Random Running Questions

Itziger · 27-06-2014 9:27pm

Clearlier wrote: »

It's Friday now so a little late for you but in case anyone else is reading it wouldn't have been a good idea to do the session on Thursday. You won't get any physiological benefits and you may still be tired from it come Sunday. If you were concerned about leg speed some strides would have been the best option. I'd be looking to leave about 5 days between last session and a race.

I'll report back on Sunday evening (unless things really go tits up). Fact is, I did the little session. It felt ok, even if the 1k reps were too fast - by quite a bit. I've changed the Garmin to miles recently as I've started a JD marathon plan so when I glance down at the pace midway through a rep like that I haven't much of a clue what the pace in mile language means yet. I feel absolutely fine today. Will do a little 20 minute leg loosener tomorrow and give the Half a wallop on Sunday.

Clearlier · 27-06-2014 11:25pm

Itziger wrote: »

I'll report back on Sunday evening (unless things really go tits up). Fact is, I did the little session. It felt ok, even if the 1k reps were too fast - by quite a bit. I've changed the Garmin to miles recently as I've started a JD marathon plan so when I glance down at the pace midway through a rep like that I haven't much of a clue what the pace in mile language means yet. I feel absolutely fine today. Will do a little 20 minute leg loosener tomorrow and give the Half a wallop on Sunday.

Good luck. If it was just a mini-session then you should be well recovered.

T runner · 29-06-2014 9:55am

conavitzky wrote: »

I was just thinking what is the optimum training mileage for distances ranging from 5k-half marathon. I have been training consistently enough for a year now at around 70-80k/week and have started seeing good returns. There is obviously a bunch of folks on here who are doing serious mileage (KC, Stazza, T-runner being examples) I often wondered where is the break point. Where is the point of diminishing returns from the experience of runners on here? At what point should you introduce double days (or treble days-Stazza ya lunatic take a bow!) At what point does the risk of injury outweigh the possible gains to be made? It is obviously different for everyone. Would be interesting to see what it generally is across the spectrum on Boards.
Another question I have is:
Why do/dont do a marathon - what are the pros and cons? (I have been running a few years now and have only run one half last year 1hr 29mins and swore after that I would never run a marathon. Instead concentrating on getting better at 5-10k. I now have this itch to do one and am unsure what to do. I would love to try one but think the mileage would break me leaving me unable to do any running!)

Ill throw my 2 cents in.

From my experience:

High mileage helps greatly with aerobic conditioning For most of us here. That's because this area has huge potential for improvement.

Conditioning puts you in whatever league you're going to be in. The quality stuff decides how high you'll climb in this range.

The build mileage slowly rule is sacrosanct when breaking new ground.
"Build mileage slowly or youll get injured"...true!
Avoid injury like the plague....

The flipside is just as relevant yet often understated:

"If you do build mileage very slowly but very steadily....its the key to reaching higher than you thought possible.

Level of importance:
1 stay injury free for consistant training
2. grow mileage very slowly assuming keeping 1. in mind.

I saw a great improvement with high mileage for a marathon in 2012...I got a glimpse...but I was lucky with injury then I feel.

To build high mileage: after a season....establish a template of training that keeps in touch with all the intensities. Should include core and strength work, stretching. (I do vinyasa yoga for this). Keep a focus on the basics of healthy nutrition. Use recovery drinks to aid with this if necessary.

Forget about mileage completely until you establish this well rounded sustainable training regime.

When its well bedded and comfortable...slowly..slolwly inflate it.

E.g for next years XC season, in order to increase mileage you may have to cut down on the quality, not drop it, just cut it enough to be able to increase mileage.

The slower you increase the mileage the better and fitter youll get.

So within a season you want to reach a sustainable mileage, after which youll be able to slightly up the proportion of quality.

If a starting point was 70k, an increase to 90k would work....
It doesn't sound like much, but 5-6 months of consistant injury free training at a higher level to what youre used to will return massive results.

S0...Whatever youre level or target.

-Establish the well rounded training template that touches all bases.
-slowly...so slowly...blow up the winning balloon
-Before you reach a physical limit, stop the increase and consolidate...now looking to the quality for your event...reducing mileage as necessary.
-next season.....more injury free progress.

You must stop comfortable before this limit for the season. High mileage is only worth it if injury free.

Hadd/Lydiard style of aerobic only is a poor recipe for self coached runners like many of us.

If I had those guys here...id headlock run them in to my physio to answerquestions....

Finnt · 29-06-2014 11:23am

Great post T runner, how do you mean the "Hadd/Lydiard style of aerobic only is a poor recipe for self coached runners like many of us."?

conavitzky · 29-06-2014 12:08pm

Thanks T. Some great nuggets of info there. Im out of action for three weeks with my now yearly achilles problems, so will definitely have to incorporate some strengthening / flexibility work into my program. Cycling on turbo trainer is the substitute for the next three weeks-yipee! (Sarcastic)
I see your training log is quiet. Are you still aiming for frankfurt? No doubt warrior's run is on your agenda.

ultraman1 · 29-06-2014 12:27pm

Finnt wrote: »

How do you get body fat measured?

Stand in front of mirror ...clench and shake....if it wobbles its fat..

ecoli · 29-06-2014 12:44pm

Great post.

With regards to the HADD/Lydiard approach I would say this is more a question of periodization or not. Neither Hadd's nor Lydiards approach could be classified as aerobic only.

In terms of Hadd many people derive most of their information on this based around the base building Phase I stage, this is an aerobic preparatory stage but trust me the Phase II stuff would be more in lines with the high end intensity work normally associated with the likes of Lydiards anaerobic phase. Discussion within this phase contains the likes of strength work and other aspects which you have alluded to but people tend to just focus on the accessible and the actually running aspect (could be said about many training programs to be fair)

I do however agree with you with regards many of us following them, If you look at the backgrounds of the athletes both coaches were dealing with (Lydiard coming off the back of coaches with a heavy interval based background like Igloi and Stampf, while Walsh was coming from US based high school systems of high intensity low mileage) it made sense for them to spend time building their athletes weakness's to prepare them to be able to train.

Most athletes here are returning to the sport after years off and come from low level aerobic training to begin with so the benefits would not be to the same extent as for most you are still ignoring the weaknesses (biomechanics, leg turnover, muscle imbalances etc)

The more long terms approaches can be useful in developing an athlete long term for high level competition but for the majority of us Joe Soaps the benefits of this long term approach come at too much of a cost given we are approaching it from a hobby perspective we want find it very hard to stick at these long term approaches without seeing some sort of rewards along the way.

You approach however is quite a good one and I think alot of people would make big gains from this sort of template.

Itziger · 29-06-2014 1:25pm

Clearlier wrote: »

It's Friday now so a little late for you but in case anyone else is reading it wouldn't have been a good idea to do the session on Thursday. You won't get any physiological benefits and you may still be tired from it come Sunday. If you were concerned about leg speed some strides would have been the best option. I'd be looking to leave about 5 days between last session and a race.

Clearlier, that little speedier session didn't do any harm, any harm at all. 1.22.31 for me which is a 90 second pb. I wouldn't recommend doing the tune up workout that late but as I'd missed the Tuesday and Wednesday and wondered about speed.... If nothing else, it set my mind at ease.

Finnt · 29-06-2014 4:21pm

ultraman1 wrote: »

Stand in front of mirror ...clench and shake....if it wobbles its fat..

Wouldn't chance it, the jingling might be hypnotic!

paddybarry · 30-06-2014 7:16pm

Question on hill repeats
How many should one do in a session, and ideally what distance should the hill be?

I have never done these, but feel they may help my endurance for shorter distances.

Recent races would be 17.50 for Parkrun and 29.36 for Terenure 5 mile.
Thanks.

RayCun · 30-06-2014 7:52pm

There are different kinds of hill repeats. You can do very short repeats with longer recoveries, eg 20 seconds up, 40 down, or two minutes up and one minute jog back down - you'll need a long hill for that one

statss · 03-07-2014 9:37am

Gels for a half marathon - are they really needed? Have taken 1 at the start line and 1 at half way in the past, but not sure if they are actually required if your running for less than two hours?

Krusty_Clown · 03-07-2014 9:58am

I could never understand why anyone would take a gel before a race. I know the gel manufacturers recommend it (they would, wouldn't they?!), but given that they are advertised as a convenient mechanism for replacing lost energy, and before a race you won't have lost significant amounts of energy (or need the convenience) taking one just seems wasteful (and could potentially upset the stomach). I generally carry a single gel for a half marathon and take it at the 10 mile mark. I'm not convinced that they provide any significant benefit but haven't had an opportunity where I've been willing to put the placebo effect to the test. They do seem to give me a boost for the final miles, but I suspect that it's all in my head.

And yes, I realize that taking one at the 10 mile mark means that I probably won't realize the benefits until around 5 minutes after my race is finished, but at least it means I have a nice cool-down.

TFBubendorfer · 03-07-2014 11:49am

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

And yes, I realize that taking one at the 10 mile mark means that I probably won't realize the benefits until around 5 minutes after my race is finished, but at least it means I have a nice cool-down.

I do the same, and in fact I take a gel at mile 7 of a 10-mile race.

Likewise, I realise that the energy boost is probably non-existent, but it does give me a psychological boost which is just as good in my view.

Krusty_Clown · 03-07-2014 11:57am

So... Is an outdoor running track completely flat? Or is it sloped on the bends or straights? Visited a track (a proper one, not a cinder track) and it seemed to be slightly sloping outwards, but I suspect it was an optical illusion.

RayCun · 03-07-2014 12:10pm

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

So... Is an outdoor running track completely flat? Or is it sloped on the bends or straights? Visited a track (a proper one, not a cinder track) and it seemed to be slightly sloping outwards, but I suspect it was an optical illusion.

http://www.iaaf.org/download/download?filename=77c027b0-46b8-405d-9ffd-889fa28e3f6e.pdf&urlslug=IAAF%20Track%20and%20Field%20Facilities%20Manual%202008%20Edition%20-%20Chapters%201-3

The kerb of the 400m Standard Track must be laid horizontally throughout. The
lateral inclination of the track shall not exceed 1.0% inwards and the overall inclinationin the running direction shall not exceed 0.1% downwards. It is recommended that the design lateral inclination be slightly less than 1% to ensure that, because of construction inaccuracies, the 1% inclination is not exceeded. Local variations in inclinations are permitted on parts of the track.

menoscemo · 03-07-2014 12:20pm

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

I could never understand why anyone would take a gel before a race. I know the gel manufacturers recommend it (they would, wouldn't they?!), but given that they are advertised as a convenient mechanism for replacing lost energy,

I would take one on the startline of a marathon, literally pop it as I start moving. My thinking is that I am getting in 'free energy'. I know gels are quick release energy but I doubt it would be in your system immediately. Therefore say at the 1 mile mark I have burned 100kcal running but now have another 100kcal in my system to replace that glycogen lost in running the first mile...My thinking might be totally flawed but there you go.

For a Half marathon I have never taken a gel and don't think I ever will. You've got more than enough stored energy in the body to last 13 miles. Besides at Half Marathon intensity I don't think my stomach would handle a gel too well.

Krusty_Clown · 03-07-2014 12:20pm

RayCun wrote: »

http://www.iaaf.org/download/download?filename=77c027b0-46b8-405d-9ffd-889fa28e3f6e.pdf&urlslug=IAAF%20Track%20and%20Field%20Facilities%20Manual%202008%20Edition%20-%20Chapters%201-3

So.... That's a 'yes' then?

Krusty_Clown · 03-07-2014 12:24pm

menoscemo wrote: »

For a Half marathon I have never taken a gel and don't think I ever will. You've got more than enough stored energy in the body to last 13 miles. Besides at Half Marathon intensity I don't think my stomach would handle a gel too well.

Shouldn't you be fine for the first 13 miles of your marathon then? Seems like flawed logic. It sounds like you're trying to pre-top-up your carb levels before you lose them, but isn't that what carb-loading is all about? And by carb-loading, I mean maintaining the same level of carb consumption, while reducing the level of activity.

RayCun · 03-07-2014 12:25pm

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

So.... That's a 'yes' then?

If the track has been constructed to IAAF specifications then it should be completely flat, no slope out on bends or straights, that's my understanding of the doc.

Krusty_Clown · 03-07-2014 12:36pm

... But it's within the IAAF specifications to have a slope of up to 1%, so it's possible.. Was just googling, and came upon this monstrosity. Would love to see a 400m race on it, where four lanes merge into two.

Clearlier · 03-07-2014 12:40pm

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

Shouldn't you be fine for the first 13 miles of your marathon then? Seems like flawed logic. It sounds like you're trying to pre-top-up your carb levels before you lose them, but isn't that what carb-loading is all about? And by carb-loading, I mean maintaining the same level of carb consumption, while reducing the level of activity.

I think that the answer would be that if your ability to absorb carbs is exceeded by the rate at which you use them then you should start absorbing them as soon as you possibly can. Of course, the ability to use and absorb carbs are affected by multiple factors.

If you can store about two hours worth of carbs in your body then those near the pointy end of a race will need to take on relatively little and can easily wait a few miles before taking anything. If you're going to be out there for 4 or 5 hours though you're going to need to take on a lot more and so you should probably start taking some on as soon as you can given that you absorb less than you spend.

menoscemo · 03-07-2014 12:43pm

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

Shouldn't you be fine for the first 13 miles of your marathon then? Seems like flawed logic. It sounds like you're trying to pre-top-up your carb levels before you lose them, but isn't that what carb-loading is all about? And by carb-loading, I mean maintaining the same level of carb consumption, while reducing the level of activity.

No my logic is that it's not the same at all.
'Topping up' carb levels as you use them is not necessary in a half Marathon because I won't be 'empty' at the end. Therefore I can top the levels back up after the race.
If I consume several gels in the first half of a marathon by the time I get to halfway my gas tank is still almost full therefore I have plenty of gas already to get me to the end and won't need to take anymore in the second half. If I hadn't taken any gels in the first half, my tank would already be almost empty and in urgent use of fuel (exaggerating here for effect). Given that my stomach is more likely to protest in the second half, I prefer to take on energy in the first half of a marathon.

RayCun · 03-07-2014 12:45pm

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

... But it's within the IAAF specifications to have a slope of up to 1%, so it's possible.. Was just googling, and came upon this monstrosity. Would love to see a 400m race on it, where four lanes merge into two.

that's fantastic! :pac:
what are those dirt areas in the middle?

Krusty_Clown · 03-07-2014 12:54pm

menoscemo wrote: »

Given that my stomach is more likely to protest in the second half, I prefer to take on energy in the first half of a marathon.

That's a personal preference though - It's not advice. The thing is, before the start of a marathon, you wont have used any calories, so you're just topping up an already full system. Like trying to overfill a car with petrol, there's a risk that some might spill out.

menoscemo · 03-07-2014 1:02pm

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

That's a personal preference though - It's not advice. The thing is, before the start of a marathon, you wont have used any calories, so you're just topping up an already full system. Like trying to overfill a car with petrol, there's a risk that some might spill out.

As I said, I wouldn't take them before the race, just once I start moving. Maybe the energy required to move that first mile is taken directly from the first gel, not from my 'Tank' of Glycogen. So there is no risk of overflowing.

Yes it is my personal preference to take them in the first half. At 20 miles the last think my stomach wants is a gel. My point is (my opinion) it doesn't matter when you take them. Energy is energy. Most people find it more dfficult to take them bnear the end of a race, so why not take them nearer the start?

Still to go back to the original question, unless you had no breakfast or skipped dinner the night before (i.e. you are carrying a half empty tank) then gels are not necessary in a half IMO.

jebuz · 03-07-2014 1:20pm

menoscemo wrote: »

it doesn't matter when you take them. Energy is energy

I'm not so sure about that. Energy gels aren't a one-to-one replacement. The glycogen must first be digested, make its way through the intestinal wall and then be absorbed by the muscles, this process takes time. However that 'perk' you feel shortly after ingesting is probably more of a mental awakening as the glucose in your liver is used directly by the brain. Taking a gel 5 miles before the end of a marathon does little physiologically for your legs but can give you that mental push you desperately need to get you over that line.

Of course the gel companies won't mention any of this, they want you to take gels before, every 20-30 mins during, in the shower afterwards, the next morning...etc :pac:

Itziger · 03-07-2014 1:48pm

statss wrote: »

Gels for a half marathon - are they really needed? Have taken 1 at the start line and 1 at half way in the past, but not sure if they are actually required if your running for less than two hours?

I guess they might be handy if you're very slow - I'm not trying to be funny here- as then you're out running for a lot longer than the speedsters. (Work colleague took a couple the other day in his second half and though he barely missed his 2 hour goal, he said he needed it/them and would take again.)

In my last two Half M's I did the following: 1 Gel Before =1.24* and Nothing=1.22.3x. That certainly suggests the gel ain't doing much for me in the Half.

As for the 'mental boost' idea, I can see how that might work alright so wouldn't categorically count them out.

* Just remembered I also took a swig or two of flat coke at km 16, just before the uphill section.

davedanon · 03-07-2014 2:04pm

RayCun wrote: »

that's fantastic! :pac:
what are those dirt areas in the middle?

Monster truck racing?

Laois_Man · 06-07-2014 2:14pm

Serious question - but I'm genuinely curious

Do people find that doing "THE DEED" within a certain timeframe before a race or hard session adversely affects performance levels??

davedanon · 06-07-2014 2:28pm

Personally I wouldn't be too worried about it affecting things, although if it was the night before a marathon I might tell the other half to get lost if the subject, er, came up. Now, and at the risk of upsetting our more sensitive posters, an all-night romp with a couple of blonde twins would be a completely different matter. But who would care about a stupid race in that situation anyway?

ultraman1 · 06-07-2014 3:22pm

davedanon wrote: »

Personally I wouldn't be too worried about it affecting things, although if it was the night before a marathon I might tell the other half to get lost if the subject, er, came up. Now, and at the risk of upsetting our more sensitive posters, an all-night romp with a couple of blonde twins would be a completely different matter. But who would care about a stupid race in that situation anyway?

Take it Wen u can get it....

Ososlo · 06-07-2014 3:27pm

Laois_Man wrote: »

Serious question - but I'm genuinely curious

Do people find that doing "THE DEED" within a certain timeframe before a race or hard session adversely affects performance levels??

We'll be discussing this in detail over on the Novices' forum in a few weeks:D but here's something to keep you going:

'Sex? I'll bet I've got your attention now. Should you or shouldn't you the night before? Will it drain away strength needed for the race? The fear of sex is deeply rooted in athletic tradition. Ancient Greek athletes were prohibited from engaging in sex and many modern athletes from around the world have been discouraged to enjoy sex the night before games. But "the ol' professor, " New York Yankee manager Casey Stengel, summed it up best: "It ain't the sex that wrecks these guys, it's staying up all night looking for it." Want a note from your doctor? The American Medical Association states, "Sexual relations the night before competition do not hinder athlete performance provided that sex is a regular part of the athlete's life." Some researchers even believe sex the night before a race may be advised since it promotes relaxation."
The Competitive Runner's Handbook
Glover & Glover

barryoneill50 · 06-07-2014 6:51pm

Ososlo wrote: »

We'll be discussing this in detail over on the Novices' forum in a few weeks:D but here's something to keep you going:

'Sex? I'll bet I've got your attention now. Should you or shouldn't you the night before? Will it drain away strength needed for the race? The fear of sex is deeply rooted in athletic tradition. Ancient Greek athletes were prohibited from engaging in sex and many modern athletes from around the world have been discouraged to enjoy sex the night before games. But "the ol' professor, " New York Yankee manager Casey Stengel, summed it up best: "It ain't the sex that wrecks these guys, it's staying up all night looking for it." Want a note from your doctor? The American Medical Association states, "Sexual relations the night before competition do not hinder athlete performance provided that sex is a regular part of the athlete's life." Some researchers even believe sex the night before a race may be advised since it promotes relaxation."
The Competitive Runner's Handbook
Glover & Glover

I'll be printing this so....

Ososlo · 17-07-2014 11:59am

Are runners more obsessed about their sport than people you know who participate in other sports? Personally I think they are. Maybe golfers come close? But do they have to do it every day like most runners do? Around these parts anyhow!

RayCun · 17-07-2014 12:00pm

Ososlo wrote: »

Are runners more obsessed about dedicated to their sport than people you know who participate in other sports?

yes, of course:)

Billy Mills · 17-07-2014 12:08pm

Ososlo wrote: »

Are runners more obsessed about their sport than people you know who participate in other sports? Personally I think they are. Maybe golfers come close? But do they have to do it every day like most runners do? Around these parts anyhow!

Running tends to attract complete mentalers/ freaks/ ocd heads/ misfits/ socially awkward weirdoes ect etc. This forum would be an excellent example of that phenomenon.

ecoli · 17-07-2014 12:11pm

Ososlo wrote: »

Are runners more obsessed about their sport than people you know who participate in other sports? Personally I think they are. Maybe golfers come close? But do they have to do it every day like most runners do? Around these parts anyhow!

I would say yes. Look at the average "hobby jogger" (mean this as in anyone who doesn't do it for a living) they become amateur -

- Coaches (we all question why we do things)

- Nutritionists (we all aim to improve diet to increase performance)

- Physio's (Injuries are part and parcel of it, even before I studied it I could tell you about ITB Syndrome, Pelvic Tilt, Stress fractures, posterior tibialis syndrome and many more just from experience)

- Personal Trainers (how many of us research exercises to fix imbalances)

- Biomechanist (how many look at their form?)

- Scientist (what other sport could you talk about aerobic and anaerobic energy pathways and people have a general idea what you are on about)

Ososlo · 17-07-2014 12:13pm

Billy Mills wrote: »

Running tends to attract complete mentalers/ freaks/ ocd heads/ misfits/ socially awkward weirdoes ect etc. This forum would be an excellent example of that phenomenon.

Ha ha I think you might have a point there Billy! most I've met would fit into one of said categories;)
If the average man thinks about sex 19 times a day, then how many times a day does the average boards runner think about running? 100s I'd imagine!

ecoli · 17-07-2014 12:19pm

Ososlo wrote: »

Ha ha I think you might have a point there Billy! most I've met would fit into one of said categories;)
If the average man thinks about sex 19 times a day, then how many times a day does the average boards runner think about running? 100s I'd imagine!

Perfectly fine as long as you are working in the right HR zones for the prescribed training for that day

T runner · 17-07-2014 2:30pm

Ososlo wrote: »

Are runners more obsessed about their sport than people you know who participate in other sports? Personally I think they are. Maybe golfers come close? But do they have to do it every day like most runners do? Around these parts anyhow!

I guess in some cases (not all) runners can act addictively/obsessively because of the release of endorphins, the feel good factor etc with distance running. The more they need that drug-the more obsessive the behaviour can be.

AuldManKing · 17-07-2014 2:53pm

Billy Mills wrote: »

Running tends to attract complete mentalers/ freaks/ ocd heads/ misfits/ socially awkward weirdoes ect etc. .

How is Dr Q anyway??

statss · 17-07-2014 3:05pm

Ososlo wrote: »

Ha ha I think you might have a point there Billy! most I've met would fit into one of said categories;)
If the average man thinks about sex 19 times a day, then how many times a day does the average boards runner think about running? 100s I'd imagine!

has to be a typo - surely an hour???

ecoli · 17-07-2014 3:17pm

statss wrote: »

has to be a typo - surely an hour???

Ososlo wrote: »

Ha ha I think you might have a point there Billy! most I've met would fit into one of said categories;)
If the average man admits to thinking about sex 19 times a day, then how many times a day does the average boards runner think about running? 100s I'd imagine!

FYP

rom · 17-07-2014 11:13pm

Ososlo wrote: »

Are runners more obsessed about their sport than people you know who participate in other sports? Personally I think they are. Maybe golfers come close? But do they have to do it every day like most runners do? Around these parts anyhow!

People who compete at individual sport are more obsessed than people in team sports I would think. You can't be carried if you have a bad day. Any sport where people train months for an event like boxing, muay thai etc rather than the weekly match/game is going to make anyone more obsessed.

cianc · 17-07-2014 11:17pm

Billy Mills wrote: »

Running tends to attract complete mentalers/ freaks/ ocd heads/ misfits/ socially awkward weirdoes ect etc. This forum would be an excellent example of that phenomenon.

Stop it, you're making me blush.

rainbow kirby · 18-07-2014 12:02am

Ososlo wrote: »

Are runners more obsessed about their sport than people you know who participate in other sports? Personally I think they are. Maybe golfers come close? But do they have to do it every day like most runners do? Around these parts anyhow!

Triathletes are worse, particularly due to the number of type A personalities with a huge M-dot hardon.

HelenAnne · 18-07-2014 2:44pm

I have a question about training paces – and I’m just wondering, I’m not querying the wisdom of Hal Higdon etc: if you’re training for a marathon, on the boards plan or the Hal Higdon plan, it seems like the fastest pace you’re ever advised to train is your planned marathon pace. But just say a marathon is just one event in your year, and you’ll be racing 2 miles / 10k / half marathon etc as well, surely you have to run some runs faster than marathon pace?
What would feel like an easy pace for me for 6-8 miles wouldn’t be my easy pace for 18 miles, so it seems natural to run at different paces depending on the distance you plan to cover, but this doesn’t seem to be advised by beginner marathon plans. Or am I misunderstanding?
(This is actually just a general query that I’ve been wondering about for a while, I’m not doing a marathon this year, but when I do sign up for another I’ll be using a fairly beginner-y plan).

HelenAnne · 18-07-2014 2:55pm

Ososlo wrote: »

I'm 8 stone 9 pounds. If I lost 10 pounds to a stone would it help my 5k time? All the elite runners both male and female are skin and bone. Does it only make a significant difference if you're at the top the field and chasing seconds off your time as opposed to minutes? 5 foot 6. I do eat a fair bit but it's 80% healthy but I guess I could cut out a handful of seeds here and there

I'd be similar-ish in size, and I've wondered about this too. I always think I probably would be faster if I was lighter. If lighter shoes make a difference, surely less body fat to carry does too? But I think we're both probably a healthy weight, and like you I'd really have to watch what I ate to lose a good bit of weight, which I don't enjoy doing.

I could cut down on biscuits though

.

ETA Racing Weight suggests a racing weight of 114lb for me (5'4") which is a few pounds lighter than I am. Maybe that should be my aim ...

walshb · 18-07-2014 3:26pm

I think a few posts relate to weight. There is no perfect weight really. One could get to a really low weight in a belief that this will help them, but there is a chance that in getting to the weight that they lose strength and muscle, which could prove weakening and detrimental. For a female of average size I would think an ideal weight would be 115-120 lbs. For a male of average size I would think 135-145 lbs would be ideal for 5 k.

Random Running Questions

Comments