posted Apr-10-2006 06:14 PM            

I am leaning to doing 6 or 8 440s at 5K pace. This shouldnt hurt much and should get the blood moving...

IP: Logged

posted Apr-11-2006 10:39 AM               

Here are my stats:

37.5 male, 5' 8", 154 lbs

I've run since age 14, but only seriously trained for two years. I've run two marathons and I'm training for a third (Baltimore). While I'm training for it, I'm also working on speedwork and seeing what I can do at the 10K distance.

5K pr = 21:05
10K pr = 45:35

These PRs were set last Saturday in the first 10K I've ever run.

1/2 marathon pr = 1:44:20
Marathon pr = 3:45:10

I was running 35-40 miles per week up until almost two weeks ago, but I slightly injured myself and I wanted to rest before the race. Running the 10K aggravated the injury, so I'm also taking this week off.

Pace for long runs varies from 7:50-8:30 mpm. Pace at all other distances varies from 7:30-8:00 mpm, depending on how I feel and what I did the day before.

I've been doing speedwork once a week since January, including four to eight repeats on a 400 meter hill, four to eight 400 meter intervals, four to eight 800 meter repearts, three to four mile tempo runs, and four mile fartlek runs. T

he best times I recorded during a speedworkout was two weeks ago, when I did six 400 meter intervals at an average pace of 1:37, three 800 meter intervals at an average pace of 3:21, and a mile at a 6:36 pace.

My goal for my first 10K (last Saturday) was 42 minutes, and at the half-way point of the race, I believed I was going to make that goal because my time was 21:05. It wasn't to be, because between 3.5-4.5 miles, my legs turned to mush and it was everything I could do to keep running. I managed to pick the pace back up, but I really lost time during that mile.

The only thing I can pinpoint as possibly being the problem (aside from an unrealistic goal) is that I only got 3 hours of sleep before the race. I can't believe this explains why I had a meltdown towards the end of the race because I felt fine, and besides, I've done plenty of long runs and speedworkouts with four hours of sleep of less.

Please share your experiences or thoughts about running a race when you haven't gotten enough sleep? Did the lack of sleep affect your performance?

Other that question, I look forwward to reading about everyone's progress.

Michael

[This message has been edited by michaell68 (edited Apr-11-2006).]

IP: Logged

posted Apr-11-2006 02:35 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by michaell68:
I'm a late comer here, so I hope it's ok to jump in. This is a very cool thread.

Here are my stats:

37.5 male, 5' 8", 154 lbs

I've run since age 14, but only seriously trained for two years. I've run two marathons and I'm training for a third (Baltimore). While I'm training for it, I'm also working on speedwork and seeing what I can do at the 10K distance.

5K pr = 21:05
10K pr = 45:35

These PRs were set last Saturday in the first 10K I've ever run.

1/2 marathon pr = 1:44:20
Marathon pr = 3:45:10

[This message has been edited by michaell68 (edited Apr-11-2006).]

---

Hi Michael,

Before I go our on a limb and offer advice let me ask you a question. Are all your PR fairly recent or did you have about the same fitness level for each of them?

Here are your VDOTs for your PR's.

5k 47
10k 45
1/2 43
Mar 41

As you can see, your VDOT goes down as the distance gets longer. This would point to a lack of aerobic fitness if the races were run while you were at similar fitness levels.

http://www.coacheseducation.com/endur/jack-daniels-nov-00.htm

[This message has been edited by bigdave10000 (edited Apr-11-2006).]

IP: Logged

posted Apr-11-2006 06:03 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by dholm:
I am leaning to doing 6 or 8 440s at 5K pace. This shouldnt hurt much and should get the blood moving...

---

6 of them might not hurt but I wouldn't do it if I was serious about the race--8 could definitely take something out of you. I'm not sure that a lot of goal pace training is necessary, period. You can get very fit by keeping your workouts a little slower than that and improve turnover by doing strides regularly.

IP: Logged

posted Apr-11-2006 09:13 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigdave10000:
Hi Michael,

Before I go our on a limb and offer advice let me ask you a question. Are all your PR fairly recent or did you have about the same fitness level for each of them?

Here are your VDOTs for your PR's.

5k 47
10k 45
1/2 43
Mar 41

As you can see, your VDOT goes down as the distance gets longer. This would point to a lack of aerobic fitness if the races were run while you were at similar fitness levels.

---

The 5K and 10k PRs were set last Saturday. The 1/2 and full marathon PRs were set in November. I'd have to say that I was more aerobically fit in November, as I had been doing 45-50 miles per week and long runs ranging from 16-22 miles for a few months. Between January and last week, my mileage ranged from 30-35 MPW, with most long runs being 12-15 miles.

BTW, I have to admit that I haven't been very faithful to the doctrine of long, slow runs to build up aerobic capacities. I know I should be running my long runs slower than my shorter runs, but I rarely do it.

Michael

[This message has been edited by michaell68 (edited Apr-11-2006).]

IP: Logged

posted Apr-11-2006 09:58 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jim24315:
6 of them might not hurt but I wouldn't do it if I was serious about the race--8 could definitely take something out of you. I'm not sure that a lot of goal pace training is necessary, period. You can get very fit by keeping your workouts a little slower than that and improve turnover by doing strides regularly.

---

Maybe a silly question, but how exactly would you define strides and how do you incorporate them into your general training routine? Cheers -- Nick.

IP: Logged

posted Apr-12-2006 06:52 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by sparkage:
Maybe a silly question, but how exactly would you define strides and how do you incorporate them into your general training routine? Cheers -- Nick.

---

Uhhh, strides? Well they are strides. Not a silly question at all. I had to think about how I would describe them. I know what they are to me but it would be interesting to hear some other definitions. I think of them as accelerations of about 100 meters where I try to gradually build up speed to where I'm going smooth and fast by about the half way point without forcing it. They are not really sprints, but accelerations. I'm currently doing them at estimated 5k pace but you can do them a little faster. I think the key is not to force it--to practice running faster while staying smooth and relaxed. A jog of about the same distance of the stride between each one sounds about right.

I looked back at your training on the first page and see that you are running a solid, but similar pace on most of your runs. Striders would probably help you a lot. As far as incorporating them there are a million ways. A couple are to include them into a couple of your easy runs or to run them at the end. Anywhere from 4-12 reps is a normal range, with 8-10 about average. Another common way to do them is jog the turns and stride the straights on a track.

Its impressive that you ran so well off of that training. It appears to me that you are probably going to run quite a bit faster yet before you are finished. There's so much you can do, but just for starters a tempo run each week and striders should bump you up another notch.

Good Luck and congratulations again on smashing the 40 barrier.

IP: Logged

posted Apr-12-2006 08:32 AM               

I don't do enough strides, myself. But I do more than I used to. I do 4-5, for example, after a 3-4 mile warmup jog and before a tempo run. The key, I've found, is to warm slowly into them. Let's say that my 5K race pace is 6:20 and my half marathon pace is 7:00. (As they are, pretty much.) I'm going to run my first stride of the day no faster than HM pace. The second, with the same effort, is going to come in close to 10K pace. The third, same effort, will smoothly approach 5K pace. At that point, on my fourth, I can smoothly--and the operative word is "smoothly"--accelerate to 6:00 pace and below. That's where I want to be running my strides, given my race paces--sub-6:00--but if I started there, on the very first one, I'd almost certainly feel clunky.

The whole point of strides is to consolidate your stride. They should leave you feeling completely in control at whatever pace you run them. Over time, if you do them several times a week, you can begin to test your limits. Given my race paces, for example, my one-mile race pace is something like 5:40-5:45. I don't need to run strides any faster than that, in order to run 5Ks at 6:10-6:20 pace. But if I plan on racing at 6:00 and below, I'm going to need to be able to accelerate smoothly to 5:30 and below. So over time, I'll want to work my strides down into that territory--down to 5:15 pace, perhaps, which is where my fastest 30 second stride took me the other day, if you trust my Garmin.

I run strides of up to 30 second, BTW. They're supposed to be alactic--no oxygen debt incurred--and it's hard to run fast much beyond 30 seconds, I've found, wiithout doing that.

IP: Logged

posted Apr-12-2006 10:38 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigdave10000:
Hi Michael,

Here are your VDOTs for your PR's.

5k 47
10k 45
1/2 43
Mar 41

http://www.coacheseducation.com/endur/jack-daniels-nov-00.htm

---

Hey, I have a question. I was looking and my 10k PR put me at a VDOT of 53. Then I look in Table 2 and it says my training paces should be 7:33 for easy running and 6:56 for long runs.

I have to be reading this wrong. Should I really be training at these paces? I have been trying to increase my easy run intensity this spring (from 8:00/mile to around 7:40/mile). I just plug my times into McMillian and use those as a guide.

Thanks for any reponses.

------------------

• My User Profile
  
• Running Log

IP: Logged

posted Apr-12-2006 11:01 AM            

http://www.svtriclub.org/run.htm

For your 39:36 10k, your VDOT is 52.56, which gives:

7:54 E-pace, 6:59 M-pace, 6:34 T-pace, 6:03 I-pace and 5:34 R-pace.

Basically, your easy runs should be around 7:54. It doesn't have to be exactly 7:54, it can be slower or slightly faster. However, I would err on the slow side.

I like the above site, since it gives you 400m times to match your mile split. Helpful on track repeats.

Depending on what you are ultimately training for will determine how much of M,T,I and R-pace runs you will do. For HM/Mar training you basically do E,M and T. For 5k,10k, you do E,T,I and R.

quote:

---

Originally posted by baggio16:
Hey, I have a question. I was looking and my 10k PR put me at a VDOT of 53. Then I look in Table 2 and it says my training paces should be 7:33 for easy running and 6:56 for long runs.

I have to be reading this wrong. Should I really be training at these paces? I have been trying to increase my easy run intensity this spring (from 8:00/mile to around 7:40/mile). I just plug my times into McMillian and use those as a guide.

Thanks for any reponses.

---

IP: Logged

posted Apr-12-2006 11:39 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by baggio16:
Hey, I have a question. I was looking and my 10k PR put me at a VDOT of 53. Then I look in Table 2 and it says my training paces should be 7:33 for easy running and 6:56 for long runs.

I have to be reading this wrong. Should I really be training at these paces? I have been trying to increase my easy run intensity this spring (from 8:00/mile to around 7:40/mile). I just plug my times into McMillian and use those as a guide.

Thanks for any reponses.

---

Right now I am base building. I am just running Easy everyday and letting the pace find itself. I know that if I was running less miles my easy pace would be faster. The last 4 weeks my pace has averaged 8:22. I am about a 52 VDOT now based on the 5K last weekend.

Daniels' new version of "Running Formula" slows down the Easy pace by about 15 seconds.

Mcmillian would put me at 7:41-8:41 for my long run range. I usually start my long runs about 8:45 and finish the last third in the 8:00-8:15 range.

IP: Logged

posted Apr-12-2006 05:10 PM               

Think about this.

This past Saturday morning I ran a 19:30 5K on well-rested legs. That's a VDOT value of around 51. What Daniels chart describes as "easy pace" and "T pace" and "marathon pace" are paces that I could have run on that morning at those respective effort levels as measured by % of HR max and subjective effort.

But if I haven't taken three short/easy recovery days--as I did before that race--I'm not running on the same legs. So I can't possibly expect the pace that Daniels calls "easy" to feel easy. Nor can I expect to go out and run 7:09s and be working at marathon pace effort. 7:09s! On "normal" workout legs, that's a pretty fast pace for me. 7:30s are more like marathon pace, in terms of effort. Similarly, my T-pace is close to 7:00 or a hair slower, not Daniels's 6:44s, and my easy pace is more like 8:20s, not the 8:07s he prescribes. Sometimes my easy pace is 8:45s. My recovery pace varies from 9:10s (on a really good day) to 10:00. Still, I can run a 5K at under 6:20 pace. I'm able to do this in part because I don't try to adhere to preestablished pace parameters, but truly let the run come to me, after making an initial determination about what sort of day (shorter/slower, medium/harder, long/progression, etc.) it's going to be. Since I've been wearing a HR monitor for the past three months, I'd gotten a very good idea of how HR and perceived effort correlate with pace. Sometimes, near the end of 15-mile long runs, 7:52's are T-pace for me. I'm talking 89% of HR max. That's ONE FULL MINUTE slower than Daniels says my T-pace should be. But of course I'm doing that on tired legs. I don't worry about what JDs charts say. I know I'm training correctly. And my race results--including last Saturday's PR--bear me out.

JD is a great man, but I suspect that his tables of suggested workout paces have hurt people as well as helped people, by creating falsely optimistic workout paces that runners try and adhere to.

Note added: I think Daniels's charts are more useful when you're talking about appropriate paces for VO2max and repetition work, and for giving you a GENERAL sense of what sort of race times at other distances you should be able to achieve based on a race time at a given distance. Still, I don't buy for a minute that my 19:30 5K means I can run a marathon at 3:07, even with adequate training. McMillan has me 3-4 minutes slower. That feels more right to me.

[This message has been edited by KudzuRunner (edited Apr-12-2006).]

[This message has been edited by KudzuRunner (edited Apr-12-2006).]

IP: Logged

posted Apr-12-2006 05:14 PM               

I did the "Satan and Adam" search. Wow.

I've never went out and bought that kind of music but there were some local people in the clubs that I used to go out of my way to see.You gotta be there live for the blues.

Never would have guessed just based on posts.

edited to add:

Regarding "You gotta be there live for the blues" ...making an exception here. Just bought "Living on the River" at Amazon.

[This message has been edited by Jim24315 (edited Apr-12-2006).]

IP: Logged

posted Apr-12-2006 05:17 PM               

It's all about the groove.

IP: Logged

posted Apr-12-2006 08:23 PM            

I am currently in 6:24 LTV (1hr on 15k) and 1:27 HM shape, but my easy pace varies from 8:30 to 9 mpm and my recovery pace may be as slow as 10 mpm.

Bill

IP: Logged

posted Apr-12-2006 10:14 PM            

Having read, absorbed and implemented your advice today strides have been re-introduced to my training repertoire, and, indeed, felt much more comfortable with the emphasis on control than they have in the past.

IP: Logged

posted Apr-13-2006 09:05 AM            

I also think the VDOT tables predict unrealistic times for longer races unless you're in really, really great shape -- I'm pretty sure they were developed by observations of top runners only and then extrapolated down to the masses. Even the Portugese Tables, which the IAAF uses for its World Rankings, predict slower times than Daniels' tables do. A table in the back of "Bill Rodgers' Lifetime Running Plan", which was generated by data from the NYRRC, is a lot more generous.

As far as strides go, the scientific jargon is "anaerobic alactic". Neither aerobic in nature nor long enough to cause lactic acid buildup. Give yourself plenty of rest between strides; some people do them at the end of a run and stand or walk between strides, while others do them as part of their run with several minutes of easy running in between. When runners think of "speed work", they think of repetitions / intervals which are actually "speed endurance" work. Endurance should not be a part of the equation when you're doing strides. For real long-distance types, or people whose 20s are well behind them, 5k pace is about as fast as we'll be running with any regularity. High school or collegiate runners might want to run theirs as fast as 400 pace. The intention is to not only give your muscles a chance to develop the strength and flexibility they need for faster running, but to stimulate your motor neurons to learn the skill of fast running.

IP: Logged

posted Apr-13-2006 09:59 AM               

Come to think of it though, I dont pay attention to my pace on Easy days. I just go by feel. Normally its around 8:30 at the start and around 8:00 or faster at the finish. I haven't been hell bent on staying with prescribed E--I just strive to keep it comfy, even if it means running slower. However, I do hit the T, I, and M workouts on the number.

**Strides** good comments above. My 2 cents: When I learned, I liked using a football field with the yard markers to help out. 30yds easy, 30 yds faster, 30 yds almost all out, 30 yds slow to a stop. Also, routine stride sessions give me feedback on any dings or soreness. The full range of motion with strides normally workout any weakness in form. I totally recommend 1-2 sets of 4-8x per week! Its only an investment of 5-10 minutes after a run.

------------------
My Profile
Run log

IP: Logged

posted Apr-13-2006 10:02 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by cowardlylion:
Arthur Lydiard always said that no one can tell you exactly how fast to run on any particular day, since there are so many variables involved.

I also think the VDOT tables predict unrealistic times for longer races unless you're in really, really great shape

---

Agree with first paragraph--absolutely. I've found, especially since I've gotten older, that as long as I give a good effort on my 3 key weekly workouts, the pace on the other days really doesn't matter. It is based almost totally on feel.

The VDOT and other tables that predict times for one distance based on the time you run another are guidlines only. I think that's all they were ment to be.
VDOT actually works just the opposite of what you said for me, especially between the mile and half marathon. Although I've run almost twice as many 5ks as half marathons (57 to 29) I have 5 HM's that tie or beat my 5k PR and 8 of them that beat my 2nd best. In virtually every case where the 2 distances were ran relatively close together, the HM time has been better. And it really doesn't seem to matter what kind of shape I'm in. Last year I ran 2 HM's off only 40 mpw and both of them were better than McMillan prediction for all 9 of the 5ks I ran. In addtion to training mileage I think we have to consider muscle fiber makeup. A person with more slow twitch isn't going to do as well in shorter races as someone with more fast twitch and vice versa. I'm not saying that training mileage doesn't matter. Of course it does. It' just that it is not everything and there are other factors. Weight is another one.

The best predictors for me are the age graded tables, which predict better long race times based on shorter races than VDOT or McMillan.

Btw, I too am a Lydiard fan. His book, Running With Lydiard, was the first I ever read and I still refer to it from time to time. I remember you mentioning it on another thread. This is not to say that I always had what it took to put his teachings into practice.

IP: Logged

posted Apr-13-2006 10:36 AM               

Thanks for your needed reminder about runners having certain inherent--as opposed to trainable--strengths and weaknesses vis a vis shorter/longer races.

I've always had the gut sense that I was slightly stronger at 5K/10K distances than I was at half marathon and beyond, and not for lack of serious aerobic training. This may have something to do with many years as a halfback on the soccer field (7th-12th grade), where I made a point of sprinting hard--charging and even frightening opposing players--because I had good short-range speed. My best 400 was right around 60: nothing to write home about, but passable for a guy with short legs and heavy thighs. I've sometimes thought that the Clydesdales needed to expand and create a category for guys built like me: distance runner from the waist up (pure ectomorph), soccer player from the waist down. Call it the Centaur category!

So yes: Some of us may, through no training fault of our own, never quite match our good 5K/10K times at the longer distances. The elites specialize in certain events for precisely this reason.

IP: Logged

posted Apr-13-2006 11:07 AM            

I just find it odd that my legs don't like to move fast. I guess that what 16 years will do to you. I was predominantly a 200/400/800 runner in HS track with PRs of (23/52/204) and also a 1822 5k on a hilly tough LI cross country course. I didn't really have any aerobic endurance in HS, I've run way more distance now that back in HS. I think my longest run ever in HS might have been 8 miles?? I don't know where my leg speed went...

Q: On long runs (say 12 miles or over), how does everyone hydrate or do you? I rarely, if ever bring along water on my runs and have run almost 19 miles doing this. I always wonder if this is doing more harm than good. It just that I don't feel like carrying a water bottle for long distances.

[This message has been edited by dcv2002 (edited Apr-13-2006).]

IP: Logged

posted Apr-13-2006 02:40 PM            

If I'm going out for more than 2 1/2 hours, I generally drive out & stash a bottle of water somewhere along my route. Since most of my long runs are out & back on a rail-trail, that gets me 8oz twice. If it's going to be a hot day, maybe two bottles so I get water 4 times. Carry water? Never done it -- seems like a pain.

I have run as many as 20 miles on 80 degree days without water. That was, however, when I was young and foolish. (I'm old and foolish now.)

IP: Logged

posted Apr-13-2006 03:57 PM               

I bought one of those silly black web belts with four little yellow plastic bottles shaped like small bulging hip flasks. Tried it once. Not for me. If I were an ultra runner, I'm sure I'd learn to get used to it and just putter and slosh along. But I'd rather not slosh--nor carry all that weight.

IP: Logged

posted Apr-13-2006 09:14 PM            

In the summer I make sure that I run a route that will take me past a water fountain or two. I could probably name the location of more than 30 water fountains in Queens and Manhattan, so that makes life a little easier I guess.

IP: Logged

posted Apr-13-2006 09:49 PM               

IP: Logged