Ironman Long run

probably around 3:40 on the trail, which I do long run on to preserve my knees.

In additioan to the above question, how much have you been running?  Not just long run, but aggregate running (per week)?

FWIW, I don't think I ran over maybe 16-18mi for any of my IM long runs.

NO.  Really, I would have told you not to bother with the 20-miler.

Not really.  A brick is just another opportunity to get a little more running done (and maybe as a 'check' on pacing).  What's important for your run is EVERYTHING you do combined.

That's a very long run no matter what your weekly volume is. How is that going? It would help to give some idea of how long you could go.

I go by time and my longest IM run is 3:00.  Running is my strength, so I was easily able to get 22 miles under 3 hours.  I think the philosophy for the long training runs of IM vary greatly and I think it depends a lot on your personal history.  I've done a number of marathons and ultras, so I didn't think it unusual to go 20+ in training. 

If you've got a strong running background and you know how you recover, why not?  However, I don't think it's necessary and you sure don't want to risk injury.  Given what you've said above (particularly your weekly mileage) I'd suggest probably not going that long.

Before Ironman events I have typically done overdistance (more than 26.2 mile) runs that have sometimes been as far as 54 miles. They benefitted me since they facilitated the adaptation of my fat burning fuel system and helped my joints and musculature adapt to the pounding from running 5-7 hours non stop.

The best overdistance run/pre-Ironman workout I did was a 3 loop, 10 mile run for 30 miles total. After two of those a marathon feels like a 10K.

That's nice.  Does it help the OP here?

While I don't think I have the run base or background to run 30 miles right now, I was trying to implement this idea with time.  Just keep the body moving for X hours so that when I get to the race I know what it feels like and know how my body will react.  I deliberately have kept my long runs slow to prevent injury (and seeing that this is the first season that I have had 0 run injurys) it has worked well.

Is my body going to react poorly when I turn my 10ish min/mile long runs into my 9 min/mile ironman goal pace?

"Is my body going to react poorly when I turn my 10ish min/mile long runs into my 9 min/mile ironman goal pace?"

Well, the key to overdistance is training your fat burning fuel metabolism. This was a significant part of Mark Allen's success at Ironman and his first win came aftr adopting an overdistance/fat burning fuel system training doctrine as espoused by Dr. Phil Maffetone.

I think your thinking is on target.

One thing people forget is that, at the highest level, Ironman is 10-15 hours of continuous, non-stop, low level aerobic exercise. If their training has not prepared them, first and foremost, for that duration they are going to have a difficult day with a significant degradation of performance in the closing hours of their event.

So many Ironman athletes go to Ironman with their longest single workouts being 7 hours. But they realize the race will take them 11,12,13, 14 or 15 hours. That means they are running a 3-7 hour deficit in preparation. They are, effectively, "winging" the last half of the race.

The first thing to remember about Ironman is that it is 10-15 hours of continuous exercise. If you aren't ready for that duration, you are going to suffer. There is no magic 6 hour workout that prepares you for a 12 hour race.

Could you elaborate on your ultra running history and how you got to that point? I believe you have done at least a few, if not more. As written originally, this honestly sounds like a terrible idea for the vast majority of people here. They will not be prepared for this workout and it will do much more harm than good.

Haven't done an IM, but speaking from my pure marathon experience while following Pfitzinger's Advanced Marathoning program, running up to 100 miles per week at peak: 

I never ran a long run over 22 miles. There were NO scheduled 22+ miles runs in his plans. Zero. The reasoning is that the risk of a stress fracture/overuse injury was simply too high at that distance of running or length of time on your feet. This is so commonly followed in marathon training that most professional runners do not run more than 22 miles at a time - the Brooks Hanson pro team (Brian Sell) maxxed at 22 miles, and usually stayed more in the 18-22 range for long runs. (They would run that in the morning, and then to keep mileage high, do a separate evening run, but never one big megarun.)

Given that this is the training philosophy for pure runners who are logging wayyyy more miles than triathlon, I'd say that it's a good principle to follow in terms of avoiding an injury, which is actually the biggest limiter in training to run 26.2. (Not fatigue, not speed, but injury from training.) 

Most of the IM programs I've seen max out the LR at 17-22 miles. Which makes sense, given the limitations I've mentioned for injury risk.

Regarding TD's concept of staying moving for like 12-18 hours, he is correct in that you do have to train that, but I think that at the speeds required for IM for most folks, you can take advantage of the overlap of the bike with run for leg motion as there's much less risk of a bone/tendon injury on the bike than the run. It would be different if you were racing a standalone marathon, as you have to run speeds that are signficiantly faster than your IM pace and need specific adaptation to run that speed that far which cycling won't help you as much with. 

so in essence, the only full preparatory training for an Ironman is...an Ironman? If we are truly winging it and not truly prepared based on this, why don't more plans, even stock ones, suggest a longer period of time on the feet, or in motion, etc..? I ask because I'm curious and currently training for my first IM and did my second last long run of 2:50 last night. Why doesn't the plan have me do longer, even a mix of walk in there, just to replciate time on feet? I relaize this is a decission that i can make on my own to do this, but coming back to the point of the thread, that isn't generally viewed as the wisest thing.

This is so much crap, I don't know where to begin.

How did you come to 9 min/mile goal? The long run pacing is a good way to estimate your goal pace for a longer event. The pacing of the long run is based off of your current fitness level. So if 10 min/mile is appropriate for you right now, then yes, your body will have a hard time dealing with a full min/mile jump. It's gonna hurt. Using long run pacing as the goal pace for an IM is about the best that many can shoot for, and it's not easy to do.

You could try doing progression or a mild tempo later in the LR to help check on pacing too. But only what you can handle. It doesn't have to be the exact same pace for every mile of it.

I have no idea what the rest of your training looks like, but the odds of you running 9min miles in your IM appears quite low based on what little you have shared so far.  You have very low overall mileage despite having a few very long runs.  Those aren't the seeds of a great running program.

I don't mean to be discouraging, and perhaps you are very strong on the swim & bike and can get yourself to T2 in great shape--allowing you run faster than it would otherwise appear possible.  But I'm trying to be honest given what I see and suspect.  You'll be fortunate to keep your 10ish min/mile pace.  Manage the swim & bike cautiously.

well first off I run my long runs on trails, generally yields a slower pace than on nice pavement.  The course is almost dead flat; Chesapeakeman in MD.  Ran a 10k in 41:15 recently, generally run my middle length runs on 8:30ish pace.  I've also been intentionally running my long runs slowly, I finish them saying, yeah I could have gone faster.  Given all of this, I feel as though 9 min/mile pace seems like a reasonable goal if I can nail my nutrition and don't overbike.

Some people do a version of this in training.  But usually with a very long bike (overdistance there is much less likely to cause injury) or like you say with a lot of walking (a long day hike is one way to do this).  For those who are going to be out on the course a long time (15+ hours), this could have some benefit.  To attempt it in running, one should have both a VERY strong running base and be running at fairly high overall volume during their IM training.

But overdistance for IM is rarely done by most athletes and it is unnecessary to train your 'fat burning fuel metabolism'.  Trianing and improved fitness, in general, does this.  That's why the AGGREGATE of your training is FAR more important than any single long workout (I'm not saying you shouldn't do long workouts or that they are not important within your overall training).  There's not a 'magic' 6 hour workout to prepare you for a 12 hour race.  But a lot of work accumulated over time DOES prepare you for a 12 hour race even if you've never gone for 12 hours staright before.

You're a stronger runner than I would have guessed.  I still think running 9's on the volume you have will be a real challenge, but if your swim & bike are strong and well-paced then your odds will be better than I first specualted.

I just completed my first Full Iron race this past weekend. I followed (mostly) the training plan in Joe Friel's book, "Your Best Triathlon". I trained by time and not miles...but of course took note of the miles. I ended up doing 10 runs of between 2 and 2 3/4 hours....between 15.5 and 20 miles at an average pace of about 7:40 per mile and an average elevation gain of about 1000 feet. I fully expected to do my run in 3:20 to 3:30. I ended up running 3:53, an 8:57 pace. Now I did push the bike a bit harder than I'd planned, 5:29 for the 112. 

The two things I'd not accounted for properly were:

1. Heat - temp was about 90 during the run
2. The "little devil in my brain" telling me, encouraging me, to walk all aid stations, then to walk the hills, then to walk a little more....seeing SO MANY PEOPLE WALKING did not help my ability to resist this temptation. 

What was interesting was that each time I started running again after having been walking, I felt fine...and immediately fell into my planned race pace without any trouble....until that next aid station and the little "devil" chirping in my ear!

So, my plan for my next IM is to do a few more long bricks....5 hour ride followed by 2 hour run, along with extending my longest runs to 3 hours, and doing 2 to 4 of these....AND mentally preparing for the battle in my head that will be telling me that it's OK to walk! Finally, I'll also wear a fuel belt, as I do when training, which will eliminate my need to stop at every aid station, and reduce that need down to perhaps 2 or 3 stops to refill my 4 little 10 oz bottles.

Based upon your current pace for a 10k, (I'll do a 39 min 10k in an Oly race) I'd not worry about doing a 20 miler, a 22 miler or a 26 miler...I'd focus on getting 2.5 to 3 hour runs in with at least 2 or 3 coming off of a 5 hour ride as a long brick.

Be conservative with your goals...I was a bit too agressive with my objectives. While I did well overall, I fell short of my goals.

Enjoy the journey, be careful to not get injured by listening closely to your body and don't ignore any pain and have fun!

Good luck!!