Forums >Running 101>Beginner Q: spread distance over more runs
runktrun
P.S. marathoners do not run marathons in training, do they? So your idea of training beyond your goal isn't really true.
Some serious marathoners will run overdistance, it's not that unusual. I know plenty of sub 2:20 guys and sub 2:40 girls that will run 24-25mi long runs and still race well. Regardless of distance, many marathoners will run close to or longer than their projected goal time, with a chunk of that run at race pace. It depends on each person's strengths and weaknesses. I'm not saying that's the best way to train, but some people do it and do it well.
Not running for my health, but in spite of it.
Feeling the growl again
I wrote about the 10% increase above. P.S. marathoners do not run marathons in training, do they? So your idea of training beyond your goal isn't really true.
I wrote about the 10% increase above.
The 10% "rule" is complete bunk. For low mileage runners it is a silly small increase. For someone running 100 miles per week it is too large.
In reality, it's more about adding something, and being willing to listen to your body and step back when you need to, then forward again when you are ready.
The "10% rule" was conjured from thin air to sell Runners World magazines.
And please, don't compare running a 5K in training to running a marathon in training. There is no similarity whatsoever.
If you have been running for 1.5 years and can't comfortably cover more than 3K, the most likely explanation is that your "easy pace" is most people's race pace. This is a common issue with newer runners. Just slow down. Once you think you have it right, slow down some more. Then get up your distance, THEN let yourself speed back up.
"If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does. There's your pep talk for today. Go Run." -- Slo_Hand
I am spaniel - Crusher of Treadmills
Awesome
You have no idea how long I've been waiting to hear this from one of you knowledgable guys. I feel such an inappropriate sense of relief right now.
A phys.ed. teacher once told me that 25 minutes was the minimum amount of time for an activity to have an aerobic benefit to your body. That has always stuck with me. I don't know if the number is exact, but my opinion is that if you can't run 5K after 1.5 years, you need to work on your aerobic system. So, I would suggest maybe training by time. 3 times 25 minutes, as slow as it needs to be, and then increase either the amount of time of each run, or the number of times per week.
You'll run 5k in no time, not even aiming for that number.
This is all great information, thanks everyone!
Dennis McCaffrey
http://imgur.com/ib0Fice
https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/shrink_100_100/p/8/000/291/1a5/2f408b0.jpg
http://photos3.zillowstatic.com/h_g/ISd69djs7j1ig3.jpg
https://media.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/shrinknp_200_200/p/1/005/019/2c7/2943798.jpg
If you've been consistently running for a year and a half, it seems like it has to be a function of the pace you are running at. Slow it down and you should be able to take on longer distances. As for the 10% rule... I think it was really just trying to get people to not do "too much too fast". It's a good measure, though not perfect. I agree with some of the other people posting that listening to your body is key. Don't get too wrapped up in standard measures. Everyone is different. If you are feeling really beat up in your training, take your foot off the pedal a bit.
That said, I think you can totally do this. Sounds like you've got some good consistent running under your belt. Time to take the next step...