RunningAHEAD - Topic: "Anaerobic" Phase HRT (over MAF) Reports & Discussion

BeeRunB

posted: 3/27/2008 at 9:25 AM

Quote from OnceADCV on 3/24/2008 at 10:50 AM:

I wouldn't base last years paces as normal. I think they jogged the first half because of the "scary" weather conditions. 2:14 was about 7 minutes slower than he ran in 2006. I think in 2006 they went something like 1:02/1:03 then 1:05/1:04 for the win... Most people I see in last years results who go out fast seem to blow up at the end. Doesn't seem to be too many negative splits...

That's what happens at Boston. People start fast. And often TOO fast. My only point is that if the best possible pace you can run (whether you are using a HRM or not) is (e.g.) a 7:00 pace, and you run that first 10k in (e.g) 6:45 pace, you will pay for it, and not achieve the 7:00 pace. Have a great race! Except for before the race (in that field they call a village) and after (getting out of Boston), it's a great race. I had a blast when I ran it. --Jimmy

OnceADCV

posted: 3/27/2008 at 11:10 AM

Quote from BeeRunB on 3/27/2008 at 9:25 AM:

That's what happens at Boston. People start fast. And often TOO fast. My only point is that if the best possible pace you can run (whether you are using a HRM or not) is (e.g.) a 7:00 pace, and you run that first 10k in (e.g) 6:45 pace, you will pay for it, and not achieve the 7:00 pace. Have a great race! Except for before the race (in that field they call a village) and after (getting out of Boston), it's a great race. I had a blast when I ran it. --Jimmy

I will shoot my self if I go through the 10k at 6:45/pace. I've done that already in better shape (at NYC 2006) and it doesn't make for a fun last 10k. In that race my 5k splits were (21:08, 21:03, 21:25, 21:33, 22:08, 21:57, 22:55, 23:44) as you can see the wheels came off some where between 30-35k. My only concerns are that for the beginning downhilll, I need to realize that it might take 6:40's to get my HR to MP HR, but not to run that fast as its probably not trashing my "heart" but my "quads".... So the village before the race isn't as nice as NYC which I thought wasn't that bad. Also, luckily I'm staying Boston til Wednesday and at the Hilton Back Bay so won't be a problem getting back. Also, seems like I'm fighting off a cold or allergies or something as don't feel 100% right now. Hopefully, this will be it before Boston. Still did my 15-miler this AM with 5 miles tempo but paces were slightly slower than expected and HR was elevated compared to Tuesday/Wednesday run...

BeeRunB

posted: 3/27/2008 at 12:36 PM

Quote from OnceADCV on 3/27/2008 at 11:10 AM:

I will shoot my self if I go through the 10k at 6:45/pace. I've done that already in better shape (at NYC 2006) and it doesn't make for a fun last 10k. In that race my 5k splits were (21:08, 21:03, 21:25, 21:33, 22:08, 21:57, 22:55, 23:44) as you can see the wheels came off some where between 30-35k. My only concerns are that for the beginning downhilll, I need to realize that it might take 6:40's to get my HR to MP HR, but not to run that fast as its probably not trashing my "heart" but my "quads".... So the village before the race isn't as nice as NYC which I thought wasn't that bad. Also, luckily I'm staying Boston til Wednesday and at the Hilton Back Bay so won't be a problem getting back. Also, seems like I'm fighting off a cold or allergies or something as don't feel 100% right now. Hopefully, this will be it before Boston. Still did my 15-miler this AM with 5 miles tempo but paces were slightly slower than expected and HR was elevated compared to Tuesday/Wednesday run...

My friend ( a sub 3:00 runner) did that at New York. He came down that first bridge and off it way too fast, and he barely finished. He had a pace plan, but forgot all about it! He gets excited. The village was just tents and porto johns. Why that is a village, I don't know. It was cold, and I sat on a muddy ground on a magazine. They're starting earlier now, so I 'm sure the wait isn't so bad. Keep going! --Jimmy

GregL

Master of Inconsistency

posted: 3/27/2008 at 5:16 PM
modified: 3/27/2008 at 6:07 PM

Today's run was supposed to help me figure out my marathon pace , but I really couldn't read anything from my splits other than they were strange. 12 Miles , overall AHR=155/168 Pace=9:03 Here are the splits : Mile 1 9:35 136/156 ( warm) 2 9:10 152/156 3 9:06 152/156 4 10:04 153/158 ( includes pee break ) 5 9:25 155/158 ( this is the one I don't understand ) 6 8:55 158/162 7 8:51 159/163 8 8:52 161/164 9 8:42 162/165 10 8:08 163/166 ( big difference ) 11 8:11 165/168 12 9:34 151/167 (cool) While I still have 5 weeks to go, I think I'll have to go with 8:20 pace for now . This run felt moderately hard toward the end , some of which I believe was boredom, as it was a 2 mile loop I did 6 times. Best thing about this run was that I didn't really feel tired afterward. Just some stiffness in the legs. Here's the link , Greg http://trail.motionbased.com/trail/activity/5254788

Ain't Wastin' Time No More !

formationflier

run-easy-race-hard

posted: 3/27/2008 at 6:49 PM

I would contend that anyone who blew out by going out too fast at the beginning of Boston: (1) does not train using a MAF approach and does not know his limits (2) did not do significant downhill training or (3) did not wear a heart rate monitor in the race. With that said, it is extremely difficult to keep any kind of a good pace going for the first 6 miles or more of Boston because most of the crowd is braking and holding up traffic. I was zigzagging back and forth for the first hour of the race, which wasted a lot of time and energy. If you follow a MAF approach strictly, then you train by effort and not by pace; hence your downhill paces will always be faster than your flat or uphill paces and that logic should transfer to the race. If you train by pace, then certainly it would be natural to recover/brake on the downs and race the heart rate on the ups and the flats.

low HR training FAQ
my marathons and ultras
my races and reports

BeeRunB

posted: 3/27/2008 at 9:57 PM

Quote from formationflier on 3/27/2008 at 6:49 PM:

I would contend that anyone who blew out by going out too fast at the beginning of Boston: (1) does not train using a MAF approach and does not know his limits (2) did not do significant downhill training or (3) did not wear a heart rate monitor in the race. With that said, it is extremely difficult to keep any kind of a good pace going for the first 6 miles or more of Boston because most of the crowd is braking and holding up traffic. I was zigzagging back and forth for the first hour of the race, which wasted a lot of time and energy. If you follow a MAF approach strictly, then you train by effort and not by pace; hence your downhill paces will always be faster than your flat or uphill paces and that logic should transfer to the race. If you train by pace, then certainly it would be natural to recover/brake on the downs and race the heart rate on the ups and the flats.

Hey Jesse, I don't think I'm be very clear. Boston goes up and down those first 6 miles, not just down. I'm talking about coming off that first downhill then maintaining the pace you set on that downhill, instead of getting back to the pace/effort you should be running. When I race, I will let gravity take me faster downhill and I slow a bit on the ups, averaging goal pace overall. Some miles will be a little faster than goal pace. Some slower. And most will be right around it. I try never to go faster than goal pace the first 2--3 miles. Hills or not. After that I let gravity do it's job. Works for me. I don't race with the HRM, once I get to my goal pace, I try to keep that feel throughout the race. I think you know what I mean, since your HRM has probably crapped out on you a few times, and you had to go on feel. Training by pace (which I don't really do) doesn't necessarily mean you have to brake on downhills. Just like in a race, the idea is to average an overall pace, taking hills into consideration. I don't think the idea is to (e.g.) run 7:00 pace no matter what, like you were on cruise control. Going harder up, and braking down. Although, I'm sure some runners do that. One of these days, I will use a HRM to help me run a race as an act of rebellion against myself. Cool

Take care, Jesse. --Jimmy

HankAchieve

posted: 3/27/2008 at 11:31 PM

Hey all As you may be aware I'm about to end 12 weeks fo aerobic and focus on a marathon in 13 weeks. I'm after some suggestions on what are the best speed sessions in training for the distance? ie what intervals are best distance for marathon (1mile, 1km, 800m? with appropriate rest?) what sort of hill reps, etc? Some sort of structured sessions would be great, I am going home after work to read the relevant sections in the Lore of Running but always value the advice of this group Hank

Just running for the fun of it!

BeeRunB

posted: 3/28/2008 at 12:49 AM
modified: 3/28/2008 at 12:50 AM

Hank, My suggestion, take it or leave it ( I reviewed your log): The best thing you can do for yourself for the marathon is to get your base mileage up higher and to stay aerobic as much as possible. Speedwork will probably add too much load for very little gain. You are starting to race and have added tempo runs, and you are doing long runs a week apart. Your load is increasing very rapidly. Speedwork could you put you over the top for an injury. Your highest weekly mileage is 34 miles, which is kind of low for the marathon. If you absolutely feel like you have to run some time faster than MRP, then Maffetone recommends keeping 90% MHR as a ceiling, and keeping the amount of time short (like a 20 minute LT run 80-90% MHR, or a few of those Van Aaken 200's that Ultrasteve talks about where your HR never gets anaerobic, but the bursts of speed wake your fast twitchers). Ultimately, it''s the MAF volume that is going to give you a good marathon time, and you more than likely to get there healthy. Good luck. Whatever you choose, I wish you great health and fast races! --Jimmy

slowgino

posted: 3/28/2008 at 1:25 AM

Quote from formationflier on 3/23/2008 at 8:16 PM:

..Many also seem to be able to knock off a near peak 10k performance even after 20 miles...

Wow, did this bring back a memory... That's exactly what I did in my first marathon (age 39.) Did the first 20 a little under 8 min/mile pace. Got excited at 20, turned on the afterburners, and was under 6:30 pace from there to the finish. What an adrenaline rush, passing all those people. Thanks for reminding me. Gino

HankAchieve

posted: 3/28/2008 at 2:29 AM
modified: 3/28/2008 at 2:29 AM

Thanks Jimmy, certainly think your advice has a lot of merit. May look at incorporating a MRP session a week and do the rest at MAF, particularly keeping my long run MAF. My main aim has to be getting to the start line followed by getting to the finish line. The time that it takes is important but only relevant if the first two aims are achieved! I guess if all goes well and I notice that my times continue to drop at MAF, it may then be worth revising my MRP but until then will continue to build. Hank

Just running for the fun of it!

OnceADCV

posted: 3/28/2008 at 9:32 AM

Quote from HankAchieve on 3/28/2008 at 2:29 AM:

Thanks Jimmy, certainly think your advice has a lot of merit. May look at incorporating a MRP session a week and do the rest at MAF, particularly keeping my long run MAF. My main aim has to be getting to the start line followed by getting to the finish line. The time that it takes is important but only relevant if the first two aims are achieved! I guess if all goes well and I notice that my times continue to drop at MAF, it may then be worth revising my MRP but until then will continue to build. Hank

I would agree with Jimmy. Since your mpw is low right now, your first priority should be to increase mileage per week. And most of that should be at aerobic pace. On some of your long runs you might want to throw in a couple of miles at MRP HR (85%ish max), but I would concentrate on getting that mileage per week up. I'm running about 60-70 mpw right now and what I've been doing is a midweek long run (15 miles) with 5 miles at tempo pace in the middle (90%max). On the weekends I've been doing two kinds of long runs (20-22). One type of long run is easy to start, a bunch of miles (8-13) in the middle @ MRP HR (86-87%) and easy to end. Another run I like is a progressive long run. First 1/4 at MAF, next 1/4 at MAF+6, next 1/4 at MAF+12, next 1/4 at MAF+18 where MAF+18 is my MRP HR. This is what I've done for Boston. For my fall marathon, I am hoping to switch back to Daniels Marathon Plan A at the beginning of June. From Boston to June, I'm think of actually of doing a lot of slow running (using MAF-5) to improve aerobically better. Since I like running in warm weather better, I'm hoping to get my max MPW to 90.

HankAchieve

posted: 3/28/2008 at 9:15 PM

Thanks DCV, i suppose in hindsight what I was really after was the way to incorporate some above MAF runs into my training sessions as opposed to genuine 'speed sessions' - your suggestions certainly look like a good way of doing that. I certainly plan to continue to increase my mileage in the build up to the marathon, at the moment my longest week planned is just over 50 miles, however I think as my pace continues to improve and I can do more in the same amount of time on the legs then I may be able to revise that. While I'm determined to not increase too rapidly and risk injury, would I be safe in assuming that if I am increasing the time on my legs by say 10 per cent, that I can have some flexibility in distance or is that flawed? Hank

Just running for the fun of it!

OnceADCV

posted: 3/29/2008 at 10:44 AM

Quote from HankAchieve on 3/28/2008 at 9:15 PM:

Thanks DCV, i suppose in hindsight what I was really after was the way to incorporate some above MAF runs into my training sessions as opposed to genuine 'speed sessions' - your suggestions certainly look like a good way of doing that. I certainly plan to continue to increase my mileage in the build up to the marathon, at the moment my longest week planned is just over 50 miles, however I think as my pace continues to improve and I can do more in the same amount of time on the legs then I may be able to revise that. While I'm determined to not increase too rapidly and risk injury, would I be safe in assuming that if I am increasing the time on my legs by say 10 per cent, that I can have some flexibility in distance or is that flawed? Hank

If you've never done this kind of mileage before (i.e. 40+ mpw) then I would definitely follow the 10% rule. Even a strict plan like Daniels Marathon Plan A kind of follows the 10% rule with cutback weeks as you are not always at your max MPW (maybe only 3-4 out of 18 are at max) and you gradulaly build up to that going 80%max for two weeks to 90% max back down to 70% then up... My main suggestion is to just follow what your body is telling you. if you are running too much it will tell you that by either you feeling tired, sore or sluggish or your HR will start to become higher at the same paces....

Docster

posted: 3/29/2008 at 10:53 PM

Quote from formationflier on 3/27/2008 at 6:49 PM:

I would contend that anyone who blew out by going out too fast at the beginning of Boston: (1) does not train using a MAF approach and does not know his limits (2) did not do significant downhill training or (3) did not wear a heart rate monitor in the race. With that said, it is extremely difficult to keep any kind of a good pace going for the first 6 miles or more of Boston because most of the crowd is braking and holding up traffic. I was zigzagging back and forth for the first hour of the race, which wasted a lot of time and energy. If you follow a MAF approach strictly, then you train by effort and not by pace; hence your downhill paces will always be faster than your flat or uphill paces and that logic should transfer to the race. If you train by pace, then certainly it would be natural to recover/brake on the downs and race the heart rate on the ups and the flats.

Great points. I've witnessed this numerous times in some of my races. Generally speaking, I'm not sure I've ever had anyone blow by me up a hill that I haven't passed (for good) in the "long run". Smile

My wife is a fantastic example of "effort pacing". She is a very efficient downhill runner (we both use HRM's of course) and she can fly down hills...sometimes I can't believe the HR she gives me. Smile

Uphills are ok, but nothing like downhills for her. I'm kind of the opposite...I do OK on downhills, and a fair bit better on uphills. Hills (and temperatures...) are a big reason why I use my HRM during races. If the course isn't flat, then your mile splits should not necessarily be that consistent. A flat mile run at 7:00 pace is NOT the same as a 7:00 mile that climbs 100 feet and descends 100 feet for a net of zero elevation gain. The energy expenditure is far from equal. This is critical for even experienced runners to understand.

formationflier

run-easy-race-hard

posted: 3/30/2008 at 12:58 PM

This is not really relevant to anything, only vaguely related to the earlier conversation, but I noticed that yesterday's National Marathon had an award category called "Red Bull Negative Split" results, which had the largest differential improvement from the first half to the second: http://www.nationalmarathon.com/Results/2008/redbull_negative.asp Either some of them took a nap somewhere in the first half, they paced someone for the first half and ran the second, or they were trying to be way too conservative to start out! Of course it would be easy to contrive a victory in such a nebulous category if you didn't care about your ultimate finishing time!

low HR training FAQ
my marathons and ultras
my races and reports

Low HR Training

"Anaerobic" Phase HRT (over MAF) Reports & Discussion (Read 6050 times)