McMillan's "new" paces (Read 597 times)

     

    Well...

     

    a.) How else would you do it?

     

    and

     

    b.) I'm not so sure that's true anyway. It would be pretty rare for me to crack 7:15 on an easy run, even at the tail end of an easy run, unless I'm in a recovery/base period (which is like almost never) and not doing any workouts.

     

    Okay I guess I shouldn't really comment on other people's workouts, I assumed that if you had a 7:40 paced run, that would include a lot of running ranges between 8min and 7:20, which now I see is exactly what you said in the comment above. Huh.

     

    My easy pace range according to McMillan is 6:15 to 7:09 for my PR marathon, and when I was in shape to run that, I think that most easy runs started around 7:30 pace and ended up around 6:30 pace, so yeah maybe they are a little on the fast side.


    Feeling the growl again

      Put in my PRs to compare to what I did then, and current fitness to compare to what I do now.  Most of it is more or less reasonable, except that I would never use the faster part of the easy run spectrum.  But not that even at my easy run pace...6:XX/mi....there is nearly a full minute window there.  IMHO it is a bit too quick.  I got 6:22-7:16.  6:22 is getting into the range I only use in a progression run on the way to something else...I wouldn't do that on an easy day.  OTOH 7:16 is rare for me to run except if I'm pretty beat up or just warming up.

       

      I liked the old numbers better...I'm afraid these may have a newb pushing too hard because they are still "in range".  And they tend to try to run too hard already.

      "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

       

        Hell, I guess I'll chime in .... Mac's easy pace seems a good bit too fast for me.  6:52 - 7:50.  On an easy day, I usually run about 8:30 and might bring it down to 8 flat, maybe.  6:52?  Never (at least on anything I consider easy).

         

        MTA;  His 'recovery pace' for me is 7:57-8:39.  Ha, I guess I do either a workout, a race, or a recovery run because that is my normal everyday pace range.


        A Saucy Wench

           

           

          I liked the old numbers better...I'm afraid these may have a newb pushing too hard because they are still "in range".  And they tend to try to run too hard already.

           

          This.  This this this.

           

          Because most of the experienced runners dont really follow little pace charts as closely.

           

          Which makes me wonder if part of the change came from the influx of newbie runners saying "but I cant run that slowly!!!!"

           

          I went back and looked at the 4 month period where I was in shape to hit that particular curve no matter what the distance was on the curve and my easy runs only averaged in the new easy range maybe once every two weeks.  Maybe once a week max towards peak fitness.  And I never cracked the tempo range on my tempo runs.  I was struggling to hit the old tempo range.

           

          FWIW I think the ranges it is giving me based on my most recent 10K are about perfect for where I am right now.  Only problem is I in no way was in 10K shape and at no point during the race was I putting out "10K effort", well except maybe the last 0.2

          I have become Death, the destroyer of electronic gadgets

           

          "When I got too tired to run anymore I just pretended I wasnt tired and kept running anyway" - dd, age 7

          MJ5


          Chief Unicorn Officer

            I personally think too many people overthink the whole thing.  "Easy" is a feeling.  Why do you need a number to tell you what "easy" is?  If the number prescribed for you doesn't feel "easy" then doesn't that defeat the purpose of training?

             

            I use McMillan for suggested interval targets ONLY (up to 1000m intervals).  That seems to work for me.  My easy days are easy and I don't care too much what the number pace is.  Some days it's 8:30.  Some days it's 9:23.  Oh well.  No single number or range of numbers is necessarily "easy" on a given day.

             

            Don't bog yourself down in the numbers too much.

            Mile 5:49 - 5K 19:58 - 10K 43:06 - HM 1:36:54


            Bacon Party!

              Put in my marathon PR from October, 3:14 ... I was training at Recovery Jog pace. On my "good" days!

              Of course, I'm a Maffetone runner trying to build a base and remain injury-free. Roll eyes

              Liz

              pace sera, sera

                I run easy effort not pace, now that I'm used to it...  (Used Daniels VDOT to get used to it... I like his paces)

                 

                Wow. I just put in some current times.

                No way. No way.

                Yeah, I could but it wouldn't feel easy.  Easy runs at  faster than marathon pace, blah. Not for me. I'd be falling apart, 
                I'll stick with Daniels.

                 

                I don't get where people think that slower runners should necessarily be running their easy runs so close to race pace.  Frankly, my PRs now are are 10K - 45 minutes, half, 1:40 BUT I could  not break an hour or 2:15 for a long time when I ran all my easy runs fast relative to race pace.  Did not work for me. 
                To me, easy pace is significantly slower than marathon pace.  It worked for me and I am a believer. 
                I think people think slower people aren't actually racing. But sometimes we are... and running a race pace day in and day out is going to beat up your body no matter what your race pace is.... it's still a high effort.

                PR's (certified courses)

                5K-; 21:45 ; 10K- 45:17; Half: 1:41 --- full : 3:40   (2009)

                Distance - 54 mi, 10 hours (2012)

                 

                Current Weight: 185 lb

                Goal Weight: 130 lb

                meaghansketch


                  Thanks for this thread.  Every time someone posts about not hitting the McMillan ranges for their easy runs I feel like I'm beating a dead horse, having to say in every thread 'they're much faster than they used to be!'.

                   

                  For me, the concept of an 'easy' run being in the same ballpark as my best HM pace is laughable.  I am on the slower side, and I guess the logic behind the calculator change is that slower runners are often closer to being beginners, and aren't putting in 100% effort running an HM just because they don't have the endurance to race an HM.

                   

                  For myself, I'm back to Jack Daniels for easy paces, just because I feel like that is more in the ballpark of what is realistic/comfortable for me.  I know that 'easy' is a feeling, not a pace, but sometimes, especially during a time of increasing fitness, my easy runs don't keep up with my races and having a target is helpful to make sure I don't turn all my easy runs into recovery runs.

                   

                  (Based on a 1:16 15K, 8:12 pace)

                  McMillan Easy pace: 8:45-9:44

                  Jack Daniels Easy Pace: 10:06

                  Up next: Front Runners New York LGBT Pride 5-mile  06/28 |  NYRR Team Championships: Women (5M) 08/02

                  Goal race: NYCRUNS Haunted Island 10K 10/25

                    I don't get where people think that slower runners should necessarily be running their easy runs so close to race pace.  

                     

                    Because at about the four or five hour mark, race pace is not significantly different from an everyday training pace, no matter the speed of the runner.

                       

                      Because at about the four or five hour mark, race pace is not significantly different from an everyday training pace, no matter the speed of the runner.

                       

                      Not my personal experience.  Slowing down is the only way I got from over 5 hours to qualifying for Boston.  I had been running everything closer to race pace for many, many years before running into Daniels and taking his advice and it helped me a lot.  I will probably stick with that when I worry about going fast again (been too lazy to care and am fat and can only race 4 hours right now) and just be glad that I wasn't pushed to run race pace for easy runs a few years ago.  Smile

                      Race pace and easy pace is very different for me.  I could see it being different if you slow down significantly as the distance increases - your endurance is too low to race, but I know Daniels deals with that by saying fastest VDOT.  Now, I'm not going to argue with you - I know you're a much better runner than I am -- but I did improve a lot with an opposite philosophy and have BEEN a 5+ hour marathoner in the past myself.  I am not sure the blanket assumptions about slower runners is necessarily true.

                      PR's (certified courses)

                      5K-; 21:45 ; 10K- 45:17; Half: 1:41 --- full : 3:40   (2009)

                      Distance - 54 mi, 10 hours (2012)

                       

                      Current Weight: 185 lb

                      Goal Weight: 130 lb

                        It's not a "blanket assumption" about slower runners. It's an observation about the point at which the duration of the race causes most runners to run at paces that would be "easy" in training.

                         

                        As for your case: I don't know much about your history, but I do know that you run more miles than most -- high mileage runners will need to run slower because of the higher training load. That's what I would say but what the hell do I know.


                        A Saucy Wench

                           

                          Because at about the four or five hour mark, race pace is not significantly different from an everyday training pace, no matter the speed of the runner.

                           

                          Not my experience either.  It is only valid if you assume undertrained as well, but if you are fairly well trained than there is approximately the same % of slowdown from race pace to  training pace .  And the way you get adequate training is to slow the fuck down so you can do it.  I do not agree with that statement at all.

                          I have become Death, the destroyer of electronic gadgets

                           

                          "When I got too tired to run anymore I just pretended I wasnt tired and kept running anyway" - dd, age 7

                            C'mon now. A well-trained 5-hour marathoner is an oxymoron if I ever heard one.

                             

                            (Dives for cover).

                            Runners run.


                            Muddling through

                              C'mon now. A well-trained 5-hour marathoner is an oxymoron if I ever heard one.

                               

                              (Dives for cover).

                              Even at 66 if I were well-trained I should be able to run sub-5:00.

                               

                              (I'll join you under cover.)

                              2014 Goals: Run first trail ultra, first 100K, and see what I can do in a 24-Hour race


                              Feeling the growl again

                                If I'm running for 4+ hours I'm at my easy run pace, no matter the situation.

                                 

                                I will refrain from extending the applicability too far as a 7:00 easy pace and a 9-12min easy pace = a world of difference in many factors.

                                "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