Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Options
Overdone it?
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
I've skimmed and noted lots of most excellent racing antics - special mention to DT, who not only ran a fantastic time, but also let me have my favourite silver cell back
Great XC running too from Tommy and McF, and a time I still dream of for 10K from Skinny apparently without really trying!
Marathon training is going ok at the moment, though I ditched an LT session today as it was too windy. I'm doing Liversedge half next weekend, not for any other reason than I quite fancy it. I don't think it's a fast one, but might give me an idea of my pain tolerance in a race at least...
All the Overdone it? ladies are back together - yay!
I'm sure running threads are the same as night clubs so it will be a busy thread again now.
I ran 10 miles last night coz I'm an idiot but seem to have survived and will now swap the 3 I was supposed to run last night to Thursday and the 10 I was supposed to do on Sunday can be a 7 or 8. Reading the early pages of the thread has me back in the mood if my body will play along.
Skinny, exciting times! Fingers crossed the body goes with it.
Beautiful out over lunch time, blue skies, little breeze and 10c. Almost a Spring day. A very easy feeling 9m MLR. 7.55mm for a recovery hr of 139.
My weekly weigh in went well this morning. 70.3kg so 11 st dead. Hoping next week will finally come in sub 70kg/11 st.
Updated for Pete reaching 67, a time that would allow him a 22:15 over 5k to beat his WAVA best.
And for Madbee being 3 pounds fatter (although still the lightest on the TTT) and DT being 3 pounds lighter (did you lose it or did Madbee steal it?).
Sounds promising Skinny. Don't overdo it...
Sounds like you're going well Madbee, good luck at the half.
Track Tuesday last night, Bob managed the warm up but felt a twinge in his calf, so didn't manage any of the session unfortunately. The proposed session was 2*6 mins at 10k pace with 2 mins recovery followed by 4*90 seconds at 'faster than 5k pace' with 90 seconds recovery. There was big group of us there with plenty of runners of about my pace which had a bit of an effect on things. The 6 minute efforts came out at 5:55 and 5:48 pace (bit quick) and the 90 second efforts 5:18, 5:12, 5:02, 4:48 pace (way too quick). Obviously went faster than the prescribed paces especially on the 90 second efforts, however, the 6 minute efforts felt pretty comfortable and was having to slow myself down. Hopefully conditions will be ok on Saturday for a decent effort at parkrun
Wow those paces are quick Tommy - sub 18 parkrun on Saturday I would presume
Presumably it was a twinge of guilt in Bob's calf over not doing us a HM report?
Good luck for Saturday.
HA! Not a chance.
Conditions looks dreadful and I'll most likely be at one with a pretty tough course so just a good honest effort is all I'm after.
Thanhks, Skinny. Hoping to keep nudging away at the weight and get it a few lb below 11st.
Some fast paces there, Tommy. Weekends weather looks awful, particularly for my long run on Sunday.
Just out of curiosity what are the speed merchants on here doing about the new shoes that have come out?
Originally there was just the Nike ones but now Brooks seem to have produced something similar but not quite as light but a lot cheaper - still £140 though.
Even at my fitness level 4% improvement could take me from a V50 also ran to top of the tree in some races but I can imagine at the more competitive end it might be almost compulsory to buy them if everyone round you gets a pair. Imagine standing post race with your current shoes on and everyone around you who beat you by less than 30 secs is wearing Vaporfly.
If anyone already has a pair are you seeing the kinds of improvements in times that are being bandied about?
Skinny, I have been using the 4% for A races since they were released in July 2017. I recently purchased a pair of Next % and the first time I wore them I destroyed my 10k pb, though to a large extent that had been coming a while. On the start line of that race (which was a race for racers) about 80% of runners had the 4% or next % on, most wearing the next %.
I know Muddy is also a big fan of them.
I will stick with Nike until I see evidence that NB, Brooks etc are decent equivalents but at a lower price.
5m done before work this morning followe3d by a spin class.
That is the point, Madbee. Most who object to them still run races in some form of race shoe, the purpose of which is the make you run faster than a pair of clogs! The other complainants are non nike athletes and older runners who are seeing their times and records beaten, but i'm pretty sure that they will have worn some sort of shoe that aided faster running.
I also look at rb rankings. In 2016 I ran 38.48 for a 10k, that had me in the top 3.5%. In 2017 I ran 38.18 for 2.7%. 2018 38.23 for 2.8% and 2019 38.22 for 2.9%. The vaporflys were released in July 17 so didn't kick in until 2018.
If they had suddenly made everyone faster, I would expect to see a bigger shift in those % figures over what are reasonably similar times.
Yeah in the 10k on Sunday my mate, who beat me by 15 secs but has been training a whole lot better/harder, was wearing 'training' shoes and I was wearing racers.
Even that felt like I was cheating him a bit but I have mentioned to him that racers might speed him up a little.
If I'd been standing on the line sporting some Next% I would feel like it was not a fair race simply because I'd spent more money than him. On the other hand if everyone else is wearing them then what do you do?
Even reading DT's post, and being totally honest, I think he beat my 10k PB by 3 seconds wearing a shoe that is supposed to improve race times by 4% and I feel a bit robbed and
a) truly I know that me v DT in the All Time TTT stats is not a key metric for my life success
b) all 10ks are done over different courses with different weather conditions etc etc so it's not comparable anyway.
So I'm stuck in Madbee's camp but I'm happy for someone to talk me across the divide. I normally get a little bonus in February so now would be a good time....
For Muddy and DT - if these shoes were banned would you feel like that you could never run a PB again or have you forgotten how good these shoes are after wearing them for a while?
Skinny, I am not sure. What do I go back to wearing, because in nearly 3 years other racing shoes have come on as natural advancement. Am I going back to say NBs version of the shoe or just a true lightweight flat?
I still look at my tempos and other training runs and where they are. They done in flyknit racers, zoom streaks etc so I know I have come on a good bit in the same time period, but I suspect I couldn't run a 37.34 10k in those.
But I don't have. The shoes are freely available and the serious part of a race start line are stacked with them. I don't feel like I have cheated those without them that I beat out of a place, I just think move with the times and spend £200.
I don't wear them for no other reason than I think I could make significant gains by training smarter (more consistently, more miles, structured sessions etc) before buying a pair of the Nikes. If I'd done all of the above and my times had stagnated then maybe I'd consider it to see if it made the difference. To me it's like the people who are overweight and then spend thousands of pounds on an expensive bike and ancillary lightweight equipment when they could drop a few pounds and make as big if not as bigger difference. However, PB's and ultimate times are not as important to me as they are to other people and I can see the appeal if that's what motivates you.
Yeah I'm not even sure what they are supposed to be 4% faster than? A pair of hiking boots or a pair of Nike Lunaracer 3 that I wore on Sunday?
If they were just 'out there' as an expensive pair of trainers without all the noise would I even have noticed?
Tommy it's a good point about why you race but the majority of people on here are competitive in their age group so it's not just times and PBs.
I hate the idea that someone is ahead of me just because I'm too tight to spend £200 although there is a very obvious solution. :-)
At the moment I am very superstitious about spending any money on my running because when I got injured I'd just spent over £200 on two pairs of trainers that sat in the house brand new for 2 years. Hence why I am currently running wearing a £7.50 digital watch with a stop watch facility.
But come bonus time maybe I'll invest.
PS 4% is massive - I would have run just over 39 mins for the 10k on Sunday.
I suppose the other theorising you could do based on 2012 and 2013 times and mileages compared to now is that the training then had some counter-productive elements. I thought you were reaching that conclusion when you were running some of your best times pre-injury without needing much in the way of big hitting sessions ?
Kevin - Your max HR is the same as mine, and my marathon intensity is 145-150 bpm these days.
8 miles at 160 (aka 10 mile race pace effort) is far too much work but I would suggest doing some work between 155-160 but doing at most 10 km worth at that intensity, and maybe breaking it down as 4 x 1.5 miles, with 2mins jog, progressing to 2 x 5km with 3 mins jog between.
I find I can be bit more aggressive with the volume I train at marathon effort - I start at 6m and build it up to 13m in a race as McFlooze does (nb. McFlooze - Warwick half is looking likely to be my venue for my 20 with 13 mp session)
McFlooze - I'm at 15 miles for the long run
I’m going to write a separate post on the Vaporfly later. Tommy’s post in particular needs addressing. That’s not fighting talk but I’ll set out why the Vaporfly purchase actually supports his point of view.
A lad I sort of know, ran a 1:09 at Brass Monkey half which was a three minute PB. He was wearing a pair of knackered old trainers with over 600 miles on. He took great pleasure in overtaking the masses in their matching shoes. His training levels are through the roof though (regular commutes of 18 miles, which he runs there and back on the same day).
I don’t have a problem with people wearing them, it’s just not for me. Not sure they’d be much use in a fell race in any case!
Muddy - will be interested in your take on things.
Switched things around to avoid today's storm so instead on friday tempo and sunday long i combined it yesterday.
8m easy Friday then 17.5 yesterday with 5m easy,v5 at mp, 1 easy, 5 at mp, 1.5 cd.
i was a bit disappointed that it felt hard going towards end of mp miles but then on reflection i was 15m in by then. Mp miles all came out 6.4x.
7m at recovery effort on treadmill this morning then spin this pm. So 60m for week plus 3 x spin and a bodypump. Mini taper thos week for Village Bakery half. Early forecast looks pretty windy. I cant seem to run a half these days without that being the case.
I decided just not to bother today and then after a walk decided wind wasn’t too bad so trotted out a 10 for a 23 mile week.
Carlisle’s on verge of flooding again so got my fingers crossed for lots of people tonight.
Yes i saw on the news flooding in and around that area. I'm always quite pleased in these circs that my flood risk is virtually nil.
Yeah my aim at moment is just to average 20 over next 3 months.
30 would be great but probably involves 4 runs a week which would mean runs on consecutive days. That might be possible but is something I'm currently avoiding.
I have a few near term goals over next 8 weeks which takes me to 5th April and then will reassess if foot is still surviving at that point.
Residential Carlisle seems to, in the main, have just survived so the flood defences did their job.
First up, there is so much hysteria about the shoe. It seems to have enraged a whole battalion of old school runners like Tommy’s clubmate whose answer to everything is almost Monty Python-esque: “when I was a lad we’d be up before midnight and run to work at the top of a mountain in our bare feet, we didn’t need to run on bloody springs!”.
Yet when I look at the design of the shoe compared to say, that Adidas monstrosity with all the blades on the bottom, or the On range with their rubber loops on the soles (and a nylon plate to stiffen up the forefoot), I wonder why the old school brigade are not picking those shoes out for their ire. Some of the remarks about 'running on trampolines' are hilarious. As a regular trampoliner I can tell you that if I was bouncing up and down on a trampoline for 2 hours, I'd be bloody exhausted. The impact on the knees, calves and core from trampolining is so much more than from running.
So why does the Vaporfly work ? It’s light as can be, the foam is almost too soft but in essence it looks like most other running shoes on the market with a reasonable stack height. It feels about as stiff as my clunky pair of Asics with ‘miraculous’ (their marketing) FlyteFoam in them. (Those were about as expensive too, but are about 2-3x the weight). The stiffness in the Vaporfly is provided by a thin carbon plate. This stiffness means you save a little bit of energy at push off as the plate supports your big toe. All shoes that are relatively stiff attempt to do this but without carbon fibre the energy saving is nixed by the weight of the material required.
So a handful of shoes have had carbon and nylon plates in before now; loads have had foam improvements - many on Stevie G’s thread were raving about Adidas Adios Boost shoes when I first started reading that thread. The foam boasted a 10% better energy return. Dennis Kimetto set a marathon world record in them. In terms of weight improvements, the Saucony Kinvara have been shedding weight over the years. Other attempts have also been made at producing the most lightweight shoe possible - I remember the Saucony Endorphin racer that preempted one of the Vaporfly’s features - a very light mesh wrapped around the foot providing the ‘sock’ part of the shoe flat which was exceptionally light. I have opted to race in Saucony FastTwitch before now and they are almost as light as the Vaporfly.
My view is that there is no great secret tech in the shoe. It’s a confluence of loads of little experiments that all shoe manufacturers have been doing for years. The focus of the hysteria is the carbon plate but the bulk of the merit of the shoe is provided by the foam. It’s a big improvement in energy return over other foams used in shoes. It is not the only shoe that uses it - for example see Reebook’s Floatride Fast racer. Overall the shoe design and materials mean that you are 4% more economical than the nearest shoe (which was a Nike Zoom Streak LT Skinny). So what does that 4% mean ? Well if you view wearing a pair of shoes as incurring a cost penalty due to their weight, you require 4% less oxygen to cover the same distance and pace in the Vaporfly versus wearing the nearest shoe. On average. Note that this is not a 4% improvement in time.
That’s the killer bit - on average. Not everyone benefits from the shoes. Just like with any pair of shoes on the market - some you get on with, some you don’t. Some you feel fast in, some you don’t. The Asics Gel DS Racer was a very popular choice for many a few years back but for me it was hopeless. Then again I’ve never found a shoe that was as lightweight and fast as the Saucony Virrata which is no longer around. This highlights the inherent problem with the ‘level playing field’ argument. If everyone is kitted out in the same shoes some will be artificially penalised because the shoe may not suit their biomechanics.
The big thing that Nike have done is quantify the performance benefits of the shoe alongside all the marketing. I was sceptical given the general level of bullshit in marketing. But they were returnable, and I bought a pair of them (for half price) alongside a new pair of Saucony Freedom ISO trainers that I’d previously marathoned in. The difference between the two brands on the same route at the same effort was about 15 seconds a mile. I noticed something else too: my legs felt relatively fresh after the run in the Vaporfly, I was not significantly beat up and sore around the calves. The recovery was really quick.
So you can see if they outlaw the Vaporfly there's also grounds for banning the next best shoe to switch to.. and so on. Suppose that they try to restrict the range of materials that are allowed in competition. Do that and we are back to the idea that some materials may not be great for someone’s biomechanics but excellent for someone else. Think firm versus soft underfoot. Think pronator versus supinator. Heel striker versus forefoot dandy. Even then many of the shoes above use the same materials but there are differences in performance improvements via switching too. It's so tricky to unpick.
Also the level playing field argument could be extended to funding, to coaching, to sleeping in an oxygen tent, to wearing left and right running socks, to compression gear, to arm sleeves, to calf sleeves, to consorting with running technique gurus, to sports massages etc etc. There is so much stuff that is accessible to people with money that I don’t think an extra £50 -75 on the price of a pair of race shoes is distorting the playing field substantially. Note: I have totally cut down on sports massages since racing in these shoes. They’ve /saved/ me money overall.
Even if the shoes are banned and remain on sale, they can be used to enhance training. This addresses Tommy’s point that he would rather train harder to improve his times, then these shoes would most certainly allow him to do that, more so than other shoes simply because you recover far quicker in them. So in theory the runner that uses these shoes for training can avoid the limiting factor of lower limb soreness and clock up many more miles than others. My view is that if you want to be a training maniac these are /exactly/ the shoes to wear. We all know that training harder doesn't make you faster too, but training smarter - looking at rest and recovery, scheduling work sessions properly, having a careful diet are all significant factors too.
Yet the rallying cry from these old school keyboard warriors is 'train harder' with the implication that the shoes are a shortcut. The people that use these shoes are heavily invested in training and getting the most out of their training. The chap that races in shoes with 600 miles on them may not be getting the race results that his training deserves. Or maybe he is, maybe he's worn the shoes into a state of optimum performance. How is anyone meant to evaluate this ? Whatever he chooses, if that suits him, that's fine. I have no quarrel at all with anyone choosing the shoe they think is best for them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8COaMKbNrX0
So my view is that there should be pretty much free rein on the engineering of shoes, and eventually it will settle down. There are limits to materials and energy return just as there are physiological limits. That all these limits are still being worked out is far more fascinating than it is iniquitous to my mind.
Running last week, bit disturbed as was up and down with a stomach bug but managed 17 miles (2 hrs 15 time on feet) in Chiara (nope not a new fangled running shoe) yesterday morning. Wind blowing across me was tripping me up at times which was perilous, canalside. Perversely enjoyable though.
I don't think I ran any big sessions last week - just a minor 7 x 0.25m on the treadmill on Friday. Oh and a 4 mile progression run on a hilly loop.
Good mp session DT. I did a similar one back in October in place of the Yorkshire marathon.
That's still looking good Skinny, 10 miles in one fell swoop again 👏
This week will do the Village Bakery half at marathon effort and see what that yields. I don't think I'll race that as I am aiming for a bigger week than last week (44 miles) as I have more spare time to do the marathon volume, but that won't leave me in anyway tapered.