My splits were: 9:37 7:48 7:45 7:54 7:50 7:58 7:58 9:14 9:11 8:53 9:04 I have a HM on Oct 11 and I'd like to beat my PR of 1:49. Should I do any more faster paced runs before the HM or just focus on getting the miles in?

Nice run, Tony. It wouldn't hurt to do something like this once a week. This is a solid workout; but I wouldn't expect good things like this to happen every week; some days you'll feel worse and run closer to those 8:20's. If I were your coach, I would have been happier to see the 7:58's at the beginning of the 6 miles and the 7:48's at the end. A well-run workout (unless you're doing something weird) is always negative split. The fact that you are slowing down (though you didn't, much) means you are probably pushing just a bit too hard. Otherwise, great job. I can tell you are improving.

If I were your coach, I would have been happier to see the 7:58's at the beginning of the 6 miles and the 7:48's at the end. A well-run workout (unless you're doing something weird) is always negative split. The fact that you are slowing down (though you didn't, much) means you are probably pushing just a bit too hard.

Nice Run Tony! But I agree with Jeff here. Always finish strong. I don't know how many other people do this, but when I get into fairly long runs, i.e. >15 miles or so, I typically save my fastest miles for the final 5k of the run. Look at my last two long runs for an example of what I am talking about. Maybe it's just a mental thing for me, but I always like to know I have a hard 5k left in me at the end of a race. There is no worse feeling than slugging through the last few miles of a long race because you haven't trained your legs to run hard when fatigued. There is an argument to be made that rather than saving a really hard 5k for the end I could have run the preceeding miles a bit quicker and therefore had a consistent pace throughout. But this is such a fine line of maybe 5-10 seconds per mile and I find it impossible to calculate that one way or the other. I just prefer to finish really strong. And the only way you can do this is by training on fatigued legs. I think doing a lot of brick workouts back in my triathlon days is where this principle comes from. YMMV. MTA: As per Jeff, when in doubt shoot for a negative split. MFTA: I am not implying you skip cool down miles. I just never log mine.

Jeff - glad to hear the achilles is good! Marcus - Thanks! I checked your 20 mile run...ddaaaaang - that's a ridiculously fast 5k at the end of 20 miles! I had planned on running the last 3 of my 17 mile long run faster, but I just didn't have it in me. (Here come the excuses) 3 weeks ago I was running ~20-25 mpw and last week I worked up to 45 46 so hopefully with a couple of weeks of higher volume I'll have something left at the end of my long runs.

I truly believe, and some may argue against me, that for non-elites (like most of us) one can get by running less miles per week if they make the miles they do run count. In other words, no junk miles.

True if you are a fast beginner with a well-developed aerobic system and experience with endurance sports and are interested in racing 5k-HM. If your goal is to complete a marathon without walking (like Tony), then there really is no such thing as "junk miles," because everything is already MP. In fact, you may want to add walking into the mix.

Jeff, I didn't know this was Tony's first go at the marathon distance so my advice might not have been appropriate, and likely was not. I admit I have not taken much notice to anyone's training in particular or what their running history is. I have just read several of his posts that touched on topics I never worried about as a new distance runner so I assumed, and probably incorrectly, that he was more advanced. If this is true Mr. Tony, just run brother. Don't worry about all of this tempo run bollocks. You must master the distance before you can attempt to master speed at that distance. I won't even go into detail about how basic my first marathon training was but I will say I never timed one single run. I knew distance and nothing more. I just ran. I had no clue what a tempo run was or things like this. I did NO speedwork at all and came out with a 3:09 while losing like 60lbs in the process. Granted I was 25 at the time, but you get my point. This is not a knock at you, but an observation in general, but at some point during the last 10 years, newer runners have gotten too focused on minutia. I blame the internet. Or Trent. Well both actually since they are the same thing.

Also I found that I had this annoying tendency to throw up when I ran hard in shorter races......throwing up at mile 17

I see a theme here. An awesome theme. I expect excellent pukage at the Monkey. See if you can save it for the finish line. That'd be sweet.

I understand Tony. There was a thread about a month ago about throwing up either during or immediately after races, but in that context almost everyone was talking about 5k's. In fact, I think there was some nice video of a Nashville lady, who shall remain nameless, hurling after a 5k. I, myself, have never thrown up but 5k's hurt my abdominals like hell. I guess that's how I know I am running hard enough. I am sure you're not the only person who has thrown up late in a marathon. My mother was a volunteer at a HM in April. She was stationed at the finish line to assist runners when they finished. She got barfed on 3 times and I saw them all. You crashing at the end of a marathon is not unique but rather typical. You bonked. Hit the wall. Whatever you want to call it. You were probably dehydrated too, which may have caused the nausea. In my first marathon I was well, well inside sub 3 pace until I, too, bonked at around mile 21 and sucked ass for the last 5. Why did I bonk? Simply, I didn't take in enough energy during the race. I ran through gatorade stations and spilled 1/2 the cup when I grabbed it and then 1/2 of the rest when I tried to drink it while running. There were no gels at that time so gatorade was pretty much it. I imagine you bonked for the same reason, you just ran out of gas. Miles 18-22 seems to be where that demon lives. Before CMM I advised Candice to walk quickly through the gatorade stations, especially in the last half and she had great results. The extra 10 seconds it takes you to walk through and chug 2-3 cups will yield overall time dividends when you don't bonk. If I remember correctly, Jeff jumped in and ran the last 6 with Candice and she finished strong as hell. And yes, LT training is great. In fact I think LT training yields the best results if done correctly. LT training will raise your LT, and LT is where you want your race pace to be for HM and if you're really in shape you should be able to run a full marathon at LT. And the only way you can accomplish this is by training at LT or a little higher. I can't tell you how to determine what your LT is. For me, I can feel it. When I am there I just know it. Also, please don't throw me in with Jeff as being "naturally talented". While I appreciate the compliment it's entirely misplaced. When you meet me in November you will see for yourself. You're at least 1-2" taller than I am and as of this morning I weighed 182. Not exactly an ideal weight for this distance running shit, but I won't stop lifting and just dedicate myself to running alone. I don't make money racing and having good overall fitness is worth more to me than faster times at my age.

My preparation for my 2:50 in my first marathon at the Monkey was similar to the First program: I probably averaged running 5 days a week. My long run was 17, and almost everything was at MP or faster. So, I am not unfamiliar with the value of harder running.

This sounds a lot like how I am training currently or close to it.

However, if I want to reach my goal of 2:29, 50mpw will not cut it. I'm going to have to develop my aerobic system at 80-100 mpw, and in order to do that, I'll have to run easy some or maybe even most days. It all depends on whether you are looking to "get by" (as you put it in your first post, Marcus), or whether you're looking to take it to the next level.

Very true Jeff. People like you who are capable of a 2:29 marathon simply have to put more miles in. There is no way around it or Kenyans wouldn't be doing 140 mile weeks. That's why I wrote in my original post that non-elites can often get by with less if it's quality. But of course easy is relative.