TOTW: Running.. A failure to train.

Of course my first thought o this thread was "oh, someone is going to call him an elitest". But secretly, I kinda feel the same exact way.

That being said, where do you stand? I WANT to run it all, but I'm humbling my spirit and training to run/walk it. I kind of feel like a failure if I don't run the whole thing. But right now I just can't. it's physically hurts and I'm not conditioned enough to take that pounding (75lbs overwieght). Have I lost weight, yep - but not enough for me to run the whole thing straight through on any distance. Not to mention I haven't been running that long. But this is one of the reasons I refuse to enter an Ironman till 2013...MAYBE 2012 - because I want to be strong enough and have enough base to be able to know (in a perfect storm) that I could run the entire marathon. I refuse to take anything less from myself.

<---perfectionist

Are you willing to self assess and lay it out here for everyone to see? see above. and for the next year I am working on building a basic training base. And to help my run I have a half scheduled for Feb and this is my focus for the off season and next year. If i could get my mileage up to where I have a base of 20-25 miles per week and maintain it through the season with the ability to end my season with the Atlanta half-marathon in Nov. Then from there I will re-assess my mileage but always maintaining a minimum of 20-25 miles per week. Ultimate goal is 35-40. But I'm also realistic and know this will take consitency and years of training to peak. I'm working on consistency.

Do you run enough? no way. This is my first season and I will have only completed 2 tri's. I have never run consistently, but there was a time I was running 5 miles 3x per week. Then I stopped like a dummy.

If not, why not? see above

If yes, what are your reasons? What makes you different from a majority of BT'ers.  I think what makes me somewhat different is that I REFUSE to rush into the Ironman or longer distances. I want solid bases with consistency before jumping to anything longer. (and I've been working out for about 3 years now but now I'm focusing on a. running, b. intensity c. consistency)

Things to consider:
Your thoughts on Bike Training VS Run Training? I think the run should be the focus of any race. We will all eventually bike fast but running is hard. no matter what.
If applicable, why your run training is less than it should be. I'm fat and I just started.
If applicable, why your run training is where it should be. n/a
Have you walked in any Triathlon? If so, why do you think that happened? Yes. I ran/walk my first one. I was pissed too. I'm going to try not to walk the next one but it may be too soon to tell.
Finally, do you intend to run more in the future? of course

All right, Mr. Provocative, I'll bite.

Bike training v. Run training 

I think Joe Friel's book says that what you do on the bike sets up your run.  If you hammer the bike above your ability, you will wilt on the run but if you go within yourself on the bike, you will set up a good/decent run.  Since I'm not a coach, I can't speak to what someone's run training "should" be but it seems to me that in any training plan you'd want to get to a comfort level at or close to the distance you will be racing.  That's what I try to do, anyway.

 My Run training

 I think that I run enough for the triathlon distances that I have completed (Sprint and Olympic) and will attempt this year (HIM).  This year I've been able to accomplish a large increase in mileage (20 mpw to 30 mpw), which I think has been possible (paradoxically) because of my cross-training and a gradual increase in my base mileage instead of speed work.  However, I've also been able to do this much mileage because I love running.  I'm better at running (and swimming) than biking so sometimes I'd  rather do it - less gear, instant sweat, no driving, more flexible to schedule, there's an i-pod if I want it.  However, this amount of running is OK for me now, but a year ago, I'd have (and DID) injure myself at this mileage.  Oh, and running makes me less crazy.  I say this a little bit in jest, but it's true.  I need those endorphins.

 Walking

I've not walked in any triathlon yet but I've only done up to the Olympic distance.  My goal is to not walk in any race but I know it will happen at some point.  I've walked in running races because of injury or trying to drink water without inhaling it.  I don't think there is any shame in walking if you've adequately trained for your distance and it's just not turning out to be your day (GI issues, injury, tummy problems, blisters, chafing, bonking, etc).  Also, I'll let Doug chime in about the Gallaway runners in his marathon but when I did the ING half last year, I met a guy who was with the 3:30 marathon pace group who was setting his watch to beep him for his walk intervals.  So, was he less trained than the other 3:30 marathoners or was he just smarter?

 Other

You've not mentioned this but I think it is quite possible that folks train adequately to do the run, but hammer the bike too hard (pacing and possibly a fueling issue) and it kills their run.   Also, I know that I'm completely relieved to get off of the bike and run but folks who prefer the bike might dread getting off to start the run - their valley of darkness is on the run so that might also cause less than stellar run performance. 

And, last but not least, most of us are training and racing triathlons for fun.  We don't get paid for this so we naturally gravitate towards the type of training that is most enjoyable.  Usually we like the thing we are best at or that's easiest/most natural for us, so it's normal that good bikers like to bike and good swimmers like to swim.  If we want to improve, we'd focus on our limiters but who really wants to do that?

This is a very valid point. Is someone discounted because they ride a hybrid or a road bike instead of tri bike? No. If someone chooses to run/walk then why not? It's not my race and if they're walking and I'm running.....guess who's going to get to the finish line first?

As far as the first set of questions.....do I personally run enough? Yes, I'm not racing triathlons this season. Does it matter to me if someone is running or walking? Not really.

True that ... if you complete the distance then you complete the race.  Did Julie Moss not become an Ironman because she had to crawl to the finish line in 1982 (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=tRB1p89k7_I)? How about the epic finish of Sian Welch & Wendy Ingraham in 1997 (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=MTn1v5TGK_w)?

[contrarian]

Btw, running or walking during the third leg of an ironman for the most part has little to do with either the will to run or even how much they ran during training.  It does, however, has everything to do with the trials and tribulations of race day.

If you undertrain on the bike or, similarly, blow yourself up on the bike then you will lack the strength to run the marathon.  If you goof-up your nutrition on the bike then you will walk some of the marathon.  If you do not hydrate or maintain your electrolyte levels correctly, you will walk some of the marathon ... and the list goes on.

In other words, lack of run training might equate to walking some of the marathon ... but it is but one of many possible reasons.

Second issue is sideline judging of how much running is enough to prepare for the marathon? The easy answer seems to be that you simply add swimming and biking to a marathon schedule ...while on the surface that seems to make sense, it is also a potential recipe for overuse injuries.

A marathon schedule is gearing towards building your legs and aerobic engine to handle to rigors of that distance.  A triathlon schedule is geared to doing the same thing.  A key consideration between the two, however, is the cross utilization of similar muscle groups.  Shoot, some marathon training plans include cross training as a means to minimize the amount of pounding one puts on their legs, joints and back.

Lastly, in addition to being less prone to injury, the bike provides the most bang for your buck in impacting your finishing time.  Simply put, the bike commands a greater proportion of the race.  Consider the following relatively easy paces:

2.4 mi Swim at 2:00/100 yd = 1:25
112 mi Bike at 16 mph = 7:00
26.2 Run at 11:00/mi = 4:50

Say you focus on running more and are able to shave it down to 10:00/mi or a 10% increase in pace.  That is a savings of approximately 26 minutes.  Compare that to being able to apply that same 10% increase in pace to elevate your average to 17.6 mph on the bike and it shaves 40 minutes off your finish time while reducing your risk for injury. (note: it is my belief that it takes more time, work and effort and reduce your run time by 10% than your bike pace similarly but I think that may not be the case for all.) 

Not sure that I would throw a blanket statement in saying that the lack of run volume and/or distance on schedules equates to walking the run ... but I would agree that there is often not enough periodized emphasis placed on the run. By 'periodized emphasis' I mean that a good training schedule will have a rotating emphasis on a particular sport where you "over focus" on that discipline for 1-2 weeks. After working your way through each discipline then you have a rest period and start all over again.

Perhaps that is the indictment in training, the lack of equivalent ramp-up on the run after first focusing on (a) not drowning, and (b) where the time money is best spent?

[/contrarian]

Concluding note: Triathlon is a struggle between yourself against time and the distance to the finish line.  So long as you complete the distance before the cut off, then you are a finisher ...and no one take take that or away or diminish that accomplishment.

Wow....look what happens when you don't get to work until 2pm

This is an interesting topic. My first response is to agree with you Ron, most triathletes don't run enough. The caveat to that is that the reason that most of us don't train enough is that with three sports to train for and limited time to train you really have to prioritize how you use your time.

My take on the whole swim/bike/run distribution is based on the athlete and their limiters, it is also a function of the race distance (i.e. the bike is the longest part of any race so proportionally you should spend more time on it).  Running is also the hardest of the three on the body therefore making a) the recovery time longer, and b) you are also more susceptable to injury.

You also have to take other factors into consideration:

1) Triathlon is one sport made up of swim/bike/run. It makes no sense to train exclusively for one of the three and neglect the other two. There is no amount of training that you are going to do in just one that will overcome the deficiencies in the other two.

2) Aerobic fitness is aerobic fitness, whether you are swimming, cycling, or running. You train your aerobic system during all three, so high mileage running is more of a musculoskeletal conditioning thing.

3) It is possible to be a very good triathlon runner on relatively low volume as long as you train smart.

Anyone who finishes 26.2 is a Marathoner just like anyone who finishes 140.6 is an Ironman.

So my point is it all depends on your goals or priorities.  I'm hoping to hit both of my goals and if it means walking in either race, I'm ok with that.  I know I'll be undertrained, but short of quitting my job to gain more time to train there isn't anything I can do about that.

Ok I disagree with you here and I will tell you why. The bike makes the run...plain and simple. It's not enough to be able to just cover the distance or to be able to cover the distance at a certain MPH, but more a function of how quickly can you cover the distance and still have a good run!   More bike time WILL lead to better runs. This also goes back to the swim thing. It isn't enough to just cover the distance, you have to be efficient enough that you aren't using all of your energy reserves just to cover the distance or trying to hit a target time.

It is statistically proven that you get more bang for your buck training wise on the bike, so it makes more sense to spend a larger percentage cycling vs running or swimming.

 Your thoughts on Bike Training VS Run Training?
If applicable, why your run training is less than it should be. For a marathon, maybe but not for my current HIM goal
If applicable, why your run training is where it should be. I've run 40-50mpw all summer (before June I was 45-65 mpw) with long runs in the 16-23.5 mile range every week for the past 6 weeks.
Have you walked in any Triathlon? No, but, heh, I've only done one sprint. But I have walked in a few marathons--not much and no matter I have always given a balls out effort for the last mile. Haven't walked in a half since I ran one while pregnant and that was 5 years ago.

 If so, why do you think that happened? BUT if I do have to walk in the HIM it will be because of my reoccuring tight calf issue. Only way to resolve it is to take a minute to walk. Sometimes I have to, sometimes I don't but I can usually continue running. Hopefully with taper it will not be an issue though. I can't say I would be walking because of a lack of training but I am afraid to run when my calf gets really tight. Worried about popping something.

Finally, do you intend to run more in the future? Yes! I plan to be back in the 50-65 mpw most of the year til next summer (except during recovery from marathons).

 Further thoughts on the subject:

Well, as primarily a runner I think I run enough but I haven't done a HIM or a IM yet. I'll have to let you know in 3 wks if  5-6 days/40-50 mpw is enough running. I think the bigger question will be is 2-3 days/60-120 mpw biking enough. I think the answer will be yes but could have been better with more bike, less run.  For me the bike is going to be such a HUGE portion of my time I probably would have been better off to put focus there.

But I am so worried about compromising my running I can't fully commit to the bike. I like being a runner(--they are the coolest after all.)And, it makes it easier to make fun of the cyclists if I am not really one

In seriousness, I will admit from many I have met who do HIM or full IM I am often surprised at how little they run. I have met a few that never do runs longer than 14 miles in training for a full. To me that is just setting yourself up for a miserable run. And as a runner I just know how good a marathon can be when trained and on the flip side how challenging and miserable when undertrained. IDK. I hate that I can't break 3:30 in a marathon so the idea of being out there for more than 4 hours would kill me mentally. It would just take too freaking long. I like to get stuff done as quickly as possible (w/out too much pain).

I think the difference is when you go into  a race planning to walk the run portion.  If you train properly and things don't go well, mentally or physically, then your fall back is to walk the run portion.

Barring going into a race injured just to finish, I think athletes do themselves a disservice intentionally walking the run.   It's up to the person, but I know I had a bad taste in my mouth yesterday when I saw a person at mile 2 (15 for me) walking and talking on their cell phone.  To me they didn't have any physical ailment but looked like they choose, beforehand, to walk the entire thing and tell their family about it (free weekend minutes I guess).  That's what gets me.

If you're going to train for a race, do your best.  Walking should be a bailout gear, not the go to gear.  But then again, if they cross the finish line before midnight they get the same medal I did.  But at least train for it is all I ask. 

I think this is definitely a topic that causes some controversy. I tend to agree that there are a lot of triathletes who skimp on run training or just fail to do the optimal type of run training to be adequately prepared for races. When marathons and IMs became a sport for the masses walking seemed to become more acceptable and with the popularity of the Galloway method athletes had science and a whole methodology to back-up their decisions to walk. I do not go into any race expecting or planning to walk. If I am not properly trained, I go into the race with the expectation that I will just race at a slower pace but I will still be out there trying to run the race. I walked parts of Lou. I am not proud that I had to walk parts of Lou but poor race day nutrition and a lingering health issue meant that walking some of the race was the only thing going to get me to the finishline. I feel I was a bit undertrained on the run (from where I wanted to be) but I know I put in the training time and I know I deserved the medal I received at the finishline.  I do get frustrated with athletes who don't have health limitations who go into a race with an expectation to walk, but as long as they're not managing to beat me I'm not going to be-grudge their decision to walk. I was a runner long before I became a runner who does triathlons, so I like to run and I like to run long, slow distance. My running program falls short because I do not put in the speedwork I should be doing. Over the winter and into next season, I plan to get back to more high-intensity running but first I've got to figure out if I can get my GI system on board with the idea.

Ron..

You ARE coming off as an elitist, and you DID mean to..

You're also coming off as a total to someone who is new to the sport, or more importantly, ANY person who EVER walked in a 5K, 10K, Half Mary, Mary, Ultra, or any of the distances of marathon..

The reason this sport has grown so much in the last 10 years is because people have a desire to test THEIR OWN SELF... it's got nothing to do with whether they walk at the aid station, or can't muster the full 26.2 at a jog..

This sport is about human spirit.. and your post is DEAD wrong, your opinion (or Thought Of The Week) is WRONG..

...that attitude that you've got is exactly why I have gravitated away from a sport like Triathlon and towards a sport like Adventure Racing... In AR we do everything as a team, we move as fast as our slowest mate, we share nutrition, water, gear, whatever it takes to make sure that our brethren can get across the line because that is exactly what we are.. brothers...

I hope you see me at a race some time in the future, and I hope to hell that I'm walking when you do, I want you to scoff at me as you run by. Because I don't race for you, or your opinion of me.. I race for me..

If you want to change your attitude about the effort that people put out during an event, come do a 12 or 24 hour race with us, come spend 6 hours in the canoe with us, or carry your mountain bike through rhododendron up the side of a mountain... I promise you that after one of OUR events, you'll lose that douchebag attitude you've got that measures everyone's effort in YOUR eyes and hopefully you'll see that just toeing the line and giving your all during an event makes a person great...

not whether you managed to complete the distance without walking..

And here I was thinking it was Neal that was the d-bag.  ; )

Seriously, though, I don't think Ron (OP) runner was trying to bag on walkers or slower racers - he started the topic to talk about whether triathletes generally fail to train appropriately for the run portion of a triathlon and then blow up and walk on the run (or train to walk all or part of the run), which some of us do.  It's harder and longer to train for the HIM and IM run distances so that's where people seem to fall down, especially if going from a shorter distance race (Sprint, Oly) or no race to the longer distances in a short period of time - you simply can't ramp up run distances very fast without risking or causing an injury.

This statement sums it all up....  he's passing judgement on another participant in the race just because that participant is walking... walking or not.. if you finish the distance within the time limit.. you're an Ironman....

Guess it's a good thing that Ron's judgement doesn't matter one bit in the big scheme of things..  

and It doesn't matter where you're coming from.. the kind of stuck up elitist attitude that his TOTW represents is damaging to the sport's growth..  no different than someone saying "you shouldn't even attempt an Iron distance race unless you can finish in less than 14 hours, because anyone who trains properly should be able to beat that mark.." 

I'm not a runner.. never have been, never will be.. and if "being a runner" means that I have to adopt the pompous attitude towards walkers that AtlRunner has demonstrated.. Why would ANYONE want to be a runner?

There's nothing constructive about criticizing someone on their race day effort