Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Options
Moraghan Training - Stevie G
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
Interesting points Ric. I was thinking about this on a run last week and a phrase Dean used to Scotch Egg last year came to mind 'no black and white in your running'. For me the danger point seems to be when I am fit and running well. When I am in that position I can end up pushing the steady runs as it feels great. Obviously I now try and avoid this and if I feel fit and am running well I up my game on the sessions.
Last week in posts it was clear Stevie is running his steady runs quicker than Matt and Dean who are quicker in races and hit quicker times in sessions. I thought you were trying to point out he is going into the 'grey area' with his steady going to quick and his speed work being too slow. I know from the past that this doesn't always go down well but if you are on an open forum and you aren't adverse to commenting on others training then I think you should be prepared to debate the issue rather than avoid it.
As they say running is a results business (or is that football!) and you can't argue with recent race results.
Dave Normans training is a good read on strava, obviously putting in some big miles recently due to the marathon but a lot of runs are 7min miling upwards.
Indeed Max, I like to think we can have an open discussion featuring all the training possibilities that can influence an enhanced result.
🙂
So yesterday I did
Distance: 7.46 mi
Time: 14:22
Avg Pace: 1:56 min/mi
http://connect.garmin.com/activity/462781664
but maybe it is a software error and not a new world record
All,
It is apparent that the fix we put in place last Friday for the issue where Garmin Connect was not taking into account the stop time when calculating Time and Average Pace resulted in some type of new issue. This we are sure is frustrating you and we apologize for this new issue that has cropped up. We will work to get this issue fixed as soon as possible and this announcement will be updated when we have a fix in place. Thanks for your patience.
Philip that's a new world pavement PB well done even someone on a certain unnamed thread would be impressed
60 min threshold for me tonight covered 9.92 miles ave HR 154 bloody windy by us tonight and last 3 miles full into head wind made it tougher than it should have been
Phil, the figures are there in black and white. Under the rules of industry you have shown 'due diligence', so it counts.
Clearly the leg you ran in the Southern 12 stage was at an easy recovery pace so the benefits of such have emerged today.
🙂
I was being patriotic. It would have upset Scott and Chris if I had lapped them when they are trying to get ready for VLM.
robT, must go and check with the holy one one pavement PB rules.
Mere reality Phil. No doubt Scott and Chris are aware of the fact that no matter how good they are, there's always someone better. You would have been doing your duty reminding them of this fact.
As for Harrow's result at the 12 stage. DQ'd as predicted. What threw us all was that our man only ran 25 minutes for the short lap, when 25 minutes for the long lap was feasible. Only 2.6k difference so do the maths. No don't.
I wondered at first whether or not our fastest runner had run twice to ensure qualification. DQ offense. Or someone not named had run (they did and he went off course) so DQ offense twice.
Still, the upside is being spared a 200 mile round trip to Birmingham.
🙂
Hey guys, I just ran 6.00 pace at relays for 5k....from that time what pace do you think my recovery runs should be in? I run most miles apart from speed sessions at 7.30 pace...is that too quick and slowing my quality down? Just wondered if im falling into that slow miles to fast category?
Lodan, put your PB into mcmillan running calculator and see what paces it kicks out.
very windy here, so tried to run to perceived effort rather than chase the clock. 6*1200 off 90 sec rec. ave came out 3.58. All reps were within a second of each other so happy enough in such conditions.
Hello all,
Been quiet for a bit... ran the Northern 12 stage, did a short leg in 17:55, which wasn't too bad after very little running last week (20 odd miles). The illness really took its toll and has taken a while to build strength. Great runs by Matt and Rob, who was looking very easy when I saw him. I will never agree to leg 12 again, what a farce.
Did 5 x 3mins @ tempo tonight as I'm doing Wilmslow. Not sure how the 2 week lay off will effect me but I shall give it my all. I reckon I'll run well.
Training question for the Mara' boys. I'm looking at the Pfiztinger plans in 'Advanced Marathoning.' They seem to be 18 weeks, is this too long? I'd have to start in June for an October marathon?! Crazy scenes.
lodan1: as well as speed sessions there are other sessions available. It is not a case of speed and recovery and nothing else, so really 7:30 for recovery is too fast if it is a real recovery run. Recovery runs are the day after a real hard session and if you are round 6 minutes a mile for a 5k then 8 minutes + for recovery is right. You also get an easy zone of 7 to 8 minutes so the 7:30 pace fits into easy, but it is easy and not recovery.
Stevie, if you read P&D you will see that 18 is not even the start of it. If I look at the 55-70 week plan, then the first week of 54 miles has 9 miles with 4 at HMP, 11 miles and 15 miles. Week 2 has 16 miles with 8 at MP. You need to ensure that when you start the 18 weeks you are ready for it. I actually cut the first 4 weeks out as VLM is 14 weeks after the Christmas and New Year break but I did base building so in the 3 months at the end of 2013 I did 220, 213 and 235 miles so the 270 miles I did in Jan and Feb were not too much of a shock.
18 weeks is a minimum for the non-marathoner. If you are a seasoned campaigner and do spring and autumn marathons you can do less as your body is used to it.
Ss, if you have to question the commitment that training for a marathon properly commands, then its not the race for you.
Lots of people train for a marathon but completely wreck their chances of doing well on account of taking their increased fitness 'forced upon' them by the programs and (because they cannot resist it) racing themselves senseless in the lead up to the main event.
I can think of two runners who ran magnificent 20 mile races and then ran total rubbish for a marathon six weeks later.
That's a marathon for you. Normal service is put on hold for the duration.
🙂
SS, I know people who use 10 mile programmes. Unsurprisingly, their marathons come out way worse than their times for other distances.
It depends really. If you are running high-ish mileage anyway, those first 3-4 weeks don't need to be anything special. My plan started at about 65-67, which is what I was running anyway as a matter of course. I would say, however, that you should definitely start getting used to a weekly medium-long run in addition to your long run, and putting in the odd bits of marathon pace here and there.
I'm hoping PMJ is referring to a 55-70 mpw plan, rather than a 55-70 week plan, which is maybe a bit OTT.
I would also echo what Ric says about 20 mile races. I've heard many horror stories of people who nailed 20 mile races and then flunked in the marathon. That's why I made damn sure I didn't 'race' Finchley. I know people who did, so we'll see what happens at VLM. P&D set a ceiling of 15K for races in the latter stages of marathon training.
SS- hope wilmslow is better weather than the last 2 yrs. im going to see if i can get across and watch. marathons, arent you a bit young for those?
nice work Rob on the threshold run in that wind.
So to throw some data at this. I ran Finchley 2102 in 2:08:11. There were 21 runners ahead of me slower than 2 hours and 15 of those ran London. (It is an interesting thought about what the other 6 did, if they did another marathon or DNS / DNF). That means I was ranked 16th of the 16 at Finchley but I was 7th at London.
The fastest at Finchley finished 2nd of our bunch (2:01:33 and 2:43:50), 2nd came 3rd, 3rd and 4th fell to 10th and 11th (2:02:38 to 2:51:26) and 2 others fell 7 places.
The best conversion was 2:04 to 2:41 and the worst 2:06 to 3:32.
PMJ, if you've got some time on your hands, it might be instructive to compare the WAVAs for their 20 miler vis a vis their marathon. (you may not know all their ages, but one would only need to assume a consistent default age to make a comparison)
For what its worth, I did Bramley in 2011 in 2:05:00, then VLM 8 weeks later in 2:55:00 - poor conversion, but at least the numers were satisfyingly round (though one is chip, and the other gun)!
A local runner and ex forumite did 1:58 at Bramley in 2012, then 2:54 at VLM. the following year he did 2:03 at bramley then 2:51 at London, which seems to support the theory of running the 20 too hard.
Due to do a speed session at lunch, but might need to re-think as my legs are feeling very heavy. Did a double yesterday, but had to really push the evening run home to avoid getting caught out in the woods in the dark with no headtorch! Will start of dead easy and see what happens, and maybe switch the intervals to Friday.
So WAVA.
Me. best ever WAVA 82.06 10 miles
Finchley 20: 78.40, VLM: 78.75
Justin Mitchell, 6th of the pack at Finchley but fastest at VLM 83.46 parkrun
Finchley 20: 76.04, VLM: 78.73
Jolyon Attwoool, 2:05 to 2:59 best ever WAVA 80.69 5k
Finchley 20: 74.32, VLM: 70.02
I don't know if WAVA can be used much in this case, it just states the obvious. My WAVA from Finchley was less than VLM so VLM was a better run but it was a ful out race and Finchley was a hard run but not full out. The guys who did badly at VLM have a lower WAVA at VLM but that is a given.
My feeling is that 20 miles is a world different to a marathon. You can run 20 hard and be fine a few days later, you can't run a marathon hard and be fine a few days later. I have run marathons where I didn't train well enough and flew to 20 and died a death.
Justin Mitchell went through half in 1:18:08
Jolyon Attwoool went through half in 1:21:58
I went through in 1:24:15
To me, what is shows is that Jolyon didn't do enough in training for 26.2 but did for 20.
Indeed Bus, that was one of the two runners. Another was a guy who actually ran 1:53 at the Finchley 20 but never managed to beat 2:40 for the marathon.
Phil and Dachs will not be like them this year.
As for dying a death in the marathon. One only has to check the splits of the vLM to see runners who have hit halfway in maybe 72/73 mins and end up barely breaking three hours. I swear you can see them walking from the data.
In my experience its hitting the wall where the real damage is done. For me it would be, run 20 miles ok, recover in a couple of days. Hit the wall and for every mile run in that 'zone' add a week. Its that bad. Don't go there.
🙂
Definitely something about having to do a 10k after you've just run 20 miles that can screw up the unprepared and/or ambitiously paced!! Phil will run like a metronome and Dachs has the recent experience of Abingdon to guide him through on top of the training.
Not sure about comparing WAVA for 10, 20 and 26.2 given the relative low numbers takin part in the first two. For example, I was UK ranked 27th V40 in 2011 for 20 miles, but there will have been plenty more vets beat that time within a marathon that year.
Easy 10k along the Grand Union canal in the end today as the legs never really got to feel right for speedwork. Pleasant enough route, and even warm enough (and secluded enough!) to run bare-chested for a couple of miles
Bare-chested, Bus. Are you in the canal or running alongside it?
As a kid doing a Saturday job in a 'plumbing' shop I recall the owner getting really peeved at fat sweaty guys coming in wanting stuff. "What the hell can you do"?
Sign on the door. No Shirt, No Service.
🙂
Luckily I didn't need any plumbing supplies today
. Just nice to fell a bit of sunshine again!
Luckily I didn't need any plumbing supplies today
. Just nice to feel a bit of sunshine again!
I was on the same canal and didn't see you, reckon you are telling porky pies
5x1200m off 400m recovery came out at 4:24, 4:22, 4:22, 4:21, 4:22 and I was aiming for 4:30 (6 minute pace) so happy with that.
I actually went to Regent's Park track (just off the Grand Union Canal so I ran past London zoo aviary etc) which is super odd: very long straights and tight bends but it was actually nice to run on as when you were on the straights you could get a decent rhythm going.
Well my debut at the marathon before I had any idea about what I was doing was one long run of 20 miles with a pocketful of jelly beans. I'd ran a few 16/17 milers and did the 20 in 2.15 ish.
Ill break 3 hours no problem I thought. bearing in mind I'd never ran a race before at any distance. :-/
i went through halfway in 1.27 and felt good. Pushed the pace a bit until around 17 miles thinking i could bank some time but then endured one of the worst experiences of my life. Collapsed over the line in 3.30.
The jelly beans weren't all they were cracked up to be.
Ha ha, a cautionary tale there Matt! I've looked at the plans and the 55 to 75 plan looks good. The 70+ plan has a 6 mile run as the 'rest' day which I think would send me under. As we all know I run 50-60 miles a week so I think hitting 70ish would be doable.
I wouldn't run a 20 miler at all, never mind race one. It's the addition of the 2nd long run that attracted me to the plan. The tempos are very demanding early on though, I might interchange those with a similar 10K/HM interval session. If only to keep my connection with friends at the track on training nights.
The reason 18 weeks worried me is if it's too long, as many are 16 week plans. But I guess the key is to not get fixated on the target race and see if as good training.
Bus, have you any marathon plans after Abo? Which to be fair, was a cracking performance all things considered.
Thanks Stevie, but at this point in time - no! I wouldn't necessarily rule one out for the future, but it's always taken me at least year to forget how bad it was before starting training for the next one
. I always thought I had a sub 2:50 in me, but I think the hopes of that are now pretty much gone, but who knows if I have some sort of resurgence in the future!
Philip - if only we'd both run a tad further we could have said hello! Very nice 1200s by the way.
Bus, I would totally, 100%, without doubt NOT rule out a sub 2:50 for you. But yeah, for now it's good to set about those shorter PBs. Don't forget I'm still chasing your PBs so you can't let your form drop!!
Stevie, the base miles you do will stand you in good stead but marathon is not about going from 60 to 70 miles a week, it is a big restructure of the week. You need to do the long runs, 20+ miles, on a regular basis and, probably more importantly, the medium long runs as well. I am in my 11th week of the plan and have done 20 runs over 13 miles in that time, and 20 on Sunday will make 21, so only one week (last week when I had a rest after a hard 20) when I didn't do 2 runs over 13 miles.
bus, you are 3 years younger than me and I am shooting sub 2:50 this year so there is no reason why you can't.