Beginners and Beyond

1234

Long SLOW Run (Read 455 times)


Bad Ass

    Never mind. Deleted post.

     

    I saw it too.

    Damaris, Marathon Maniac, Ultra Runner

    Blog

    "The most powerful weapon on earth is the human soul on fire."

    happylily


      Okay, recovery is 9:38 to 10:22

          Long runs         8:35 to 9:53

          easy runs         8:30 to 9:31

      PRs: Boston Marathon, 3:27, April 15th 2013

              Cornwall Half-Marathon, 1:35, April 27th 2013

      4 years racing, 15 marathons, 15 BQs     

        I saw it too.

         

        Oh, I'm glad I'm not losing my mind then. Maybe Pluck temporarily followed us here. Namtor - Btw, if you're feeling a new stress when running slower on different body parts that you didn't feel before, my best guess is that you altered your stride somewhat.
        happylily


          A little faster than I thought, but that's the way McMillan works now and me loves McMillan. Big grin

          PRs: Boston Marathon, 3:27, April 15th 2013

                  Cornwall Half-Marathon, 1:35, April 27th 2013

          4 years racing, 15 marathons, 15 BQs     


          Bad Ass

            I clarify my prior comment. I would say LSD should be at 1-2 mm slower than pace. I still think McM is too aggressive.

            Damaris, Marathon Maniac, Ultra Runner

            Blog

            "The most powerful weapon on earth is the human soul on fire."

            cmb4314


              Do you think 12mm is too slow for me though?

               

              Edit:When I say i run fast that means 8 mm pace for 10+ miles. For me, that's fast, and pretty close to my "race pace" since my race pace and training pace have been almost the same till this point.

               

              I think 12 is probably slower than you need to go.  My HM PR pace is 8:25, and I never run much slower than 11s, and that's a recovery run.  A long, slow run is 10:20-10:30 pace, usually, and that's a pace I can hang onto easily, even on my 20 milers.

               

              Running slow, though, is great.  About two years ago, I used to have this thing where I never wanted to run slower than 10 minute miles.  This wasn't really a difficult pace, per se, but it wasn't really easy either.  The thing that really let me up my mileage, and thus really improve, was to just always run "easy".  If it meant that my body wanted to go slower that day, so be it.  

              My wildly inconsistent PRs:

              5k: 24:36 (10/20/12)  

              10k: 52:01 (4/28/12)  

              HM: 1:50:09 (10/27/12)

              Marathon: 4:19:11 (10/2/2011) 

              happylily


                Damaris, what did I miss? Tell me! Big grin

                PRs: Boston Marathon, 3:27, April 15th 2013

                        Cornwall Half-Marathon, 1:35, April 27th 2013

                4 years racing, 15 marathons, 15 BQs     


                And in the end...

                  You're throwing in an added factor by specifying + LT + VO2Max - and then ran slow all the time. What about the person who always ran slow from the beginning, no LT, no VO2Max, no fartlek, no strides, just long slow miles?

                   

                  If the overall volume is substantially higher than that runners prior base, then that runner should get faster.  Just random numbers... a 40mpw runner who is always running 'easy' ramps up to 80mpw while still running 'easy'... that runner should see dramatic race time improvement.  The aerobic upside is much higher for most runners than the benefits of imrpoving LT or VO2Max.  That upside can be realized by simply RUNNING MORE.

                   

                  Alternatively, that same runner could stay at 40mpw and convert some of those miles to speedwork, and that runner would likely improve, but I don't believe that payoff is nearly as substantial as that which comes from running volume... and trying to do both at the same time often leads to bad outcomes...

                   

                  For those who try to identify some magical LSD pace range... it really isn't necessary... it's just 'EASY'... it isn't a workout that needs to be between Pace A and Pace B.  Easy running doesn't work that way.

                  ------------------------

                  The GITM is moot.

                  meaghansketch


                    I clarify my prior comment. I would say LSD should be at 1-2 mm slower than pace. I still think McM is too aggressive.

                     

                    I agree that the new McMillan* is too aggressive, at least for mid-pack-ish runners running moderate mileage.  It now gives me a range of 8:46- 9:44 for my easy runs (this is based off a 39:23 5-mile race (7:53 pace)).  I almost never run my 'easy' miles faster than 9:50, and 8:46 is almost my HM pace.  My easy runs almost always end up averaging between 10:00 and 10:30.  9:44 is definitely, for me, an 'effortful', not 'easy' pace, and 8:46 is a significant effort. 

                     

                     

                    *McMillan paces were adjusted a few months ago

                    Up next: Front Runners New York LGBT Pride 5-mile  06/28 |  NYRR Team Championships: Women (5M) 08/02

                    Goal race: NYCRUNS Haunted Island 10K 10/25

                    happylily


                      I don't think I'll ever want to run 80-100 mpw. So, that option as a way to get faster is out for me. I run about 50 mpw when not training, and 55 to 70 miles in training. That's it, I refuse to do a mile over 70 at this point. I had 5 marathon training cycles last year, constantly being in training could easily drive someone nuts. One needs to set limits somewhere... With my type of lower mileage, I need more speedwork and my ratio of quality runs to easy/recovery runs is not 50-50, but close to it (by quality, I also mean hills, progression runs, MP miles, on top of intervals and tempo). So far, I'm still seeing an improvement in my finish times. So... I must be doing something right somewhere...

                      PRs: Boston Marathon, 3:27, April 15th 2013

                              Cornwall Half-Marathon, 1:35, April 27th 2013

                      4 years racing, 15 marathons, 15 BQs     


                      Muddling through

                        If the overall volume is substantially higher than that runners prior base, then that runner should get faster.  Just random numbers... a 40mpw runner who is always running 'easy' ramps up to 80mpw while still running 'easy'... that runner should see dramatic race time improvement.  The aerobic upside is much higher for most runners than the benefits of imrpoving LT or VO2Max.  That upside can be realized by simply RUNNING MORE.

                         

                        Alternatively, that same runner could stay at 40mpw and convert some of those miles to speedwork, and that runner would likely improve, but I don't believe that payoff is nearly as substantial as that which comes from running volume... and trying to do both at the same time often leads to bad outcomes... 

                         

                        From personal experience I didn't find that to be true, at least in the near-term. When I bumped my weekly mileage from 60 to 80 mpw I got noticeably slower. It wasn't until after I dropped my mileage back down to 60 mpw AND added back speedwork that I saw any improvements in times.

                        2014 Goals: Run first trail ultra, first 100K, and see what I can do in a 24-Hour race

                        catty


                        Goddess of the Cuisine

                          Do you think 12mm is too slow for me though?

                           

                          Edit:When I say i run fast that means 8 mm pace for 10+ miles. For me, that's fast, and pretty close to my "race pace" since my race pace and training pace have been almost the same till this point.

                           Yes. Even if 8 mm is your race pace, 10:00-10:30 would be slow enough, unless it's just not slow enough to get that endorphin rush.


                          And in the end...

                            From personal experience I didn't find that to be true, at least in the near-term. When I bumped my weekly mileage from 60 to 80 mpw I got noticeably slower. It wasn't until after I dropped my mileage back down to 60 mpw AND added back speedwork that I saw any improvements in times.

                             

                            Did you sustain 80+mpw for 10 weeks or more?  That is the key... volume over time.  After acclimating the body to running over 80mpw every week, running 26.2 miles in one shot get remarkably easier... it's almost impossible to NOT get faster.

                             

                            Now, if for someone who isn't going to run more than 'x' miles per week no matter what, then making a small percentage of those miles uptempo makes sense.  The volume ceiling has been set, so the focus shifts to other areas for improvement.

                            ------------------------

                            The GITM is moot.


                            Muddling through

                              Did you sustain 80+mpw for 10 weeks or more?  That is the key... volume over time.  After acclimating the body to running over 80mpw every week, running 26.2 miles in one shot get remarkably easier... it's almost impossible to NOT get faster.

                               

                              Now, if for someone who isn't going to run more than 'x' miles per week no matter what, then making a small percentage of those miles uptempo makes sense.  The volume ceiling has been set, so the focus shifts to other areas for improvement.

                               

                              This was 40 years ago, but I think I logged about 1000 miles in 3 months. I'm also talking about getting faster as in 10K, 5K, and mile times. I'd been at 50-60 mpw for about 3 years already.

                              2014 Goals: Run first trail ultra, first 100K, and see what I can do in a 24-Hour race


                              And in the end...

                                This was 40 years ago, but I think I logged about 1000 miles in 3 months. I'm also talking about getting faster as in 10K, 5K, and mile times. I'd been at 50-60 mpw for about 3 years already.

                                 

                                Yeah, that's about what I was doing... 350+ per month with no speedwork.  My race times dropped like a rock.  Not sure what to say... others I know who've followed the 'RUN MORE' philosophy seem to confirm the hypothesis that running volume trumps intensity, but clearly there are outliers.

                                ------------------------

                                The GITM is moot.

                                1234