st century
(8 world records); best global times of all time <2:04:00 hours (n = 29), including those of
Eliud Kipchoge in the Nike Breaking2 Project in Monza 2017 (Italy) and the Ineos 1:59
Challenge in Vienna 2019 (Austria).

In the Frankfurt Marathon, the races of the best runners (top 10) in the men's category were
analysed (n = 110 runners, range: 2:03:42 h - 2:14:05 h) (http://live.frankfurt-
marathon.com/2017). In this work, the female category is excluded because it is understood
that women may present different tactical behaviours to runners in the male category.17 No
differences have been observed when analysing the 2017 Ljubljana Marathon.18 However, it
should be taken into account that in this case 1853 runners with different performance levels
are included.

In order to demonstrate the existence of two different types of tactical behaviour, these
runners were divided into two groups. The first (GROUP A: GA) includes runners (n = 36)
who finished (last 7195 metres) at a speed that was ≥97% higher than the average speed
during the race (Vmean: 5.46  .11 m/s, range: 5.19-5.69 m/s); the second group (GROUP
B: GB) includes runners (n = 74) who finished the race with a drop in speed of ≥3% with
respect to the average speed of the race (Vmean: 5.46  .08 m/s; range: 5.24-5.58 m/s). This
methodological criteria was based on the authors experience. However, future research could
aim to determine the percentage that could be considered as a change of rhythm.

Statistics
Conventional statistical methods were used, including mean and standard deviation (SD) to
describe each group of runners. For the detailed analysis of split times and comparison
between the different groups, a normality test was carried out initially (Kolmogorov-Smirnov
or Shapiro-Wilk) to then perform comparison tests of means (parametric or nonparametric)
according to the characteristics shown by the series. A one-way within-groups ANOVA

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

 compared meanings of each group with repeated contrast tests conducted to identify changes
between successive race segments (5 km). Change in pace between the first and second
halves was compared using an independent t-test. In the comparison of nonparametric series,
Accepted Article
the Mann-Whitney U test (different groups) and the Wilcoxon test (same group) were used.
The comparison of means was completed with calculation of the Effect Size (ES) value of
Cohen's d. The value was considered trivial (ES: < .20), small ( .21- .60), moderate ( .61-
1.20), large (1.21-2.00) or very large (2.0-4.00). The p-value ≤ .05 was taken as the
significance limit in all statistical tests.

RESULTS
In the Frankfurt Marathon, both groups included runners with similar results in the event
(GA: 2:08:37 h  794 s vs. GB: 2:09:19 h  237 s; ns; ES = .24). The first half of the race
was faster in both cases, with similar average running times (GA: 1:03:25 h  56 s vs. GB:
1:03:13 h  67 s, p = .019, ES = .19). The second part of the race was significantly slower in
both groups (GA: increase = 78 s, p ≤ .001, ES = 1.61 - GB: increase = 172 s, p = .001, ES =
1.05), especially in GB (see Table 1 and Figures 1 and 2).

<<Table 1>>

It can be interpreted that the GA runners (Figure 1 - Table 1 top) ran quite a steady race at an
even pace. Their speed can be considered quite steady up to km 35, where the average drops
by 1.3% (p = .003, ES = .40) in the race section between km 35 and 40, and the speed drops
moderately before increasing in the final stretch of the race. The greatest increases in speed in
the last section of the race were achieved by the Kenyan Wilson Kipsang when he won the
races in 2010 and 2011 (2010: 5.64 m/s – 20.30 km/h, 5.77 m/s – 20.77 km/h and 5.90 m/s –
21.24 km/h, final time: 2:04:57- 2011: 5.59 m/s – 20.12 km/h, 5.71 m/s – 20.59 km/h, 5.72
m/s – 20.59 km/h, final time: 2:03:42).

<<Figure 1>>

In GB, a moderate but significant drop in speed (p ≤ .001) is detected, starting from the
halfway through the race (Figure 1 - Table 1 bottom). However, this decrease in speed
usually stabilises after a few km, and it is from km 30 when fatigue tends to be clearly
reflected in the speed. It is from this moment when the drop in intensity is progressive and
constant until the end of the race (30-35 km = 1.6%, p ≤ .001 - 35-40 km = 4.3%, p ≤ .001 -
40-42.195 km: 3.9%; p ≤ .001; Total = ≈10%). We can observe that 23 runners lose more
than 10% of their speed in the last stretch of the race, and 2 of them even lose 20%. Also note

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

 that in both cases the speed is not the same for all athletes. The SD values always increase at
the end of the race, especially in GB (Table 1 top and bottom).
Accepted Article
All runners who achieve their all-time best (Table 2) tend to run at a speed that can be
considered steady throughout the race, since the loss of speed never reaches 1% in the
slowest section (.7% with respect to the average speed in the event). It must be borne in mind
that this loss of speed can sometimes be due to factors external to the athlete himself (i.e.
course, wind). Note that some of these runners show a significant increase in the last stretch
of the race (Kipsang: 104.4%, 2:03:23 h - Kipchoge: 103.2%, 2:01:39 h - Gebrselassie:
109.6%, 2:03:59 h).

<<Table 2>>

In the races in which the world record is achieved (Table 2), the runners’ behaviour is very
similar to that of the GA in the Frankfurt Marathon. The speed tends to be steady and
relatively conservative during the first stretch of the race, before increasing smoothly in the
second half and achieving a significant increase in the last few metres of the race (p = .016,
ES = 1.14). Six of the eight runners manage to finish the race at a speed higher than the
average speed of the race. Seven of the records were achieved at the Berlin Marathon (2003,
2007, 2008, 2011, 2013, 2014 and 2018). The course of the Berlin Marathon is ideal, as it is
very flat (it starts at 38 metres above sea level and never reaches a height of more than 53
metres or less than 37), and it is held at a time of year (end of September) in which the
temperatures (≈15ºC) and humidity (≈10%) are appropriate for this type of race.

<<Figure 2>>

Figure 2 shows the evolution of the pace of the three fastest races in history. The data for the
three races run by Eliud Kipchoge show two opposite strategies. In Monza 2017 and Vienna
2019, the athlete tried, with the aid of pacemakers who helped with drafting and a reference
light from a car, to maintain a steady pace (170 seconds/km; 5.88 m/s – 21.17 km/h)
throughout the entire race. However, in the race at the Monza circuit, Kipchoge started
slightly faster, causing a significant loss of speed from km 35 that was sustained until the end
of the race. In the second of the two races (Vienna 2019), Kipchoge managed to keep up the
initial speed throughout the race, allowing him to accelerate slightly during the last few
kilometres and break to the 2-hour barrier. In the race where he achieved the official world
record (Berlin 2018), Kipchoge started with a slightly worse time, but by running the first
part of the race more conservatively, he was able to accelerate significantly in the last stage

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

 of the race. It must be taken into account that all the races were run on a flat, very fast course
and in excellent environmental conditions.
Accepted Article
DISCUSSION
The data show that, except for particular cases, there are two dominant race strategies among
high-level runners: a) maintain a steady speed; b) maintain a steady speed during the first part
to later slightly decrease the speed in the last phase of the race. The first of these tactical
behaviours seems to be the most effective to achieve an optimal result among runners who
aspire to win an important race or who seek to achieve a top-level result. This is clear from
the Breakin2 and INEOS 1:59 projects.
19-22
Other authors have already favoured this tactical model as an effective strategy to
maximise the athlete’s performance. It was verified in 59 winners of the Tokyo, Osaka and
Nagoya marathons (1982-2007) that the average speed in each phase of the race (5-km splits)
shows a minimum variability of no more than 20 s compared to the average time for the
entire race.11 In the case of the all-time best marathon runners analysed in our study, the
variations were 12.5 s and 11.1 s among the runners in the Frankfurt Marathon included in
the GA. In this type of strategy, some of these variations in running speed are likely to be due
to the course profile, wind direction (headwind or tailwind) or changes in temperature.20

It is only possible for very experienced and highly trained athletes to maintain a steady pace
over such long periods of the race. Indeed, expert trainers consider this skill to be one of the
key characteristics of high-level marathon runners. Reaffirming this opinion, studies show
that there is a strong correlation between the volume of training and the performance
achieved by these runners.23-25

Despite being runners who achieve excellent final results in all cases, the athletes who ran the
Frankfurt Marathon at a steady pace started the race at a speed equal to or slightly slower
14
than the overall speed for the whole race rather than those who started faster. Foster et al.
limit themselves to stating that this behaviour is mainly used by athletes who seek to win the
competition and not so much improve their personal best. However, even though the premise
is fulfilled among the subjects of our sample (Frankfurt - GA), this is not the case when we
analyse world records.

In the record races, we see how the athletes also begin the race at a controlled and
conservative speed, despite the fact that the objective was to achieve the best possible time
(world record). We must bear in mind that starting too fast entails risks that are sometimes

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

 irreversible. Two of the most significant risks are premature exhaustion and the appearance of
26, 27
a high sensation of fatigue early on. Some authors state that fatigue and the perceptual
processes that accompany it are elements that could condition decision-making regarding the
Accepted Article
appropriate pace that the athlete should use for the rest of the race.

A clear example of the above can be seen in the two races run by the Kenyan Eliud
Kipchogue in Monza 2017 and Berlin 2018 (Figure 2). It is well known that this runner’s
goal was to break the historic barrier of 2 hours in marathon (2:50 min/km). In the first race,
the attempt was meticulously prepared by the company Nike within what was called
Breaking2, although he was 25 seconds away from achieving it his objective. After specific
preparation, scientific support and personalised running shoes (Vaporfly 4% Flyknit),
Kipchoge ran alongside two other great specialists, the Ethiopian Lelisa Desisa and the
Eritrean Zersenay Tadese, in addition to another 30 high-level supporters who helped the
aforementioned runners by acting as pacers who ran the race placing themselves in specific
positions to reduce wind resistance. In the second race, the aim was to beat the time achieved
in the previous race and get closer to 2 hours. If we look at both races, we see the differences
between starting conservatively or taking risks and pushing the potential limits of the athlete.
In the first case, the record was achieved but the time was relatively far off 2 hours (1:30
minutes), although the runner reached the finish with enough strength to be able to accelerate
significantly. A year earlier in Monza, this same runner kept to the limit of the proposed goal,
but after 35 km fatigue manifested itself with a moderate drop in speed toward the finish line.

The Monza race was held at the Autodromo Nazionale, began at 5:45 a.m. with a temperature
of 12°C, some light rain and a large group of athletes as pacemakers (for pacesetting and
drafting). The INEOS 1:59 Project was also held at an excellent circuit (flat course at 193
metres above sea level with a 4.3 km straight section without any pronounced curves), with
optimum environmental conditions (temperature at the start was 9°C, and had warmed to
11°C by the end) and better external assistance than at Monza (running shoes with an
improved weight, cushioning and elasticity, hydration provisions, a V-shaped formation of
pacemakers, 41 rotating pacemakers and an electric pace car, among others). In Berlin, when
Kipchoge achieved the current world record (2:01:39 – 2.53 min/km), although he was aided
by pacemakers, he covered the usual course together with the other participating runners,
following a circular route along both sides of the main river in an ideal circuit to achieve
excellent records (7 of the 10 all-time best times have been achieved on this circuit) with a

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

 difference of only 27.8 m between the lowest point (89.4 m above sea level) and the highest
point (117.2 m above sea level).
Accepted Article
In high-level races run at a steady pace, athletes usually seek to achieve important or
maximum records, causing them to reach the last stage of the race almost at the limit of their
capabilities. In these conditions, the possibility of accelerating in the last stage of the race can
be compromised, as we have already seen. Despite this, with this strategy some of the runners
studied are able to increase their final race speed significantly. In the Frankfurt Marathon,
five GA runners increased their speed by 2% in the last metres of the race (2,195 metres)
without needing to reduce the speed in the previous stages. Something similar is observed
among the runners of the other two groups studied (world all-time bests and world records).
In the first, 7 runners (36.8%) managed to accelerate by more than 2%, the most remarkable
case being that of the Ethiopian Gebrselassie (Berlin 2008), who managed to accelerate by
more than 7% at the end of the race (5.75 m/s – 20.70 km/h vs. 6.22 m/s – 22.39 km/h). In the
case of the athletes who managed to beat the world record, there are also 4 runners (50.0%)
who managed to accelerate significantly in the last stretch of the race, the most outstanding
final stage of the race being that of Kenyan runner Wilson Kipsang Kiprotich (Berlin 2013),
who achieved a final improvement in speed of more than 4% (5.71 m/s vs. 5.95 m/s).

The other dominant strategy that we have detected in the races analysed, is that of
maintaining a steady speed in the first stage of the race and progressively reducing the
intensity, as slowly as possible, until the end of the race. It has been suggested that this is the
most common tactical behaviour, although logistically not the only one, among medium- or
low-level runners.21 However, in light of what we have observed, we can verify that this is
also seen among high-level contenders (74 runners, 67.3%) such as those who managed to
finish in the top 10 of the Frankfurt Marathon between 2008 and 2018. As can be seen in the
results section, the athletes included in the GB maintain a steady speed in the first half of the
race, but they reduce the running speed, sometimes in a very surprising way. It would be
logical to assume that this is a symptom of fatigue (metabolic, neuromuscular or
psychological). Fatigue usually manifests itself from 30-35 km of a marathon. This is what is
known as “the wall”.28 Among experienced athletes, this drop in performance usually occurs
primarily for four reasons:29 1) low glycogen reserves; 2) premature depletion of these
reserves; 3) low efficiency in the oxidation of lipids; and 4) low running economy.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

 It is well known that, in marathon races, most of the energy supply (2950-3000 kcal) is
obtained from oxidative metabolism and it therefore depends almost exclusively on aerobic
ATP resynthesis. Carbohydrates and fats are the main metabolic substrates from which the
Accepted Article
necessary energy is obtained.30 It is assumed that the marathon is an event that is highly
dependent on glycogen reserves.31 The first problem is that storage of this energy substrate in
humans is limited (≈740 g, <3,000 kcal).32 Most of it is stored in the skeletal muscle (≈80%),
a small part in the liver (10-15%) and the rest in the blood.33

Initially, although the mechanisms that regulate the choice of substrate to be used at each
moment are not fully understood, it is known that at higher workloads muscle metabolism is
highly dependent on carbohydrate breakdown. The level of participation of this substrate can
vary significantly from one athlete to another, especially if we compare a sedentary subject
with a high-level marathon runner. In any case, it is essential not to exhaust the glycogen
reserves too much or too quickly during a marathon (known as hitting the wall or bonking).
Although the body is continuously regenerating glycogen from non-glucidic precursors
(gluconeogenesis), in long-distance races it is advisable to provide glucose during the race.
An insufficient supply of glucose during the race can cause hypoglycaemia and accelerate
muscle fatigue,34 which is why adequate training and a proper diet are the key to these
races.35 With adequate training and correct glycogen levels, we will have an important
reserve that, if not exhausted prematurely, could be the key to achieving a good time and
competing for victory.

An important part of glycogen savings depends on running economy, that is, on the athlete’s
ability to run at high speeds with a low energy cost.36 Remember that the energy cost in each
case depends on the running speed, the training level and the fatigue accumulated during the
race, which, as is logical, always increases with race distance. Limited data have been
published on high-level athletes in scientific journals, so it is difficult to know precisely the
real energy cost of these increasingly well-trained athletes. The lowest published value
corresponds to the half marathon ex-world record holder (58:23 min), the Eritrean Zersenay
Tadese.37 This runner showed an energy expenditure of 150 ml/kg/km (47.6 ml/kg/min)
during a treadmill test running at a speed of 19 km/h, which is a lower baseline value (> 21
km/h) than a runner would need to run a marathon is less than 2 hours.

The body’s fat reserves are very high (≈68,250 kcal, 7000 g in a subject with a body weight
of 70 kg and 10% fat percentage),38 especially if we compare them with other energy

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

 substrates. During exercise, the lipid oxidation rate is linked to the intensity of the race,
showing hyperbolic behaviour in which the oxidation rate increases initially with the intensity
of the exercise and progressively decreasing beyond certain work intensities.39, 40
Accepted Article
The best-trained athletes, especially those who perform high volumes of aerobic training,
have a greater ability to oxidise fats (FMO) than sedentary subjects.41 Athletes can reach
values above 1.00 g / min, compared to sedentary subjects who barely exceed .5-.6 g/min.42
Another parameter to be taken into account is the exercise intensity that elicits maximal fat
oxidation (FATmax) and the intensity of the minimum oxidation intensity of fats (FATmin),
which change according to the athlete’s level:43 sedentary FATmax: 51.3 8.7% VO2max;
trained FATmax: 69.4  9.5% VO2max - sedentary FATmin: 70-75% VO2max; trained
FATmin: 90-95% VO2max). However, these values could improve in athletes who have
accumulated high volumes of aerobic training over many years. The effectiveness of these
mechanisms is a key factor in preserving glycogen reserves and achieving high yields from
the metabolism of fats, so low levels of lipid oxidation will require intense use of glycogen
from very low intensities.

CONCLUSION
The data for the analysed races show the great importance of accurately selecting the running
speed when competing in a high-level marathon and trying to beat our personal best or win
the race. The analysed races seem to show that, for this type of athletes, this objective
involves selecting as high a speed as possible that we can maintain steadily throughout the
race (even pace). This is especially important when the priority objective is the time rather
than the position. Other strategies, in high-performance athletes, do not seem to be as
effective, except in very specific cases.

PERSPECTIVE

The most effective tactical alternative would be to run at a steady speed for 80-85% of the
total distance and then slow down, as long as the speed losses towards the end of the race are
43
moderate. However, this result conflicts with what Billat recently stated. These authors
consider that running a marathon at a perfect pace seems almost impossible. To our
knowledge, the differences are based on differences in the samples used. As mentioned at the
beginning of the study, in lower level runners, in the second part of the race or even at earlier
stages, the running speed must be very high, and the speeds used by runners can vary a lot
due to the lack of race experience or low levels of performance.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

Accepted Article

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

 REFERENCES
Accepted Article
1.
Sabina M, Daniela M, Gabriela D. Marathon, Between history and tradition. Ovidius
University Annals. 2018; 18(2S1): 319-325.

2.
Cejka N, Knechtle B, Rüst CA, Rosemann T, Lepers R. Performance and age of the fastest
female and male 100-km ultramarathoners worldwide from 1960 to 2012. J Strength
Cond Res. 2015; 29(5): 1180–1190.
3.
Vihma T. Effects of weather on the performance of marathon runners. Int J Biometeorol.
2010; 54(3): 297–306.
4.
Hoogkamer W, Snyder KL, Arellano CJ. Modeling the benefits of cooperative drafting: is
there an optimal strategy to facilitate a sub-2-hour marathon performance? Sports
Med. 2018; 48(12), 2859-2867.
5.
de Smet D, Verleysen M, Francaux M, Baijot L. Long-distance running routes’ flat
equivalent distances from race results and elevation profiles. In 6th International
Congress on Sport Sciences Research and Technology Support. 2018.

6.
Joyner M.J, Ruiz JR, Lucia A. The two-hour marathon: who and when? J Appl Phyisiol.
2011; 110: 275–277.
7.
Knechtle B, Wirth A, Knechtle P, Zimmermann K, Kohler G. Personal best marathon
performance is associated with performance in a 24-h run and not anthropometry or
training volume. Brit J Sport Med. 2009; 43(11): 836-839.
8.
Bassett DR, Howley ET. Limiting factors for maximum oxygen uptake and determinants of
endurance performance. Med Sci Sport Exer. 2000; 32(1): 70-84.
9.
Volek JS, Noakes T, Phinney SD. Rethinking fat as a fuel for endurance exercise. Eur J
Sport Sci. 2015; 15(1): 13-20.
10.
Candau RB, Sanchez AM, Borrani F, Minetti AE. Comment on: “How biomechanical
improvements in running economy could break the 2-hour marathon barrier”. Sports
Med. 2017; 47(11): 2403-2404.
11.
Chinevere TD, Cadarette BS, Goodman DA, Ely BR, Cheuvront SN, Sawka MN. Efficacy
of body ventilation system for reducing strain in warm and hot climates. Eur J Appl
Physiol. 2008; 103(3): 307-314.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

 12.
Noakes TD. Hydration in the Marathon. Sports Med. 2007; 37(4-5): 463-466.
13.
Abbiss C, Laursen P, Describing and understanding pacing strategies during Athletic
Accepted Article
competition. Sports Med. 2002; 38: 239–252.
14.
Foster C, De Koning JJ, Hettinga FJ, Lampen J, Dodge C, Bobbert MF, Porcari JP. Effect
of competitive distance on energy expenditure during simulated competition. Int J
Sports Med. 2004; 25(3): 198-204.
15.
Díaz JJ, Fernández-Ozcorta EJ, Santos-Concejero J. The influence of pacing strategy on
marathon world records. Eur J Spor Sci. 2018; 18(6): 781-786.
16.
Utkin VL. Aspectos biomecánicos de la táctica deportiva. Muscú:Vneshtorgizdat, 1986.
17.
Deaner RO, Lowen A., Rogers W, Saksa E. Does the sex difference in competitiveness
decrease in selective sub-populations? A test with intercollegiate distance runners.
PeerJ. 2015; 3: e884.
18.
Nikolaidis PT, Cuk I, Rosemann T & Knechtle B. Performance and Pacing of Age Groups
in Half-Marathon and Marathon. Int J of Environm Res and Public Health. 2019; 16:
1777.
19.
Renfree A, St Clair Gibson S. Influence of Different Performance Levels on Pacing
Strategy during the Female World Championship Marathon Race. Int J Sport
Physiol. 2013; 8: 279–285.
20.
Angus SD. Did recent world record marathon runners employ optimal pacing strategies?
Sports Med. 2014; 32(1): 31-45.
21.
Santos-Lozano A, Collado PS, Foster C, Lucia A, Garatachea N. Influence of sex and level
on marathon pacing strategy. Insights from the New York City race. Int J Sports
Med. 2014; 35(11): 933-938.
22.
Hanley B. Pacing, packing and sex-based differences in Olympic and IAAF World
Championship marathons. J Sport Sci. 2016; 34(17): 1675-1681.
23.
Esteve-Lanao J, San Juan AF, Earnest CP, Foster C, Lucia A. How Do Endurance Runners
Actually Train? Relationship with Competition Performance. MED Sci Spot Exer.
2005; 37(3): 496-504.
24.
Karp JR. Training characteristics of qualifiers for the U.S. Marathon Trials. Int J Sport
Physiol. 2007; 2: 72-92.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

 25.
Ogueta-Alday A, Morante JC, Gómez-Molina J, García-López J. Similarities and
differences among half-marathon runners according to their performance level. PloS
One. 2018; 13(1): 1-11.
Accepted Article
26.
Smits BL, Pepping GJ, Hettinga FJ. Pacing and decision making in sport and exercise: the
roles of perception and action in the regulation of exercise intensity. Sports Med.
2014; 44(6): 763-775.
27.
Roelands B, de Koning J, Foster C, Hettinga F, Meeusen R. Neurophysiological
determinants of theoretical concepts and mechanisms involved in pacing. Sports
Med. 2013; 43(5): 301-311.
28.
Stevinson CD, Biddle SJ. Cognitive orientations in marathon running and" hitting the
wall". Brit J Sport Med. 1998; 32(3): 229-234.
29.
Rapoport BI. Metabolic factors limiting performance in marathon runners. Plos Comput
Biol. 2010; 6(10).
30.
Van Loon LJ, Greenhaff PL, Constantin-Teodosiu D, Saris WH, Wagenmakers AJ. The
effects of increasing exercise intensity on muscle fuel utilisation in humans. J
Physiol. 2001; 536(1): 295-304.
31.
O’Brien MJ, Viguie CA, Mazzeo RS, Brooks GA. Carbohydrate dependence during
marathon running. Med Sci Sport Exer. 1993; 25(9): 1009–1017.
32.
Gonzalez JT, Fuchs CJ, Betts JA, Van Loon LJ. Liver glycogen metabolism during and
after prolonged endurance-type exercise. Am J Physiol-Endoc M. 2016; 311(3):
E543-53.
33.
Jensen J, Rustad PI, Kolnes AJ, Lai YC. The role of skeletal muscle glycogen breakdown
for regulation of insulin sensitivity by exercise. Front physiol. 2011; 2: 112.
34.
Callow M, Morton A, Guppy M. Marathon fatigue: the role of plasma fatty acids, muscle
glycogen and blood glucose. Eur J Appl Physiol. 1986; 55(6): 654-661.
35.
Stellingwerff T. Contemporary nutrition approaches to optimize elite marathon
performance. Int J Sport Physiol. 2013; 8(5): 573-578.
36.
Arellano CJ, Kram R. Partitioning the metabolic cost of human running: a task-by-task
approach. Integr Comp Biol. 2014; 54: 1084-98.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

 37.
Lucia A, Oliván J, Bravo J, Gonzalez-Freire M, Foster C. The key to top-level endurance
running performance: a unique example. Brit J Sport Med. 2008; 42(3): 172-174.
Accepted Article
38.
Jeukendrup AE, Wallis GA. Measurement of substrate oxidation during exercise by means
of gas exchange measurements. Int J Sports Med. 2005; 26(1): 28-37.
39.
Romijn JA, Coyle EF, Sidossis LS, Gastaldelli A, Horowitz JF, Endert E., Wolfe RR.
Regulation of endogenous fat and carbohydrate metabolism in relation to exercise
intensity and duration. Am J Physiol. 1993; 265(1): 380-391.
40.
Maunder E, Plews DJ, Kilding AE. Contextualising maximal fat oxidation during exercise:
Determinants and normative values. Front Physiol. 2018; 9(: 599.
41.
Lima-Silva AE, Bertuzzi RC, Pires FO, Gagliardi JF, Barro RV, Hammond J, Kiss MA.
Relationship between training status and maximal fat oxidation rate. J Sport Sci
Med. 2010; 9(1): 31-35.
42.
Achten J, Jeukendrup AE. Maximal fat oxidation during exercise in trained men. Int J
Sports Med. 2003; 24: 603-608.
43.
Billat V, Carbillet T, Correa M, Pycke JR. Detecting the marathon asymmetry with a
statistical signature. Physica A. 2019; 515: 240-247.

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

ccepted Articl
Table 1. Shows the evolution of the intensity (average running speed and standard deviation per 5 km section and at the end o f the race expressed as average speed (m/s)) of
each section and percentage with respect to the average speed achieved in the whole event. The top part shows the data for the runners included in Group A and the lower part
shows those corresponding to Group B of participants in the Frankfurt Marathon.

GA (N = 36 runners)
Distribution of efforts per 5-km section and at the end of the race.
Mean speed per section (m/s) and percentage with respect to the mean speed.
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 2.175 42.195
Parameter
Km km km km km km Km Km km Km
Speed 5.50 5.50 5.54 5.49 5.47 5.47 5.45 5.38 5.45 5.46
(m/s - SD) 0.11 0.11 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.16 0.19 0.16 0.11
Percentage 100.7 100.7 101.3 100.4 100.1 100.2 99.7 98.4 99.7
100%
(% -SD) 1.5% 1.3% 1.7% 1.4% 1.3% 1.9% 1.8% 2.7 2.0%

GB (N = 74 runners)
Distribution of efforts per 5-km section and at the end of the race.
Mean speed per section (m/s) and percentage with respect to the mean speed.
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 2.175 42.195
Parameter
Km km km km km km Km Km km Km
Speed 5.55 5.55 5.61 5.57 5.52 5.52 5.43 5.17 4.97 5.46

(m/s - SD) 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.13 0.22 0.26 0.08
Percentage 101.8 101.7 102.8 102.1 101.2 101.1 99.5 94.7 91.0
100%
(% - SD) 1.6% 1.6% 1.8% 1.5% 1.5% 1.7% 1.7% 3.2% 4.2%

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

ccepted Articl
Table 2. Shows the evolution of the intensity (average and running speed standard deviation per 5-km section and at the end of the race expressed as average speed (m/s)) of
each section and percentage with respect to the average speed achieved in all the races corresponding to all-time bests, as well as in the whole event in the races in which the
world record was beaten, including the best time achieved by Eliud Kipchoge in Monza 2017.

ALL-TIME BESTS (n = 29 runners - <2:04:00)

Distribution of efforts per 5-km section and at the end of the race.
Mean speed per section (m/s) and percentage with respect to the average speed.

Parameter 5 km 10 Km 15 km 20 Km 25 km 30 km 35 Km 40 Km 2.175 km 42.195 km

Speed 5.74 5.72 5.68 5.71 5.72 5.73 5.73 5.67 5.71 5.72
(m/s - SD) 0.09 0.08 0.10 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.22 0.05

Percentage 100.45 99.97 99.39 99.86 99.98 100.23 100.24 99.20 99.86
100%
(% - SD) 1.54 % 1.23 % 1.55 % 1.06 % 1.24 % 1.15 % 1.89 % 1.89 % 3.57%

WORLD RECORDS 2000-2018 (n = 8 runners)

Distribution of efforts per 5-km section and at the end of the race.
Mean speed per section (m/s) and percentage with respect to the average speed.

Parameter 5 km 10 Km 15 km 20 Km 25 km 30 km 35 Km 40 Km 2.175 km 42.195 km

5.68 5.66 5.66 5.67 5.65 5.69 5.72 5.67 5.79 5.68
Speed (m/s)
0.07 0.04 0.04 0.10 0.07 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.12 0.06
Percentage 99.6 99.7 99.2 100.1 99.6 100.3 100.9 99.9 102.1
100
(%) 1.2 1.1 1.9 0.8 1.3 1.2 1.0 1.5 2.2

This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

 6,0

Velocity (m/s) 5,5

5,0

4,5 GROUP - A (N=36)

Frankfurt Marathon 2008-2018

4,0
5B
km 10 Ckm 15 Dkm 20Ekm 25Fkm 30 G
km 35 H
km 40 Ikm 42.195
J

6,0

5,5
Velocity (m/s)

5,0

GROUP - B (N=74)
4,5
Frankfurt Marathon 2008-2018

4,0
5 Bkm 10 Ckm 15 Dkm 20Ekm 25Fkm 30 G
km 35 H
km 40 Ikm 42.195
J

Figure 1. Box-plot showing the evolution of the average speed of the race in 5-kilometre sections plus the

last 2,195 metres. Each box includes all runners in GA (n = 36) and GB (n=74) who ran in the Frankfurt

Marathon between 2008 and 2018.

 6,05

Monza'17
6,00
Berlin'18
Vienna'19
5,95

5,90
Speed (m/s)

5,85

5,80

5,75

5,70

5 km 10 km 15 km 20 km 25 km 30 km 35 km 40 km2,195 km

Figure 2. Shows the evolution of the running pace for the three all-time bests achieved by the Kenyan Eliud

Kipchoge when he achieved the world record (Berlin 2018: 2:01:39) and the two world’s fastest time

(Monza 2017: 2:00:25; Vienna 2019: 1:59:40).