Hanson's Marathon Project (Read 2124 times)


I'm back!

    I am open to trying something different from Pfitzinger next time, but I prefer to be able to squeeze in a few marathons as training runs. Sounds like that might be difficult on a Hanson's plan?

      Yeah although I'm still firmly in the "long runs are overrated" camp, I have a new found respect for the long run and at the moment the difference between 16 and 20 seems pretty significant.

       

      As I said to you (Jeff) as we were drinking Dos Perros and getting swarmed by yellow jackets 8 days ago, longs may be over rated but they're still pretty important.

       

      Agreed. I think the Hanson ideal would be to get your weekly volume to the level where 16-22 doesn't even feel long.

       

      Maybe schneidr can chime in with his thoughts on the Hanson approach. I am sure it is more flexible and individualized than the internet versions appear.

        I am open to trying something different from Pfitzinger next time, but I prefer to be able to squeeze in a few marathons as training runs. Sounds like that might be difficult on a Hanson's plan?

         

        On the "plan" it might be difficult, but really Hansons is a set of principles and approach rather than a strict plan. As I understand it, the core of the  approach is a high weekly volume of mileage at steady pace close to aerobic threshold. Could training run marathons fit into this approach? If you can cover the 26.2 mile distance without needing a ton of recovery (which you can), my guess is, "Absolutely." 

        DoppleBock


          16-20 = 25%

           

          Difference between running 16 and 24 = 50%

           

          Difference between 16 and 32 = 100%

           

          I find it interesting I occassionally find people (Some local friends also) that feel they can only run close to a max effort marathon if they over distance a few times.

           

          I think "Fitting my temperament" is one of the most important comments - You will excell at training if you pick a plan that fits your temperament.  It will feel natural, you will give a greater effort and be more consistent.

           

          16 miles will get you home much better than 20 or 24 or more if all the other training within the cycle goes well.

           

          I personally have always like to spend 2.5-3 hours on my long runs training for a marathon, or basically a similar amount of time I would spend on my feet in the marathon.  But that is because it fits my temperament. 

           

          Jeff's temperament is that of an artist - Mine is of a workhorse or grinder.

           

           

          The difference between running 16 and 20 as a long run in training is slight. 

           

          http://a-big-horse.blogspot.com/ 

          2013 Goals ~ Mar < 3:00, 5M < 29, 10k < 35  

           

          onemile


            I'm planning to start this plan in 3 weeks for a spring marathon.  I've done one marathon two years ago using a Higdon plan and wanted to try a plan with some speedwork this time around.  I've been running about 50ish mpw lately and was thinking to do the Advanced plan, adding 2 miles to each of the easy runs (what Hansons recommend for adding mileage). 

             

            Should be interesting because it doesn't fit my temperament at all but I'm thinking that might be a good thing (I tend to like long slow slogs).

            beycist


            inappropriate.

              wish I had something useful to add to this, but as of right now, I really enjoy reading (all) your thoughts on this! some really interesting points brought up in this thread!

              You suck -- Arie 3/08/14


              I'm back!

                I find it interesting I occassionally find people (Some local friends also) that feel they can only run close to a max effort marathon if they over distance a few times.

                 

                Well that's not really me, though I would say training marathons do make the distance feel more like a normal thing. Mostly I just can't stand to go months of training with no marathoning payoff. I like to see all my friends.


                Bad Ass

                  If you look at the entire context of training -- will 4 miles here or there make any difference in a weekly total? Maybe a little, but not a ton.

                   

                  Oh, and I think that the 16 mile long run of Hansons gets overblown as a key aspect of the plan. As you can see Ben does his share of 20 milers.

                   

                  I agree. The higher your mileage (and the more consistent) the less important the long run becomes.  And Hanson focuses more on the quality days than the LR total mileage.

                   

                  My only question would be whether you think you would have PR'd bigger had you used a plan with 20-22 milers or whether the Hanson plan produced a PR (and/or a great result).

                  Damaris, Marathon Maniac, Ultra Runner

                  Blog

                  "The most powerful weapon on earth is the human soul on fire."

                    I can't read the title of this thread without thinking this: "Mmm-Bop!"

                    HF #8206

                     

                      I agree. The higher your mileage (and the more consistent) the less important the long run becomes.  And Hanson focuses more on the quality days than the LR total mileage.

                       

                      My only question would be whether you think you would have PR'd bigger had you used a plan with 20-22 milers or whether the Hanson plan produced a PR (and/or a great result).

                       

                      To be clear, I followed the approach more than the plan: moderately high volume of steady runs almost daily, relatively few long runs (one 20 miler). This was back when I was 29 and had a little better recovery. It helped me run 2:38 in my debut. Later, I would add more long runs and chip my time down to 2:35, but I don't think it was the long runs that did it.

                       

                      I am more of a speed-side runner, and long runs are not my strength. A general rule of thumb in training is to train to your strengths and mitigate your weaknesses. For me, that means enough long runs to get the job done, but most of my good training is shorter steady runs, tempos, and intervals -- and paying attention to recovery.

                        16-20 = 25%

                         

                        Difference between running 16 and 24 = 50%

                         

                        Difference between 16 and 32 = 100%

                         

                        I find it interesting I occassionally find people (Some local friends also) that feel they can only run close to a max effort marathon if they over distance a few times.

                         

                        I think "Fitting my temperament" is one of the most important comments - You will excell at training if you pick a plan that fits your temperament.  It will feel natural, you will give a greater effort and be more consistent.

                         

                        16 miles will get you home much better than 20 or 24 or more if all the other training within the cycle goes well.

                         

                        I personally have always like to spend 2.5-3 hours on my long runs training for a marathon, or basically a similar amount of time I would spend on my feet in the marathon.  But that is because it fits my temperament. 

                         

                        Jeff's temperament is that of an artist - Mine is of a workhorse or grinder.

                         

                        So what if you are planning on spending 4 hours on your feet during the marathon? 

                         

                        That's where it seems that spending 4 hours slogging out a 22 miler at a long run pace might not be the best thing to do?  I've read several times that going much over 3 hours on your feet is going to wear you down more than build you up.  For me I can probably get an 18 miler in around 3 hours but even than is going to be pushing it.

                         

                        Is the 3 hour number really a magic dividing line or is that just some arbitrary made up thing?

                        Age: 46 Weight: 200 Height: 6'2" (Goal weight 195)

                        Current PR's:  Mara 3:48:09; HM 1:43:26; 10K 43:59; 5K 21:27

                        Venomized


                        Drink up moho's!!

                          Thanks for all the input guys.  Interesting reads in this thread. 

                           

                          I will have to do some tweaking here and there to see what will work.  From the book they state to adjust the easy runs rather the substance runs so that is what I have moved around a bit so far as I feel things out for the spring but my adjusted plan is still not far off the advanced plan.  On paper its about 65 miles shorter over 18 weeks right now.

                           

                          So far all but 1 of my marathons have been trained for using 20 milers or other marathons as the last long run so the concept of "only running 16" is still a bit foreign to me.  Chicago 2011 was the only marathon I have ran on really short training with a max run of just 15 miles for that cycle.  That cycle was coming off a stress fracture and going zero to marathon in 8 weeks with the intent of just finishing and having a good time.

                          Longboat


                          Letting off steam

                            I'll average 65 mpw over a marathon cycle, without much variation between weeks (55-70 almost each week).   My training for the last few has been my own concoction based on ideas from Pfitz, Hudson, and Daniels, with a strong emphasis on balancing the week and not overemphasizing the long run.  Next cycle, I'm going tobreak from this and  try the Hanson's Advanced (from the book), and maybe add a little to the easy days.  The principles set out in the book make a lot of sense to me.  I like to run everyday, I have the time to get longer workouts done during the week, and the speedier stuff (at my age-induced slower pacesRoll eyes) doesn't seem particularly scary.   

                            Neil

                            ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            Nearly back to 100% 6 months after Achilles surgery. Now at 35 50 mpw.

                            Base building time!

                            DoppleBock


                              4 hours for a 22 miler = 5.5 miles per hour.  I would agree that running much over 3 hours for someone running 4 hour marathons does not have a lot of benefit and could be counter productive.  My 2.5-3 hours has always been < 30% of the time I spend training that week and lamost always under 25%.

                               

                              When I started running - Many of the runs were based on time and not distance, so I often think in terms of time. 

                               

                              Your question cannot be applied generically to everyone - In your case if you are spending 4-7 hours a week training and running under 40 MPW. 

                               

                              When I was training for my 1st marathon I was running 70-80 MPW in 9-12 hours of running, so 2.5-3.0 hours for a long run was a significantly different stressor.

                               

                              Now after 9 1/2 years of running and lots of miles.  Running 2.5-3.0 hours without making it a faster run or putting an interval speed workout into it does very little other than maintain aerobic fitness.  Runs of 4-8 hours however still provide a stimulous to building my aerobic engine.

                               

                              This is about the Hanson's Marathon Project - This is a very solid plan and great for many people - It does not fit my temperament.

                               

                              There is no magic in any numbers - It is just the accumulation of different kinds of training stress that you have to be able to recover from to benefit from and apply more training stress. 

                               

                              As Jeff pointed out you have to play to your strengths and minimize the impact of your weaknesses.  I do not know you or how long you have been running or your running history.  Would it be better to focus on building your aerobic capacity and stamina or will you get more out of working on running efficiency and speed acquisition?  If you are new to running both are very important, but usually people focus on building their aerobic capacity and then start adding speed.

                               

                              The only reason I posted was to agree with the statement of picking a plan that fits your temperament.

                               

                               

                              So what if you are planning on spending 4 hours on your feet during the marathon? 

                               

                              That's where it seems that spending 4 hours slogging out a 22 miler at a long run pace might not be the best thing to do?  I've read several times that going much over 3 hours on your feet is going to wear you down more than build you up.  For me I can probably get an 18 miler in around 3 hours but even than is going to be pushing it.

                               

                              Is the 3 hour number really a magic dividing line or is that just some arbitrary made up thing?

                              http://a-big-horse.blogspot.com/ 

                              2013 Goals ~ Mar < 3:00, 5M < 29, 10k < 35  

                               

                              DoppleBock


                                PS - Also I am a WYSIWYG person (What you see is what you get) - So I have just tried to answer your question as best I can.  I recognize each of us has a different set of priorities and interests in life - We dedicate the amount of time and effort to training that is personally right for us.  We are blessed or cursed with different abilities.  I have been blessed with the knowledge I will never be good enough at running to make it anything more than a hobby, but cursed with the desire to care and train more in running than any hobby jogger should.

                                 

                                Now I have to go for a run Smile

                                http://a-big-horse.blogspot.com/ 

                                2013 Goals ~ Mar < 3:00, 5M < 29, 10k < 35