Gleaned this nugget from the latest Running Times, p. 43, quoting Renato Canova:

"The program should follow the athlete, it's not the athlete who should follow the program.  This is so huge because runners tend to get so married to a program that if they deviate from it they see that as a failure, when in actuality it is the program that should be adjusting continually for the athlete's changing day-to-day needs."

Brad Hudson's book Run Faster borrows a lot from Canova.  It stresses building your own plan based on your goal race distance, volume ability, strengths and weaknesses, and gives building blocks for this - though he also constructs sample plans in the back of the book, and alas most people take those as "Hudson plans" and attempt to follow them directly, which is missing the point in my opinion.

 

Agreed.  And I'm one of those people missing the point, to an extent.  I'm still learning how to assess what I need, and to determine what my relative strengths and weaknesses are.  I feel like Run Faster could have done a little better job of teaching runners how to make changes based on the results from workouts.  I know it's in there, but I still feel like I'm at the point where I need it s-p-e-l-l-e-d out.

I agree-- and it's tough when you can't actually make the changes that you know would be most beneficial to you.  I know I'd be a stronger runner if I was able to consistently run 50-70 mile weeks (my biggest weakness is endurance) but I can't seem to make that happen.

Has anyone had a chance to pick up McMillan's You (Only Faster)?  I feel like there is some similarity to Run Faster (it teaches you how to best adapt an existing program, whether his or another, to your own strengths and weaknesses and to your schedule) but it does, I think, a good job really spelling out the process.  I am halfway through a training plan now, so I haven't had a chance to actually go through the process myself, but it looks interesting.  I don't think it's any more helpful than Run Faster in terms of showing how to make changes as you're going through the program based on the results of workouts, but I think that the initial training plan creation/adaptation process is more spelled out.

As for the adding mileage, I did okay with doing that primarily by starting to run doubles on the day I did group runs at a slower pace with my running store (usually twice a week).  Would you have an opportunity to try anything like that?  I also just started tacking on little miles to the end of easy days within the plan, which made a big difference.  My bigger struggle is on the quality days, but obviously we'll all have our own challenges.

Thanks for the input.  Doing doubles is (I think) just a time issue for me-- I work later in the day (10-7, sometimes I have to stay later) and have a 1-hr commute each way, so I get home between 8:00 and 9:00.  I still have to make and eat dinner, and fitting a run in is tough, especially with my early bedtime so I can wake up for my morning run at 6:00.  (I'm not trying to make excuses, I know everyone has their own stuff going on, I'm single so I don't even have family stuff to deal with, and lots of people who have jobs with big time commitments, commutes and families still have time to run a ton of miles).  It's just something I haven't been able to manage.  I do try to tack on miles to my morning runs when I can, I'm just having trouble increasing my mileage to where I would want it just by doing that.

 

Agreed.  And I'm one of those people missing the point, to an extent.  I'm still learning how to assess what I need, and to determine what my relative strengths and weaknesses are.  I feel like Run Faster could have done a little better job of teaching runners how to make changes based on the results from workouts.  I know it's in there, but I still feel like I'm at the point where I need it s-p-e-l-l-e-d out.

Here's one of the ways to assess your strengths and weaknesses a/l/a Hudson.

Think about your last race.  It doesn't matter much whether it was a 5K or a half marathon (although a marathon is a bit of a different animal).  Where did you feel strong and where did you feel weak?  If you tried to pick up the pace, could you?  Did picking up the pace even incrementally seem like a monumental effort?  If so, then you are likely weak in your speed development.  Did you have trouble maintaining a strong pace from the very start.  Did that 6:00 pace feel like a 5:45 pace and you faded throughout the race?  If so, then you need to work on developing your stamina.  Were you running well until the last quarter of the race?  Did you fade badly during that last quarter?  Was your pace in the last quarter slower than your pace the rest of the race?  If so, then you need to improve your endurance.

This analysis applies every time you run unless you just happen to have the perfect day.  In five years of racing, I can say that the perfect day has only happened maybe two or three times.  In every other race, even when I had a good race, I can point to one of those three things as a weakness for me.  It's usually not a surprise because it's really difficult to be equally strong in all areas and I will find my paces differing from the Daniels expectations in my weak area.

Okay, so please help me evaluate my last race, because I guess I still have confusion.  It was a 5k, the conditions were warm but decent, and the course was gradually uphill for the first two miles.  I settled into my pace without any real difficulty, and felt like I was running the pace I could sustain.  Mile two felt tough, like I starting to struggle and I was bargaining with myself, but the pace actually didn't change.  Mile 3, I felt like I could empty the tank a little more knowing I was almost done.  I kicked pretty hard to the finish, starting right about mile 3 (I probably could have kicked longer, but this seems like a race experience thing).  Splits 5:49.8, 5:49.2, 5:39.9 + kick = 17:33

 

I just don't feel like any one part of the race was different than the other.  Basically, the goal is just to do it all faster.  I suppose if there's a trend, the last mile is always my strongest.  Last night, I did a trail 3 mile race.  Splits were 6:19.3, 6:21.9, 6:01.9.  Is there something you can glean from the fact that my typical race profile is:  even, even, faster by a little?

So what you're doing seems to be working fine. Continue as is with incremental increases in volume. As long as you continue to maintain the same intensity (not pace) along with the increases in volume, you should be fine.

I tend to agree with George.  My only thought might be that if your last mile is always the fastest, then you may want to focus a bit more on your stamina.  Having that big of a kick in the final mile may mean you haven't been able to sustain your fastest possible pace throughout.  Some of it has to do with recovery as well.  At age 50, I find that I simply can't focus on everything at once.  I need two recovery days after a hard day.  Younger runners can go hard every other day.  Given that limitation for me, I have to pick a couple of areas of focus and neglect others for a bit.