Marathon Weekend 2018

And to me that's the critical part when people compare training plans to each other. If my current fitness pace dictates that my easy pace is an 8 min/mile and I want to do an 80 min workout, then I need to do 10 miles. But if someone else's current fitness easy pace is a 16 min/mile and they do an 80 min workout, then they would need to do 5 miles. On the surface it seems like I did more given 10 vs 5 miles, but based on my training philosophy we put in the same workout. My training philosophy is centered around the basis of relative current fitness pace X duration. Mileage is just a product of that.

This is an old post I made about a year ago but anytime these types of discussions come up I always dust it off:

To me, there are two types of impressive (and neither is necessarily more impressive than the other). My basis for my opinion is the following.

1. I believe in perception of effort. The harder you run the faster you go. But everyone's 75% is equal to everyone else's 75% when relating perception of effort.
2. I believe that time spent running is an important factor, more so than mileage.
3. Mileage is a function of perceived effort x time. If you run faster (effort), or longer (time), then you increase your mileage.

Scenario 1

We have two people standing next to each other. I tell them both to run at 75% effort for 90 minutes. They both complete the workout.

Person A - 75% effort at 90 minutes
Person B - 75% effort at 90 minutes

Which is more impressive? Based on the information given, they are equal.

Person A ran 10 miles
Person B ran 5 miles

Which is more impressive? Based on the information given, Person A is more impressive. Person A's 75% effort is faster than Person B's 75% effort.

Scenario 2

We have two people standing next to each other. I tell them both to run at 75% effort for 13.1 miles. They both complete the workout.

Person C - 75% effort for 13.1 miles
Person D - 75% effort for 13.1 miles

Which is more impressive? Based on the information given, they are equal.

Person C finished in 1:45
Person D finished in 3:00

Which is more impressive? Based on the information given, Person D is more impressive. Person D ran at the same effort level as Person C, yet did it for 71% longer in time than Person C.

So, to me there are two kinds of impressive.

1. It's impressive to me that Galen can run at 75% effort and that equals a 5:00 min/mile. It's impressive because when I run at 75% effort it equals an 7:30 min/mile. Galen is faster than me at the same effort level.
2. It's impressive to me that Person D ran at 75% effort for 3 hours. It's impressive because when I run at 75% effort it equals 1:45. Person D is able to maintain the same effort level as me, but for 71% longer in time.

Hopefully this helps make sense of my idea. So when someone says I ran a 15:00 min/mile for a half marathon, but I gave it everything I got. I come away impressed. That person's perception of effort was the same as mine, but yet they maintained that effort for significantly longer than me.

Look at it one other way. When someone goes out and runs a marathon in 5:00, for me to match the same physical feat (same effort X time) I would have to run 40 miles instead of 26.2 miles. I don't believe I could run 40 miles in 5:00.

So I come away impressed by anyone that's running no matter what. Every one of you impresses me!


As a personal example, I've written 121 training plans to date, and @MommaoffherRocker's Dopey 2017 plan still ranks in the Top 2 hardest plans ever written. Far harder than many of the training plans I use for myself. Her current fitness is a 5:30 marathon, and mine is a 3:02 marathon. Yet, she trains significantly harder than I do because she has shown she can handle a much higher training load then I can. So I may have 30x 10 mile runs and she has 4 for this upcoming Dopey, but our plans are just about equally as difficult.

Somewhat in this same vein, I've had to rethink my training for Dopey. I've completed 2 full marathons and nearly a dozen half marathons. I changed over to a ketogenic diet in 2016 and shaved 12 minutes off my half marathon time after a year of adapting my body and training using this diet plan. I've always been one of those that trained at near race pace until the keto switch. For my last half, I trained at a 7:45 pace, but raced at a 7:22 pace. During that training and post-race, I battled some fatigue in my knees and even had a little hip flexor issues. I realized my best course of action for building my base during the south Georgia summer would be to slow myself down and actually run slower than I had previously been training.

This has resulted in really strong runs (albeit much slower pace than I'm accustomed to) but finishing my long runs feeling good and without pain or even soreness. Up until this past weekend's 16 miler, I had nailed every run and felt good doing them. We won't go into details about my 16...er 13 miler from Sunday, but my point is I realized that pace is secondary to completing Dopey for me. I'm super competitive with myself, but I'm also very driven to complete a task I set out to do no matter what. Training at too fast of a pace could cause injury or cause me to hit the wall much earlier in the race due to faster pacing than what my body is capable of. I'd rather finish Dopey averaging 8:30 for the 4 days than to finish the first three days averaging sub 8's and then bomb on marathon day. It's a tough pill to swallow, but one I'm fighting down one run at a time. :-)
 
Somewhat in this same vein, I've had to rethink my training for Dopey. I've completed 2 full marathons and nearly a dozen half marathons. I changed over to a ketogenic diet in 2016 and shaved 12 minutes off my half marathon time after a year of adapting my body and training using this diet plan. I've always been one of those that trained at near race pace until the keto switch. For my last half, I trained at a 7:45 pace, but raced at a 7:22 pace. During that training and post-race, I battled some fatigue in my knees and even had a little hip flexor issues. I realized my best course of action for building my base during the south Georgia summer would be to slow myself down and actually run slower than I had previously been training.

This has resulted in really strong runs (albeit much slower pace than I'm accustomed to) but finishing my long runs feeling good and without pain or even soreness. Up until this past weekend's 16 miler, I had nailed every run and felt good doing them. We won't go into details about my 16...er 13 miler from Sunday, but my point is I realized that pace is secondary to completing Dopey for me. I'm super competitive with myself, but I'm also very driven to complete a task I set out to do no matter what. Training at too fast of a pace could cause injury or cause me to hit the wall much earlier in the race due to faster pacing than what my body is capable of. I'd rather finish Dopey averaging 8:30 for the 4 days than to finish the first three days averaging sub 8's and then bomb on marathon day. It's a tough pill to swallow, but one I'm fighting down one run at a time. :-)

I certainly agree. Although, for me I train much much slower than even 7:45 vs 7:22 relatively speaking (assuming this is total average training pace and not specifically for just HM Tempo training runs). I actually do 80% of my training at easy. The easy is defined by a current fitness assessment or race equivalency calculator and is set at "long run pace". I define "long run pace" as roughly 7-9% slower than marathon tempo.

So for me,

Screen Shot 2017-10-17 at 12.04.56 PM.png

Screen Shot 2017-10-17 at 12.05.08 PM.png

My current fitness marathon tempo is a 6:58 min/mile. I run roughly 80% of my training at a 7:35 min/mile or slower. And most of that 80% is actually at 7:54 or slower. The other 20% of my training is spent at marathon tempo or faster. But all of those runs have very specific time requirements to elicit certain physiological adaptations.

I combine this with my HR data to determine whether the pace at which I'm suppose to run (current fitness) is meshing well with my cardiovascular performance. I only evaluate the HR data after the run is over using Daniels %HRR recommendations:

Screen Shot 2017-10-17 at 12.08.53 PM.png

I put this together several months ago as an example prior, but the HR data shows just how slow I'm running (relatively speaking).

Screen Shot 2017-10-17 at 12.10.07 PM.png

Since changing my mindset over from mileage, to thinking more about current fitness pace X duration I've made vast improvements. This methodology has not prevented me from being very successful in racing at really any distance. Including my goal for this year's coming Dopey 2018 of a Top 25 cumulative finish. My current goal (and likely still to change) times for Dopey are:

Screen Shot 2017-10-17 at 12.12.39 PM.png

So I certainly agree that slowing down, relative to one's own current fitness, will yield tremendous results on race day.
 
I certainly agree. Although, for me I train much much slower than even 7:45 vs 7:22 relatively speaking (assuming this is total average training pace and not specifically for just HM Tempo training runs). I actually do 80% of my training at easy. The easy is defined by a current fitness assessment or race equivalency calculator and is set at "long run pace". I define "long run pace" as roughly 7-9% slower than marathon tempo.

So I certainly agree that slowing down, relative to one's own current fitness, will yield tremendous results on race day.
I only run 3 days a week and never as slow as marathon pace. How can I apply slowing down into my schedule and benefit? With only 3 days, I've gone with quality over quantity on my runs.
 
I certainly agree. Although, for me I train much much slower than even 7:45 vs 7:22 relatively speaking (assuming this is total average training pace and not specifically for just HM Tempo training runs). I actually do 80% of my training at easy. The easy is defined by a current fitness assessment or race equivalency calculator and is set at "long run pace". I define "long run pace" as roughly 7-9% slower than marathon tempo.

So for me,

View attachment 277652

View attachment 277651

My current fitness marathon tempo is a 6:58 min/mile. I run roughly 80% of my training at a 7:35 min/mile or slower. And most of that 80% is actually at 7:54 or slower. The other 20% of my training is spent at marathon tempo or faster. But all of those runs have very specific time requirements to elicit certain physiological adaptations.

I combine this with my HR data to determine whether the pace at which I'm suppose to run (current fitness) is meshing well with my cardiovascular performance. I only evaluate the HR data after the run is over using Daniels %HRR recommendations:

View attachment 277654

I put this together several months ago as an example prior, but the HR data shows just how slow I'm running (relatively speaking).

View attachment 277655

Since changing my mindset over from mileage, to thinking more about current fitness pace X duration I've made vast improvements. This methodology has not prevented me from being very successful in racing at really any distance. Including my goal for this year's coming Dopey 2018 of a Top 25 cumulative finish. My current goal (and likely still to change) times for Dopey are:

View attachment 277656

So I certainly agree that slowing down, relative to one's own current fitness, will yield tremendous results on race day.

You are my hero! Not just because of pace, but as a numbers nerd, I'm in awe of how detailed and meticulous you are with your tracking. At my age (39) and paces, I'm fast enough to be in contention for a top 3 age finish at local races, but no where near fast enough to be in consideration for the same at a major race. By comparison, I finished this year's Snickers Half Marathon 29th overall (out of nearly 1000 runners) but was 6th in my age group. I track my mileage on shoes and my weekly, monthly and annual paces and mileage, but that's about as deep as I go.

I always set 3 goals for race day. My "if it all comes together perfectly" goal. My "realistic" goal. My "if the wheels fall off I better at least do this" goal. My best-case Dopey goal was to finish under 7 hours. If I was running my single race paces, I'd easily do that in under 6 hours, but I have to be realistic. I haven't run a full on keto and I haven't run a full since 2014. I want to finish pain/injury free first and foremost and part of that is maintaining a pace that keeps me running. Whenever I stop for walk breaks, I have a tendency to cramp up VERY quickly. My first full was WDW 2013 and cramping started just outside Animal Kingdom before WWOS. It was a long finish that day. I don't want a repeat of that ever again!
 


I only run 3 days a week and never as slow as marathon pace. How can I apply slowing down into my schedule and benefit? With only 3 days, I've gone with quality over quantity on my runs.

Great question! As always, I write this with the idea that you'll read it as well as others. So I tend to go into a deeper explanation than completely needed, but it gives all the necessary background information. Different than a PM which tends to be more concise (few people spit their coffee on that one as is known Dopeybadger does not equal concise) and to the point.

The first place I'd start is to ask why you've chosen to run 3 days a week? Is it a fatigue/injury thing (i.e. I've tried running more days per week but always end up injured or get too tired from doing so) or a time availability thing (i.e. I don't have time in my life to run more than 3 days a week)?

If it's a fatigue/injury thing, you might find that if you slow down your training to 80% easy, that you can handle a higher training load overall. I'll say from experience that when I use to run 3x/week it was tough on the body as I used to "PR the day" when training and like you would run many of the training runs much much faster than marathon tempo. When I made the switch to 6x/week, you would think things became significantly harder. But in fact, that first training cycle of switching to 6x/week was the easiest training cycle I had done in the 3 years I had been doing marathon training. The 6x/week wasn't necessarily what made it easy, but rather because I was running so slow on all the days it enabled me to feel so much more comfortable running on almost everyday. I barely ever felt as if I was trying that hard and yet that first 6x/week with slow training cycle dropped by marathon PR from 4:20 to 3:38 in a matter of 16 weeks. And that wasn't first to second marathon, that was fifth to sixth marathon.

I always try to urge people to evaluate their choice on number of training days or how much they train based on their availability. Then, we set the plan based on where you are now and bridge that to how much time you have available. Escalating, building and bridging in a safe way. Sometimes this means someone could say - I train for 90 min per week but could do 540 min per week. My race is in 6 weeks. I'd say we can build from 90 min but we won't get to 540 min because there isn't enough time to safely build to there.

So when I build a training plan I use the following guidelines -

Hard Workouts
1) Long Run (for endurance)
2) Tempo (either Marathon or HM dependent on race distance)
3) 5k, 10k, CV, or LT pacing (for speed work)

You get #1 for doing 3 days per week.
You get #1 and 2 for doing 4 days per week.
You get #1, 2 and 3 if doing 5 days per week with enough time allotted.
You get #1, 2 and 3 if doing 6 days per week.

If it's a time availability thing, then I can certainly understand. There are two marathon training plans that I'm aware of that do 3 runs per week. FIRST and Galloway.

A critical component of FIRST is that it does three really tough workouts per week. It does a long run, speed work, and a semi-tempo like run. So no easy running days. The key part of this is the cross training. Without the cross training, I believe this plan has a tough success rate. Do the cross-training and I've read a few people being successful with it. So this plan successfully states to do most pacing at marathon tempo or faster on three days per week, but requires cross training on many of the other days. So if it's a time availability thing, then I'd always try to say more running (instead of cross training) will make you a better runner (with caveats of course because there's pros and cons to all methods). More running with cross training will make you more fit and a better athlete.

The other 3 day a week marathon plan is Galloway. Unlike FIRST, Galloway actually has you do almost exclusively easy training. Per the written instructions, many of the Galloway days are to be trained at +2 minute from marathon tempo. So, if your marathon tempo was 10 min/mile, then almost all Galloway training is at a 12 min/mile. But why?

Like any training plan, the real fundamental part of it is this - you run to provide a stimulus to the body. The body reacts to that stimulus by providing an adaptation.

In the example of Galloway, his training is based on the philosophy of train slow to race fast. He uses +2 min from marathon tempo because that pace allows the body to make some critical adaptations including mitochondrial density/volume and capillary development (among many adaptations). It's also why his recommended long run pace (+2 min) is so much slower than most other training plans out there. When using Galloway, you follow a run/walk method. If a run/walker and continuous runner both set out to do a 10 min/mile, the continuous runner just runs a 10 min/mile. But based on the intervals, the run/walker will run faster than a 10 min/mile at points during the run. If you prescribe to the notion like I do that all paces are relative to current fitness and all paces provide a certain stimulus to the body at certain durations, it means that the run/walker is providing a different stimulus than the continuous runner if they have the same fitness but both average a 10 min/mile. So, Galloway accomplishes the "easy benefits" by scheduling a +2 min long run instead of a +45 sec long run. Since he recommends maintaining the same interval timing (like 30/30 or 120/30) for the long run, he is essentially forcing you to slow down the run portion of the run/walk. Slow down the run portion to meet the +2 min average recommendation and you find yourself in a very similar pace area as the continuous runner at +45 sec for their long run. Now both reap the benefits of slow running.

So, that was a really long winded setup to the point, but I felt it prudent to give the necessary background information.

So, if you're running 3 days per week because of fatigue/injury, then I'd consider trying to bump that up to 4 if you were to coincide that with slowing down the paces (which I'm willing to give recommendations if you provide me recent race results). With 4 days per week, I'd recommend two very easy days, one long run (which I max at 150 minutes for a bevy of other reasons), and one marathon tempo day/interval day. By working more of the pace spectrum, you'll elicit even greater adaptations in the body. You'll be manipulating the bodies recovery adaptations with more days per week (cumulative fatigue), forcing the body to learn how to run on tired legs with more days per week (cumulative fatigue), and working different sets of muscles on different days by varying the paces. Since certain muscle groups take different time frames to adapt, it's beneficial to work several different paces to allow certain muscles to recover/adapt in between. Work the same muscles over and over and over and they'll repair but never adapt. You'll be stuck in training purgatory always wondering why you haven't improved at the rate you'd hope.

Now, let's say you want to stick with 3 days per week for one reason or another and you weren't planning on doing any other cross training. I'd still recommend slowing down on the training runs, especially the long run. Endurance is built by working the aerobic system. A marathon is a 99% aerobic event. So doing lots and lots of slow running will not prevent the benefits you're looking for. It seems counterintuitive, I know. But the methodology has proven itself to me over and over. So, I'd probably go with an oscillating schedule like this:

Day 1 - Easy
Day 2 - Easy
Day 3 - Long

Day 1 - Easy
Day 2 - Easy
Day 3 - Marathon Tempo

Day 1 - Easy
Day 2 - Speed
Day 3 - Long

Day 1 - Easy
Day 2 - Easy
Day 3 - Marathon Tempo

Then repeat Week 1.

Now there's certainly a lot more that goes into designing it from there, but that's where I would start. You could do touches of speed or tempo on some of the easy days, but the grand majority of the plan would stay easy. Now that's just my recommendation and there are certainly lots of different ways to train.
 
You are my hero! Not just because of pace, but as a numbers nerd, I'm in awe of how detailed and meticulous you are with your tracking.

You have no idea. :D My job is very data driven. So Excel and I have a great relationship. My running related Excel sheets have tons and tons and tons of information on them. #Math :teacher:

At my age (39) and paces, I'm fast enough to be in contention for a top 3 age finish at local races, but no where near fast enough to be in consideration for the same at a major race. By comparison, I finished this year's Snickers Half Marathon 29th overall (out of nearly 1000 runners) but was 6th in my age group. I track my mileage on shoes and my weekly, monthly and annual paces and mileage, but that's about as deep as I go.

Sounds like we're in a similar boat. I'd say that if you could find yourself to be a tad more data driven and make some training adjustments to doing a bit more slow running, you may find a tremendous improvement. The first place I'd look is your race equivalency. How familiar do these race paces look?

Screen Shot 2017-10-17 at 2.24.07 PM.png

Based on a 1:36 HM, you have a 5k PR of 20:56? Or a 10k PR of 43:38?

If I understood your previous post correctly, you do most of your training at a 7:45 min/mile. That's roughly marathon tempo. So whereas, I do 80% easy and 20% hard. You do 0% easy and 100% hard. If you switch up those ratios, I think you'll find yourself getting much much faster. Like, by a lot.

My best-case Dopey goal was to finish under 7 hours. If I was running my single race paces, I'd easily do that in under 6 hours, but I have to be realistic.

I can understand that. My goal is to PR all 4 races and the 2 challenges. I coined it the "Sextuple PR Dopey Challenge". I attempt to PR the 5k, 10k, HM, and M as all non-first attempts at the distance and then the associated Goofy and Dopey challenges as non-first attempts as well. I've come close, but have yet to achieve it in the 4 prior events (although last year was a good shot with a 5k, 10k, and M PR but the HM was cancelled). In the four years, I've found I can hit 5k equivalency, 10k equivalency, and HM equivalency. My M tends to be about 9-11% slower than race equivalency with the other three PRs coming on the days prior. So there's definitely a fade with racing all four events but dependent on where the current fitness is in relationship to current PRs, it's certainly possible to get close. So I'd say a 6:22 cumulative time is definitely feasible if that's what you wanted out of your Dopey experience (with ideal weather conditions and appropriate training).

Whenever I stop for walk breaks, I have a tendency to cramp up VERY quickly. My first full was WDW 2013 and cramping started just outside Animal Kingdom before WWOS. It was a long finish that day. I don't want a repeat of that ever again!

Happens to me as well. Not necessarily cramps, but just have a tough time getting going again and getting back into pace. I do much better when I just keep moving and not stopping. Although, I have been working on this deficiency the last couple of years to get better in case a race day scenario requires it.
 
My race PR's are not far off the ones you posted. I haven't run a full since I've gotten faster (after my change to keto), but my 5k PR is 21 minutes, 10k 44 minutes and half is 1:36. My full PR is just under 4 hours, but that was pre-keto and I've trimmed a lot of time (and subsequent weight) off since then. The difference in what you're saying and what I'm doing is I've been training for Dopey at paces closer to 8:30. That's significantly slower than I'd be training if I were only training for a half or even a full. If I were only training for a full, I'd probably be pushing myself to train at a much faster long run pace than that. Every run I'm doing right now is between 8:30-8:50/mm except my pace runs which I do more in the 8:00-8:15 range. I've done a few of those sub 8 just because I couldn't make myself go any slower those days. The results are I've done very well with every training run except for my last long run this past Sunday, which was partially due to electronic malfunctions pre-run causing me to start significantly later than expected(thanks Apple watch update!).

One little thing I've also added to my training program since going keto is I do a pre-long run workout supplement that is primarily geared for weight lifting but I contacted the manufacturer and many of the ingredients and components help reduce lactic acid buildup which is something I've struggled with during previous long training and races. The pre-run supplement has a high dose of slow-releasing caffeine which is nice when you get about 4-5 miles into the run. I haven't noticed any change in my heart rate nor do I feel jittery. I typically don't start refueling until about 10-12 miles into the run but I do drink a half/half PowerAde Zero/water blend after a few miles, mainly because I live in South Georgia and it's usually mid-high 70's and 95% humidity even at 4am when I get up to run. I have taken electrolyte tablets but don't do so consistently.
 


My race PR's are not far off the ones you posted. I haven't run a full since I've gotten faster (after my change to keto), but my 5k PR is 21 minutes, 10k 44 minutes and half is 1:36. My full PR is just under 4 hours, but that was pre-keto and I've trimmed a lot of time (and subsequent weight) off since then. The difference in what you're saying and what I'm doing is I've been training for Dopey at paces closer to 8:30. That's significantly slower than I'd be training if I were only training for a half or even a full. If I were only training for a full, I'd probably be pushing myself to train at a much faster long run pace than that. Every run I'm doing right now is between 8:30-8:50/mm except my pace runs which I do more in the 8:00-8:15 range. I've done a few of those sub 8 just because I couldn't make myself go any slower those days. The results are I've done very well with every training run except for my last long run this past Sunday, which was partially due to electronic malfunctions pre-run causing me to start significantly later than expected(thanks Apple watch update!).

Sounds about perfect to me then, Dopey or not. The 8:30-8:50 pace range is right in that easy zone of long run to Easy B. So right on target.

One little thing I've also added to my training program since going keto is I do a pre-long run workout supplement that is primarily geared for weight lifting but I contacted the manufacturer and many of the ingredients and components help reduce lactic acid buildup which is something I've struggled with during previous long training and races.

What are those ingredients? Certainly something I'd be interested in learning about is pushing back the fatigue wall. Although I would wonder about the lactic acid part of it as there's certainly debate about it's role or existence.

Do You Really Want to Get Rid of Lactic Acid? No. Here’s Why
What is lactate clearance and how can it help you run faster
 
the product is called Nutrex Outlift

http://www.nutrex.com/outlift/?utm_source=bing&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=Search - Outlift&utm_term=+nutrex outlift&utm_content=Branded - Outlift

I'm on my 3rd bottle/jug of the stuff. I only use it for runs over 10 miles. I take it about 30-45 minutes prior to running. The first couple of times I took it, I had to make myself slow down at the very beginning. I think that was more adrenaline from a new product than the actual product itself. It seems like I'm always jacked up on the first run with anything new (shoes, headphones, even socks! lol).

I'm not a coffee drinker so this is a nice way to intake a good amount of caffeine, but only 8-10oz. of water needed with it so I'm not needing to pee as soon as I start running. lol.

I've also been trying Run Gum for shorter, pace runs. Don't know if it's doing anything for me, but it's an inexpensive caffeine addition
 
I'm not a coffee drinker so this is a nice way to intake a good amount of caffeine, but only 8-10oz. of water needed with it so I'm not needing to pee as soon as I start running. lol.

Interesting! Looks to be right near the limit for caffeine consumption at 400mg per day. Not bad. Not a coffee drinker myself either, but not sure I want to take it that far.

So what ingredient in there helps push back the fatigue wall via a biochemical reaction with lactate or the by-products of fatigue?

I've also been trying Run Gum for shorter, pace runs. Don't know if it's doing anything for me, but it's an inexpensive caffeine addition

I just recently used RunGum in my last training cycle and certainly noticed the decrease in perception of effort that caffeine provides. But I also learned that while perception of effort decreases, the damage from the training run does not. So while I felt I could run faster, I most certainly shouldn't because it would cause excess damage. I'm keeping this type of performance enhancer to race day. Similar to my view on compression socks and only using them post only races as to not stunt my bodies natural training adaptation.
 
I only run 3 days a week and never as slow as marathon pace. How can I apply slowing down into my schedule and benefit? With only 3 days, I've gone with quality over quantity on my runs.

As DopeyBadger says "lots of ways to train". As a FIRST user, I have had good success with their program. Speed work, tempo and long run. Long run is always MP+20-30 secs, speedwork and tempo are at paces determined by current fitness level/race results.

This year I am trying Hanson's, just to shake it up. Of course, my goal race went out the window due to injury, and I'm not sure Dopey is a good data point as far as its effectiveness goes, so who knows what I'll make of all this experimentation!
 
Lurk In...
I may print out all of DB's days per week explanation and attach them to treadmill sales clippings and ask my husband to read through them. My hopes it he zones out halfway through and just says "yeah, ok buy the treadmill and run 6 days a week next year" etc.

I have found changing from 3 days to 4 days this year really changed a lot of my running for the better. Fatigue down, soreness down, speed up!

Lurk out...
 
My job and life are very data-driven and math-centric, but even I get a little :eek: at first blush of @DopeyBadger 's posts. :) But upon second reading, they make total sense.
:worship:

Good stuff, and very consistent with my running group's coach plan. You, sir, are da man.

I'm a Rocket Scientist and I have no idea what he's talking about half the time...so I know how you feel!!!
 
In the example of Galloway, his training is based on the philosophy of train slow to race fast.

I wish I could get this through my thick skull. I have always followed the Galloway plan for each of my HMs/Ms at least in terms of 2 maintenance runs and a long run. Up until this summer I did not do the run/walk/run intervals and I definitely did not do the +2 minute marathon pace, even doing the run/walk intervals this summer I still feel like I am a “PR everyday” type runner. Based upon all of your posts if I could just convince myself to run slower in training maybe I would get faster during the race.
 
I wish I could get this through my thick skull. I have always followed the Galloway plan for each of my HMs/Ms at least in terms of 2 maintenance runs and a long run. Up until this summer I did not do the run/walk/run intervals and I definitely did not do the +2 minute marathon pace, even doing the run/walk intervals this summer I still feel like I am a “PR everyday” type runner. Based upon all of your posts if I could just convince myself to run slower in training maybe I would get faster during the race.

If you can make the change to slowing down, I'm confident that over time you will see the improvement you're looking for. When I use to "PR the day" I use to do some awesome training runs. Then race day would come and I couldn't even match those awesome training runs under similar conditions (weather, mileage, and pace). So why did I struggle not to run the full distance at pace, but just the same distance as in training? The conclusion I came to was I was "racing in training" and thus was wasting my race efforts (and not reaping benefits of training) on training runs. So after "race" after "race" after "race" during training (which should have been training days), my body was so tired come actual race day that I didn't have much of anything left. I now use the mantra, "Save it for Race Day". Which means follow the slow running on all the training runs, and then on race day, that's when I actually race. Now the first concern I had was, if I don't do much running at faster paces, how the heck am I going to race faster? To my surprise, it was there on race day. On multiple occasions I've set multiple personal PRs during the middle of races, including in Fall 2015 (first time slowing down) I set a 10k and HM PR during the SECOND HALF of the marathon!!! I beat my HM PR from only 6 weeks prior, during a marathon?!?! During the Dec 2015 HM, I set PRs at 1K, 1 mile, 5k, 10k, and HM all in one race. I've never looked back since.
 
When I use to "PR the day" I use to do some awesome training runs. Then race day would come and I couldn't even match those awesome training runs under similar conditions (weather, mileage, and pace).

I think part of people's training pace dilemma is that sometimes people set training paces on what they think they SHOULD run towards what they WANT to be their race goal, versus what they are really capable of training for and racing based on their current physical status.

I guess the takeaway is that a training plan--be it 3 day, 4 day, 5, 6 or (god forbid) 7 days/week of running needs to be based on current performance level to set the appropriate training regimen for future success.

And also, that one size most definitely doesn't fit all! Isn't it great that we can find success with multiple plans?
 
If you can make the change to slowing down, I'm confident that over time you will see the improvement you're looking for. When I use to "PR the day" I use to do some awesome training runs. Then race day would come and I couldn't even match those awesome training runs under similar conditions (weather, mileage, and pace). So why did I struggle not to run the full distance at pace, but just the same distance as in training? The conclusion I came to was I was "racing in training" and thus was wasting my race efforts (and not reaping benefits of training) on training runs. So after "race" after "race" after "race" during training (which should have been training days), my body was so tired come actual race day that I didn't have much of anything left. I now use the mantra, "Save it for Race Day". Which means follow the slow running on all the training runs, and then on race day, that's when I actually race. Now the first concern I had was, if I don't do much running at faster paces, how the heck am I going to race faster? To my surprise, it was there on race day. On multiple occasions I've set multiple personal PRs during the middle of races, including in Fall 2015 (first time slowing down) I set a 10k and HM PR during the SECOND HALF of the marathon!!! I beat my HM PR from only 6 weeks prior, during a marathon?!?! During the Dec 2015 HM, I set PRs at 1K, 1 mile, 5k, 10k, and HM all in one race. I've never looked back since.

Thanks for the encouragement. During this years Dopey training runs I have a 10K and HM PR (doing run/walk/run intervals) according to Runkeeper. Not a wasted effort but just not the most productive method of training. I guess I have a little over 2 months and 38 training runs to change my "PR the day" mentality. Thanks again.
 
I think part of people's training pace dilemma is that sometimes people set training paces on what they think they SHOULD run towards what they WANT to be their race goal, versus what they are really capable of training for and racing based on their current physical status.

I guess the takeaway is that a training plan--be it 3 day, 4 day, 5, 6 or (god forbid) 7 days/week of running needs to be based on current performance level to set the appropriate training regimen for future success.

And also, that one size most definitely doesn't fit all! Isn't it great that we can find success with multiple plans?

Completely agree. My first step when developing a training plan for someone is to assess their current fitness. The rest of the plan builds from there. When I look at their race profile and current fitness and how much time they have available to train is when I can start to put together ideas on how that individual person can best improve using my principles. That's why I believe a custom plan whether it's Hanson's, Daniels, Higdon, Galloway, or anyone else can be maximized when taking into consideration individual needs.

And something I always remind my runners is even after we set the paces, you can and should go slower when the effort no longer matches previous runs. If easy is a 10 min/mile, memorize what that feels like. If the temp jumps from 50 to 100 degrees that 10 min/mile isn't going to feel the same anymore. So while I said run a 10 min/mile for easy, an adjustment should be made to consider the change in weather (or a myriad of other possible factors). I always say, "an easy day should feel easy. If it doesn't feel easy, then it isn't easy." That 10 min/mile easy day might be a 12 min/mile easy day, and that's perfectly fine.

Thanks for the encouragement. During this years Dopey training runs I have a 10K and HM PR (doing run/walk/run intervals) according to Runkeeper. Not a wasted effort but just not the most productive method of training. I guess I have a little over 2 months and 38 training runs to change my "PR the day" mentality. Thanks again.

Hey, relish in the fact that you hit those. At a minimum you've proven to yourself that you can run those PRs. Plenty of time between now and Dopey to get back under the Galloway guidelines and reap the benefits of his methodology. And if you need any help with developing physiologically relevant pacing just let me know. I study all forms of training plans including Galloway in order to help this community to the best of my ability. I've got about 5-6 people doing run/walk training plans right now with run paces, walk paces, and interval timing that we custom designed based on that individual and my principles.
 
I've typically used Higdon but almost always have to modify it slightly due to my work/travel schedule. I've got 6 kids and work a full-time job 50+ hours per week plus I own some real estate businesses so my time is challenged. I still find a way to get in 4-5 days per week of running. I haven't been as diligent with my cross-training and core-training as I was earlier in the year. It makes such a difference when I am though.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!





Latest posts

Top