how to run faster? (Page 4)

It really is like a lot of the above posters have said.

Run more.

But with one caveat- Don't run at your medium pace. Run slowly. Slower than you think you should. Keep your heartrate low.

This will allow you to run more often. Hence you will get faster at your slow pace / heartrate.

Once you have a base then keep running slow all days except speedwork days .

Most people don't run their slow runs slow enough and their fast runs (once you have a base to start speed work) fast enough.

Basically you are not recovering from you medium paced runs to run your tempo / intervals fast enough which is what has the effect of making you faster!

I would hazard a guess that at least 70% of people run at a pace that is too hard

I agree with those that are saying that the tempo/speedwork is too risky until a good foundation is laid and here is why:

After a few months of training, and reading all this stuff about intervals, tempos, etc, I started doing some intervals.  The 2nd or 3rd time I did some intervals I injured myself and have paid for it ever since.  Only now, about 9 months later, am I able to keep the injury at bay.  For the most part, my training was greatly hindered due to this one event of doing too much too fast. 

One thing I wanted to mention here is that, in my experience, people focus too much on numbers.  Other posters hit it on the head by saying to ignore your daily training pace.  Comparing one day to the next will only drive you nuts, and make you hate running.

Also, how you gauge effort is also immaterial.  Some use RPE, other use HR, some use pace.  I use pace for specific types of workouts, and RPE for everything else.

The debate about changing up your pace, to me is sort of a non sequitur.  I say this because I think that people will naturally change their pace over time, and even from day to day.  This change is accomplished absent of running intervals.

I firmly believe that most of the changes people want to see happen (faster pace, more efficient/economic form) can be accomplished by just getting out the door for more miles, more often.

The real key to the elites' training is that they put in 100+ mile weeks.  Now, this doesn't mean that any of us should (or even can), but if you look at the training logs of people just on this site who are where you want to be, look at their weekly and monthly volume.  On average, those people are putting in a lot of miles, and time. 

nice thread!

here are my thoughts:

training load: http://jorgepbmcoaching.blogspot.com/2008/02/what-is-training-load_27.html

Base training http://jorgepbmcoaching.blogspot.com/2008/01/what-exactly-is-base-training.html

Why volume works: http://jorgepbmcoaching.blogspot.com/2008/03/why-following-volume-approach-works.html

Why intensity works - I haven’t done that post but in a nut shell: More intense training allows you to stress your body in a shorter period of time and produce great training adaptations: Lactate clearance, increase in mitochondria, increase glycogen storage, increase VO2 max, etc. If we quantify the load on each session and assign it a score in theory the stress placed on our body in at different intensity/durations would be equivalent. i.e. a 30 min run at your threshold pace might be similar stress/load wise to a 60 min tempo run or a 90 min easy run. (This is just an example). A Coggan created training stress score (TSS) for ccling using a power meter to attempt to quantify this stressing what he refers to it as the metabolic cost. Training peaks now offers an rTSS (running training stress score) which attempt to quantify the same and P Skibba offers an alternative with his race day software in which via training/testing one can also quantify the metabolic cost of every s/b/r session depending on intensity and duration and using RPE/HR/pace/power.

Anyway, for that reason it is appealing and time effective to do some session at a higher intensity, the problem is that this sessions place more strain on our bodies and for those not properly adapted to handle such sessions, this increases the risk for injury due to the inability of your body to handle such stress. Also the recovery time from these sessions tends to be longer hence it can make training inconsistent if not properly planned. Finally, while these sessions produce great raining adaptations on a shorter period of time; the ability for your body to adapt to this load tends to be on the shorter side (i.e. 4-5 weeks) and after that in order to continue to improve the load should increase; IOW train at a higher intensity or do more of this sessions, but any athlete will be only able to handle so much before reaching the breaking point.

IMO the best way maximize training gains is via a mix of volume and intensity although keep in mind that most triathletes will benefit from some Z3/Z4 or tempo/threshold training but anything higher than that is not really necessary. But to become faster as bear, scout, daremo, slake and other had said: running more and consistency will make the majority of readers of this forum faster no doubt about it.

There are no short cuts and no one way to approach training, however in many cases allowing your body to adapt to training via volume (duration and frequency) is a beginner friendly way to get a greater training load at a lower risk cost.  Those who are not so patient and add intensity too fast tend to suffer with chronic injuries in particular for running whish places so much stress on one legs,  making training very inconsistent. Endurance training takes YEARS in order for our bodies to continue adapting and growing fitter and only those who approach training in that way tend to be more successful in the long run. Oh and I almost forget; forget about weight lifting to improve performance! Do so just to look good nekid

Spokes - your post started good addressing the OP and then you just took in onto something completely away from the OP and pretty much reflected your personal views in a different topic. This has nothing to do whether someone is a BOP or FOP, whether you think triathletes are snub or about your personal attitude towards competition. It is about the OP asking how to get faster; since he/she asked it is because it IS important for the OP and whether you think is right to be competitive or not it is irrelevant. It is about the OP wanting to be the best possible triathlete within his/her time constraints, abilities etc.

Maybe you should start a new thread discussing your perception about competition, triathlon snubbery, and people CHOOSING to spend $$ on whatever they want or whether is oke for a recreational athlete to strive to be a better BOP, MOP or FOP...

PS. I think it is important to celebrate and cheer ANYONE who competes/participates in a triathlon regardless of their shape, size, color, speed and finishing time because IMO everyone made the choice to do so and most likely worked their tails off. This divisive mentally of us versus them is quiet disappointing in a sport we all come to embrace and enjoy...

x2 on the whole post.

It is pretty clear everyone believes that weight training will not make you faster.  However, what about "core" stregthening exercises?  Won't they help prevent injury?

 Also, what about stretching.  (not before a workout, which most people believe can lead to more injuries) Isnt a stretching program helpfull to prevent the normal stiffening that happens with aging?

Since this thread is about beginners learning to run faster, without increasing the risk of injuries, shouldn't core strengthening and stretching be a part of the training?

Won't hurt you, but won't make you faster by itself.  And if you sensibly increase your training load, your core will strengthen from running (or swimming or biking) such that it won't be a limiter for most people.

Maybe.  Maybe not.  Studies are completely inconclusive (regarless of what kind of stretching is done).  And stretching, or not, does not appear to correlate with injuries either.

Bottome line, for core, stretching or weights is to do them if you like and it makes you feel better/gives you confidence/makes you look 'buff'/etc.  But they probably won't have much direct impact on your triathlon performance (unless perhaps you need to address a specific issue--e.g., prior injury, known muscle imbalance, exceptionally poor flexibility, etc.)

Read amiine's post above.  It does work.  But not forever, i.e., eventually you still have to run more.  And it is a 'riskier' strategy.  Especially for any beginners.

In Hal Higdon's Marathon book, he states that studies have shown that stretching after running does not increase or reduce the probability of injury vs no stretching.  However, stretching before running did increase the probability of injury.

But, thinking back to my post, I guess I should have left the whole stretching thing out of it.

OK, I will bite.  What is the FIRST program?

And I know people who couldn't even get through the program without either slowing down, or getting injured.

The FIRST Program is NOT a beginner's program by any stretch.  You have to be very aware of pacing.  You have to be very diligent about getting in lots of cross training.   I think these are things that the average newcomer is going to struggle with.  Lastly, it's not something that you can bag a run for the week and not lose out.  If you follow the plan, you have to really stick to it.

From everything I've read about it, and those who have tried it, the ones who have the greatest success are the ones who ended up adding more running (they used a cross-training day). 

If you're trying to peak for a race, sure.

But if you're a relative newcomer to all this, or you're in regular training mode, I think this is not the optimal solution. 

The key phrase in your post is "since the marathon," which indicates that you've quite possibly already established a solid running base. The OP and others here haven't come any where close to marathon mileage.

And I know a few that followed it to the letter with lousy results. Anecdotes are funny that way.

http://www.furman.edu/first/fmtp.htm

I'm just starting FIRST now. It seems good for my two goals

1) an Oly in August

2) NYC Mary in November, just coming off 2 sprints in April and June.

It seems sort of doable- biking and swimming are 2 days- three days of running- 1 long, 1 tempo, one track work.  I'm only in week 2 but I think I like it. ??? There is also a book, which I just started reading.

Good read

The story of Tor

Speed work for distance runners

Lydiard's training

Throwing those out there for anyone interested in learning more. 

I tuned into this thread because I too want to run faster.  I read the whole thing, this is a summary of what I learned/relearned:

Improvement in anything; running, swimming, cycling, mathematics, etc, takes practice.  There are indeed different types of practice and training methods available.  We each might respond differently to the different methods.  We most certainly have differing motivation for different training methods (would I prefer to run for an hour, or do intervals??).  Each of us can choose to take the time and effort to zero in on our own successful training regime (as we define success).  Until we each zero in on our preferred plan, we should follow the advice of the prevailing message: run more. 

I personally am getting to the point were I am throwing in intervals as well as more volume.  Maybe that won't work well for someone else becuase of motivation to run intervals, propensity for injuries, or something else.   Maybe I won't best benefit from intervals, but I can hope they will work for me and most importantly, intervals motivate me.  I'll change my plan as I discover what works for me.

I am also positive that I can get faster and still have fun.  My ultimate plan will balance the two.

Finally, I bet even the best runners are still zeroing in on their run training plan.  What got them faster two years ago might need changed later.