x-post - not sure I can say that a 100 miler is sensible though!
I like the long nicely hurting runs! Did North Downs Way 50 last year and ran with someone else. Will do it on my own next time as it held me back.
spen71 wrote (see)
Well I have thought about how I am going to go about this and this is it. I work in miles as it is how my brain works!!"!! Mon 6 @ 70% Tues 10 @ 80% Weds 6 @ 70% Thurs 6@ 70% Fri 10 @ 75% Sat Rest Sun 15 @ 70%
Well I have thought about how I am going to go about this and this is it.
I work in miles as it is how my brain works!!"!!
Mon 6 @ 70%
Tues 10 @ 80%
Weds 6 @ 70%
Thurs 6@ 70%
Fri 10 @ 75%
Sun 15 @ 70%
I like the plan you have assembled. See the underlined above. I would consider moving the 80% earlier in the week. Even though you do your long run Sunday, it's at 70% and you should be recovered nicely by Tuesday. Hit the 80% that day and then have 2 nice 70% runs to recover before you do the slightly longer 75% run on Friday. I found I needed more rest after the 80% as opposed to the long run at say 70 to 75%. This would also open up Friday to be a second 80% effort if you wanted to add that in later. If not, I can defenitely see it they way you outline if Sunday/Monday begin evolving into much longer efforts.
Good luck getting ready for that awesome distance. All my future overuse injuries cry out in anticipation at the thought of that type of mileage.
Took 2 days off before today's run. Was 30 and windy and the legs still felt a bit sluggish so I cut it at 8 miles. We'll see how the next one goes...
Stewart: Nice run, glad I'm not the only one who had trouble with the weather today!
Spen: Plan looks good. As VT says though, it'd be nice to get that 80% run out of the way early in the week.
Brian: Have a nice break.
Keir: I think the Docs can be over cautious on running injuries, its an easy call for them to say "stop running for xx weeks" rather tell you that you might be able to ease yourself in earlier. Good Luck.
VT: Good luck with the next outing.
BTW Spen which 100 miler are you doing? I've just entered the Ladybower 50 in Sept which will my first ultra. Any tips for a newbie?
Thanks for the comments. I like to keep it like that for the sole purpose of building back to backs up.
Gaz - Last year I did Northants 35 miles and North Downs Way 50 miles. I also did 8 marathons at a slowish pace. I used these as long training runs. Im not sure what the lLadblower is like but spend time in the hills and practice run the flats and downs and walking the ups. I may do that one myself yet.
StewartC - all running done at 70%-75% at the moment. I'm looking for an improvement in pace at this level over 8 to 10 miles before moving up to 80%. I'm hoping the next 4 - 6 weeks might show this.
If it does it gives me a good 10 weeks then to move up a gear in preparation for March.
From listening to people on the thread for people like me who are not as aerobically fit as they could be, the 'Base Phase' is very important.
Nice training folks.
Spen - I also work in miles and your week looks pretty similar to what I have done before, except I tend to do what VTr suggested (and what Hadd outlines for Joe) and do the subLT sessions on Tues and Fri. The sub-LT sessions are key (but tough) and I think that a day recovery would not be enough for me to get the most out of the second sub-LT session ... and it also allows a longer run on a Thursday so you can get in a "mid-week long".
Yesterday's attempt at 2 x 2.08M @10KP went a bit wrong when I did it at 5KP. First rep was okay ... second one ended at 1.8M with a stitch from hell. Third rep was done at MP as there was no way I could do more. Still, I think it was good to hit some 5KP ... 10 days until the 10K race now and that was my last hard session. I'll do some 5KP and 10KP early next week, to keep the leg turn-over going, but it will be limited in distance.
After the race, I'll be back to Hadding ... ... plan up until the "Brass Monkey" HM in late Jan is to do a 62 mile week, with some run commuting 3 days a week and the two subLT sessions at lunchtimes (it's not HM preparation but I think it will get me through ... the priority is base):
Mon: 2x 5M at 70%Tues: 10M, with 8.3M at 82%Wed: 2x 5.3M at 70%Thurs: 2x 5M at 70%Fri: 10M, with 8.3M at 82%Sat: restSun: hilly 11.6M at 70% (extend the distance in January, if all is going well).The double run-commuting will be a new approach but I think it might work - we shall see. It's not going to be rigid - I'm sure there will be days when I'll drive in and do a single run instead etc. But I needs a plan...After that, I'll replace one sub-LT session with something faster involving 10M/10K pace ... target is Snake Lane 10M in late Feb and Bradford 10K in March. All these will be "B" races ... the main "A" target is Leeds HM in May (not a fast course but one I'd like to nail).
Thanks for the input. I would like the plan to look like this in New year as I do the miles required for a ultra.
Mon 14 @ 70%
Tues 6 @ 70%
Weds 10 @ 80%
Sun 20 @ 70%
This gives me the option of a Tuesday off if need be,
Andy...incredible results. I would absolutely keep the 65-70% range...if you can get to 65% at a brisk pace, I'd go for that over 70. Keep up the good work. That's truly outstanding.
Dr. Dan. That looks like a solid plan to me. The only potential pitfall would be the splitting up the runs for in/home days. It might limit the your aerobic base as you'll lose the continual time on your feet. I seem to recall reading in several places that the true aerobic benefits kick in around an hour to 1.5 hours. Either way though, 60 miles per week is solid and will net you solid results. Good luck with the upcoming race (and repress the last speed session from memory). It just tells you that you are still human
BD2000. With your progression, I think you want to be able to run 10 miles at a rock steady pace and HR. So, when you can hit 70% at a constant pace for 10 miles, then you can begin to consider adding in the 80% run. Prior to that, you might be limiting your improvement by not squeezing enough toothpaste out of the bottom of the tube. Good luck.
Spen, seeing the distance of the Sun/Mon runs, I agree that the 80% should be later. But if you will only do one 80% run per week and do not plan to add a second, perhaps Thrusday would be better for it as opposed to Wednesday. That way you could have Tues/Wed to recover from the back to back long runs and then Friday/Saturday to recover from the 80%. Might give you a mental boost to separate the two hard blocks from one another as well. As someone addicted to simply getting in as many miles as I can each week, I am very jealous of this training. If I could kick up the extra time (and was fully healed/trusted my body) I would love to put in weeks like you describe
Where did you read that aerobic benefits kick in after an hour?
VTrunner wrote (see)
I feel VERY human thesedays, don't worry!I agree that longer is better for aerobic development .... but also think that you get more aerobic "bang for the buck" by doing slow miles on tired legs. The reason longer is better, when going slow, is because you need time to fatigue the initial muscle fibers so you can get to the later/deeper fiber sets and start training them ... but if the earlier ones are still fatigued from a recent run, you'll get to them more quickly on the 2nd run later that day. I'd suggest that 2 x 5 miles is probably worth a single 8 miler in aerobic terms (I admit that is a total guess) ... but for me it would be more time efficient to do 2 x 5 mile commutes than to drive and try to fit in 8 miles at lunch (I can get in early and do a couple of longer lunch runs in a working week but it's not feasible every day).
Dr. Dan, very interesting view on the benefits of splitting up a run into two segments or just doing it all at once. Your explanation rings true. I had forgotten about the requirement to fatigue the muscles to get to the other fibers. It's all mechanism in the end. I'm a scientist and you would think the science of running physiology would be straightfoward, but it's actually fairly complicated. It's part of why I enjoy it so much...I enjoy learning and testing!
Spen, I think i read that in one of Hal Higdon's training pages (not scientifically tested but I assume the man knows his stuff). I'm pretty sure I've seen it eslewhere but am blanking right now. Below is some text from his webpage:
Run Slow: I know this is tough for you. You want to go out on those long runs and BLAST! Don't! Normally I recommend that runners do their long runs anywhere from 30 to 90 or more seconds per mile slower than their marathon pace. This is very important, particularly for advanced runners who do speedwork during the week. Listen to what the Coach is about to tell you! The physiological benefits kick in around 90-120 minutes, no matter how fast you run. You'll burn a few calories and trigger glycogen regenesis, teaching your muscles to conserve fuel. Running too fast defeats this purpose and may unnecessarily tear down your muscles, compromising not only your midweek workouts, but the following week's long run. Save your fast running for the marathon itself.
Vt Runner - I can see what your saying BUT that is for long runs only!
Andy, that is a brilliant progression. Really good to hear how this has worked for you. Any chance of some more detail - how long you were running at this pace / frequency / distance before you noticed improvements. Did the improvements come on slowly or suddenly? Do you think the track work is responsible for the impromvemnts? Have you done any races or anything speedier to see how your HR has improved at faster paces? Cheers.
For anyone interested, Minni has posted this Lydiard link on another thread. Intersting views on muscle fibres.
Well, regardless of the benefits of time on feet at one stretch or two, today's run was good. Legs felt fresh again. Put in 11 and felt nearly as good at the end as the beginning.
Also, not sure what you guys wear for shoes, but I've been running mostly in the Kayano18s. Have been trying out the 19s and after about 50 miles not sure that I like them. They are about 0.5 oz lighter than the 18s, but they don't have the same cushion. I think they took too much good stuff out. I am 6'1" and 165 lbs and my legs just feel kind of beat up when I run in them.
Out of choice for long runs I'd like to use Asics Nimbus but they are pretty expensive. I recently got 2 pairs of new Asics Cumulus 13 samples off Ebay for less than half price, and a third of the price of a pair of Nimbus. Tthey arn't as good as Nimbus for cushioning but as I'm only 5'6 and 138 lbs I can't really justify the extra expense for something I don't really need.
Visit the official Runner's World page
Follow Runner's World on Twitter
Other Natmag-Rodale Sites
Run For Charity
About Runner's World
Runner's World is a publication of Hearst Magazines UK which is the trading name of The National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.
Website powered by: Immediate Media Company Ltd. | © Runner's World 2002-2013 |