Forums >General Running>Lets be realistic
Self anointed title
Yeah I know - they spoke strangely in the 1950s.
FWIW when I was running as a teenage my grandmother would say to me "just off to do your keep-fit are you?" as I headed out the door for a punishing session of 400m reps. Heh.
I am certain he was talking about intervals - that was what he meant by practice - most of his training was intervals - he was sort of a Zatopek type man.
He is probably right though - your intervals should be close to race pace and cover similar distance with short recovery. EG if you are training for the 10,000m run something like 10x1k at race pace with 60 sec rec.
I don't know though - I'm no expert. Especially not on intervals.
I think the idea is a simple and important one. Running is a skill, and running a particular pace in a relaxed way takes practice. The way to get most practice running 5k pace is to run a whole bunch of miles slower than that so that you can become an aerobic beast and then you'll be able to practice 5k pace well in your workouts. Note: running a lot at a quality pace does not mean running everything at a quality pace.
I think the idea is a simple and important one. Running is a skill, and running a particular pace in a relaxed way takes practice. The way to get most practice running 5k pace is to run a whole bunch of miles slower than that so that you can become an aerobic beast and then you'll be able to practice 5k pace well in your workouts.
Note: running a lot at a quality pace does not mean running everything at a quality pace.
Yes. When he said "the speed at which you practice most," I read it as the speed at which I running most of the time. And when he said "best," I took it as "best/ideal pace on race day."
Now, I see that he meant the best pace for you is the one you run most of your miles on (i.e., easy pace).
"If you have the fire, run..." -John Climacus
Marathon Maniac #957
I peeked your training log and it showed that you recently did 12X400 within a 10-mile workout. They were run somewhere around 2:00, the second half of the set all under 2-minutes... If I remember it correctly, they were done with 1-minuet recovery. Take this workout, for example; what is the purpose of this workout and what were you expecting to achieve from this workout?
I had several purposes when I did this workout.
1. Coming off a long stretch of marathon training, it had been a long time since I had done any short intervals, and I wanted to see where I was, pacewise, plus I wanted to see how much I could, over the course of 12 of them with relatively short recovery, bring down the pace, with the last one at pretty much all-out effort.
2. Taper/partyat Boston/recovery added some extra weight that still had not come off, so I was feeling like I needed a good calorie-burn workout.
3. Done with serious marathon training for a moment, I was just kicking up my heels and having fun.
Life is a headlong rush into the unknown. We can hunker down and hope nothing hits us or we can stand tall, lean into the wind and say, "Bring it on, darlin', and don't be stingy with the jalapenos."
I've been teaching this "Beginning Women's Running Class" for MDRA in the past 6 years.
What is MDRA?
I won't speak for elites, but for most of us the only real differences we need to make to turn our marathon training into 5K PRs is: -Shorten long runs to 16 miles or so and add some quality. Save the gas you'd spend on longer runs for other workouts. -Add some intervals with longer recovery closer to 3000m pace -Short, fast hills for power -Fartleks or intervals at least at 5K pace if you don't do them for marathons (I always did).
I won't speak for elites, but for most of us the only real differences we need to make to turn our marathon training into 5K PRs is:
-Shorten long runs to 16 miles or so and add some quality. Save the gas you'd spend on longer runs for other workouts.
-Add some intervals with longer recovery closer to 3000m pace
-Short, fast hills for power
-Fartleks or intervals at least at 5K pace if you don't do them for marathons (I always did).
I like this. I often read running ideas and advice and think, is this only for elites? How does this apply to a "regular" runner like me, someone with a job and children and a busy life that often shoves my running aside. Someone who doesn't have time to run 60-120 mpw to reach my 5K potential.
Minnesota Distance Running Association.
I didn't know you taught the women's running class, Nobby. I was seriously considering taking it this spring to help me with my post-partum comeback. Decided Edina was too far away with the baby. Now I wish I had taken it!!
Only 26.2 miles more to go.
I had several purposes when I did this workout. 1. Coming off a long stretch of marathon training, it had been a long time since I had done any short intervals, and I wanted to see where I was, pacewise, plus I wanted to see how much I could, over the course of 12 of them with relatively short recovery, bring down the pace, with the last one at pretty much all-out effort. 2. Taper/partyat Boston/recovery added some extra weight that still had not come off, so I was feeling like I needed a good calorie-burn workout. 3. Done with serious marathon training for a moment, I was just kicking up my heels and having fun.
Holly S:
I, honest to God, don't mean any hostility whatsoever. Wannaberunner speaks the world for you and I respect that. But, you see, right or wrong, this is where I difffer from you. "Just wanted to see how much I could do" or "to see how much bring down the pace" or "kicking up my heels and having fun", as far as I'm concerned, don't qualify as "purpose". I used to think all-out sprint at the end of pretty much every run was fun (when I was in junior high school) but I don't do that any more because I know a little better.
Far too many people, just for the sake of "seeing what I can do" or "see if I can do it at all", losing the opportunity to grow and develop. I've usde this analogy before; it's like pulling a newly planted flower out from the soil everyday, or every week or whatever, to make sure it's "rooting". I'll apologize beforehand if I offend you by saying it this way but that, to me, is crap-shooting--just to see if I can run fast TODAY.
Again, the reason why I promote Lydiard training is because it takes a guess work out of it. You know you're slow today; but you WILL be faster 20 weeks from today. Why? Because we put the training blocks in such way that you work one development to another in a balanced way so as to eliminate injury possibility as well. You won't try to see how fast you can run until you strengthen your legs and work on some flexibility and also let that anaerobic pathway to go through. I know I probably won't be able to do 12X400 today because I haven't done anything to work on running 400s and I probably won't be going much faster than 8-minute pace at this point either. But I know, by the time I actually race, I'll be somewhere around 20-minutes 5k shape.
PS: Gordon Pirie was a great runner--no question about that. But his training was crap-shooting. He trained hard--damn hard. But he never knew why he was doing them and when he would peak. I don't know for sure but it would be interesting to see where he set the world record--in a championship race or some local competition with 30 people watching? He ran well when he ran well. But he didn't have any control over WHEN he would run well. So in that scheme of things, his training, be it 20X400 in 60 seconds or 6X1200 in 3:12 or whatever else he might have done; they are damn tough workout--a good workout too. But what's the purpose?
There's this guy who argued with me a couple of years ago and he gave us an example of his recent workout like 20X200 as hard as he could and he said it felt good. So I asked him; "Is there an important race coming up in a month or so?" He said no--there's no race scheduled in the next few months. So why do such a demanding workout in such high effort? To feel good? That ain't "purpose".
Again, the reason why I promote Lydiard training is because it takes a guess work out of it.
Hi Nobby,
how fast to run a marathon? Let's say they are a beginner,
and they have trained for their first one, what in the training
clues them into what their marathon race pace feels like and should be?
What are the indicators?
Thanks.
--Jimmy
Okay, I see your point. If I want to get faster I need to quit playing around and get a plan. Let’s get more specific. My base is good right now. Two weeks ago I ran a trail 50K (not a target race but for fun) and consider that I am fully recovered from that at this point. So now I’m 13 weeks out from my target marathon for the year. with a good base, ready to start fine-tuning. Is there a specific plan you would recommend for me to get faster at all distances, and still target that marathon?
Hi Nobby, How does one know at the end of the training how fast to run a marathon? Let's say they are a beginner, and they have trained for their first one, what in the training clues them into what their marathon race pace feels like and should be? What are the indicators? Thanks. --Jimmy
Jim:
Hey, sorry; I owe you a response in regards to those times as marathon predictor. Well, surely I probably should have read your post a little more closely but the thing is--while it is so true that there are certain time you should be able to run in order to run a certain time for the marathon. I mean, surely, if you can barely break 2-hours for half, then it's not feasible to run 4-hour marathon. But that's no-brainer. I didn't like, years ago, when Salazar said to his runners that unless they break 28 minutes (for men, obviously), he wouldn't let them try a marathon. I think some people are better suited for marathon. Deek never broke 28, neither did Rodgers (though I think he could easily have if he concentrated on track). Doubt Khanouchi ever did nor Beardsley. The thing is; one you go through training for a marathon, most likely, their track times will come down. So restricting them from running a marathon and training for a marathon would limit their potential.
On the other side of the coin, if you say--and I know this wasn't your intention--you can run a 4-hour marathon if you can run 5k in 28 minutes; that's not quite accurate either becasue I think it is very much feasible for someone to run 28-minute 5k on very low weekly mileage and that would be misleading. Someone somewhere said that the best predictor to run, say, 5k is to run 5k.
I guess in a way predicting a marathon time is a bit tricky one. You get some long runs, long tempo type of runs, and some races, 5k, half marathon, whatever... And then there's other workouts to get the feel of the individual--types, temperament, likes and dislikes, etc. The thing is; it's not that you run some races like 5k or 10k and calculate the time of the marathon from those. It's that you arrive those times for those distances while working for the marathon. Let's say you pick 4-hours for the marathon target. If you've done whatever is necessary to run the marathon in 4-hours, then whatever the times for other distances for you would come along naturally.
I know this doesn't really answer your question but hope this kinda gives you an idea.
Holly:
First of all, you do realize that you can't really expect to PR in every ditance from 5k to marathon. That said, depending on where you had been, it could happen depending on how you structure your training. For example, Frank Shorter PRed and set the American record 10000m only 5 days before his marathon victory at Munich. That's pretty much because he was a track runner who ran a lot. In other words, he was conditioned enough to go the distance and he was fast in shorter distances. But in essense, 10k is probably closer to marathon than 5k (well, after i said it, I noticed that it's pretty obvious...! ;o)). What I mean is; training for 10k and marathon at their level--meaning, they actually RACE the marathon--are very similar and probably 1500m and 5k are closer today.
Now I don't know enough about you and I only "peeked" you log just a bit. But from what you're saying, you're well-conditioned as far as endurance is concerned and you are actually now that slow either--having run 22-something for 5k. Being able to do 12X400 with "only" a minute recovery shows your strength. And you have 13 weeks till your target race. Well, a quick and simple suggestion, based on Lydiard program, would be to start hill training right away--you have done all the distance work already. So about twice a week, you head for the hill and do some hill exercise to strength your legs. We don't recommend doing any race during this period. If you want to do it this way, you are actually 1 week short. I'd actually do 4 weeks of hills instead of making it shorter (down to 3) and do 4 weeks of what we call "Anaerobic Training Phase" for 4 weeks--I'd cut THAT down to 3. This is because, during this period, you'd be doing twice a week interval type workout and that could be a lot. I'd rather you be on the light side than too heavy. So that's 4 weeks of hill and 3 weeks of anaerobic phase; now you have 6 weeks to go. These last 6 weeks, you'd be doing a tempo run of as long as 100+ minutes (if you have a half marathon or 25k race, that would/could substitute); gradually cut back these tempo runs until about 2 weeks before the marathon and then cut back the workout quite a bit. All these 6 weeks, you might be doing a workout like 100/100--if you're near track, it might work best to go and run around the track, sprinting the straight (100) and "float" the curve. This, we're talking, not at 8 minute pace; not 7 minute pace... But close to your all-out sprint effort. The last few weeks you'd be doing about 4~5 laps of 50/50--50m sprint with 50m float. This is such a short workout but very demanding. Now, THIS is a kind of workout I was talking about--if you hadn't done anything like that and say that you're born slow, to me, is nonesense. You won't know your true potential (genetic talent, if you want to call it) until you do such a systematic training program for at least 3~5 years. The program should include long runs, long fast runs, intervals, very short intervals such as 50/50, sprint drills, hill strength exercises.... If you never done long runs and tell people that you don't have talent to go far is nonesense. Same thing. If you never sprint, run fast and train to run fast; then how can you say that you're SLOW?
If you're interested in more details, you can always send me a personal e-mail. Actually, I prefer you send me to my personal e-mail, not through RA--this is simply because I don't know how to attach any document through RA address! ;o)
Jim: Hey, sorry; I owe you a response in regards to those times as marathon predictor. Well, surely I probably should have read your post a little more closely but the thing is--while it is so true that there are certain time you should be able to run in order to run a certain time for the marathon. I mean, surely, if you can barely break 2-hours for half, then it's not feasible to run 4-hour marathon. But that's no-brainer. I didn't like, years ago, when Salazar said to his runners that unless they break 28 minutes (for men, obviously), he wouldn't let them try a marathon. I think some people are better suited for marathon. Deek never broke 28, neither did Rodgers (though I think he could easily have if he concentrated on track). Doubt Khanouchi ever did nor Beardsley. The thing is; one you go through training for a marathon, most likely, their track times will come down. So restricting them from running a marathon and training for a marathon would limit their potential. On the other side of the coin, if you say--and I know this wasn't your intention--you can run a 4-hour marathon if you can run 5k in 28 minutes; that's not quite accurate either becasue I think it is very much feasible for someone to run 28-minute 5k on very low weekly mileage and that would be misleading. Someone somewhere said that the best predictor to run, say, 5k is to run 5k. I guess in a way predicting a marathon time is a bit tricky one. You get some long runs, long tempo type of runs, and some races, 5k, half marathon, whatever... And then there's other workouts to get the feel of the individual--types, temperament, likes and dislikes, etc. The thing is; it's not that you run some races like 5k or 10k and calculate the time of the marathon from those. It's that you arrive those times for those distances while working for the marathon. Let's say you pick 4-hours for the marathon target. If you've done whatever is necessary to run the marathon in 4-hours, then whatever the times for other distances for you would come along naturally. I know this doesn't really answer your question but hope this kinda gives you an idea.
Thanks, Nobby. I think each has to work out their own indicators.
Of course, there are variables on race day that can greatly affect pace,
but generally, if a runner pays attention to what kind of paces they are
running during certain training runs and races, over time, you can see correlations.
In Noake's Lore Of Running, there is a section on Bruce Fordyce (9 time winner
of the Commrades). He mentions that Fordyce used an 8k speed test. When he
could run it in 25:00, he knew he was ready to run the Comrades. That worked for him, but
perhaps not for someone else. The point being he found a way to measure his own
readiness.
Personally, if I'm not hitting 9:00ish pace during a certain training run (MAF test), then
I have no chance of breaking 3:30. I also use a heart rate monitor and run marathon
tempo runs based on what my heart rate does in a marathon. Those two runs,
along with recent race times and some McMillan Calculator or Team Oregon Pace Wizard
outputs, I've been able to zero in on paces that have been on the money. Though,
I find the MAF test to be key for me in measuring aerobic progress and warding off over-training.
The one time I ignored the test, I paid dearly. This is the same test Mark Allen used to keep
track of his aerobic system (also mentioned in The Lore Of Running, posted here). I figured out
a system for myself. I try to encourage others to do the same. Self-knowledge is key. Or at least
have a coach that is gathering the knowledge for you and is making the correlations, and can help
you plan a race. As an example, if Bruce Fordyce was to ignore is main indicator of his fitness,
and it was pacing at 27:00, and went out and ran the race as hard as he would when it was at
25:00, then he would probably experience a crash of some kind. Also, if he was training with
the same load as usual, or maybe harder, and that 8K trial is not improving, then he might be approaching
a state of overtraining, or something is wrong in his body or training, and adjustments need to
be made. Self-knowledge.
Thanks, Nobby. Your posts are fine pearls. May they never be cast before the swine.
Thanks, Nobby. I think each has to work out their own indicators. Of course, there are variables on race day that can greatly affect pace, but generally, if a runner pays attention to what kind of paces they are running during certain training runs and races, over time, you can see correlations. In Noake's Lore Of Running, there is a section on Bruce Fordyce (9 time winner of the Commrades). He mentions that Fordyce used an 8k speed test. When he could run it in 25:00, he knew he was ready to run the Comrades. That worked for him, but perhaps not for someone else. The point being he found a way to measure his own readiness. Personally, if I'm not hitting 9:00ish pace during a certain training run (MAF test), then I have no chance of breaking 3:30. I also use a heart rate monitor and run marathon tempo runs based on what my heart rate does in a marathon. Those two runs, along with recent race times and some McMillan Calculator or Team Oregon Pace Wizard outputs, I've been able to zero in on paces that have been on the money. Though, I find the MAF test to be key for me in measuring aerobic progress and warding off over-training. The one time I ignored the test, I paid dearly. This is the same test Mark Allen used to keep track of his aerobic system (also mentioned in The Lore Of Running, posted here). I figured out a system for myself. I try to encourage others to do the same. Self-knowledge is key. Or at least have a coach that is gathering the knowledge for you and is making the correlations, and can help you plan a race. As an example, if Bruce Fordyce was to ignore is main indicator of his fitness, and it was pacing at 27:00, and went out and ran the race as hard as he would when it was at 25:00, then he would probably experience a crash of some kind. Also, if he was training with the same load as usual, or maybe harder, and that 8K trial is not improving, then he might be approaching a state of overtraining, or something is wrong in his body or training, and adjustments need to be made. Self-knowledge. Thanks, Nobby. Your posts are fine pearls. May they never be cast before the swine. --Jimmy
Thanks, Jim. I think the problem is that there are way too many "formula" out there and it probably hurt more people than not. For a long race like Comrade, I personally feel 8k seems rather short; but chances are that he wouldn't run it fast. The key there really is how easily he could do it in 25-minutes. You see, the problem is, by reading that, some people might even try and push hard to run 8k in 25-minutes. See, that's the difference. There's this page on Lydiard Certificate Presentation Part II about fine tuning section. Suppose you are supposed to run 3000m in 10 minutes according to the schedule. Which workout do you think is better as a final stage of training: (1) you feel a bit sluggish so you try to keep it to the effort and finish the run in 10:45 by running throughout the 3k in the same effort, no kicking in the end... You see, this indicates that you need a bit more sharpening so, in the following days, do some sharpening like 50/50... So in sessense, this particular workout showed what you need to do to finish up. (2) you realize you are close but about 10 seconds slower so you push in the last 800m, trying to make it in 10 minutes, and kick it in in the last 200m to get 10-minutes. Naturally, (2) is no good regardless of meeting the prescribed time.
One of the most important lessons I've learnt in the final stage of preparation, I've shared this here a couple of times, is when Lorraine Moller was running Grandma's marathon (which is tomorrow by the way). She was supposed to do 2 X 1 mile. She did the first one in 4:50 and felt like she was jogging. She stepped off the track. Her coach rushed to her, thinking something went wrong. She said; "I felt so good, I didn't want to leave this feeling on the training track..." I'd say 90% of runners try to get a good time to gain confidence instead and leave all the good running behind them.
Here's another anecdote; I was used to doing 1km the day before the race. Just a few years ago, it really didn't workout that much and I in fact felt a bit tired. I noticed, when I was more competitive, I used to do 1km somewhere around 2:45~2:55 range. Now it takes me 3:20!! :-( But anyways, I switched to doing this mini-tempo run, instead of 1km, somewhere around 2:30~3:00. Spot on! Actually I found about 2:45 works best for me. That's actually got a lot to do with "feeling" than any formula.