Random Running Questions

Ceepo

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

And physios still talk with glowing eyes about the golden years when barefoot running was becoming popular for a while and their cash registers were bursting as a result!

While I totally agree that gradual adoption is key, the vast majority of runners just don't do gradual.

Are you sceptical of my statement?

For sure there was a time physios were busy with over zealous people that caught up in the barefoot hype, of course there was an increase in calf and achillies injuries because of the over enthusiasm. But we also know that injuries can occur from other training errors, and while the no doubt the barefoot fad contributed to lower limb injuries, it would be wrong to say it was the only factor.

Barefoot running is not bad thing when its done with proper adaption and moderation.
And as I said it can have a positive effect on running gait and economy.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233956034_Four_weeks_habituation_to_simulated_barefoot_running_improves_running_economy_when_compared_to_shod_running.

Just for balance, I've also seen an incerase in achillies and plantar fascitis from carbon plated shoes.

TFBubendorfer

Ceepo wrote: »

Are you sceptical of my statement?

No, not really. I'm sure that the statement that barefoot running can have positive effects if used in appropriate moderation is true. The same is most likely true for running on soft sand as well. And sprints. And even plyometrics.

The facts, however, speak for themselves. Runners are notoriously bad at judging how much is good and how much is too much, and moderation is rarely applied. Therefore, I will always urge caution when someone eyes up a new route that's "predominantly soft sand"

Ceepo

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

The facts, however, speak for themselves. Runners are notoriously bad at judging how much is good and how much is too much, and moderation is rarely applied. Therefore, I will always urge caution when someone eyes up a new route that's "predominantly soft sand"

...

I agree with you 100% regarding runners being notorious bad at judging what is appropriate.
But imo telling them to do something in moderation that could be beneficial to their running is better than advising them "not to do it".
Similar to any training advise you wouldn't get them to start doing 20 x 400 straight of the bat without increasing their tolerance. If you give them the right advise around moderation and let them adapt to the stimulus gradually then you mitigate the risk of injury.
You will never adapt to something that you don't try.

adrian522

Swashbuckler wrote: »

Tempo can mean a lot of things, including threshold.

Yep, threshold can also mean different things to different people too.

BeepBeep67

The coach I work with doesn't like the term tempo, preferring to use pace runs.
Pace runs are specific in duration and intensity, which could be something like 15 mins at 5k pace or 5k HR.

Swashbuckler

BeepBeep67 wrote: »

The coach I work with doesn't like the term tempo, preferring to use pace runs.
Pace runs are specific in duration and intensity, which could be something like 15 mins at 5k pace or 5k HR.

15mins at 5k! Yikes

BeepBeep67

Swashbuckler wrote: »

15mins at 5k! Yikes

Used as part of a cycle, would come around every 8 weeks or so, other paces in between.

BeginnerRunner

Is it appropriate (desirable) to do your long run at slightly higher HRs?

Most of my runs are in the 10k range at 72-74%.

Today's long run was 15k @ 77%.

It felt fantastic, for what it's worth

BeepBeep67

BeginnerRunner wrote: »

Is it appropriate (desirable) to do your long run at slightly higher HRs?

Most of my runs are in the 10k range at 72-74%.

Today's long run was 15k @ 77%.

It felt fantastic, for what it's worth

Depends on the purpose of the run, depending on your fitness at the same intensity and duration of the run you can encounter HR drift the longer you run.

Swashbuckler

BeginnerRunner wrote: »

Is it appropriate (desirable) to do your long run at slightly higher HRs?

Most of my runs are in the 10k range at 72-74%.

Today's long run was 15k @ 77%.

It felt fantastic, for what it's worth

It depends........

If you have a very solid aerobic base and need the added stimulus in your long runs then it's not unusual to start mixing up the long runs and put in some steady miles or even a long session with MP miles.

I haven't dipped into your log much so I don't really know your history. Unless you have a solid base then you're probably better placed to keep long runs easy. It also depends what you're training for. Some of the marathon lads would have more long runs with stuff than just plain vanilla long runs.

The percentages you quote are % of max HR or HRR?

As is often the case with running, just because it feels fantastic doesn't mean you should do it.

I was gonna ask of it felt easy but that's also misinterpreted a lot. What pace was it run at and what are your recent race/TT times?

FinnC

BeginnerRunner wrote: »

Is it appropriate (desirable) to do your long run at slightly higher HRs?

Most of my runs are in the 10k range at 72-74%.

Today's long run was 15k @ 77%.

It felt fantastic, for what it's worth

Do you have an accurate Max HR? Unless you do then HR zones are worthless.
I’m not a fan of HR training at all,but if you are using it you need an accurate MAX HR to set your zones correctly to at least have some chance of getting a benefit from it.

Annie get your Run

What are people's thoughts on a 10 day training cycle v a 7 day cycle? What are the benefits of a 10 day cycle? It strikes me that it allows to you stretch out the time between sessions and long runs rather than squeezing them all into 7 days week after week but would love to hear if anyone has tried this and what thoughts are.

BeginnerRunner

BeepBeep67 wrote: »

Depends on the purpose of the run, depending on your fitness at the same intensity and duration of the run you can encounter HR drift the longer you run.

I guess the only purpose of the run is to get better at running

Swashbuckler wrote: »

It depends........

If you have a very solid aerobic base and need the added stimulus in your long runs then it's not unusual to start mixing up the long runs and put in some steady miles or even a long session with MP miles.

I haven't dipped into your log much so I don't really know your history. Unless you have a solid base then you're probably better placed to keep long runs easy. It also depends what you're training for. Some of the marathon lads would have more long runs with stuff than just plain vanilla long runs.

The percentages you quote are % of max HR or HRR?

As is often the case with running, just because it feels fantastic doesn't mean you should do it.

I was gonna ask of it felt easy but that's also misinterpreted a lot. What pace was it run at and what are your recent race/TT times?

HR% is of max HR. HRR would be 195-53 so 142 (?). Today's run was at 151bpm so does that mean it was at 106% of HRR?!

Pace was 6m 09s per km. No races or TTs. Ran a half marathon distance before xmas at around 6m 24s, but that was only at 75% MHR so not a true test to measure against.

I'm not really training for any specifically at the moment other than to be able to run for a decent amount of time at an ok pace, while also being able to sling some heavy weights around and do most other things well too.

FinnC wrote: »

Do you have an accurate Max HR? Unless you do then HR zones are worthless.
I’m not a fan of HR training at all,but if you are using it you need an accurate MAX HR to set your zones correctly to at least have some chance of getting a benefit from it.

Max HR is dead on. But was established on a longish row test. I'd think max HR running would probably end up a few bpm higher than rowing, but I don't think the difference would be substantial enough to make any meaningful difference?

BeepBeep67

Annie get your Run wrote: »

What are people's thoughts on a 10 day training cycle v a 7 day cycle? What are the benefits of a 10 day cycle? It strikes me that it allows to you stretch out the time between sessions and long runs rather than squeezing them all into 7 days week after week but would love to hear if anyone has tried this and what thoughts are.

9 is popular amongst masters runners, 1 day on, 2 days recovery, I think Meb or Lagat adopted that approach also.
The challenge I would find with it would having to do the long run mid week, which it will probably fall on 2 weeks out of 3.

Pherekydes

BeginnerRunner wrote: »

HR% is of max HR. HRR would be 195-53 so 142 (?). Today's run was at 151bpm so does that mean it was at 106% of HRR?!

HRR (heart rate reserve) is your max minus your resting HR. This is 142 for you.

Your run at 151 is 69%. The calculation is (151-53)/142

BeginnerRunner

Pherekydes wrote: »

HRR (heart rate reserve) is your max minus your resting HR. This is 142 for you.

Your run at 151 is 69%. The calculation is (151-53)/142

Ahhh thank you.

Is a run at 69% of HRR considered easy? I know it sneaks under John Parker's 70% cap anyway.

Pherekydes

BeginnerRunner wrote: »

Ahhh thank you.

Is a run at 69% of HRR considered easy? I know it sneaks under John Parker's 70% cap anyway.

The simple answer to that is it depends on the runner's fitness. An elite distance runner would find that quite easy, while a beginner middle-aged runner might find it tough after a few minutes.

Snodge

Annie get your Run wrote: »

What are people's thoughts on a 10 day training cycle v a 7 day cycle? What are the benefits of a 10 day cycle? It strikes me that it allows to you stretch out the time between sessions and long runs rather than squeezing them all into 7 days week after week but would love to hear if anyone has tried this and what thoughts are.

I have tried both, 10 day cycle allows for greater recovery between sessions, also gives possibility to add a third(shorter, less intense session) depending on your goals. I found 10 day to be beneficial in terms of greater recovery. However, it does mean the days of sessions and long runs will change from week to week, which can be hard if you are trying to juggle work, school,family etc. 7 day therefore easier to plan training days around other commitments, it just means recovery needs to take that bit more of a priority as turn around between sessions will be shorter. I liked both approaches for different reasons, overall would favour the 7day but I think it’s really what works best for you.

Bill Ponderosa

Back doing a good bit of running since the new year. Have a garmin watch which I find really useful, like looking at stats etc,

I've heard a few mentions of stava so signed up for the free trial, I see it's 60 euros for the year but it seems to just give me the info I've already got on connect.
Question is, is there more to Stava and what's the general opinion on it?

Stark

You can use Strava for free, you just don't get all the features. Only real advantage is the social aspect of it. If you're someone who gets motivation from seeing other people's runs and other people seeing your runs.

Kander

You can get better statistics and info by using the chrome extension Elevate for strava https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/elevate-for-strava/dhiaggccakkgdfcadnklkbljcgicpckn?hl=en

It just over lays some added info.

Smash Run (https://smashrun.com/) has a very good static's site for free also. It links to garmin connect and pulls the data from there.

BeginnerRunner

Is there a limit as to how long your long run should be?

I've seen suggestions that it should be capped at 20-25% of weekly mileage. For someone like me who only runs 40ish km per week right now, 10km seems to be a very low cap

And yup... I'm sure I could just run more during the week but I'm so slow that I can't clock up enough kms in the time I have t do that!

dwayneshintzy

There won't be any hard or fast rule, no. But 20-25% of weekly mileage seems awfully low, considering many marathon training programs build to 20 mile long runs. And quite a few of those marathon programs will have you peaking around 50-60 miles per week, i.e. nowhere near 80-100 miles.

Is there any distance you want to train for?

Ceepo

BeginnerRunner wrote: »

Is there a limit as to how long your long run should be?

I've seen suggestions that it should be capped at 20-25% of weekly mileage. For someone like me who only runs 40ish km per week right now, 10km seems to be a very low cap

And yup... I'm sure I could just run more during the week but I'm so slow that I can't clock up enough kms in the time I have t do that!

You could always think of it in terms of time instead of distance. To many people get caught up with doing x km per week.
So if some of your mid week runs are 1hr you could do 90 mins for your long run.
Most of us are under time constraints during the week, hence why people do a long run at the weekend.
There's no hard and fast rules when it comes to training, if there was everyone would be doing the same.
If you're trying to improve, then consistency in your running is the key.

BeginnerRunner

dwayneshintzy wrote: »

There won't be any hard or fast rule, no. But 20-25% of weekly mileage seems awfully low, considering many marathon training programs build to 20 mile long runs. And quite a few of those marathon programs will have you peaking around 50-60 miles per week, i.e. nowhere near 80-100 miles.

Is there any distance you want to train for?

Yah thought so. Tbf I think I read it in the Hansen Method book so since you're doing the long run while f*cked from a week of intense running, different rules might apply.

No race or TT aspirations, just wanna become very competent at running long distances or for long periods of time. Medium term goal? MAYBE a < 4 hour marathon in 2022.

Ceepo wrote: »

You could always think of it in terms of time instead of distance. To many people get caught up with doing x km per week.
So if some of your mid week runs are 1hr you could do 90 mins for your long run.
Most of us are under time constraints during the week, hence why people do a long run at the weekend.
There's no hard and fast rules when it comes to training, if there was everyone would be doing the same.
If you're trying to improve, then consistency in your running is the key.

Gotcha. Love it, thanks. That's kinda what I have been doing - 3-4x 1 hour runs mid week, maybe one half hour run included in that, plus a 90ish minute one on the weekends.

THank you

That's my Q answered!

Ceepo

BeginnerRunner wrote: »

Gotcha. Love it, thanks. That's kinda what I have been doing - 3-4x 1 hour runs mid week, maybe one half hour run included in that, plus a 90ish minute one on the weekends.

THank you

That's my Q answered!

Running is a simple game, keep it simple and consistent and you'll improve

Murph_D

For the record, Hanson suggests 25-30%, and the long runs peak at 16 miles.

4Ad

As part of shoe rotation where (I'm on garmin and strava) and how do you log miles for each pair of individual trainers ??
Thanks

Slideways

4Ad wrote: »

As part of shoe rotation where (I'm on garmin and strava) and how do you log miles for each pair of individual trainers ??
Thanks

Go to your profile on strava and you can edit your gear. Put your trainers in there and when you complete a run edit the activity to the trainers you used if they weren’t your default pair

Itziger

Slideways wrote: »

Go to your profile on strava and you can edit your gear. Put your trainers in there and when you complete a run edit the activity to the trainers you used if they weren’t your default pair

Unless you're fairly nerdy, you'll forget to this every now and again (most of the time) so your default will have 2,000 miles on 'em and Strava will tell you you need new runners.