Marathon training - any interesting new sessions?

--amadeus--

Since a lot of us are in the middle of training for teh Spring marathon season I thought it might be interesting to see what sessions people have that are a bit different and their reasons for doing them.

I'm currently being coached (which is a first) and my LSR last week was 18 miles so I had expected teh standard progression to a 20 this week with pace at PMP+10-20%. Instead I have been asked to do 16 at "steady" pace, which is closer to PMP+5%. To put numbers on it my LSR was 8 min/miles (PMP+20%) but this weekend I have been asked to run at 7:15 - 7:30 pace.

I'm used to doing a couple of longer runs at PMP pace in training but I'd never seen a steady session of that length. When I asked for the reason the explanation was that virtually all long runs in marathon training are either easy or PMP with nothing in between. So most of the miles you do on tired legs are at one of those two speeds and this is reinforced by recovery runs. As a result when your legs tire on race day if you can't hold PMP you may slip back to easy pace by default even if you could run faster. By introducing an intermediate stage you teach your body not to fall back as far (this is my interpretation of his explanation, I may have that slightly out of whack)

From my own understanding of training stimulus it should also help build speed endurance in a similar manner to a PMP paced run but with a faster recovery and lowered injury risk.

It struck me as quite a good idea. Anyone else have any innovative sessions to share?

Tec Diver

Well a friend of mine (based in the US) does strength and conditioning training 3 times a week (HIT weights sessions) and runs to and from the gym (about 4-6k each way). She then does 1-2 other relaxed runs per week, never much more than 10k.
In the autumn she completed a 29 mile trail race and a few weeks ago completed a 50k trail race based on that training.
She isn't racing these, she's running them, not for time.
As I was running 5 times a week last year, building up for a marathon, and logging 80k + per week and cross training twice a week I always felt like I was recovering.
I'm very interested in going from "traditional" marathon training to HIIT training (including running intervals). Again it wouldn't be for getting a great time in races. I'd like to be able to spend more time with the family, rather than use 10-12 hours a week training for a 3-4 hour race...
(...waiting for responses )

--amadeus--

Tec Diver wrote: »

Well a friend of mine (based in the US) does strength and conditioning training 3 times a week (HIT weights sessions) and runs to and from the gym (about 4-6k each way). She then does 1-2 other relaxed runs per week, never much more than 10k.
In the autumn she completed a 29 mile trail race and a few weeks ago completed a 50k trail race based on that training.
She isn't racing these, she's running them, not for time.
As I was running 5 times a week last year, building up for a marathon, and logging 80k + per week and cross training twice a week I always felt like I was recovering.
I'm very interested in going from "traditional" marathon training to HIIT training (including running intervals). Again it wouldn't be for getting a great time in races. I'd like to be able to spend more time with the family, rather than use 10-12 hours a week training for a 3-4 hour race...
(...waiting for responses )

Relevant section in bold

Any shoddy training will get you fitter and if you are moderately fit and healthy then you can complete a marathon or one of the shorter ultras. If you're happy completing not competing though then go for it...

Tec Diver

I disagree, you're entitled to your opinion though.

Clearlier

Tec Diver - She's running 4-5 times a week for 25 - 35 miles plus weight training which I'd venture a guess is not aimed at building bulk. Of course she can finish an ultra. Do you think that she wouldn't run faster if she were running 40mpw with one run a genuine long run though?

I did quick google on HIIT training and read through an article or blog post about it. The interesting bit was right at the end where the author said that he'd recommend that you be in good cardio shape before taking on this training....., i.e. in running terms it sounds like HIIT = intervals.

There are many ways to train to complete a marathon and I certainly don't think that most people need to train 10-12 hours a week to complete one. It's very important to keep you life in balance. Really, you work out what time you're prepared to commit to training and then you build your plan with that in mind. HIIT type training has a place in many plans but with the focus of training being a marathon I wouldn't consider it to be optimal use of time.

To the original question. My club introduced sessions that mixed up marathon pace, half marathon pace and 10k paced intervals in preparation for London last year. Unfortunately I could only make 1 but there was a notable improvement in performance relative to expectation which many put down to these sessions. Previously sessions would mainly have focused on a single pace. It could simply be that it was a new training stimulus and that if it is maintained for a few more years a new plateau will be hit.

--amadeus--

Tec Diver wrote: »

I disagree, you're entitled to your opinion though.

With which part? That shoddy training will get you fitter? Or that any fit person can complete a sub 30 mile race?

Let's be honest if HIIT could get you competitive at endurance running don't you think we would know it by now and the elites would be doing it? As supplemental strength work fair enough but on its own? Pretty pointless

ecoli

I wouldnt say that the session is exactly reinventing the wheel. Lydiard preaches the benefits of long steady state runs both for middle distance and Long distance runners as developing endurance characteristics within the fast twitch fibers

According to Snell

In 1976, Snell's academic mentor, Washington State University's exercise physiologist Phil Gollnick and colleagues, published a study that was one of a series of groundbreaking research papers on the adaptation of muscle fibers to training. In simple terms, what Gollnick's study showed was that long runs were beneficial because they caused the adaptation (training) of both slow-and fast-twitch fibers. By measuring the glycogen content of the various muscle fibers at intervals of 30 minutes up to two hours of cycling done at a moderate level (60 percent of VO2 max), the researchers discovered that it wasn't until one hour of exercise that fast-twitch fibers--those normally recruited during high-speed running--began to have their energy stores of glycogen depleted, which indicated that they were being activated. Though the pace didn't change, the recruitment of fibers did. So, at the 6:00 per mile pace Snell and Halberg were running, it took about 10 miles to begin the endurance training of the fast-twitch fibers, without the damaging effects of exhausting speed work.

The fast-twitch fibers that every runner needs to call on during the end of a race, or to keep up a fast pace, are pretty much spectators early in the long run; for Snell, however, those last 7 miles of the 22-miler become prime conditioning for these fibers, developing what could be categorized as "speed endurance." "There are two ways to train fast-twitch fibers," Snell would learn in his exercise physiology studies, "moderate running for long distance or high-intensity training."

Peckham

Back to the original question.

I'm a convert to the Daniels approach which includes threshold pace running within long runs. Pace is about 10% faster than marathon pace (i.e. about 6:30 pace for a sub-3 marathoner). Will probably do 3 of my long runs with this element, for example:

2 miles easy
2 x 10 minute threshold pace with 2 mins recovery between each
10 miles easy
15 minutes threshold pace
2 miles easy
(Total of about 21-22 miles)

Tough session, but pays dividends.

Another two will be PMP, with the remainder at standard long run pace.

T runner

Half-marathon with 10 km @ marathon pace then the second half with a progressive acceleration to HM race pace.



A good one to intro to MP during a long run if youve a long run or two alraedy in the bag.

Long run 32k:

19k at MP x 1.1 - 1.2
6k at MP
7k at MP x 1.1 - 1.2

ThePiedPiper

I'm not sure if my current philosophy qualifies as interesting or just plain mad. But, on a lower than optimum number of miles, I'm trying to keep most sessions of 15 miles or less at marathon pace or faster. This would tie in very loosely with Canova's method having loads of MP runs but without the volume.

The only recovery runs I'm doing are with a friend who is just restarting running and they are generally at MP+2.5 minutes.

I'm doing tempo work but no intervals. Maybe I'll start changing this a bit in the next couple of weeks.

There's no basis for what I'm doing other than current time constraints but it'll be interesting to see how good of a March half/April full combination of races I can pull off from it. It's certainly satisfying to be busting myself on 10-15 mile runs without wondering how it's going to affect a session the following day.