Calling anyone interested in a Running - Wizard training group (Read 1462 times)

Nobby,

Thanks for the clarification on the O&B and PCR. just did my first PCR yesterday, so this was very timely!

Molly

Also appreciate the info on the PCR run. I start hills next week in my 5K plan and the first time I read the description of the PCR run I thought that i was basically going out at close to race pace and was starting to dread it. So, it is most like an out and back, but slightly faster right??

Happy Valentine's Day!!

RACE EFFORT maybe (still, you'd want it not quite at race effort) but hardly EVER race pace.  Far too many people make this mistake particularly with a marathon; they don't seem to understand that, while TRAINING, their stress level is so much higher.  Many now talk about "taper" for the race.  Yet, they don't understand and implement that concept into their actual training.  Why taper?  So the body would have a breather and bounce back and be ready for the race.  Do you do that for whatever the workout--tempo, interval, whatever--so you'll be able to run as fast for that workout?  No!  Think about it.  Those who try RACE PACE during training most likely won't even achieve that pace in the actual race.

PCR stands for Progress Calibration Run (it's Lorraine's brain-child--she's good with coming up with all these fancy names! ;o)).  That basically means we have several ways to gauge our progress.  For example, say, you run 5 miles at 9-minute pace this week and your HR was 165 (I'm picking up bogus numbers).  Next week, you run the same 5-mile at 8:50 pace and your HR was 165; then you're progressing 10-seconds per mile faster AT THE SAME EFFORT.  That is the progress and that should happen naturally--not by trying to achieve it.  So you need to be "calibrating" all the time.  We have explicit numbers, which may not be the best way to go about, but we're also showing a very good guide-line.  With O&B, you may be improving a few seconds each week simply because you're getting fitter.  With PCR, you'll be picking up 5-10 seconds per mile faster because you'll be working out to be faster during that period.  You do hill training and do it correctly (meaning, without over-taxing your body), then it really would happen--you will be getting faster without trying to run faster.

Some may argue that you'd HAVE TO run at race PACE in order for the body to get used to run that speed.  Theory is fine and most of us talk of these theories.  Few understands how to put them together in a practical sense.  Your strides, done even during Conditioning Phase if the race distance is shorter, is more or less 5k pace; Cut-Downs where you'd do 3 X 100m at progressively faster, would get it down to your projected 1500m pace or even faster; and in the final few weeks, you'll be doing almost full-sprint in a workout like 50/50.  In other words, you'll be stimulating ALL paces throughout the plan and YOU WON'T BE DOING THAT WHEN YOU'RE NOT READY.  As far as we're concerned, no point trying to run all-out (in early stage of the plan) when you can't even run all-out.  But that's so many people try to do--"Oh, I need to work on my speed so I'll start doing some fast runs..." when they can't even run fast!!  This is the pyramid we always talk about.  THE RACE is on the top and you'll be sharpening stage by stage, workout by workout.  As far as we're concerned, no point slapping some workouts here and there without coordinating ALL of them fully, orchestrating each and every workout in a logical way.

Jon:

Lydiard used to say that "What you do this year is really for next year..."  What it means is that, you do Lydiard-type pyramid training cycle once and that would benefit you for the next cycle.  I didn't quite understand this at first and thought that, if I keep on training and keep on pushing, I'll get better and faster...  It didn't quite happen that way.  But rather, the progress happens like this; so you start out as, let's just pick some bogus number, 23-minutes 5k runner.  According to our formula, which is pretty much the same as McMillan's or Daniels (it's all based roughly on calculated VO2Max so there shouldn't be that much of a difference; only the training pace may vary a bit depending on the training philosophy).  According to our formula, which is developed by Dr. Dick Brown, if you go through a cycle, you'll improve your 5k time by roughly 50 seconds.  That's roughly 15 seconds per mile.  In other words, when you start the next cycle, you are NO LONGER A 23-MINUTE 5K RUNNER.  You are 22:50 runner and you'll be running roughly 10-15 seconds per mile faster AT THE SAME EFFORT.

Many people think that you keep on improving just by running--running a lot or running slowly.  To a degree, yes.  But real improvement and progress comes with a well-rounded training program and one program is built upon the previous progress.  With a successful training program, you should improve steadily one cycle to the next.  You might be experiencing this progress.  Depending on how you feel, you may want to consider (1) do more days of running, (2) push the duration of the runs upward of "longest suggested duration" or (3) push the pace closer to the "fastest suggested pace".  Running fast is not necessarily a bad thing as long it's controlled.  Make sure you check your Daily Recovery Indicators Index so as not to over-train yourself.

Hi Nobby,

 

My 5K went pretty well.  My left ITB was a bit cranky after running the downhills hard during my half marathon in Philly so I opted to just run easy efforts with strides leading up to my attempt to better my 5K.  I ended up taking my 5K PR from 22:45 to 21:23 (splits 6:43, 6:57, 6:53).  I think that I could have run a faster race but I am happy with the result.  I used 21:23 as my starting point for another Running Wizard plan for a 5K in late May (currently just starting the Hills phase).

 

I am having a somewhat different experience this time around as I go through the Running Wizard plan.  Last time, I noticed a huge fitness improvement in the later phases and I had to be very careful to keep the paces in the recommended range to avoid sharpening too soon.  This time around, I am noticing that the fitness surge is occurring easier in the training cycle leaving me with the high class problem of finding the runs fairly easy.  I hope that this indicates that my 5K in May will be a good race.  In the meantime, I will stay on plan and resist the urge to run faster.

 

Thanks!

Jon:

 

Lydiard used to say that "What you do this year is really for next year..."  What it means is that, you do Lydiard-type pyramid training cycle once and that would benefit you for the next cycle.  I didn't quite understand this at first and thought that, if I keep on training and keep on pushing, I'll get better and faster...  It didn't quite happen that way.  But rather, the progress happens like this; so you start out as, let's just pick some bogus number, 23-minutes 5k runner.  According to our formula, which is pretty much the same as McMillan's or Daniels (it's all based roughly on calculated VO2Max so there shouldn't be that much of a difference; only the training pace may vary a bit depending on the training philosophy).  According to our formula, which is developed by Dr. Dick Brown, if you go through a cycle, you'll improve your 5k time by roughly 50 seconds.  That's roughly 15 seconds per mile.  In other words, when you start the next cycle, you are NO LONGER A 23-MINUTE 5K RUNNER.  You are 22:50 runner and you'll be running roughly 10-15 seconds per mile faster AT THE SAME EFFORT.

 

Many people think that you keep on improving just by running--running a lot or running slowly.  To a degree, yes.  But real improvement and progress comes with a well-rounded training program and one program is built upon the previous progress.  With a successful training program, you should improve steadily one cycle to the next.  You might be experiencing this progress.  Depending on how you feel, you may want to consider (1) do more days of running, (2) push the duration of the runs upward of "longest suggested duration" or (3) push the pace closer to the "fastest suggested pace".  Running fast is not necessarily a bad thing as long it's controlled.  Make sure you check your Daily Recovery Indicators Index so as not to over-train yourself.

 

Nobby:

I think that the consistency in training that I have been able to achieve using the Running Wizard approach has really helped. I have been able to train consistently without interruption due to injury for the better part of a year now, and I credit the approach of the training plan where individual building blocks are assembled sequentially over a longer training cycle.    As to your recommendations, it is funny that I had a similar thought.   During last week’s long run, I pushed the distance to the maximum suggested by the plan while keeping the pace moderate (16 miles in 2:30 - 9:25 average pace).  During today’s long run, I kept the distance shorter while running at a pace that was at the faster end of the suggested range (14 miles in 2:05 – 8:56 average pace).  Both runs felt quite comfortable and I think that I will continue this approach of mixing up the distance and pace as long as my perceived effort level stays easy.

I may also add an additional day of easy running if all continues to go well and my recovery indicators stay in the safe zone.  I have been limiting my running to 4 days per week to accommodate an ugly 3 hour per day commute to work.  I could probably fit in one other training day for a short easy run.  I am assuming that adding another day where I run 30-45 minutes is preferable to adding distance to my other runs?  I am already running close to 40MPW over four weekly runs and I think I would benefit more from adding another day versus adding distance to the existing runs in the training schedule.    Thoughts on this would be appreciated.

Thanks

Jon

Thanks, SubDood!

There are target heart rates, if that's what you're looking for. But I have no idea how those heart rate ranges were derived. I recall being asked about my rest heart rate, but not max, so who knows what formula they used.

i just stick to the pace/duration recommendations and go from there. In my specific case, my actual HR during the workouts is typically lower than the recommended HR ranges.

A question for those of you with experience using the Running Wizard plans. (Or, of course, for Nobby.)

 

If one wanted to purchase and follow a RW training plan AND also incorporate heart-rate zone training, would it be fairly easy to do so? I know that the plans give pace and duration guidelines. Which would take precedence? I would assume duration but would rather be sure.

 

Thanks.

You can use EITHER duration OR distance.  The original program (as developed by Dick Brown) was based solely on duration.  And we believe that's how it should be.  However, how many of you actually go running and say, "Oh, I'm supposed to run 53-minutes today..." and you get to 4 blocks from home and the watch clicks "53-minutes" and you stop and walk home?  And how many of you look at the schedule and all the workout is shown in minutes and wonder, "Well, it says 45-minutes and I always enjoy running around that lake and I know it's 4-miles around and it takes me about 48 minutes..."  Frankly, it wouldn't matter that much if it's 45 minutes or 48 minutes.  In fact, we rounded up or down for distance (shown as duration divided by pace) because, again, it's silly to show the distance as 7.3 miles...  Basically, whichever is easy for you to use; pick one.

As for Heart Rate, ours is based on Karvonen formula, using resting heart rate and age.  I know far too many people are hooked with this so-called maximum heart rate.  We found out that there were (at least based on our research) 21 different formula to come up with Maximum Heart Rate.  In short, the best way to determine Max HR is to hop on a treadmill and actually do a max test.  The worst one, in my opinion, is to use whatever the number minus age formula.  Some old folks have much better fitness level and they can manage much higher stress (=higher HR) than some unfit young folks.  Likewise, some young people have very high HR, basically indicating low fitness level (not always necessarily) and they can't even push that much (=max being lower).  We found Karvonen's formula makes most sense, taking BOTH resting HR and age into consideration.  Is it perfect?  Most probably not.  I don't think any of us know how to get the Max HR correctly by using any formula.  And this is why we provided the range.  If you take 100 people using this formula, I think vast majority would fall into this range but I wouldn't be surprised if some fall off either side of it.  Jim Ryun's resting HR was way above 60 but that was not a good indication of whether or not he's fit or not.  So HR is a very tricky thing.  However, in general, I personally found it to be a pretty good indication of how hard or easy you're exercising--much better than simply going by some number formula for your pace (Garmin).  I found it absolutely ridiculous to go by the actual numbers shown on treadmill--I found it's better to go by HR, better still by RPE (which we also show on RW plan).  We basically mix all of them up so as to be used as a good educational tool--we want the user to check out what, say, 9-minute pace feels like using RPE, what your HR is like when you're running at that pace and compare that with other workouts.  We tried to provide all the possible "indicators" for pace and effort.  Along with Recovery Indicators, it is our hope that the users come a good term with your own self to become a good "body whisperer".

A question for those of you with experience using the Running Wizard plans. (Or, of course, for Nobby.)

 

If one wanted to purchase and follow a RW training plan AND also incorporate heart-rate zone training, would it be fairly easy to do so? I know that the plans give pace and duration guidelines. Which would take precedence? I would assume duration but would rather be sure.

 

Thanks.

Thanks Nobby- I am also using the Karvonen formula, except I'm using the ranges based off of Max HR instead of age.

Thanks SubDood- Again I'm just glad to hear that HR ranges are suggested by the plan. I'm sure now that I can work with it. Are you keeping with the suggested durations?