Favorite Marathon Workout? (Read 961 times)

Yup.  

To be clear, after posting and reading on here for 6 months now I think the advice given on here is much better than any of the generic training plans that are out there.  I'm still hung up on my HR stuff, but there are folks here with a ton of knowledge about that side of the coin as well.

Also, it will be 3 or 4 months before I will have my base built up to handle a 55 - 60 mile week.  Part of the reason I'm running close to 10:00 miles still is because of my HR hang up.  Most of the calculators are telling me my easy pace should be getting down closer to 9:00 pace based on my last 5K race time, but I'm hung up on running my easy miles truly easy and that ends up closer to 10:00 pace for me still, even a little slower on longer runs.

I might start expanding my easy runs to include some more moderately easy paces on the shorter ones (6 miles and less) and throw in some 9:00 type paces. It would allow me to get in some more mileage in the same amount of time anyway.  Running at a 75% HR vs. a 70% HR probably isn't going to be much higher risk of injury or anything.

As far as building a runner's body, I'm not sure I have much of a chance at that.  I think I can get down around 195, but not much less than that.  That would put me down under my weight from when I was a sophmore in college.  I don't think I have the body type that will ever be classified as a runner.

It would be an interesting experiment to just go with that base training plan with maybe only a 16 mile long run tops and then go run a marathon and see what the results were. 

Pfitzinger says that doubles should only be done after you crest 70mpw.  Before that you're getting reduced benefit from splitting your runs.

No he doesn't.  He says not to do it more than a couple times a week until you are in the 70s.

Edit:  Also, "what he said".

Interesting read.  However elites are, almost by definition, freaks of nature.  It is very hard to draw any real conclusions from how they train.

Marc Davis (1996 Olympian in the steeple and HS standout on par with the times of Bob Kennedy and Todd Willians) told me he never ran more than 50-odd mpw in his entire career...direct, personal communication.  He was pretty clear that he considered himself a freak and did not train average athletes (myself included) along those principles.  When I was under his coaching I was pretty much doing twice the volume he ever did.  I did not have freak elite genetics to work with.      Using the broad generalization brush, elites TEND to have a much higher tendency towards natural speed (especially those specializing 10K and under) and a higher ability to recover from fast workouts and/or frequent hard workouts.  That's what makes them elite.

I recently read that Alan Webb has hit some 100 mile weeks for the first time in his life.  For the mile AR holder and someone with a 27-low 10K PR, there is some freak talent.

A runner has to figure out what type of runner they are before deciding what kind of mileage they seek...especially if they are focusing on the marathon.

Why use mileage? Why not hours per week?

Daniels says "around 50 miles per week". I could look it up. Point being, it's probably good to get them in when you can handle it.

I believe Nobby has said "doubles are always better". Again, I'm sure he meant assuming you can handle it.

I think he is wrong on this, if this is what he says. I would like to see a direct quote. It is one thing to say that doubles are of minimal benefit below 70mpw, but it's another thing to phrase it as you have, which is that they should only be done past a certain threshold. That's a much stronger claim.

This is the direct quote from p144 of Advanced Marathoning.  I was paraphrasing from memory, of course.

"Doing Doubles

Marathoners have a tendency to start running twice a day before their weekly mileage warrants it.  Doing doubles sounds like serious training, so runners often assume it must be better marathon preparation.  The reality is quite different; as you increase your training mileage in preparation for a marathon, you should resist the urge to switch from single runs to doubles.

[. . . he talks about how doubles are better for 5K people . . . ]

For marathoners, the basic guideline is to not do double workouts until you've maximized the amount you're running in single workouts.  If you're preparing for a marathon, and are running less than 75miles a week, then you shouldn't regularly be running doubles.  If you're running less than 75miles a week, by the time you get in your long run and a midweek medium-long run, there's no reason to double more than once or twice a week to get in the remaining miles.  It's better to get in longer runs and give your body 22 or 23 hours of recovery between runs."

So, to me that says, eschew doubles until over 75mpw.  You can do it, of course, but it's better to run singles and get more contiguous recovery time.

MTA: further down he states that when your recovery days go over 8mi it is better to double those days for better recovery.

So, Stadjak, we went from the statement that Pfitz says that you should not run doubles over 70 miles per week to the statement that a) while in marathon training and b) when running a midweek long and long run and c) if running no more than 8 miles for your recovery days then its probably best to do no more than a couple of doubles a week. As the good sr says: Okay then. I'll agree with that. But I don't see how you boil that down to "eschew doubles under 75 miles a week" unless this is some weird "I can't be wrong on a message board" thing, but you don't strike me as that type of guy.

I was thinking about this thread on my run today, how likely it was that the message would get misconstrued, etc. That people would think that I was saying that the key to good training is doubling every day. Or running 100 mile weeks. Or training like an elite runner. Or running high mileage. Or listening to malmo.

That's because the tendency of all runners is to look for a single secret.

Doubles are not the secret.

100 mile weeks? Nope.

Long runs? Nope.

60 to 90 minute runs? Nope.

Longer singles? Nope.

Mid-week long run? Nope

None of these are the secret. In training everything is an art of building slowly from where you are to where you want to go. The secrets of running are like the secrets of life -- just as vague, requiring the same skills: self-knowledge, patience, experimentation, learning from those who came before, applying old ideas in new contexts, balancing training with all of the rest of our wild and unwieldy lives. I think training can be distilled into a set of principles about as well as life can, which is to say, not very well.

So, Stadjak, we went from the statement that Pfitz says that you should not run doubles over 70 miles per week to the statement that a) while in marathon training and b) when running a midweek long and long run and c) if running no more than 8 miles for your recovery days then its probably best to do no more than a couple of doubles a week. As the good sr says: Okay then. I'll agree with that. But I don't see how you boil that down to "eschew doubles under 75 miles a week" unless this is some weird "I can't be wrong on a message board" thing, but you don't strike me as that type of guy.

Nope, not that that kind of guy.  

I this is a case of 1) my recollection being a bit off; 2) trying to distill 2pages of text into 2 sentences; 3) varying interpretations of how strong an imperative "don't" is in regards to something like 18weeks of training and an experience that works differently for everyone.

I typed up the whole piece so you could read his own words, rather than have me mangle them.  I wasn't quoting as proof I was exactly correct.

However, I still read the above and distilled it in my mind to: "Gotcha, singles are better.  Do singles up to 75.  Then consider doubles."  I don't think that's far off as a rule of thumb.  Of course, any such rule should eventually consider the fingers.