Allright, trying this for the first time...
Since I am doing this for the first time, I'm assuming that my gradual slowdown means that I still have some work to do on building my aerobic base? Any comments are appreciated! This was done outside on a relatively flat 3 mile loop, done twice.
Allright, trying this for the first time... Type Distance Time Total Time Pace Avg HR Max HR Notes Interval 1 Mi 10:23.74 10:23.74 10:24 137 150 Interval 1 Mi 10:46.9 21:10.64 10:47 147 151 Interval 1 Mi 11:10.93 32:21.57 11:11 146 151 Interval 1 Mi 11:19.83 43:41.40 11:20 147 150 Interval 1 Mi 11:29.06 55:10.46 11:30 147 151 Interval 1 Mi 11:59.61 1:07:10.07 12:00 147 150 Interval 0.33 Mi 3:45.86 1:10:55.93 11:25 146 151 Since I am doing this for the first time, I'm assuming that my gradual slowdown means that I still have some work to do on building my aerobic base? Any comments are appreciated! This was done outside on a relatively flat 3 mile loop, done twice.
yep, I read the ideal slowdown is 5secs / mile.
btw you seem to have some usable base already (as your pace is not ungodly slow) but it does need work to become a lot better
Not blind. It is in the overtraining sticky in the boilerplate threads.
thanks, I'm still blind though I cannot find anything in that sticky even though the 1st post in it does mention a chart...i see it nowhere, this is really weird! (I've been looking for about 10 mins at the thread and nothing)
I did find this in an old thread http://homepage.mac.com/jimmybrunelle/FileSharing4.html but the content is not there anymore.
Bottom line - we are all experiments of 1. Pick an initial maf to run at. Perform maf tests every 3 or 4 weeks and see if there is progress, e.g. pace increases. If not, bump maf by 5, etc. until improvement happens. The more I run at near maff the easier it is beginning to feel - and at a faster pace. hth
Bottom line - we are all experiments of 1. Pick an initial maf to run at. Perform maf tests every 3 or 4 weeks and see if there is progress, e.g. pace increases. If not, bump maf by 5, etc. until improvement happens. The more I run at near maff the easier it is beginning to feel - and at a faster pace.
hth
thanks, you did answer my question very well. very interesting stuff. especially about your subjective feelings about getting it easier. do you mean easier physically or mentally?
Decker Challenge 12/12
Both. Mentally in knowing that I can get out and run 5-6x/wk w/o injury/re-injury. Physically, as told by maf pace results and enjoying showing/seeing improvement. I started running to increase hdl cholesterol and lower ldl even further than the meds I am on. The side benefit is falling in love with it and discovering a way to do even more of it!
bob e v 2012 goals: keep on running! Is there anything more than that?
Finish 2 halves, 3M Half 1/29 and probably Decker Challenge in Dechistory: blessed heart attack 3/15/2008; c25k july 2008 first 5k 10/26/2008, 62nd birthday; 1st 10k 2/28/2009 - 50 wks from heart attack to 10k; 1st Half Marathon 11/9/09 20 months from heart attack! !
today's workout showed me how I'm constantly hovering on a border between running-walking and continuous running... I planned 8 laps, 4miles total, I did 4 laps and a half before my friend arrived (we do runs together sometimes and we previously agreed on doing this workout together) and we went on together and due to that (!!) my HR crept up by 2-3bpm or so, so then for the rest of the workout I kept having to slow down to a walk... that wasn't a very good feeling... that my HR can be that fragile... so I think I'll do the workouts alone from now until I get to 12:00 pace or something..
the pace was 13:45 until then, then it worsened to a total of 14:20 due to the slow walks. (the walks are intentionally very slow, slower than the running, so it can bring my HR down quickly.)
the weather was 4C / 39F, nothing special. warmup the usual 1.2 mile.
overall I still feel I'm improving a little bit...
I'm a big believer now because of the overall feeling this workout plan gives me! it makes running a very simple and natural thing in terms of load/stress. so when the thought of "heck i'll just go and run faster now!" comes up I always remember this and then I'm happy to go on with the plan again. also, I was able to find a nice rhythm for the 13:45 pace today and that helped with enjoying it a lot.
cmon2 - you're getting there. Be patient. We all had/have to be.
Doubling up today. 3+ in the morning and 5+ in the evening. 120 minutes total. AHR = 126. Ran in my Vibrams. Very relaxed and comfortable. I might use these more often this year. Not ready to barefoot at except at the local XC grass course but my Vibrams seem ready for the roads and maybe even a 5k. Who knows.
cmon2 - you're getting there. Be patient. We all had/have to be. Doubling up today. 3+ in the morning and 5+ in the evening. 120 minutes total. AHR = 126. Ran in my Vibrams. Very relaxed and comfortable. I might use these more often this year. Not ready to barefoot at except at the local XC grass course but my Vibrams seem ready for the roads and maybe even a 5k. Who knows.
thanks for your kind words.
as for doubling... is that a good idea for someone who just started the MAF workouts (10 days ago)? I thought about this because if I could do 2x1 hour workouts on a day instead of a 2 hour workout that would be easier for my legs.
Now you're asking a question that requires more input from you. I would recommend that you start keeping your log here and open it for us to see. It will help with these more technical conversations.
A bit of context - I started using doubles last summer but I was averaging 40-45 mpw at the time. Now I average 50+ and use it for convenience and with a plan. By that I mean its easier to fit 2 runs into a day when I don't have a single large block available. I try to run both easy but will experiment in the future with one hard and one recovery. I do not use doubles to replace a long workout. I use them to add aerobic base miles.
That being said, your original question of 2x1hr vs 2hr needs some context. For now I will assume that you are doing this to replace your long run. If this is the case, I would not recommend this strategy. The continous 2 hours of work will strengthen your body very differently than 2 1hr runs even in the same day. Nobby (who is a frequenter of RA in the general forums) has some excellent descriptions of this and you can read any Lydiard work for more detailed discussions. You will still benefit from any miles but the training of the body is different. So I would say this about doubles - experiment with them and work them into your training. The added miles will help if you do them listening to your body. This is where keeping below MAF will really help from overtraining due to speed. Doubles do not replace the long run.
Go to the general foumr and search for "doubles" or "doubling" or "two runs". There are many threads out there that can help.
Disclaimer - I am currently trying to incorporate LHR and Lydiard together. I like both approaches and figure somwhere they can mesh to make me faster without breaking down - what I'm finding is that my 1/4 workouts are below MAF, my 1/2 workouts are <150 AHR and 3/4 workouts are >150 (interstingly thisis the van Aaken line).
thanks for your very detailed and thoughtful reply!
yes, I would replace "long run" because I'm afraid to do a 2 hour run at my current pace, I'd like my knees to stay healthy. I would not be wondering about doubling if I was able to do 12:00 or better pace below my MAF - I'd just go out and do 2 hours no problem (I did that a few times in the past but those 2 hour runs were MAF+10, sadly. of course not so bad if you consider I can maintain a MAF+30 easily for a long time but still too much load even if I didn't feel it).
OK, I'm going to research what you hinted at when mentioning long runs mean different training.
today's workout (I'll start the training log too): around 5.7-5.8 miles, 5 laps on my 2nd flat-ish course (not exactly flat, pace difference is around 50 secs between the two halves of the loop).
this was 78mins, average pace 13:40 which is great considering I was running on a quite snowy road! I guess without snow it'd have been nearly 13:00?!
due to the hard terrain (snow in March, what the hell is going on!! it was snowing all day and during my run) AHR was 152 instead of the usual 151, but MHR wasn't too high.
in any case, RHR and pace both show that I'm nearly back to my best shape I had in february I'm so happy!
thanks for your very detailed and thoughtful reply! yes, I would replace "long run" because I'm afraid to do a 2 hour run at my current pace, I'd like my knees to stay healthy. I would not be wondering about doubling if I was able to do 12:00 or better pace below my MAF - I'd just go out and do 2 hours no problem (I did that a few times in the past but those 2 hour runs were MAF+10, sadly. of course not so bad if you consider I can maintain a MAF+30 easily for a long time but still too much load even if I didn't feel it). OK, I'm going to research what you hinted at when mentioning long runs mean different training.
cmon - 2 hours is 2 hours regardless of heart rate or pace. The time on your feet is part of the training. Actually running slower should be easier on your body to adapt to the extra time. Perhaps I am do not understand what you are typing. One of the downsides of electronic boards.
As far as different long run workouts, those can be as varied as snowflakes. I'm now experimenting with mixing hard sections and recovery sections. Feel free to look at my log and see but I would suggest to look at some of the faster runners on RA for some interesting long run workouts (schneidr, DakotaRR, spaniel, srlopez, purdey, dopple bock, mikeymike). Of course the group on this forum also has good workouts as well - yes I do log stalk you guys. Hah!
Another double today. First one was an 8.9 mile fartlek so hardly a LHR but the evening run was very relaxed and didn't get over 120 AHR - 3.1 miles in 30 minutes with my daughter biking along.
cmon - 2 hours is 2 hours regardless of heart rate or pace. The time on your feet is part of the training. Actually running slower should be easier on your body to adapt to the extra time. Perhaps I am do not understand what you are typing. One of the downsides of electronic boards. As far as different long run workouts, those can be as varied as snowflakes. I'm now experimenting with mixing hard sections and recovery sections. Feel free to look at my log and see but I would suggest to look at some of the faster runners on RA for some interesting long run workouts (schneidr, DakotaRR, spaniel, srlopez, purdey, dopple bock, mikeymike). Of course the group on this forum also has good workouts as well - yes I do log stalk you guys. Hah! Another double today. First one was an 8.9 mile fartlek so hardly a LHR but the evening run was very relaxed and didn't get over 120 AHR - 3.1 miles in 30 minutes with my daughter biking along.
oh, yes, slower running is generally easier - until a point where it starts to make the load on my knee too high (knee moves a lot less and that with a less than ideal female Q-angle doesn't do it good). it has already adapted to this slow running in the last few days quite well but I still wouldn't want to risk hammering it for 2+ long hours in one go. the pace below which I do not have to worry about it is anything less than 13:00 (i.e. faster).
hence the idea for doubling the other option would be doing the long run at such a faster pace but that will involve a higher HR and that doesn't sound like a good idea at this point. (I just "came back" from some previous overreaching.) another option is mix in walking after a while but that takes away some of the fun hehe. and the last option is just skip the very long runs until I can do them at a faster pace...
I'll look at all that stuff you mentioned, thanks
OK, run number two monitoring splits:
So this was intended to be a 6 mile run, but stopped at 3 with my wife. I think the swim earlier took too much out of me. Anyway, question time. If I were to go out a little bit slower in the first mile, would my subesequent miles be faster? Logic is pointing me to yes, since I know from experience that I have better race times if I go out easier in the beginning of the run. Opinions?
Opinions?
Did you warmup? 15 minute warmup gradually brning HR up to MAF before the first mile is recommended. Your pace dropped off a lot compared to your previous MAF test, where your dropoff was not so much. So, perhaps you were spent from the swimming?
© 2012 RunningAHEAD.com. All rights reserved. | Privacy