Login
Furman FIRST Training
12

Welcome/Introductions (Read 236 times)
va
posted: 11/30/2007 at 1:13 AM
modified: 12/7/2007 at 3:27 PM
Hi, I am relatively new to running, but have logged enough easy miles that I am interested in mixing things up and trying something new. The FIRST program looks interesting to me due to its emphasis on quality work-outs and cross-training, so I want to give it a try. I’d love to hear from others who have experience with FIRST-like training, either good or bad, as well as others, like myself, who are interested in learning about and discussing different approaches to training.
TrailSurfer
Husband and father of 4
 posted: 11/30/2007 at 4:01 AM
Hi- this group sounds interesting. I am going to do some research on furman first training. I like the approach. I already do a variety of activities and am just starting to train with a plan that includes running. I am using an adapted version of a Higdon 15K training program -- the novice one. Right now my only running goal is a 15k trail run in mid-January. I don't list everything on my logs... surfing, hikes & paddling don't really have a place and it would get too complicated.

I like what it sounds like you are doing with training. I like the concepts of balance and quality in training. Although I need an easy run now and then to clear my head or remind myself to enjoy training.

I look forward to learning more about Furman and FIRST.
Find the fun.
va
posted: 11/30/2007 at 11:17 AM
Welcome TS! Yeah, I really enjoy easy runs as well, but I think if I am going to improve as a runner, I need to start including some more quality work-outs in my training. I am hoping that the FIRST idea of balancing hard running work-outs with non-load bearing cross-training will allow me to do this. Regarding finding out more about the FIRST program, the Furman web site has a lot of info, including specific training plans. Also, I think their new book, "Run Less, Run Faster" is pretty good. Have you participated in many running races, or is this 15K trail race your first?
TexasRunner
posted: 12/4/2007 at 3:53 PM
I've been using the program for the last 6 weeks or so. I've been using the 5K program as I'm not a marathoner (I've run one), and I don't have a goal race. I'm just trying to get somewhere close to where I used to be.

So far, I've managed to drop my 5K from 21:43 (prior to the program) to 20:09 on T-Day. That last race was run in the cold and wind. I was actually way ahead of 20-minute pace before I hit the wind and uphill of the last mile. While I really haven't lost any weight, I've toned up quite a bit, especially through the core area.

Prior to starting the FIRST program, I was running about 40-50 miles per week, but most of it was at an easy pace. I run early in the morning, and I would often bag my hard days until "tomorrow." "Tomorrow" never came in most cases.

As noted on the thread introducing this user group, I do 3 days of running, 2 days of spin classes, and 2 days of rowing. Someone wanted to know more about the x-training, so I'll start with this:

Spin Classes: I belong to LA Fitness. They have spin classes that I attend on Mondays and Fridays at 5:45 a.m. I just do whatever the instructor tells us to do. I don't know enough about biking to set up my own workouts. I sometimes also go on Wednesdays. Since I'm in control of the resistance, I can push as hard as I want. I usually have a river of sweat running across the floor after the 45-minute to 1-hour session.

Rowing: I try to do 2 rowing sessions per week. The first is a steady-state tempo type workout where I row for 30 minutes. Getting used to the rowing comes quick. It took me 25 minutes to row 5000 meters in my first workout. I now row over 7000 meters in 30 minutes.

This is all going by gut feeling and trial-and-error. I set the resistance at a certain level (let's say 5 for this exercise). Once I can hit 7000m for 30 minutes, I move the resistance to 6 for the next workout. It goes to 7 when I hit 7000m in 30 minutes on level 6.

The other workout is a session of 8 * 500m w/ a 1-minute rest. After a 5-minute easy row to warmup, I do 8 * 500m. I set the resistance so that I can complete each rep in 1:45-1:50. I row easy for the minute in between. When I can handle the pace at that resistance, I move it up the next time. Why 500m? The machine has a program that allows for 500m repeats. Smile Why 1:45-1:50 for the time? Gut feeling. I also know that it's similar to my 600m running times when I was running faster (at a younger age).

I use the rowing as my resistance exercises as I don't really have time for lifting since I'm in public accounting and work a bunch of hours.

As you can tell, I'm going hard virtually every day of the week in some form. I contacted the FIRST people and got different responses regarding the intensity of my workouts. One of the respondees suggested that I might be able to do some of the running workouts harder if I took a day off. Another respondee said to go for it if I feel good and seem to be recovering from my workouts. At age 42 (nearly 43), I have 30 years of running a bunch under my belt. I just don't recover like I used to, and this program seems to allow me to recover pretty well.

Feel free to ask any questions about what I do. Most of it is gut feeling, but it might generate a discussion where I can learn something.
va
posted: 12/4/2007 at 4:14 PM
modified: 12/4/2007 at 4:15 PM
Hi TexasRunner, Thanks for all of the details on your cross-training. I had some questions about the running work-outs...Which of the 3 do you find the most challenging - repeats, tempo run, or long run? I suppose this could be split into two questions - which is the hardest to complete? and which takes the longest to recover from? Also, how closely do you follow the recommended paces in the Furman program? Did you update your paces after you ran your Thanksgiving 5K race (congrats on your improvement!)?

MTA: I am an older runner too (46 soon to be 47). So, recovery is something that I am concerned about.
TexasRunner
posted: 12/4/2007 at 5:21 PM
I find the most challenging run to be the long run. The main reasons are that you don't have ready access to your pace like on a track, and I've spent too much time slogging around in recent years. 7:16 pace is not really that hard, but I struggle to stay close to that pace right now. I tend to go too fast too early, and it becomes a painful endeavor to the finish. The first time I ran it, I did it on a measured course that didn't have mile markers, and it was dark. In my 'panic' to hit the proper pace, I ended up running sub-7 minute miles the whole way.

I do update my paces as I improve. I didn't go straight from 21:43 to 20:09 as I had run another race in 20-something along the way. As I mentioned, I do almost all of my runs at 5 a.m. when it is still dark. For pace control, I set the countdown timer on my watch for the 400m pace I'm trying to hit. Thus, if I'm running repeats 800s at 2:59 (based on my current time), I set the watch for 90 seconds and try to come through the first lap in 89/90. I'm usually pretty close on the track.

Last week, I did 2 * 1 mile in 6:13 w/ a 400j and followed it with an 800 in 2:59. I hit 6:10 on both 1600s. I then surprised myself with a 2:54 800 on supposedly dead legs.

I do the same thing for the tempo run unless I move it to the treadmill for weather reasons. At that point, the tempo run becomes my hardest workout because it seems to last forever. I tend to put a towel over the display and will glance at the distance covered after each song on the mp3 player. That keeps me from going nuts watching one dot at a time light up as I 'circle the track.'

None of the workouts are overly difficult to recover from. The x-training keeps me from feeling stiff and sore then next time I run. I would experience a lot of stiffness the day after a hard run, and it was really bad if I skipped the day after a run. I only sleep 5-6 hours per night, and I find that I can get up and handle a x-training session easier than pounding myself on easy days. I look forward to the running sessions because there is a purpose to each one, and there is a challenge to be met.

I would imagine that the long run would be the hardest in a marathon plan. I personally think that the long run becomes hard because I'm attaching a predetermined pace to it instead of just going out and running. Running 7:16 pace is not that difficult for me, but having to run it puts some stress on me.
va
posted: 12/4/2007 at 5:35 PM
Thanks TR, good info! I hope that I have the same experience with recovery. What you describe sounds real good.

Btw, I recently got a Garmin. This should help me with pacing the tempo and long runs, when not on a track or treadmill...
marcus_g
posted: 12/6/2007 at 3:32 AM
Garmins are a Godsend for a plan as precise as the FIRST plan...

As for me, the tempos were by far the hardest to do and the long runs were by far the easiest..... in trading e-mails with the FIRST guys, they said most people struggle with the tempos...
Go to http://certainintelligence.blogspot.com for my blog.

va
posted: 12/6/2007 at 4:14 AM
Hi marcus, glad you joined us. So what's next for you in terms of your training and target races? You had mentioned after Harrisburg that you were thinking of adopting some things from Fitzgerald's Brain Training program.
TexasRunner
posted: 12/6/2007 at 3:29 PM
Quote from marcus_g on 12/6/2007 at 3:32 AM:
Garmins are a Godsend for a plan as precise as the FIRST plan...

As for me, the tempos were by far the hardest to do and the long runs were by far the easiest..... in trading e-mails with the FIRST guys, they said most people struggle with the tempos...


I wouldn't argue about the tempos being harder for most people. In my case, however, I do them on a track and can control the pace better than I could on the road. In my case, I'm doing a 4-mile tempo at MT pace (7:01) and an 8-mile long run at 7:16 pace. If I could relax my mind and just run, I could probably do them okay, but I get concerned that I'm not holding pace.

For my first long run (if you call 5 miles long) on the 5K plan, I ran it on a 2.5-mile course that has a fairly long hill on it. I was running in the dark where I couldn't see my watch, and I don't have the miles marked off. I could take my split at the halfway point and again at the finish. I was aiming for 18:10 for each half. I ran the first loop in 18:13 and panicked on the 2nd loop because I thought I was running too slow. I ran that loop in 17:10.
marcus_g
posted: 12/10/2007 at 2:57 PM
I'm taking the month of December and dedicating it to - as much as possible - trail running. More days per week, better full leg workouts, and joint recovery. So far, so good. Smile

In January, I'm going to start training for the Wilmington Marathon in May - pretty much using a plan that's half Fitzgerald, half FIRST. Basically, I'm doing the FIRST plan for the long run - and then I compare the Fitz. tempo/interval workouts with the FIRST ones and do the 1 I think I can complete. Most of the Fitz tempo work is at half-marathon pace, which I can pound pretty well. FIRST uses two other faster tempo paces, and my personal failure rate was a bit higher than I thought was good.
Go to http://certainintelligence.blogspot.com for my blog.

va
posted: 12/10/2007 at 4:23 PM
Hi marcus, besides the paces being a little different, how else does this fitzgerald plan differ from FIRST? Is it a 3 day a week plan? What is the gist of it?

Also, I have not heard much about the Wilmington marathon. What do you know about it? What made you choose it for your next?
marcus_g
posted: 12/11/2007 at 2:58 AM
FIRST is 3 runs, plus 2 XT's/week.
Fitz is 5 runs, plus 1 XT/week - slightly slower pacing than FIRST and fewer 20 milers (though - as mentioned - I'm using the FIRST long runs). I also might decide to do 4 runs and 2 XT's.

The main reason I'm using Fitz is because my performance on FIRST is a bit too uneven.... technically, you should find a groove where all 3 workouts are tough, but not too tough.... I can't find that groove, so I either fail at shorter workouts or don't challenge myself on the long runs. So, I'm making my own.

In my last marathon, I hit the wall hard @ 22 and wonder if partially this was because I was always fresh for my 20 milers... I want a plan that has me a bit more tired going into the long runs.

All of that being said, I'm not knocking FIRST... what FIRST is really about is saving your legs by NOT doing junk miles (easy runs)... I just don't think I maximized my potential well enough on FIRST and also think I can use the stress of some easy runs to build more endurance on the long runs.

Why Wilmington? 1) It's a flat course. 2) It's a little marathon... I really love the idea of a low-stress drive and start. 3) It's within an hour of me - we've got two kids busy w/ swim team and I'm a master of not letting running cut into family time. I pretty much run over my lunch hour and do my long run before they're up on the weekend, so a local marathon is a big plus for me.

As important, I won't make the final call and register until a month before... that's what I did with Harrisburg and enjoyed many races and PR's along the way... so, it's a goal I'll train for, but if things aren't coming together, I expect to enter the summer racing season sharp and will ramp up for a fall marathon (likely Steamtown).

And also... if I'm lucky enough to BQ in May, that gives me plenty of time to try and achieve another goal - completing the JFK 50 miler in the fall --- though, I haven't exactly told the wife about that one yet. Smile
Go to http://certainintelligence.blogspot.com for my blog.

va
posted: 12/11/2007 at 2:44 PM
I think it makes sense to adjust your training based on your personal experience.

Wilmington sounds good. I also like the convenience of close by races. For me, Richmond was only an hour a way, and it was very convenient to drive there on race day.

25 years ago I did some bike touring. Once I passed through Wilmington, my recollection was that it had some big long hills. I guess the marathon must be in a different part of town.
TexasRunner
posted: 12/12/2007 at 7:53 PM
For fun, I'll toss a wrench into the works.

It was mentioned about being a bit tired going into the long runs in order to get the legs used to running tired. Back in the day, I ran my first (and only) marathon in 2:50.

My long run was only 14 miles, and that was done one time. However, I was running between 70 and 75 miles per week, and I had a bunch of 10-12 mile runs at 6:30 pace. That's the pace I held during the marathon.

I'm seeing more and more programs that emphasize overall higher mileage while reducing the number and length of long runs. The idea being that the legs and body are constantly in a depleted state. I also had a friend run a 2:24, and he had only 3 20-mile runs. They all came during races. However, he was also running 120+ miles per week.

I know this is way off the topic of this user group, but I thought it'd be interesting to provide some food for thought.
12
Feedback  |  Help
© 2005 – 2009 RunningAHEAD.com. All rights reserved.