Ok, I’m trying to plan out 2010 by working backwards. I’ll do the full Ironman in Panama City, Florida in November. In June, I’ll do the half-Ironman in Boise. But before that, I want to get a marathon in, because I’ve never done one and feel like I need to have that under my belt. But I would prefer to do the half-Ironman after the marathon, so that once the marathon is over then I can focus on all three disciplines rather than focusing on all three, then running, then back to all three.
The thing is…that gives me two options as I see it. I’ve got the Salt Lake Marathon on April 17th, or the Ogden Marathon on May 15th. But the SLC marathon is managed by Devine, who has a horrible reputation for event management. I did the SLC half marathon last April, and while it was fine for a half-marathon, I hear they ran out of drinks for the marathoners on the course, and they ran out of food at the end as well. I know I had to fight to get more than one popsicle at the end, which seems ridiculous after paying $80 for entry. C’mon, you can’t afford to give me two popsicles? But I’ve heard great things about Ogden, plus they appear to have a lot more nutrition at the aid stations in the form of Gu, Clif bars, fruit, etc.
However, what about the dates? Between the Ogden marathon and the Boise half I’ll have less than a month to recover from the marathon and get back in shape for the half…is that just cutting it too close? I have a feeling my coach is going to say “yes”, but we’ll see. After all, I’m not trying to do anything amazing on the half. On the other hand, I’ve already finished one so I want to do more than “just finish”. But is there any reason do a good job on both?