First IM tng plan and longest run is 16 miles???? (Page 3)

I really appreicate the willingness to end my confusion.  I am going to be a slow IMer.  I probably jumped the gun a little too early, my youngest just turned 1 so I probably didn't have the strongest base to start with.  My bike will be in the 7-7.5 hour range.  Part of my confusion lies with training run vs. run/walk.  I know I will end of run/walking at Lousiville but I would love not to.  I would think the best way to do that is to train not to walk.  I am also a pretty slow runner although I haven't ever done a marathon well trained so I am not sure what my real potentail is.  I know this is lots of rambling, I am not good at filtering sometimes.

Rachel,

By training to do run/walk you will be able to execute that better in IM. 90% of the field in IM run/walks as unless you are FOP or very strong runner the athletes walk the aid stations. Folks struggle with starting to run again after walking. Training so you can restart easily without any mental internal debate will help you race day. First IM I just ran in training, ended up walking 20 miles. Second IM I did most of my run training to start just run and about 2 months out my coach added in walk breaks in the 10-15' interval or at end of mile segment in my long runs. His thinking was that if it is part of your race plan, when you walk you don't feel like a failure and you stay mentally strong. It helps get nutrition and hydration in you. My second IM run was far better than my first, ran/walked my plan, and finished strong. Still could have done better.

I started run/walking year 3 or 4 of tri training and found I was faster. Many see walking as failure. My goal is to get to finish line as fast as I can.

Here is a good article and in it is a link to a great podcast about run/walking with some very knowledgeable coaches.

I think you will be one of those people who benefits much more by doing more, shorter runs rather than a few long runs (whether you train to run/walk or not is likely less important, but may also make your longer runs easier to manage in your training--Whizzzzz and KathyG are probably better sources of info for you there).  But, I am going to suggest you focus much more on the swim & bike.  Getting to T2 in the most relaxed fashion possible is going to make the marathon a much easier-to-manage problem, regardless of how much walking you end up doing.  You aren't running a marathon.  You are doing an IM.

The alternative to the above, is basically what Josh did.  REALLY build up your running.  But I don't know that you are in a position to consider that option and think the swim/bike focus is likely your best bet.

Something no one has brought up is walking is highly contagious if you are a 14+ IM finisher. Your body is tried, your mind may be trying to convince your body to walk or maybe your body will be trying to convince your mind to allow you to walk, you see so many others around you walking, it is easy to just follow along and walk. Maybe the first time all day you have a conversation with someone which makes the pain and walking seem better.

I know many BTers who got sucked into walking just because everyone else was. In hindsight they are mad at themselves for not running and pushing through the discomfort. They were unprepared for the mental aspect of others walking and how appealing that will be to you.

My swim/bike fitness was good enough that I could have an easy swim, an easy bike and walk the entire marathon and still finish under 17 hours.

Along with all of the injuries I battle on a regular and daily basis, I broke my toe about 4 weeks pre-IM in 2009. I couldn't wear a shoe. I did the IM run with the side of my shoe cut out. (Again, I use the "run" term loosely) Heh.

Anyway, what I've learned is that at some point a person has to swallow their pride and lay out a plan that will work for THEM. Do I wish I was training to run a 3:30 marathon? Sure. Of course! Is that a realistic goal for me? Not at all. No. No. No.

So, I sat down and figured out, realistically, and honestly, what an achievable goal would be, for me. That's the WHAT part of it. Now I'm working through the HOW. 

For me, a 1:15 swim is realistic and achievable, given the amount of time I'm willing to commit to swimming. (1:17 in 2009)A 6:20 or so bike (sub 6:30 for sure) is also realistic and achievable, without that much more effort. (6:34 in 2009) The plan is to push the bike more in training this time around. Last time I rode 6 100+ mile rides. And rode mostly 2x a week. This year I'm aiming for 8-9 100 mile rides and riding 3x a week. I love riding my bike and it's FUN. I want to be at a place where I can ride the course in Z2ish and average 17.5 mph. I want that to be my basic fitness level. I plan to go to the course a couple of times and ride it, as well. I want to work up to speed without much effort.

Now for the run. I threw down (hah, I know)   a 7:16 (I think? Maybe 7:17) marathon in 2009 with 2 grapefruit sized knees and a broken toe. It was miserable and awesome all at the same time.  I know I have a sub 6:00 marathon in me. So, my goal is sub 6 using a run/walk program. 5:59:59 would suffice. That's a 13:30 or so min/mile pace. It sounds slow... but I can do that with a run/walk. My long run will be 18 miles.

That is my plan. I am coaching myself. I know my body. It's a matter of injury/fatigue/recovery management for me...  

Well, I guess that depends on what you mean by greater benefit. I used to argue that the benefit was the same and that it just seemed like the slower athlete benefited more because they saved more over all time. Some postings by some pretty sharp folks here convinced me that while the slower athlete will have a larger overall time savings, the faster athlete actually has a higher percentage of time savings. I can dig up the thread of you want.

You are correct in your distinction, which makes aero savings imoprtant for the FOP too, but that's exactly what Fred said:

The time benefit differences will be bigger for the slower athlete.

And those time differences can matter a lot in an IM for the reasons being discussed here (getting off the bike faster can help yield a better run).

Wow this is a great post with some great and interesting input from everyone. I will just chime in with my exp from last year to add.

Last year I trained my run off time will my longest run culminating at 2.5 hours. However, due to training time I was only able to knock out a run up to 2.25 hours which came out to be 15 miles. I enjoyed running based off time for long runs all last year, I feel that I just didn't get enough long runs in (15mi/2.25hr, 14mi/2hr, 13mi/1:50, 12mi/1:40, plus 3 HM runs in races) My long runs did incorporate a run/walk method and I walked the "aid station" which meant I walked for about 30-45 sec every mile. This helped me learn pacing, and my RECOVERY was great from these runs. I would be fatigued and feel the run the day after, but 2 days after I was ready to rock again. Because of this I highly endorse running off time with the max being around 2.5 hours, and adding in walking during your run for recovery purposes. My fault was simply in the amount of long runs I got in throughout the year, and my overall miles I got in before IMWI last year. 

With that said I think it is important to realize that unless you are an elite or 3:30 or less IM marathon runner you are going to walk at some point during the marathon so why not bring that into your training so you can learn to pace with walking, and learn to walk and how to deal with it. Often walking is an ego buster to many runners, but in fact in great bring great benefits as well. I am running on miles this year for my long runs, but I feel that 16-18 miles are long enough or 2:30 time is plenty long enough to get in the run "fitness" that is needed to run an IM marathon. Also without the great base that many elite runners have running past 18 miles or 2:30 in time more then once in training not only increases risks of injury, but burnout and many other problems that might rear their ugly face well before the race and the taper too. 

Yes! It's entirely an ego thing.

Why? Why is that? Seriously. What is it about walking/walk breaks that gets into people's minds/messes with their psyche/ego? I don't understand it.

Even for me, with a 6 hour marathon PR, finally accepting a run/walk program was a blow to the ego. Why, I wonder? Seriously. I'm wondering about the psychology of it.

For me, it's the notion that because it's a race, you're supposed to run it and somehow walking feels like a cop out or you're somehow cheating.  I'm not saying that's right; in fact, I'm sure I've had people finish in front of me that employed a smart and effective run/walk strategy.  I can, however, justify walking though aid stations!

Meh, I seem to have no problem with it  :^

Me neither, anymore... But I fought it like the devil! WHY!? I'm happier, much less achy and injured, and in better cardiovascular shape after just giving in and making it a part of my Ironman reality.

There's a lot to be said for being able to walk down stairs normally after a 10 mile run. Or for being able to put pants on normally. My recovery time is... halved. I'm a believer.