Run less to run faster...? New 5k PR and new 5k goal (Read 1087 times)

Or are these improved time perhaps due to the training I did months ago with a rest period allowing my body to recover?

Even elite 5K runners cut volume by as much as half during racing season.  I bet if you kept up the lower volume you'd find the trend reverse in the not-so-distant future.

Was your previous PR run in the middle of the higher volume, or at a previous time before you put all the work in?

If lower volume really meant faster times overall, couch potatoes would rule the roads  

Has anyone every had this experience?

I used to log many miles a week (~30-35 - which really isn't much for a lot fo you here) and did many workouts, easy runs and long runs and was running 6 days a week. I had been running decent times until an ankle injury about a month ago set me back and forced me to reduce my miles and number of workouts. (most f my runs are not short easy runs)

My goal race came Feb 7th (5k) where I PR'd in 21:42, shaving 17 seconds off my previous PR.

Then today, one month later, I decided to run another 5k race, just to see how many ankle would hold up and took 36 seconds off of that PR with a time of 21:06 - and it felt easy due to the babying of my ankle.

So this saturday I'm running another 5k, and I'm shooting for the moon on this one, aiming to take another 15 ish seconds off that PB.

(By the way, the ankle feels awesome!)

 

My questions to you:

Is this a good idea?

Is my running less really contributing to my improved times?

Or are these improved time perhaps due to the training I did months ago with a rest period allowing my body to recover?

What are your trainging plans like and are there any suggestions to help me hit my goal

 

And yes, after this goal race I am going to settle down on racing so much

*Sigh...*

Kimmie:

All I can say is; why don't you go back and read some of Lydiard pieces (http://www.lydiardfoundation.org/pdfs/al_training_eng.pdf).  It's like a never-ending battle...  A typical mistake many of high school runners/coaches make, or even some "researchers" make...

A farmer was digging out the ground and, as he sat down to take a break, a rabbit rushed out from the forest and ran straight into a tree trunk near-by and knock himself out.  So the farmer just picked it up and brought it home and had a rabbit stew for dinner.  A-ha!  All we have to do is to sit around and wait for rabbits to come out from the forest and knock themselves out on that tree trunk.  "The key to success is not in working hard on the farm land; the key is that tree trunk!"

Training for a good performance is like long jump.  Some people focus way too much into the angle of take-off; form in the air, etc...  The truth is; it's pretty much how fast you can run in a run-way.  Of course, that does NOT mean you can completely ignore the take-off angle, air-borne form, etc...THAT is the final sharpening and tapering.  But without the run-way sprint; which in fact is the foundation; you just can't go very far.

Lydiard's runners ran 100 miles a week 24 weeks before the competition.  10 weeks before competitions, they were doing probably 50 miles a week.  The week leading up to the competition, they may do 30.  A-ha!  Why even struggle to do 100 miles a week when you can actually in fact peak at 30 miles a week!?  You go right ahead and run 30 miles a week (or 1/3 of what you normally do) year around and expect to PR every time you race. 

Actually, I would very much like to see you continue your "run less to run faster" regime and see how many PR you are going to set and what happens toward the end of the "season".  The bigger the base (aerobic base, that is), the longer you can continue to race hard.  Training is like putting money in the bank.  The more you put in, the more you can use and the more often you can shop.  If not enough money in the bank, you'll dry out after a few shoppings.

Kimmie:

Yeajh, I thought you like to run so I was a bit surprised.  But just to think; if someone like Richard read what your original post, he would jump and promote "Run Less to Run Fast" nonesense.  But then if I now read what your question correctly, here's an example.  When my wife was training for her first marathon, I put  together a training plan and I paced her for her long runs quite often.  She was shooting for a sub-4 marathon and her usual training pace was somewhere around 10-minute mile pace (though she never cared too much about what pace she was running, I was checking her pace once in a while.  We always trained time-based and only ONCE did we measured the distance that we ran).  She did her last long run of 3-hours 4 weeks before her marathon--I actually wanted 3 weeks before but she didn't feel comfortable so we went with her instinct.  At any rate, we used to go to this health club to run (change of venue) and, without her knowing, I measured the first mile just to see how she's doing.  Once she started her "taper", her pace started to pick up without her trying to do so.  The week before her marathon, we went for an easy hour's run and she ran the first mile in somewhere around 9 minutes.  I just told her to take easy and she snapped and said, "What?  Do you want me to walk?"  She had NO idea her pace was picking up so dramatically.  Incidentally, I figured she could run the opening mile in about 8:40 or so.  We ran together but I missed the first mile marker.  It turned out she ran her first TWO miles in something like 16:35!  She speeded up just by tapering.  She ran her first marathon in 3:54.

By the way, she usually trains with some marathon training group in town and, the first thing she would do when she received a training plan is to give it to me and what I would do is to cut it back by, say, about 30%.  I really believe most beginners train way too hard and, by the time they toe the starting line, they are way too tired.  Her last marathon was Twin Cties Marathon when it was really hot.  A week before TCM, she went out and ran the final workout with the group.  I think it called for a 12-mile run.  I told her to cap it at 8; if anything, less than that even.  I think she ran about 1:15 easily.  It was pretty hot and she said she saw a lot of people walking the final 2 miles.  I tell ya, if you have to walk the final 2 miles of a 12-mile run a week before the marathon, how would you expect to run 25 miles?  Well, they don't because they take walk breaks...

Nobby, I have a question for you since you seem to really know your stuff! I forgot to add this earlier but if what is happening to me is what you discuss in your post in reference to Lydiard's training program, how long can I enjoy racing good times in this "down" phase before I should go back into a hard training phase, take time away from the races and work toward peaking again?

I wouldn't be able to tell ya.  You'll have to let me know.  Like I said, the bigger the base, the more fast running you can do and the longer you can maintain top performance.  If the base is short, you may hit the wall after 2 or 3 races; if the base is solid, you may be able to maintain good form for 6 or 7 or 8 races--but everybody is different and you'll have to figure out, in the first year or two of your "racing" cycle how many races you'll need to peak.  I've read an article about the former world record holder in 100m, that Jamaican, Powell.  I think that was the time when he yet once more time screwed up in a big championship meet (Osaka World Champinships).  His coach said something like (can't remember the eact number); "He usually comes to the peak race after 5 races but..."  YOU have to figure out yourself.  Some might peak quickly; others may take quite a few races to peak.  This is another reason why changing the training program all the time is not a good idea--you'll never know what worked.  This girl I was coaching to be an 800m runner; her speed came back VERY quickly when she did downhill striding so I actually had to limit how much downhill striding she'd.  We did classic Lydiard hill circuit but, instead of doing downhill striding, we cut it back by 1/3.  I mean, what's the point of sharpening 14 weeks before the important races?  You see, all those things would have to be analyzed and incorporated into your program so you know exactly when you peak.  Otherwise, any training is nothing but a crap-shooting. 

So I take it that you were asking whether you should ease up in order to actually race well; this is what Arthur Lydiard used to say ever since 1950s: "You cannot train hard and race well AT THE SAME TIME."  When you don't have races, you work hard and build, build, build (put money in the bank).  But once races starts, you need to knock off your training so you can race.  So many people don't understand; once you start to race, you should look for races just about every other week, if there's no race around, you should do some time trial in real race environment so you can maintain race fitness.  Many people misunderstand Lydiard method by thinkiing, in his schedule, THE RACE means the end of it.  They think you train 6 months just for ONE race.  It is not.  That's the first race and you really should take advantage of good racing fitness and continue to race and see.  A couple of years ago, this young girl came to me and told me she was training for Bolder Boulder.  I think she ran two 5k races and maybe one 10k...  We were shooting for Bolder Boulder which was in May.  She actually PRed by almost 2 minutes.  I told her that she's doing great and she should continue to race.  At one stretch, because there was no race around, I asked this guy (she lived in Alburqurque) to arrange a time trial with a bunch of high school boys.  If there's no race, I told her to try 3k time trial on track so she would keep herself race-fit.  She went down to San Francisco in August and ran a 5k race there and the second, and her last, 10k race down there, she ended up running a minute faster than Bolder Boulder.  Previously, her PR (not her life time PR which she set in college) was 39 something at Bolder Boulder the year before.  She ran 37 something at BB...I think it was something like 37:30; which was just about her college PR.  Now, granted, BB is at high altitude.  I like to text my prediction time WHILE she's racing.  I sent a text message, saying I thought she could break 37 minutes.  She ended up running something like 36:35!  I guess I was quite a bit off (unexpectedly and pleasantly).  When she texted me, I thought it was a typo.  But the point was; she improved that much just by continued to race.  With Lydiard program, there are a lot of time trials in the final stage of the program.  You'd be doing, as a 5000m runner, 1500 or 3000 or 5000m time trial almost twice a week.  Unless you have a very solid aerobic base, there's no way you can handle schedule like that.  Some people had just skipped marathon conditioning part and went straight into track workout only to get disappointed.  No way they could manage to do his track workouts unless you have established good foundation.  Same thing with races; there's NO way you can continue to race week after week without a good base.  Old timers like John Walker or Rod Dixon or Dick Quax used to race twice or 3 times a week once they went to Europe.  If you have a good base, you can continue to PR for quite some time.  Without it, down goes condition--you cannot cheat.

So, you ran a bunch of miles at mostly easy effort, spent some downtime recovering, came back into it it fewer miles but more intensity, and set PRs.

Sounds like a pretty standard training cycle.  When you are ready, go back to easy miles, but run even more of them, and then when you get close to another race, you increase the intensity again while dropping the miles a bit.  It's all cyclical.

 Right. But how long should I stay in this race phase before I return to a training phase?

a) when race times fall off

b) when nothing significant is in the near future

So,  quest-ee-on for you.   I peeked at your log.  Are you really running everything at 7-8 minute/mile pace?  This is pretty quick for someone running 21ish for 5k times.

N'est-ce pas?