Forums >Racing>Anyone else disappointed with Hansons Method?
not bad for mile 25
I think it's hard to draw any general conclusions about a training approach or method from the result of one runner applying that method and failing. I have had generally sound build-ups to a marathon result in a crappy marathon. It sounds like this marathon fell within the range of your general capabilities. Hansons and Pfitz are tried and true plans. They both work. And by "work" I mean that if you choose the appropriate level, and execute according to principles, and adapt those principles appropriately to your own life and physical and mental strengths and capacities, and pace and fuel appropriately, and have good weather, and the marathon gods smile on you, then you might have a good day on race day.
I think it's hard to draw any general conclusions about a training approach or method from the result of one runner applying that method and failing. I have had generally sound build-ups to a marathon result in a crappy marathon. It sounds like this marathon fell within the range of your general capabilities.
Hansons and Pfitz are tried and true plans. They both work. And by "work" I mean that if you choose the appropriate level, and execute according to principles, and adapt those principles appropriately to your own life and physical and mental strengths and capacities, and pace and fuel appropriately, and have good weather, and the marathon gods smile on you, then you might have a good day on race day.
You said so much more eloquently what I was trying to say.
I think the plans are different and some seem to fit people's personality better. I am sure they also fit the person's actual needs better or worse too, but usually we pick one that fits the way we think, not the optimal way our body needs to train.
Long dead ... But my stench lingers !
I'm not sure how relevant this is to the issue being discussed, but many runners talk about a training plan, even a marathon training plan, as if the 16-18 weeks of the plan was all that's under consideration. All I know about Hanson's method is hearsay, but I was quite happy with most of my marathon results topping out at 16 miles for a long run while consistently putting in 50+ mpw year round, not just in the few months leading up to the marathon. While I didn't deliberately run at MP in training, I did race frequently at a variety of distances and included a fair amount of quality speed work, so my training was probably closer to Hanson's than to the other programs being mentioned. If I had a race that didn't meet expectations it was due to race day execution, not my training.
Yes, if someone asks me what my training plan is, I say, run lots, mostly easy, sometimes fast. If they press for details, I say, run 2000 miles for two consecutive years leading up to the marathon.
CMJHawk86 - so, basically during your 3.5 months of training you ran two 16 milers and one 14 miler. You missed quite a few tempo runs and you are unhappy about 3:24? And you blame the plan, though you didn't follow even the Beginners version of it - which has 3 16-milers and one 15 miler. To me it looks like your overestimated your endurance. In any case, you followed incomplete Hansons Beginners plan, hit 3:24 time - you should be proud of yourself. Seriously... Imo, to get out of plateau runners of our age run more, not less... Or they just run for fun without blaming some plans (which they barely follow) .
paces PRs - 5K - 5:48 / 10K - 6:05 / HM - 6:14 / FM - 6:26 per mile
Sorry but I don't see how your divining those conclusions out of my workout log. I did miss one 16 miler, yes, because I had to deal with an achilles issue but I don't recall missing any tempo runs or interval workouts. As I said earlier I followed the plan as closely as I reasonably could. I may have shuffled some workouts around, and that may not jump out from the log, but that was just me doing what I had to do to get them all in.
The simple truth is followed the plan for 18 weeks and didn't run as well as I had in my previous marathon where I only trained for 11 weeks. And I'm trying to understand why that is so I can make the appropriate adjustments before I start locking in for my next marathon.
That is all.
Options,Account, Forums
I fell off from 6:40s & 6:50s through the first 20, to 7:10s over the last 6, at my last goal marathon, and those last 6 were gentle mildly downhill, so I was hoping to pick it up, not fall off. It's been suggested to me that I went too fast on the first 20, and would have been better off aiming at negative splits - that is, going out a bit more slowly.
This has nothing to do with your race, of course, but it does sound somewhat like DB's analysis of your pace fall-off; that is, maybe I made the same mistake.
(I didn't follow a plan, but I was trying to do a fair amount of MP running, due to my impression of Hanson's emphasis.)
It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.
Has anyone used Greg McMillan's plans or mcmillan pro for marathon training. I just ran a 2:52 marathon 3 weeks ago on 55-65 mpw. I would have ramped up more but I suffered an injury in the winter due to pulling a muscle on the ice, so was only 100% for a bout 2 months prior. I felt stong at the end and felt I could have given more. I want to run under 2:40 this in october on a faster course running on 75-85 peak mpw. I just checked out Pfitz's Advanced Marathoning from the library, and it does not seem to have you run much on a faster than marathon pace. It just seems to me that there needs to be more lactate threshold runs and running at a pace faster than marathon pace to make marathon pace feel really easy. Just looking for the best plan for the amount of miles that I will be running. Any suggestions?
Goal: sub 2:40 marathon
flashlight and sidewalk
**Ask me about streaking**
Any suggestions?
Runners run
Sorry but I don't see how your divining those conclusions out of my workout log. I did miss one 16 miler, yes, because I had to deal with an achilles issue but I don't recall missing any tempo runs or interval workouts. As I said earlier I followed the plan as closely as I reasonably could. I may have shuffled some workouts around, and that may not jump out from the log, but that was just me doing what I had to do to get them all in. The simple truth is followed the plan for 18 weeks and didn't run as well as I had in my previous marathon where I only trained for 11 weeks. And I'm trying to understand why that is so I can make the appropriate adjustments before I start locking in for my next marathon. That is all.
Going from a 7:15 pace to a 10-11 pace, does not sound like a lack of strength or enduranace ~ That is called hitting the wall .. Glycogen depletion to the point your body switches over to using only fat. So basically it sounds more like a fueling issue. If were on pace until 2 miles to go, you should consider you pre-race (Last 3 days) of eating and in race fueling.
There may have been something physically wrong. Two days after the race I came down with a really nasty virus that knocked me out for nearly three weeks. So I do wonder if the dehydration was related to onset of an incubating virus that just hadn't shown any outward symptoms yet. In any case if my body was trying to fight that off and run a marathon, maybe something had to give..
I used Hansons for my first marathon this year. I followed the Advanced plan and averaged 55 mpw for 12+ weeks. My peak week was 71 miles, but that was a few miles over the standard plan. Many people look at the plan and think it is a 50 mpw plan, but they have 3 to 6 miles of warm up and cool down on 2 runs each week that don't show in the plan miles so that's another 6 to 12 miles a week above the numbers in the plan. I was using 3:50 as my fairly aggressive goal time, and ran a 3:48:09 on a decently tough course. I thought it was a pretty good plan and felt that it prepared me pretty well.
I used Hansons for my first marathon this year. I followed the Advanced plan and averaged 55 mpw for 12+ weeks. My peak week was 71 miles, but that was a few miles over the standard plan. Many people look at the plan and think it is a 50 mpw plan, but they have 3 to 6 miles of warm up and cool down on 2 runs each week that don't show in the plan miles so that's another 6 to 12 miles a week above the numbers in the plan.
I was using 3:50 as my fairly aggressive goal time, and ran a 3:48:09 on a decently tough course. I thought it was a pretty good plan and felt that it prepared me pretty well.
Proboscis Colossus
"God guides us on our journey, but careful with those feet." - David Lee Roth, of all people
Over the winter I used the purchased 16 week 40 - 60 week plan (it had three 18 milers) and got a PR at the Lake Wobegon Trail Marathon. I'm currently using the purchased 20 week 60 - 80 week plan which has six 20 mile runs and six 18 mile runs. Their only caveat on the long run is that it not be more than 30% of one's total weekly mileage. So that would mean that one should be running 60 miles per week for an 18 mile run to be appropriate and 67 miles per week for a 20 miler to be appropriate.