Boardsies marathon plan by debate

Clearlier · 10-06-2011 10:26PM

This is turning into a nice thread! I'd like to mention that although my writing style makes me come across as being quite certain and confident about what I write I am actually expressing my current thoughts on what works. If you'd have asked me 6 months ago I probably would have given different answers.

Krusty - You got what I was trying to say in the second part of your reply which is that there's plenty of space for marathon pace running but don't kill yourself adding in hmp and/or threshold running. The reference to Jack Daniels was for his liking for sessions that mix up threshold, marathon pace and easy running. For sure they help you get fitter but for most runners at the 2:45 level 14 miles of marathon pace, 2 miles of threshold pace and 6 miles of easy pace (mixed up) will take to much out. If you're running 100+mpw then you could probably handle it but I doubt that there are too many runners doing that kind of mileage for a 2:45.

In respect of marathon pace running in general I've just recently come to think that marathon pace running is important at all levels not so much because it gives you pace judgement but because it bridges the gap between easy and hard runs and I think that you need to improve your ability at all levels of effort. It's kind of like a medium pace/effort run. They can be done on their own or as part of the long run. It's important that it's done on terrain similar to what you race on though. I personally like to find a low key race and do a long warm up beforehand to make up the long run but that's because all my other long runs are done on an off-road hilly route.

Martha - Advanced Marathoning is a great book, I keep going back to it. It probably gives you 90% of what anybody needs. The last 10% being person specific. Unless you do base building beforehand I think that the 18 week plans are much better than the 12 week plans. In respect of why overall mileage is more important than long runs - it's because the more you run the better you'll get at running. That said and I probably didn't make this as clear as I could have, when training for a marathon you do need a long run each week, it should last at least 2 hours and I think that there are benefits to going out to 20 miles at least once and possibly twice even though it will have an impact on the following week.

ecoli - I wouldn't leave out intervals for a 2:45 runner - I just wouldn't include them in the long run. I'm guessing that Woddle's going to have a question about intervals/tempos/faster running in the not too distant future so I'll not expound on what I think about that just yet.
Really interesting point on the anaerobic/aerobic relationship. In training I tend to notice fitness boosts about every 6 weeks and I had spotted that their impact was diminished if some kind of faster running wasn't done to 'lock in' the improvement. I think that this applies at all levels though and may not be exactly what you were thinking.

TBB - ecoli said most of what I think but perhaps instead of faster - think of it as approaching your peak - a peak which is probably limited by living life (family, work, etc.) rather than physical ability. It then becomes about getting the biggest bang for your buck. Not many would advise a 5hour marathon runner to spend much time developing their anaerobic capacity - there's still loads of scope for aerobic development. A sub 2:10 Kenyan however will do some savage sessions to get the last little bit out of their ability. When you get to sub-3 you start having a mix of people, some highly talented lightweights can run sub-3 with relatively little aerobic development and should focus their efforts there. Other well trained 60 year olds running sub-3 would probably get more benefit out of including anaerobic training in their plan. I've meandered a little here but hope it makes enough sense.

ecoli · 11-06-2011 10:19AM

Clearlier wrote: »

Krusty - You got what I was trying to say in the second part of your reply which is that there's plenty of space for marathon pace running but don't kill yourself adding in hmp and/or threshold running. The reference to Jack Daniels was for his liking for sessions that mix up threshold, marathon pace and easy running. For sure they help you get fitter but for most runners at the 2:45 level 14 miles of marathon pace, 2 miles of threshold pace and 6 miles of easy pace (mixed up) will take to much out. If you're running 100+mpw then you could probably handle it but I doubt that there are too many runners doing that kind of mileage for a 2:45.

In respect of marathon pace running in general I've just recently come to think that marathon pace running is important at all levels not so much because it gives you pace judgement but because it bridges the gap between easy and hard runs and I think that you need to improve your ability at all levels of effort. It's kind of like a medium pace/effort run. They can be done on their own or as part of the long run. It's important that it's done on terrain similar to what you race on though. I personally like to find a low key race and do a long warm up beforehand to make up the long run but that's because all my other long runs are done on an off-road hilly route.

Would definitely agree. In the long run, miles at MP should be added and be progressive (much like the mileage of the long run). Personallly i feel that adding threshold to your long run is a bit of a disaster as it takes too much out of the body that hampers your overall training in terms of recovery time.

Each session must be looked at in the grand scheme of things, no point in doing a "monster session" if you miss another session later in the week because you are recovering from it. I would leave threshold paced running for seperate independent sessions. Each run should have a purpose and not try to fit too much into one session.

There are times when progression runs can be useful however the duration of these is usually more in line with easy run duration or medium length runs

Clearlier wrote: »

ecoli - I wouldn't leave out intervals for a 2:45 runner - I just wouldn't include them in the long run. I'm guessing that Woddle's going to have a question about intervals/tempos/faster running in the not too distant future so I'll not expound on what I think about that just yet.
Really interesting point on the anaerobic/aerobic relationship. In training I tend to notice fitness boosts about every 6 weeks and I had spotted that their impact was diminished if some kind of faster running wasn't done to 'lock in' the improvement. I think that this applies at all levels though and may not be exactly what you were thinking.

Apologies I misinterpretted your post I agree your long runs should be left to easy run with marathon paced segments at quickest added (normally i would only add MP miles to every second week as opposed to every week and add a session the day before instead).

I can see how "locking in" of fitness boosts could be seen. For me the idea that one of the main principles of training would be variety. Do too much of the same thing and you get good at doing just that but body then becomes shocked by introduction of another variable (in marathon maybe one or too miles too fast could ruin your race by shocking the body if this training philosophy is followed). By stressing the body in different ways you boost your fitness on an overall scale as opposed to specific (which could be seen as stagnation).

While it does apply to all levels i feel that runners beyond three hours normally find the aerobic aspect continually stressing and as a result stagnation does not occur to the same extent (just in my experience).

However my references were more in line with 10k paced work etc in mind, as such when i discuss aerobic development this would include threshold paced (Tempo) work to some extent also so for people in the 3-3.30 threshold pace could be construed as the "faster running" which is spoken of. Again this would be based on an athletes level coming into training program (not their speed but rather their running background)

dev123 · 18-06-2011 12:11PM

ecoli wrote: »

Would definitely agree. In the long run, miles at MP should be added and be progressive (much like the mileage of the long run). Personallly i feel that adding threshold to your long run is a bit of a disaster as it takes too much out of the body that hampers your overall training in terms of recovery time.

Each session must be looked at in the grand scheme of things, no point in doing a "monster session" if you miss another session later in the week because you are recovering from it. I would leave threshold paced running for seperate independent sessions. Each run should have a purpose and not try to fit too much into one session.

A lot of Daniel's sessions include tempo intervals mixed in with easy pace miles for his quality sessions.

From what I understand Daniels is a believer in getting the most out of as little effort as possible.

By running 2 miles easy, then 5 x 6min tempo intervals with 1 minute rests and then 1 hour easy puts you in a fatigued state with lactic acid build-up, elevated heart rate and core body temeperature. For that last hour of easy pace running you are in a physical state that may have taken 10 miles of easy running to get to.

I completed the session above last night and covered just over 12 miles. However, due to the interval session at the beginning the last mile or two of the 1 hour at easy pace was definitely tougher than the last miles of a 12 mile run at easy pace throughout.

Is this what Daniels is trying to achieve? Get you fatigued early and then start your easy run thus reducing the amount of time on your feet and thus reducing the risk of injury?

ecoli · 18-06-2011 02:09PM

dev123 wrote: »

Is this what Daniels is trying to achieve? Get you fatigued early and then start your easy run thus reducing the amount of time on your feet and thus reducing the risk of injury?

Yes I believe that this is where Daniels is coming from (havent read his book in a while so couldnt confirm off hand). Daniels training methods are based on the notion of getting quality over quantity of miles and getting the most out of the miles put in.

As many coaches will tell you there is more than one way to skin a cat and likewise in athletics there are many ways to get to the same destination (which is why this sport has yet to be "cracked" as it were in terms of training methodology)

For me I would be based along more specific sessions with each training session having its own purpose. As such easy runs are to develop aerobic base and aid in recovery from session.Anaerobic (Tempo) Threshold sessions are for the develop the threshold in order to be able to maintain higher intensity with the production of blood lactate, Aerobic threshold pace (Marathon paced/ steady state running) is to simulate race day in terms of form while carrying out a particular pace, Long runs time in feet (though sometimes these can be used together for race day simulation again) and Vo2Max sessions (intervals) to help boost Anaerobic capacity in an attempt to boost aerobic fitness.

With Daniels i think his training is based around the aspects of a successful training plan being independent of each other and as a result he tries to fit all the aspects into the training as independent components eg. Tempo and easy running pace boost different aspects of fitness so therefor each have to be fit in to make sure one aspect is not lagging.

Also the role of fatigue in terms of the Central Governing theory is not taken into account (possibly because this is a debatable theory). CGT suggests that your brain subconsciously doles out energy to your exercising muscles with the goals of preserving a state of homoeostasis and preventing any possible catastrophic physiological failure such as rigor or heart problems.

High intensity running or prolonged running at moderate paces places high energy demands upon your body. Your brain reacts by trying to maintain the equilibrium in the body and as a result tries to reduce muscle fiber recuritment. By fatiguing the body before your easy run you are actually inhibitting some of the benefits normally attained from your hour easy running

Again like i said this is only my take on it and there are many ways to skin a cat. Other people may disagree as CGT is a heavily debated so by using it I am probably opening myself to criticism

dev123 · 18-06-2011 03:39PM

ecoli wrote: »

Also the role of fatigue in terms of the Central Governing theory is not taken into account (possibly because this is a debatable theory). CGT suggests that your brain subconsciously doles out energy to your exercising muscles with the goals of preserving a state of homoeostasis and preventing any possible catastrophic physiological failure such as rigor or heart problems.

High intensity running or prolonged running at moderate paces places high energy demands upon your body. Your brain reacts by trying to maintain the equilibrium in the body and as a result tries to reduce muscle fiber recuritment. By fatiguing the body before your easy run you are actually inhibitting some of the benefits normally attained from your hour easy running

Again like i said this is only my take on it and there are many ways to skin a cat. Other people may disagree as CGT is a heavily debated so by using it I am probably opening myself to criticism

With repsect to the CGT I would say that by completing some easy miles after a tempo interval session gives you a chance to "re-programme" the Central Governing mechanism by pushing through the easy miles in a fatigued state. It gives you the chance to run some easy miles when you feel like you are at the end of an 18 mile run with out the need to run for 2.5 - 3 hours.

I'm all for having to tap into mental resources after 1.30 rather than 2.30 hours.

Daniels does specify some straight up 2-2.5 easy pace runs but this idea of running easy miles when fatigued and even following up the fatigued easy miles with a further tempo run of 15-20 mins is a recurring theme.

ecoli · 18-06-2011 05:04PM

dev123 wrote: »

With repsect to the CGT I would say that by completing some easy miles after a tempo interval session gives you a chance to "re-programme" the Central Governing mechanism by pushing through the easy miles in a fatigued state. It gives you the chance to run some easy miles when you feel like you are at the end of an 18 mile run with out the need to run for 2.5 - 3 hours.

The one flaw with GCT is that there are two elements peripheral (more mental) and central (strictly physical). The strictly physical aspect would say running while fatigued does not do benefit (blood PH levels and the fatigue factor inhibitting muscle fiber recruitment as well as muscle contraction)

You are right however and the mental element comes into factor here (which is why it works for so many people) as you are still getting some benefit which exceeds the physical

Again different coaches have different approaches and I would me more along the lines of Lydiard based theories as opposed to Daniels

dev123 · 18-06-2011 07:14PM

ecoli wrote: »

The one flaw with GCT is that there are two elements peripheral (more mental) and central (strictly physical). The strictly physical aspect would say running while fatigued does not do benefit (blood PH levels and the fatigue factor inhibitting muscle fiber recruitment as well as muscle contraction)

You are right however and the mental element comes into factor here (which is why it works for so many people) as you are still getting some benefit which exceeds the physical

Again different coaches have different approaches and I would me more along the lines of Lydiard based theories as opposed to Daniels

Thanks for the clarification ecoli.

I'm gonna be giving Daniel's a go for Dublin in Ocotober and while tempo / easy pace sessions are frequent in the 18 week plan there will hopefully be enough easy miles in there to get the benefit from these type of runs.

Clearlier · 18-06-2011 11:20PM

Seems like the questions have stopped which is a shame but I'd still be interested in your thoughts ecoli on faster than marathon pace running in a marathon training schedule and on peaking.

Obviously you have tempo/lactate threshold runs. I think that most plans have them in from an early stage. Cruise intervals are an alternative from a physiological standpoint but psychologically for a marathon I think that runners are better off sticking to a long tempo than several long intervals.

For my own training I've been heavily influenced by Lydiard's ideas and have almost completely excluded intervals on the grounds that I'm nowhere near maximising my aerobic capacity and can benefit more by working on that than on my anaerobic system. For a couple of reasons I've begun to regret that approach. As I mentioned earlier in the thread I feel that I lose the benefits that I get from aerobic training if I don't somehow 'lock in' the improvement. Fast intervals worked once and I should possibly have maintained that. That said I do wonder if regular tempos (I always screwed them up by running too fast) allied to strides a couple of times a week might be enough to get the effect without the need to do intervals which obviously have a cost to other types of training. The other reason I regret it is that I'm now an awful lot slower than I used to be over shorter distances although I'm not sure how relevant that is to marathon training. I'm toying with the idea of introducing very short hill sprints with full recovery once a week to see if that makes a difference.

I run for Bournemouth AC (moved over from Dublin about 2 years ago) and the focus here is on the London marathon. One interesting change this year was that a couple of the guys got together with Liz Yelling who lives nearby and sometimes runs sessions with us and put together the following sessions starting in January:

3 x 15 mins tempo Threshold/Tempo/HM
3 x 10 mins each rep quicker Progressive
18 mins MP > 5 x 3 mins > 18 mins MP Marathon pace + intervals
2 x 27 mins tempo Threshold/Tempo/HM
20 mins MP > 5 x 4 mins > 20 mins MP Marathon pace + intervals
3 x 10 mins each rep quicker Progressive
5 x 1 mile (MP for those with HM in legs) Marathon pace, or faster if fresh
20 mins MP > 12 HMP > 6 > 4 > 3 > 2 > 2 > 2 MP through to VO2 max
3 x 10 mins each rep quicker Progressive
5 x 1 mile (MP for those with HM in legs) Marathon pace, or faster if fresh

There were other sessions following those which were on a similar theme right up to the event.
Those who did these training sessions all performed very well (with the exception of Liz who probably over-reached and one poor guy who ran from toilet to toilet after the 8 mile point), several PB's, one guy within a second of his PB despite injury issues and strong runs from some more 'experienced' runners. I wasn't able to make any of the sessions which was a pity. The only guidance given was that the intervals should be faster than marathon pace but slower than 5k pace (I'd imagine 10m - HM pace). The interesting thing here for me is that this seems to be a lot of marathon pace and tempo mixed up together. Perhaps not a million miles from what Daniels advocates.

On Daniels - I haven't properly worked out what he has to say yet but I have noticed that his focus (unsurprisingly) is on the development of athletes in their late teens and early twenties.

Another approach to peaking for a marathon which some may have seen on letsrun was posted by Renato Canova (coach to some of the top Kenyans). He talks about the following kind of workouts in the 6-8 prior to the taper:

Aerobic Power Workouts (one per week):
1) 10 x 800 w 1:30 jog @ 110-112% of MP (5:04-5:09/mile)
2) 6 x 1 mile w 2 min jog @ 108-109% of MP (5:12-5:15/mile)
3) 4 x 2 mile w 3 min jog @ 105-106% of MP (5:21-5:24/mile)
4) 3 x 3 mile w 4 min jog @ 103-104% of MP (5:27-5:30/mile)
5) 2 x 4 mile w 4:30 jog @ 102-103% of MP (5:30-5:33/mile)
6) 2 x 5 mile w 5 min jog @ 101-102% of MP (5:33-5:37/mile)
7) 6 mile continuous run @ 104-105% of MP (5:24-5:27/mile)
8) 8 mile progression run @ 100-106% of MP (5:21-5:40/mile)

Aerobic Endurance Workouts (one per week):
1) 18-22 miles steady run @ 90-95% of MP (5:58-6:18/mile)
2) 24-26 miles easy run @ 80-85% of MP (6:40-7:05/mile)
3) 18-22 miles progression run @ 85-100% of MP (5:40-6:40/mile)
4) 12-15 miles simulation run @ 100% of MP (5:40/mile)
5) 20 miles - last 5-10 miles @ 100% of MP (5:40/mile)
6) 20 miles incorporating 10 x 800 @ 103% of MP w 800 jog (5:30/mile)
7) 6-7 miles @ 85% + 6-7 miles @ 100% of MP (workout done AM and PM)

Whatever about the aerobic power workouts the endurance ones are unimaginable without a consistent diet of 90+mpw. (my current holy grail for marathon training is to do several months of Lydiard's 100mpw base training followed by 7-8 weeks of the above incorporated into 100 mile weeks - I think that it would produce a pretty quick marathon runner!). I suspect that most runners could incorporate cut down versions of the speed sessions and I'm tempted to introduce it into a P&D plan replacing the VO2 max sessions.

Ok, time for me to stop rambling

Woddle · 18-06-2011 11:30PM

Clearlier wrote: »

Seems like the questions have stopped which is a shame

The thread and questions certainly havn't finished yet

I'd like to see this thread hang around for some time with alot of nuggets.

Here's a link to an excellent read from our own TBF, I'm sure he won't mind and if he does I'm sure he'll let me know

Thanks for sharing.
TBF training with mystery coach

Given that we're already discussing intervals and tempos, I think we can make that our next topic, so how do you do yours.

macinalli · 19-06-2011 11:03AM

I'd also be curious about the ideal balance of a training week. I'd like to run an average of 5 times per week for my upcoming marathon (Liverpool) and am still a bit unsure of how to structure the week. I do my LSR on Saturday, that's obviously essential. Otherwise I have access through work to a tempo run, a fartlek session, a track session and 2 recovery runs. I don't think that I can do them all, but likewise I'm not sure on what to leave out and don't want to include too many tough sessions per week.

To answer Woddles question, the only intervals that I do are fartlek. These are fairly well structured and the shorter legs (maybe 1-2 min) are no faster than 5k pace, the longer ones (3 min max) are no faster than 10k pace. These have a strict 30 sec recovery between legs. The tempo run is usually about 6.5k and starts off at about 4.45/k and peaks at about 4.15/k. Again this would be slower than 10k race pace.

The group that I run with do these sessions all year round so they're not marathon specific. My thinking for the upcoming training was to keep the fartlek as is, and gradually increase the length of the tempo run, not sure how that matches with other peoples training plans?

And this is a good thread - would like to see it continue!

woodchopper · 19-06-2011 01:01PM

7) 6-7 miles @ 85% + 6-7 miles @ 100% of MP (workout done AM and PM)

[/QUOTE]

Also Cavona's athletes can only eat vegetables between this workout. No carbs are allowed. The idea been that they start the second workout in a glycogen depleted state, in an attempt to simulate the latter stages of a marathon.

ecoli · 19-06-2011 04:33PM

Clearlier wrote: »

Obviously you have tempo/lactate threshold runs. I think that most plans have them in from an early stage. Cruise intervals are an alternative from a physiological standpoint but psychologically for a marathon I think that runners are better off sticking to a long tempo than several long intervals.

For my own training I've been heavily influenced by Lydiard's ideas and have almost completely excluded intervals on the grounds that I'm nowhere near maximising my aerobic capacity and can benefit more by working on that than on my anaerobic system. For a couple of reasons I've begun to regret that approach. As I mentioned earlier in the thread I feel that I lose the benefits that I get from aerobic training if I don't somehow 'lock in' the improvement. Fast intervals worked once and I should possibly have maintained that. That said I do wonder if regular tempos (I always screwed them up by running too fast) allied to strides a couple of times a week might be enough to get the effect without the need to do intervals which obviously have a cost to other types of training. The other reason I regret it is that I'm now an awful lot slower than I used to be over shorter distances although I'm not sure how relevant that is to marathon training. I'm toying with the idea of introducing very short hill sprints with full recovery once a week to see if that makes a difference.

I mentored the sub 3 marathon thread here last year with the same thoughts in mind. I put the emphasis of quality sessions on HM - M pace almost solely with strides added just to keep turn over going. In hindsight I see this as one of the reasons it was not as successful as should have been but since then I have had more coaching success regarding this barrier

Since then I have come to see more benefit with the introduction of 10k paced sessions. The emphasis of these sessions was rhythm running. The idea behind these came from my own coach a sub 2.18 marathon runner. The reps were kept short with short recovery (400s-800s). I have come to favour the ratio of 4:1 in terms of distance: recovery so for every 400m ran 100m jog recovery. The amount of reps was kept high (12-20 depending on the athletes weekly mileage). The advantages to this is reps are short enough that they are not as taxing on the body as longer sustained efforts yet you still get the distance covered to allow the mileage conducive to marathon training. It also allows for these sessions to be conducted without the need for long term recovery which would compromise the rest of the weeks training
These again would be in the first half of your marathon plan and should be blended with Tempo paced running as well as hills and as the plan goes on (in the second half of the plan (last 8-12 weeks) move to more Marathon specific sessions while still retaining some sort of element. Many people fail to see that training particular systems should not be independent as the benefits arent as such. Different aspects are interconnected which is why variety in training is paramount.

My usual schedule outline would be as follows (2 week cycle with 2 per week)

1 10k paced session
1 Threshold run
1 hill session
1 LSR w/PMP miles

This way the LSR is alternated between easy one week and the second week it counts as 1 of the two weekly sessions

Would also include one or two Vo2 Max sessions throughout the plan just to provide differnt stimulus so that it is not ignored as can have slight benefit even to marathon runners (that 1% anaerobic component of marathon running cannot be ignored)

Here is something i posted in a previous thread regarding variety

ecoli wrote: »

4 Aspects to a successful training plan i believe which will bring a runner on are as follows.

Consistency, Capacity, Frequency, Mixture

In order to make the most gains and realize your full potential as a runner you have to maximize each area in unison with the others.

That means get in the right mixture of work: speed work, threshold work, long runs, races, and don't let any area fall behind. You have to work on all aspects year round.

Do this consistently, week after week, month after month and year after year. There is no short cuts in running, it takes time to realize your full potential.

You need to improve your frequency, slowly over time until you are running anything between 6-13 times a week (or cross train depending on injury history again this is ability to listen to ones body)

You need to slowly build your capacity/mileage over time, but only in conjuction with the proper mixture. This means that the usual 18 week plan coming up to a marathon should only tell 1/2 the story of the work put in through cumulative miles throughout the last three to four years

Big jumps in either mileage or quality don't work 9 out of 10 times because they aren't sustainable be it injury risk or sickness.

No short-cuts, just look at these 4 tenets and slowly and methodically over time improve on them. Maintain good mixture while increasing your capacity and frequency.

Too many people just pick out 1 of the 4 areas and then go overboard on it and that just doesn't work in the end.

Runners are like chains, we are only as good as our leakest links.

Improve your consistency until you are training solidly year round except for occassional planned short regeneration breaks.

Improve your capacity until you have reached your own personal maximum amount that you can do while keeping up the other areas.

Keep you mixture in balance with regular work on all areas.

You won't be able to make big changes to any area very quickly but will have to work on all areas (starting with whatever your weakest is) slowly over time

There are no magic formulas or sessions just keep it Simple and constant and you will see the results

ecoli · 19-06-2011 04:46PM

Clearlier wrote: »

I'm toying with the idea of introducing very short hill sprints with full recovery once a week to see if that makes a difference.

This is something I have found to be very beneficial in early stages of training. This has a number of benefits on top of speed development, including stride efficiency and explosive power.

Many athletes use this during base building phase to maintain speed but there is no reason why you cant use it in marathon training to give the fast twitch fibers in the muscle some stimulus.

The idea with these is 8-10 secs up very steep hill at maximum effort with full recovery (2-3 min)

TFBubendorfer · 20-06-2011 10:34AM

Woddle wrote: »

Here's a link to an excellent read from our own TBF, I'm sure he won't mind and if he does I'm sure he'll let me know
Thanks for sharing.
TBF training with mystery coach

I didn't put my training on the interwebthingy to keep it secret, you know. :rolleyes:
Fitting in with the recent posts here, I spent quite a lot of time running 10 seconds per mile faster than MP. Not quite tempo pace, but it made MP feel easier eventually and I think it was absolutely crucial. My coach was very fond of doing these the day before a long run, which invariably meant I got used to running on very tired legs.

Woddle wrote: »

Given that we're already discussing intervals and tempos, I think we can make that our next topic, so how do you do yours.

Intervals and tempos are 2 different things. And I think that intervals are the least important part of marathon training (I'm Lydiard influenced as well).

heffsarmy · 20-06-2011 11:47AM

Clearlier wrote: »

Aerobic Power Workouts (one per week): 1) 10 x 800 w 1:30 jog @ 110-112% of MP (5:04-5:09/mile)
2) 6 x 1 mile w 2 min jog @ 108-109% of MP (5:12-5:15/mile) 3) 4 x 2 mile w 3 min jog @ 105-106% of MP (5:21-5:24/mile)
4) 3 x 3 mile w 4 min jog @ 103-104% of MP (5:27-5:30/mile)
5) 2 x 4 mile w 4:30 jog @ 102-103% of MP (5:30-5:33/mile)
6) 2 x 5 mile w 5 min jog @ 101-102% of MP (5:33-5:37/mile)
7) 6 mile continuous run @ 104-105% of MP (5:24-5:27/mile)
8) 8 mile progression run @ 100-106% of MP (5:21-5:40/mile)

Aerobic Endurance Workouts (one per week):
1) 18-22 miles steady run @ 90-95% of MP (5:58-6:18/mile)
2) 24-26 miles easy run @ 80-85% of MP (6:40-7:05/mile)
3) 18-22 miles progression run @ 85-100% of MP (5:40-6:40/mile)
4) 12-15 miles simulation run @ 100% of MP (5:40/mile)
5) 20 miles - last 5-10 miles @ 100% of MP (5:40/mile)
6) 20 miles incorporating 10 x 800 @ 103% of MP w 800 jog (5:30/mile)
7) 6-7 miles @ 85% + 6-7 miles @ 100% of MP (workout done AM and PM)

Clearlier thanks for posting these sessions, gonna give some these a go, my target is sub 2.30 saves me getting the calculator out

Clearlier · 20-06-2011 11:03PM

I'd like to give Woddle's question a direct answer but I don't think that I know enough to do that. A couple of observations though:
Tempo runs are important because they make marathon pace easier. They should be included in every plan.
If you're naturally reasonably quick and haven't run much before you don't really need intervals to run 3:30. The odd session to help sustain the fitness improvements that you see about every 6 weeks is as much as I think is necessary for this type of runner.
For somebody who has been running for a few years and progressed down from 4hr+ running they'll probably need to develop their speed so the hill sprints and 10k paced intervals probably need to feature regularly.

The 2:45 and faster runners that I know do intervals regularly and throughout the marathon specific preparation period. I don't know what paces they aim for although I suspect that it varies between 5k and 10k.

TFB - I'm sure that I'm not the first to say this but that was an epic race report. I really enjoyed reading it. Congratulations. From the point of view of this thread though your training report is even more interesting. It's the first time that I've seen a Lydiard style training plan actually implemented and adapted for as specific runner (all the previous stuff I have has been generic). I'll be reading it again and again I suspect. One question for you though is why was the eval workout only 4 miles and why was it done so frequently?

ecoli - I'll bring the hill sprints into my training then substituting in for one of the strides sessions (at least when my calf has recovered). Nice article on the need for balance in training. I think that novice runners may need to take into account their fitness background and put greater emphasis on one area than another (usually endurance), also ala TFB's account would need to be taken of the athletes response to different types of training.

The big difference between ecoli's balanced approach and TFB's plan is the outright periodisation (classic Lydiard) of the latter. That said I've read in two separate interviews Peter Snell saying that the only thing that he would change about Lydiard's training was that he would include intervals on a year round basis once a week (although in one interview he said long easy intervals and in another he said short ones

).

macinalli - Two or at most 3 tough sessions per week with as much easy running as possible is a reasonable rule of thumb. If you're doing intervals I'd make them longer. Even before my club moved to the session I posted earlier the shortest intervals we would have done for marathon training would have been 3mins. We usually did about 30 mins of hard running between 10*3mins and 3*10mins but like I said that results were noticeably better when the move was made to the sessions I detailed earlier in the thread. Perhaps you could persuade whoever you run with through work to alter the sessions. You could mention that they were put together by an Olympian who works professionally as a coach for runners for all standards. In terms of which sessions to do through work - the harder ones. Recovery runs are easy to do on your own and it removes some of the temptation that some people have (usually younger people to be fair) to run them a bit too quickly.

ecoli · 21-06-2011 09:16AM

Clearlier wrote: »

The big difference between ecoli's balanced approach and TFB's plan is the outright periodisation (classic Lydiard) of the latter. That said I've read in two separate interviews Peter Snell saying that the only thing that he would change about Lydiard's training was that he would include intervals on a year round basis once a week (although in one interview he said long easy intervals and in another he said short ones ).

I would agree with TFB regarding periodisation. While the balance of the different training stresses is there i think throughout a season its the emphasis that should change. Regarding hill work would be more inclined to moderate intensity early season to higher as it progresses. Likewise with intervals to be shorter early training program progressing to longer (to suit more marathon specific) un the latter half of a training program.

Personally I think that 20x400 @ 10k pace off short recovery is less taxing than mile reps on the body yet still providing similar stimulus which is why the shorter sessions would be included early in marathon training with sessions such as 6x1 mile @ 10k pace be better in the 8-12 weeks preceeding a marathon

Clearlier wrote: »

Recovery runs are easy to do on your own and it removes some of the temptation that some people have (usually younger people to be fair) to run them a bit too quickly.

I sometimes find it is the opposite and often runners sometimes push it too hard when they are on their own. An alternative approach to this is find someone or a group who normally you wouldnt run with because you feel their pace is slightly (only slightly talking 15-20 secs per mile) and run with them. On your long runs it often best to run too slow than too fast and doing these takes away the temptation (or even the fluke chance) that you may run to fast and hinder your recovery

ecoli · 21-06-2011 09:22AM

Clearlier wrote: »

ecoli - Nice article on the need for balance in training. I think that novice runners may need to take into account their fitness background and put greater emphasis on one area than another (usually endurance),

I agree with you that in novice trained athletes their would be more emphasis on endurance however this can be derived from different forms of training. For these hills might be based on building leg strength and form rather than for boosting aerobic/anaerobic fitness for example.

The different aspects are training are one side of the coin, the other is the distribution of them and this is where training needs to be tailored to the athlete.

Training methods and how to get faster/fitter are the easy part of this sport the thing that makes the sport difficult to train for is getting the blend right to suit their own personal physiological demands

TFBubendorfer · 21-06-2011 12:00PM

Clearlier wrote: »

TFB - I'm sure that I'm not the first to say this but that was an epic race report. I really enjoyed reading it. Congratulations. From the point of view of this thread though your training report is even more interesting. It's the first time that I've seen a Lydiard style training plan actually implemented and adapted for as specific runner (all the previous stuff I have has been generic). I'll be reading it again and again I suspect. One question for you though is why was the eval workout only 4 miles and why was it done so frequently?

First of all, thanks. Second, I think my coach used to know Lydiard personally and either trained under him or trained under one of his 'boys'. Either way, he tended to quote him on a very regular basis.

Last, the 4 mile evaluation sessions were so short because it told him all he needed to know. He wrote two fairly short articles about the evaluations on someone else's blog (part 1 and part 2) and says "I have found that a run of about 25 minutes works very well. The first 10 minutes gives the systems time to stabilize and the next 15 minutes gives a good reading into the fitness of the runner".

The two things he looked out for most were the slowdown between the first and the the later miles, and the time it took for the HR to drop back to 130 while standing still immediately after completing the fourth mile. When I slowed down no more than about 5 seconds and recovered in little more than 30 seconds, we moved on from the aerobic base phase.

My problem right now is that I can do the same evaluation workouts on my own, no problem, but I don't really know how to react and adapt the training when the numbers are not what I expected.

TFBubendorfer · 21-06-2011 12:02PM

Oh, and if you, or anyone else, have questions about that training plan, I'm happy to discuss this either here or via email, no problem.

T runner · 21-06-2011 04:52PM

ecoli wrote: »

Since then I have come to see more benefit with the introduction of 10k paced sessions. The emphasis of these sessions was rhythm running. The idea behind these came from my own coach a sub 2.18 marathon runner. The reps were kept short with short recovery (400s-800s). I have come to favour the ratio of 4:1 in terms of distance: recovery so for every 400m ran 100m jog recovery. The amount of reps was kept high (12-20 depending on the athletes weekly mileage). The advantages to this is reps are short enough that they are not as taxing on the body as longer sustained efforts yet you still get the distance covered to allow the mileage conducive to marathon training. It also allows for these sessions to be conducted without the need for long term recovery which would compromise the rest of the weeks training

I think it was pointed out that the difference between a 3:30 and a 2:45 is that everyone must work for a 2:45.

I managed it last year and i found that a huge benefit of the large mileage was that running economy increased during my base phase and after due to the high volume of running. Base phase was 80-90mpw.

In my base phase i did doubles and triples--- anything to get teh miles in. Some CC races for strenght and threshold improvement too. When i started doing more specific faster runs i found my running style was a lot more efiicient due to the high mileage base phase.

For someone running the lower mileage for a 3:30 marathon these high mileage benefits in efficiency and economy will not be realised.
(unless tahy are talented which means they will be naturally efficient in all liklihood)

Therefore, someone who needs to work on their efficiency will struggle to get their time off medium mileage.

It is these runners especially that need sessions to improve efficiency early in the season.

The 10k short interval sessions above help with rythm and efficiency as well as anaerobic threshold.

After experimenting with 5k pace 400s over the last 4 weeks I am leaning to believing that this is a better bang for buck pace to improve running efficiency for sub elite standards. Im not sure that 10k reps are fast enough for slower runners to gain in efficiency although they would be a nice transition to sustained runs while helping rythm and could be incorporated after the 5ks

For 3:30 runners id suggest doing these sessions closer to 3k pace (4k pace).

so for a 3:30 runner:
8 by 80s at 4k race pace off 1 60s (this should not be a taxings ession if ran at right pace.)

add two per week Building up to 16 by 80s off 60s (last session to be no more tiring than first one)

For a 2:45 runner
12 by 400 at 5k race pace off 60s, building up to 20.

A week in this phase might include a long run and a medium long run.

The medium long run might be run faster accelerating the benefits to efficiency in tandem with the short intervals.

So structure might be:
Base phase, with some fartlek and strides.
A quality phase focusing on improving efficiency while developing the long run and a medium long faster run.

Marathon specific phase.

Taper. Race

The addition of this phase means one of the major benefits (improved efficency aiding economy) of high mileage to marathon performance is not lost to the medium mileage sub elite runner.

My caveat is taht ive never tried a marathon off this. Although with 4 of these sessions (im on 40-50 mpw now, doing 18 by 400 tommorrow) i have managed a PB in a 5k , a moral PB in a very hilly 10k.

I know that if i moved to marathon training now, i would run my long intervals, tempos and faster longer runs significantly faster. Which would allow me to run marathon at a significantly faster pace were i not to have included this phase.

I think the more inefficient a runner is, the more important it is to address it especially off lower mileage.

Im not running a marathon this year BTW so this is just a point for discussion.

macinalli · 21-06-2011 06:02PM

Apologies if this is an obvious question, but does the LSR count as one of the 2-3 tough sessions that should be done each week? Over the last year I've gotten into the routine of doing a 10-12 mile easy paced run most weekends so I don't think that I'd find a 14 mile LSR especially tough... I know this will change as the miles go up, but I don't want to take it too easy at the start!

asimonov · 21-06-2011 08:23PM

Your two sessions + long run make up the week. What worked for me last year was sessions on Tuesday & Friday, Wednesday was medium long (90'), Thursday and Saturday easy and Sunday was either straight long or long with last hour at pace. The intensity of the Sunday run was dialled up or down depending on the severity of the sessions in the week before it. So if it had been a long tempo on friday (80') it would be easy running only on Sunday. However if Friday had been lighter, say 400's at 5k pace then it would be a fast finish long run. I was coached at the time by a 2:09 marathoner.

ecoli · 21-06-2011 08:47PM

macinalli wrote: »

Apologies if this is an obvious question, but does the LSR count as one of the 2-3 tough sessions that should be done each week? Over the last year I've gotten into the routine of doing a 10-12 mile easy paced run most weekends so I don't think that I'd find a 14 mile LSR especially tough... I know this will change as the miles go up, but I don't want to take it too easy at the start!

With my athletes i only count a long run as a session when i have MP segments in the long run (every second week) so on two week basis athletes would have as follows:

Week 1: 2 sessions(usually wed and sat) + LSR
Week 2: 1 session plus LSR w/ MP miles

Gringo78 · 22-06-2011 03:25PM

asimonov wrote: »

Your two sessions + long run make up the week. What worked for me last year was sessions on Tuesday & Friday, Wednesday was medium long (90'), Thursday and Saturday easy and Sunday was either straight long or long with last hour at pace. The intensity of the Sunday run was dialled up or down depending on the severity of the sessions in the week before it. So if it had been a long tempo on friday (80') it would be easy running only on Sunday. However if Friday had been lighter, say 400's at 5k pace then it would be a fast finish long run. I was coached at the time by a 2:09 marathoner.

Would the Wednesday medium long of 90minutes not count as a 'session'? I know its 'easy' but I would count it long enough to take it out of the easy zone?

Which session was 'harder', the tuesday or the friday?

I'm prob going to start into a marathon program soon but due to Work/life committments etc will likely do long run monday evenings after work & session wednesday & friday. I like the look of clearlier's aerobic endurance workouts for mondays & the power workouts for fridays. Wednesdays then would be for some cruise intervals maybe.

ecoli · 24-06-2011 03:12PM

T runner wrote: »

After experimenting with 5k pace 400s over the last 4 weeks I am leaning to believing that this is a better bang for buck pace to improve running efficiency for sub elite standards. Im not sure that 10k reps are fast enough for slower runners to gain in efficiency although they would be a nice transition to sustained runs while helping rythm and could be incorporated after the 5ks

I think here is a case where you must look at the athletes background. You are coming from high mileage base that others wont have come from which is why you are recieve better benefits from this higher intensity work.
Someone without such an aerobic base wont recieve the same benefit as they will put their body under too much stress inhibiting recovery and compromise training more so throughout the week unless they have spent a long time building a high mileage base (as you did with your 80-90 mile weeks). While you can water down the sessions as you have suggested you create the problem that you are sacrificing volume as a result which is important withing marathon training. Again you could add a quality phase but this would drag out a training plan longer as yiou would have to bridge the quality with the Marathon which is why 10k is advised as it becomes a natural progression. The odd 5k session should be done but in general i would stick more to 10k based sessions for the quicker spectrum

VO2 max reps(roughly 5k pace), not only tend to raise maximum oxygen consumption, but they elevate fuel burning rate of sugar (glucose and glycogen) and raise anaerobic capacity. The result is reduced ability to hold a good race-pace after about 90 minutes of running. People who do too many VO2 max reps slow down drastically in the last 10-15km of a marathon race. 5k pace session do have their place in training but during a marathon plan i would not recommend it

T runner wrote: »

My caveat is taht ive never tried a marathon off this. Although with 4 of these sessions (im on 40-50 mpw now, doing 18 by 400 tommorrow) i have managed a PB in a 5k , a moral PB in a very hilly 10k.

Again i think you must balance volume with quality. This worked for you because of your higher mileage background over last few years. I would also suggest you may be a little quicker in a 5k than the pace you are carrying out in sessions and will prob suprise yourself

wideball · 24-06-2011 03:46PM

Hi, very interesting thread. Aiming for sub 3 in Dublin this year myself.

I have a simple question, when talking about 5k or 10k pace regarding pace for various interval distances, are we referring to your best 5/10k time paced splits?

E.g. If best 10k time is 40mins, so if doing 8 x 400 the pace of these runs would be at 4min per km as a rule of thumb?

ecoli · 24-06-2011 03:51PM

wideball wrote: »

Hi, very interesting thread. Aiming for sub 3 in Dublin this year myself.

I have a simple question, when talking about 5k or 10k pace regarding pace for various interval distances, are we referring to your best 5/10k time paced splits?

E.g. If best 10k time is 40mins, so if doing 8 x 400 the pace of these runs would be at 4min per km as a rule of thumb?

Yep that is what is meant by the paces. the only thing I will say is your best to go by current fitness rather than your best. No point in running 4 min kms if you ran that 2 years ago and have done nothing since then. this can be hard if you dont have any recent race results. Some people try to base these sessions on pervieved effort (how hard they feel on scale of 1-10)

ecoli · 27-06-2011 12:34PM

Dont want this thread dying so early so ill push on with the topics

Racing - Should this be encouraged or avoided during marathon plan? If encouraged what sorts of distances should be focused on?

Marthastew · 27-06-2011 02:56PM

ecoli wrote: »

Dont want this thread dying so early so ill push on with the topics

Racing - Should this be encouraged or avoided during marathon plan? If encouraged what sorts of distances should be focused on?

Great question, I'm most definitely not qualified to answer but I look forward to the discussion; I've just decided to increase the amount of races I'm doing in prep for Berlin, (5, 10 mile and halfs), hoping this will help in many ways. What do the experts think?

Boardsies marathon plan by debate

Comments