login
Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club (Page 18)
-
No new posts
|
 2013-11-12 3:01 PM in reply to: rrrunner |
Regular  5477    LHOTP |  Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book ClubOriginally posted by rrrunner Cool, TJ :)Ok, I FINALLY finished the book and want to start incorporating JD's training plan in the BT run focus plan I'm on now. So I got the sessions typed in to my log then went to the VDot tables to get the pace at which I should be doing said sessions. According to the Vdot table my E is at 11:48 per mile. Now I'm far from being Speedy Gonzales but I don't think I can do a long run at 11:48/ mile! The M they have listed (based on a recent HM and 1.5 mile test at work) is 10:14. That is closer to my easy pace. Thoughts? What race did you use to calculate your VDOT?
|
| 2013-11-12 3:13 PM in reply to: switch |
Master 6595  Rio Rancho, NM | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by switch Originally posted by rrrunner Cool, TJ Ok, I FINALLY finished the book and want to start incorporating JD's training plan in the BT run focus plan I'm on now. So I got the sessions typed in to my log then went to the VDot tables to get the pace at which I should be doing said sessions. According to the Vdot table my E is at 11:48 per mile. Now I'm far from being Speedy Gonzales but I don't think I can do a long run at 11:48/ mile! The M they have listed (based on a recent HM and 1.5 mile test at work) is 10:14. That is closer to my easy pace. Thoughts?  What race did you use to calculate your VDOT? Interestingly both my recent HM and a 1.5 mile fitness test done at work came up with the same VDOT. |
| 2013-11-12 3:15 PM in reply to: rrrunner |
| Seattle | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by switch Originally posted by rrrunner Cool, TJ Ok, I FINALLY finished the book and want to start incorporating JD's training plan in the BT run focus plan I'm on now. So I got the sessions typed in to my log then went to the VDot tables to get the pace at which I should be doing said sessions. According to the Vdot table my E is at 11:48 per mile. Now I'm far from being Speedy Gonzales but I don't think I can do a long run at 11:48/ mile! The M they have listed (based on a recent HM and 1.5 mile test at work) is 10:14. That is closer to my easy pace. Thoughts? What race did you use to calculate your VDOT? Interestingly both my recent HM and a 1.5 mile fitness test done at work came up with the same VDOT. Well, I suppose that tells your it's pretty damn accurate, no? I guess I am curious then, why you want to ignore the suggested paces? |
| 2013-11-12 3:17 PM in reply to: 0 |
Master 6595 Rio Rancho, NM | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by Asalzwed Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by switch Originally posted by rrrunner Cool, TJ Ok, I FINALLY finished the book and want to start incorporating JD's training plan in the BT run focus plan I'm on now. So I got the sessions typed in to my log then went to the VDot tables to get the pace at which I should be doing said sessions. According to the Vdot table my E is at 11:48 per mile. Now I'm far from being Speedy Gonzales but I don't think I can do a long run at 11:48/ mile! The M they have listed (based on a recent HM and 1.5 mile test at work) is 10:14. That is closer to my easy pace. Thoughts? What race did you use to calculate your VDOT? Interestingly both my recent HM and a 1.5 mile fitness test done at work came up with the same VDOT. Well, I suppose that tells your it's pretty damn accurate, no? I guess I am curious then, why you want to ignore the suggested paces? I'm not trying to be a rebel or nuthin... I'm just not sure how to run that "slow"... BTW, love the avi Edited by rrrunner 2013-11-12 3:18 PM |
| 2013-11-12 3:19 PM in reply to: 0 |
Expert 4758 Middle River, Maryland Silver member | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by switch Originally posted by rrrunner Cool, TJ Ok, I FINALLY finished the book and want to start incorporating JD's training plan in the BT run focus plan I'm on now. So I got the sessions typed in to my log then went to the VDot tables to get the pace at which I should be doing said sessions. According to the Vdot table my E is at 11:48 per mile. Now I'm far from being Speedy Gonzales but I don't think I can do a long run at 11:48/ mile! The M they have listed (based on a recent HM and 1.5 mile test at work) is 10:14. That is closer to my easy pace. Thoughts? What race did you use to calculate your VDOT? Interestingly both my recent HM and a 1.5 mile fitness test done at work came up with the same VDOT. I would think, in theory, that they should be pretty close, especially with the recent HM. The other way around probably not so much. As for your original question, the 'E' pace is about how you feel, you know...easy. I think that it depends on the type of runner you are (i.e. endurance vs. speed) and what your recent training focus has been. I have trouble holding my 'E' pace the other way...the effort level isn't the problem it's just when I lose focus my pace drops. Given your recent HM, your endurance is pretty good which is why the 11:30+ seems like you're crawling. I think as long as your effort is comfortable, just go as slow as you can without losing form or sanity. Edited by jmhpsu93 2013-11-12 3:21 PM |
| 2013-11-12 3:27 PM in reply to: rrrunner |
| Seattle | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by Asalzwed Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by switch Originally posted by rrrunner Cool, TJ Ok, I FINALLY finished the book and want to start incorporating JD's training plan in the BT run focus plan I'm on now. So I got the sessions typed in to my log then went to the VDot tables to get the pace at which I should be doing said sessions. According to the Vdot table my E is at 11:48 per mile. Now I'm far from being Speedy Gonzales but I don't think I can do a long run at 11:48/ mile! The M they have listed (based on a recent HM and 1.5 mile test at work) is 10:14. That is closer to my easy pace. Thoughts? What race did you use to calculate your VDOT? Interestingly both my recent HM and a 1.5 mile fitness test done at work came up with the same VDOT. Well, I suppose that tells your it's pretty damn accurate, no? I guess I am curious then, why you want to ignore the suggested paces? I'm not trying to be a rebel or nuthin... I'm just not sure how to run that "slow"... BTW, love the avi As Mike said, there is certainly a range. But I think it's a good idea to stay pretty close to that #, assuming you are doing all of your other workouts the way they are prescribed.
|
| 2013-11-12 3:39 PM in reply to: Asalzwed |
Master 6595 Rio Rancho, NM | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by Asalzwed Soooo would a run/walk be an appropriate way to get to that number? Assuming it captures the appropriate "easiness" that he's wanting with that number?Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by Asalzwed Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by switch Originally posted by rrrunner Cool, TJ Ok, I FINALLY finished the book and want to start incorporating JD's training plan in the BT run focus plan I'm on now. So I got the sessions typed in to my log then went to the VDot tables to get the pace at which I should be doing said sessions. According to the Vdot table my E is at 11:48 per mile. Now I'm far from being Speedy Gonzales but I don't think I can do a long run at 11:48/ mile! The M they have listed (based on a recent HM and 1.5 mile test at work) is 10:14. That is closer to my easy pace. Thoughts? What race did you use to calculate your VDOT? Interestingly both my recent HM and a 1.5 mile fitness test done at work came up with the same VDOT. Well, I suppose that tells your it's pretty damn accurate, no? I guess I am curious then, why you want to ignore the suggested paces? I'm not trying to be a rebel or nuthin... I'm just not sure how to run that "slow"... BTW, love the avi As Mike said, there is certainly a range. But I think it's a good idea to stay pretty close to that #, assuming you are doing all of your other workouts the way they are prescribed.
|
| 2013-11-12 3:40 PM in reply to: Asalzwed |
Elite 7783 PEI, Canada | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by Asalzwed Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by Asalzwed Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by switch Originally posted by rrrunner Cool, TJ Ok, I FINALLY finished the book and want to start incorporating JD's training plan in the BT run focus plan I'm on now. So I got the sessions typed in to my log then went to the VDot tables to get the pace at which I should be doing said sessions. According to the Vdot table my E is at 11:48 per mile. Now I'm far from being Speedy Gonzales but I don't think I can do a long run at 11:48/ mile! The M they have listed (based on a recent HM and 1.5 mile test at work) is 10:14. That is closer to my easy pace. Thoughts? What race did you use to calculate your VDOT? Interestingly both my recent HM and a 1.5 mile fitness test done at work came up with the same VDOT. Well, I suppose that tells your it's pretty damn accurate, no? I guess I am curious then, why you want to ignore the suggested paces? I'm not trying to be a rebel or nuthin... I'm just not sure how to run that "slow"... BTW, love the avi As Mike said, there is certainly a range. But I think it's a good idea to stay pretty close to that #, assuming you are doing all of your other workouts the way they are prescribed.
I had this same discussion with my coach when I started working with him. He told me not to worry too much about E pace as long as the runs felt nice and easy and I was fully recovering from them. I wasn't any where near M pace though - probably somewhere in the middle, maybe a little closer to the E pace side of the middle. |
| 2013-11-12 3:44 PM in reply to: 0 |
| Seattle | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by Asalzwed Soooo would a run/walk be an appropriate way to get to that number? Assuming it captures the appropriate "easiness" that he's wanting with that number? Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by Asalzwed Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by switch Originally posted by rrrunner Cool, TJ Ok, I FINALLY finished the book and want to start incorporating JD's training plan in the BT run focus plan I'm on now. So I got the sessions typed in to my log then went to the VDot tables to get the pace at which I should be doing said sessions. According to the Vdot table my E is at 11:48 per mile. Now I'm far from being Speedy Gonzales but I don't think I can do a long run at 11:48/ mile! The M they have listed (based on a recent HM and 1.5 mile test at work) is 10:14. That is closer to my easy pace. Thoughts? What race did you use to calculate your VDOT? Interestingly both my recent HM and a 1.5 mile fitness test done at work came up with the same VDOT. Well, I suppose that tells your it's pretty damn accurate, no? I guess I am curious then, why you want to ignore the suggested paces? I'm not trying to be a rebel or nuthin... I'm just not sure how to run that "slow"... BTW, love the avi As Mike said, there is certainly a range. But I think it's a good idea to stay pretty close to that #, assuming you are doing all of your other workouts the way they are prescribed.
I wouldn't. If you are saying you literally cannot run that slow, then by all means, run a little faster. But be careful you are stressing the "system" you are supposed to be stressing.
* Also, I believe that if you truly can do your M pace for a long run, the discrepancy suggests you have some untapped potential being reflected in your race times. And likely that is due to low weekly mileage or a low "training load" if you will.
Edited by Asalzwed 2013-11-12 4:05 PM |
| 2013-11-12 3:46 PM in reply to: switch |
| Seattle | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by switch Originally posted by Asalzwed I'm watching intently to see what others say, but I feel like anything I would say would be a guess Originally posted by jmhpsu93 Originally posted by Asalzwed Hmmmm before I ask my coach, I'm curious what you guys think of this. I'll be starting marathon training in the middle of December. Typically I would do some sort of long(ish) tempo on Saturdays followed by my long run on Sunday. Do you think replacing 4-5 of those Saturday tempos (within a 16-18 week build) with a series of 2-mile races would be a good thing, break even or a bad thing? I should add that IMHO, speed is my weakness. The main thing I would be concerned about would be the recovery cost and how it would affect your long run. I would doubt that there's anything in your marathon training plan that calls for a 12-13 minute all-out effort. That said, racing is fun, you seem to be good at managing it, and it might keep you from going crazy not racing for four months. My thought is that a 2 mile race would be fairly comparable to a 4-6 mile "tempo." I very well could be wrong though. and BTW Mike, I make my own training plans, so maybe I just need to write that in there |
| 2013-11-12 4:23 PM in reply to: Asalzwed |
Regular 5477 LHOTP | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by Asalzwed Salty, you know I'm gonna defer to you on this, but based on what you just wrote, do you think TJ could shoot for 11min EZ pace--or something between the EZ and M pace--at first and see if that works, or would you err more conservatively and stick with the calculated EZ? Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by Asalzwed Soooo would a run/walk be an appropriate way to get to that number? Assuming it captures the appropriate "easiness" that he's wanting with that number? Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by Asalzwed Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by switch Originally posted by rrrunner Cool, TJ :)Ok, I FINALLY finished the book and want to start incorporating JD's training plan in the BT run focus plan I'm on now. So I got the sessions typed in to my log then went to the VDot tables to get the pace at which I should be doing said sessions. According to the Vdot table my E is at 11:48 per mile. Now I'm far from being Speedy Gonzales but I don't think I can do a long run at 11:48/ mile! The M they have listed (based on a recent HM and 1.5 mile test at work) is 10:14. That is closer to my easy pace. Thoughts? What race did you use to calculate your VDOT? Interestingly both my recent HM and a 1.5 mile fitness test done at work came up with the same VDOT. Well, I suppose that tells your it's pretty damn accurate, no? I guess I am curious then, why you want to ignore the suggested paces? I'm not trying to be a rebel or nuthin... I'm just not sure how to run that "slow"... BTW, love the avi As Mike said, there is certainly a range. But I think it's a good idea to stay pretty close to that #, assuming you are doing all of your other workouts the way they are prescribed.
I wouldn't. If you are saying you literally cannot run that slow, then by all means, run a little faster. But be careful you are stressing the "system" you are supposed to be stressing.
* Also, I believe that if you truly can do your M pace for a long run, the discrepancy suggests you have some untapped potential being reflected in your race times. And likely that is due to low weekly mileage or a low "training load" if you will.
|
| 2013-11-12 4:44 PM in reply to: switch |
| Seattle | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by switch Originally posted by Asalzwed Salty, you know I'm gonna defer to you on this, but based on what you just wrote, do you think TJ could shoot for 11min EZ pace--or something between the EZ and M pace--at first and see if that works, or would you err more conservatively and stick with the calculated EZ? Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by Asalzwed Soooo would a run/walk be an appropriate way to get to that number? Assuming it captures the appropriate "easiness" that he's wanting with that number? Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by Asalzwed Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by switch Originally posted by rrrunner Cool, TJ Ok, I FINALLY finished the book and want to start incorporating JD's training plan in the BT run focus plan I'm on now. So I got the sessions typed in to my log then went to the VDot tables to get the pace at which I should be doing said sessions. According to the Vdot table my E is at 11:48 per mile. Now I'm far from being Speedy Gonzales but I don't think I can do a long run at 11:48/ mile! The M they have listed (based on a recent HM and 1.5 mile test at work) is 10:14. That is closer to my easy pace. Thoughts? What race did you use to calculate your VDOT? Interestingly both my recent HM and a 1.5 mile fitness test done at work came up with the same VDOT. Well, I suppose that tells your it's pretty damn accurate, no? I guess I am curious then, why you want to ignore the suggested paces? I'm not trying to be a rebel or nuthin... I'm just not sure how to run that "slow"... BTW, love the avi As Mike said, there is certainly a range. But I think it's a good idea to stay pretty close to that #, assuming you are doing all of your other workouts the way they are prescribed.
I wouldn't. If you are saying you literally cannot run that slow, then by all means, run a little faster. But be careful you are stressing the "system" you are supposed to be stressing.
* Also, I believe that if you truly can do your M pace for a long run, the discrepancy suggests you have some untapped potential being reflected in your race times. And likely that is due to low weekly mileage or a low "training load" if you will.
I don't feel comfortable giving an exact number. I am more just coming from the perspective that TJ has a relatively low volume. What might feel "easy" when you are running 15 miles a week might change when you are adding a little more of a training load (volume and intensity) per what JD prescribes. But sure, in general, I think that EZ pace is flexible. I just worry when it starts getting too close to M that something is a little off. |
| 2013-11-12 5:19 PM in reply to: Asalzwed |
| Master 10208 Northern IL | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by Asalzwed Originally posted by switch Originally posted by Asalzwed I'm watching intently to see what others say, but I feel like anything I would say would be a guess Originally posted by jmhpsu93 Originally posted by Asalzwed Hmmmm before I ask my coach, I'm curious what you guys think of this. I'll be starting marathon training in the middle of December. Typically I would do some sort of long(ish) tempo on Saturdays followed by my long run on Sunday. Do you think replacing 4-5 of those Saturday tempos (within a 16-18 week build) with a series of 2-mile races would be a good thing, break even or a bad thing? I should add that IMHO, speed is my weakness. The main thing I would be concerned about would be the recovery cost and how it would affect your long run. I would doubt that there's anything in your marathon training plan that calls for a 12-13 minute all-out effort. That said, racing is fun, you seem to be good at managing it, and it might keep you from going crazy not racing for four months. My thought is that a 2 mile race would be fairly comparable to a 4-6 mile "tempo." I very well could be wrong though. and BTW Mike, I make my own training plans, so maybe I just need to write that in there I would run it by the coach, especially since you want to do this multiple times. The 2-mile races would certainly be "hard", but what are you trying to stress there? The pacing would seem to be right between T-pace intervals and I-pace intervals, so what do you want to stress with it? I'm cautious on this range as it may not really be that great for working either. Might only bump VO2 max a little at times there and time spent up there is substantially less than the 4-6 mile tempo. 12:xx min vs what 27-40 minutes or so? I'm not quite sure what you mean by "speed", but if you think more HTFU would help then something like this *might* help. So long as you aren't too beat up for the long run. On the bike I might push some break throughs like that, but not that regularly. |
| 2013-11-12 5:31 PM in reply to: brigby1 |
| Seattle | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by brigby1 Originally posted by Asalzwed Originally posted by switch Originally posted by Asalzwed I'm watching intently to see what others say, but I feel like anything I would say would be a guess Originally posted by jmhpsu93 Originally posted by Asalzwed Hmmmm before I ask my coach, I'm curious what you guys think of this. I'll be starting marathon training in the middle of December. Typically I would do some sort of long(ish) tempo on Saturdays followed by my long run on Sunday. Do you think replacing 4-5 of those Saturday tempos (within a 16-18 week build) with a series of 2-mile races would be a good thing, break even or a bad thing? I should add that IMHO, speed is my weakness. The main thing I would be concerned about would be the recovery cost and how it would affect your long run. I would doubt that there's anything in your marathon training plan that calls for a 12-13 minute all-out effort. That said, racing is fun, you seem to be good at managing it, and it might keep you from going crazy not racing for four months. My thought is that a 2 mile race would be fairly comparable to a 4-6 mile "tempo." I very well could be wrong though. and BTW Mike, I make my own training plans, so maybe I just need to write that in there I would run it by the coach, especially since you want to do this multiple times. The 2-mile races would certainly be "hard", but what are you trying to stress there? The pacing would seem to be right between T-pace intervals and I-pace intervals, so what do you want to stress with it? I'm cautious on this range as it may not really be that great for working either. Might only bump VO2 max a little at times there and time spent up there is substantially less than the 4-6 mile tempo. 12:xx min vs what 27-40 minutes or so? I'm not quite sure what you mean by "speed", but if you think more HTFU would help then something like this *might* help. So long as you aren't too beat up for the long run. On the bike I might push some break throughs like that, but not that regularly. I will go ahead and ask, and his answer may be along the lines of yours in terms of working that dangerous no mans land. When I think of myself as a runner, it is very apparent that I excel on a hillier type of a course while I struggle on the track. I think this is because I am stronger than I am fast. This leads me to believe that I need to work on those things that come together to make someone a fast track runner. I guess I don't entirely know what those things are? But I feel like racing a series of two milers would at a minimum, give me lots of experience running fast. That is just my thought process. And I clearly don't really know how else to describe it. But feel free to rip it apart and tell me where I am going wrong. and perhaps I am not using the right word but I can't think of a better one. |
| 2013-11-12 9:16 PM in reply to: switch |
Veteran 945 South Windsor, CT | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club TJ-easy should be easy-there is a great range, it is easier to run closer to the upper end of the 'easy range' when you are undertrained in terms of volume. Just run more, keep is easy/comfortable..work the distances and overall mileage up. Do not run faster and walk to keep it closer to the desired 'range'. Run more Adrienne-How important is the 2 mile race series? It will not help you nearly as much as doing medLR with MP. 'Speed' helps a bit with sharpening with marathon training but holding MP longer and working LT is MUCH more important. If it is not that important doing 10-16 mile medLR with MP or tempo segments will add much more to your preparation for the marathon, IMO. I know I have reiterated what everyone else said, but take it FWIW. Did I tell you all that I got my 'new' copy of the first edition in the mail recently? I LOVE that version 10X more. |
| 2013-11-13 6:51 AM in reply to: Asalzwed |
Expert 4758 Middle River, Maryland Silver member | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by Asalzwed Originally posted by switch Originally posted by Asalzwed I'm watching intently to see what others say, but I feel like anything I would say would be a guess Originally posted by jmhpsu93 Originally posted by Asalzwed Hmmmm before I ask my coach, I'm curious what you guys think of this. I'll be starting marathon training in the middle of December. Typically I would do some sort of long(ish) tempo on Saturdays followed by my long run on Sunday. Do you think replacing 4-5 of those Saturday tempos (within a 16-18 week build) with a series of 2-mile races would be a good thing, break even or a bad thing? I should add that IMHO, speed is my weakness. The main thing I would be concerned about would be the recovery cost and how it would affect your long run. I would doubt that there's anything in your marathon training plan that calls for a 12-13 minute all-out effort. That said, racing is fun, you seem to be good at managing it, and it might keep you from going crazy not racing for four months. My thought is that a 2 mile race would be fairly comparable to a 4-6 mile "tempo." I very well could be wrong though. and BTW Mike, I make my own training plans, so maybe I just need to write that in there Problem solved then! |
| 2013-11-13 8:33 AM in reply to: 0 |
| Master 10208 Northern IL | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by dtoce TJ-easy should be easy-there is a great range, it is easier to run closer to the upper end of the 'easy range' when you are undertrained in terms of volume. Just run more, keep is easy/comfortable..work the distances and overall mileage up. Do not run faster and walk to keep it closer to the desired 'range'. Run more Yeah, run/walk is different. Don't walk to get the average to where it's *supposed* to be. Do be sure to pay attention to "easy" as your mileage increases. It might very well change with the additional load. Adrienne-How important is the 2 mile race series? It will not help you nearly as much as doing medLR with MP. 'Speed' helps a bit with sharpening with marathon training but holding MP longer and working LT is MUCH more important. If it is not that important doing 10-16 mile medLR with MP or tempo segments will add much more to your preparation for the marathon, IMO. I know I have reiterated what everyone else said, but take it FWIW. Did I tell you all that I got my 'new' copy of the first edition in the mail recently? I LOVE that version 10X more. I think you're asking it more directly too. Making sure of priorities of events. I'm also wondering about the rationale. Investigate more on differences between the hilly races and track runs. How well do your various track sessions compare to how well others run theirs? As in how they match up to their own speed profiles, not who is faster. Also know that it might not just be more "powerful", but in execution of the hills. I've read that running up hills is supposed to translate well into more speed development (and seem to experience that as well). It's possible that you do better with the changes in terrain. Maybe you're better at carrying speed through the course changes and measuring your effort in the different situations. Sometimes rapidly changing situations. All the ups and downs do feel different, so there is some skill in that along with physical ability. I certainly can't tell through by only reading. Just putting the thought on the table to think about. Edited by brigby1 2013-11-13 8:36 AM |
| 2013-11-13 10:36 AM in reply to: Asalzwed |
Master 6595 Rio Rancho, NM | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by Asalzwed Originally posted by switch Originally posted by Asalzwed Salty, you know I'm gonna defer to you on this, but based on what you just wrote, do you think TJ could shoot for 11min EZ pace--or something between the EZ and M pace--at first and see if that works, or would you err more conservatively and stick with the calculated EZ? Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by Asalzwed Soooo would a run/walk be an appropriate way to get to that number? Assuming it captures the appropriate "easiness" that he's wanting with that number? Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by Asalzwed Originally posted by rrrunner Originally posted by switch Originally posted by rrrunner Cool, TJ Ok, I FINALLY finished the book and want to start incorporating JD's training plan in the BT run focus plan I'm on now. So I got the sessions typed in to my log then went to the VDot tables to get the pace at which I should be doing said sessions. According to the Vdot table my E is at 11:48 per mile. Now I'm far from being Speedy Gonzales but I don't think I can do a long run at 11:48/ mile! The M they have listed (based on a recent HM and 1.5 mile test at work) is 10:14. That is closer to my easy pace. Thoughts? What race did you use to calculate your VDOT? Interestingly both my recent HM and a 1.5 mile fitness test done at work came up with the same VDOT. Well, I suppose that tells your it's pretty damn accurate, no? I guess I am curious then, why you want to ignore the suggested paces? I'm not trying to be a rebel or nuthin... I'm just not sure how to run that "slow"... BTW, love the avi As Mike said, there is certainly a range. But I think it's a good idea to stay pretty close to that #, assuming you are doing all of your other workouts the way they are prescribed.
I wouldn't. If you are saying you literally cannot run that slow, then by all means, run a little faster. But be careful you are stressing the "system" you are supposed to be stressing.
* Also, I believe that if you truly can do your M pace for a long run, the discrepancy suggests you have some untapped potential being reflected in your race times. And likely that is due to low weekly mileage or a low "training load" if you will.
I don't feel comfortable giving an exact number. I am more just coming from the perspective that TJ has a relatively low volume. What might feel "easy" when you are running 15 miles a week might change when you are adding a little more of a training load (volume and intensity) per what JD prescribes. But sure, in general, I think that EZ pace is flexible. I just worry when it starts getting too close to M that something is a little off. Very valid point! Right now I'm doing the run focused winter maintenance plan from BT but in place of their run sessions I've substituted JD's Red plan. The BT plan has me running 4-5 times a week for the next few weeks so that gives me JD's "important" sessions plus one or two extras per week. I'm doing the first one on the dreadmill tonight so I can make sure I'm doing it correctly. |
| 2013-11-13 11:29 AM in reply to: brigby1 |
| Seattle | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by brigby1 Originally posted by dtoce TJ-easy should be easy-there is a great range, it is easier to run closer to the upper end of the 'easy range' when you are undertrained in terms of volume. Just run more, keep is easy/comfortable..work the distances and overall mileage up. Do not run faster and walk to keep it closer to the desired 'range'. Run more Yeah, run/walk is different. Don't walk to get the average to where it's *supposed* to be. Do be sure to pay attention to "easy" as your mileage increases. It might very well change with the additional load. Adrienne-How important is the 2 mile race series? It will not help you nearly as much as doing medLR with MP. 'Speed' helps a bit with sharpening with marathon training but holding MP longer and working LT is MUCH more important. If it is not that important doing 10-16 mile medLR with MP or tempo segments will add much more to your preparation for the marathon, IMO. I know I have reiterated what everyone else said, but take it FWIW. Did I tell you all that I got my 'new' copy of the first edition in the mail recently? I LOVE that version 10X more. I think you're asking it more directly too. Making sure of priorities of events. I'm also wondering about the rationale. Investigate more on differences between the hilly races and track runs. How well do your various track sessions compare to how well others run theirs? As in how they match up to their own speed profiles, not who is faster. Also know that it might not just be more "powerful", but in execution of the hills. I've read that running up hills is supposed to translate well into more speed development (and seem to experience that as well). It's possible that you do better with the changes in terrain. Maybe you're better at carrying speed through the course changes and measuring your effort in the different situations. Sometimes rapidly changing situations. All the ups and downs do feel different, so there is some skill in that along with physical ability. I certainly can't tell through by only reading. Just putting the thought on the table to think about. Great input you guys. The 2 mile series is the New Balance Grand Prix. A race series that totals up points based on 5 2-miles series blah, blah blah. It just sounded fun and it sounded like an opportunity to work in short distance "speed." Last summer I attempted to do some time racing on the track but it didn't work out well because I was trying to balance that with tri training AND doing some intense hiking. Sooooo kind of funny that I am bringing it up in the same context - trying to do too many things at once. So, I got my answer. It would not be a good time.
So, to address my "problem." I hear what you are saying about execution being an element that I might not be accounting for. I just see my race times compared to the group that I run with at the track (our groups are organized by pace.) I REALLY feel like I am running hard and executing the way I should be but there is a significant discrepancy between my race times and the other girls in my group. I am beating some of the "faster" girls (that run in 1-2 or even 3 groups ahead of me) in races but I couldn't imagine keeping up with their interval/tempo/etc paces that we do at practice. Now clearly I prefer to have slower training times and faster racing times, way better than the opposite, but I wonder what's up? Perhaps it's just experience? Most of the girls that I run with ran in college so maybe they are just used to high training intensities while I am just getting started? Sorry, I don't know if I am articulating very well. So please let me know if I need to clarify anything.
|
| 2013-11-13 12:29 PM in reply to: 0 |
Veteran 945 South Windsor, CT | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by Asalzwed
So, to address my "problem." I hear what you are saying about execution being an element that I might not be accounting for. I just see my race times compared to the group that I run with at the track (our groups are organized by pace.) I REALLY feel like I am running hard and executing the way I should be but there is a significant discrepancy between my race times and the other girls in my group. I am beating some of the "faster" girls (that run in 1-2 or even 3 groups ahead of me) in races but I couldn't imagine keeping up with their interval/tempo/etc paces that we do at practice. Now clearly I prefer to have slower training times and faster racing times, way better than the opposite, but I wonder what's up? Perhaps it's just experience? Most of the girls that I run with ran in college so maybe they are just used to high training intensities while I am just getting started? Sorry, I don't know if I am articulating very well. So please let me know if I need to clarify anything.
Mixing marathon training and 2 mile racing does not work well. There is a gradual build in LR's, with pace added, and varied periodization during the marathon training block. You can do well at 2 miles in races with M training, but it won't be as good as you can get with speed training/sharpening which is specifically needed for that distance. Your build keeps the focus on aerobic pace and pushing LT, as that is the best predictor of how you will do in the marathon. If the M is the race of importance, let the shorter series go and focus on putting your best block of training together. Do not worry about which group you are in when running your training runs. It may be that the others have more or less experience in training w intensity but as you pointed out, I'd rather race faster and train appropriately, even if it's slower training paces than some others. You're the one that can dial it up on race day and that's a golden quality to have. Hills and strength training have a time and a place in M training. There are varied theories on it and many say hills/strength training is 'speedwork in disguise'. For a solid M, you need lots of pieces of: total distance, total volume, strength and speed with enough medLR's and especially LR's. If you are writing your own schedule, post it. I'm sure the group will comment, but I'd be interested in Ben's comments on periodization for M training. I know what I did and what I wrote for people in training to achieve BQ's, but everyone responds differently to training loads. Edited by dtoce 2013-11-13 12:30 PM |
| 2013-11-13 2:12 PM in reply to: dtoce |
| Seattle | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by dtoce Originally posted by Asalzwed . So, I got my answer. It would not be a good time. Do not worry about which group you are in when running your training runs. It may be that the others have more or less experience in training w intensity but as you pointed out, I'd rather race faster and train appropriately, even if it's slower training paces than some others. You're the one that can dial it up on race day and that's a golden quality to have. Hills and strength training have a time and a place in M training. There are varied theories on it and many say hills/strength training is 'speedwork in disguise'. For a solid M, you need lots of pieces of: total distance, total volume, strength and speed with enough medLR's and especially LR's. If you are writing your own schedule, post it. I'm sure the group will comment, but I'd be interested in Ben's comments on periodization for M training. I know what I did and what I wrote for people in training to achieve BQ's, but everyone responds differently to training loads.
So, to address my "problem." I hear what you are saying about execution being an element that I might not be accounting for. I just see my race times compared to the group that I run with at the track (our groups are organized by pace.) I REALLY feel like I am running hard and executing the way I should be but there is a significant discrepancy between my race times and the other girls in my group. I am beating some of the "faster" girls (that run in 1-2 or even 3 groups ahead of me) in races but I couldn't imagine keeping up with their interval/tempo/etc paces that we do at practice. Now clearly I prefer to have slower training times and faster racing times, way better than the opposite, but I wonder what's up? Perhaps it's just experience? Most of the girls that I run with ran in college so maybe they are just used to high training intensities while I am just getting started? Sorry, I don't know if I am articulating very well. So please let me know if I need to clarify anything.
Alright. Great. 2-mile series, off the list (sad sigh) The M is absolutely my goal. It's what I will be planning my cycles from micro to macro around. Let me start with the big picture. I want to do more large scale periodization so, fast track stuff in the summer (5K focus) for "speed" then XC in the fall for "strength" then a block of training for endurance in the winter for a spring marathon. I would plan to take time off between each season (1-2 weeks depending on what I would need.) Now, for the upcoming marathon cycle I plan on doing 18 weeks. I'll be coming into it with a great base. Typically in the 70 MPW range for non race weeks and 50-ish for race weeks. We'll go ahead and call it 60 MPW coming in. Quality: I am kind of at the whim of my coach for quality, but he will take us through (pretty much a Daniel's cycle) where we do some form of I and Rs on our Q1 and then some form of a T for our Q2. Slowly that progresses and we do less stressing of V02 max and a lot more things geared towards T. Sometimes a week will happen where Q1 is T and Q2 is a long run with a block of M pace. Other than the M pace long runs, I generally always double up Q2 on a Saturday and the long run on a Sunday. Long Runs: will more or less be 16, 18, 20 because that is what has worked in the past. But I am flexible on this. And don't worry. I don't get too caught up in the numbers. If I am on tough terrain I am totally alright with defaulting to time. Or if I finish at 21.87999 miles I won't flip my lid. Everything Else: will pretty much be easy. I try and change up the terrain and do a slower recovery type pace when needed. I'll try and do at least one of these in the 9-13 mile range. Mileage: will probably go from 70-80/90? Not sure yet. I think I just have to play that by ear. Open to input.
This is all high level right now. Nothing is set in stone. Let me know what you think.
|
| 2013-11-13 6:52 PM in reply to: Asalzwed |
Veteran 945 South Windsor, CT | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by Asalzwed Let me start with the big picture. I want to do more large scale periodization so, fast track stuff in the summer (5K focus) for "speed" then XC in the fall for "strength" then a block of training for endurance in the winter for a spring marathon. I would plan to take time off between each season (1-2 weeks depending on what I would need.) Now, for the upcoming marathon cycle I plan on doing 18 weeks. I'll be coming into it with a great base. Typically in the 70 MPW range for non race weeks and 50-ish for race weeks. We'll go ahead and call it 60 MPW coming in. Quality: I am kind of at the whim of my coach for quality, but he will take us through (pretty much a Daniel's cycle) where we do some form of I and Rs on our Q1 and then some form of a T for our Q2. Slowly that progresses and we do less stressing of V02 max and a lot more things geared towards T. Sometimes a week will happen where Q1 is T and Q2 is a long run with a block of M pace. Other than the M pace long runs, I generally always double up Q2 on a Saturday and the long run on a Sunday. Long Runs: will more or less be 16, 18, 20 because that is what has worked in the past. But I am flexible on this. And don't worry. I don't get too caught up in the numbers. If I am on tough terrain I am totally alright with defaulting to time. Or if I finish at 21.87999 miles I won't flip my lid. Everything Else: will pretty much be easy. I try and change up the terrain and do a slower recovery type pace when needed. I'll try and do at least one of these in the 9-13 mile range. Mileage: will probably go from 70-80/90? Not sure yet. I think I just have to play that by ear. Open to input.
This is all high level right now. Nothing is set in stone. Let me know what you think.
I think the general plan is very good. You will just need to make sure you listen to your body during training and take extra time if necessary, for any minor niggles. Injuries will set you back from the plan significantly. Also, a few scheduled cutback weeks should be included. I advise and take one q4-6wks, depending on life's pressures, but they should be semi-planned. There will be times when it calls for a harder workout, but you just don't have it. The most likely reason is that you are incompletely recovered. Make that an easy day, if it happens. M pace runs during 16 milers really let you practice race pace and let you know how you will handle race day. It is a difficult run and if you do big blocks of M running during LR's, try to adjust intensity as needed, getting the biggest bang for your training buck. These also get your nutrition dialed in so it should be automatic. Make most of the medLR's and LR's on the easy side at first. During one of my previous M training blocks, I did LR's that were: E, then w MP, then fast finish, then progression. Only after 4 LR's did I push the distance up. So, I only went up 2-3miles on my LR q 5wks, since I tried to take a cutback week each month. I never added intensity and distance together on a single run/workout or in total. You will have to look at the schedule and decide how you will make an 18 wk schedule work. I'd consider using a Pfitz model and blend it with JD's intensity progression and periodization, unless you are going to go totally with your coach. Lastly, you'll have to decide whether to do a 2 or 3 week taper and also decide on the timing of your last LR. Decisions, decisions... Let's see what others say... |
| 2013-11-14 7:49 AM in reply to: Asalzwed |
Expert 4758 Middle River, Maryland Silver member | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by Asalzwed Mileage: will probably go from 70-80/90? Not sure yet. I think I just have to play that by ear. Open to input. This sentence right here disqualifies me from any suggestion. I can't even fathom that type of running volume. I know lots of serious runners do it, but wow.
|
| 2013-11-14 9:11 AM in reply to: jmhpsu93 |
Regular 5477 LHOTP | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by jmhpsu93 Haha, yeah, what Mike said! I'm just sitting back watching the thread in awe right now :)Originally posted by Asalzwed Mileage: will probably go from 70-80/90? Not sure yet. I think I just have to play that by ear. Open to input. This sentence right here disqualifies me from any suggestion. I can't even fathom that type of running volume. I know lots of serious runners do it, but wow.
|
| 2013-11-14 9:31 AM in reply to: switch |
Veteran 945 South Windsor, CT | Subject: RE: Sept 15-Oct 15 "Daniel's Running Formula" Book Club Originally posted by switch I'm just sitting back watching the thread in awe right now this is nothing...back in the day at one of my 'old running sites', I used to look at kevin beck and heather may's logs wow |
|
|
|
|
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
|
| ||||
|
| |||
|
| |||
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK