Not to focus on you Kristin, but when I hear these type of statement I ask myself, "Ok, but how much do you run?". What have you done to not be slow? I know everyone doesn't have the luxury to train as much as they want but it's impossible to reach your potential if you don't 1st put in the level of work to get there. I think there are a very small % of runners that [seriously] even want to really find out. And that's ok :> Less than perfect execution of training schedules is much more the normal than the rule. Stuff happens, you adapt. I don't knwo wif this applies to you must many runners focus only on their immediate schedule and think that's the ticket to getting faster when they really should expand their window and think long term. What should I do now to improve my odds of being better 2-5 years down the road? Increasing mileage, which is holding more runners back then anything, is typically a 2-3 year project in itself. Lay the foundation, build the pathways and then you're ready to get more specific. It's not sexy [far from it] but it puts the tiger in the tank.
Not to focus on you Kristin, but when I hear these type of statement I ask myself, "Ok, but how much do you run?". What have you done to not be slow? I know everyone doesn't have the luxury to train as much as they want but it's impossible to reach your potential if you don't 1st put in the level of work to get there. I think there are a very small % of runners that [seriously] even want to really find out. And that's ok :>
Less than perfect execution of training schedules is much more the normal than the rule. Stuff happens, you adapt. I don't knwo wif this applies to you must many runners focus only on their immediate schedule and think that's the ticket to getting faster when they really should expand their window and think long term. What should I do now to improve my odds of being better 2-5 years down the road? Increasing mileage, which is holding more runners back then anything, is typically a 2-3 year project in itself. Lay the foundation, build the pathways and then you're ready to get more specific. It's not sexy [far from it] but it puts the tiger in the tank.
+1 When I first started running, I thought I was just slow and that was just how it was. But I was running low mileage and not doing regular speedwork. I have found that averaging over 50mpw for the year with some hard speedwork has gotten me faster than I ever imagined I would run. Not fast by a lot of people's standards but fast enough that I've built up a small collection of AG awards and am hoping to run 5 minutes under my BQ time in my marathon next month, which isn't something I thought I was capable of a couple years ago.
I was half joking but 4.5 weeks out from my marathon and I'm feeling a little burned out and exhausted.
That was me a few weeks ago, running became a chore. It was one of the reasons I decided to do only one marathon a year. For me, two is too much.
+1 When I first started running, I thought I was just slow and that was just how it was. But I was running low mileage and not doing regular speedwork. I have found that averaging over 50mpw for the year with some hard speedwork has gotten me faster than I ever imagined I would run.
The thing I learned was you don't even have to do speed work to get faster. It obviously does not maximize your potential, but it is amazing (to me as a n00b) how much faster you can get with just mileage.
2012: ~25 mpw @8:30-9:00 pace --> 2:01 HM
2013: ~45 mpw @8:30-9:00 pace --> 1:48 HM
No real speedwork at any time; shorter runs are faster, longer runs are slower. I don't have the stats from last year, but I bet if anything my average training paces were a bit slower this year. Mileage is king.
Did not quite get the same improvement in the full (only cut off 10 min from 2012-13), but for that I know I need to maintain the mileage over a longer period. (Um, and pick a race with less hills & cooler weather.) I am thinking about seeing how much I can improve in the full by only building/maintaining mileage, before worrying too much about speed work. If I ever recover from my knee injury.
Dave
faster than a glacier
Good stuff. 1983 @ 26 YO I weighed 139 lbs and ran 3:05:01 - also, not nearly good enough to BQ. 28 years later, weighing 142 lbs I ran 3:28:13. BQ - 7:46.
Good stuff.
1983 @ 26 YO I weighed 139 lbs and ran 3:05:01 - also, not nearly good enough to BQ. 28 years later, weighing 142 lbs I ran 3:28:13. BQ - 7:46.
Alarming that you are packing on weight at a rate of 0.107 pounds per year. Have you considered gastric bypass?
No, but I was thinking a sticker for my singlet that read "gastric bypass survivor" might spark interesting comments / looks in my next race!
Youth Has No Age. ~ Picasso / 1st road race: Charleston Distance Run 15 Miler - 1974 / profile
I've been meaning to compliment you on the mileage you're running now. You're one of several folks I've noticed who are running much higher mileage than just a few years ago. It sounds like it's treating you well.
Skirt Runner
Probably not enough at all. I try to stay above 20 mph, but most weeks I can't manage much more. And that is due to my lifestyle right now. If I come up with a way to work 3 jobs, eat decent meals, sleep more than 4 hours, have some sembelence of a social life, keep my apartment clean, AND run much more than I do then that would mean having more than 24 hours in a day. Maybe down the road I will have more time to commit to training. I still am not sure if I'm built for real speed though. Not just speedy for ME but actually placing in my age group at races. Maybe I'm wrong, who knows. Guess I just have to keep runing to find out!
PRs: 5K- 28:16 (5/5/13) 10K- 1:00:13 (10/27/13) 4M- 41:43 (9/7/13) 15K- 1:34:25 (8/17/13) 10M- 1:56:30 (4/6/14) HM- 2:20:16 (4/13/14) Full- 5:55:33 (11/1/15)
I started a blog about running :) Check it out if you care to
More miles are, of course, the answer (up to the limit you can safely handle, and putting aside time management concerns, etc.) but there is a fair amount of genetic variation.
I have been increasing my miles each of the past 3 years, running between 1500-1800 miles the past 2 years and hopefully this year will make it to 2000. On one hand I am very happy with my progress-- my HM time has gone from a 2:15 in 2010 to a 1:52 this year, as one example. I am thrilled with that but know it is not fast by any stretch of the imagination. I am peaking at right around 60 mpw right now and I feel like that's around where my current limit is, physically, mentally, and in regards to time management. I keep trying to bump it up slowly, but I feel like it's almost certainly true that if I'm not going to be a 1:45 HM runner on 40-60 mpw, I'm not going to be a 1:35 HM runner on 50-70 mpw.
(This is with 2 speedwork sessions most weeks, plus some weeks a long progression run)
I'm not asking for validation, and again, I'm happy with my progress-- but it is always a little frustrating talking to people who are around my pace (in my running group, or whatever) and they're all running much less than me, and the people who are running as many miles as I am are BQing with ease.
I'm pretty much in agreement with Mike. I recognize that we all have genetic limitations. I will never run a sub 2:40 marathon even though there are plenty of folks my age who can. I am not at that level and never will be. I recognize that others may have genetic limitations that mean they are slower than me no matter how hard they work. I do think that we too frequently fall into the trap of thinking that everyone who is faster is more talented and everyone who is slower doesn't work hard enough.
(Side note. We fall into that same trap in life. Everyone who is less successful than me doesn't work hard enough and everyone who is more successful than me got lucky or had some advantage I didn't have).
Having said that, I simply don't buy the "I'm just slow" argument from anyone who hasn't put in a minimum of 4,000 miles in the last two years combined with regular speed work. I'm not talking about executing training plans. I'm just talking about consistently doing speed reps and hill sprints and VO2max intervals and tempo runs and long runs, etc. I'm willing to bet you'd be hard pressed to find a male under the age of 50 who did all of that who couldn't run a 5K in under 22:00 or a female who couldn't run a 5K in under 25:00.
If you plug those times into McMillan, you'll find that those are nearly BQ equivalencies. I have long asserted that most people could BQ if they put in the time and effort.
Just as I recognize that we all have genetic limitations, so too do I recognize that we all have life limitations. I mentioned the family trip to Disney in the middle of training for my first marathon. Some people may not be able to put in the time it takes to run 50+ miles per week or, more likely, they have other priorities. There is nothing wrong with having other priorities. An active social life may be important to you. Hell, stamp collecting or gun collecting or whatever collecting may be important to you. That's cool. However, that doesn't mean you CAN'T run 50+ miles per week; it simply means that you choose not to do so. By choosing not to do so, you are limiting how fast you can run. That's fine too but it doesn't mean that you are genetically slow.
Short term goal: 17:59 5K
Mid term goal: 2:54:59 marathon
Long term goal: To say I've been a runner half my life. (I started running at age 45).
LRB - I agree. I am not doing back to back marathon cycles again. It's too much for me. In fact, I am hoping to not run another one til April 2015. Signed up for a 5k series this winter instead.
Moth - Thank you! Not sure if it's the miles or the quality work (probably a combo) but yeah it seems to be working. I just ran a 7 min HM PR a couple weeks ago.
Kristin - I just forgo the house cleaning and the social life.
I'm willing to bet you'd be hard pressed to find a male under the age of 50 who did all of that who couldn't run a 5K in under 22:00 or a female who couldn't run a 5K in under 25:00. If you plug those times into McMillan, you'll find that those are nearly BQ equivalencies. I have long asserted that most people could BQ if they put in the time and effort.
But McMillan equivalencies don't really apply for most people unless you're running about 70 mpw, right?
(I'm under the 25:00 5K mark, but feel that I'm FAR from a BQ-- much further than 4000/miles over the next 2 years)
But McMillan equivalencies don't really apply for most people unless you're running about 70 mpw, right? (I'm under the 25:00 5K mark, but feel that I'm FAR from a BQ-- much further than 4000/miles over the next 2 years)
Well, yes and no. The reality is that almost no recreational runners are going to average 70 mpw. That's 3,640 miles per year. Most decent recreational runners will be running about 50 mpw if you average out the entire year. That's 2,600 miles for the year and much more realistic for even fairly dedicated recreational runners. Remember that you have to count the zero mile weeks and the 20 mile weeks and all the other low mile weeks. Still, those runners putting in 2,600-3,000 miles are going to be putting in some 70-90 mile weeks - especially if they start training for a marathon. Do I think they'll run a McMillan equivalent time? Maybe not. But they won't be far off.
There's a base thread on this forum and over in RWOL Beginners. People tend to think of your "base" as what you ran last month but I have consistently asserted that your base is more about what you ran last year. Because I ran over 2,500 miles last year, I can go from a 20 mile week to a 70 mile week without any major difficulty. I can go from a 150 mile month to a 250 mile month without problems. There is no way to ramp up like that without a base built over a period of time.
I still think that most people who run more than 4,000 miles over a two year period, regularly do speed work, and I should add, who up the mileage and intensity for a 12-16 week marathon training plan, would qualify for Boston.
I agree with you, Brad, but I think that not all people can do that for two reasons: either they mentally are not up to it (but they could physically do it), or they get injured too often because of their physical constitution (but they would have the will-power otherwise). Or it could be both, even. But yes, in theory, what you said is true.
PRs: Boston Marathon, 3:27, April 15th 2013
Cornwall Half-Marathon, 1:35, April 27th 2013
18 marathons, 18 BQs since 2010
I'd suggest checking those numbers. Sub 25 for a 5k is equivalent to a 4:03 marathon. That's not a BQ time unless you're a 55+ yo woman. My 5k PR is 22:17 and that only predicts a 3:37. Luckily my HM is a little faster
Uffda
For me it takes waking up between 5:00 and 5:45 AM every day to get it done. Really that's the only way I can do 50+ mile weeks. Fortunately my DW goes to bed a little early, so I get fairly good sleep.
- Andrew