login
Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt (Page 2)
-
No new posts
|
 2013-10-08 9:25 AM in reply to: Comet |
Champion  7036    Sarasota, FL |  Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attemptOriginally posted by Comet The only thing I disagree with is your title for this thread. What's amazing is that he ran that interval, at 68 years old and finished in 4:10! "failed BQ" is a little pessimistic. Dude is amazing! No disrespect intended for Jeff at all. A 4:10 marathon at 68 certiainly is an accomplishment. To his credit, he says he intends to try to BQ again. I was just intrigued by the rather extreme 30sec/15sec pattern he used to do it. If it was due to injury issues, I'd like to hear more from him as to how he arrived at that ratio. In my case with my Achilles, I played around running until it hurt and then walking until it didn't, to come up with my 4min:1min ratio. Without knowing more about Jeff's situation, if I couldn't run more than 30 seconds at a time I don't know if would be attempting a marathon. Obviously there is more to the story. Mark |
| 2013-10-08 10:44 AM in reply to: jennifer_runs |
Veteran 361 North Carolina Foothills | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt While I understand why people embrace it, I don't buy into the fact that it is faster. Just as a simple example, let's say you can run a 5-mile race in 40 minutes .. that's a consistent 8 minutes per mile pace. If you did the 4-1 run to walk ratio, and let's just say the 1-mile of walking was at a 16 minute per mile pace, then you would have to do the 4 miles of running at a 6 minute per mile pace to finish in the same 40 minutes. This may be overly simplistic, but if you are capable of running 4 miles at 6 minute per mile pace, then one would think you could conservatively run the whole thing at a 7 minute per mile pace and still finish 5 minutes sooner. I believe someone else said it earlier .. if it was faster, than elites would be doing it ... and their not. |
| 2013-10-08 11:01 AM in reply to: rventuri |
Extreme Veteran 1018 | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt Originally posted by rventuri If you did the 4-1 run to walk ratio, and let's just say the 1-mile of walking was at a 16 minute per mile pace, then you would have to do the 4 miles of running at a 6 minute per mile pace to finish in the same 40 minutes. This may be overly simplistic, but if you are capable of running 4 miles at 6 minute per mile pace, then one would think you could conservatively run the whole thing at a 7 minute per mile pace and still finish 5 minutes sooner. I believe someone else said it earlier .. if it was faster, than elites would be doing it ... and their not. 4:1 is in minutes not miles. |
| 2013-10-08 11:08 AM in reply to: Fred D |
Elite 3779 Ontario | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt Originally posted by Fred D Originally posted by morey000 . Count me along with Kathy as someone who doesn't agree with you here. Run/walk in the context of triathlon especially is often the fastest route for most of us. I have run a 3:45 ironman marathon with run/walk. No, I wouldn't have been faster with a full run as it would have been much more walking at the end than I actually did. This stuff isn't pure science, just adding my vote that run/walk for TRIATHLETES is often our best strategy, especially in longer course events. Just my useless opinion. Originally posted by TriDadinAsheville ... I just can't keep my HR in aerobic without doing a run/walk...
yup. then you're an excellent candidate for a R/W strategy. If you cannot stay below your threshold when running, then you need to rest and recover. If you increase your fitness/capacity level such that you can comfortably run continuously, a R/W strategy will not be your fastest any more.
Fortunately- you're not a professional runner, and you're welcome to enjoy the sport any way you wish. no criticism. But, if someday you want to be faster.... To Fred's point. I think it has a needed place in long course Tri racing for most athletes. In stand alone marathons/half marathons, I think you will find a very small minority who are racing faster times (arbitrarily say sub 3:20 marathon) using a Galloway method. I think slower/less trained/injured runners benefit better from it vs faster runners - it's my uneducated opinion unless someone can show some stats saying otherwise. |
| 2013-10-08 11:09 AM in reply to: rventuri |
Alpharetta, Georgia Bronze member | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt Originally posted by rventuri I believe someone else said it earlier .. if it was faster, than elites would be doing it ... and their not. I like how we are comparing ourselves to the fastest people in the world... on a beginner site. LOL! Simple fact is that it IS faster for some people. Do what's best for you but no need to knock what works for someone else. |
| 2013-10-08 11:14 AM in reply to: RedCorvette |
Champion 14571 the alamo city, Texas | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt Originally posted by RedCorvette Originally posted by Comet The only thing I disagree with is your title for this thread. What's amazing is that he ran that interval, at 68 years old and finished in 4:10! "failed BQ" is a little pessimistic. Dude is amazing! No disrespect intended for Jeff at all. A 4:10 marathon at 68 certiainly is an accomplishment. To his credit, he says he intends to try to BQ again. I was just intrigued by the rather extreme 30sec/15sec pattern he used to do it. If it was due to injury issues, I'd like to hear more from him as to how he arrived at that ratio. In my case with my Achilles, I played around running until it hurt and then walking until it didn't, to come up with my 4min:1min ratio. Without knowing more about Jeff's situation, if I couldn't run more than 30 seconds at a time I don't know if would be attempting a marathon. Obviously there is more to the story. Mark if you are doing run walk you shouldn't EVER run until you just can't run anymore - you run what you know you can sustain repeated over the course of your race. i run 12-1 in cooler weather (9-1 when it's hot) for runs over 10 miles - even though i can run less than 10 without ever walking - to be able to last 13 or 18 or 26.2 i need to spread the walking out over the WHOLE run - not just once i've given up. |
| 2013-10-08 11:14 AM in reply to: GoFaster |
Extreme Veteran 2263 Ridgeland, Mississippi | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt Originally posted by GoFaster To Fred's point. I think it has a needed place in long course Tri racing for most athletes. In stand alone marathons/half marathons, I think you will find a very small minority who are racing faster times (arbitrarily say sub 3:20 marathon) using a Galloway method. I think slower/less trained/injured runners benefit better from it vs faster runners - it's my uneducated opinion unless someone can show some stats saying otherwise. That's more or less what I said. You just said it more eloquently. |
| 2013-10-08 11:17 AM in reply to: rventuri |
| 6 | Subject: the inflection point is somewhere around 3h Galloway itself puts the inflection point at around 3h, so that if you are running a marathon faster than 3h, walk breaks would slow you down, but for slower runners they help overall. I got myself to a 3:27:17 this year which I think would have been impossible without the walk breaks. It is of course not possible to prove because there are a lot of other factors at work, it's just that when I compare myself to runners besides me, after a walk break I can usually overtake them in the following couple of minutes. I guess that most studies are done with good runners and for all those who approach the 3h mark or are faster, walking is never an option. I think though, that breaks every 30s are way too many. I take my first walk break after 10k and then every 5k for some 20s. |
| 2013-10-08 11:17 AM in reply to: 0 |
New user 205 Athens, GA | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt Originally posted by GAUG3 Originally posted by rventuri If you did the 4-1 run to walk ratio, and let's just say the 1-mile of walking was at a 16 minute per mile pace, then you would have to do the 4 miles of running at a 6 minute per mile pace to finish in the same 40 minutes. This may be overly simplistic, but if you are capable of running 4 miles at 6 minute per mile pace, then one would think you could conservatively run the whole thing at a 7 minute per mile pace and still finish 5 minutes sooner. I believe someone else said it earlier .. if it was faster, than elites would be doing it ... and their not. 4:1 is in minutes not miles. Also, Galloway recommends a 4 minute/35 second ratio at 8 minute miles, so there would be much less walking than the example. Edited by paxsarah 2013-10-08 11:18 AM |
| 2013-10-08 11:20 AM in reply to: lisac957 |
| Seattle | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt Originally posted by lisac957 Originally posted by rventuri I believe someone else said it earlier .. if it was faster, than elites would be doing it ... and their not. I like how we are comparing ourselves to the fastest people in the world... on a beginner site. LOL! Simple fact is that it IS faster for some people. Do what's best for you but no need to knock what works for someone else. Well, beginner doesn't necessarily mean lack of talent. I believe it would be limiting to disregard different philosophies elite athletes use and don't use. |
 2013-10-08 11:23 AM in reply to: GoFaster |
| Subject: ... This user's post has been ignored. |
| 2013-10-08 11:25 AM in reply to: paxsarah |
| Extreme Veteran 555 Carrollton, TX | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt Apologies if this has been mentioned already, but I think a major plus to the Galloway method is that it prevents (or partially prevents) the slowdown that most people experience after a certain point in the race. Those not doing intervals may still be running at the end, but most of them are not running at the same pace they were in the beginning. On the flip side, while utilizing the Galloway method, I find that I can maintain a pretty even pace over my long runs/races, and in most cases negative split them. |
| 2013-10-08 11:27 AM in reply to: rventuri |
| Champion 9407 Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt Originally posted by rventuri I believe someone else said it earlier .. if it was faster, than elites would be doing it ... and their not. While you won't see this at the elite level, a marathon at the elite level is very much removed from a marathon for an age grouper. However, there are many very fast (sub 3) marathoners who make use of this approach in training and racing and have gotten faster after beginning to incorporate a run:walk approach. That is not to say that it is faster or the right approach for everyone but for some it will be best approach and lead to faster race times. Shane |
| 2013-10-08 11:57 AM in reply to: 0 |
| Veteran 361 North Carolina Foothills | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt Originally posted by gsmacleod While you won't see this at the elite level, a marathon at the elite level is very much removed from a marathon for an age grouper. However, there are many very fast (sub 3) marathoners who make use of this approach in training and racing and have gotten faster after beginning to incorporate a run:walk approach. That is not to say that it is faster or the right approach for everyone but for some it will be best approach and lead to faster race times. Shane Don't disagree ... and admittedly I haven't read his book or tried his method. I know that when in the course of a run, when I am forced to stop (at an intersection for example), restarting the run feels very uncomfortable and seems to throw me completely out of whatever rhythm I had attained earlier in the run. Similarly during a race if ever I decide to walk a water station, it seems to be tough to get going again. I can't imagine doing it dozens of times during a run/race. I guess it comes down to what works best for us as individuals. Edited by rventuri 2013-10-08 11:57 AM |
| 2013-10-08 11:58 AM in reply to: tkos |
| New user 205 Athens, GA | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt Originally posted by tkos But I must say, take you avg pace for your last run/walk event (not your run pace your overall avg pace) and go out for a run at that pace and see what happens. How long a run? The same distance? I'm trying to figure out what you think will happen. |
| 2013-10-08 1:09 PM in reply to: rventuri |
| Extreme Veteran 1018 | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt Originally posted by rventuri Originally posted by gsmacleod While you won't see this at the elite level, a marathon at the elite level is very much removed from a marathon for an age grouper. However, there are many very fast (sub 3) marathoners who make use of this approach in training and racing and have gotten faster after beginning to incorporate a run:walk approach. That is not to say that it is faster or the right approach for everyone but for some it will be best approach and lead to faster race times. Shane Don't disagree ... and admittedly I haven't read his book or tried his method. I know that when in the course of a run, when I am forced to stop (at an intersection for example), restarting the run feels very uncomfortable and seems to throw me completely out of whatever rhythm I had attained earlier in the run. Similarly during a race if ever I decide to walk a water station, it seems to be tough to get going again. I can't imagine doing it dozens of times during a run/race. I guess it comes down to what works best for us as individuals. I know what you mean. At first it was hard to crank this motor back up once it stopped. No doubt that you have to train to do it properly. It engages different muscles. Seems easier now. |
| 2013-10-08 1:09 PM in reply to: paxsarah |
| Alpharetta, Georgia Bronze member | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt Originally posted by paxsarah Originally posted by tkos But I must say, take you avg pace for your last run/walk event (not your run pace your overall avg pace) and go out for a run at that pace and see what happens. How long a run? The same distance? I'm trying to figure out what you think will happen. x2 - I have done both the "try to run the whole thing at the slower pace" and "run/walk" and it simply comes down to a run/walk works better for me on long distances. I think a lot of it is that I'm a slower runner (talking 5:30 marathoner) in general and very prone to injuries. |
| 2013-10-08 1:52 PM in reply to: RedCorvette |
| New user 50 Central Florida | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt Originally posted by RedCorvette But the surprising part to me was reading that he did a 30 sec run/15 sec walk for most of the race. Sure seems like it would be herky-jerky starting and stopping that many times over 26.2 miles. Almost like running 220yd intervals the whole way. In my experience, the starting and stopping is stressful and it took a long time for me to get used to it. I've dropped down to 1:1 a few times in races to gather myself, but can't imagine doing intervals that short for an entire race. Then again, I've never done a 4:10 marathon, so maybe I'm missing something? Would like to hear more about how he arrived at that ratio. It doesn't seem to be consistent with charts in his books. Mark Jeff has been experimenting with the run/walk ratio for almost 2 years now with his running but also some e-coach clients. He is working on a revised ratio table for serious time based runners. It should be out next year in one of his books. I talked with him in May while trying to set a PR for a 5k, and learned about the new ratios. |
| 2013-10-08 3:13 PM in reply to: jennifer_runs |
| Science Nerd 28760 Redwood City, California | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt Originally posted by jennifer_runs Run/walk is not faster overall (or else you'd see elites doing it!), but it may be the BEST way for many people to finish happy and injury-free. Galloway would run well under 4 hours if he was healthy enough now. Run/walk may be faster overall for some people. I know I certainly am. I have asthma and r/w helps keep it under control during races. |
| 2013-10-08 3:18 PM in reply to: Asalzwed |
| Subject: ... This user's post has been ignored. |
| 2013-10-08 3:23 PM in reply to: Fred D |
| Alpharetta, Georgia Bronze member | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt Originally posted by Fred D Originally posted by Asalzwed, beginner doesn't necessarily mean lack of talent. I believe it would be limiting to disregard different philosophies elite athletes use and don't use. . Very well said! Beginner does not mean only use beginner training philosophies.... A wide array of options work for the wide range of athletes on a site like this. I agree with both of you - it's the "Elites don't do that so no one else should" attitude that I was making a counter point to. Clearly not very well |
| 2013-10-08 3:27 PM in reply to: lisac957 |
| Subject: ... This user's post has been ignored. |
| 2013-10-08 3:41 PM in reply to: Fred D |
| Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt If Galloway recommends a 4:1 then why did he do a 2:1 in his "failed" BQ attempt? Does anyone know? |
| 2013-10-08 4:59 PM in reply to: lisac957 |
| 928 | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt Originally posted by lisac957 Originally posted by Fred D Originally posted by Asalzwed, beginner doesn't necessarily mean lack of talent. I believe it would be limiting to disregard different philosophies elite athletes use and don't use. . Very well said! Beginner does not mean only use beginner training philosophies.... A wide array of options work for the wide range of athletes on a site like this. I agree with both of you - it's the "Elites don't do that so no one else should" attitude that I was making a counter point to. Clearly not very well To be clear, I never said "Elites don't do that so no one else should." In fact, I said run/walk may be the better way for many people. The fact that elite runners don't use run/walk proves to me that it's not the fastest way for people to run. But most of us don't or aren't able to train to our optimal potential, and run/walk will help many people achieve their fastest times within the constraints of their training. It takes some experimenting though, and I don't believe that Galloway necessarily will be able to give a perfect formula for everyone. |
| 2013-10-08 5:44 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
| Expert 1130 Fernandina Beach, FL | Subject: RE: Jeff Galloway failed BQ attempt Originally posted by Left Brain If Galloway recommends a 4:1 then why did he do a 2:1 in his "failed" BQ attempt? Does anyone know? I could be mistaken but I don't think he necessarily recommends a 4:1 for everyone. There's something he does called "magic mile" which, after finding, you find your given Galloway pace. My fiancee is using his method to get to her first HM and my dad is using the Galloway approach for the first time in his 4th marathon. I haven't converted. I'm hoping to BQ next year and don't think I could do so using his method. My plan B for my Ironman in November involves a R/W (I still plan on running the whole thing) also I'm considering doing my first Ultra in April that I plan to use a R/W approach to. I think if someone has conditioned themselves to run 26.2 miles properly, then running the entire marathon is faster than R/W. I have 0 evidence to prove this, that's just my opinion. However what works for one doesn't always work for another. As long as people are out running, who really cares how they're doing it. |
|
|
|
|
| Jeff Galloway run/walk? Pages: 1 2 3 4 | ||
| |||
| Jeff Galloway to Speak at North Atlanta Multisport Club Meeting | ||
| |||
|
| ||||
|
| |||
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK