Fred D Mentor Group Part III (Page 110)

Yeah, HTFU!    I just ran 15k in the snow - close to ankle deep in a few places.  

I have a thick-headed question. This might come across as me sounding like a smart aleck. I assure you I am not trying to. I really am this confused and ignorant about hard running. 

I am distilling a good bit of the advice I've gotten so far this way: don't push all out in training in half mile segments. Push hard in your next 5k, then see how it feels. 

Do I have that right? And if so..... huh? Why wouldn't I want to train to run harder in small doses? I thought that was the whole point. If I've never pushed hard, but always run easy miles, wouldn't I be setting myself up for trouble by holding out an all-out effort for a 5k race? 

I realize this is not the only direction the advice has gone, but it is a major part of what I am hearing. I apologize for taking up so much time trying to understand something that I am sure is really simple and obvious, I'm just that dense about it. 

Andy,

I can understand your confusion.  The best way I can describe it is to look at it in terms of training load.  Training load is a function of time and intensity.  Time can also be considered volume, and intensity is how hard we are running.

So it may seem like you aren't getting faster if you run a whole bunch of miles at an easy pace...but rest assured your training load is getting higher, and higher training loads improves your fitness.  The reason why speedwork is not highly recommended for new runners is because new runners can often increase their training load simply by running more.  Once a runner reaches a point where they do not have the time to run any more miles, then to increase their training load they must increase their intensity.

Me for example...my next race is a 8.15 mile run.  Last year I did it averaging 7:19 miles.  This year I plan to do it around 7 flat.  I've run over 4000 miles in the last 3.5 years...and I can probably count on one hand how many miles in training I have run faster than 7:19...and how many have I run faster than 7 flat...ZERO.  I would guess that I'm not very typical...being that I rarely run 5k or 10k pace in training, but again, I tend to increase my training load by adding volume.  Usually I have enough time to run about 40-45 mpw if I feel up to it...and 40-45 mpw usually wipes me out pretty good even if done at all easy pace.  So I really haven't found the need to run faster.  I usually train at about 8:45-9:20.

Again...just remember that the way to get faster is to improve fitness.  The way to improve fitness is to increase training load.  The way to increase training load is to increase volume and or intensity.

Hope that helps.

That is actually a good question that you should be asking if you don't understand the difference. It is along the lines of training load, as Jason was explaining. Run more (farther or longer) and your training load goes up. Run harder (higher intensity) and your training load goes up. For swimming and biking, the second one is fine because of the lower injury risk. But for running, one will get faster by running harder, until they get hurt. The load bearing nature makes it harder on your body, (possibly) more so than the gains the increased intensity brings, so generally it is better to add more running than more intensity.

And to address your question more specifically, the race is more of a one time thing. You aren't doing that every week or several times a week. But with adding speed work, generally people look to add that in at those frequencies. Every week, or a few times a week. Only going hard once in awhile (say once a month or less for the 5k race) isn't going to push up the stress on your body tremendously, not on a continuous or regular basis, whereas adding speed work every week will.

Then for the effort level, some would not recommend going until you nearly drop in either the half mile sections or the 5k (though there are levels of "hard" below that). Going by half a mile at a time is not necessarily a bad idea, it's just that you're going *too* hard for it by the "cough up a lung". Michael gave you a more specific way to build up to doing harder running, including how the effort level should feel. The idea wasn't tremendously different than what you were attempting, but this would have you in much better control of your effort level to make it a much more productive running session. Doing this could help you learn how to build into some nice tempo sessions and maybe some other things.

Injury.  Getting to be a faster runner is a years long process, especially if you start (1) heavy and (2) late in life, like I did.  That's all I got, based on my n=1 experience.

Michael - keep those drive-bys coming - really great to hear that it seems like you are quickly getting your feet both figuratively and literally back underneath you. A HM anywhere under 1:30 is killing it, especially for us old dudes. Sub 1:25 and we ought to be asking for a blood sample! 

Melissa - say what?? Your only luggage is a bike box and a carry-on?? We should all take more vacations like that! have a great time - you sure have earned it.

Yanti, like Arend I resisted the urge to click on your race report until I was settled in with a martini (Hendrick's, up) in hand. You of course did not disappoint. What an epic day - I am only afraid that once you do cross the IM finish line in Taupo it will be anti-climatic... While I was out on a 3 hour ride today in the cold and rain and wanted to cut it short, I thought to my self, "Self, what would Yanti do?." Then I thought "Stop, make a gazillion piglet friends, have pancakes, get rash and some deadly tropical disease, laugh, and carry on." I decided to skip most of that, but I did laugh and carry on. Thanks for the inspiration today!

Andy - you are getting tremendous advice today, even if it is not really what you want to hear. Running hard/fast is fun. And it can be frustrating exercising the patience that is being advised. I am only guessing, but the advice you are being given was learned the hard way - I know it was by me. So, instead of cautioning you against it, my only advice is is how you can minimize the risk of injury when you ignore all of that excellent advice. First, don't do your fast running on the track. There is hardly any other circumstance in real life where you run such a tight turn. The asymmetrical forces the turn puts on your body are murder, especially the faster you go. If you have to go to the track, run the outside lane and reverse it on each interval if you are allowed. Second, get on a soft surface - do you have any places that have something like granite fines (pulverized granite). I try to do as much of my fast running on such and it has made a huge difference - plus you feel like greased lightening when you get on the road. Next (and I think this was part of what Michael was getting at) run your hard efforts by RPE, not pace or distance. On occasion just run a little harder on your ups and recover just a bit on your downs. Third, if you are going to run harder efforts, instead of doing "speed work," instead do a little progression, but make sure you have enough time to really warm down well at the end. Progressions let you warm up, and I would also really encourage you to do some dynamic warm up at the beginning of your run as well. If you don't have time to do a good warm up and warm down, you don't have time to run harder efforts. Lastly, running has to be fun. So instead of looking at your time, distance, HR, pace, etc. Just give yourself one stop sign a week for the next four weeks. Somewhere deep in your run, when you turn a corner and see the next stop sign, just pick it up and get there quicker than you normally would. Make sure you make it a good one. Do that for three or four weeks, if you still feel good, give yourself two per week. Preferably on the same run. Do that for three or four weeks. Report back how you feel. Oh, and I just read your most recent blog post, I too was giddy Geddy when I heard the news. The Canucks in the group have to be beside themselves...

And Jason, I am all ready to line up behind you as our leader. Unless you did not get out and run today. If you didn't, then I may lead the charge to have you impeached even before you are officially sworn in. 

Andy, FWIW I was a late starter (aged 40).  I was naturally thin as a kid and through my 20s but became 60 lbs overweight in my 30s.  That's not exactly your situation, but we were fishing in the same waters.

I had the opposite problem to you -- no doubt due to my own character flaws -- I went way too hard when I started running, and as a result quickly became injured.  So I learned early on that intensity can be counter-productive.

I'll stick by the suggestion I made earlier (also endorsing what others have said), even if just as a one-off to experiment with intensity.  Try the 6x400 that I mentioned, and pay attention to three things:

1.  Breathing -- once per cycle (in/left, right, out/left, right, in/left, right...).  (If you don't already breathe in 'tempo' with your foot-strikes it can be a really helpful thing to do.)

2.  Pace within each 400 -- each 100 within the 400 should be the same pace.  If they aren't, you're going too hard.  (If your track doesn't have the 100 splits marked, it will at least have the 200 split marked, and that's a good enough measure.)  A difference of more than 1s between your fastest and slowest 100 is too much.  Be that strict with yourself.  (It really should be a lot less than a second.)

3.  Pace throughout the workout -- each 400 should be the same pace.  If they aren't, you're going too hard.  Aim for no more than 2-3s difference between your slowest and your fastest.  Less is better.

Try to satisfy 1-3, but only barely.  I.e., you are pushing the limits, but within the strict boundary of satisfying 1-3 (all of them! -- each of them is providing a slightly different limiter that is keeping you under control and hopefully away from injury).  If you can do that, then you just discovered a pace that is probably pretty close to (but probably a bit under) your all-out 5K race pace. Exactly how it relates to 5K depends on other factors, but in any case, you will have discovered what a 'reasonably hard' effort feels like and you could do a lot worse than to attempt to run a 5K at that pace and see what happens -- that would be a very educational experience.

It will probably take several tries to get it right -- you are trying to balance several things.  It is far better to approach it from below than from above.  I.e., better if you walk away from your first attempt thinking "that was too easy" and bump it up a notch each time until you feel like you've hit the limit of pace within the boundaries of satisfying 1-3.

ETA:  BTW, the limits (1-3) that I mentioned above are a kind of shot-gun approach.  I don't really know you as an athlete, so I'm proposing all three.  You might find that only one of the three ends up being the relevant one, for you.  I.e., satisfying one might already guarantee that you satisfy the others without even thinking about it.  That's fine.  (And which one it is could also change over time.)  And also BTW, if you get a consistent message about which one is the hardest to satisfy, that can be very useful information about how to focus your training.  For example, if it is #1 then you just need to slow down and run more, occasionally (1x/week) running at a pace that is slightly slower than when you are pushing the once per cycle breathing limit.

Safe travels Melissa!

The last time we took our bikes through customs was a riot (also going to Hawaii).  It was a very friendly lady with a heavy southern accent and she asked where we were going with bikes and why.  When we said we were going to Hawaii on vacation she just looked at us and said "You're taking your bikes.......  on vacation????".  She was absolutely dumb-founded and kept repeating "On vacation??".  LOL

Never mind, my Vegas cloudy mind did not read customs

I've been running since age 8 but am late to the triathlon party- just learned to swim and bike about 6 years ago. I hesitated to chime in because you already got some great feedback, and you were looking for late starter. I still feel that I have something to add because I just spent this past year trying to get better on the bike. I had no background in it, no muscle memory and a lot of fear as to how to "get faster". I see a lot of forum threads along the lines of "How do I run faster?"...the short answer is that you need to do some faster running. I understand the risk of injury increases greatly with "speedwork" but IMHO the only way to get faster is to run faster sometimes. It's about taking a very small risk (of injury) but if you really listen to your body, I believe you can do some faster effort running, see results and gain confidence in your running.  I'll try to keep this short, but if you look at a pure runner (not trying to fit in swim and bike workouts), their typical training week includes at least 2 forms of "speedwork", usually in the form of a track workout (400s, 800s, mile repeats etc) and a tempo run (3-6 miles at tempo pace depending on the distance they are training for). Some runners will also include a run with race pace miles towards the end, possibly in their weekly long run. That's the route that most of my runner friends take to training and improving at all distances. I notice that my 5k runner friends really push the speedwork because they are not pounding out the miles like my ultra running friends. The key is to balance the hard efforts with recovery. Now, take the triathlete, our goal is usually to run well off the bike, we can't fit in a lot of hard effort running as well as swim and bike, it would be too much. We do bricks, maybe a tempo run and possibly throw some race pace efforts into our longer runs the closer we get to peaking for a race. If you are stuck at a plateau in running (and the same applies to swim and bike), maybe you take a few months to work on your weakness. I don't see the harm in trying some speedwork during that time to improve your running.  I would stay away from the track but IMO, the tempo run is your friend. The tempo run allows you to throw in some harder efforts without feeling like you are coughing up a lung, it will also eventually improve your overall pace and give you something to pull from in a race when things get tough. You don't even need to start out doing tempo "miles", you can throw in some 2-3 minute harder efforts every mile or so while doing a run of say 4-5 miles. Always use the first mile or so as a nice warm up before you do any faster paced stuff.  

To sum up this rather clumsy post....I think you need to do a little speedwork in order to get faster, you need to start small and build up (find out what your body tolerates), be patient (it can take months for results) and not over do ( make a commitment to really listen to your body).

Best of luck to you!

I don't use the track. Never occurred to me to do so, as I have only used access to an indoor one with the kids for some pre-Disney world mickey mile warmups. The tight turning risks mentioned won't be an issue for me. I am 99% open roads. 

I looked up what tempo run means. The definitions I see are typically based on 15-20 sec/mile slower than one's 10k race pace. 

Can I translate that via percentages? Meaning, 15-20 sec/ mile for someone running 9min miles or faster, seems like a significant difference in pace. At my speeds, 15-20/mile difference is a typical random variation for me on any given day, or course. I live in Central PA. I have never had a flat training run. The question is never whether to do hills, it's "which ones?" 

So, if my usual regular effort is anywhere from 14:15-15:15, does my tempo run look like 13:45? 13:30?

You've gotten a bunch of good advice from people who know much more about running than I ever will.  I've only been running about three years and have lost about 70lbs in the process.  I don't do speework, per se.  I don't know if that is making me slower or not.  What I do know is that when I consistently run 20+ miles per week over the course of several weeks or months, I get faster.  For me, I would rather be able to run 20+ miles per week every week injury free (and keep the weight off), than risk an injury doing speed work that may shave a little bit of time off a race result.  I fear being sidelined more than failing to get a PR (even though lots of easy running still produces that PR, for me).

i appeciate that. I do want to say for the record that my interest in speed right now has mothing to do with racing itself. There is a physical fitness test that I will need to pass in the next year to facilitate a career move that I am trying to make. I can see the path to the rest of the weight loss. I am not as sure about the path to a 14 mile mile an a half.

Andy, I for one completely forgot about that, but I do remember you writing a little more specifically about it a while back. I think there are plenty of brains in this group (not me!) to get you there if it is possible. I have to think your continued weight loss will be a significant contributing factor to accomplishing your time goal - don't discount that. We have all said the risk of injury is too great in running too hard to soon, but in light of your life goal the reward is obviously much, much greater than a PR or plastic trophy, and would actually open up some life-altering possibilities for you. But as I understand it you have a relatively narrow window of time in which to accomplish it, correct?

So what says the group? What specific info do you need from Andy to get him from where he is to a sub 9:20 pace for a mile-and-a-half? Andy if I were in your shoes I would want to know exactly where I was relative to this specific goal, and despite my earlier caution against it would find myself at the track as soon as possible to find out. I know that is probably bad advice even as I write it, but it is the way my brain works - I need clear benchmarks to get me focused. When exactly is the test next year - how much time do you have between now and then?

We can sometimes be a little over-the-top as to the significance SBR plays in our lives. In this case it is genuinely exciting to think of the real-life opportunities such an accomplishment will afford you.

That's a good point...you have to consider the terrain you are running on, sounds like your usual run routes are giving you a good hill workout!

There are many "calculators" online that can estimate what your tempo pace is, usually based off a recent 10k or 5k time (Macmillan calculator comes to mind). If those times seem too fast and the effort feels anywhere near to all out, then just back it off. Remember your body will feel different day to day due to a variety of factors. I know my approx paces for s/b/r but if I am having an off day or I'm tired for any reason, I throw those paces out the window and use RPE.

Another tool that many runners/triathletes use over pace is a HR monitor. I don't use one personally but it can be a good tool provided you know your HR zones. Perhaps relying on that over shooting for an actual pace would be better?

Great point! I think most of us have a threshold for running and once we push too far past that (either in terms of volume, intensity or both), then things can go wrong. I run around 15 mpw, which is very low compared to mist people but it works for me

Me too.  A bit more significant than chasing a PR.  Andy, what does your weekly run schedule look like now (apologies if you posted it previously)? 

The track isn't necessary.  You can use a city block, or whatever.  What you need is some regulated and relatively short, repeatable distance.  The track is convenient for that, and typically they also have very nice surfaces to help a bit with injur prevention.

'Tempo' means different things to different people in different contexts.  I wouldn't place much stock in any particular 'definition' unless it is the definition of a coach whose plan you are following.

I also would suggest -- for now -- that you don't do this by pace.  You said you aren't confident about going hard enough, or even what that necessarily means.  I gave you one way to try to discover it.  There are other ways.

I realize that you have a concrete time-related goal in mind (and that's great, and I think if you work hard you've got a shot at it).  I don't think that the best way to get there is to think, right now, about pace rather than about effort.

To be honest, haphazard and inconsistent over the last few months. That can't be of benefit right now. A good chunk of my motivation in this line of questioning is to get re-established in a routine, so I am using all the advice here to try and figure out what it will look like. But I am sure that the answer pretty much anyone would give me looking at not just my spotty couple of months, but the sum of the whole year, is that with just under 500 miles total for the year, while that may be a heck of a leap forward from where I was, it js simply not enough to make the kind of goals I am talking about, no matter the pace or RPE.

I think I'll just start with running more.

I agree as well. As much as I like having the reference to Fred D in the name of the mentor group - I also see no issue with an official or unofficial leader.

What's the weight loss situation and plan?  I lost about 30+ pounds in about 6 months between 2011 and 2012 and my "easy" pace on the run dropped approximately :30-:45 per mile if not more, solely as a result of the loss. I was running basically the same volume.  My 2011 HIM run was 11:20/mile, my 2012 run was 9:20/mile

I would be a little worried about chasing a time goal in s shortened time period, but if that is the only opportunity to try this, then give it a shot.  But honestly, again from my n=1 experience if you are heavy, if you want to run "faster" losing weight is more important and more effective than running faster.  It's a lot easier to drag 195 pounds through a suffering mile than 230 where I was.