Dublin marathon (2018)

Last Sunday, October 28th, together with my brother Jaime (see here his post about it), I took part for a second time in the Dublin marathon, the “Friendly marathon” according to one of their lines, the 4th largest marathon in Europe with about 18,000 people registered, above 16,000 finishers.


Jaime and I subscribed to the marathon after the good experience I had in Dublin two years ago (see here my post about it), when I ran it with Serna. After the bad experience in Vienna last spring (see here) I wanted to have better prepared this marathon, but I did not. I arrived to Dublin with just above 470 km in the legs (in the previous 16 weeks), some 70 km more than for Vienna but between 200 and 300 km less than when I have closely followed the training plans in the past years. As you can see below, I found myself at the end of August or the beginning of the 8th week of the plan without having trained much and with 9 weeks to go and about 10-12 kg overweight, and then I put myself to the business.


In the 8 weeks prior to the marathon week I averaged 50 km per week, but I missed many long runs on weekends and wasn’t able to complete good series sessions until the last 3-4 weeks. In any case, I could complete some trails, lose some 6 kg and arrive with the confidence of being able to finish it even if the final time was uncertain.


The circuit of the marathon was the same as in previous years.


From experience, I knew that the profile was not flat with a few climbs but that the crowd, with plenty of Dubliners cheering at the runners, and the cold weather (5 degrees Celsius at the departure time) would help in keeping us running at pace. My strategy was to start with Jaime from his box and run together with the 4-hour pacers until I could not keep up with them, hoping to come with them until the km 30 and then see.

Due to the big crowd of runners at the start of the race, it took me some 3 kilometres to get to the pacers, with whom I lost contact after the km 6 due to a short technical stop, but I quickly recovered the gap. I skipped taking a bottle of water at the supply station around km 10, and got to some distance ahead of the pacers. I then doubted what to do, whether to wait for them (to actually run between them) or keep going ahead pacing myself. As in 2016, I took the second option and I went ahead, running consistently a bit faster than the target pace for a 4-hour marathon (5’41” per km) until the km 33, and only then, at km 34, I felt that it was a bit harder to sustain that pace so I softened a bit, not much, and I kept some strength to run a faster last 1.5 km to enjoy the last crowded streets.


In the end, I clocked a net time of 3h55’15”, better than expected and with great feelings while running all along the race, as it was the case in 2016. It was my 19th marathon completed, easy to say today but not so on April 30th 2000 when I completed my first one in Madrid.


With the 3h55’15”, I was again below the 4-hour mark, and finished in the 7181st place of 16236 finishers (see the diploma below), that is in the top 44%, just in the upper half. That time makes it my 10th best marathon, just in the median of the 19 I have completed.



At the finish line, I changed clothes and waited for Jaime to take a picture with him and share the experiences of each other before going to our hotel. It may not have been the last time to run in Dublin.


1 Comment

Filed under Sports

Flight excursion to Menorca and Mallorca

Last weekend, with Luca and our children, we took one of the aeroclub’s DR-400 to make a flight excursion from Toulouse (France) to the islands of Menorca and Mallorca, in Spain. The excursion was part of a “Fly out” organised by the Aviation Society of the Airbus Staff Council in which 5 aircraft would make the same trip.

The main purpose of the flight was to visit Menorca, and we flew to Mallorca to refuel before coming back. It is an excursion that in the Society we had been trying to make since 2015 but we have had to cancel it due to bad or uncertain meteorological conditions several times. The flight includes a leap over the sea of about 1 hour from the East of Bagur (in Gerona) to the North of Menorca and, as there are no safe landing spots in that area, you want to have more or less certain good weather along the route both the day of the departure and return flights.

22. a Formentor, Alcudia, Cap Farrutx

Cape Formentor, Alcudia & Cape Farrutx.

We made 4 flights.

Toulouse Lasbordes (LFCL) – Perpignan (LFMP)

Flight duration: 1h11’.


We included this first stop over Perpignan just to refuel the aircraft to the maximum before flying over the sea all the way through Menorca, so in case of bad weather or any other problem at the destination we could make a comeback to France or somewhere else in the Spanish coast. We selected Perpignan instead of other viable options such as Ampuriabrava for various reasons, among them lower cost of fuel and landing fees.

In the way to Perpignan the sky was overcast (OVC) at a low level around Carcassonne, and, as I did not want to fly on top for that leg, this forced us to fly just at 1000 ft above ground and to follow the highway to Narbonne rather than taking a more direct route to Perpignan over the mountains. You can see the route we followed above.

It was the first time I landed at Perpignan, but finding the field from the way points NL (in the coast) and NF was trivial. Once in the vicinity we integrated directly into the circuit for runway 31, closer to the fuel pump. There, we had a quick lunch and prepared for the following flight.


Find the Garmin record of the flight here.

Perpignan (LFMP) – San Luis (LESL)

Flight duration: 1h56’.


Just after the take-off from Perpignan we took a right turn towards the East and reached the coast South of waypoint EA. From then on we started climbing up to 5500 ft, the altitude selected for the flight over the sea (the highest, the better). In order to keep a high altitude you need to avoid the TMA from Barcelona, otherwise they may ask you to descend below 3000 ft. Thus, we went to the capes of Bear, then Creus and from then on South East heading to pass about 10 nm East of the VOR at Bagur. From then on we followed a series of IFR waypoints (NEMUM – AGENA – VERSO – TOSNU – SARGO).


Flying above the sea is not particularly eventful. You mainly need to maintain the altitude and attitude and the heading stable, as it is very easy to loose references with the difficulty to distinguish the horizon.

As far as radio communications are concerned: we were first transferred with the Gerona traffic control and then to the one of Barcelona. The communications were held in Spanish. Easy, as long as you have a flight plan and follow the announced route. Those frequencies were mainly used by commercial flights going to/from Barcelona or Palma, mainly Vueling flights. Also good to know is that as you fly away from Barcelona at some points you may not be heard by the control; no worries, keep going and sending the messages.

About an hour later we had in sight the North of the island of Menorca, the cape of Cavalleria. But before that, approaching the way point of SARGO (about 25 nm or 14 minutes from the shore) you need to descend down to below 2500 ft, though the control will ask to go down to 1000 ft AMSL as that is the limit of the air space class A around the main airport in Menorca, Mahon.


Cape of Cavalleria.

Once in sight of the shore we requested to follow the coastal line to the East down to the East Corridor for Mahon in order to reach San Luis from the East (the control had however proposed to surround the island around the West and South).

San Luis_chart

Following that route we took the opportunity to take some nice pictures of the coast, the lighthouses and the fortress of Isabel II at La Mola.

San Luis is a non-controlled aerodrome without radio. Therefore, you must stay connected to the frequency of Mahon and land at your discretion, with a circuit to the East of the runway (02/20). The aerodrome is managed by the Aero-club of Menorca. In their site you may find contacts and charts (old ones being in use). There are not official fees but a contribution is expected; 10 euros for landing, 5 for parking. These are paid at the restaurant by the apron, which serves very decent menus and where the staff will be happy to help you calling for  taxi.

We spent the remaining of Friday afternoon and all Saturday enjoying the beach and the hotel’s pools, including a beer on Saturday night with the colleagues from the Society at a bar by the beach, Es Corb Mari (in Son Bou).

Find the Garmin record of the flight here.

San Luis (LESL) – Son Bonet (LESB)

Flight duration: 1h10’.


As the aerodrome of San Luis doesn’t have a fuel pump we could refuel at the main airport of Mahon, but as it requires to contract handling (with expensive fees) we preferred to fly down to Son Bonet (in Mallorca island), which landing fee is less than 7 euros, no handling contracting is required and there is free parking for a stay below 2 hours.

We filed the flight plan on the phone with Menorca airport (at this time the number for flight plans being: +34971157138). On ground, we were already connected to the frequency of Menorca and right after take-off we were cleared to turn West and cross the axis of the airport in our way to the West corridor which took us to the South coast of the island up to the cape and lighthouse of Artrutx.

From Artrutx we flew over the sea towards the bay of Pollensa (making use of its VOR), in Mallorca, and then we flew within the inner side of the island following the road from Alcudia to Mallorca by way of Inca. When leaving Inca we passed with the frequency of Son Bonet (123.5) around which English is mainly spoken as there are quite a few helicopters flying in and out. Finding the aerodrome coming from the road was trivial and we easily integrated into the circuit for runway 23.

At Son Bonet we paid the landing fees (~ 7 euro) and filed the flight plan at the small office by the parking. We refuelled (~3.05 euros per litre of Avgas 100LL) and had some lunch before the long  flight to Toulouse.

Find the Garmin record of the flight here.

Son Bonet (LESB) – Toulouse Lasbordes (LFCL)

Flight duration: 3h04’.


Once we were ready at Son Bonet, we got on board and departed from runway 23 again, took a right turn to the West during the climb to fly North of Son Moix on the way to Esporles to reach the coast of Tramuntana in order to fly along it up to the cape of Formentor.


In the past, we had visited several spots along the way of this coast on the ground. The landscapes are remarkable. This time we wanted to get a view of them from the plane, which was breath-taking.

Once we reached Formentor we took a heading to the North and followed another series of IFR waypoints (KENAS – SULID – AGENA – NEMUM) to reach the East of the above mentioned VOR of Bagur, cape of Creus and enter back into French air space. This time, as the weather was clearer than during the first flight of the excursion, we maintained 5500 ft altitude until we had exited the TMA of Carcassonne.

Find the Garmin record of the flight here.

Some general remarks:

All the navigation logs were again prepared using the tool Mach 7, and during the flight we used the help of the AirNav Pro on the mobile phone (no tablet, though it would be easier). For Spain we had 1/1.000.000 chart from AIR MILLION (Editerra) and the 1/500.000 from Rogers Data. Neither of them has the IFR waypoints marked on them, so you need to write them down yourself in advance.

VFR aerodrome charts in Spain are retrieved from the site of ENAIRE, which in my opinion is less user friendly than the French equivalent. The charts themselves are comprised of too many different documents to handle; it is better to have a simple single PDF of 2-8 pages s in the French case for VFR. On top of that, not all small aerodromes have the information in ENAIRE, try googling about them or contact the local club.

1 Comment

Filed under Aerospace & Defence, Travelling

Detalle de las votaciones para el premio FIFA The Best 2018

Ésta es una pequeña entrada futbolera para mirar el detalle de las votaciones para el premio FIFA The Best 2018 al mejor jugador del año, que fue ganado hace pocos días por Luka Modric.


¿Qué es lo que se premia?

De las reglas de FIFA para la organización del premio [PDF, 243 KB]:

Art. 2 The Awards reward the best in each category, regardless of championship or nationality, for their respective achievements during the period from 3 July 2017 to 15 July 2018 inclusive for the men’s awards and from 7 August 2017 to 24 May 2018 inclusive for the women’s awards.

Art. 3. The Awards are bestowed according to on-field performance and overall behaviour on and off the pitch.

Es por tanto una definición genérica: no se elige al que más goles meta, ni al que más títulos gane, ni al que gane el Mundial, ni la Super Copa de Europa, etc., se vota “al mejor por sus logros de acuerdo a la actuación en el campo y al comportamiento global dentro y fuera del terreno de juego”. A partir de ahí, cada uno vota al que quiera, siguiendo el procedimiento descrito a continuación.

¿Cómo se organiza la votación?

Según las reglas de FIFA para la organización del premio:

  • Un panel de 13 expertos (1) selecciona una lista de 10 jugadores sobre la que después votaran capitanes, seleccionadores nacionales (coaches), periodistas (media) y aficionados (fans). (2)
  • 168 capitanes de selecciones votaron a 3 jugadores de entre la lista de 10 elaborada por los expertos. Los clasificaron en primer, segundo y tercer lugar, obteniendo el jugador seleccionado 5, 3 y 1 puntos respectivamente.
  • 171 seleccionadores nacionales votaron del mismo modo que los capitanes.
  • 168 periodistas designados (uno por país) votaron del mismo modo que capitanes y seleccionadores.
  • Aficionados de todo el mundo votaron en la web de FIFA.
  • La votación tuvo lugar entre el 24 de julio y el 10 de agosto de 2018.
  • El resultado final para la designación de los ganadores es una media ponderada en la que los resultados parciales de los votos de capitanes, seleccionadores, periodistas y aficionados pesa cada uno un 25% del total.

Por España votaron Sergio Ramos (capitán), Luis Enrique (seleccionador) y Francesc Aguilar (periodista de Mundo Deportivo).

El resultado global, es el publicado en diferentes medios, con un podio formado por Luka Modric (29.05% de los votos ponderados), Cristiano Ronaldo (19.08%) y Mohamed Salah (11.23%). Dejo debajo una tabla resumen. Esta misma tabla se puede descargar de la web de FIFA [PDF, 260 KB].


Por otro lado, en la web de FIFA se puede encontrar el detalle de todos los votos emitidos por capitanes, seleccionadores y periodistas, en un documento PDF de 16 páginas [PDF, 517 KB]. Y es a partir de ese documento del que muestro las tablas resumen de debajo.

Tabla resumen con el voto de los capitanes:


Tabla resumen con el voto de los capitanes, si solo votasen aquellos pertenecientes a las selecciones que disputaron el Mundial de Rusia 2018 (31 capitanes de entre los 168 de la muestra total):


Tabla resumen con el voto de los seleccionadores:


Tabla resumen con el voto de los seleccionadores, si solo votasen aquellos pertenecientes a las selecciones que disputaron el Mundial de Rusia 2018 (31 seleccionadores de entre los 171 de la muestra total):


Tabla resumen con el voto de los periodistas:


Tabla resumen con el voto de los aficionados:


Esta última tabla con el voto de los aficionados se obtiene a partir del resultado global y tras haber calculado los resultados parciales de capitanes, seleccionadores y prensa, dado que en los resultados de FIFA no aparece publicado el voto de aficionados.

Comparación de la tabla resumen oficial con todos los votos con cómo quedaría la tabla si se excluyese de la ponderación el voto de los aficionados.


Comparación de la tabla resumen oficial con todos los votos con cómo quedaría la tabla si se excluyese de la ponderación el voto de los aficionados y la prensa, es decir, si contase sólo el voto de los profesionales.


Y por último una comparación con cómo quedaría la tabla si contase sólo el voto de los profesionales de aquellas selecciones que participaron en el Mundial de Rusia 2018 (los 31 capitanes y 31 seleccionadores).


Comentarios finales:

  • En todas las votaciones aparecen destacados siempre en primer lugar Luka Modric y Cristiano Ronaldo con diferencia entre ellos y con el tercero.
  • En el tercero y cuarto lugar aparecen distintos jugadores según se cojan los votos de capitanes, seleccionadores, prensa o capitanes y seleccionadores de las selecciones participantes en el Mundial: Salah & Mbappé, Mbappé & Messi, Salah & Varane, Mbappé & Hazard, Griezmann & Hazard, Mbappé & Griezmann.
  • La excepción se da en el voto de los aficionados, donde en primer lugar destacado aparece Salah, seguido de lejos por Cristiano Ronaldo y Messi y en cuarto lugar Luka Modric.

(1) El panel de expertos [PDF, 402 KB] estaba formado por: Sami Al Jaber (Saudi Arabia), Emmanuel Amuneke (Nigeria), Cha Bum-Kun (Corea del Sur), Fabio Capello (Italia), Didier Drogba (Costa de Marfil), Kaka (Brasil), Frank Lampard (Inglaterra), Lothar Matthaus (Alemania), Alessandro Nesta (Italia), Carlos Alberto Parreira (Brasil), Ronaldo (Brasil), Andy Roxburgh (Escocia), Wynton Rufer (Nueva Zelanda).

(2) Una vez elaborada la lista todos los votos se circunscriben a ella, es por tanto normal que no haya votos para Neymar, Sergio Ramos, Isco o Cavani, dado que no forman parte de la lista hecha por el panel de expertos.

Leave a comment

Filed under Sports

Cómo pondera la UEFA el palmarés de los clubes

Ésta es una pequeña entrada futbolera para compartir una curiosidad sobre cómo pondera la UEFA el palmarés de los clubes dentro de los rankings de clubes que realiza la UEFA.

La UEFA publica varios rankings de clubes y asociaciones de futbol (federaciones de cada país). Para realizar los ranking de clubes, la UEFA asigna una serie de puntos según los resultados conseguidos en los partidos de las competiciones que organiza la propia UEFA. A partir de ellos, cada año se puede ver cuál es el club europeo que ha obtenido una mayor puntuación.

A partir de esas puntuaciones, la UEFA publica un ranking a 5 años y un ranking a 10 años. El ranking a 5 años es el que la UEFA utiliza, por ejemplo, para distribuir a los clubes en los diferentes bombos en los sorteos. También es el que utiliza para publicar cada año cual es el club que lidera el ranking UEFA (que no es necesariamente el que haya obtenido más puntos en ese año de competición, sino en los últimos 5 años).

Por otro lado, la UEFA aclara en su web que el ranking a 10 años sólo lo usa para la distribución de los premios en metálico a todos los clubes participantes en sus competiciones. Para realizar ese ranking a 10 años la UEFA utiliza la puntuación que los clubes han obtenido en cada uno de los últimos 10 años y a esa cifra le añade un coeficiente al que llama “títulos”. Y es sobre este coeficiente sobre el que quería escribir.

Primero dejo debajo el ranking a 10 años ordenado por la columna “títulos”:

Ten-year_UEFA_club_coefficient_2018.06.19_filtered by Title

En la tabla se puede ver que lo lidera el Real Madrid con un coeficiente de 98, al que le sigue el Barcelona con 45, el AC Milan con 42, Bayern con 31…

¿Cómo calcula ese coeficiente la UEFA?

  • Copa de Europa / UEFA Champions League:
    • Ganadas en los ultimos 5 años (2014-2018): 12 puntos.
    • Ganadas desde la creación de la Champions League hasta hace 6 años (1993-2013): 8 puntos.
    • Ganadas antes de la creación de la Champions League (1956-1992): 4 puntos.
  • Recopa (Cup Winners’ Cup) / Copa de la UEFA / UEFA Europa League :
    • Ganadas en los ultimos 5 años (2014-2018): 3 puntos.
    • Ganadas desde la creación de la Champions League hasta hace 6 años (1993-2013): 2 puntos.
    • Ganadas antes de la creación de la Champions League (1961-1992): 1 punto.
  • UEFA Super Cup: no suman para el cómputo del ranking de títulos UEFA.
  • Intercontinental Cup / FIFA Club World Cup: no suman para el cómputo del ranking de títulos UEFA.
  • Competiciones nacionales: no suman para el cómputo del ranking de títulos UEFA.


  • La UEFA, entre las competiciones que ella organiza, da un valor a la Champions League 4 veces superior que a la antigua Recopa o a la UEFA Europa League.
  • La UEFA aplica una ponderación temporal:
    • Los títulos conseguidos entre 1956 y 1992 tienen un valor hoy de un 33% de los conseguidos en los últimos 5 años (4 vs 12 para la Copa de Europa; 1 vs 3 para la UEFA).
      • Por tanto, la Copa de Europa del “Dream Team” (Barcelona FC en 1992, en “color”) para la UEFA tiene el mismo valor temporal que uno de los “botijos” que ganó el Real Madrid de Di Stefano en los años 1950 (“en blanco y negro”).
    • Los títulos conseguidos entre 1993 y 2013 (para el ranking de 2018) tienen un valor hoy de un 67% de las conseguidas en los últimos 5 años (8 vs 12).
  • La extinta Copa de Ferias (Inter-Cities Fairs Cup), a la que en España se le da mucha relevancia, no computa para la UEFA. No era organizada por la UEFA, no había criterios de clasificación para la misma…
  • La Supercopa de Europa: no suma. Un torneo veraniego, que es mejor ganarlo que perderlo, pero que para la UEFA no tiene mayor relevancia que la fiesta de ese día.
  • La Intercontinental Cup / FIFA Club World Cup : no suma. Para la UEFA es un torneo pre-navideño, que es mejor ganarlo que perderlo, pero que para la UEFA no tiene mayor relevancia que la fiesta de ese día.
  • El palmarés europeo del Sevilla (13) es, para la UEFA, superior al del Atlético de Madrid (8). No obstante, el Atlético de Madrid en 2018 tiene una posición en el ranking (4º con 230 puntos) bastante superior al Sevilla (13º con 163.5 puntos), dado que a pesar de no haber ganado ninguna Champions League (palmarés), sí ha sumado puntos para el ranking por sus buenos resultados obtenidos entre 2014-17.

¿Qué club europeo tiene un mayor palmares de títulos europeos?

La respuesta es clara, el Real Madrid. Tan clara que tiene un coeficiente por títulos (98), aplicando las ponderaciones de UEFA, igual que la suma de los coeficientes de Liverpool (28), Juventus (17), Atlético de Madrid (8) y Barcelona juntos (45), es decir igual que todos los otros cuatro finalistas de la Copa de Europa en los últimos 5 años (2014-2018).

Por último, debajo dejo una tabla clara donde muestro el cálculo de los coeficientes de Real Madrid y Barcelona.



Leave a comment

Filed under Sports

Simpatía por el Real Madrid en 2007 y 2014 en España

Ésta es una pequeña entrada futbolera para compartir la gráfica de debajo donde se puede comparar el madridismo o simpatía por el Real Madrid en 2007 y 2014 en España con respecto a la simpatía por los otros equipos con mayor afición en España, incluida la propia Selección española de fútbol.


La primera vez que se me ocurrió escribir esta entrada fue el pasado mes de junio, tras el anuncio de fichaje de Lopetegui por el Real Madrid y leer cómo diversos medios y comentaristas indicaban que con ello el Real Madrid creaba antimadridistas. Como digo, en junio preparé la gráfica pero se me quedó pendiente el escribir este post. Es ahora, cuando tras la contratación de Mariano he vuelto a escuchar la cantinela de que con ese proceder el Madrid creaba antimadridistas, que he terminado el post.

La fuente de los datos son los barómetros del CIS (Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas) de mayo de 2007 y de junio de 2014 [PDF, 217 kB]. En ambos barómetros se incluían varias preguntas sobre actividades de ocio y deportivas. En una de las preguntas se requería lo siguiente: “¿Podría decirme cuál es el equipo por el que siente Ud. más simpatía?”; y en una segunda pregunta: “Además de por este equipo que me ha mencionado, ¿siente Ud. simpatía por algún otro equipo?”

Comentarios a la vista de las respuestas:

  • El madridismo creció de 2007 a 2014.
    • Como primer equipo: de 32.8% a 37.9%, esto es 5 puntos más, o un 16% más sobre la referencia de 2007.
    • Como segundo equipo: de 6.8% a 7%, o 0.2 puntos, un 3%.
  • El barcelonismo, sin embargo, decreció de 2007 a 2014. Tanto como primer equipo, como segundo equipo. La diferencia no es muy grande, con lo que puede estar dentro del error de muestreo. Según las encuestas, lo que no hizo fue crecer.
  • La afición por el Atlético de Madrid tuvo en esos años un crecimiento espectacular en términos relativos. En términos absolutos el crecimiento fue más discreto que el del madridismo.
  • Igual sucede con aquellos que a la primera responden con la Selección española de fútbol: gran crecimiento relativo, pero menor en absoluto que el del madridismo.
  • La afición por el resto de grandes equipos (Valencia, Athletic, Betis, Sevilla) se mantuvo en parecidos niveles o decreció.

Por poner algo de contexto: En 2014 el Madrid ganó la Décima Copa de Europa, con Ancelotti como entrenador tras 3 años de Mourinho (de quien se decía que generaba antimadridistas por doquier). Quizá la consecución reciente de títulos tenga más influencia que ningún otro aspecto, pero no se puede hacer un seguimiento anual, dado que el CIS no incluye estas preguntas sobre simpatía con equipos de fútbol todos los años. Por otro lado, en 2007 el Madrid entrenado por Capello estaba en la carrera para proclamarse campeón de Liga empatado a puntos con el Barcelona.

Igualmente, uno puede imaginar que los títulos de la Selección entre 2008 y 2012, o la Liga de 2014 para el Atlético de Madrid pueden haber tenido influencia en el crecimiento.

En el caso del Barcelona: en 2006 ganó Liga y Copa de Europa, en 2007 nada. Entre 2008 y 2012 se nos decía poco menos que estaba inventando el fútbol. En 2013 ganó la Liga y en 2014 perdió la final de Copa y quedó segundo en Liga.

Alguien podría todavía decir que el Real Madrid, con Mourinho, con Lopetegui, con Mariano (y con cada argumento que se utiliza cada pocos meses), crea antimadridistas y que los barómetros del CIS no lo desmienten. Y técnicamente es así: Los barómetros no incluyen una pregunta del estilo “¿se considera usted antimadridista?” Podrían incluirla, pero hasta ahora no lo han hecho. Y, por tanto, se podría dar el caso que entre el 60.4% que no declararon simpatía por el Real Madrid en 2007 hubiese menos antimadridistas que en el 55.1% que no declararon simpatía por el Real Madrid en 2014. Pero afirmar eso, sin datos, no deja de ser un brindis al sol.

Por último, la primera vez que vi hablar de estos estudios del CIS fue gracias a un artículo de Kiko Llaneras donde con los datos de las encuestas dibujaba unos mapas de España por aficiones. Os recomiendo ver ese artículo.

Leave a comment

Filed under Sports

Vienna City marathon 2018

On Sunday April 22th, together with my friend Juan and brother Jaime, I took part in the Vienna City Marathon.


At the Wiener Riesenrad in the Prater amusement park.

Since some years ago, I always follow the same 16-week training plan to prepare for the marathons. That lead to a start of the plan at the beinning of January. However, I got the flu at the end of January and that got me for a week in bed. It continued with an otitis and then skiing holidays at the end of February. It was not until the beginning of March that I managed to clock some serious training for some weeks in a row. By then the objective had come to get a level of fitness to finish comfortably the race, no more. In the two half marathons I did in the month and half before the race I could already see that my fitness level was the worst in years…


During the 16 weeks of the nominal training plan, I completed:

  • 447 km of running, thanks to a streak of 5 weeks from March in which I averaged 58 km per week.
  • 13 series / intervals training sessions, out of the 28 included in the plan, and many of those I did were not the ones included in the plan but softer sessions trying to catch up.
  • 4 long runs of over 20 km, 2 half marathons and one session of 28 km plus one of 31 km.

The circuit of the marathon would take us from the International Centre to the Prater, the parks by the Danube river, and then to the city centre to make another excursion through the outskirts of the city, this time to the Schönbrunn Palace and back to centre, then back to the park by the river and back again to the centre to finish by the Rathaus. The organization wanted to show off a bit of the centre and mix it with classical music being played at some points, to match their motto Theatre of emotions.


The circuit was flat. The only inconvenient of the race was the heat of the day. That Sunday several marathons took place in Europe (Madrid, London…). In all of them the main issue was the heat. We had almost 19° C when I started, it went up to 27° C or more by the end. The organization did not spare the provision of water but when the heat hits like that you need to focus on not getting suffocated and run at a softer pace.


My race strategy was clear: to complete the marathon comfortably at a pace slightly slower than the one I am used to; for that purpose I would try to run a 3h45′ marathon for while to fall back at the second half of the race targeting a 3h55′ or 4h marathon. I quickly found that it would be hard to be under 4 hours. Just before the half marathon point I had to make technical stop which cost me a few minutes. Since then I ran at about 5’45” per km for a few more kilometres.


In my mind I started figuring that I could encounter my brother Jaime, since he had started about 15 minutes before from a different block and was shorter of training. And so it happened. At about the km 30 I saw him at a cross road and I caught him about 5 minutes later. He told me to continue ahead as he was suffering and struggling with the pace (see here his post about the race). I told him that by then I would no longer be under 4 hours but rather 4h06′, 4h16′ or 4h26′, so I’d rather stay with him and finish another marathon together as we had done in Madrid in 2015 or in Millau the same year.


From then on we ran at about 7’15” per km till the end. They were about 11 kilometres of keeping a soft but steady pace under the sun, drinking at every supplies post, chasing the few shades along the circuit and getting prepared for the finish line.


In the end, I clocked a net time of 4h23’08”. It was my 18th marathon completed. It is  great feeling of accomplishment to finish a race in such conditions even if with a discrete time, and always happy to still be able to complete them, even more together with my brother and friends.


With the 4h23’08”, my worst marathon since 2001, I finished in the 3236th place, out of 5434 finishers, in 40% percentile, down in the lower half.

At the finish line we took some pictures with Jaime and with our friend Juan and Balint, a Hungarian fellow that Juan had met in a previous marathon in Madrid.


Filed under Sports

Review of Boeing Current Market Outlook 2018

Two weeks ago, on the second day of Farnborough air show, Boeing Commercial published its yearly update of the Current Market Outlook (CMO) for the next 20 years of commercial aircraft market (2018-2037).

I have just compared the figures for passenger aircraft of the last two years’ CMOs:

CMO 2018 vs 2017 comparison

CMO 2018 vs. 2017 comparison.

Some comments to it:

  • You can see that the total number of new aircraft delivered has slightly increased from 40,110 to 41,750, a 4.1%, which is consistent with the 4.7% traffic increase (1) that Boeing predicts (2).
  • The volume (Bn$) increases by a higher percentage, 4.8% (280 Bn$) up to 6.07 Trn$. This is due to the increase in the single-aisle aircraft expected sales in volume (9%, +300 Bn$) and aircraft (6.2%, +1,830), as the other segments see both a forecast decrease in terms of volume and aircraft.
  • For years, Boeing has been dowplaying in its CMO the demand for the segment of the large aircraft (seen as mainly 747, A380 and some other high capacity aircraft, depending on the manufacturer). Last year, Boeing stopped to consider them a category by themselves and merged that category with the “intermediate twin-aisle” (i.e. 777, A350…). This year, Boeing has further reduced the detail provided in the wide-body category by merging large aircraft with the small wide-body (i.e. 787, A330…) segments and now provides a single forecast for wide-body.

This year presentation did not include slides showing the accuracy of Boeing’s CMO of 20 years ago in predicting today’s fleet. They used to include such a slide in previous years’ presentations. I will come back to that in a following post.

Find below a slide from the excutive summary [PDF, 263 kB] that provides a good snapshot of the forecast that the guys from Boeing have put up together:


As always, I recommend going through the CMO, as you can learn a lot about the business: from global numbers, to growth, traffic figures, fleet distributions, forecasts, etc… You may find the presentation [PDF, 5.1 MB], a file [XLS, 0.6 MB] with all the data or the full CMO report [PDF, 11 MB].

(1) Traffic increased measured in RPKS (revenue passenger kilometers) in trillions.

(2) These two ratios, 4.1% fleet demand and 4.7% traffic growth, point to an implicit increase in the average size of the aircraft in fleet and / or a higher utilization of the aircraft (higher availability).

(3) Find the reviews I wrote comparing 2017 CMO with 2016 CMO2016 CMO with 2015 CMO2015 CMO with 2014 CMO2014 CMO with 2013 CMO and 2013 CMO with 2012 CMO.

Leave a comment

Filed under Aerospace & Defence