Moraghan Training - Stevie G

17,601 to 17,620 of 25,210 messages
12/05/2013 at 20:34

yep, slots in seamlessly i reckon, as I was up for a 5k. Got sign off now  Pb might be optimistic, but i'll see what can be produced.

Did 17.22 in 2010 and only took a second off in 2011. The plug was pulled on me doing that series after that day actually.,...so it's a bit of a comeback!

If nothing else it'll be some good social stuff after with the local clubs, today reminded me I've fallen off that a fair bit last couple of years! 

Edited: 12/05/2013 at 20:37
12/05/2013 at 20:43

Bit of a north south divide this weekend regards results.  Congrats on a PB SG and other good races by dachs, bus and pmj,   Sounds like you are heading in the right direction Philip. 

One question what the hell is a social team prize? 

12/05/2013 at 20:47
Stevie G . wrote (see)

Wargrave...Phil, do you fancy using up your priviledged guest entry on me, or shall I weasel for a guest pass elsewhere?

You get a lift out of it this way!

Not running Wargrave: 16th birthday party. Will do Burnham on the 28th and it is Dashers champs race so there will be a full house of fast people to pace you.

Admin corner: last year's country champs results:
http://www.bucksaa.org.uk/results/tf2012bucksoxon.pdf
http://www.thepowerof10.info/results/results.aspx?meetingid=61617&event=3000&venue=Horspath&date=13-May-12

This year entries closed 4th May
http://www.bucksaa.org.uk/entry/tf2013entryform.pdf

Watford Open: Wednesday is not a good day as after schools clubs dominate for me so will have to be in the holidays. 21st August looks a good slot.

 

Edited: 12/05/2013 at 20:49
12/05/2013 at 21:03

Oh yes, you're not in! Who was asking me if I was in? I completely forget now! Arse x2!

I'll have to weasel an entry out of someone else... i'm making real hard work of this!

 

Edited: 12/05/2013 at 21:08
12/05/2013 at 21:17

No Sam running today Dachs - she's out with an op on her foot involving a cast for several weeks, so I can get away from all the shouts of "Go Sam" and "first lady" for the summer!  Mind you, as her pace is increasing  that only happens in the forst few miles of a race now anyway!

12/05/2013 at 21:27

Bus..change of venue for tue now, fancy a 5k? It's 25mins rather than 50 now!

12/05/2013 at 22:02

Mebbe - need to work out what time I'll get back from Chelmsford...

Should be able to work it out tomorrow. How would I get a guest invite though?

 

12/05/2013 at 22:04

There'll be loads of people I know who will sign us up, the old club, Handy Cross etc, won't be a problem, they'll be glad of the £3s!

See how the timings work out.

IronCat5    pirate
12/05/2013 at 23:11
Stevie G . wrote (see)
ps Iron, my coachee had a pb of 43.50 and she's now 41.58, so I'm hoping that on a flatter course she can take a good chunk off that, as the big target is sub 1hr 30 for half. She's definitely better with distance, and currently has a pb in the 1:31:xxs, so it's hard but doable i think. This was a "C" race for her today. Her 10k "B" race is in 2 weeks.

That's a good chunk to take off. I guess the sub-40 10km is harder than the sub 90min HM (having done neither!)?I'm sure she'll do it.

As well as Yateley there is a 3-race series at Dinton. 10km is 2 laps though each lap has a tight turn and the footing can be moist.


When's Wargrave, and what is the distance...?

 

13/05/2013 at 08:11
IronCat5 in the Hat wrote (see)

When's Wargrave, and what is the distance...?

 

Wargrave 5k, TVARC summer series. Closed race (clubs and guests), Tuesday 14th May 19:30 start.

13/05/2013 at 08:12

Came out 42.00 in the end Iron. No chip timing job! Still a 1.50 pb. We'll definitely have to get her closer to 41 i'd say to have a real crack at the sub 90 by September.

She hasn't really done any real hard sessions yet, so she's at a good place at this point in time.

Hard to tell on sub 40v sub 90  from my records.  I did a 1:28:42 at Wycombe in 04, and a 38.27 10k at Prestwood in 05, but both were hot an hilly courses. In fact all my early 10ks either had whopping hills in, or were MT, and I didn't know flat halfs existed in those days either, so not the best evidence to compare!

 

Wargrave is 5k and tomorrow, but it's really a closed club event. I'm weasling in on the "friend of a club member" rule.
Used to do 5 of the events and marshall the Marlow one. I'm sure the nerves of the opening race will quickly be remembered tomorrow, as Wargrave is typically the big attendance one.

IronCat5    pirate
13/05/2013 at 08:44

Cheers. I remember the discussion about Wargrave some months back.

Maybe the sub-40 10k is harder based on WAVA

I bounced out of bed this morning without any calf stiffness or sore Achilles - obviously due to the hard turbo last night and the OW swim in the morning. I may try a short run at the weekend, then gently ramp the distance. Must be sensible this time round.

Current club are chasing me for membership 'if I wish to continue' decisions, decisions.

13/05/2013 at 08:48
IronCat5 in the Hat wrote (see)

That's a good chunk to take off. I guess the sub-40 10km is harder than the sub 90min HM (having done neither!)?

 

Interesting comparison. Raw data says the open standard for women is 30:20 so 40:00 is 75.83% and for a half the standard is 65:50 so 90:00 is 73.15%. The simple conclusion is therefore that the half is easier than the 10k.

Last year, 723 women did 39:59 or better and 702 did 89:59 or better which shows the other trend i.e. sub 40 is easier.

The reality is that you will most likely find it easier to conquer the one you train for. If you train short and fast then 10k will be easier, if you train long and slow then the half will be easier.

Other thing is it is odd how hard I find it to get my mind round women's times. For men in 2012 there were 7391 men sub 90, and 90 minutes gives you 65.8% WAVA. I'd find it hard to coach a women to sub 90 as in reality it seems to be as hard as a man going sub 80 which is a completely different kettle of fish.

 

 

13/05/2013 at 10:51

All depends where they currently are, and what they've been doing. If they've been doing high mileage with well thought out structure for 10years, you're going to struggle.

If they've done ok mileage, but with no structure, and aren't a million miles away (1:31:30 for example), you've got a chance.

It is all relative though. a 24 year old at the Watford 3k I did told me she'd done a 1hr 20 half, and remembering my pal who has gone sub 1hr 20, and is top 100 in the country, I told her that ballpark figure.

because she's used to track stuff giving her a much higher ranking, she wasn't too impressed by top 100!

 top 100 in the male rankings would be pure dreamworld!

13/05/2013 at 11:32

Phil - using pure numbers that have hit the times doesn't on the face of it seem a good measure and I  think a fairer comparison would be the percentage of runners hitting the target. I suspect more women ran 10k than half. If this assumption is correct then a greater percentage hit the half target and this would suggest that the half target is easier on both your measures.

Edited: 13/05/2013 at 11:34
13/05/2013 at 11:59

I'd explain how a sub 90 has to be easier than a sub 40 like below using my own pbs, and McMillan.

39:59 is 6.26 pace, 1:29:59 is 6.52 pace   so 26secs a mile difference.

My current pbs are 75:41 half, and thus 5.46 pace, and 34:30 10k which is 5.33 (13sec difference)

Even taking McMillan's optimistic prediction from that half of 33:57, that'd still be 5.28 pace which is still only 18secs a mile difference.

26secs is a big gap between 10k and half, and is backed up in Phil's point about the 2% WAVA difference.

Therefore, my coachee's 10k was 6.45 yesterday. If she has the same transition as me, 13secs extra would see a 6.58 time, which would be 1:31:15, so pb form, but not close enough to the sub 90.

So work to be done, but hopefully the 3 phrase plan below, will get us closer.
1) Base working MP and MP progressions, steady-hills and 10k "easy" sessions, ie short reps, decent recoveries

2)faster work short period focusing on more V02 max stuff

3) Long build up of HM specific work.

13/05/2013 at 12:55

I ran 39:45 and 1:35 in the same month in 2011.  Having said that, that 1:35 was still an utter disaster of a race even by my standards then, and it was all done off one training run a week of between 10k and 10 miles, so I had no training endurance base to speak of, so it's probably not that surprising.

If you've got to sub 40 off reasonable mileage, sub 90 ought to be pretty straightforward.

13/05/2013 at 14:38
Maxpower North West wrote (see)

Phil - using pure numbers that have hit the times doesn't on the face of it seem a good measure and I  think a fairer comparison would be the percentage of runners hitting the target. I suspect more women ran 10k than half. If this assumption is correct then a greater percentage hit the half target and this would suggest that the half target is easier on both your measures.

I disagree on that for two reasons:

1) Pure numbers is a reasonable measure in this context. I am selecting a small number of fairly high quality athletes and these will typically have run multiple 10ks and half marathons in the year.

2) Percentage based on total "runners" will just give you al the padding of not real runners at all and so does not help. runbritain lists 100,849 women runners and the 999th on this list coincidentally has a 39:59 10k and a 97:37 half. Those other 100,000 women we are not interested in, we just want that top 1%.

The thing is that the half is easier if you train for it. Most runners will run 5 or 6 times a week and up to an hour on 4 or 5 of these runs and once over. If I look at my own log, on 670 occasions I have run for less than 90 minutes, and over on 86 occasions. Most people do not train for a half, so in reality less do well.

13/05/2013 at 14:44
dean richardson 7 wrote (see)

 

One question what the hell is a social team prize? 

Not quite sure. The race has 4 team prizes: Mens athletic club, ladies athletic club, company team and social team. The first two are fairly clear but the others are just vague. I have often seen prizes for first Non-Affiliated Social Team so that is clear, you get £2 off for affiliation and enter the affiliated teams competition or you can be unaffiliated and enter the other one. We had a quick check of previous results and saw all sorts of people in social teams so did the same.

13/05/2013 at 16:09

One year Hayley Yelling, GB runner turned up in a social team, so that was our alibi!.

And we thought, if another team can beat our 3 in the top 25ish, they're welcome to the prize!

17,601 to 17,620 of 25,210 messages
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