Hey folks, I found this extract while browsing through "The Lore of Running" by Tim Noakes, and thought you migt like to read it. No doubt many of you will have heard of run-walking, and its a strategy I plan to practice at the Belfast Marathon on Monday.
Including Walk Breaks
Provided all is going well and you are not forced to stop for any of the reasons previously discussed, you may find you have a desire to walk. During the 1970s and 1980s, walking during a marathon was considered taboo. But thanks to the activism of Jeff Galloway and others, walking during marathon running is being advocated increasingly as a virtue. Thus, in the more accepting marathon culture, the real crime is to start walking when you are already exhausted. Start walking sooner than later. Do not wait until you are too exhausted to continue running.
If you are unsure of whether you are able to run the entire marathon or ultramarathon distance, alternate regular running and walking. For example, do 20 to 25 minutes of running, followed by 5 to 10 minutes of walking. By spreading the distance walked over the entire course, instead of only resorting to walking at the end, you have a chance to recover every 20 minutes or so. You will probably find that you will cover the same distance with less discomfort and in a shorter time. Alternatively, you may consider walking 1 minute for every 5 that you run. Another approach is to walk only on the uphills, which is good advice for hilly ultramarathons but does not allow much walking time on a flat marathon course.
Tom Osler (1978), one of the first modern proponents of walking in racing and training, concluded that anyone capable of running 42km can easily run 80km if they alternate regular walking and running in the ratio described previously.
0 ·
Comments
How long do other people walk?
I'm simply bringing this extract to the attention of peeps who think that they don't need to walk, but end up hitting the wall and limping the last 6-8miles home. I know the subject of run-walking has come up many times before, but I just wanted to share that particular extract.
When I first looked at this site, one of the first articles I read was "It's good to Walk" by Amby Burfoot. Here's the link: -
http://www.runnersworld.co.uk/news/article.asp?SP=&V=1&UAN=46
I haven't re-read it, but I thought it said something along the lines of having a 1minute walk every hour (for a marathon). As a beginner, this article was a REAL eye opener. made me feel a lot better about walking/plodding when I was gasping along dirt trails. )
Jonny
It's not that I am against people walking if they want to, but surely an intermediate runner (in terms of speed) is going to go faster by running than by running and walking. If you walk for even a minute people are going to open up a pretty big gap and I can tell you that you are going to have work hard to close it. Of course if those people then blow up and start walking then your strategy has worked, but if they don't I can't see that run/walk is the best way to get a decent time. In other words so long as you can run the whole distance I really do doubt that run walk is going to deliver a faster time.
No doubt some people have run/walked respectable times but they will be exceptions and they have probably achieved better times just by running.
Of course not everyone is interested in getting round as fast as they can and run/walk may make for a more comfortable race. Also there are going to be people who aren't capable of running the distance and run/walk probably is better than run/blow up completely. So it has its place. But I'd have thought for anyone that you'd categorise as an intermediate runner it isn't worthwhile.
there is much evidence to suggest that most people can benefit by run/walking. Not everyone wants to run/walk and thats fair enough, however, i was just pointing out that the evidence suggests that most people could benefit with a faster time, mainly because of a combination of breaking the run down, if paced properly, runners are able to go at faster than marathon pace for each stint which more than compensates for time spent walking. Its unfortunate that run/walking seems to be tied to slower "get u round" runners, and that is perhaps why many more endurant runners do not want to walk.
Hal Higdon describes how his son ran a sub-2:30 marathon by walking for 45secs at each mile marker. This suggests that during his running stints, he ran at 2:10 pace, but would not have been able to sustain this for the duration of the marathon, nor was he able to sustain a consistent sub 2:30 pace for the duration. By breaking the route down, he was able to run fast mile times with a recovery in between each one.
John Bingham (The Penguin) says that hes never met anyone who wasn't faster with run/walking, and I'm sure he doesn't just talk to runners at the back of the field.
Jonny
Assuming a 5min run/1min walk
To get sub 4hrs, I would need to sustain 10.9km/h overall. I *know* I could not possibly sustain 10.9 for 26miles. I DO know that I can sustain many repetitions of 1mile @ 12.5km/h without adverse effect. I worked out that if I walk at about 5km/h on the walking stints, I need to average 12km/h on each 5min leg to average 10.9km/h overall. That means I will only be travelling 1km (0.62miles) on each running leg @ 12km/h, which from experience, I know is more than possible.
The mathematics also works out for faster runners, although some may prefer to elongate the running phase to say, 10mins. The key is to run slightly faster than target pace on the running stints.
Jonny
I can honestly say that I don't remember ever passing someone in a race who was walking and subsequently getting passed back by them - if it really was a useful strategy for anyone mid-paced or above someone would be using it by now. I can maybe accept that walking through water stations for maybe 20 seconds is useful - it allows you to hydrate properly and loses you little time - but when you start walking say a 10-20% of the race as a strategy you really are going to have to up your speed substantially to compensate. Everything I know about physiology and how the body works suggests that is not an efficient way to run and that is borne out by the fact that people I meet have not adopted this method to achieve fast times. Also if it applies to the faster end of the field wouldn't top athletes be using it all the time?
Wouldn't you get in the way of people using a run-only strategy in the early part of the race?
Coyote Jake (An absolute beginner with his eye on the GNR)
Red face
returning to plodding after a long time and weight gain ive found that accepting it is ok walk in training ( i dont 'race') makes it possible to do reasonable 30-40 to 60min min plus sessions without getting knckered
- but i was surprised that by doing run /walk - i managed to get round my usual loop course quicker than if i tried to run it all the way - but im a very slow runner and quicker walker -so it can be benficial to slow folk i guess
if fitness is your goal then brisk walking is an excellent additional activity
Ah
I joined the thread too late to ask for a justification of this - call Stephen Hawkins someone?
;-))
I'm planning on using this method on my half marathon in a couple of weeks - certainly cannot run all the way round, so this seems much more logical than run followed by crawl.
Thought I'd use the mile markers and run a mile walk a minute as Galloway recommends.
No way can I run that far or for that long sustained. if I try to go too far I find I'd be quicker walking!
One of the best reasons for walking breaks is to get a proper drink to help you manage to go further.
b) I remain to be convinced that it would improve my times by allowing my legs to rest. c) I don't beleive that people who run / walk marathons can say that they have "run" a marathon, completed yes but run no. Its supposed to be a challenge of human endurance not a day out for the masses.
You don't get an extra medal for being exhausted and needing two weeks to recover!
Ummmmm, says who?
As it happens I don't run walk either, but I don't think that most city marathons would exist if they were NOT a day out for the masses?
As long as they don't hold up people who are running then what's the issue? Unless of course you believe in making all the events run only, then where do you draw the line? no one can enter who will take more than 3 hours because it should be as fast as possible and if you can't make 3 hours then you haven't trained properly?????
now-didnt our very own Spans get her GFA at lake vrynwy using run walk
Id love to run a whole marathon--might take me 100 of the buggas to get there-but ill keep trying
as long as well all try our best)and i accept that life also gets in the way of running, so that may not be to our full potential)
What does it matter whether we walk, or run, or whatever
it is very hard not to compare with others, but ultimately-you alone will know if youve done a race justice-however you have completed it.
i find nearly every run a struggle, depsite now going up to 40 mpw-----Ill never be fast, and maybe ill never run a whole marathon
but that doesnt make me a lesser person, or a "cheat"
i wouldnt look down on someone with less academic qualifications-or think they are "less of a person"
I find it sad when i come across that sort of attitude on what is usually a very supportive site
The best support ive ever had has been form those very ultra runners who understand why sometimes we have to walk
as for the run/walk method---well, Spansie, i dont know how you got that to work so well, but you did
Right
off to save lives for a bit
I think it is great that long distance running is now accessible to 'the masses'. A lot of the people on these forums, me included, have been inspired to take up running because of watching FLM on the telly. I don't think I'll ever be able to run a whole marathon - at the very least I have to walk through the drink stations, and like Hippo I don't feel that makes me a cheat or less worthy of claiming to have finished a marathon.