Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Options
It's Good to Walk!
The materials in this website are in no way intended to replace the professional medical care, advice, diagnosis or treatment of a doctor, qualified personal trainer, therapist, dietitian or nutritionist Runners's World, Part of the Hearst UK well-being network © Copyright 2017
Comments
your misreading what I'm trying to say, if you set out with the intention to run as far as you can, then are forced to walk, Ok you gave it your best shot but you tried your best. I've certainly done that in the past. The people I'm going on about have no intention making that sort of effort, we've all seen them at events like the GNR when its jog the first mile and walk the rest. Suddenly their announcing that the've run the GNR or whatever. Its the statement that "they have run XXX" which I consider "cheating". PH don't take it personally I'm well aware of the effort that you put into your running and I actually doubt if there is anyone on this Forum who falls into my definition of "cheating".
Now I will quietly slide away into cyberspace and shut up
It's like trying to define 'raced' could you say you'd 'raced' a marathon, if you walked part of it. Rather than 'run' a marathon? Well, if you've tried your darndest and beat some people, I guess that that would be justified? But I don't 'race' other people, just myself.
Each to his own, I'm gonna just try and stay out of the way of the fast guys and try not to get injured and try to finish in one piece.
Why is it ok to run/walk in an ultra but not in a marathon?
Dave
you mean people who dont take the race seriously, and hence dont try very hard
Beanz, if you want to run the full distance of an ultra then the sheer volume of training is beyond we mere mortals whom have to work. According to the principle of collapse point as included various publications (everymans guide to long distance running, for one) you need to be averaging about 60 - 70 miles a week to run a full marathon without walking. Therefore the required training to run say Comrades at a race distance of 55 miles is near to 130 miles per week. Most of us do not have that sort of time to train and perhaps more importantly rest between sessions. Should I ever get paid for doing nowt I would love to train to that level but in the meanwhile I'll accept that I have to walk in ultras, not because I want to but because there is no choice. The point here is that I have never claimed to have run "comrades" but I do claim to have completed it.
PH at risk of getting my words twisted I'll agree with your definition. I guess its safe to say that people who don't try get my goat up in every walk of life.
Will stop on this subject now as its time to go home and train... Marathon coming.
60-70 mpw
not easy with my job
ive a long way to go myself
Blimey Dubai Dave you set a very high standard - presuambly us people on 35 mpw, because we are not trying hard enough, should not even start.
I see it rather differently - the idea is to get round the 26 miles as quickly and efficiently as yu can. If that means walk breaks thats fine, if it is full run then that is also good.
It is all a matter of your personal goals, abilities and life balance. Whatever you do is an achievement.
his schedule is:
Time goal of more than 6 hours: 1-2 minutes of walking every 1-2 minutes running
Time goal of 5:50-6:00 hours and slower: 1 minute of walking every 4-5 minutes running
Time goal of 5:00-5:29: 1 minute of walking every 5-6 minutes of minutes running
Time goal of 4:30-4:59: 1-2 minutes of walking every 6-7 minutes running
Time goal of 4:00-4:29: 1 minute walking every 7-8 minutes running
Time goal of 3:30-3:59: 1 minute walking every mile
Time goal of 3:22-3:29: 30 seconds walking every mile
Time goal of 3:16-3:21: 20 seconds walking every mile
Time goal of 3:08-3:15: 15 seconds of walking every mile
Time goal of 2:50-3:07: 10 seconds of walking every mile
Why do walk breaks work?
By using muscles in different ways from the beginning, you legs keep their bounce as they conserve resources. When a muscle group, such as your calf, is used continuously step by step, it fatigues relatively soon. The weak areas get overused and force you to slow down later or scream at you in pain afterward. By shifting back and forth between walking and running muscles, you distribute the workload among a variety of muscles, increasing your overall performance capacity. For veteran marathoners, this is often the difference between achieving a time goal or not.
Walk breaks will significantly speed up recovery because there is less damage to repair. The early walk breaks erase fatigue, and the later walk breaks will reduce or eliminate overuse muscle breakdown.
The earlier you take the walk breaks, the more they help you!
To receive maximum benefit, you must start the walk breaks before you feel any fatigue, in the first mile. If you wait until you feel the need for a walk break, you've already reduced your potential performance.
Most people could run a marathon on much less than that anyway - I reckon 30 miles a week would get most people round without walking - not everyone obviously.
Geoff Galloway doesn't half talk crap (in my opinion of course!).
(well, at 12 min miles, 12*70 is 840 mins, that's 14 hours, so by your reckoning I'd have to do an 8 hour run at the weekend!!!)
I think everyone should do their best and it would be a shame if first timers (like me) were put off doing marathons by people who look down on them for giving it their best shot, even if that does mean walking part of the way. Shame we don't all live in an ideal world really.
Realistically, once my dissertation is handed in I'm hoping to push up to 40 miles a week over the winter(from 20-25) and would definatly hope to be able to complete a marathon some time next year without walking. But if I don't it's not the end of the world, and I respect anyone who can go the distance, however fast or slow they do it.
Any fast runners want to volunteer to try out the Galloway technique in their next marathon (or long training run). I'd be fascinated to see how the theory pans out in real life?
I've the whole day hold off to saying something on this thread.
Personally I don't like walking in between running, because I find it to hard to start running again after a walk break. It brings me out of rithm.
Dubai dave you may have your opinion. I don't think I can change that. But I honestly think you can't say you ran an ultra when you walk a bit of it. Well how do you feel now, when somebody takes such an achivement from you away? Feels like crap, doesn't it. I think it was a rude post to do, especially in a beginners forum. Doesn't sound tactfully.
I just think that it doesn't make a difference how you came round a race. Nobody can take the achivement of finishing a race away from you. Doesn't mather if you ran, ran/walked, crawled, rolled, etc...
thats only 5 miles for me
i wont argue about work hours with you again though;)
Sasjeh for Pope!
I've nothing against run/walking btw and if I thought it would get me a faster marathon time I'd do it - but I can't see how a 10 second walk every so often (which is what Galloway is recommending for me) would be of benefit - why do I only need 10 seconds whereas if I was say half an hour slower I'd need 20 seconds to benefit - it doesn't seem to be based on anything other than the fact he knows if he put that a 3 hour marathoner should walk for longer they'd have to be running that much faster to make up for it.
On the subject of achievement and completing a marathon. I've a mate in his 20s who plays cricket and football to a decent level. He runs FLM most years but finishes in over 5 hours (his best was 4.15 when he trained a bit). I don't think that is an achievement at all. If my mum finished in 7 hours and walked it all that would be an achievement.
so--thats 35 miles for me isnt it
We all have our own standards and targets. I'd love to have an extra hour a day to do a hobby, but with 3 hours commuting on top of an eight to nine hour day, it ain't going to happen.
I guess it all comes down to what you are trying to achieve and what you're personal standards are. If running and the time is really important to you, fine that's your choice, but personally I'd rather spend some time with the kids kicking a ball around and not run so far or fast.
Its called a life balance.
I don't know if Jeff Galloway talks crap or not. I assume his advice is based on empirical evidence of all the people who have followed his schedule.
But for me the fascination of running is the way different methods work for different people.
run/walk is not an invalid method. It either works for you or it doesn't.
For me it doesn't - to keep on looking at my watch makes me feel more tired. I prefer to think that the finish as the indefinite future and then try and get into a rhythm and stay in it. But for others the breaking the race into small chunks makes it more digestible.
HK - yes it's not invalid if people want to run/walk - it may even help people get round faster than just running. I really doubt that it would work for sub 4 hour runners though, let alone 3 hour runners. If people want to run/walk because it allows them to finish or enjoy a marathon then great - but when people start saying it's a way of getting a fast marathon time I'd say show me the evidence.
I doubt very much if Geoff Galloway's advice is based on anything other than his desire to sell books - I base that on having read one of them.
This is what I posted early on this thread
"meanwhile I'll accept that I have to walk in ultras, not because I want to but because there is no choice. The point here is that I have never claimed to have run "comrades" but I do claim to have completed it." enough said I think.
Looks like its me and Popsider against the rest, well everyone is entitled to their own opinion and we'll leave it at that.
I'm doing the FLM and intend to run about 10/11mm because an injury has slowed my training down. At the end of the day 26.2 miles non-stop, at whatever speed, is an achievement many airmchair sportsmen would envy!
enjoy your day
xx
I am going to do my first marathon, the Paris in april and after RUNNING my first half M last week I realised that even with another month of training doubling up what I did last week just ain't going to happen! Feeling slightly upset by this I have been trying to think what I can do in my training over this month to get to finishing a full 26.something miles....I guess its got to be the run/walk method...but the 'smiles' way....lots of smiling, lots of running and a little walking....I will get there, I won't give up and I will use this as prep for another marathon but near the end of the year!
It has its uses....yes we all have to make a choice...for me its being sensible and finishing with the ability to walk afterwards!
Enjoy!
Max Smiles
I'm in the same boat as you - a Marathon at the end of May and I've done a run this morning of just 10 miles (and I've got a ½ mara next weekend) which, although it didn't kill me, I realised that even with 10 weeks to go, I'm probably going to have to consider this option.
I've also got an ankle injury that I'm recouperating from which has seriously curtailed a lot of my running anyway so I'm surprised I even lasted the full 10 miles this morning.
It must be fate that this thread appeared this morning because I've been thinking about the run-walk method and was thinking on the run 10 minutes, walk 1 minute sort of thing next week just to see how it went.
And I'll be more than happy to finish, even if I can't say I RAN a marathon, I can still say I completed one at the end of the day and there's only 4 people in my immediate company of friends and associates that can ever say that.
Good luck with Paris.
for extended ramble about it). I used the Galloway minute a mile technique picked up from the RW site and it worked a treat. Got me round in 2hrs dead.
The only reason I can think of for "ordinary" runners not utilising it is that you do look like a bit of an idiot walking only one or two miles into an easy start. But it pays off later on as you more than make up for it in the later stages.
As to whether or not it is "proper" running - who cares? It doesn't seem much more than extreme pace variation. And what is wrong with that?
I have to place the original Amby Burfoot article right at the top of the info on this site. Much more valuable than all the top 10/best 20/essential 40 lists put together.
Recommend the technique for beginers/low intermediates. Target becomes 5 mins running then a rest - not too hard. Much easier than an 'indeterminate' future.
Presume those runners targetting 3 hours don't really need much advice along these lines - they are probably well experienced and capable/knowledgeable about their own pace/ability.
I felt real achievement after finishing my marathons and if anybody had used the word 'cheat' at the time I would have flattened them. Now, I think it is just their own problem/complex that they have to deal with.
btw while people passed me during the walk I caught up with them during the runs and finished ahead of many running around the same pace.
Each for his own. let's support the endeavour of all.
on on
Just thought I'd mention it in case it was putting people off trying cos they couldn't fit in 70 mpw.
If you can run for say an hour, 6 miles but can't run for 90 mins.
Training for a while using run /walk up to 2 hours will probably get you running constantly for 90 mins.
Now if you want to go faster over agiven distance you also use interval training. But it's run fast / run slow.
There's no difference except in your personal degree of fitness.
However if you want to run faster and longer then you have to train faster and longer. There's no easy answer!!