(Not) sticking with the plan

cporto

Hi all,
Looking for some opinions more knowledgeable than my own please! I'm about to start training for my first half marathon (rock n roll in mid August), and I'm not totally sure about my training plan. I've been base building for the last few weeks, using the base building plan posted here for the 2015/16 (forget which) DCM graduates. I haven't done the marathon but followed the thread and decided to give the graduate plan a go. I really like the base building phase so was thinking of using the 10k - half marathon plan for my HM.
BUT there are a couple of minor issues. 1 - I only have 13 weeks and the plan is 14. 2 - I'd like to run a 10k early on in the plan as I've never done one (longest race is 5 miler) - thinking of Malahide Castle on 25th June so it wouldn't mess with the later training. So I would need to rework the boards plan a bit. Do you reckon it's ok to do so, or would I be better off with a plan like one of the Hal Higdon ones that is only 12 weeks and incorporates races already? I feel like the Boards base plan had a much better impact on my fitness than previous HH plans I've used, but also conscious that I'm a slow runner so running the longest LSR by time (2 hours in this plan) probably won't take me near HM distance so I might be under-prepared for the race.
Sorry for the long question... (or many questions in fact) but any advice is appreciated!

El Caballo

cporto wrote: »

Hi all,
Looking for some opinions more knowledgeable than my own please! I'm about to start training for my first half marathon (rock n roll in mid August), and I'm not totally sure about my training plan. I've been base building for the last few weeks, using the base building plan posted here for the 2015/16 (forget which) DCM graduates. I haven't done the marathon but followed the thread and decided to give the graduate plan a go. I really like the base building phase so was thinking of using the 10k - half marathon plan for my HM.
BUT there are a couple of minor issues. 1 - I only have 13 weeks and the plan is 14. 2 - I'd like to run a 10k early on in the plan as I've never done one (longest race is 5 miler) - thinking of Malahide Castle on 25th June so it wouldn't mess with the later training. So I would need to rework the boards plan a bit. Do you reckon it's ok to do so, or would I be better off with a plan like one of the Hal Higdon ones that is only 12 weeks and incorporates races already? I feel like the Boards base plan had a much better impact on my fitness than previous HH plans I've used, but also conscious that I'm a slow runner so running the longest LSR by time (2 hours in this plan) probably won't take me near HM distance so I might be under-prepared for the race.
Sorry for the long question... (or many questions in fact) but any advice is appreciated!

I know you are worried about running by time, this is not something to be worried about though. The graduates plan created with slower/faster runners in mind. Our bodies really don't understand distance very well, not at all tbh as it's a man made creation. What our bodies do understand is intensity and time.

A major flaw that lies within distance based plans is that they do not take the speed of a runner into account. Let me give you an example, there's two runners training for a half, runner A is going for 2:30 and runner B is going for 1:30

Lets say they are using the same plan e.g week

Mon:5 Miles Easy
Tue:5 Miles Tempo
Wed: 6 Miles Easy
Thu:8 Miles Steady
Fri:4 Miles Recovery
Sat:10 Miles long Run
Sun:Rest

Both are using this exact same plan for the week, who has the bigger workload?

A)Runner A
B)Runner B
C)Both the same

Nope, it's runner A. Simply because they are slower thus making the runs longer from a time perspective and intensity perspective. They will spend more time at a higher intensity on both workout days and they will also run for more time on recovery and easy days. This has a double whammy effect in that they will be training harder on workout days which means they will need more recovery which they then in turn do not get as they are once again running for longer on days which are devoted to recovery

When we train, we are hoping to create a stimulus for growth and intensity is the single most important factor in providing that stimulus. Distance, nope but intensity and the best measure of that is time @intensity=workload. That is the reason that Myles Splitz designed the graduate plan in that way. For instance, a tempo run is generally recognised in one of it's forms as the pace you could hold for one hour, if a plan has a 6 mile tempo run down, that mighy take your local elite road race winner 34 minutes but it might take your 55 minute 10k runner an hour at the exact same level of intensity. For the local elite guy, it's a mild workout at best, for the other, it's a balls to the wall race which is not what a tempo should be. 3 Miles @tempo for the 55 min runner would be an equivalent stimulus to 6 miles for the local elite pretty much without going into more technical detail on that.

This holds true for nearly every type of run you do.

Singer

Fantastic advice El Caballo.

Annie get your Run

Singer wrote: »

Fantastic advice El Caballo.

Yeah I just deleted mine altogether, E knows his stuff!

cporto

El Caballo wrote: »

I know you are worried about running by time, this is not something to be worried about though. The graduates plan created with slower/faster runners in mind. Our bodies really don't understand distance very well, not at all tbh as it's a man made creation. What our bodies do understand is intensity and time.

A major flaw that lies within distance based plans is that they do not take the speed of a runner into account. Let me give you an example, there's two runners training for a half, runner A is going for 2:30 and runner B is going for 1:30

Lets say they are using the same plan e.g week

Mon:5 Miles Easy
Tue:5 Miles Tempo
Wed: 6 Miles Easy
Thu:8 Miles Steady
Fri:4 Miles Recovery
Sat:10 Miles long Run
Sun:Rest

Both are using this exact same plan for the week, who has the bigger workload?

A)Runner A
B)Runner B
C)Both the same

Nope, it's runner A. Simply because they are slower thus making the runs longer from a time perspective and intensity perspective. They will spend more time at a higher intensity on both workout days and they will also run for more time on recovery and easy days. This has a double whammy effect in that they will be training harder on workout days which means they will need more recovery which they then in turn do not get as they are once again running for longer on days which are devoted to recovery

When we train, we are hoping to create a stimulus for growth and intensity is the single most important factor in providing that stimulus. Distance, nope but intensity and the best measure of that is time @intensity=workload. That is the reason that Myles Splitz designed the graduate plan in that way. For instance, a tempo run is generally recognised in one of it's forms as the pace you could hold for one hour, if a plan has a 6 mile tempo run down, that mighy take your local elite road race winner 34 minutes but it might take your 55 minute 10k runner an hour at the exact same level of intensity. For the local elite guy, it's a mild workout at best, for the other, it's a balls to the wall race which is not what a tempo should be. 3 Miles @tempo for the 55 min runner would be an equivalent stimulus to 6 miles for the local elite pretty much without going into more technical detail on that.

This holds true for nearly every type of run you do.

That makes perfect sense, thank you! And I'm more than willing to believe it - as I said following his plan for the base building phase alone seems have to had a far more significant impact on my fitness and stamina than any of the previous internet plans I tried which went by distance rather than time.
So, duly noted!

I'm still unsure as to whether it's ok to follow this plan given the modifications I'd need to make though? I'm hoping they're minor enough not to matter (i.e. having only 13 weeks instead of 14, and adding one 10k race in week 6). I'm probably overthinking this as it's not like I'm going for a fast time or anything... Then again when I follow a plan I like to follow it completely!

gypsylee

Thanks for posting that information El Caballo.

I too am hoping to complete my first half marathon at the Rock & Roll. I am a slow runner so can relate to that 2.30 reference!

cporto don't overthink the plan. Stick to it as much as you can, switch it around a little bit to suit your circumstances.

I am following the HH loosely, I have completed a few 10 kms, have another one on the 18th of June and will then stick religiously to the plan for the last few weeks.

What time are you hoping to finish in?

cporto

gypsylee wrote: »

Thanks for posting that information El Caballo.

I too am hoping to complete my first half marathon at the Rock & Roll. I am a slow runner so can relate to that 2.30 reference!

cporto don't overthink the plan. Stick to it as much as you can, switch it around a little bit to suit your circumstances.

I am following the HH loosely, I have completed a few 10 kms, have another one on the 18th of June and will then stick religiously to the plan for the last few weeks.

What time are you hoping to finish in?

Ooooh great, good to hear from someone else who's doing R&R! Honestly I have no real idea about goal time. I'd love to do it under 2 hours, and various online predictors suggest I should/could, but I'm also not very good at pushing myself when it starts to hurt so I might opt for going slower and enjoying it. It's my first "long" race (like I said I've never even done a 10k) so I'll be fairly happy just to finish it and enjoy the experience! What about you?

gypsylee

cporto wrote: »

Ooooh great, good to hear from someone else who's doing R&R! Honestly I have no real idea about goal time. I'd love to do it under 2 hours, and various online predictors suggest I should/could, but I'm also not very good at pushing myself when it starts to hurt so I might opt for going slower and enjoying it. It's my first "long" race (like I said I've never even done a 10k) so I'll be fairly happy just to finish it and enjoy the experience! What about you?

If I finish in 2.30 I will be happy. Ideally I would like to finish under 2.20. Not going to push myself too hard, being a slower runner suits me just fine. My PB for a 10 km is 1.05 and I am hoping to improve on that on the 18th of June.

Good luck with the training.

El Caballo

Annie get your Run wrote: »

Yeah I just deleted mine altogether, E knows his stuff!

Thanks but there's no need to delete your post. This is a discussion forum after all and ideas or thoughts on training that might stick out to one person might not to another. Every opinion offers value and could be helpful and add to the scope for more discussion. That's what makes a forum, different ideas being shared.

cporto

gypsylee wrote: »

If I finish in 2.30 I will be happy. Ideally I would like to finish under 2.20. Not going to push myself too hard, being a slower runner suits me just fine. My PB for a 10 km is 1.05 and I am hoping to improve on that on the 18th of June.

Good luck with the training.

I kind of have 2.20 in my head as a possible goal for myself too (since I think the sub 2 hrs is a pipe dream). Though in all honesty I just don't have a clue what will happen, so the main goal is just to do it and finish! Like you I'm fairly happy being a slow runner, I enjoy just trudging along