running under the BigSky
would love to hear what folks think on tapering before a race-when, how long, etc
thanks
2023 goal 2023 miles √
2022 goal- 2022 miles √
2021 goal- 2021 miles √
Endless trails
I imagine there are many points of view on this; typically the longest run at 3 weeks before target race. I've also recently read an article that explained the
benefits of short, fast runs a few days before the race. I've had pretty good experience with the 3 week taper, reduce mileage, then reduce mileage again
during final week. I still struggle a little with that final week before a race.
This guy has some tips on tapering, under the Racing section.
http://fellrnr.com/wiki/Main_Page#Racing
Faster Than Your Couch!
For shorter distances, I don't do much of a taper, I just do my normal runs, keeping the distances a bit shorter than usual in the week before the event. And I stay off running for 2-3 days before the race.
For ultra distances, I have done 2-week and 3-week tapers, and I have not noticed a difference. Perhaps I did a bit better with the shorter taper? But I also tend to loose confidence during a long taper, so this might have been just in my mind.
I once did a rather long run (18 miles) a week before a 50-miler, and that was not such a great idea. Although ultimately it did not hurt my performance, I was still tired from it 4 days before the race, and I kept wondering about what I had done to myself. I would not recommend this.
During the taper, I keep the distances shorter, maybe add an extra rest day during the week, and try to do the short runs fairly fast. Medium runs about the same speed as usual, no long runs. But I'm by no means an expert, just saying!
Run for fun.
My experience with tapering doesn't come from running, but rather my background in swimming. (high school, club, Masters, etc.) it seems to me like my best performance came after a three week taper, where distances dropped by 20-25% per week, but intensity was kicked up each workout. the articles I've read all discuss the importance of keeping the intensity level high. To many people go into the taper and just let things slide, and take it easy. to make it effective, you need to be training at or above race pace, but for shorter times or distances. IMHO.
The ultrarunnner site ultrunr.com has a great article on tapering under the training headIng. It has some specific tips for ultra distances as well.
Trail and Ultra Running User Group
thanks gents
good read at the link you posted, I gleaned a few things out of it- looks like 2 weeks is about as long as you want to go (barring an injury), he points out that frequency should stay pretty close, but instead cut volume (mileage) back (incrementally 20-40%), don't decrease intensity and last long run in the 2-3 week out range
I'll check out the article at ultrunr.com-thanks
Tim
Two week taper works well for me. I eat, therefore I run, so I found I tend to gain weight on a three week taper.
I coach HS XC, and as an experiment of "one team", we used a two week taper this year before the District Championship meet. With rule changes, we had to win our district to qualify the team for the PA state meet (or individually place in the top 5 runners), so we put all of our training goals into performing well at districts.
Our girls team won and our boys was second. 13 out of 14 runners had PR's, on a course they had run earlier in the year and/or previous years. One boy qualified for the state meet based on finishing 3rd. We basically continued the taper and did some intense running after districts, as the state meet was one week away (three weeks from start of taper). At the state meet we had one girl out of seven run faster than the week before and our boy was two seconds off his time from the week before (same course). The kids said they felt sluggish.
I know this is not scientific, as there are many variables (especially dealing with teenagers), but here are our PR results:
Two week taper - 13 out of 14
Three week taper - 1 out of 8
“Paralysis-to-50k” training plan is underway!
^ very interesting to say the least; that does at least bolster Fellrnr's site and his findings