|
Run-Down Forums
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Guest
|
Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2001 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I was wondering what sort of improvements better training would bring to a 10k or marathon runner. I ran my first marathon in 2:57, training about 75 miles/week. Am I doomed to be slow forever, or will I ever get faster? I struggle to run a single mile under 6:00 pace, let alone 26.2. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dan Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999 Posts: 9334 Location: Salem, OR
|
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2001 10:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lots of questions there that are tough to answer in any definitive fashion, especially with the gray area surrounding such definitions as slow, fast, and mileage/good training.
Is 2:57 slow? If so, what about the bulk of the field that is 4:00 or slower? Is 75 miles a week high or low? It's moderately high for a 5k runner, about average for 10k, and on the low side for serious marathoning, but some half milers run more than that and some marathoners much less... Furthermore, I think mileage on its own is one of the most worthless factors in determining a good training routine. If your 75 miles a week consists of 65-70 junk miles at 7:30 to 8:00 minute pace, then that does you absolutely no good. If, on the other hand, it consists of 30+ miles of tempo and interval work at least as fast as your marathon pace, then that is pretty good.
Other unknowns that make it impossible to answer your question are your age, how long you've been running, health (injury history), other events you have run, and at what pace.
Dan |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Micah Ward Olympic Medalist
Joined: 08 May 2000 Posts: 2152 Location: Hot&humid, GA
|
Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2001 10:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hey Anonymous, we need more info. Just as Dan said, what is your age, background and specifics on the type of training. If you are in your 20's and are doing little speed work then you have great potential for improvement. But if you are in your 40's and doing lots of high quality trainng then you may have reached your peak.
By the way, a 2:57 marathon is nothing to feel bad about for the vast majority of runners.
Micah |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2001 5:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am 22. I have been running consistently for about 2 years. As far as speedwork goes, I do a tempo run and some intervsls once a week. I also run most of my miles on hilly terrain, which at times feels like tempo-type pace, though actual speed may be slower. I know I have room for improvement, but it seems like the fast guys were running 5:10 for the mile in 8th grade, before any kind of training. I am curious as to what sort of lifetime 10k and marathon goal times I should be realistically expecting.
Thanks guys for your replies. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Indeurr Olympic Medalist
Joined: 08 Aug 2001 Posts: 1558 Location: Elizabeth, NJ, 07202
|
Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2001 10:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think that you should be more flexible. You should decide on short-term goals, first.
Analysis:
I am overweight.
Step 1:
Therefore, I have to lose the weight first.
Step 2:
In the mean time, I wan to get my 400 m current 'PR' (of sub 80s at +50 lbs.) to about 60s.
Step 3: I have achieved the weight loss and ran 400m in 60s. Analysis...etc...
...getting better is a circular process
The greatest athletic talent is a talent for repeatition.
[ This Message was edited by: Indeurr on 2001-11-05 01:16 ]
[ This Message was edited by: Indeurr on 2001-11-05 01:17 ] |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dan Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999 Posts: 9334 Location: Salem, OR
|
Posted: Wed Nov 07, 2001 9:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
At your age and with not much running background, a sub-3 hour marathon is not that slow. The marathon generally takes a lot of time to build up the necessary endurance base, so give it time.
My impression is that you do too little tempo and interval work. Once a week isn't even maintenance level, let alone enough to improve. Should be 2-3 times per week.
Quote: | I also run most of my miles on hilly terrain, which at times feels like tempo-type pace, though actual speed may be slower. |
Almost certainly. I am a firm disbeliever in the effectiveness of slogging through miles in the hills. Nice for relaxing and taking a break from the day, but that's about it as far as I'm concerned. If a hill forces you to slow down, how is it helping you? Most people don't bother trying to answer that question...
Quote: | but it seems like the fast guys were running 5:10 for the mile in 8th grade, before any kind of training. |
That's irrelevant. For one thing, the mile has little to do with the marathon. Second, everyone progresses at a different rate, especially in an event as extreme as the marathon. Many people do not reach their peaks until their early to mid 30's, and the best youth runners in any event are rarely at the top of the heap beyond high school.
As to goals, who cares what to expect? Go out there, bust your butt, have fun, and see what sort of results you achieve. If you enjoy what you're doing enough to stick with it, then you'll start to develop a realistic picture of what you can expect to get out of the sport.
Dan |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2001 9:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for your help, Dan.
So how would you suggest I set up a typical training week? What should my interval workouts look like? Please also consider that I would like to see improvement in my 10k speed as well; not just the marathon. I feel that if I can crank out some solid 10k's, I will have better speed to apply to the marathon--this seems to be what most successful marathoners have done. If it helps any, I am pathetic at sprinting--even as a kid before endurance training, I would get killed by my friends in a 50 yard sprint, but would be one of the leaders during the mile.
Also, running hills gets me breathing hard and gets my legs burning, because it takes more effort to run a certain pace. So, I would assume that it would be equivalent to running a faster pace on flat terrain, at least in terms of cardiovascular benefit. The advantage I see with flatter terrain then would be more of a neuromuscular thing--your legs get used to turning over faster. Is this why you say to avoid hills? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mario Water Boy
Joined: 21 Oct 2001 Posts: 18 Location: Mario Drapeau
|
Posted: Thu Nov 08, 2001 10:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Dan, I feel like you are sneezing over aerobic base as "Junk miles". Running all year long 30% of training milleage as speedwork, particularly fo someone targeting marathoning could lead injuries. I accept that near the competitive season intensive speedwork is a must, but at some point you have to do volume at a slower pace. You can't be year long on a Hal Higdon's Marathon training schedule |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dan Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999 Posts: 9334 Location: Salem, OR
|
Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2001 12:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: | Running all year long 30% of training milleage as speedwork, particularly fo someone targeting marathoning could lead injuries. |
Or it could lead to success. I can't speak for anyone else, but I never involved myself in the sport just to participate. I was never overly competitive, but I believe in taking every risk necessary to maximize one's chance of going as far as the body is willing to be pushed. Anything less is giving up before even starting, which isn't the approach I'm going to follow or recommend.
Quote: | I accept that near the competitive season intensive speedwork is a must, but at some point you have to do volume at a slower pace. |
Why? As far as I'm concerned, the traditional training model of base work most of the year followed by "speed" work leading up to racing time is a joke. Expecting de-trained fast twitch muscles to respond to faster paces is more likely to lead to injury than is training them to handle pace and volume year round.
Quote: | running hills gets me breathing hard and gets my legs burning, because it takes more effort to run a certain pace. So, I would assume that it would be equivalent to running a faster pace on flat terrain |
From a purely aerobic standpoint, maybe. However, I see no evidence that hills at less than race pace provides anything other than therapeutic gains.
I don't have any training plans or advice for marathons. I won't pretend to have enough interest in that area to waste your time with pulling workouts out of a hat... For 10k work, mile repeats and 3-5 mile tempo runs would seem a good bet.
Dan |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dan Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999 Posts: 9334 Location: Salem, OR
|
Posted: Fri Nov 09, 2001 12:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
One thing I forgot to mention: Most serious distance runners will run sufficient mileage without reminders, so I see no reason to emphasize that. On the other hand, many will put in too little quality work, which is why I stress it regularly.
Dan |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Hammer Varsity
Joined: 17 Jan 2002 Posts: 385 Location: New Mexico
|
Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2002 10:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
For runners who want to get fast they must run fast.....and smart. Every run should have a purpose. If you are running just to lose weight then LSD is your best bet.
For those who are trying to get FAST then it is time to run FAST. Follow the following rules and you will get faster:
20% of mileage should be done in one run (the Long Run)
No more than 25% at VMAX VO2.
20% @ Lactate Threshold (tempo)
Recover after every hard run (Tempo or MAX VO2) recovery pace =1-1:30 slower than race pace. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
training2run Varsity
Joined: 08 Jun 2002 Posts: 253 Location: CyberSpace
|
Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2002 2:52 pm Post subject: Getting Faster in the Marathon |
|
|
Saying that 75 miles a week is "low" for the marathon, in my opinion, just ain't so. Alison Rowe (sp) when she set the women's world's best time for the marathon in New York, was running 65 miles a week.
She was also swimming, biking and weight training. After that win and record, she upped her mileage, got injured and really did nothing again (as far as I can remember).
Again, in my opinion, very high weekly training mileage has little to do with training, but a lot to do with type "A" personalities. These runners psychologically just "have" to be out there "trucking," or they they "eat themselves up inside."
The answer to this is to do a reasonable amount of weekly mileage (65 to 75), then switch to other, non-impact activities.
Years ago, I did a survey (which I assume still holds). The results showed that elite marathoners who ran 90 miles or more a week in training lost half their running career due to injury.
As for "junk" mileage, that is a term that has always bothered me. If you're running up hill rather slow (but working at it), running down-hill fast, and briskly on the flats, I don't see how that could be called "junk."
According to Ernst van Aaken (really my only running mentor), the bulk of your training mileage should be run at a pulse rate of around 150.
Generally, if you can converse while running, but only in short sentences, you are about right.
Again, according to Dr. van Aaken, only about 5% or 10% of your training should be at race pace.
In my experience, the best way to improve time in the marathon is to train hard (without excessive mileage), suppliment training with non-impact activities, Stay uninjured and rested (take a full day off from running each week) run frequent 10Ks for speed, and run frequent marathons.
Once all the above is taken care of, the most important thing you can do to improve marathon times, is to learn to pace yourself correctly. Mad Dog Mike www.training2run.com |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Paul Olympic Medalist
Joined: 28 Apr 2002 Posts: 1610 Location: Oregon
|
Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2002 8:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hammer, was your figure of 25% at VO2 Max correct?? I would think that would be more in line with 1500and 5000 training than Marathon. When I see modern training programs and how little they allot to Anaerobic Threshold and VO2 Max training, I am surprised. For a low mileage person, that might account for only 3-4 miles a week. People in the 1960's, at the height of interval training did much higher percentages of hard training.
Mike and Dan, as far as junk miles, I am beginning to wonder if its just important during the very base phase of the MACROCYCLE to get out and run for 30, 45, 60 or more minutes.
Paul |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dan Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999 Posts: 9334 Location: Salem, OR
|
Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2002 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You just had to throw that macro reference in, didn't you?
This is primarily for sprinting, but it still applies fairly well to distance training... Charlie Francis best explained a notion I never quite managed to put into words. The typical training approach focuses on base training early, pace toward the middle, and speed at the end. Two things happen here: 1) a lot of strain is put on the legs to readjust to a faster pace late in the season (a big cause of hamstring injuries) after having de-trained the fast twitch, and 2) the workload (volume) has to be cut rather significantly in order to up the intensity and not fatigue the athlete.
Now, compare that to the approach where speed is developed year round. The body is well adapted to the speed and injuries become much less likely (I can point to first hand evidence of that with my sprinters the past two years). When it comes time to taper/peak, volume does not need to be cut back in order to build speed, so conditioning is not lost and it is much easier to time and hold a peak.
I should mention that Francis talks regularly of micro-cycles...
Dan |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Paul Olympic Medalist
Joined: 28 Apr 2002 Posts: 1610 Location: Oregon
|
Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2002 1:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
I like that approach. I think different emphases (is this the correct plural?) during different phases is sound especially post season, but I like the idea of keeping in contact with all aspects of your racing fitness, ie speed, anaerobic threshold level, etc. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|