Swashbuckler wrote: » Fair point above. And you'll have a lot of reference points from the last two TT for where to set min starting pace.
TFBubendorfer wrote: » I think it's a great idea, but to cap the distance allowed would be a terrible idea IMHO. You're meant to get faster and faster and be limited by how fast you can go on tired legs. If you already know how man km you will go right from the start, half of the challenge and fun is gone. If you really want additional rules, giving a certain range for the first k pace would be much better. Easy pace according to TT might work, for the ones who did one of the TTs at least. Keep in mind, the fewer rules the better.
OOnegative wrote: » What about setting a specific distance, as C says measure it off kilometres. Each one has to be progressively faster than the last, if it isn’t your out of the race. Each participants starting pace is there easy pace measured off either there 5k TT or 1 mile TT?
Dudda wrote: » Another thing to consider is some people will have run a lot of progression runs in training and some will never have ran one. The experience will help a huge amount. Those who aren't used to progression runs will be looking at their watch every 10 seconds and it will be a higher level maths assignment for others. Does an app or Garmin widget exist that says speed up or slow down after you program everything in? I've only once attempted a progression run and had the paces all over the place.
shotgunmcos wrote: » Progression run is a great idea and it's a great session too. How feasible is it to track though? I did a royal flush a while back and while I aimed for 10sec drop every mile I was +/- 3 secs or so and that was with the help of LL pace on the garmin etc Not everyone will have the functionality etc.. It was undoubtedly a body of work to set up strava and boards thread, chase and validate users on both ends, motivate, track and verify results on strava, collate on a spreadsheet, edit, verify again and then cross fingers its all 99.99% right. How much work would that be to do to track and verify split times?!!
skyblue46 wrote: » In a word.... impossible :pac: As an idea it is something probably best suited to an ongoing thread devoted to progression runs. I just can't see it being manageable in the same way that the mile and 5k TTs were done.
BeepBeep67 wrote: » Consideration, I always like to try and find a mathematical solution Run 1 mile at your all out mile pace from the recent TT +50%. Example 6min milers start at 9min/ml. Each mile run 'at least' 5% faster than your 50% differential, in this case 9 secs. Mile 1 = 09:00 Mile 2 = 08:51 Mile 3 = 08:42 ETC....... Seems achieveable, mile 10 would be 07:39, Mile 13 07:18 (very close to McMillian HM pace off a 6 min/ml), of course if you run mile 1 in 8:55, your next mile needs to be at least 9 seconds faster. This seems to work across the ranges and obviously if people don't want to run for 13 miles +, you can set at 6%, 7%, etc.
TFBubendorfer wrote: » Just to clarify, I think we were talking about km progression, not miles. I know it would work either way but just as long as we're all talking the same workout! Not convinced about the percentage calculations. I'll be struggling to correctly subtract 10 seconds from my target pace as the pace intensifies and my brain starts to shut down. I really don't think I'd be able to correctly adjust my target time by x % as we go along - and I'm a numbers guy!
ThebitterLemon wrote: » Anything longer than about 10k and in my current state I’m out. Really enjoyed the last one and it was simple. The proposed taxonomic gyrations are hurting my head TbL
ThebitterLemon wrote: » What about some thing like 3 events over 3 or more days? A 400m, a mile and a 5k, mix it up a bit and give everyone a chance. TbL
BeepBeep67 wrote: » Just to clarify this, if your progression is to be 10 secs faster per split that's all you need to remember and your previous split. If you run too fast tough, your next split needs to be at least 10 seconds faster.
Murph_D wrote: » Certainly something I would have a go at - I like beepbeep's variation based on TT pace. I'd like to think I could get to mile 14 or 15 based on that (could be wrong!) The challenge would be to keep going til it breaks you.
MY BAD wrote: Keep it simple. I like the idea of a relay but I'm not sure how you'd pick teams.
Swashbuckler wrote: » I think the more inclusive it is the better. And I think something that will have multiple options like above would work very well. Giving people an option of 10mins, 10k or 10M caters to a lot of people. I'd worry a 10 miler alone will mean a lot of people who aren't in serious training won't take part.
skyblue46 wrote: » I think the 10 mins, 10k and 10 mile on the one day would be brilliant and simple if we forget about the progression element. 3 different length TTs, J &M at the helm and away we go.
