Forums >Running 101>Hanson ManathonTraining
Feeling the growl again
Probably because, as a high mileage runner, the program was actually easier for me in a lot of ways. . . . I don't know. I just left the program wondering if the people who have success with it wouldn't find themselves running even faster if they did more mileage/longer long runs. Just my $0.02.
Probably because, as a high mileage runner, the program was actually easier for me in a lot of ways.
.
I don't know. I just left the program wondering if the people who have success with it wouldn't find themselves running even faster if they did more mileage/longer long runs. Just my $0.02.
You kind of said it right there. The published Hansons plan is to save the average marathoner from themselves. It gets them off of the thought that they need to be running 20-22 mile training runs of 3++ hours to run a marathon.
For the higher mileage runner, or the faster marathoner, the 16 mile limit makes less sense. But for the masses it makes all the difference by preventing them from over-emphasizing the long run and sacrificing all other running in pursuit of long run length.
If people are running higher total miles...60-80 mpw...longer long runs start to make sense. But below that, or at slower paces, they are counter-productive. You do NOT need to be running 20-22 mile long runs to run a good marathon, in general. In 2002 I ran a few 16-18 mile long runs. I attempted one each at 20 and 22 miles, but ended up walking significant portions of each due to heat issues. I ran a 2:29, my second-best ever marathon.
In general people over-emphasize the importance of the long run, even moreso for slower marathoners.
"If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does. There's your pep talk for today. Go Run." -- Slo_Hand
I am spaniel - Crusher of Treadmills
Gang Name "Pound Cake"
It sounds like you want to trade higher mileage plans for the high intensity of Hanson's plan to avoid injury. Well... Good luck. I started the Hanson plan but found the immediate high intensity coupled with mileage increases to be way too much. I felt on the edge of injury almost immediately. I did the pfitzinger 55 plan instead and had a good first marathon. I'm 53 and only been running 8 months, but managed a 3:49 first marathon while still being a bit over weight. A hilly marathon too. I'm trying the pfitzinger 55-70 plan next.
Make sure your easy days are truely easy. I think I run mine too fast. This will help avoid injury.
- Scott
2014 Goals: First Marathon - BQ2016 <3:40 (3:25:18) - 1/2M <1:45 - 5K <22:00
2014 Marathons: 05/04 Flying Pig (3:49:02) - 09/20 Air Force (BQ 3:25:18) - 11/01 Indianapolis Monumental
Not a particularly big fan of Hansons. I used it a year ago heading into Boston and felt fatigued and flat on race day. I started out well, but faded badly at about 23 and ran a 3:24. More on that in a minute.
This year, doing my own plan based on a McMillan plan I had purchased in the past. I ran about the same total mileage as under Hansons the year before, and I did hit the 20-mile mark in long runs twice plus one 18-miler. The quality workouts were more varied with the paces than under Hansons and I liked that better as well, both from a training theory standpoint and simply how I felt. Whatever the case, I came into Boston feeling great and PRed in 3:18:25.
When doing Hansons I definitely felt the fade referred to by others late in the cycle. My training performances didn't necessarily suffer but they certainly felt harder.
What's interesting is when I look at my 2013 (Hansons) vs. 2014 (self-designed McMillan) Bostons, the 2013 race "led" my 2014 race until the final 5k. It could be that I just paced myself better and ran smarter this year. Looking back I may have trained too ambitiously (targeted 3:10) with Hansons, too. But notwithstanding those qualifiers I most definitely felt better during the 2014 Boston cycle, and there's no question in my mind that I came in feeling stronger and more confident this year.
I know Hansons has its passionate defenders. And if it works for them, more power to them. It just wasn't right for me.
I'm definitely not passionate about any plan. Like I said initially I was more interested in trying to marry a good plan with a particular body type (5'10 180LB) and trying to determine if a two day 10 and 16 mile run was better than the 22 mile run. Historically I would pick a plan and then tweak it, which then becomes no plan at all!. On paper the Hanson plan looks harder than the others, but again I was trying to avoid the multiple long runs and find a way to feel more comfortable in the last 6 miles of the marathon. The reason I have such large gaps between my marathons (I have done 6) is the pain I endured in the last hour of the run.
Many of you have reinforced other errors a few of us make when training. 1. Running too fast in training. My last goal pace in Richmond was 8:02 but I bet I did ALL of my runs at that pace or faster. That mistake limited my overall miles and days I could run. 2. Not running even pace in the marathon. Lesson 2 I have learned, Lesson 1 I am GOING to learn this time. More of the long runs at 8:30 to 8:45 and only run marathon pace or faster when the schedule call for it.
I have the original copy of Pfitzinger marathoning book and I think I'll invest the few bucks in the Hanson book and make a decision. I'm in NC so our group always points to a fall marathon with training based on a schedule that doesn't need to start until July 1.
I'm 53, 6'3" and 185 lbs. Not exactly a young marathon runner's body type.
I think Hanson's methods are sound. But as a newish runner, it just was too intense for me out of the gate with a weak base. The Pfitzinger plans focus on base to begin and are easy on speed until the mileage is higher. My limited experience take is that approach is a bit more forgiving but still challenging for runners who don't have extensive running backgrounds.
My advice, for what its worth, is to do the 18/55 Pfitzinger plan. It has two rest days a week to help you stay away from injuries. Stick to it as close as possible. Trust the plan. Use McMillian pacing charts to determine your various paces based on recent race performance. Then use a gps watch or some other method to keep you to the correct pace for the day. If you run everything at a moderately fast pace, then you are not recovering properly and can't do more intense workouts properly either. You are sabotaging all your paces and training by running everything too fast. Adaption occurs on rest and easy days, so make them rest and easy days.
After you have done that plan (and trusted it), you can then stay with it, or try something else like the Hansons plan. Then compare. Until you have tried it, it's only theory and guess work.
There is a difference in the number and distance of long runs between the book and the purchased 20 week 40 - 60 mpw and 60 - 80 mpw Hansons' plans.
For the purchased plans:
The 40 - 60 mpw plan has three 18 mile runs. (note that this is 30% of the longest weekly mileage.)
The 60 - 80 mpw plan has six 18 mile runs and six 20 mile runs. (with 20 miles being 25% of the longest weekly mileage.)
My Hanson training book came on Friday and I read the entire thing over the weekend. It is possible to get the actual training plan on the internet for free but I wanted the details on the theory, the explanations and reasoning for the paces. If you just look at the schedules on paper it may look like the hardest thing out there, but what I have found is that is not really true (compared to the way I train today).
If my goal is a 3:30 to 3:35 marathon (goal pace of 8:00 to 8:10) then speed work example maybe be 12 x 400 in 98.
In the past I would attempt this workout and try and run them in 90, get tired and stop at 6 or 7. I think I can do 12 at 98.
Strength. MP -10 Seconds, so now I just need to run 7:50 to 8:00. This is close to my current long run and also the reason I cant currently run more than 4 days a week. (I'm wore out). I'm out there now trying to run 7:20 tempo pace runs!
Marathon (Tempo) Pace runs. Now I can run 8:00 to 8:10. Same reasoning as above. This is my current long run pace which is why I'm wore out and rarely get LONG runs in.
Easy and Long Aerobic runs. Now maybe as slow as 9:00 minute a mile! I have never done that but looking forward to smelling the roses, hearing the birds chirp and enjoying the run.
I understand now the reasoning behind cumulative training effect, conscious pace control and the necessity for resisting the urge to exceed the prescribed pace. So without actually trying it "sounds" better. It really come down to whether the body can really handle the total miles and whether your work schedule can handle the 6 days a week. It looks like things could fall apart quickly if you cannot do the schedule. I have run 5 marathons so really I am only trying to find a way to avoid the 6 mile death march at the end of the race.
I think for a beginner who has never run a marathon this plan would be a tough sell and I would not recommend it. It would be hard to convince someone to run a 16 mile max run and tell them they have to run 10 miles further that on race day.
I just finished my second marathon yesterday. I used Hanson's for both. I have only been running since 2012. My first marathon was marked by a trip and fall that required a trip to the medic tent but i did finish fading badly at the 20 mile point. Yesterday was worse. No fall to blame but probably as others have said I think my failure in using Hanson as a new runner is a lack of respect for pacing and 26 miles. I was able to do all the training the program asked for at the prescribed workout paces as the book explains (pace based on using the McMillian calculator based on my HM and 10K races). The Tempo and Speed runs (up to 12 mile) at Marathon and Marathon - 10 sec pace seemed to lull me into thinking I could hold that pace for the whole 26. That has just not been the case in either marathon. I think that maybe for a seasoned runner that has a firm understanding of pace and distance they might be able to excel on the Hanson plan but I think I am going to abandon the idea that 16 miles is the longest run i need and fewer,frequent miles at faster pace will translate to success on race day. So I guess I am not a fan of Hanson's specifically for a beginner so now I'm looking for the next plan.
I have run 5 marathons so really I am only trying to find a way to avoid the 6 mile death march at the end of the race.
Two words: MORE MILES
Just heard on the Marathon Talk podcast that Paula Radcliffe does 140 mile weeks. There is a reason the elites run huge training weeks. While us mere mortals might explode at that volume, most marathoners would benefit by running more volume. Some of that volume would likely make you faster over each mile. Certainly, that increased volume would reduce the "death march" you describe at the end of the race. Endurance is not just built by one weekly long run, but also by weeks, months, and years of miles.