Raceday is almost upon us, so time for some maps and pre-race analysis. After looking at the online map for the 10K course, I was not encouraged about the pain-factor of this race. From the email I got from Striders:

“It will be an epic 10K run, we hope you like it.”

Yeah, I bet! The 5K was pretty epic, and even fun, in kind of a sick, twisted sort of way.

Making my own maps did nothing to help these sentiments. One of the benefits of using a GIS-based approach for mapping is that you can overlay multiple layers, which allows for direct visual comparison between two data themes. In this case I overlaid the Striders 5K course from two weeks ago with the 10K course. Doing this allows us to see where the 10K goes relative to the 5K, and also lets us assess how much worse the 10K will be!

Of course, a course map for these particular races would be virtually meaningless without an elevation layer! Overlaying a digital elevation model (DEM) accomodates planimetric visualization of all the climbs and descents…all without a profile graph. This is one reason why I tend to bash Google Map mashups, which we are seeing with increasing frequency as “official” race course maps. Yes, Google Maps and Google Earth are quick and handy, they display roads and aerial photography quite well, and they accomodate some custom data. But even for simple maps they are lacking in several major areas: 1) No elevation layers; 2) Poor cartography; 3) Commercial-use limitations and map ownership limitations. They are referred to as “Google Map hacks” for a reason. I’ll discuss points 2 and 3 in other posts, for today I’m only interested in elevation.

The GIS map posted below is very simple: it only shows the 5K route (red dash), the 10K route (solid yellow), 10K mile and tenth-mile markers, and a shaded elevation map. I did not have time to do any real cartography (ie roads, labeling, etc.), so just a “down and dirty” map for today. I left out aerial photography to focus the eye on the true point of the map: showing elevation, which grades from green (low elevation) to red (high elevation). See the legend for details, but the elevation colors change in 25-ft increments. Click on the map image to download a full .pdf file.

We can see immediately that the 10K course reaches a higher elevation (>5100 ft) than the 5K course from two weeks ago. Yikes! We’ve got a heck of a climb between Mile 2.2 and 3.1, but from there on we’ll have a very fast downhill (aside from a wimpy little climb just after Mile 5.0).

My take on this race is similar to that of the 5K: the race can be lost in the first half, and won in the second half. A relatively conservative start will ensure success and plenty of leg pop for making a mad surge on the downhill section. But if you go into debt in the first half, you may be out of gas by the time the course becomes favorable for speed.

Even though one can glean everything they need to know from the elevation map itself, I’ve sketched up a very quick and dirty profile and stats for those of you who must have one. Note that the 5K profile is overlaid on the 10K profile for direct comparison (another handy feature of custom mapping vs. a web service or Google Map). I calculated roughly 680 ft of total gain and drop for the 10K. This is just slightly more than twice that of the 5K. Gradients are very similar to those that we experienced in the 5K (unfortunately), although some parts will definitely be less brutal on the knees. I didn’t have the time or desire to actually calculate gradients and post them on the profile like last time, but I think the graphic itself says it all (click on image to enlarge profile).

Since the total elevation gain/loss is pretty much twice that of the Striders 5K, I think simply plugging your Striders 5K time into a standard race calculator, such as RunWorks or Sasha’s, and not worrying about calibrating for elevation, will get you pretty close. Based on my 5K time from two weeks ago, my projected 10K time would be 34:27. So that will be my 2nd-tier goal time to beat. If I’ve experienced fitness gains over the last two weeks, and/or just bust off a great race, my 1st-tier goal is sub-34:00. I predict that the winner (assuming the same cast of runners as last time) will be somewhere between 33:40 and 33:55.