nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Opinions on different Marathon Training plans

MisterJinx

Hi All,

@Swashbuckler linked in a log post to a website which I had bookmarked previously which set out a comparison of various different Marathon training plans. I was going to use this to select a plan for myself for DCM 2022, assuming it's going ahead......

https://fellrnr.com/wiki/A_Comparison_of_Marathon_Training_Plans

So for myself, based on the definitions provided on the fellrnr site, I'd suggest I'm a Novice i.e. I have run some shorter races, have experience of interval running but this will be a first time Marathon training block for me. A few of the other variables in the comparison chart also apply as I'd be time limited (a great week for me is a ~2hr long run, 1xinternal session and 3 x 50 minute runs - on a bad week, it depends, but could be as little as 2 runs). I'd also select Multisport as quite happy to substitute in swimming and cycling. Also with Family life and all that looking for something flexible as things crop up and I try to fit in what I can where I can.

Based on my criteria the following plans seem to come through

First Novice and First Marathon (these do seem to review very poorly online but do seem to draw me in)

Jeff Galloway's You Can do it

Jack Daniels 4Week, 2Q and PlanA

Hal Higdons UTG

So looking for some opinions on the above plans, have people tried these plans before, what works well and what doesn't, are they suitable for a Novice, is there a huge emphasis on mileage or a mix of activities, any recommendations on any plans that have worked well generally?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Swashbuckler

I'll only comment on the 2Q plan as that's the only one of the ones you listed that I've done a deep dive on.

Given your history and experience level I'd steer clear...the Daniels plan really looks like its set up for more experienced runners. Some of the sessions are monsters. If I didn't have 5 years of solid consistent running 6-7 days a week with two sessions, one long run per week and plenty of high volume sessions I'd have steered clear.

Best of luck with choosing one. It's half the enjoyment of the whole process!

MY BAD

Out of interest what's the JB Plan A they mention in that link? It's not in my edition

Murph_D

If some weeks only have two runs you are definitely going to struggle, with any plan. Higdon has a great range of plans. I used one (Novice 2, I think) for my own first marathon and it worked well. It’s all about getting in enough mileage, at the right paces. Definitely not JD, as swashbuckler says. Hanson has a beginner plan that might work too.

MisterJinx

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118353350#Comment_118353350

Great thanks for that, definitely steering me away from the JD plans by the sounds of it from where I'm at.

Obviously I'd be hoping to not have too many bad weeks next year... have averaged 32k per week for this year while still doing tri training so with a run focus next year I'm under no illusions that I'll need to make a lot of progress on the weekly mileage and frequency.

I'll take a look at Hanson and Higdon

E.coli

As Murph has alluded to

The success or failure based around any of these plans isn't the specifics but more the consistency

FIRST tends to get bad rap due to lack of run specific training but (and its a big but) the area many fall down here is that they don't take the Cross training as seriously for consistency. Ultimately the plan is designed with the heavy emphasis here because the number of run sessions is lower it has to over compensate

JD plans again require consistency but the difference here being that lack of consistency will result in much higher injury risk. There are many caveats to the plans which are explained earlier in the books that often get ignored (like time based reps rather than distance once you are slower than a particular level)

HH and Galloway are more forgiving plans in terms of consistency but as a result they have lowest ceiling in terms of optimal training. Generally these plans are designed towards those looking to complete and as a result tend to have higher success rates

Hanson training would be very much in line with the athletic club model.I wouldn't truly view them as marathon specific but the cumulative effect of solid training week in and week out will work for 90% of people especially if you haven't grown up in the running scene. I would say though that the success here also revolves around consistency as the strength you build up tends to be based around the cumulative strength built up over weeks and months. It's attritional though so niggles and bumps can be expected and if consistency is an issue you are likely not gonna get the true benefits from the training being done (sessions not overly hard in isolation but benefit comes from stringing 8-10 heavy weeks of them back to back when body is tired as hell)

Murph_D

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118355781#Comment_118355781

Interesting thought on Hanson. Why would you consider it not marathon specific, given that it probably contains more marathon paced workouts than any other plan (that I've seen anyway)? Also, it front loads the speed work in favour of more tempo-like speed work in teh second half, again with the view that these 'strength' sessions are more marathon focused.

MisterJinx

"like time based reps rather than distance once you are slower than a particular level"

Is there a particular thinking in any/ most plans in relation to time versus distance? I tend to already be on the clock so actually time based might be something I can plan around although so far HH might seem like a route for me.

Also consistency comes through in the advice here very regularly and will be key to any plan, it's a work in progress!

Swashbuckler

Well if you take a Daniels plan as an example. You might see a session like 4M easy/8M at marathon pace/1M Threshold/2M easy. To an elite athlete that's probably a total of less than 40mins at marathon pace and less than a total of 90mins running all in. Working off my head here so forgive me if I'm a little off. Take that same session for a beginner and it could mean 80mins at marathon pace and more than 2.5hrs running. So you have a beginner working wayyy harder than an elite in a session.

Hal Higdons plans, especially the beginner plans ,are more geared towards the novice runners. So the sessions are probably working on the assumption of someone running much slower paces.

You just need to be very careful when choosing a plan. I had to get my calculator out when choosing the 2Q plan.

Not sure if any of this was even your question but I think that's the point of ecolis post.

MisterJinx

Yes it's all helping with the decision making process and thanks for the input

E.coli

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118358441#Comment_118358441

I haven't read specifics on Hanson plan in quite some time so completely open to correction on many of these points.

First though I wanna preface this by saying that this is my opinion and there are plenty of examples of successful approaches to this type of training (Molly Seidel of the US being on which sticks out in my mind)

From memory format approaches with Speed early week, M Tempos of 6-10 miles later and steadier long runs of 15-16 miles (for the most part) at weekend consistently. As I said previously its highly successful in making a very strong runner (and in fact I think most people would improve from 5k up on training like that) however for me marathon specific refers to preparing you for the latter half of the race. The old adage of it being a 20 mile warm up and a 10k battle rings true. Fact is if you are feeling anything but comfortable in the first 10-12 miles of a marathon you are in trouble.

This format heavily relies on cumulative fatigue which does in build a lot of strength but you are still effectively running Marathon tempo's like the early stages of a race rather than the latter. Yes fatigue is there but from a fuel perspective and muscle fibre exhaustion aspect they are not fully replicated. This is why the big long run sessions play a role in simulation. 2 miles @MP is going to have a very different effect after 10-15 miles already done compared to as part of 10 mile tempo.

There is the risk though of these big long run sessions and injury/ overtraining though and that is why they need to be balanced and tailored to the athletes level or they are a recipe for disaster,

This is the point trying to get across with it being good plan for strength building but not marathon specific. It does not mean that it is inferior in any way as I would put many 10k runners on 60mpw running strength based work in better position than others doing say JD 40-50 mpw plan

Swashbuckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118360177#Comment_118360177

Do you mind me asking, and apologies if you said it already but do you have a particular target time in mind and is this your first marathon? Have you seen the DCM novices plan?

E.coli

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118358602#Comment_118358602

I am not sure if it is in the newer JD versions but I remember he previously advised that the distance is based around 6 min/miling being the baseline. If you are running slower than that you should go with the assumption of 6 min work for every mile prescribed. Tends to be overlooked by many leading to either people being scared off the training or getting injured

E.coli

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118360300#Comment_118360300

Here is the man himself discussing time vs distance in relation to long runs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EO1hQ_kplgo&list=PLnAKD1Q8PRQ-lo2fMXbYdLyaJUHznbfvG&index=12

Swashbuckler

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118360300#Comment_118360300

That is very good to know..I missed that!

E.coli

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118360598#Comment_118360598

Unfortunately my copy is out on loan at an unknown location (always take photos of a person holding the book you are loaning them) but If I remember correctly this was general guideline as opposed to being specific to the elite plans.

Would make sense though based off the session you listed above 48 min @ MP sounds about right

Murph_D

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118360279#Comment_118360279

Those are all very good points. My own experience with Hanson is that those M tempos, because they're on the back of fairly hefty speed (5k pace) or 'strength' (10 secs faster than MP) sessions, do quite effectively simulate the second half of the race. Having used the plan a few times I'd say it suits me anyway, more so than the likes of P&D which I've also used a few times. But that all could just be a recency effect with more M experience and conditioning leading to better results anyway! There's an excellent Hanson thread here where a lot of these points have been mulled over. Most people balk at the lack of 20 mile runs (in the non-elite versions of the plan) but I've never felt that to be a shortcoming personally. I'll probably move on from Hanson next year for the next block but more out of a desire for different approaches every so often than any feeling that the approach is lacking.

E.coli

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118361202#Comment_118361202

I have no doubt it suits my points were not a criticism of the plan in the slightest I am a big fan of this type of training and I would advise this styled approach for the large majority of people here my points around specificity are more abstract in general sense. By in large the running population of Ireland don't have the foundational background of 10+ years of training with good mix middle to long distance training exposure so this sort of style of training is more important than specificity

I agree with you on the 20 mile debate. To be honest I think for alot of people that is actually one of the pluses of the plan they are not being overtrained with necessity for time on feet. There is a US running coach who explained the phenomenon as "aerobic fitness preceding structural intensity" the idea being take a novice cyclist throw them on a bike and they might go for a few hours, apply the same to a runner and they might get 70 min. We need to get the body used to the pounding much more than developing aerobically, the issue being that this build up is slower and alot easier to overload

MisterJinx

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118360288#Comment_118360288

Yes first Marathon, no I don't think I've seen the dcm novices plan and as for time I'm intending to do a park run in Jan, Raheny 5mile and boherameen half before I look at a time

Swashbuckler

Well definitely look at DCM novices plan..I can't link it as I'm on my mobile .maybe someone else can help there? It's tried and trusted for all the DCM novices every year.

Unless you have a good few years experience at running sessions and regular long runs I'd be a little careful at going down the route of some of those plans linked in the wiki site especially the likes of Hansen, Daniels, even pfitzinger. Maybe hal higdon would be the safest bet. Would you consider getting coaching for your first marathon?

Laineyfrecks

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16gSieCUamkjxOBVB2li8jA6bQSvkuLySyjG-ZilizDY/edit?pli=1#gid=1343555020

Hopefully that works. I followed the Novice plan in 2019 & really enjoyed it. Having very little running background I found it a very manageable plan & was more than happy with my 1st marathon. Definitely worth a look.

MisterJinx

Thanks, I'll do a search once I'm back on desktop myself. Hal H seems to bre winning out so far and will look at the dcm novices as well.

I think for this one I'll go it alone with a plan and see if I get the bug for the longer distances and see how I go before going down a coached route.

Singer

I'm not a coach or particularly well read or anything, but based on my own experience running for longer than like 2.5 hours is pointless. If you're John Tracey, sure, knock out a few 30 milers. For non-elite athletes, especially those in the masters+ category, the damage done from super long runs (18+ miles?) in a classic marathon plan is awful, requiring multiple days to recover and ultimately dominating the training schedule. The last few times I did LSRs over 2.5 hours I ended up semi-injured and didn't run well at the target marathon. For a novice marathoner I think it can be useful to do one or two runs close to marathon distance to get a feel for the distance, but generally I think consistent mileage and regular work on 10k-HM pace sets up a good marathon as opposed to a bunch of gigantic Sunday 20+ mile LSRs, for most people. Running training runs over 3 hours is brutal on the body for most of us.

demfad

It has to be said that the new running shoes (High stack, Carbon Plate types) should have a positive effect on the 'time on feet'/pounding element of traditional plans. That requirement is not as great now: pounding the pavement for 26 miles isn't what it used to be (just look at vastly reduced marathon recovery times)

demfad

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058223683/opinions-on-different-marathon-training-plans

Another point I'd make. People have correctly mentioned that the training plans are predicated on accumulated fatigue (some more than others). If life etc. may mean the training is inconsistent for you, you may not accumulate the fatigue necessary to make the prescribed training have the desired effect.

There are some mitigations you can do which IMO should be endurance biased as that is more or less the quality trained under accumulated fatigue.

1: After missing some training: add lenght to the prescribed sessions until you 'catch up' with the fatigue. Be biased towards the endurance sessions as I indicated.

2: If you've time, insert a short 'endurance block'. Could be a long easy run then easy day, or a marathon paced run followed by long run then easy day. This predetermined block could be inserted in after a few days/week where the training was suboptimal. Its a quick pill catch up on fatigue that would also target endurance.

MisterJinx

Thanks @demfad that's a great suggestion you have there in relation to the short endurance block. It's something I can have in the back pocket should there be a bad few days or a couple of weeks where things have been tight at home and priority calls had to be made!

E.coli

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118383065#Comment_118383065

On your first point. Surely that is dependent on why training was missed? Adding length to prescribed sessions after say an injury break or illness is surely high risk?

Personally I would not be of the opinion to change dynamics of a designed session by adding length as it changes the injury/ recovery dynamics of the session in relation to the overall plan. I don't think you can replicate cumulative fatigue simply by overtraining. Would be more inclined with the second approach.

demfad

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118402349#Comment_118402349

I think it was specified that the OP might occasionally have weeks where only a couple of runs might happen due to life etc. and that specifically was what I was addressing (Obviously, if someone is recovering from injury/illness that is a completely different set of circumstances). As has been noted in the preceding posts many of these general schedules rely on accumulated fatigue. If sessions are designed expecting accumulated fatigue and the runner is not fatigued then the session/schedule will not achieve what it intends to achieve: it will be too easy. To get 'back on track' there a number of approaches. One approach would be to make the next session harder (on paper) so that it will force the runner back into the same ballpark of adaption/recovery as if the training hadn't been missed. That isn't overtraining. In general as it's a marathon being targeted I would advise the addition of difficulty on a session to be biased towards the endurance side ie by adding volume to the session. Idea here is to keep the remedy as simple as possible. There can be a lot of emotional fatigue wasted on worrying over missed training and complex remedies to schedules to compensate. Simple is best.

The second suggestion does trump the first on simplicity. The caveat that I should have mentioned is that a buffer of a couple of extra weeks to the schedule might be recommended if training is to be missed. That gives the runner the space to carry out the small endurance block and keep all the sessions/elements in the schedule.

MisterJinx

Yes @demfad this was the track of my thoughts in relation to the weeks where the running was lighter than wanted, more life than injuries.

I have a stupid question: It's been mentioned on this thread a couple of times now, accumulated fatigue. Can someone explain this to me in basic terms. While I understand what is meant I'm not sure I understand it. From my perspective, and this is probably where I don't understand in that, sometimes, I have not run as I felt tired or leggy and was concerned that running that condition could lead to injury or do me more harm than good and backed out of a run as a result or instead of a planned session did an easy run instead. So in a marathon training block should I be feeling leggy all the time and that the purpose of the sessions is to be able to perform while tired?

Also, another stupid question, most plans seems to work off 3 weeks on and 1 week recovery. Is this the standard for everyone, looking at my own log I seem to do 2 weeks on (long run plus easy + sessions) and 1 week off (easy runs + long). Is it wise to keep an eye on this and work towards getting to 3 weeks on (a plan will help with this obviously!)

Bluesquare

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118382864#Comment_118382864

Do the shoes subtract from the accumulated fatigue element though ?

Bluesquare

I’m a relative novice marathon runner . The big questions I had before picking a plan was what mileage I could do :

around my lifestyle
around how much my body could handle

I looked at Hal , my clubs generic plan and a plan that a friend had gotten from a PT ( a well known Irish marathon runner )

Hals was a bit dull with no little /variety in paces. The club one was better but the mileage was low and there were no 20 mile runs ( my training partners couldn’t cope with this - seems to be mental training for lots of people .)The third plan was great but the mileage was way too much for me and involved 6 days running which would have broken me .

In the end I went with the club schedule but used Hal’s weekly mileage to tweak it . It suited me perfectly and I loved every bit of the training .

I have them all saved down and paces added for a sub 4 marathon if your interested I can share - no idea what your targets are.