Another tough run. After a few miles of feeling like shit, I just decided to let my legs find the pace they were happy with. That ended up being 7:15 to 7:20 for a few miles, then down into the low 7:00 range for most of the rest of the run. Finally, by fifteen I was feeling better and started dipping into the sub-7:00 paces. I threw on a 5:40 mile to finish, which felt good (and burned off some frustration).
The left shin locked up on me again for about four miles, at 7:00 minute pace, which is incredibly frustrating, but expected, following these three mile test runs. It's good to know I can run fast without the lockup issues as long as I get some miles in first. I'll have to do some other test workout, because the shin thing is absolutely wrecking any chance of these things being a positive experience.
Run Two | Weather | Supplemental | Nutrition | Sleep | Injury
11 comments:
Boy, these runs sound tough. Stress & relief is all you can do to find out the earliest it is healed.
Are the 5:40 miles necessary? You appear to be violating my rules:
Intensity Chart
Distance - variable
Duration - variable
Speed - delete 1st
Frequency - adjust 2nd
I hope this comes around for you really soon. Merry Christmas by the way.
Another tough run??????
7 minute pace for > 2hrs. I am very impressed but uncertain how you will address yourself when your schedule officially commences with tougher workouts hitting you left and right. Ramp up your miles and not your frustration when you are 144 days out.
I would like to read about your weekly objectives leading up to your main goal(fargo). You have them written down already I hope and pinned to the fridge. A main goal can only be achieved with the role of small and intermediate targets.
A small note: Andrew is absolutely right asking "Are the 5:40 miles necessary?" You have 20 weeks of hell to overcome. Absolutely no need to visit the devil right now. He will soon seek you without you searching for him.
Hmmm...I am having to explain myself a lot lately. I'm apparently not the wordsmith I was trained to be. Damn state colleges.
This run wasn't tough in the sense that it was physically stressful. It was one of the most relaxed, easy long runs I have done in some time. However, it was stressful and tough because dealing with my stupid shin problem for four miles and cruddy feeling legs is mentally draining.
My aim is to run these at a moderate pace (currently 6:35-6:40) and at a heart rate consistent with the previous week or so of runs at that pace. The idea is, I should be carrying a moderate amount of fatigue into the second of back-to-back workouts, and recovering on the third day, then repeating the cycle. If at some point, (like Saturday) I notice I'm not recovered before starting another moderate-moderate-easy pattern, then I run easy until I recover. Today I was obviously recovered, so I started up the pattern again.
I don't have this hanging on my fridge, but here is what I would pin under a magnet if I was keen to write things down. 2:26:xx.
Are the 5:40s necessary? I would say so. These aren't intense, difficult efforts. It's an extended stride, near marathon pace. Andrew, I would say your near-MP workouts are much more intense than tagging a MP mile onto the end of a run. How do they fit into your program, and are they necessary?
Am I missing something? I'll be the first to admit I don't understand a lot of training theory, but how is seven minute pace for 2:20 impressive in the context of a sub-2:27 marathon goal? I read some Hal Higdon quote yesterday where he said that many sub-2:10 marathon runners routinely run their long runs near seven minute pace. Someone please explain that to me. Is that bullshit like I think it is? If not, please explain the physiology there, because I don't get it.
I don't have weekly objectives. Maybe that's a failing of mine, but I'm no coach, and I don't have a coach, so I'm just flying by the seat of my pants. I don't even know what kind of intermediate goals I would set. Don't get hurt? Make regular measureable progress?
Marry Christmas, guys. Thanks for the comments.
That's Merry Christmas.
but how is seven minute pace for 2:20 impressive in the context of a sub-2:27 marathon goal?
You answered your own question with the following It was one of the most relaxed, easy long runs I have done in some time.
Therefore it was impressive. Your aerobic engine is well developed already.
I don't have weekly objectives. Maybe that's a failing of mine, but I'm no coach, and I don't have a coach, so I'm just flying by the seat of my pants. I don't even know what kind of intermediate goals I would set. Don't get hurt? Make regular measurable progress?
Start writing your weekly goals, set 1 or 2 intermediate goals, and put under magnet on your fridge.
Don't get hurt is too broad.
What technique or process would you use or develop to stay away from injuries? more vitamins? more stretching? longer warmups? cool downs? deviate from dangerous icy routes? prescribed rest on specific weeks? etc...
Intermediate goal #1 could be a 10k race, a fast mile race. Intermediate goal #2 could be to drop your bodyweight down to your ideal weight of 139 lbs maybe 4 weeks out and keep it there. How do you get there? Whatever you set.
The walk past your fridge will be a daily reminder concerning your short(weekly), intermediate(week #8,#16), and long term goal(fargo week #20) and will render a possible analytical sane reason why you are embarking on a marathon cycle.
But...I need to keep building aerobic capacity. A strong aerobic engine at seven minute pace doesn't get me closer to my goals. Unless Hal Higdon is right.
Thanks for the goal setting comments. You're right--I should think about that. I am planning a half-marathon at about five weeks out, but otherwise there are not a lot of racing opportunities in the area between now and May.
You mentioned ramping up the miles in the first comment. I am averaging about 13 miles per run right now, although there have been a few days on the bike to drag the average down. I don't know that I want to go much higher than that with the level of intensity I am trying to incorporate. I'm thinking 105 per week is about where I'll top out during this build up.
I'm still curious on the reasoning for cutting out the 5:40 miles. Lydiard says to work a little every day on your speed. It makes sense to me that I should get comfortable near goal pace, even in small bursts like a mile at the end of a run. Sure, the 20, 25, and 30k efforts at 5:35 pace coming up in a few months will be tough, but practising a little bit beforehand can't be damaging. Can it?
Of course you need to continue and shape your aerobic engine. It's your foundation. It's your base to spring board from. 100-105 miles per week will get you there.
A strong aerobic engine at seven minute pace doesn't get me closer to my goals. Unless Hal Higdon is right. It makes sense to me that I should get comfortable near goal pace, even in small bursts like a mile at the end of a run. Sure, the 20, 25, and 30k efforts at 5:35 pace coming up in a few months will be tough, but practicing a little bit beforehand can't be damaging. Can it?
I’d like to know if 7 minute pace 144 days out is a goal of yours on Dec 24, 2006. It appears that it is because you stated but practicing a little bit beforehand can't be damaging. Can it?
You hear this all the time; tough workouts are designed and formulated well in advance, so tough that there is a panic need to start practice sessions and start emulating(I should get comfortable) because these so tough workouts are on your mind and perhaps frighten you. If your planned schedule(20weeks) is grounded and each weekly(attainable) objective is met with a high degree of accuracy then there is absolutely no need to run a 5:40 mile. None what so ever. Active rest or a walk in the park is better served to your body right now. Do not show disrespect to your planned schedule. You’ve worked hard to put it on paper.
Good idea the ½ marathon 5 weeks out could be your last intermediate goal. But it is just that; an intermediate goal. Don’t forget that your weekly goals contribute to reach an intermediate goal, and your intermediate goals summate to reach your ultimate goal 2:26.
I'm still curious on the reasoning for cutting out the 5:40 miles. Lydiard says to work a little every day on your speed.
Cultivating your leg speed once per week is sufficient. I'm sorry to say but running a 5:40 mile is not working your speed Eric. You want to work your leg speed, you work short sprints, powerful flexible ankles, relaxed strides, sprint training - which means high knees, running tall, powerful long strides, good arm movement. Also Video review of your running technique is part of the overall leg speed package.
This is the thing. I don't have a planned schedule. I have an idea in my head that I can run 2:26 something at the end of May if I run 100 miles a week for a long time at the right intensities. If I can run 1:09-1:10 something for a 1/2 marathon in April before tapering, that tells me my goal is reasonable. Other than that indicator, I have no plan. I have a feeling my goal is possible, and every day I try to do the best training I can manage to do within a certain set of parameters.
Dropping to seven minute pace was viewed as kind of a failure, but I admit I did go out the door knowing that it was what needed to be done in order to recover and get things in line for more quality workouts. So yes, on that day, it was a goal. Now I realize it wasn't a 'failure' or 'weakness', but just another piece of a puzzle. In doing a lot of reading over the past couple of days, I'm seeing a lot of references to working at 'steady state' and '2.0mmol lactate' and things like that. I'm starting to realize that hard/easy is not ideal, and that a constant moderate, repeatable level of work is ideal training. It's also mentally challenging because I become impatient, and think that running 6:40 has to be better than running 7:00, and 5:40 has to be more beneficial than running 6:00, etc., etc. But this is not the case. Not only is training a puzzle, but a puzzle that has to be put together in order. So it is simple, and it is more difficult.
In ten years, when my kids are ready to train, I will be one hell of a coach!
Remember that 100 miles a week is a general guide line. If you train systematically and use a progression line in your base conditioning period, you eventually will require to run more than 100 miles per week. I see you at 130 miles per week if you apply proper rest weeks, listen to your body, and take in nutritious meals. Remember Lydiard's boys did 100 miles in their main training sessions but did approx. 5 miles of jogging in the morning x 6 days per week which gave them an extra 30 miles a week. This is where the secret is. Those 30 jogged miles were essential in order to bear on and dish out another 100 miles and so forth. If you can run 130 miles per week, go for it because 100 miles supplemented with 30 miles of jog recovery is superior than 100 miles alone. I know this probably doesn’t make any sense but you will soon understand.
I actually tried to add some supplementary miles a few weeks back, but unfortunately it doesn't work with my schedule and other committments. I was able to run 25 minutes 4-6 times per week on my lunch break, but after a couple of weeks I found it was taking too long to get home, run, eat, shower, and get back to work. I had to stop.
I did feel a good deal better when I was doing the extra miles, though, so I wish it was workable. I already get up to do my main run at 3:00 to 3:30am every day, so mornings are gone, then work from 8-5. Between 5 and 7 is dinner and time with the family, and 8 is bedtime (at the latest). Just not enough hours in the day.
Like JK, alactic speed work...
I am sure you have read this before. I have it posted in my room and locker and read it at least once every couple weeks just to keep me on the level.
Read number 3
http://www.letsrun.com/jkspeaks.html
Post a Comment