RW Forum Six – Sub 2.50 Kier with Parkrunfan

541 to 560 of 985 messages
05/02/2013 at 09:24
Keir - I'm a virgin so Manchester is my first marathon. I only half a half under my belt of 1:47. So using McMillan and also having Spoons as my mentor (see the carterusm and spoons thread) the initial target is 3:45 but that is to be reviewed nearer the time. I have liversedge HM this Sunday so that will give me an idea of how I have progressed in the last 3 months
05/02/2013 at 11:03

Keir - How do you find these early morning runs? When I did them regularly I enjoyed the routine but when you generally run evenings the odd early morning run doesnt half take some willpower.....

More miles in the VLM bank!

Carterusm - I would have thought that 10:00 was a more appropriate pace for long runs. My long runs can often be 8:30-9:00 for a 6:30 marathon pace so the intensity of being only 15 secs off the planned marathon pace is likely to be too high an intensity, which may feel comfortable but wont be creating the adaptations you are looking for on a long run.

What are you going to be wearing on Sunday? I'm going to be running around the Spen 20 course while your race is taking place and since it is a lot of the same course I may well bump into you.

 

05/02/2013 at 11:39

Purkrunfun- Just a thought. I know you're meant to be running your LSRs at around 30-60s slower than your marathon pace but do you think that the same measure should be applied regardless of your speed?

I just think that at the slower end of the spectrum it's natural to train at a speed closer to what you will be racing at. From experience when I trained for my first mara I probably averaged 8:50-9:00mm on my long runs and ended up running 3:50. I'm now closer to 3:20 mara but my long runs are not done that much quicker... probably around 8:30-9:00mm.

So it almost seems like my 'easy' pace remains very much unchanged even though I'm getting faster in races. I could never however, even right at the very start of my running career run @ 10mm, it just didn't feel natural or enjoyable... I think what I'm trying to say is- if it genuinly feels easy and you manage to complete all your other sessions at the correct pace- is it really necessary to force yourself to slow down to a pace that doesn't feel natural?

05/02/2013 at 12:02

Brolish - you're right in that the differential between MP and easy training pace tends to get squeezed closer together as marathon time increases. But there has to be a limit to this. It cant be right to be doing LSRs at, or perish the thought, quicker than MP surely.

So MP+60 should be close enough for anyone. I have always been puzzled by runners saying that they cant run at 10 min/mile because it feels too slow. I can happily run at 10 min/mile as can Jocelyn Payne, she mentions it in the interview I linked to a while back, so if sub 3 runners can run at 10 mins/mile why cant 3:30 or 4:00 runners?

Another element is that the faster the marathon time, the higher the number of long runs completed and the more they are run on tired legs. The flip side of that is that the slower the marathon time, the lower the number of long runs and the fresher the legs when longs runs are tackled possibly leading to faster relative paces.

But, in general, slowing it down and getting more long runs done at a slower pace, prreferably on reasonably tired legs, should lead to improved marathon times and a better race day experience.

Edited: 05/02/2013 at 12:18
05/02/2013 at 12:06

Well I don't mean to say that I can't physically run @ 10mm, of course I can but don't enjoy it much, that's all. It would also just take sooo much time to complete each 'easy' session...

05/02/2013 at 12:29

Ah, running easy runs faster so they dont take as long........

In all seriousness though, the easy pace is a pace that can be continued happily for 26 miles, or 30 miles without any fuelling being involved (once enough long runs are in the legs). Clearly, anything close to actual MP is not going to allow this, you cant run further than marathon distance at marathon race pace at any time, let alone in training.

05/02/2013 at 12:46

Interesting discussion.  I can completely understand where prf is coming from and it makes complete sense but I'm also with Bro in that running slow is so much harder.  I can run 10 m/m off road, but then the effort is higher, but on the roads I struggle with a slow pace. 

pfr - I find a ache more when running slow and the whole thing feels like a chore.  On Saturday I ran 20 on a hilly course.  The first 10 with with others and running late 8s early 9s and it felt really hard: I felt slow, tired and achy and wondered if I could finish.  But once I got on my own for the next 10 I gradually picked the pace up and ended up running the last few miles at sub 8 m/m, with the last one at just over MP.   This felt so much better even though the hills were bigger. 

Is that so wrong?

05/02/2013 at 12:56

I think it was McMillan, he of the famous calculator, who said that his running was transformed once he learned to run his easy runs slower.

The fact that they seem harder, and it is a struggle to run at slower paces, is because you are training areas that are undertrained. Specifically, everyone is very accomplished at metabolising glycogen but can the same be said for the ability to metabolise fat to fuel running activity.

Hence the temptation to push on a bit to get into the comfortable glycogen burning territory.

05/02/2013 at 13:19

Minni- sure, I can run 10mm off road/ on hills/ during a cool down when I'm knackered, but that's a different story.

PRF- I do seem to remember an article from McMillan a few months ago where he said that the slower end runners should do a lot more of their easy/ long runs at or faster than MP and his pace recommendations were changed accordingly. My LSR pace based on my 10k time of 43min is, according to Mcmillan 7:49- 9:05. I would never dream of doing my LSRs @ 7:49- that's way too fast!

I think what I'm trying to say is that I'm not questioning the need to run your easy runs slow, I'm just questioning applying the same rule of let's say '60s' to runners of all abilities. I mean at some point it does become a walk, doesn't it?

05/02/2013 at 13:19

I'm with you on this one PRF. I run my easy runs easy, but I do understand it does feel harder to start with, but it feels so much better for your legs the next day. And yes 15 secs slower than MP for your long run is too quick. Means either your MP is too slow or you are running your long runs too quick. No way I could run 20 miles week in week out at 7:00-7:05 miling. No way. I'd struggle to run them at 7:30s tbh. Sunday I ran with a friend for 15 miles at 8:15s then ramped up to sub 7s. Found that a struggle, but I often find it hard to hit MP until Feb/March. Oh it is Feb!!??

Am struggling today big time. No idea why. Just feel very tired. The wind is so strong too. Dreading club intervals tonight now!!  But I coach the session so must be there!!

05/02/2013 at 13:24

Just back from a 4.28mile run @ 9:49/mile  

parkrunfan wrote (see)

I think it was McMillan, he of the famous calculator, who said that his running was transformed once he learned to run his easy runs slower.

The fact that they seem harder, and it is a struggle to run at slower paces, is because you are training areas that are undertrained. Specifically, everyone is very accomplished at metabolising glycogen but can the same be said for the ability to metabolise fat to fuel running activity.

 prf – I think Hadd said something similar in the famous ‘Hadd’ document.

I agree with Minni, speeding up can make you feel better when tired on a long run, but I sometimes resist the urge to do it and battle on. If it hurts it must be doing me more good  

05/02/2013 at 13:39

YD - I think it may have been Hadd I was thinking of actually!

So, a mere 4 mins/mile+ slower than last Sunday's race pace - a bit more effort and you too could be a 10mins/mile runner

Brolish - I havent seen that McMillan advice but I can imagine that it is based on the fact that, on average, 4 hrs+ marathon runners are less likely to be out training 7 days a week. They may be training 4/5 days a week, say, which means that there is almost full recovery between sessions and we are not really comparing like with like.

Mitchie - Theres AGES yet

05/02/2013 at 13:53
parkrunfan wrote (see)

I think it was McMillan, he of the famous calculator, who said that his running was transformed once he learned to run his easy runs slower.

The fact that they seem harder, and it is a struggle to run at slower paces, is because you are training areas that are undertrained. Specifically, everyone is very accomplished at metabolising glycogen but can the same be said for the ability to metabolise fat to fuel running activity.

Hence the temptation to push on a bit to get into the comfortable glycogen burning territory.

Perhaps my challenge at the weekend should be to stick to 9 m/m for my 20.   I can definitely see where you're coming from.

Mitchie Moo wrote (see)

I'm with you on this one PRF. I run my easy runs easy, but I do understand it does feel harder to start with, but it feels so much better for your legs the next day.

I followed my long run on Saturday with a set of 5* 1400m @ 10k pace.  within an 8m run.

 

 

05/02/2013 at 14:21

Minni- tut tut! Good luck with your 9mm on the next LSR! Judging by your last few attempts, it will be a struggle...

05/02/2013 at 14:49
 

Mitchie - Theres AGES yet

I know PRF. Just hate this exhausted feeling. More coffee required!! School run to get through, then 30 min drive to boys gymnastics class, watch gymnastics whilst juggling a 2yr old (going on 12 yr old!), drive home, cook kids tea, run and coach intervals, then hurrah tuesdays are over!!

05/02/2013 at 15:22

Yes Bro but now I'm thinking the previous two weeks were very slow runs - 3hrs (17m) and 3hrs 12 (20.5m) due to the snow so perhaps I've ticked those boxes already.

MM - I usually find the end of Feb brings tiredness for me.  This past couple of weeks has proved a challenge with long hours at work and parents' evenings thrown in.  Last night I got home at 8:30 and did an hour of maths with my son then proof read an essay for my daughter and then it was 11pm.

 

M.r Zuvai    pirate
05/02/2013 at 15:41
Minni wrote (see)

Yes Bro but now I'm thinking the previous two weeks were very slow runs - 3hrs (17m) and 3hrs 12 (20.5m) due to the snow so perhaps I've ticked those boxes already.  


hmmm, i'm not convinced! you ran at those paces because of the conditions rather than to control HR. In terms of effort it was probably the equivilent of a LSR at under 8m/m

haha - i'll get back in my box! *gulp* don't know what came over me then!

05/02/2013 at 15:43

Yeah Minni- it doesn't count in the snow.

05/02/2013 at 15:44

Interesting discussion on training paces. Can I add my agreement (fwiw) to (with?)Parkrunfan. I have had very similar forum conversations over on the Hadd thread. Runners new (and old) seem to sruggle to achieve the lower intensities required for the initial mitochondrial developments, citing that they "can't run that slow". But, as if by magic, as soon as they achieve some consistent slower running, the pace (at the lower intensity) improves. It's the old tube of toothpaste analogy.

 

Edited: 05/02/2013 at 15:45
05/02/2013 at 16:19

Brian - 'Slow it down to speed it up' just about summarises it.

It is when you start to accept that many things in running are counter intuitive that it becomes easier to progress.

If someone struggles at 8 min/mile in a marathon and they have been training with LSRs at 8:45, it isnt hard to see why they would think they need to work harder and push the pace of the long runs along.

Of course by doing so it is likely that the next marathon could well be even more of a struggle.

Previously bookmarked threads are now visible in "Followed Threads". You can also manage notifications on these threads from the "Forum Settings" section of your profile settings page to prevent being sent an email when a reply is made.
Forum Jump  

RW Forums