Moraghan Training - Stevie G

19409419439459461258

Comments

  • I think it's the cake at the end of fell races what swing it Rob.
  • Matt, most runners are aware that weight has some sort of effect on running speed, but invariably they choose to ignore the issue.

    They'll want advice on trimming a second or two off a pb but will only accept a training program as the means. Never diet. Too painful.

    Yes the program may work. If they were told one effect of the program resulted in a 3kg weigh loss, and that loss made a difference, they'd find a way to convince themselves that it made no difference at all. 

     

     

  • I wouldn't bother with diet either if I had to do it  your way, Ric- I like eating too much! I can and do sometimes drop a few pounds, though, slowly and just by eating slightly less food. It doesn't have to be hard at all.

  • Ugh - Still feel a bit crappy, hopefully this cold will go soon and I can get some training done..Interesting reading on weight loss. Just get so hungry after running!

    Had a bit of a trainer saga - gutted that after a month I phoned up Up and Running and the Adidas Adios Boost were sold out anyway (after I was goimg to get them for £30)..and they had sent me an email on the 3rd January - that I didn't get..). So spoke to the bloke and decided on some Adidas Boost Techfit..he called back and said that although they were on the website - they had sold out too (and told the web people to sort their life out!)

    ANYWAY...Have gone for some Asics DS Trainers, as remembered them being quite fast and enough support for the Reading Half and responsive enough for tempo stuff on the roads. Might see if they will do for Berlin. Well not everyone can wear Adios Boost I suppose!

  • Used to have some DS racers, which were superb. Anyone tried the Saucony Virrata 2? They look pretty good - light, but cushioned, and are £40 at the mo.

     

    As for weight - I guess the easiest way for me to get a PB at Wokingham then is to chop an arm off!!

    Actually, the most sensible thing would have been to have had a dry January I guess! I totally get that power to weight ratio is important for race speed, I just don't believe the 1% "rule".

    My weight varies by 4 or 5 lbs regularly, but my times stay about the same. Back in September when I ran 1;19:53, I was my heaviest all year as it was post holiday and I just don't believe that if I'd run the same race just before holiday (5lbs lighter - 3%) it would have been 2.5 mins quicker!

     

  • ps - went out with the intention of doing either a tempo or 3x2M at HMP today. Failed miserably! My legs were obviously not up to the job from the off, and the wind didn't help! Just did a 7M steady instead, though to punish my lazy legs I made them do mile 6 fast - came out as 5:38.

     

  • Rob - I am quite excited to see what you can produce if they are tempo runs, so you must be counting the days to your 10k race.

    Hope that cold buggers of Simon, I have a pair of Asics DS, I used them in a HM and they were fine.

    I find the weight thing interesting, the beauty of doing all this exercise, is that I can eat what I want. I'd rather carry a few extra seconds round the waist image. I reckon I could lose half a stone, in just fat.

    So I've had lots of advice re the achilles to take it easy. So I took it on board, and thought f*** it!

    Just been for 9 miles and just ran how I felt. Looked at the watch after 1/4 of a mile and I was on 5:40 pace! Must be the 3 week injury taper, or the 20 mph wind. It felt easy but I knew it must be the wind, so I backed off in the knowledge that I was coming back this way later.

    First mile came out at 6.14, next few were 6.30's with the wind then 7.1ish back into it. Average 6.48 for 9 miles. All felt fairly comfortable had some niggling in the ankle but nothing too bad and it came and went. Seems like I have a chance of making it to the Wokingham start line, but will see how the ankle feels tomorrow, this was a good test.

  • Ric - great point, I know I'm in shape when my mum asks me if I'm eating peoperly, as I look a bit drawn! 

  • The 1% rule is basic physics with force and power. If you loose some weight but keep the same power, you go faster, and the increase in speed is directly proportional to the loss in weight (mass). To be exact, the correct statement should use  Δ and not 1% as obviously if you double weight you don't go exactly twice as slow due to other factors. So 1%, 2% etc may be OK, but as you get to higher percentages, it doesn't hold true.

  • RicF - I'd call it a whole lot of 'assertion' rather than 'information'.  You can also find 'information' about how motion control shoes will prevent injury if you are an overpronator (randomised controlled trials failed to confirm this 'fact') and in the 19th century you would find 'information' on how to treat asthma by bloodletting or how to evaluate a person's intellect from the circumference of their head.  I do not dispute that being lighter can make you faster (I am trying to shed a few pounds myself), but I have struggled to find research to back up the numbers that are bandied about.  After PubMed/google Scholar searches I do not see where '2 secs per mile per pound' and '1% speed per 1% weight' come from and suspect they are zombie statistics.  And PMJ, these things can't be worked out from first principles: bodies are complicated, so you can usually come up with a reason why something should happen and another reason why the opposite should happen e.g. 'light body takes less energy to move' vs. 'starved body is reluctant to expend energy'.

    We could attempt a randomised controlled trial e.g. two parkruns 4 weeks apart, one group diets in between, the other doesn't.

  • I agree with marrows. Though to be fair, I don't think you would find any information about how to treat asthma by bloodletting on the internet in the 19th century.

  • Losing weight and variations in training are obviously connected. Therefore to isolate the benefits of the weight loss alone is difficult. This is the fundamental problem. I would have thought the only way to measure the benefit of weight loss is to take a runner and add weight artificially by having them carry it. This can then be compared to running without it.

  • Only if you made them carry it distributed evenly over their body in all the places they would be likely to carry extra fat, AG.

  • Bus, this 1% rule, its not absolute but close. There are many factors involved, some of which involve co-ordination. 

    The improvement isn't linear. I'm sure Phil could devise some graph that takes into account all the variables. The maths is beyond me. 

    I discovered (in 1997) as the weight comes off, its necessary to speed up and adapt to a new efficient running style. In my case, I can now run up on my toes. I also don't sweat like I used to. The impact of hitting the ground has lessened.

    I don't think a runner should be scared of getting down to super low fat levels. After all, there's food available whenever we need it. Biggest problem I've found is other people making comments in the way LSH88 has mentioned.

    Anyway, I wouldn't be too concerned about this weight/diet thing. It affects no one but me.

  • Don't disagree that we can all afford to lose a lot of weight and still have the fuel, and that we will get faster - just can't accept that linear relationship - not even as close!

    marrows wrote (see)

    RicF - I'd call it a whole lot of 'assertion' rather than 'information'.  You can also find 'information' about how motion control shoes will prevent injury if you are an overpronator (randomised controlled trials failed to confirm this 'fact') and in the 19th century you would find 'information' on how to treat asthma by bloodletting or how to evaluate a person's intellect from the circumference of their head.  I do not dispute that being lighter can make you faster (I am trying to shed a few pounds myself), but I have struggled to find research to back up the numbers that are bandied about.  After PubMed/google Scholar searches I do not see where '2 secs per mile per pound' and '1% speed per 1% weight' come from and suspect they are zombie statistics.  And PMJ, these things can't be worked out from first principles: bodies are complicated, so you can usually come up with a reason why something should happen and another reason why the opposite should happen e.g. 'light body takes less energy to move' vs. 'starved body is reluctant to expend energy'.

    We could attempt a randomised controlled trial e.g. two parkruns 4 weeks apart, one group diets in between, the other doesn't.

    Well put Marrows image  My own case in point was the before and after holiday example I gave. Very little difference from training to take account of, so the only real difference was my weight. OK, I didn't run a before and after half, but I know damn well if I had run one just before the holiday there's absolutely know way on Earth it would have been 1:17:20 compared to the 1:19:53 I did with the extra 5lbs on board!

    Anyway - good to hear the Achilles is holding up. Fingers crossed you can make the Wokingham start line!

  • Lets stick to basics.

    I've lost fat/weight before. But concede I did the job quite badly. I started out (1987) by just starving it off. I didn't drink either. Boy was I stuffed. So not great.

    Ten years later, I simply cut out my daily bag of crisps. That worked to an extent but what really moved things along was getting so ill, I didn't really eat for three weeks. I ran my pb's off that temporary level.

    The other occasions were transient crash diets. Not good either. I was running too fast and kept going hypoglycemic due to burning all my glycogen stores away. 

    But I think (believe) I've worked it out.

    How much fat weight to shift is an issue, but how to do so in a proper controlled manner is more important. The races will follow.

     

  • Ric I'm approx 62/63kg, 178cm is there an ideal weight to height ratio?



    55 min undulating threshold tonight cold and windy average pace 5.59 Average HR 157 !
  • rob, I'm not sure if there is. I feel its more a question of basic build. I mean, longish legs to height might be a factor.

    If the weight is muscle and you are a natural light build, then there's an advantage.

    You are on a BMI of 19.72. To match your figures I would need to lose another 3kg. That would be 52kg. I'm only 162cm. I suspect we both have the advantage of natural light build.

    The information on the NHS choice site puts the lower end BMI at 18.7. If you have achieved your current level by normal food intake, with calculation you could chip off another kg or maybe two. I reckon you would be even faster than tonight if you managed that.

     

  • My body fat is 12% I think and my visceral fat 4%,my resting HR about 41

    I don't diet but I do try and eat well most days other than a few beers at the weekend I don't drink, I hydrate well everyday drinking about 2 litres of water.

    My pace tonight was a little slower than normal because of the hillier route and the fact I've done 4 thresholds in 5 days 60,60,45 and 55 mins
  • robT wrote (see)
    Ric I'm approx 62/63kg, 178cm is there an ideal weight to height ratio?


    The rule I work by is 2 lbs per inch, so you are 138 lbs and 70 inches so creep 2 lbs under that rule. At that weight people say you look gaunt and you thank them.

  • Gaunt or Illimage
  • rob, I've a couple of sets of fat monitor scales. The advanced model is of no use to me as it claims I'm under 5% fat and flashes a warning. The older set says I'm around 11%, sometimes 10.5%. My resting HR is also around 40bpm. One cold morning it averaged 34bpm over 3 minutes.

    Phil, if non runners say because we are thin, we look ill, then we must be ill and they are happy. Its a feeling of security, like looking outside on a wet day and deducing that it must be due to rain.

  • I'm 67/68 kilos, 178cm with 13% body fat and 4% visceral fat. That 20 years you've got on me Rob is cancelled out because I'm lumping 5kg extra around!image



    I look pretty skinny but I've got a fat arse. A bit like a weeble
  • Matt don't even go there WAVA doesn't take weight into accountimage
  • Ric - I guess it's down to peoples perceptions. As in my mum would have a different one to a fellow runner. I'm stubborn enough to ignore it! 

  • Matt, now that bit of information makes your running really impressive. Get your body fat down towards elite averages and you'll be nailing HM's at sub 5 pace. Lets face it, you're not far off already.

    Hardest part of this diet I found is eating to calculation rather than when my guts say 'feed me'. Fighting against our evolutionary instincts. Goes against the grain. 

     

  • Body imperfections? I could do with an extra inch (no sniggering) between knee and ankle. Got quite a long body and femurs, but small shins. God knows if that would help...and we'll never know, of course image

    Amazingly the DS Trainers have already had an attempted delivery yesterday..I only ordered them in the morning! Looking forward to getting them on this afternoon. Cold still reluctant to finally go. Pencilling in a session on Saturday as we are going to Lee Valley as our god daughter is doing an indoor meeting.

  • Think I've lost a few lbs this week thanks to this feckin chesty cough and cold. I must be coughing up a LB of mucus a day at least.



    Wokingham looking unlikely now as the plan was to go and spank it as a gauge of fitness.



    I hate the body ache you get with a cold. Although, it might just be reading some of the paces on here and Strava making me tired.
  • Hmmm.  Diet.  I would run faster if I ate better - I know that.  But it's a quality of life issue really.  I enjoy running, and I enjoy eating, and I'm not prepared to sacrifice my diet.

    Of course, the biggest step I could make to get better is to actually get more sleep.  I sleep less than 6 hours a night.  That isn't because I'm having some kind of power sleep that means I don't need more - it's because I don't go to bed on time.

    Track session last night was a blatant copy of Johnas's.  It was supposed to be 3 x 15 minutes, testing out half marathon pace.  First two were decent enough, going through the 11 lap mark in 14:46 and 14:54 (5:24 and 5:27 pace).  Then started to do rep 3 and my thigh tightened up immediately.  Jogged 200m and tried again, and same thing again.  Eventually jogged it out after a couple more laps, but by then time was ticking on and my training group was going out for a curry afterwards, so I did the final rep as just a 3K (10:08, so 5:26 pace).  Overall it was OK, but not quite what I had in mind.

    This tightness is an odd thing, it tends to crop up towards the end of interval sessions, and is gone the next day.  It doesn't generally come on continuous runs at a consistent pace.

  • Dachs still looks like a great session what was your recovery?

Sign In or Register to comment.