Monday, December 04, 2006

51:51 :: 6.5 miles

Recovery run. Started outside, but had a familiar problem with my ankle. On the left leg my shin tightened up once yesterday on the icy part of the run, and today after about .25 mile on the ice, the front of my ankle really started burning. So, I turned for home, got on the treadmill and hoped it would go away. It was okay for a while, but didn't last. Icing it today and will probably be on the mill tomorrow. Overall, really slow, but otherwise felt fine.

Run Two | Weather | Supplemental | Nutrition | Sleep | Injury


Anonymous said...

Anyway, none of this tells me what I am interested to know:

how do I key in on the right kinds of aerobic efforts during the base phase? I'm very keen to try what Andrew has been doing, which is basically MP and slightly faster than MP efforts during his key workouts, supplemented with plenty of volume.

Anyone care to weigh in on that question? Please?

Before weighing in on the question a few points: At any race distance longer than 600 meters oxygen debt supplies less than half the energy, during a thirty minute race only 3% of the energy comes from oxygen debt, once you get to a 2 hour race less than 1% comes from oxygen debt. ( for a further discussion on this go to: ) Now if you go a bit slower than marathon pace ( 97% speed or about 12 seconds a mile slower) oxygen debt becomes almost non existent ( A good way to estimate this pace is to run a 15 minute time trial ( 5K ) and add 50-60 per mile to the pace ( be conservative and add 60 seconds). This pace is Lydiard's 3/4 effort ( also verified by Farrell et al. (1979) .28 miles per hour slower than marathon pace for a range of runners 2:30 - 4:00 marathoners). This is your high level conditioning work without oxygen debt. It will condition most of your muscle fibers in the least amount of time, once you go slower than 90% of this speed ( about another 30-40 seconds slower per mile, Lydiard's 1/2 effort) the combination of increased fat usage and how the body shuttles glycogen from the liver allows you to train at much larger volumes. So how does this relate to effective base training? First it is difficult ( but not impossible ) to run at 3/4 effort every day and do a large volume of work. ( For a discussion on this see: and . ) Secondly consistent effort is very important at this stage ( Coach Farrell makes his super consistent by controlling distance and pace exactly ), the ability to come back day after day is the key. It will take another post sometime to show some examples of equivalent efforts. One thing at this stage that you might find helpful is a 2 to 3 mile evaluation run ( at about your 8 mile race pace for the 2 mile or 12 mile race pace for the 3 mile ) once a week to help biomechanical efficiency and by checking your heart rate a minute after the run it will give you a good indication on you recovery improvement.

Anonymous said...

To fix the links above:

Eric said...

This is great stuff. Thank you.

A question on determining race paces. I'm in a bad way here with the weather and won't have any real opportunities to race a 5k (or an 8-mile or 12-mile). Also, I seem to hurt something lately every time I run a race effort. Would I be doing more harm than good with a guess?

Eric said...

Okay, so having perused those links, I see a different aspect of the aerobic training regime. I understand now what you mean by 'coming back day after day'. I have been focusing on high volume with two or three 'quality aerobic' days. Two of the days are my long run (20-22 miles) and my mid-week longer run (18 miles). The paces come down on those days relative to my other mileage, but they are much slower than my goal marathon pace. According to Kristiansen's philosophy, I would be exhausting myself as opposed to tiring myself, resulting in a longer recovery period for each day's training.

Another thought that occurred to me is that my mileage should increase because the pace of the mileage is improving, not from an arbitrary volume increase. I'm quite comfortable running those 100+ mile weeks, and I do have a certain amount of pride about hitting that number, but if I'm wasting my time, I'm wasting my time. I'm not getting any younger, so I'd better get smarter.

Thanks for the links. Very good information.

Anonymous said...

OK, I'll make a guess for you based on what your log has said; Evaluation effort: 2 miles @ 5:35 or 3 miles @ 5:45. Your 3/4 effort is 6:15-6:20 and 1/2 effort is 6:40-6:45. (very conservative guesses but at this point that is good) A good triad for you at this point would be 10 miles in 63 minutes; 20 miles in 2:14; 15 1:44; then a 3 mile evaluation run in 17:15 testing your recovery ( with a 3 mile warm up and cool down). When I trained in up state Wisconsin the weather was freezing in the winter ( -20F but no ice) and buggy in the summer. Now Florida is great in the winter but drop dead killer heat in the summer ( 90F + 80%H) , but the worst place ever to train is New England, damp cold, freezing rain, snow at night, thaw during the day which turns to ice at night. Better hot or cold none of that back and forth stuff. Now all of these runs should be repeatable the same day ( throw a deck of cards in a hat and if you draw an ace repeat the workout) that will keep you from going too hard any one day. It sounds funny but you'll learn the proper level quickly.

Eric said...

So I'm understanding, would these four efforts be back-to-back-to-back-to-back? What would the other three days look like? I'm a little bit confused with the implementation.

I'm still trying to find time to post some pictures. I'm sure they will bring back some fond memories of your days in Wisconsin.

Anonymous said...

Ha,ha, you are looking for an exact answer but the four days would be in a row, then repeated ( because you would not have not over done any one day ) I only put that down as an example but it is close to what you should be working for ( repeatability of effort) base training is only getting you ready for specific training. No great mental effort from day to day ( you need that during peak training) You're trying to improve your recovery ability and work capacity so when you do the real specific workouts you can do more and come back quicker ( that depends on you base level ( like what coach Farrell points out) Some of these changes turn on genes that are not turned on unless consistent stress is put to them ( they are low level system changes that may take 2-3 years to show up and is why many runners never realize their potential) If I find the link to the article that explains this ( I'm not sure if it free on line ) I'll send it. Quick changes are easy (enzyme changes) but the ones that develop your potential require something that Arthur Lydiard identified long ago ( the slow activation of special genes)

Mark said...

I'll need to digest this on my run. My comment now (lived in all three areas mentioned) is N.E. is potluck runnning, it seems you are alwys keyed into the forecast. But, it's better than the extremes of either end, kind of like training . . . it's more moderate.

Eric said...

So what I will be experimenting with is basically keeping my mileage goals within 10 percent of current plans, but increasing the intensity to fit with the suggestions. I suspect that I will need to pull back a couple of miles a day, but I'll monitor recovery and see how it goes. That may just be the intimidation talking...

Thanks for your time in putting those comments together.

Another question...Kristiansen mentions the difference between being 'tired' and 'exhausted'. This seems to correspond with Lydiard's 'pleasantly tired' state. What are your feelings on that vis-a-vis my two two-hour-plus runs each week? Are these efforts misplaced? I know I've gotten a huge benefit from a fueling standpoint, and a 20 mile run is no longer difficult--invigorating is more like it. But, is there a concern those types of runs are too taxing physically and outweigh the aerobic benefits?