Forums >Racing>Daniels or Pfitzinger?
Hehe, that's why I said "most". Anyway, the 18-55 plan has me doing only a 14 mile MLR during the week once. The rest are 12 miles or shorter. So, stretching the lunch break to 1.5 hours once a week is manageable for me. The 18-70 requires a lot more time (obviously). That's why I think the OP should see which plan fits her lifestyle/schedule better. Like others have said, you can't go wrong with either plan.
Hehe, that's why I said "most". Anyway, the 18-55 plan has me doing only a 14 mile MLR during the week once. The rest are 12 miles or shorter. So, stretching the lunch break to 1.5 hours once a week is manageable for me. The 18-70 requires a lot more time (obviously).
That's why I think the OP should see which plan fits her lifestyle/schedule better. Like others have said, you can't go wrong with either plan.
Oh yeah, I didn't check the 55. The 70 has a 15 MLR 6 weeks in a row, plus another with a 14, and many of those weeks have a 2nd MLR of 12ish thrown in. That thing is a grind.
But I agree with any plan the thing to do is review it to make sure it will fit into your life. Because if it will require too many modifications of your schedule, or if your schedule will require too many modifications of the plan, it's not gonna work out.
Dave
my experience with Pfitz has been very positive and i can wholly recommend his approach...while i've read Daniels, i haven't trained through his plan. a lot of people on this site (and elsewhere) recommended Pfitz to me, and the plan helped me reach my (ambitious) goal so i'm probably biased. I've bought the book for several friends as well, as it has great advice even beyond the plans.
I"m sure either plan will get you where you want to go...both have volume and quality. good luck, and enjoy!
Waltons ThreadLord
A lot of good back and forth points here. Does any of it change with the age and speed of the runner? For example, someone like me who started running later in life, ran his first marathon at age 50, and whose PR is 4:47. Is one or the other better for older, slower runners?
5k 23:48.45 (3/22); 4M 31:26 (2/22); 5M 38:55 (11/23); 10k 49:24 (10/22); 10M 1:29:33 (2/24); Half 1:48:32 (10/22); Marathon 4:29:58 (11/23)Upcoming races: Clinton Country Run 15k, 4/27; Running is Back 10k, 5/12
I don't think so. I started running later in life, first marathon at 47, first Pfitz cycle at 51. Age may be an influence as to whether your body can hold up to the stress of a hard training plan, but is certainly not the determining factor. I think it's more whether you've had sufficient mileage volume over the last year or two, to prepare yourself. Your speed just determines how fast you do the workouts; although maybe if you are slower you're better off with the 55 than the 70, just to limit time on your feet.
I thought he was talking about Daniels vs Pfitz rather than the 55 vs 70. I would imagine Pfitz as more straightforward. That would be my recommendation anyway.
You are probably right (as usual). I could only comment on Pfitz anyway. I just read the question as to whether any of these plans are too dangerous for fragile old people and our brittle bones.
Yes, that was the basis of my question, thank you. As to speed, I've never been fast, even as a child, and that hasn't changed with age. :-)
Never too late! I would start with the 18/55. It has two days off per week which I thought was really great as a physical and mental recovery as well as kind of necessary physical and mental preparation for the workouts. I would try to understand the purpose of the workouts that are proposed and, rather than try to follow them to a T, run them with the proper intention.