| Pages: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | |
| PhysMech |
| ||
|
A quick post about the table of numbers I presented yesterday. It was intended to paint a picture of the breakdown curve and the last column reflects an example of the area under that curve. I thought it was interesting how the total in column 3 just kept increasing rapidly after 90 minutes, something you don't always appreciate immediately when you actually look at a graph of those numbers. And as I stated in the original post, it's just from memory and the numbers are only for comparison to themselves and should not be considered very accurate in a quantitative sense. But I think I remember the shape and nature of how this breakdown occurs, and all my experiences the last 13 years have only reinforced that Burke was right on. I would also make the following points: 1) Increasing the intensity of the energy consumption would almost certainly activate the breakdown curve both earlier and more steeply. 2) If you were to drop out of a 3-hour marathon at the 1-hour mark, your total breakdown would be close to 1/9th the breakdown that you would undergo if you finished the race. There is also a 4:1 ratio between a two hour run and a one hour run at the same pace. Insights like these are the intention behind why I posted that information. I would like to reiterate again that I have tried to err toward less breakdown later - reality is probably actually much higher breakdown later in the activity. 3) Supplementing carbs and/or protein cannot keep up with the energy requirements. If it could, we could just start a marathon with 26 gel packs and finish with full glycogen. Pretty sure someone has tried this and it doesn't work. |
| PhysMech |
| ||
I'm going to go ahead and give my suggestions for creating a plan for the next 20 months. I have thought a lot about your situation and I think my recommendations will be very enjoyable and rewarding, both for the next 20 months and beyond. And the focus is achieving your lifetime PRs in a variety of events, starting 20 months from now with races in the 5k to 12k range. I would suggest that you plan the marathon this fall. And that you go for a solid effort in the race, not an all out effort. An all-out effort in the marathon really is brutal and might put your PRs in the shorter races at risk. I think you are looking at age 44 or maybe even later to get your lifetime PR in the marathon, so let's not beat ourselves up trying to run all-out for a time that we should be able to beat by 10 minutes or more in 3 years. I would also race as much as you want to the next 20 months, with the idea of lowering your comeback PRs consistently. And I would also wait to start racing again until I could easily break 18:22 (or equivalent). I would look to nibble away at the comeback PRs and make the efforts start out easy and progressively get more intense over the next 20 months. Think of them as workouts, with the effort increasing over time. You will probably meet lots of people along the way and they will marvel at your steady progress at age 40+. Keep the cross country race as a goal for the fall of '12. |
| Missing something? |
| ||
|
PhysMech, Here's what I take from your chart, which I think you've posted mainly for heuristic purposes: We all know training involves a relationship between breakdown and subsequent build-up; we'd like to maximize the latter while avoiding too much of the former. Some kinds of breakdown give obvious signs: muscle failure (or our version of it: rigging up) tells us we're maxing out our anaerobic endurance; huffing-and-puffing tells us we're maxing out the oxygen-delivery system. No matter how good the shape you're in, you should be able to notice those signs. But there's another kind of breakdown, the metabolizing of protein, to which we may not be as well attuned. It accelerates not across seconds (like rigging-stress) or minutes (like huffing and puffing), but across dozens of minutes. So if you're in good shape, you may do a 90-minute run feeling good, going perhaps slightly slower than marathon pace, and think you're not really stressing your body too much...but you are. All this is really useful, and I want to thank you for adding a dimension to the way I think about my training. However, if we want to get any more specific, such as a claim that you shouldn't run longer than an hour unless you have a great reason, or that a 45 minute run at marathon pace might be less stressful than a 90 minute easy run, then I think we'd need more charts. Not only precise figures, but also charts for hormonal protein breakdown at different levels of exertion. Of course, the main support for those claims could be the actual experience of lots of people, and what I've read elsewhere suggests that lots of world-class runners do tend to cap their day-in, day-out (twice daily) runs around one hour. |
| Impossible Dream |
| ||
|
PM, Thanks for that thoughtful post. I'm curious as to the thought process behind your recommendation. Do you think that the higher mileage of training for the marathon will have a better training benefit than training for cross country? Or do you think that my benchmarks and subsequent competitive goal for cross country are too aggressive and could cause training set backs? Just curious. Thanks again! |
| Shoebacca |
| ||
I understand that the way the graph appears would be essentially the same, but what gets done with the third column impacts the arbitrary scale in a very persuasive way. The more minute intervals you take, the higher the third column becomes. The example given by PhysMed led to 233 arbitrary units. My example uses the same idea to get 74 units. If you did a period each minute, then your number would be in the thousands. The third column is just irrelevant rhetoric of scale. Yes, we know there is some total quantity of breakdown accumulating and at variable percentages over time, but the whole point is we haven't yet given a good measure of it, so I object to a column called total breakdown that does nothing to solve this question. Keep up the good discussion. I just happen to object to the third column. |
| PhysMech |
| ||
|
Just thought I would point out that you have a math error at the 90 minute mark...it should be 28, and all the subsequent numbers should be +10. And by making the interval 30 minutes instead of 10, you have largely missed the inflection points where the graph would change directions sharply. These intervals are important to reflect a somewhat accurate firgure of the area under the curve. |
| PhysMech |
| ||
Both. But I'm not saying you should be totally training for the marathon either. But Alan Webb focused on high mileage in '06 and we saw how he did in '07. And it is probably not advisable to have an all-out competitive goal in the next 12 months. Stay focused on building a quality foundation. |
| PhysMech |
| ||
Actually, sometimes the last thing I want to think about as an athlete is reality. I really don't want to know the real amount of loss from this type of breakdown. But knowing how the percentage changes over time is useful in both planning workouts and dealing with the current state of affairs during the workouts. Should I stop now and eat something, or do a warmdown? Quantitative reality can ruin your confidence. That's why I don't weigh myself within two days of a race. :D |
| laughingostrich |
| ||
|
I think my question got lost along the way here. If that graph shows protein breakdown and not muscle breakdown, then can't you just up your protein intake and be fine? |
| Impossible Dream |
| ||
|
If any thread participants are spiritual/religious, please remember my little boy today in your thoughts or prayers. He'll have a very simple and common surgical procedure done to remove his adnoids, but still worrisome for a parent. Peace all and have a great day. PS - Training is going well. |
| florida oldtimer |
| ||
|
Nice 15k today PM 52:38 is rolling something special. You have made such a huge jump, keep it going. Congrats. |
| Impossible Dream |
| ||
|
Weekly Summary: 2/20 - 14 easy in AM 2/21 - 65 min am, 32 min plus 6 x strides in the pm 2/22 - 65 min am, pm was a 4 mile tempo in 25:35 w/ 15 min warm up and 5 x strides and 10 min cool down 2/23 - 32 min am,,, Off in the pm to nurse sore achilles 2/24 - off in am, 71 min pm 2/25 - 40 min am, 65 min pm plus 6 x strides 2/26 - 2 mile warm up, 8 x 60 sec hill repeats on the treadmill with full recovery, 1 mile cool down 10 sessions for a total of 72 miles this week. Supplemental Work - Sunday - Heavy leg lifts with core routine for a warmup Monday - Upper body light weight session and core routine Tuesday - Core Routine Wednesday - Core Routine Thursday - 2 Sets of 7 exercise circuit after light core routine for a warm up, repeated the full core routine in the evening Friday - Core Routine Saturday - Off Felt like a disjointed week with the change in schedule, the achilles thing and then my son's surgery and his recovery putting our regular household routine out of whack. All that considered and considering the volume of exercise with the supplemental stuff, I guess I'm doing a lot. Real fitness is in my future. |
| PhysMech |
| ||
|
Dunno how to explain the 15k today - was expecting barely a PR (55:52) but it was a pleasant surprise, considering tree allergies this week (in February, but hey, it's Florida). This recent jump is nuts. I noticed that the body was really lagging the aerobics - breathing was pretty good in the race. This is happening really fast, so body needs to catch up! Left hamstring was sore after the race, but is feeling better after a good recovery of dates, sports drink, water, and 2 protein bars (plus a smoothie at the convention center). I guess this jump is a fitness and body composition thing, but I'll ask my subconscious tonight to tell me the answer in the morning. Hope things are going well with your family, ID. I've been having you all in my thoughts and prayers. How did the 36-hour rest feel? One thing about racing - I usually plan to take the day off from everything the day before any race. Sort of a planned 36+ hour rest. It works, and the race sort of erases any detraining effects. Plus, I have an occasional lazy streak, which I consider essential to the successful distance runner mentality. :) If the answer to the question "Am I running myself into the ground?" is no, keep up the good work. |
| Impossible Dream |
| ||
|
PM - Congrats on the 15k. That really is a stellar time. Wow! I don't think I'm running myself into the ground. Life catches up with you sometimes though so I have to keep things in perspective. For instance yesterday I decided just to do the work out portion of my day and not worry about the mileage. It was all I had time for and I really didn't have time for it :) This morning, I started my week out right with a 14 miler on my hillier course. I decided to just run however I felt and not worry about anything. Turns out I felt pretty good throughout most of the run and ended up averaging 7:15 pace. I'm starting to think about being prepared to run a sustained pace for my HM on April 16. In fact, I think I'll want to add in a few HM specific workouts in the 4 week cycle leading up to that date. Perhaps some long tempos or mile repeats with minimal rest. Anyway, despite not much sleep I'm feeling pretty good today. I'm going to take my oldest boy out for a "Daddy Day" considering he's the only one of my 3 boys who isn't recovering from surgery or suffering from an ear infection. Life of a parent. ;) Hope everyone has a fantastic day! |
| VF Runner |
| ||
|
Keep up the good work ID! You've been better about diligently adding in the extras than I have, even with everything life has thrown at you. I've only got 1 kid and I know how much it can take out of you. I reconciled my lack of adding in core/circuit stuff with the fact that I have run 32 days in a row. That is possibly an all time high - I honestly don't remember if I ever went that long in HS. It's certainly the most since I really resumed running seriously about 11 years ago. I'm still hoping to add in the extra but I'm willing to be patient and get to it gradually. I'm certainly getting some motivation to get to it from following this thread. Speaking of which - Excellent race PM!! Wow! is right! |
| eurodonkey |
| ||
|
Hi all, For some reason letsrun.com banned the IP address range I was using in France last week and I couldn't post. Back home now, had a great week skiing with family, and hip seems to be 95% better (posted about this under my other alias on the weekly masters thread...) But I've had 2 weeks not running seriously so will be working back in gradually this week... ID, I hope your son's recovering well and am amazed how much you fit in under the circumstances. I wish my 'off' weeks ended up at 70+. One thing you didn't mention is the Achilles - can you still feel it or has it 'gone'? PM, congratulations on another amazing race. I wonder if it's something to do with training really well for a marathon, then basically stopping the hard work before all the usual damage got done? I recall John Walker once pissed off a bunch of Kiwis by doing 20 miles of a marathon then stopping... I would agree that if a controlled marathon fits ID's schedule then it's probably a great way to build fitness. I'm tempted to look around for one myself... |
| PhysMech |
| ||
|
Haha, let's stir the pot again with some more made-up data. There are basically 4 main energy systems at work when we run: creatine phosphate, fat burning, aerobic, and anaerobic. Only aerobic and anaerobic use glycogen and lets say for the sake of our discussion that they provide 75 percent of our energy during a marathon. For simplicity, let's call each percent of aerobic glycogen use = 1 glycogen unit, and each percent of anaerobic glycogen use = 18 glycogen units. Let's also assume that aerobic can provide a constant 74 percent of our energy. So as energy use is increased in 1 percent steps, we come up with the following: 74 + 18 = 92 glycogen units 74 + 36 = 110 74 + 54 = 128 74 + 72 = 146 74 + 90 = 164 This only goes up to a 5% anaerobic pace, which is somewhere between a 10k to half marathon pace, depending on what research you look at. It's pretty easy to realize why running just a little too fast, even for a fairly short time, means you will run out of gas in a marathon. Anyway, I guess I'm interested in this because a marathon run with only 1-2 percent constant anaerobic contribution should not be severely debilitating. ID, I think there are only around 6,000 sub-3 hour marathons run in the U.S. every year. By this fall, you should be able to do one fairly easily. So that might be a good goal - to see how easily you can do a sub-3 marathon. |
| Impossible Dream |
| ||
|
Ok fellas, thanks for the thoughts and support. Our boy is having a rough day which I guess is typical 3 and 4 days out. My Achilles pain has turned into a slowly receding tightness. I haven't been very diligent with treatment late this week. My first run after my 36 hour break I felt great, btw. The circuit caused a fair amount of soreness. Hill repeats were done at a7% grade at 5:35 pace. With the incline and speed lag of the TM, they were more like 50 sec repeats. |
| eurodonkey |
| ||
I know it's stressful for all when a kid is not well but they bounce back amazingly quickly - hope he feels better soon....
I'm hoping the circuit caused general all-over soreness, not specific Achilles soreness! Some soreness from new exercises is natural but the idea is to gradually work in over the first 3 sessions or so. I did a circuit in an unfamiliar gym on Saturday night, and I'm sore now - although maybe some of that is from 10 hours drive on Saturday and 6 more on Sunday. Just out of interest, how long does your treadmill take to speed up? The ones at my gym are quite frustrating - they need something like 30-40sec to go from zero to interval paces, or 15-20 from recovery-jog (e.g. 8:00) to interval paces. It's rainy and slippery here so I might hit the TM at lunchtime. |
| eurodonkey |
| ||
I was going to ask about this while 'banned from posting' last week. I completely agree that people may be pushing themselves a bit too long in sessions. To be honest I'd need to see the original studies and see how much work has been done on breakdown rates at different events/paces/types of session. If you're doing intervals, that partially-burned lactate does get re-used as fuel, which explains why I can bang out a vast number of 200s at 1500 pace and not feel too tired - although if you're doing a tempo or race, I take your point and it seems like a good conceptual model. Speaking of which, have you seen the points systems in Daniels Running Formula? Everyone discussed the VDOT / pace calculators but nobody else seems to use his points system, which is based on studies of a LOT of runners. I find it very accurate indeed: a 20-point sessions is a big one, and if I push much harder than that I can be tired for a lot longer. It works across common paces from 3000 down to easy running. Personally I go for a much simpler rule of thumb which I find younger athletes can understand, and which I believe holds for both steady runs and a lot of speedwork: - During base work, finish each quality session at a point where you could do it all over again if you had to - In pre-competition period, finish each session feeling like you could do 20%-25% more. (e.g. do 8x400 where 10x400 would grind you to a halt). |