No that isnt what I mean exactly, I get that.  It is just that I have a hard time judging my effort.  I'll think I am running easy and then a mile later think  "oh shit", or I think I am running hard, but then realize, no I really wasnt.  My legs and my lungs are often not in sync.   Or more often every attempt to add effort becomes a progression run, every attempt to back off turns into a dwindling plod.  Gas, brake, gas, brake.  I'm like a teenager trying to drive a stick.

if you think you are running easy, you are running easy.  i mean, if it feels easy it is an easy effort -- regardless of how fast or far or for how much time you run. if you think you are running hard, then you are. that's the input, the subjective part. perception is reality in this case. with effort, you define the standard.

sometimes it is easy to run a mile in 7 minutes. sometimes it is hard to run a mile in 12 minutes. sometimes it's vice-versa -- hard is rewarded with fast and easy is slow -- and this is the way that we can recognize it because it makes logical sense. it's the other, the days that it takes all we have to get nowhere - these days can be confusing. these are the days when you realize later -- "I think I am running hard, but then realize, no I really wasnt". what you are realizing here is that your effort wasn't rewarded in the way you thought it would be.

the trick is that the outcome does not define the effort. the effort is the input.

speaking of inputs - this song "santa baby" that i keep hearing. is that line about santa hurrying down the chimbly some kinda sexual innuendo?

 

For some reason I went away from it this fall, but alternating weeks between HM tempos and MP tempos (increasing the distance each time) seemed to help last spring.  A very simplistic way to work up to a goal race pace, but seemingly effective.

Good stuff - thanks.  This is something I can understand.  Is the mileage the same on the alternating weeks between HM and MP, or are the MP runs longer?

 

Is it a breach of etiquette to quote one's own blog? Tempo runs according to Jeff.

 No because, as everyone knows, etiquette relates essentially to privacy. 

What I find interesting is how tough the fast guys say HM PR pace feels.  For me, 5 miles at HM PR pace is not that tough, but that may mean I have yet to really race a HM.

This is part of what I got out of all of this as well.

 

if you think you are running easy, you are running easy.  i mean, if it feels easy it is an easy effort -- regardless of how fast or far or for how much time you run. if you think you are running hard, then you are. that's the input, the subjective part. perception is reality in this case. with effort, you define the standard.

 

sometimes it is easy to run a mile in 7 minutes. sometimes it is hard to run a mile in 12 minutes. sometimes it's vice-versa -- hard is rewarded with fast and easy is slow -- and this is the way that we can recognize it because it makes logical sense. it's the other, the days that it takes all we have to get nowhere - these days can be confusing. these are the days when you realize later -- "I think I am running hard, but then realize, no I really wasnt". what you are realizing here is that your effort wasn't rewarded in the way you thought it would be.

 

the trick is that the outcome does not define the effort. the effort is the input.

Exactly.  This is what I was talking about.  Just because you ran slower doesn't mean you ran easier.  Which is why it's not always easy to relate workouts to pace.  If you have an off day, maybe you're getting sick, and you struggle through a run but the pace is what you might consider easier, does that make the day an easy day?  I'd say no it doesn't.  Just because you scheduled an easy day on the calendar doesn't automatically make it so.  This is probably while measuring effort is so damned hard for most people.  Even when they know they are running hard, they don't believe it.  They don't trust in themselves enough to realize that they are indeed working at a higher intensity level.  And of all the metrics used, pace is the furthest removed from your body.  Pace alone doesn't really tell you anything about how hard you are working on a given day.

I don't know if that's really dumbing them down as much as doing them right.

MTA:  For my next HM training cycle (goal race in march, I will PR), I am thinking of trying something very unorthodox.  Basically:  My general aerobic runs will be finished with 5 minutes at 5k-10k pace effort, making each run a mini-progression run.  Not anything that will leave me in any kind of debt, but good to build a stimulus of running tired and focusing on form.  That is the only speedwork harder than HM effort and strides.  I am looking at a rough outline like this:

Mornings:

4 days run 50-60 minutes easy, 5 minutes accelerate to 5k-10k effort, 5 minutes hold 5k-10k effort.

1 day 90-100 minutes with substantial HM effort stuff.

1 day 30 minute recovery jog with dog.

1 day 2 hours with fun stuff (M effort and possibly some HM effort) in the last hour.

strides whenever I feel like it (I do them during the run rather than at the end)

Evenings:

30 minute recovery jog with dog whenever I feel like it (usually around 4 days per week).

It's a pretty standard schedule for me with the exception of the mini-progressions.

I've done base phases (I'm not periodizing this time -- the schedule you see is basically it for 16 weeks) before where the last few minutes of each of my runs I run hard home (I live on top of a ~3 minute hill), and it's worked pretty well.  I'm pretty conditioned to this type of volume, but when I start doing a big workout at the faster paces is when I get in trouble.  So I thought, why not spread the workout out so that there is enough volume in each run to cause the stimulus that I am looking for, but not enough to cause any real fatigue.

Obviously, if I'm not feeling good, I don't have to do the progression part, and can just go easy instead.  What I wonder is what kind of effect this will have, will it be good or bad.