OTQ marathon training advice

After your fall marathon, cut out all racing and interval training and focus on boosting mileage to no less than 100-120 mpw, running twice a day almost every day. Training pace should be slow enough to allow a pretty rapid build-up in mileage. Training pace can get quicker as you adapt to the higher mileage, but continue to avoid racing and intervals for at least 16-18 weeks.

If you're in condition to run 2:25-2:27 on a record-quality course, you're in better condition than I was doing similar mileage (60-80 mpw at most) before increasing to 100-120 mpw. For me, the difference between running on 6-80 mpw and 100-120 mpw was huge.

Avocado's Number wrote:

For me, increasing mileage from 60-80 mpw to 100-120 mpw had a huge effect on race times.

Avacado thanks...just mileage 100-120? So just running easy for 15+ miles per day for 4 months and strides... ? Just cruising doing doubles like 5am 10pm ?

Easy like 7-8 pace?

Agreed. 60-80 is barely marathon training. Amazing things can happen when 100 is your down week.

As for how to get there, obviously you need lots of doubles. Run 7-8 min pace as needed. Take a few months. I wouldn't cut workouts entirely, but do just one per week, at a moderate volume (e.g., 6x800 at 5k pace), stopping while you still feel decent.

How's your weight?

Otq dreamer wrote:

Avacado thanks...just mileage 100-120? So just running easy for 15+ miles per day for 4 months and strides... ? Just cruising doing doubles like 5am 10pm ?

Easy like 7-8 pace?

To me, training volume (generally, mileage) overwhelms other considerations and provides the biggest and surest return on your training investment, so although there may be other productive ways to tinker with training, don't let them distract you from your primary focus on boosting and maintaining volume until you've adapted to the higher mileage. Personally, I'm even uneasy about strides during this initial transition to higher volume, because I'm concerned about anything that could increase the risk of injury or require backing off volume, but it's arguable that strides may be beneficial in the overall context of injury prevention, so I don't rule them out entirely; just keep them easy and controlled.

Like Lydiard, I don't advocate that you stick to 7-minute pace or slower. As you adjust to higher mileage, your training pace should generally increase. I suspect that,if things are progressing well, most of your mileage should eventually be in the range of 6:00 to 6:30 per mile. I don't really like the term "easy" to describe typical training paces during pure mileage build-ups; I don't consider this training to be easy at all. I prefer terms like "steady" (Lydiard's term) and even "cautious," which reflects my concern about injury prevention during transitions to higher training loads.

During this transition to higher mileage, I really don't like the idea of including what are now often referred to as "workouts" -- generally, sessions that include short or extended periods of running at higher speeds and intensities that may approach max-VO2 pace. It's not that you can't progress while including that kind of "workout"; I just don't think that it's likely to be optimal for an aspiring marathoner who is already physically mature and who is looking at a fairly limited window of opportunity for increasing training volume and, eventually, better racing times.

There are going to be times when you're dealing with injuries, nascent injuries, or other frailties that limit mileage and speed of training. Perhaps you should rest during those times; I almost never did. I preferred to find other ways to maintain many of the metabolic stresses of training. I was especially fond of deep-water running and steep upslope treadmill running, which both allow high-intensity and high-volume training without some of the musculosketal stress of more conventional high-mileage running schedules. Those were my mainstays over thirty years ago; these days, there are things like Alter-G machines and underwater treadmills, but I've never tried them and never even seen them.

I believe that the general training methods I've discussed can get you at least 70- 80% of the way from where you are to where you are setting your sights. The last 20-30% will probably involve modulations in speed and distance -- a shift in focus to include so-called "tempo" or "threshold" runs, sessions that include shorter repetitions of hills and intervals, longer long runs, and probably slower "recovery" runs. There are lots of books and articles that discuss this stuff. It's not unimportant, and it may be necessary to reach your goals, but I really want to emphasize that increased training volume is most likely how you're going to grab the low-hanging fruit. I see many runners who get caught up in the relative minutia of stuff like how to structure a max-VO2 workout for optimal marathon performance before they've achieved anything close to optimal training volume. That's a big mistake. And I generally don't buy thier arguments about, for example, how other things in life prevent them from higher-volume training; track workouts and frequent racing are far bigger time-sinks and impose much bigger constraints on daily living than simply grinding out a few extra miles every week in training.

Avocado's Number wrote:

thier arguments

"their arguments"

(I want to make sure that no one confuses me with the Princeton and Yale graduates on this site.)

Otq dreamer wrote:

Currently running a 1:11-12 half is pretty solid but not to awful and can be done during a normal training week with a very stable heart rate and not rested.

For a short-term goal, focus on running a 1:09:30 half. Proving to yourself that you can run 13 at goal pace is a good confidence booster and something to build from.

The endpoint is CIM 2019. Plenty of time.

Don't put hurdles in front of yourself that don't need to be there. You're closer than you think.

Like Avocado said, building volume is not a good enough goal in and of itself. Volume doesn't make a runner. It is a step that allows the work that does create the runner, but there is no reason you need to focus on volume and ignore any kind of other factors.

I would not recommend more than 12 weeks of any single phase. You do reach a plateau doing the same of anything, even the very general work.

There was a post (http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=6734660) in the past the provided a good structure. 10-12 weeks of

.

A good place to start.

I missed the OTQ by 12 seconds in 2016 (so not a recent trials qualifier), but I've hit a couple in 2007 and 2012. I've also run a lot of 2:20s-2:19s over the past decade or so.

Like others have said mileage is going to be key. Months of averaging over 100mpw. Besides the super talented I don't think I've ever met a mens trials qualifier (or sub 2:19 guy) that didn't run triple digit mileage weeks at some point. But you can't get hurt! So you have to start slow (I still run over 7:00 pace on a lot of days...at altitude though).

But at some point you are going to have to hit some Lactate Threshold/Tempo workouts (long ones on tired legs). Things like 3 x 5km with a 5-min rest and 5 x 2 miles. These need to be faster than marathon goal pace...almost closer to half marathon race pace (current) but not quite that fast. Like others said, take a long term approach and worry about the mileage base first before adding in this intensity though.

Consistent mileage and some rather hard long runs in the 20-22 mile range (throw in some miles at marathon goal pace).

Then keep doing some strides and every so often you can do some workouts like 5 x 1 mile or 8 x 1km at 10km pace or so just to keep the "speed"up at bit and boost Running Economy/Vo2max a tad. Or jump in a low key 10km.

But yeah that half marathon time needs to come down and is a good indicator of where your Lactate Threshold is at (about). Get it down under 1:10 and you can start thinking about sub 2:24-2:23.

Ok thanks for the amazing posts. This is Ninja advice..thank you!

Thanks for keeping it positive:)

I'm I know a ton of people can benefit from this thread regardless. I need to actually try a few months of high mileage just to see. I am use to high volume from cycling, but haven't ever ventured anywhere near this numbers in running. I have the time and support, but I can't imagine the dicipline for 12-16 weeks of 100+ that is no joke.

I can only imagine it's transformative but very difficult.

Just typing it made me shake my head. I ran 17mi this morning after reading the post:)

Otq dreamer wrote:

I am use to high volume from cycling, but haven't ever ventured anywhere near this numbers in running.

How long ago were you cycling that much? I ask as sometimes it can be a year or two of consistent running to shed excess leg muscle that does you no good in the marathon. Even if it's just 3-5 pounds of lower body mass that can make a huge difference with no change in fitness.

I biked for about 10 years, so it has been a long transition for sure...I think I'm getting pretty close to mostly runner body. I have 3-4 years of running now so I think I'm close.

I still have some mass I can drop, but my guess is 135 would be very close to marathon perfection for me.

Currently - 143pounds and 6ft

I've run about 70-80mpw all summer I just looked.

*Ran 1:11:30 half in July that was almost full gas, But cruised easy 1:12:30 last week solo. I don't have any extra speed. Sadly *My 10k and Marathon pace are very similar:)

Thank you for the thoughtful response.

Changing the way I think about volume versus intensity is going to be a massive paradigm shift, but it does sound like it might be the biggest most obvious piece of the puzzle I'm currently ignoring.

I don't mind running long at all.....I just get lured into track work and mile repeats thinking they are the key to getting faster. The patience required is mind boggling. Thanks for sharing your recipe ....honestly it might have been the first time in my adult life....someone explained the volume required and how to achieve it.

So how does a 1:11 guy get down to 1:09?

Or a 2:28 guy get to 2:18? It seems almost impossible.

Would just bumping mileage from 60-80 to 100-120 work on its own for some people?

Obviously you have to hit the workouts but has anyone made that jump in mileage and seen 5:25 pace drop to 5:15 after 4-6 months? 6-12 months? 1-2 years?

They look so similar it's only 10 seconds but that is a fast 10 seconds.

10 seconds wrote:

So how does a 1:11 guy get down to 1:09?

Or a 2:28 guy get to 2:18? It seems almost impossible.

Would just bumping mileage from 60-80 to 100-120 work on its own for some people?

Here's my progression.

First, before running any marathons, I ran a couple of seasons of high school cross-country and a couple of seasons of track, mainly the mile, with my best time just under 4:50. In college, I ran three seasons of cross-country and a couple of years of indoor and outdoor track. Indoors, I ran the two-mile, breaking ten minutes twice, and never breaking 9:50. Outdoors, I ran 3 miles, 5000m, 6 miles, and 10,000m. I don't remember my precise times, but I know that I never broke 15:30 for 5000 (or the equivalent time for 3 miles) or 33:00 for 10,000 (or the equivalent for 6 miles). (It's possible that I did not break 34 for 10,000m, but I'm confident that I could do it; I don't want to overstate my mediocrity.) My training varied a lot in high school and college, but even then, I saw that higher mileage resulted in substantial performance increases at distances from two miles to 10,000m; I didn't see similar improvements from programs focused primarily on interval training.

After college, I turned to road racing and, in particular, the marathon. After some months of about 60-70 mpw and regular racing at shorter distances, I ran just under 2:40 in my first marathon. After another year of similar training, I ran my second marathon in 2:33. After adding a second, shorter session of running on most days for a few months, I ran my third marathon in 2:30. At that point, I shifted my focus away from short-term incremental improvement at various distances to more long-term improvement of my aerobic condition as a basis for bigger gains in the marathon, with an eye toward qualifying for the Olympic trials. For about five months, I did no racing at any distance or training at anywhere close to any race pace, and did nothing but mileage of about 100 to perhaps 120 mpw. As I noted in a previous post, the training was not done at what I would consider "easy" paces; rather, it was at paces that were simply slow enough to allow me to handle the increased volume, and those paces would tend to get faster as I adjusted to increased volume. My only high-intensity training was deep-water running, which I added after several months to get through various injuries, but which I felt was also useful as a higher-intensity, lower-impact supplement to "real" running. After about five months of this, I ran a couple of moderate-distance road races, followed by my fourth marathon in 2:23.

Having not yet qualified for the Olympic marathon trials, I returned to my base mileage after that 2:23 marathon. I ran a few shorter races over the next year or so, including a half-marathon in 1:06-low and a sub-30 10k, but some ill-timed injuries and other distractions prevented me from running any marathons prior to the Olympic trials. I then had a period of several years when I focused on non-running stuff (mainly law school) and trained sporadically with just a few races at various distances.

After law school, I returned to the marathon, again training with a focus on volume (mileage). My next marathon was 2:28. After another year of high-mileage training, with almost all of my high-intensity training done in the water or on treadmills (which, particularly at steeper slopes, greatly reduced peak loading forces during high-intensity running), I ran 2:20. Three weeks later, I ran 2:19. After a couple more years of generally high mileage, while continuing to do almost all of my high-intensity training in the water and on treadmills, I ran 2:18. (Because of an impact injury, all of my running for about four weeks immediately prior to that marathon was done on a treadmill at very steep inclines.) As the Olympic trials approached, I decided to take an unpaid leave of absence from my law firm to focus almost exclusively on running for the first time in my life, but I got a metatarsal stress fracture in the months leading up to the trials, and that brought my racing career (such as it was) to an end. (In my forties, I returned to regular training with the hope of qualifying for the Olympic trials again as an old man, but after a year of solid training, I only managed a marathon in the high two-twenties, and could tell that my body could not do what it could when I was thirty.)

My training during my peak years would probably seem ridiculously scattershot to many coaches and athletes, and was certainly unconventional, but it was not mindless, and I believe that I got a lot more out of my body than the great majority of marathoners do when they try to follow cookbook running schedules. I simply learned everything that I could about training methods and the physiology of running, and I sought to apply that knowledge within a variety of constraints. I don't doubt that I could have run some faster marathons if I had been better at avoiding certain injuries or if I had taken different paths outside of running, but that's life. I think it's very important for runners to be clear (to themselves) about what they want to get out of their running and how the sport is going to fit in with the rest of their lives.

I think it would take at least 1-2 years.

I'd be cautious with a jump in mileage. I ran a 1:09 off of 75 mpw 2-3 years ago. Last year I ran 2:29 and 1:10 off of 75-85 mpw, probably averaging 80 mpw for 4 months. After the 2:29 I bumped up my mileage to 100-110 average for two months, during a 20 week marathon cycle, looking to run low 2:20. I think I would have been there, and was able to run workouts like 10-12 miles under 5:20 pace, and 2x5 miles at 5:10 pace (half marathon pace probably). Although I ended up with a stress fracture. Likely the combination of increased mileage with not many down weeks eventually caught up to me. i think that overall base mileage is important, but you need to be careful with increasing mileage too quickly, and make sure you take down weeks. Cardiovasularly you may feel great running doubles every day, but you need time for your bones strength to build as well. I went from running 16 miles on an easy day at 6:30 pace the day before, to waking up the next day not being able to walk, and needing 6 weeks before getting back to decent mileage of 50 mpw.

Do you have an example or excert from your logs of your pool running and treadmill workouts?

I find this fascinating that you were able to run so fast with a lot of your workouts in the pool. As someone who spends a lot of time pool running lately, I'd be interested to see what a typical week of your schedule would look like, and what sort of intensities you were hitting during these workouts (duration, heart rate, anything you could provide would be awesome)

Avacado,

Honestly your history is amazing. The discipline and process wow. That had to be one amazing journey. Sort of Bruce Denton-ish.

From 2:40 to sub 2:20 has to be rare especially with the lack of college PR's.

It makes me think in a crazy dream it could be possible.... I feel "light years" away from low 2:20 but until I put in some serious mileage maybe I shouldn't think that way.

I am going to give this an honest attempt this winter-spring after chicago... and be patient.

Just reading about your journey got me stoked. If not for me... maybe the other guy who reads that and actually pulls it off.

Curious is Avacado thinks his age was a limiting factor at 40 or mainly just injuries and life. Had he been healthy like his 30s was the motor willing?