Anyone NOT do C25K? (Read 2371 times)

...Very much like Lydiard suggests.

Yeah, but here's a problem (and this is why I like to come here--it's such an educational thing for me).  We are in fact trying to set up training programs, starting from "real" beginners.  Lydiard started his program from 15 minutes non-stoppers.  When he started working with ex-heart attack patients, their first goal was to get to the point where they could run 15 minutes without stopping.  So we got program starting that point.  So how to get there?  Arthur wasn't quite clear on that and, if anything, Bowerman's was more to do with "real" beginners and he applied "interval" principles.  We in fact, looked at C25K and thought it was a good program to start with.  But later, with Lorraine's suggestion, we rearranged it a little.  The more we looked at it, the more we felt that C25K was actually not a program to "get to the point where you can run 15 minutes without stopping".  It was a program to "get to run 5k no matter what--run, walk, crawl--in 8 weeks".  The truth is; it's more or less Jeff Galloway's marathon program syndrome.  I had discussed this with Jeff before and, yes, he HAD helped 200,000 people (I can't remember the number he gave me exactly) to "get to the finish line of the marathon".  It's a sensitive program; I more or less based my wife's program on his out of his first training program book (which, in turn, was based on the Lydiard principles anyways).  But the thing is; you need to appeal to the audience and, at times, you need to accommodate to the audience's needs and "wants".  So what do they "want"?  They want a finisher's medal but they don't want to do a lot of work.  So by the time they get to the start line, more likely than not, they are not well-conditioned.  So how would they get to the finish line?  Take some walk breaks!  Ding, ding, ding...!  The truth is; in the beginning, I think it was the way Jeff had thought (and said)--you take walking breaks and you may actually get to run quite well.  But at the same time, I feel many people are actually pushing themselves more than they should but they can because they are taking walking breaks. 

So...the thing is; we felt that C25K does not incorperate enough CONTINUOUS running to get to "15-minutes without stopping" effectively.  It would, most probably, get you to "finish a 5k race no matter what" within 8 weeks.  But somehow, we've got to get those people to get to the point where they can run 15-minutes without stopping.

Yes, there are a  lot of people who can skip that part of it.  But there are some people who need some systematic program to get to that point. 

So after all this mumbling, I'd be very curious to see WHY you guys didn't use C25K.  So basically am I seeing that it's too easy?  Like I said, there are people who can't "just went straight to running".  In the case of Arthur Lydiard, he said that, at first, with the original group of 20 people, most peolpe couldn't run a half a lap around the local track (200m).  It's rather hard for someone like that to "just go straight to running" unless "running" means just 200m...

 ... Lydiard started his program from 15 minutes non-stoppers.  When he started working with ex-heart attack patients, their first goal was to get to the point where they could run 15 minutes without stopping.  So we got program starting that point.  So how to get there? ,,,

The more we looked at it, the more we felt that C25K was actually not a program to "get to the point where you can run 15 minutes without stopping".  It was a program to "get to run 5k no matter what--run, walk, crawl--in 8 weeks". ... But the thing is; you need to appeal to the audience and, at times, you need to accommodate to the audience's needs and "wants".  So what do they "want"?  They want a finisher's medal but they don't want to do a lot of work.  So by the time they get to the start line, more likely than not, they are not well-conditioned.  So how would they get to the finish line?  Take some walk breaks!  Ding, ding, ding...!  The truth is; in the beginning, I think it was the way Jeff had thought (and said)--you take walking breaks and you may actually get to run quite well.  But at the same time, I feel many people are actually pushing themselves more than they should but they can because they are taking walking breaks. 

 

So...the thing is; we felt that C25K does not incorperate enough CONTINUOUS running to get to "15-minutes without stopping" effectively.  It would, most probably, get you to "finish a 5k race no matter what" within 8 weeks.  But somehow, we've got to get those people to get to the point where they can run 15-minutes without stopping.

Nobby, Really good points.

I know I've heard people comment about being able to do the time part of the c25k, but they weren't any where near 5k for that time duration.  (That would probably be me if I'd used the program, but it didn't exist in the late 70s. I just took a look at the pgm, and it "finishes" with 30min or 3 miles.) OTOH, the instructions do say to repeat a week if needed. Galloway's run/walk tables are somewhat similar in that the pace during the run part is faster than anything I've ever run and maybe where the run / walk / run gets the reputation of being an excuse for poor pacing. Galloway adapted the run/walk from ultra runners like Ted Osler, as he indicated in his 1984 book.

Just a thought, but why do people get into running, esp. those that use a c25k program? Is everyone really wanting a medal - or just posters in some forums? Not that there's anything wrong with that, but what is the target audience of such a program and what are that audience's goals?

This question may just come from what I see as a major disconnect between the runners I see online and the runners I know in real life. Granted, Alaskan runners tend to be a bit different than those in lower 48 and elsewhere.

I knew many runners before I even knew there were races. In real life for me, it seemed like races are a motivating factor for people that raced in school, but not for those that started running as adults. Some of that is no longer true among people I know now, in that some people that started running as adults may do races, but not sure if it's a motivating factor or just something different to do on a particular day.

Some people run for fitness, weight loss, stress relief, etc. And I *think* some of those could care less about races, unless they get introduced to the concept somewhere along the line - at least based on some people I know. I know that's not the case in these fora. But how representative of running in general are the fora? (I honestly don't know since I don't have any contact with non-electronic runners outside AK.) Among the runners I know who do races, getting to the finish line safely (think AK backcountry races) is more important than racing for many of them.

In my own case when I started more structured running in 2001 then got turned onto trail running, but had limited races available to me because of my summer work, I was more into building time on legs and strength (hills). I also biked to work and xc skied when we had snow. When my long runs got close to 2 hr (run/walk/whatever), then running could replace one of my other activities - instead of running being supplemental to something else. But I was probably close to 1:45 for a long run before I started using walk breaks except for snow. But even if it had been run 14 min / walk 1 min, I would have been running about 1:42 in the 2 hrs. Even if there were no races, I would still run  (and include walk breaks as needed - for me, it's about getting outside in the fresh air, not medals).

Intro to running=Painful XC season

On my intro to running, I had no fancy program, it was go for a run or get off the team, in other words, WALKING=DEATH. I guess it worked considering my times dropped a minute and a half per mile in about a year...  I'm sure there's other ways to get good results, but it's hard to beat simple, hard-work if you want to improve.