Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Chasing the Kona dream and a Mai Tai cocktail
Options
Comments
-
-
-
-
Wednesday 6th
Swim
4km set and it was a bit of a struggle. Not so much with form just arms felt heavy and had no power in the pull phase which reflected in the slower times to recent swims.
4x50fists in 60-62secs
Main set was 5 x 300sw easy and 2x100p steady with 15-20secs rec
300s in - 5.54,51,52,49,55 and 100s all between 1.44-1.52 but mainly high 40s. Fast 50s for a finish in 48,49,48,50.
Lunchtime run
Another poor run and i was not running well. Not sure what the cause is but feels like i have only started running this week
A bit of a slog tbh.
44mins,9.17kms,4.48m/km pace
Core/roller/stretch
I was left shaking after some of the core exercises and my core felt it. I really hate doing these sessions with a passion but its the one area of my body that i always struggle to tone up even though the rest of me is lean.
Rolling was very painful. My hips and in particular glutes, (right one being very tight). Think i managed to get in and released some of the tightness but might take a trip down to MWT to loosen out things before ADhabi.
Thursday AM 7th
Long treddie run
Struggled out of bed early this morning even after hitting the hay early. Within a few minutes i was quitely tipping along on the dreadmill at 5.30am for another 90 minutes as 1hr easy and 30mins steady. Once again running not feeling fluid and has not in my last 3 runs (need a good one) but at least i was able to concentrate and try keep the form as best i could.
Did not push the pace too much when hitting steady effort, tbh i was running pretty crap so would not have been able to:o
Just a short recovery run tonight and chillax.
90mins, 19.8kms,4.33m/km
Felt a bit flat the last two days in particular on the running front, lets hope things pick up for the weekend as i want to nail the last of these key sessions.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
I mean, the general rule is run your fast runs fast and your slow runs slow.
Your race pace on Sunday was about 3.50? Your marathon pace, if you were to do a marathon around now, would be 4.10? (just checked, 4.09 for a 2.55 marathon)
To be honest his race time wasn't great. In all honesty slightly pi$$ poor. Even taking into account his lack of focus on the distance and fast running there should be another reason. Something like heading off for a 30+ hour training camp with athletically more mature pro and semi pro athletetes who are much more committed, younger, unmarried, taller, and genetically superior a few days before the race. That *could* explain the poor time but in the absence of something like that.....Your easy runs seem to be too fast, too close to those race paces, and maybe you are pushing yourself too hard on runs that should be easy. I don't understand the point of 30 minutes at 4k pace after an hour easy, for example.
Lets say you start an IM run at an easy pace. Regardless the last 5-10 miles will feel tough for most, brutual even. Even though the pace maintained remains the same. How can you prepare body and mind for this? Some ideas are:
1) Long runs in uber lightweight racers
2) Double long run days
3) Long runs on successive days until you get that sensation
There are lots of ways to simulate it, however most are rather destructive. A progression long run can give some preparation without too much cost.
Ideally the robustness of legs would be developed multi annually, say a five year plan to an IM, but it seems JB doesn't have time for this!It seems like you're pushing yourself too much, to try to make fast gains?
AgreedBut you need to factor in recovery too (and 4.50 is not recovery pace:))
Disagree, recovery pace depends on the runner, the time of day, what they had for dinner, what the weather is like etcI realise I'm coming at this from a runner's perspective, and your training is different because you also have the swims and cycles, but maybe your peaks would be higher if you let yourself ease off more in between?
Swimming wise I gather JB does little that would tax the body. Appears four quality sessions a week across the bike and run. Hardly excessive, especially as the quality runs aren't that tough as the tough stuff would be too much I'd imagine.I'd be inclined to agree. Your easy pace would seem to be far too fast. Your easy pace is not 4:30. Your races times don't support that.
I'll get lynced for this but 4:30 IS SLOW for someone putting a serious effort into training, diet and lifestyle its slow.
I agree on his 5 miler not supporting this however the five miler was a poor result. If it was me I'd have not done the 5 miler. I'd have seen it as pointless. I'm sure his coach pointed this out and then accepted that JB is a stubborn hobbit.How do you measure the ease of this pace? HR? Feel?
I don't know how others do it but I would base it of HR as determined by a 30 minute TT combined with pace, ability to talk and sing, and experience.As Ray says, based on your race at the weekend your easy pace, I would expect, would be closer to 4:45/4:50 on a good day, while recovery pace 5:00 or thereabouts. Which would be similar to where I am at the moment.
4:45/4:50 thats where I am too. I'm rather ashamed of it. As for having a recovery pace - I see paces as being (All out, Hard, Mod hard, Steady and Easy) I'd see the pace zone down from easy not as "Recovery" but "Fvcked". If I wanted to active recovery I'd swim or ride.To be honest JB, based on current easy and LR paces I figured you would run low 29 in Raheny...
Fresh with an altered approach to running I think he'd be easily 29. I get the impression all his run training is based on being robust rather than fast. I get the impression the run training cannot be all out as it could be if he was more experienced as IM is all about the bike and the hard bike sessions he seems to do would, in my opinion, bork you for running.Obviously you're balancing three sports so you have to consider how each one peaks and each is recovery from the others.
I don't think JB has the abilty to do damage to himself in the pool!If you do one 400 (or 600/800/1k) and recover fully before the next, that's going to work your anaerobic system, but if you do 5k worth of intervals with short/jog recoveries it's an aerobic workout.
There is an interesting concept in cycling. Normalised power.
If you take the cycling equivalent of "5k worth of intervals with short/jog recoveries" you can get an average power which would suggest an aerobic and somewhat light session.
(Lets say: the average power for a sprint was 600 watts and the average power for a recovery was 100 watts. Lets say the time of recoveries was the same as the time for the sprints.
Average power is: (500 + 100 + 500 + 100 + 500 + 100 + 500 + 100 + 500 + 100 + 500 + 100)/12 = 3000/12 = 250 watts
Not a huge number but is this an accurage reflection of the "work done" in the session. Research has said no. Hence Normalised Power
Normalised power is: Quadratic root of ((500^4 + 100^4 + 500^4 + 100^4 + 500^4 + 100^4 + 500^4 + 100^4 + 500^4 + 100^4 + 500^4 + 100^4)/12 = Quadratic root (375600000000/12) = Quadratic root(31300000000) = 420 watts
A much scaried number for those familar with power
So just because you add some recoveries to a session doesn't mean that that interval session no longer addresses different energy systems and ellicte different training responses.It's got to be hard to run by feel on a treadmill, isn't it? Outdoors, I slow down or speed up without thinking about it, on a treadmill you're more likely to adjust your pace to the machine.
I hate threadmillsI think it would be worth trying the HRM for a while, just to see.
AgreeTo me, your estimate of easy pace is too close to your hard paces to really be 'easy' - it looks more like a 'steady' pace, a pace you can maintain for the length of the session without feeling like you are killing yourself, but still more work than it should be.
My easy paces are 4:45-4:50, I suspect I couldn't do a 5 miler in much better than 34 minutes but my easy is most definitely easy. HR, RPE, breathing, experienceMaybe I'm just lazy
but I think easy should be easy, 20/30 minutes later you feel no real after-effects. (and recovery is no more effort than walking)
A good way to know if you are going too hard or not hard enough in hard sessions
"Have to pi$$? You're not going hard enough. If you might sh1t yourself you're going too hard. Can't hold food down after? You WENT too hard."
One race.but I think you're the one whose training paces don't align well with race performances.
pace or effort levelLarry Brent wrote: »jacky, what is your IM marathon race pace - am I right in thinking around 3:30 for the marathon, or 8min/mile, 5min/km. Should a lot of training not be done at this pace (or effort level)?
Two very very different things.Larry Brent wrote: »I would have thought that 60mins at that pace would be more beneficial (specific training) than 30mins at 4:20/km pace...but maybe that marathon training thinking doesn't fit with triathlon training.
Pace or effort levelLarry Brent wrote: »
a) learn to use energy as economically as possible and
b) have as much energy available to you as possible.
a) will be achieved by using glycogen as sparingly as possible and rely more on fat. The harder the effort the more glycogen used and the lower the effort the less glycogen used. So if you take your current 'easy' effort down a notch to 'very easy' you'll be using less glycogen, training the energy systems needed on race day. If that very easy effort is 5:20 pace today, in a few weeks it might be 5:10 and then 5:00 and so on, for the same low glycogen usage, as you get trained at that effort level. How that happens is related to b) below.
But you aren't trying to get the body to use *less* glycogen but rather more fat. Running easy doesn't promote increased fat oxidisation. Oh that it did.Larry Brent wrote: »b) Imagine you have 1,000 muscle fibres in your leg, 500 fast twitch, 500 slow twitch. If you are always running within a narrow pace range (I think 4:20-4:50 is mentioned above and given your 5m time of 3:47/km and so lactate turnpoint pace ~4:00/km, marathon pace ~4:10/km) you may be predominantly using and thus training 200 of the slow twitch and 100 of the fast twitch fibres. So those trained fibres will have plenty mitochondria, ability to store lots of glycogen etc. and so enhanced ability to store and use energy. But the more fibres you have trained, the more energy you'll be able to store and use.
Mitochondria don't store glycogen, mitochondria produce ATP. Slow twitch do so aerobically using carbohydrates, fatty acids and branched-chain amino acids as substrates. Slow twitch muscles have losts of mitochondria, fast twitch do not.
The body can store a finite about of glycogen, after that its fat that is used. The goal for IM in general is to promote fat oxidisation. Thats it reallyLarry Brent wrote: »The fast twitch fibres won't be much use to you in the IM as they'd use up glycogen too quickly. But the more slow twitch fibres you have trained the better you'll run as you'll have access to more energy. You can recruit these untrained slow twitch fibres by
i) running at easier efforts (I don't like saying more slowly, as while it might be slower than you currently run initially, it will speed up with time, for the same effort). Muscle recruitment is based on force requirement. Less force is needed the slower the pace, so at easier efforts the slowest twitch fibres will be recruited.
ii) running lots - if you use up energy stores of a fibre on a run and then run again before it is fully replenished, that fibre cannot be recruited, so another one gets called up and hence trained.
iii) running long - the 200 fibres you usually use will fatigue/use up their energy stores during a long run and so other fibres are recruited to take their place.
I think the best approach to IM running is frequency fo running.Larry Brent wrote: »I don't think the question should be whether you are running too fast, but what are you hoping to achieve from each run. I imagine when IM training it's all about sparing glycogen use and low lactate levels. So rather than query the pace, query the cost - what energy does your every day run cost you. If it is easy then it should be fine, but that's only as long as you have a good perception of easy. The best way to find out would be to do a lactate test on the run.
By the time he hits the run on an IM the race is already won or lost. If he went too hard on the bike he will have used too much CHO and its game over regardless of the pace he runs at. The damage to glycogen stores will be done on the bike.
Everyone is focussing on energy stores but another real limiter is the central governor. If thats not trained, and pi$$ing about running easy will not do it, then its just not going to happen on race day.Larry Brent wrote: »Not necessarily, depending on the 'cost' of your easy pace, as above. You run practically all your miles at or faster than IM pace, 4:44/km. Would this be the case with pro triathletes? Do the lads who run in the 2:40s in an IM do all their running at 4min/km or faster? They may well do, I'm just asking as I don't know and this would certainly not be the case with marathon runners who might only be at or faster than marathon pace 3 times a week.
They pretty much do.My problem with the zones idea is that is based on it been linear. the fact is that you are mainly training your ensurancebase, so your easy- tempo may actually be a wider % and the high end which uses fast twitch muscled be a narrower range than someone concentrating on shorter racing.
Zones? what zones? Pace? HR? RPE?Because the first few times I tried using a HR monitor it didn't work and now the strap is sitting on top of a bookcase gathering dust
Like yourself, I train on effort.
I think you are missing out. I like having as many metrics as possible as it becomes obvious when gains have been made and also when things are going badly and pacing strategy in a race need to be reassess and indeed in training whether you should just go home and watch Corrie.I actually don't think your running too fast. As my coach said - your long run pace should be faster than your pace in an Ironman marathon. For me - I would have been running roughly 20 seconds per mile faster.
My old coach used to say similar - that your absolute best pace in an IM run is your average pace of a true long easy run.Long runs - don't mean Long Slow Runs.
+1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1You mentioned that you haven't been doing speed sessions - your training for an ironman.. 1km sessions are your speed sessions.
Recovery Runs - What are they?
Swimming, Long Biking recovers the muscles from the running.
All of the above QFTLarry Brent wrote: »That seems about right then. One thing to look at maybe though - if average is 151, I'm presuming like most people your first mile is somewhere in the 130s, 2nd low 140s before you get up to a stable HR. So are you sightly higher than 151 for the bulk of the run, but those early miles bring down the average?
I seem to remember reading somewhere that his coach was anal about not doing this. That a zone should be something that you heart rate should drift into but not exceed and that the pace should not need to taper off to remain in the zone.Larry Brent wrote: »Your 5m race pace was 3:47/km. This would give a lactate turnpoint (1 hour race pace) of somewhere around 3:55-4:00/km, (based on the rule of thumb that you add 10s/km to your pace as the race distance doubles, and also fits in with your lab test figures). That in turn would put your marathon pace at about 4:10-4:15/km. A 3:05 marathon is 4:23/km. So I think the faster end of your easy/aerobic pace is maybe too close to your marathon pace whether you take the 4:10 figure or the 4:23 figure.
Fran went to the lab??Larry Brent wrote: »I'm coming at this as a runner, so perhaps I'm totally off the mark. But it makes me wonder, when I see a lot of IM lads rarely if ever running more slowly than 7:30-8:00/mile, but then they end up running the race at 8:30-9:00 per mile. Is it too simplistic to think that this is because they either a) went too fast and thus used up too much energy on the swim and cycle or b) were not as running fit as they could have been? If it's a case of b) I'm not surprised - if one was always training at 7:30 pace, you wouldn't expect to be able to race well at 6:30 pace. So why would you expect to race well at 8:30 pace? I may be totally wrong, but I'd have thought that some time spent at IM marathon pace would be beneficial?
Its almost always (a)shotgunmcos wrote: »Pointless comparing straight long run pace to IM running pace. The only real comparison is RPE. As halftri pointed out you have the bones of 6 hours steady effort put down before you start out on your feet. Ideally you will train at similar condition, so long runs on tired legs. However the recovery cost is too high. I support the notion to do long runs at a faster pace than IM pace to tax the legs a little. Its NOT like regular marathon training. Long runs on an empty stomach is good too to simulate the low glycogen levels of that 6 hour + starting point.
The place for IM marathon paced runs is off a hard or long bike.
I agree that 'recovery runs' is a load of nonsense.
All extremely true.0 -
-
Great little thread going on here. Interesting read.
I'd only have one criticism of JB and to be fair, I'll be blunt. No point beating around the bush.
WTF are you doing listening to SHM?
All this fantastic training, support structure, diet, treating the body well, foam rolling etc and then you go ahead and treat your ears like ****! For shame.
0 -
nerraw1111 wrote: »Great little thread going on here. Interesting read.
I'd only have one criticism of JB and to be fair, I'll be blunt. No point beating around the bush.
WTF are you doing listening to SHM?
All this fantastic training, support structure, diet, treating the body well, foam rolling etc and then you go ahead and treat your ears like ****! For shame.
Nothing wrong with SHM - Sexy Hobbit Music:)0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
Unfortunately the freewheel is stuck and there's still some pedalling to do!!Aliya Wailing Bench wrote: »All downhill from here!!
Happy birthday, young man 0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement