Base Training



  • popsider - I'm serious. The happy easy jogger of Woollaton Park is not going to become the pathetic hobbler of the City Ground again! :)
  • BR – I think your (and Pantman’s) training ideas are pretty close to mine. A few thoughts for you:
    I agree that your morning run should be at least 30 mins, but very slow. They should be to aid recovery from the night before and set yourself up for the evening session. Currently my morning jogs are at only 50% WHR, I see no reason to increase the effort as I get fitter.

    I agree with Pantman regarding the long runs. Your goal is to RACE a marathon, which means you should be capable of running the distance (slowly) at any time. I know this is not widely agreed upon, but something I strongly believe in.

    If you are running for 1½ to 2½ hours per day, you’ll soon know if you are going anaerobic! There are various tests you can do to find the ‘right’ pace, but if you can continue training day after day without deteriorating then you are probably OK.

    One thing I’ve noticed missing from your training plan is races. I can’t imagine you going months at a time without them! I think running the odd race (but not easing up the training) will not do too much harm. It is OK for the elite to target just one or two races a year, but us mere mortals need the odd race here and there to keep our motivation up.
    As I have said before, your peak is probably (or should be) a few years away yet. So why put all your eggs in one basket this year to run a time that you’ll be able to beat easily in a couple of years time?

  • Cheers TT


    24th Sept - club track 5k
    28th Sept - Barnsley 5k
    5th Oct - Maltby 10
    12th Oct - x-country
    26th Oct - Holmfirth 15
    early Nov - x-country
    30th Nov - Leeds Abbey Dash 10k
    7th Dec - x- country
    26th Dec - Ward Green 6

    That would make 41 races for the year, so I don't think I'll miss out there:)

    Glad you agree on the 30 mins morning runs. To me a 20 min run is what I do when tapering just to loosen up and stretch.

    Yes, RACING a marathon. The poor soul you saw on Sunday laying flat out by our car had walked in from mile 22 to finish in 3:35! He had been in an ambulance on a drip for a while.

    Tonight he flew round the club run leaving everyone for dead apparently.

    50% is low - but it seems to be working for you!

    BTW, shouldn't you update your picture? You look like a frightening bouncer up there, not the toned and fit bloke I didn't recognise Sunday!
  • Frightening bouncer look may dissuade people from disagreeing with my opinions on the forums though!

    Oops - late for bed. Got an exciting 9 miler planned for the morning ;o)
  • TT!! I was trying to get him to race LESS...

    Just bear in mind, BR, that your base won't make you faster immediately for certian - it may well do, but you have some good PBs already. Just make sure if you race that you allow for the stage of your training when considering the performance.
  • And BR don't think of the toothpaste being a linear analogy (goes higher beat by beat), but as one of stages. The easier running will allow for aerobic adaptation and improved efficiency and increase in mileage. Then build up to allow you to gradully phase in to the work of LT improvement.

    Then anaerobic work can be done at the end as you can get it up to maximum in less than a month while aerobic base takes a long time to go and will hold while you do the harder stuff.
  • MinksMinks ✭✭✭
    Having read all of this, I still have one question. How do you know if you're going anaerobic, and if the aim is to raise the LT threshold so that you're running aerobically at a pace which used to force you to run anaerobically, how do you know where the threshold is? I assume it varies from runner to runner. I'm sure there was something about this in Hadd which involved some kind of test?
  • I was wondering if you use a graph plotted from Hadd's 2400m-at-specific-HR tests to work out your LT level?

    Alternatively going on past performances - for instance in 2002 my FLM heartrate was in the low 160s for the first half and crept up to the mid/high 160s in the second half on average (176 in the last mile!). In this years FLM the average had gone up to the mid 170s, however i hit the wall badly unlike 2002 and of course the heat didn't help.

    Therefore can i assume my LT moved between 2002 and this year & that it is possibly in the high 160s?
  • creepy! i hadn't seen your post minkin.

    Great minds...
  • MinksMinks ✭✭✭
    Yes, a bit spooky that Chaos!!

    It's a good question though. Hadd recommends the 2400m-at-specific-HR tests, but others (eg Phil Maffetone and Mark Allen) recommend slightly different tests.

    Let's see what our guru Pantman says ...
  • Different tests - Hadd is testing LT while the Allen/Maffetone test is simply seeing how pace increases at slow aerobic efforts.

    Hadd's LT test is pretty much the same as Conconi which seems to work, but at Uni the physiologists loved to tell us it wasn't very good (can't remember why). If you use Hadd's test you MUST do a long warm up first so that results are too heavily affected by cardiac drift.

    Personally I prefer the more natural approach. Do you have lactate in your legs - you've gone too hard, slow down immediately and don't go that hard again!!
    Back in my Tri days I remember doing some LT work on the bike doing reps up the switchbacks of the big climb in Lanzarote. At 165bpm I could ride the whole climb (18min) without lactate. If the pulse rose to 167 I could feel the lactate and the change in breathing.
    It is good to be aware of your body like that and observe what the HR is doing rather than be a slave to a set of numbers that may or may not be right. It helps a lot in knowing when to back off in racing and training too.
  • And just to add that once I want to start running above FB pace this time round, I plan to increase pace on 3 runs very gradually - I will FEEL my way slowly up to LT. Don't see the point in testing it now - all it will do is tell me that it is higher later - but then I already knew that would happen...
  • When are you planning to race PM ? Are you targeting the Spring?
  • May have to postpone a bit Popsy - doing this Pose method thingy has slowed me down somewhat. I have no desire to go out a race each week and I love the training so no rush... I had hoped to get to the 1hr a day by end of August, but now with Pose I'll be back there in Nov I think. Then 6 months proper base building, me thinks... No rush. I'm running really well on these shorter runs and am full of confidence for the long run. Don't want to balls things up by rushing them.
    Probably aim for a fast marathon next summer, maybe do some shorter stuff for training in spring. May also turn up to a race and plod it...
  • How's your ankle, BTW? Have you considered Pose?
  • Do you have to do long runs with this type of training? I currently do hour long sessions but am considering running to and from work as a partial replacement, which I do twice a day and takes 15 minutes each time. Will I get the same benefits from this approach?
  • BR will tell you that for SERIOUS marathon training you'd want to do your main session in addition to those beneficial extra recovery runs to and from work.

    I think he's right...
  • An excellent thread this (will print off and read the entire thing this evening). Although I bash out the miles (and, when on form, can still achieve periods of improvement) I realise how completely unstructured and without any kind of real plan my own training currently is. Have tried following Frank Horwill's 10 day plan (i.e. the 5 pace theory) but don't always manage to fit the more intensive quality sessions in.
  • PantM,

    I am waiting to see a specialist but I fear my running days may be over. It kills me looking at this site and not being able to run to be honest but force of habit I suppose. No real idea what I'm going to do with myself now - I'd rather come to see myself as a runner.
  • Popsy - a lot of runners have been given a new lease of life by Pose running - the impact is so minimal. Please go look at the trhead in General and the web site There is a message board there where you can post specific questions to be answered by the experts. Hang in there...
  • Found all this very good and I am thinking of giving it a go after completing the Abingdon Marathon. I do most of my runs at an easy or steady pace anyway. The problem I have is wearing the HR monitor, I believe you can get belts which are much softer than the older ones, any recomendations? An easy way of working our max. HR please apart from 220 minus age.

  • Jane if you read back you'll get a good HR formula from Mark Allen I posted earlier that does not require a Max HR. Better by far...
  • Thanks Pantman, worked it out and apparently up to 137 for me, I can do that. I assume its okay to cross-train as long as you keep to the correct range. Some of my training over the winter will be done in the gym, don't like being on treadmill too long. Most of my runs for marathon training have been done below 130 HR, with ocasional races with HR up to 155.
  • Sounds about right, Jane. X-training won't help running much, but will burn more cals - if you do it then, yes, do keep to FB HRs.
  • Jane - the belt will work through something thin like lycra/coolmax/etc as long as it's moist. Or perhaps try the new Polar "wearlink" belt?
  • Thanks Chaos, have looked at the new "wearlink" belt, looks okay but not sure about the different sizes, I will wait and order one when they have them in stock. My monitor doesn't work over my Enell bra, but works okay if tucked under it, making bra a little tighter, use vaseline but now have a very sore mark where chest strap was.
  • Have just read all the Lydiard clinic stuff Michael linked to in the 2nd posting on this thread.

    2 questions

    1. It talks about runs being done at `best aerobic' capacity. This for me is about 165 bpm. Does this mean I should aim for as many runs as possible at this level?

    2. In the conditioning phase it mentions hilly runs. At our club they are done by charging up them as fast as you can then jogging along to the next one. I've found it hard today to rein myself back on hills to stay within HR limits.

    How would a Lydardian (new word for the language!) do these hilly runs? If the answer is within the same HR boundaries, what's the advantage of doing them over the regular flat course?
  • BR - my understanding of Lydiard's ideas:
    1. He talks of doing up to 100 miles per week at 'best aerobic pace' - supplemented with as much easy jogging as you can manage. Like all great coaches, he is fairly dogmatic - 'Nobody can do more than 100 miles a week at this effort, etc...)' Then again, most of us aren't going to try to prove him wrong ;o)

    2. Lydiard's runners did a lot of their aerobic work on hilly terrain (roads). Just at their steady state, not surging / jogging. I have not seen Lydiard talk about HRs - more about perceived effort (like comments from Pantman & myself earlier in this thread).

    Personally, I will only be using my HRM to control my slower runs. If your HR goes above your ideal training rate from time to time, that is not a problem, so long as over the course of the run you are not building up lactic acid.
  • MinksMinks ✭✭✭
    Presumably 'best aerobic pace' (as in Lydiard) is the maximum aerobic pace using the Mark Allen formula mentioned earlier?

    Lydiard does tend to focus on perceived effort, but I think for the inexperienced that heart rate is better - most runners aren't very good at judging perceived effort (I know I'm not) and go too fast if left to their own devices.
Sign In or Register to comment.