Hansons vs. Pfitzinger (Read 2525 times)


Smashy!!!

    I know there's two (brag: I have met them); my "does" was in reference to the plan that Bob was cross comparing.  What I should have said was "Does the Hanson plan" or "Does the Hansons' plan", but I am lazy. 

     Bragger! Nay, lazy bragger!

    PRs: 21:35 (5K); 1:46:46 (HM); 4:30:46 (FM)


    I'm back!

      Oops -- one point I forgot to make.

       

      Another difference between Hansons and Pfitzinger is that Pfitzinger plans feature a fairly standard 3-week taper. Hansons plans have a 10-day taper. Really all this means is shortening the last long run, and skipping the speedwork the final week. The thinking is that it takes about a week and a half to see any benefit from a speed workout, so there's no point in throwing any in after that. And I guess they just differ from Pfitzinger and most other plans in feeling that 10 days is enough for you to toe the line rested.

       

      I just PRed off a (unplanned) 5-week taper, so I'm going to have to think about this.


      Smashy!!!

        I can imagine the music to "Do the Hustle" for these names.

         

        I don't think it's that Pfitz minimizes it's importance; he sounds like running that much at MP would interfere with recovery and most of all, does not create as much endurance as his workouts would.  I already did Pfitz and even with asthma got a 6-7 minute PR.  When I try Hanson, I'm going to see how much I can PR with it and see whether I get the results I want.

         

        Pfitz says somewhere in AM that there is no reason to train at GMP, except to break any bad habits that might develop from the slower paces. If that is not minimizing its importance, then I don't know what is. As far interfere with recovery. If that is his worry, then why prescribe a 7 mile Tempo run? That interferes with recovery as much as anything else. And it is the Hansons point that by doing a quality workout at GMP and not doing speed workouts too fast, and breaking up your weekly mileage over 6 days (instead of one huge LR), you are better able to recover.

         

        Lastly, I don't think it's a fair comparison to judge your PR now versus when you did Pfitz when you did. Depending on where you are in your development, you just might not have as much room to improve. I think there are important factors other PR, such as, injury-prevention, the way you feel during the training, recovery, etc.

        PRs: 21:35 (5K); 1:46:46 (HM); 4:30:46 (FM)


        I'm back!

          Pfitz says somewhere in AM that there is no reason to train at GMP, except to break any bad habits that might develop from the slower paces. If that is not minimizing its importance, then I don't know what is. 

           

          That might have been true in the first edition, though I don't remember reading it. But one of the changes in the second edition was the addition of more MP runs -- now four instead of the original two. The book says (page 140)

           

          Over the past few years, the benefits of marathon-pace runs have become more fully recognized, and we have included more of these sessions in this edition of Advanced Marathoning.

           

          Even so, this is still the most striking difference between Pfitzinger and Hansons, much less mileage at MP.


          Pass the coffee.

            Thanks for the thread, and all of the thoughtful responses. As a marathon newbie it's hard to compare/contrast sometimes. I was intending on running Pfitz's 18/55 this spring before this thread - some of the pro-HansonS posters have similar traits as I do. Looks like I have some considering to do.


            Smashy!!!

              That might have been true in the first edition, though I don't remember reading it. But one of the changes in the second edition was the addition of more MP runs -- now four instead of the original two. The book says (page 140)

               

              Over the past few years, the benefits of marathon-pace runs have become more fully recognized, and we have included more of these sessions in this edition of Advanced Marathoning.

               

              Even so, this is still the most striking difference between Pfitzinger and Hansons, much less mileage at MP.

               Thanks Bhearn, for the info. 

              This is what confounds me about Pfitz. Okay, so he says there are widely recognized benefits for training at GMP. So are 4 runs enough to capture these benefits? But I guess he has to keep their number low because he's gonna have you run 18-22 milers that keep the average novice on their feet for 3:30+. Therein lies the biggest difference. Hansons trades that 20 miler for weekly runs at GMP and Speed/Strength workouts as well as running 6 days a week. 

              PRs: 21:35 (5K); 1:46:46 (HM); 4:30:46 (FM)


              Finally PRed!!!

                Great thread! Thanks, bhearn, for your analysis and  for starting a great discussion. Haven't read the Hansons book yet myself, but I'm interested in doing so very soon.

                PRs: 5K: 22:09, 10K:44:55, 15K: 1:10:35, HM: 1:42:49, M: 3:32:09


                Finally PRed!!!

                   Thanks Bhearn, for the info. 

                  This is what confounds me about Pfitz. Okay, so he says there are widely recognized benefits for training at GMP. So are 4 runs enough to capture these benefits? But I guess he has to keep their number low because he's gonna have you run 18-22 milers that keep the average novice on their feet for 3:30+. Therein lies the biggest difference. Hansons trades that 20 miler for weekly runs at GMP and Speed/Strength workouts as well as running 6 days a week. 

                   

                  (bolding mine in above quote) I'm not sure Pfitz plans are really designed for the average novice, though. Now, I agree with some of your points about the 7 mile tempos, etc. with regard to slower runners. That's one reason I haven't tried a Pfitz plan, and if I did I would modify some workouts. Some of the VO2 max interval lengths are also not optimized for people in my pace range.

                  PRs: 5K: 22:09, 10K:44:55, 15K: 1:10:35, HM: 1:42:49, M: 3:32:09


                  I've got a fever...

                    The title of this thread makes me think that poor Pfitz is getting ganged up on by these guys:

                    On your deathbed, you won't wish that you'd spent more time at the office.  But you will wish that you'd spent more time running.  Because if you had, you wouldn't be on your deathbed.


                    Smashy!!!

                      (bolding mine in above quote) I'm not sure Pfitz plans are really designed for the average novice, though. Now, I agree with some of your points about the 7 mile tempos, etc. with regard to slower runners. That's one reason I haven't tried a Pfitz plan, and if I did I would modify some workouts. Some of the VO2 max interval lengths are also not optimized for people in my pace range.

                       

                      Pfitz claims his book and plans are for anyone who wants to do more than just cross the finishline. That's what he says he means by "advanced Marathoning." 

                      But I agree,it may be wise to revise some of the workouts. But then again if someone isn't going to do the whole 20+ mile LR, and cap it at 2:40-3:00 hours, then what's the point of following Pfitz? 

                      PRs: 21:35 (5K); 1:46:46 (HM); 4:30:46 (FM)


                      Finally PRed!!!

                        Well, though I've never done a Pfitz plan, I've never capped LRs at 3:00, and I've typically done a couple 22-23 milers that take close to the amount of time my marathon will take (had reasonable success with that, until my last marathon in which I do think I overemphasized 20+ mi runs a bit). I had years of running experience (not all consecutive) before I started marathoning, though. So I'm not one of those who is convinced the 3+ hr LRs are bad, but I do see the point that they aren't always necessary. So I'm definitely interested to try a Hansons plan and see how it works for me. I'm not convinced the 6 days/week would work better for me, though, I did 6 days for my last marathon (Hudson-based plan), and it seemed to give me issues, though I can't be sure that was the reason for them..

                         

                        Pfitz may say that about the target audience in the Preface (though he also alludes in the next paragraphs to the schedules being designed for runners who want to compete in the marathon)--but some of the specifics in the book seem not to be geared toward slower runners. But, like I mentioned, I haven't done a Pfitz plan partly for this reason.  I may start a modified 12-week Pfitz cycle soon for my next marathon. If I do it, I  will adjust the distance/pace of some of the LT runs and the distance of the some of the interval runs. Will probably not modify the LRs schedule all that much.

                        PRs: 5K: 22:09, 10K:44:55, 15K: 1:10:35, HM: 1:42:49, M: 3:32:09

                        Longboat


                        Letting off steam

                          The title of this thread makes me think that poor Pfitz is getting ganged up on by these guys:

                           

                           

                          You'd prefer these guys?

                           

                           

                          Doh! Still can't get it to work

                           

                          Help anyone? Thanks SRL!

                          Neil

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

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

                          Base building time!

                          Dreamn


                            You'd prefer these guys?

                             

                            [IMG]http://i49.tinypic.com/70ciu0.jpg[/IMG]

                             

                            Doh! Still can't get it to work

                             

                            Help anyone?

                             

                            skygazer


                              Great thread.

                              BUT, weird that Pfitz (in the vein of Lydiard training) got criticized so badly in this thread like it's crap training.

                               

                              In terms of "specificity" of marathon training, Hansons' isn't superior, IMO. A lot of MP miles (sure) + a lot more hard workouts, as shown in the OP. It's not even the way the Hansons' elites train but more similar to Higdon's, doing very easy long runs the day after a hard MP run to simulate the last 20(16 in Hansons) miles of the race. Anyway, for all the hard miles you run using the plan, you better expect to get a lot better results for similar mileage plans that you'd get from Pfitz.

                               

                              If Canova is the new standard for marathon training, the 16-mile LR Hansons' plan has got nothing resembles it (I'm not sure if the "speed" sessions in the Hansons in the similar pace ranges (for training certain systems) as in Canova's). Canova talks about training specificity that for marathon is to build to the "hard" "long" LR, not doing a lot of hard runs. Suddenly, Pfitz's* looks a lot closer to this approach.

                               

                               

                               

                               

                               

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

                              *Though I had doubts about how one can suddenly get to run the hard LR in Pfitz's plan. But was assured by a few people who followed the plan that they had no problem with it.

                              xor


                                You'd prefer these guys?

                                 

                                [IMG]http://i49.tinypic.com/70ciu0.jpg[/IMG]

                                 

                                Doh! Still can't get it to work

                                 

                                Help anyone?

                                 

                                When you use tinypic, you want the stuff out of the very last field... the native url without the formatting stuff.  When you are in RA's editor, punch the image button (looks like a tree) and paste that url in the appropriate spot.

                                 

                                zim zala bim

                                 

                                As for Pfitz getting "criticized so badly", I must be reading the posts differently.  I haven't noticed a lot of that.