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
ooh sorry.
I recall TR who used to post on mg thread (can't remember his half time but he was a 35 min 10k man) last year posting about 3.02 in Edinburgh.
Skinny - Have a look through here. Interesting reading http://www.runnersworld.co.uk/forum/spring-marathon/conversion-rates-from-hm-to-marathon/173342.html
He who dares Rodney ....
Que sera sera. But if Skinny thinks he has a particular time in him my money's on him nailing it. He's one for the big occasion, as footy commentators like to say.
Intrigued by your tapering strategy, Bob. Getting your rest in early makes sense because tapering (or whatever we want to call it is not recovery). You need to recover from your training first - then you're at ground zero. After that you can do whatever needs doing for the race. That might be more rest in order to make you gagging for running (pulling back the catapult as it were). Or it might be awakening fast twitch fibres, as you did. But I don't want to experiment too much pre my HM because I seemed to have it just right for the 10k. I'll introduce strides from this week and see how demanding they are.
Great running Bob. Very impressive to saunter in with that sort of improvement and so sign of a grimace.
Well done too to Madbee for the 14mile pb. I expect that is a pb that will stand for quite some time.
Mace impresses with a 95 mile week and a shit behind a beachhouse. That sounds a bit public even by my al fresco habits.
Just noticed Charlie equaled my 10k time last weekend. I didn't realise when he told me at the time.
Skinny - Your training has gone well so 3hrs is not unreasonable. The fetch calculator is skewed by real world folk such as me, who are under-trained, over-ambitious, and blow up and hobble the last few miles. Even if you don't quite crack it, you should be close enough to not suffer too much.
I think its a bit early for the YES/NO camps - maybe once we know I'm not ill/injured and a weather forecast we can have a bit of fun but for now I was just looking for back up from the calculators for the paces I've done in training and my other race times.
SG
- I presume that is mock offence taken by the way you have edited my post to exclude the bit where i explain why it is irrelevant.
DT - I'm loathe to accept that Fetch figures are correct still but I didn't say they were irrelevant as they are based on an averaged selection of facts as are Mr V's link which I haven't trawled right through but also comes up with some unfavourable factors for me to chew over.
Que sera sera? Maybe but if that was the case we wouldn't bother training - I prefer 'training is physical, racing is mental'.
I am trying to get my head round aiming for sub 3, I am not saying I will not fail to run sub 3.
Lou - I think 3:00:01 could cause a lot of suffering!
Hello everyone. I am in a very nice hotel in Williamsburg, where a nice lady has just knocked on my door to offer me some chocolate. I have the following to contribute:
1) I too think the Fetch calculator is irrelevant as it includes loads of stats from runners who will have been undertrained, or gone off too fast at the start, etc., and it doesn't make sense to plan your race strategy based on those things.
2) McF - the Robin Hood half has changed since 2009 anyway, as they got rid of the Wollaton Park bit in 2012, replacing it with a flatter, but boring, detour through the Boots industrial estate. I can't imagine that they will make changes that will reinsert hills, as DT says.
3) Mace - 95 miles? You bloody nutter. I like you and think you are quite clever, so please don't turn into one of these car-crash marathon boys who sabotages his own marathon in an utterly predictable way.
Read the stuff about race predictions/calculators. Here's a couple of examples: David McGregor and Colin Steptoe.
These veterans could/did run a marathon in 2:31 & 2:37 respectively. But at the same time could barely run at a faster pace for half of the distance. That's strength and endurance for you. To the best of my knowledge, both these runners did a 20 mile run once per week all year round, and for years.
🙂
I missed the comments/concerns re my mileage last night as I was half asleep but thanks for them and as ever they are welcome and appreciated.
My plan was always to get in a peak week last week of around 95 miles so it wasn't something I just fell into. I built my mileage slowly and carefully from the end of summer to December and was comfortable with 70 mile weeks and did a few 75's so when I started P&D in late December the 85 plan wasn't particularly intimidating. I'd done two 55-70 campaigns for my previous marathons off average 40-45 mile weeks hitting 55-60 in December so figured I could handle somewhere in the 90's this time
I think I've tested myself as I wanted to this campaign and at times have felt very tired so make sure I sleep well and have needed it. Not so much over the last couple of weeks though which told me that my body was adapting to the miles and was my own signal that my peak week was within me. Which, apart from a bit of a twinge in my calf , seems to be the case. It seems fine this morning having binned last nights club recovery run and took the dogs for a walk instead.
That's enough babbling from me, have a good day all
mace, I've also built up the mileage to something in the 70's and 80's. It wasn't difficult since I wasn't pushing the pace, just letting it fall into place as each foot hit the ground.
Added to that was plenty of time to do other stuff like biking.
As for overall training volume, the gadgets show that I use an average of 96 kcals to run one mile. In the past 6 weeks I've done 83,700 kcals.
Only training I will not go near is the sustained distance run at a fast, but slower than race pace. I've never found it could make me faster (how? its slower than race pace) just an injury risk.
People love them and do them, up to them.
A distance run made up of multi paced bits and pieces with multiple recovery gaps is for me much better. I once ran 21 x 3 minutes fast with one minute rest recovery, faster than race pace, less damage.
🙂
Skinny – What do you think you would run on a flat half at the moment?
Ric – What do you mean when you say you would never do a sustained run at slower than race pace? 5k race pace? Mara pace? Or do you just mean you’d never do a continuous tempo or threshold type run?
Lit - that hotel sounds a bit more personal than the one I stay in when in Denver.
Mace - good - if it was all pre planned and not you getting carried away then you are just following the plan (although it is your own plan and not P&D 70-85 but something else based around that).
Just to make SG feel better RicF's fact , whilst interesting, is also irrelevant to my plan as they are also exceptions - does show what specificity can achieve.
Lou - you ran 3:30 correct (my memory is not perfect but was it a marathon and a poo in 3:30:48 or am I getting you confused with someone else?)
Finally I quoted this last night 'training is physical, racing is mental' - I'm not sure what the person who said this originally intended it to mean but, to me, it does not mean that you have to tough it out and want it more than anyone else. I take it to mean that you have to put some mental preparation into a race in the same way as you have to run the training miles.
EDIT: Mr V - I skipped the option of finding that out by not doing Wilmslow - I would be disappointed with more than a 1:24 though and would probably aim for converting my 10 mile speed in November off little training into a HM speed which would give me 1:23. All a little academic though.
Thanks for posting link Mr V, I've read it all now - I would have to be towards the better end of the 68% within one standard deviation and be correct with my current HM potential. Both are possible as of course is being at the upper end
. There are also some sobering comments from people regarding their first marathon and how they had underestimated how much further 26 miles is than 20. Anyway got some work to do 
.
More later on usual thread comings and goings, but that's an interesting view, Ric - and one I think I've heard you express before.
As someone with a (perceived at least) short distance bias, and who certainly prefers short, sharp reps to the longer, generically titled continuous 'tempo' runs, I'd jump at the opportunity to can the latter in favour of the former if it was something that I thought would work at distances up to and including 10k.
Obviously, we're all experiments of one, but my own experience over the last 18 months or so suggests that I need something to glue everything together. A brief summary of my 10k experience: -
Winter 2013/4 - Base Period - Upped the miles, ran XC, improved 10k from 42:42 to 40:25.
Spring 2014 - 5 weeks with a focus on LT runs after the 40:25, with one track session, a parkrun and a 2.5m relay leg being the only running faster than race pace. Improved 10k from 40:25 to 39:44.
Summer 2014 - Short, sharp reps up to 1/2 mile, and mostly racing 800m to 5k, with virtually no 'tempo' running. Took 37 seconds off 5k, over a minute off (a soft) 3k time, 25 seconds off Mile, 20 seconds off 1500m, and 12 seconds off 800m between May and September.
Autumn 2014 - Ran a 10k off the back of the above with little specific race prep, and did PB, but only took it down from 39:44 to 39:21 (23 seconds), and after feeling strong to 4 miles or so, I slowed in the last mile or so which was a complete suffer-fest.
Suggests to me that whilst the short reps were brilliant for track racing, still effective for 5k, and certainly what I respond best to overall, there is still something missing for 10k racing.
I've since filled in those blanks with more miles, XC, tempo running, and just a couple of faster than race pace sessions over the winter, and am now down from 39:21 to 38:24 - the latter being a time I didn't have to beast myself to achieve.
Any thoughts?
Skinny – Obviously never having run a marathon I’m not really in a position to comment. But it seems from the many examples I’ve come across most people wish they’d added 5-10 minutes to the time they thought they could run first time out. If I was running a first marathon I’d pick a conservative time and then pick up the pace in the last 10k if I were able. I’d rather do that and finish strongly thinking I had a little bit in the tank than risking having a horrible finish and missing my targets by loads. I’m saying this in general terms by the way and I’m not necessarily suggesting you shouldn’t go for sub 3!
Bob - I reckon it goes without saying that if you don't do any LT work you wont improve your LT level - at least not effectively. Why miss out one of the key aspects of 10k - HM training? I'm not sure if that's what Ric is advocating or whether he's saying he would break that kind of training down with recoveries to make it less stressful on the body.
I think i'll just read and absorb the above discussion. I'm a bit out of my depth passing comment.
Anyway, in keeping with this and recent discussions,i am planning 3 x 8 minutes at LT this lunchtime.
Been following the Newport half marathon saga over the last few weeks. A conclusive decision now ben reached-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-mid-wales-32031105
I would be furious if i had reached the finish at pb average pace!
In answer to Mr V about my potential marathon time.
A more detailed answer can be found on page 125 of the second edition of P&D Advanced Marathoning - in brief the best strategy for your best time is to try and run approximate even pacing but due to glycogen depletion it is likely your times will tail off slightly in the second half giving a positive split. (this is not true for elites). Therefore if I believe I have a slim chance of sub 3 to maximise my chances I should be aiming for around 1:29 for the first half allowing me 1:30:59 for the second half.
Logically given reasonable weather the unknown last 10k will decide it one way or the other because there is no reason to think I can't run 20+ miles at 6:50.
Skinny – As I said I wasn’t trying to put you off aiming for sub 3. I was just saying how I’d approach a marathon if I was doing one. The good thing is you’ve answered your own question as its clear that sub 3 is what you are going to try and run. Having set your target I wouldn’t disagree with your proposed 1.29 half way which makes perfect sense.
Once I've done 26.22 I'm stopping!
I agree with DT. I've heard too many cautionary tales of people missing goals by relying on Garmin pacing and then discovering they still have a quarter of a mile to run
. I'll be wearing a pace band as well and aiming for a faster pace than on the face of it i need for my goal.
My conversion for my first marathon was 2.05 but I'd been pretty slack leading up to starting marathon training. Hence ran a 1.50 half and put in a 3.46 marathon. Not expecting that this time!
Mace - interesting that you feel you've adapted to the higher mileage. I was thinking earlier that I don't feel as tired and seem to have more energy for other things again.
11 buggy miles this morning. Really sunny here and enjoyed myself
I am in a distinctly average hotel in Belfast and nobody has offered me chocolate.
Skinny, I think just go with your gut instinct (1:29 first half) and see what happens. I think it's quite common to over think predicted marathon times.
Bob, good skills at the weekend. You seem to be set up nicely for your track season.
Madbee and McF - decent races for you both, not long to go till London.
After parkrun, I spoke to my former teacher again, he's got a 5k PB of 14:5x and a marathon time of 2:25 (from 1986), which he says is 'ok' but he wasn't even fastest in his club. Looking at marathon times from last year, that time would put him in the top 50 in the UK. Not bad.
It means I never go sub 7:15 pace in any steady run, which means my fastest steady training pace is a full one minute slower than my marathon race pace.
It's a physiological reason. I'm building mitochondria and micro capillaries to carry the oxygen. The sign the method works is my leg muscles get bigger and the effort for any speed becomes less.
Fast sustained running smashes these to bits, so a step backwards. Training like that might make me fitter but only using what muscles I already have. It's why most runners top out at one speed. They never build up extra muscle.
Once I've got some extra bulk, I'll speed it up.
At extremes I'll convert 100 miles/week plus easy, into 20 miles/week speedwork.
Higher the effort, the greater the recovery. What form the speedwork takes is almost irrelevant.
🙂
Interesting what you say about building muscle RicF. Before, I've always heard that low reps, high load plus caloric excess and loads of protein was the way to get stacked.
Just to build suspense, I went for a foot x-ray, and it looked possibly like there might be a little crack in my cuboid, but they weren't sure. Cliffhanger. Next episode (bone doctor) coming soon.
Fingers crossed that there's no crack, marrows. Whatever I do never leads to apparent muscle growth. I guess that's why I'm 10st 2.