Run Less, Run Faster Book. Load of tripe or worth a look?

altercor

I've been stuck to Pfitzinger/Douglas for a year or two now and getting faster. I plan on doing Barcelona Marathon in the spring. The thing is, Im tearing busy in work and fitting a 15 mile wednesday run just isnt going to happen.. A mate of mine (triathlete and physio who is a very decent marathon runner too) said that teh book 'Run LEss, Run Faster' book is brilliant. He was talking about pre-fatiguing on a rowing machine (I did rowing for 13 years) before going out to do 5-10 miles rather than doing 15 miles and having all that impact.

To be honest, I'm dubious and feel that the body needs the conditioning that constant impact provides (and the injuries that follow!!)

Anyone wanna weigh in on this? Any experience of the book? Positive and negative feedback would be equally accepted!

AC>

Raighne

altercor wrote: »

I've been stuck to Pfitzinger/Douglas for a year or two now and getting faster. I plan on doing Barcelona Marathon in the spring. The thing is, Im tearing busy in work and fitting a 15 mile wednesday run just isnt going to happen.. A mate of mine (triathlete and physio who is a very decent marathon runner too) said that teh book 'Run LEss, Run Faster' book is brilliant. He was talking about pre-fatiguing on a rowing machine (I did rowing for 13 years) before going out to do 5-10 miles rather than doing 15 miles and having all that impact.

To be honest, I'm dubious and feel that the body needs the conditioning that constant impact provides (and the injuries that follow!!)

Anyone wanna weigh in on this? Any experience of the book? Positive and negative feedback would be equally accepted!

AC>

It is probably the running book I own which has seen the least usage after the initial read. The FIRST system may fulfil your goals if all you are trying to do is build basic fitness, stay injury free and bring forth the basic parts of your physical abilities.

Essentially, it has three running days per week and these are roughly a long run, an interval session and a tempo run. Scientifically, it's an attempt to work the aerobic system, the lactate threshold pace and the VO2max pace each once per week. The remaining days are filled with cross-training.

So as an entry level programme I can see it having some worth but to really maximise your running potential you will want to look at the training systems that have actual won the medals. FIRST is not one of them. Developing the necessary capillarisation to your running muscles to bring ever faster paces into the aerobic realm remains, as it always has been (and indeed that will not change for middle and long distance races), the main determinant for maximal running performance and the FIRST method cannot develop that system to the degree that the more traditional systems (Daniels, Coe, Lydiard, Canova, Rosa, Cerutty) can.

D Chief

I bought the book this time last year and have followed it for my training this year. I have a bad knee and thought that it would be a good idea to run less on it, basically doing 3 quality runs and substituting cross training for the shorter easier runs you'd be doing in other schedules. I did the 10K plan from February to July. I liked the fact that I had a target every time I went out to run and that the runs were invariably tough. I felt like I was training, although there were times when I wanted to just do a nice easy run and not be bothered with targets.

I then followed the marathon plan for DCM. Unfortunately my performance in DCM was disappointing. I was gone after 25km or so. Looking back at my training, while I did the long runs, I only once finished one where I wasn't totally wrecked. That may be down to the plan, probably I didn't have enough miles done to have the endurance required, or maybe the plan was ok and I just ran the long runs too fast. I ran every long run ahead of the recommended target pace.

So, although the sample size is just one inexperienced slow runner for one marathon, I wouldn't be recommending it as a marathon training schedule. Maybe it would work better for someone who has been running for a few years and has lots of miles and endurance built up. Or maybe it would work better if you stick to the target paces better than I did.

Anyway, I plan to do a P&D 18 week/55 mile plan for Kildare marathon in May and see how I get on with that.

jfh

altercor wrote: »

I've been stuck to Pfitzinger/Douglas for a year or two now and getting faster. I plan on doing Barcelona Marathon in the spring. The thing is, Im tearing busy in work and fitting a 15 mile wednesday run just isnt going to happen.. A mate of mine (triathlete and physio who is a very decent marathon runner too) said that teh book 'Run LEss, Run Faster' book is brilliant. He was talking about pre-fatiguing on a rowing machine (I did rowing for 13 years) before going out to do 5-10 miles rather than doing 15 miles and having all that impact.

To be honest, I'm dubious and feel that the body needs the conditioning that constant impact provides (and the injuries that follow!!)

Anyone wanna weigh in on this? Any experience of the book? Positive and negative feedback would be equally accepted!

AC>

Hi AC,

check out the following links
http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,7120,s6-238-244-255-13791-0,00.html
seems interesting
http://runningtimes.com/Article.aspx?ArticleID=4447

theboyblunder

altercor wrote: »

The thing is, Im tearing busy in work and fitting a 15 mile wednesday run just isnt going to happen..

if you have a 9-5 job then it can happen. I have recently started doing these at 5am. You have to want it, but its possible. Did 13 miles starting at 5:10 am this morning. Back at 6:45 before my daughter gets up.

Fun?

No.

Possible?

Yes.

Good training?

Hope so!

dna_leri

D Chief wrote: »

I bought the book this time last year and have followed it for my training this year. I have a bad knee and thought that it would be a good idea to run less on it, basically doing 3 quality runs and substituting cross training for the shorter easier runs you'd be doing in other schedules. I did the 10K plan from February to July. I liked the fact that I had a target every time I went out to run and that the runs were invariably tough. I felt like I was training, although there were times when I wanted to just do a nice easy run and not be bothered with targets.

I then followed the marathon plan for DCM. Unfortunately my performance in DCM was disappointing. I was gone after 25km or so. Looking back at my training, while I did the long runs, I only once finished one where I wasn't totally wrecked. That may be down to the plan, probably I didn't have enough miles done to have the endurance required, or maybe the plan was ok and I just ran the long runs too fast. I ran every long run ahead of the recommended target pace.

So, although the sample size is just one inexperienced slow runner for one marathon, I wouldn't be recommending it as a marathon training schedule. Maybe it would work better for someone who has been running for a few years and has lots of miles and endurance built up. Or maybe it would work better if you stick to the target paces better than I did.

Anyway, I plan to do a P&D 18 week/55 mile plan for Kildare marathon in May and see how I get on with that.

How did it work for the 10K training?

D Chief

dna_leri wrote: »

How did it work for the 10K training?

I think it worked ok for the 10K. As I said I enjoyed having a defined target for each run and I was happy that I was meeting most, nearly all, of those target times. It gave me a feeling that my training was on track. And the 3 runs a week was very manageable in terms of fitting the running into the rest of my life. Also, I have had no injuries (touch wood).

I started the year with a best (from just one 10K) of 56 mins. Doing almost 2 full 12 weeks of the 10K plan, I got that to 53, 50 and then 49 mins. My target was to get under 50 mins, so, I was happy with that outcome. Not massive improvement, but I am 45 and this was only my 2nd year of running, so not bad. Possibly I could have made the same improvement on any decent 10k plan.

viperlogic

Any other followers of Run Less, Run Faster?

It works for me as I do a lot of cycling also as there are only 3 days running although they are tough quality sessions.

TFBubendorfer

viperlogic wrote: »

Any other followers of Run Less, Run Faster?

It works for me as I do a lot of cycling also as there are only 3 days running although they are tough quality sessions.

The main problem with that program is that most people who follow it are using it because they are too lazy to do the required training. Then they find this plan which only requires running 3 times a week, they think "deadly, I'll do that because then I don't have to run more often". Most of them then don't do the required cross training and usually don't run the runs hard enough either.

The number of runners who met their marathon target with that program is very small indeed.

jebuz

I agree with the above sentiments by TBF and I'm also dubious, there's no shortcut to marathon success but I do feel the "less is more" philosophy has its place in running, we're all individual and there is no one-size-fits-all plan. Having followed the P&D 70+ mile plan last winter in preparation for Barcelona, I never felt more prepared going into the race and I felt those midweek 15 milers were key for me, obviously physiologically in terms of conditioning but also mentally. Having slogged through those 15 milers every wednesday after work I felt extremely confident when I finally put toe to line in March, I committed to every session on the plan and carried it out as best I could no matter what and doing the miles gave me that confidence. I also got 3 lunchtime gym sessions in per week doing resistance training and I feel that help keep injuries at bay and that extra upper body strength kicked in during the latter stages of the race, I never felt stronger and hit my target feeling I had more in me.

That worked for me, I can't speak with experience for "run less, run faster approach" and obviously everyone responds differently to all these training plans, take what you can from the advice here and experiment, you'll quickly find out if it's for you or not. Let us know how it goes if you do try it I'd be interested to hear how your experience.

kchsligo

In previous marathon attempts I have used a plan along the lines of the FIRST approach and have seen some improvements in marathon times. But I have realised that if I want to get decent improvement then 3 runs a week, even if they were three hard sessions, will not do it. This time around I'm aiming to run at least 5 times a week.
Can only agree with the sentiment above as for me the appeal of a 3 run program was the fact that I didn't want to commit to anything more, or was maybe just too lazy to do so.

wrstan

From what I can recall, the FIRST system is still based around 3 sessions a week, 2 of which are very intensive and a LSR, which tends to be very long.

The only difference to most conventional running plans, is that they replace the EZ runs with cross training. This is an integral part of the approach, and is just an alternative form of aerobic conditioning. So in effect, while you are running less miles, the time commitment and overall effort levels are just as high as for most conventional programmes. As has been said above there is no cutting corners. The only advantage is the reduced weight bearing impact on your non session days.

Another observation of mine is that the sessions are very intensive, and without some solid base building, may lead to a high risk of injury.

Just MHO!