Being obsessed with numbers as we are loath to do in our early years of running, most often we completely ignore we sometimes ignore effort altogether.

This has been the case for me on one route in particular the Paint Creek Trail (PCT), where there is an elevation gain of over 200 feet covering its 9 mile length going out.

In the past I have completely ignored this often paid no attention to this and ran my target pace going out, only to stagger back in sometimes even stopping to take a breath.

Today was my first run on the PCT since MRT last fall and I decided I was not going to be a slave to pace but instead try to master effort. I had 3 easy then 8 at marathon pace ( which was 6 out and 6 back) meaning the first 3 at MP would be running upwards.

With this in mind I focused solely on effort and despite the discrepancy in the splits going out versus coming back in (a 20 second differential), I consider it a good run...the alternative of course is that I simply suck, but I digress.

Anyway, for those that run on hills or sometimes struggle to hit a given pace on flat land, is effort a variable you consider when trying to run at target pace?  Do you run at pace come hell or high water and consider the run a failure if you do not hit it, or do you even take effort into consideration at all?

What is this flat land you speak of? I have done 2 out of 50+ races on truly flat courses. And 1 had gale force winds, so any benefit of the flat land was completely negated by 50 mph winds.

Recently I have been going more by effort. The Hudson plan has some training at faster effort, like 5k, 10k, half, but other workouts have 10-20 minutes at a moderate or hard effort (sometimes that is called for uphill). Anyway, I prefer this, because I don't feel like I am as much as slave to the garmin. Plus, unless I run on the track, which is not an because it still has snow on it, nothing will be flat. Also, there are some hills that are a really hard effort, but my pace may be slower than what my usual easy pace is.

As an example, Thursday I did 4 miles at HM pace. Baring ridiculous wind, I think 9:30-9:45 is more than doable on a flat course. My splits for those miles were 9:22, 9:24, 9:47 and 9:02. Mile 3 was largely uphill and along a business route during rush hour. So I swear I had to stop every business entrance and even with auto-stop on, it takes a few seconds for the watch to realize I'm not moving. As far as I'm concerned, the workout was a success. The splits aren't super pretty like what some run, but it is what it is.

You did a great job with this run today. Ignoring effort is a big mistake. Most of us know this, but for some reason, we're still guilty of it. In my case, stupid misguided pride is the reason... I used to train with a very specific set of paces to achieve a very specific goal and it worked well at the time. Now, I long for those paces, but I don't want to fool myself anymore. I know too well that if I do not run at the proper effort, I will eventually collapse.

That's a good lesson, there, LRB.

Training too hard for my fitness level (or whatever variable on a given day) just for the sake of hitting X pace and then getting injured is not fun and I try to avoid that.

Right. The addition of Hard as a training option in Daniels Third Edition was a God send. That is where the change in perspective began for me this winter.

So instead of running for X pace during a VO2 max workout (which actually can be considered hard), I ran at what was Hard on that day, given the course and conditions.

Ignoring effort and being a slave to pace only leads to chronic fatigue. In the beginning I focused on pace but over the years I put a greater emphasis on effort. Eventually you realize you can't BS yourself and learn to ID where you're at fitness-wise.  Now I'm pretty much dialed into what effort I can sustain for 5k, 10k, half or marathon. But this comes with experience and including pace runs into your race schedule, something most beginners ignore or don't emphasize enough.

 

For my bread-n-butter training runs I don't have target paces. Instead I shoot for, but don't always have the self-control, target effort. Some days my easy paces overlaps into recovery and vice versa. Recovery is stupid easy while easy has the broadest range and greatest opportunity to go too fast [setting up a downward spiral]. I think this is where many runners make a mistake by running too fast for the bulk of their training. They probably go too fast for their speedwork too but that represents a much smaller sample. Begineers likely do their tempo miles too slow [one speed snydrome] and intermediates too fast. The solution for them is just to do longer [but slower] tempo workouts. When I do tempo intervals or run hills my focus is on my rate of recovery.

This is a great post Mike. I especially like that you included yourself as one who has had issues balancing the two, so the rest of us are in good company.

 Unless there's a typo, that's not what we call hilly around here..

It is not considered hilly here either, which is why I was hell bent on running at pace on it in previous years. The problem with that though is you end up blowing a gasket because you are going up, even if it is not uphill.

This is a graph from a 14 mile run last fall (7 out, 7 back in) from the same course (Garmin does not recognize my ANT stick anymore , so I do not have today's run available). And no it is nothing drastic, but you are climbing.

Recovery seems to be the most important pace to not push, IMO.  It should really be jogging, as LTH has mentioned thinking of it as to prevent falling into the "too fast" trap.  If it's 2 or even 3+ minutes slower than MP, so be it.

Easy can vary a lot, as mentioned above and in the Hansons book, IIRC.  Some days you'll be itching to turn it up, some days are a slog.

Effort needs to be accounted for, definitely.  If you're doing GMP and come up to a monster hill, the likes of which will not be seen on your race course, bye-bye GMP until you're over it.