Pfitz's Marathon Calculations

Marameow wrote:

The calculations turn out to be like an easy run pace for me....

No sh*t, Sherlock

I would say yes, you should push it a little on the days you can. I would say especially on the shorter ones, although some would not agree.

OK: let's start with 6:40 pace.

This is easy because it's an even 400 seconds. You may be faster; I'm actually a little slower now but this was my M pace once....

10% is 40 seconds.

90% is 7:20

80% is 8:00

Now for me at this point I would try to do a medium-long run at 7:20 for sure. In fact, I could do something truly considered 'long ' at that pace if I wanted it to be hard. And like I said, under 7 is a tall order for me for full 'thon.

Now, 5% is :20

95% M is 7:00

So, I believe you should be able to do a fair amount at that pace, at least medium-long. Maybe some runs can be easy, especially early in a cycle and/or when you don't really need or want to go deep (or can't for whatever reason, like hangover from previous days or weeks). But I think you'd agree that 8:00 is real easy for anyone who is racing a half at 6:40, let alone a full.

Like I said, my short answer is yes. Change the 80-90% to 90-95%. Or 10-20% slower to 5-10% slower if that's how it's written or how you think about it. A least a few long runs should be at a solid 90% and several medium show definitely be 95%.

Let me tell you that I believe long runs are the most significant specific training for an event as long as we're looking at, so maybe I put more importance on them than some. It seems to me that these should be hard workouts, or at least half of them should be. I believe Pfitz agrees, although his book isn't in front of me right now. He and I both agree that a bunch of 10km training (quite a bit faster than goal race pace) isn't ideal, so it seems we're coming from the same direction. I just think he should have cut the 10-20% in half to 5-10%.

At least that's one opinion. Good luck!

80% is slow wrote:

OK: let's start with 6:40 pace. ...

10% is 40 seconds.

90% is 7:20

80% is 8:00 ...

Now, 5% is :20

95% M is 7:00

find your maths a little confusing.

95% of 6:40 pace is 1 mile in 7:01.05

90% of 6:40 pace is 1 mile in 7:24.4

80% of 6:40 pace is 1 mile in 8:20.0

what you have calculated seems to be something quite different.

7:20 is the time it takes to run 10% further at the same pace. 1.1 miles at 6:40 pace = 7:20

8:00 is the time it takes to run 20% further at the same pace. 1.2 miles at 6:40 pace = 8:00

maybe in the context of answering the OP's question the difference doesn't matter that much, but you haven't calculated what you think you have.

a lot might also depend on what Pfitzinger means when he says "20% slower." does he mean "take 20% more time to run the same distance," which is what you calculated, or does he literally mean, "run at 20% of the pace"? the two are not synonymous.

Cheers

80% is slow wrote:

At least that's one opinion. Good luck!

This guy is smarter than Pfitz. He has numbers and stuff. Do what he says and send Pfitz back to Amazon for a refund.

Marameow wrote:

Looking at Pfitzinger's Advanced Marathon book:

His calculations for intensities:

Long Runs - 10-20% slower than goal marathon pace

Med Long runs - 10-20% slower than goal marathon pace

The calculations turn out to be like an easy run pace for me.... Am I taking these days to easy? Or should increase the intensity a bit more on those?

long runs and MLRs should be easy unless they are meant to be a MP workout.

Is 10% slower or 20% slower your easy run pace? I know Pfitz advocates starting 20% slower and maybe finishing 10% slower.

My MP was 7:20 (targeting 3:15, so went for a mildly aggressive MP target to see if I could get myself a little bit of comfort on race day!) so I calc'd that 10% slower was 8:04 and 20% slower was 8:48. No way I fancied doing 8:48s, so settled on easy pace 8:15s or so and quickened them up towards the end if I was feeling good. But avoided dipping under 8min/mile as it didn't make sense to me to buy the book then ditch the training philosophy.

No matter which way round you calculate it, you'll end up with the same numbers.

The long tempo runs are challenging enough, you don't need to make the LRs and MLRs harder than they need to be. The point of them is to allow you to get the miles in AND be able to train at a higher intensity on the other runs in the following days.

Screw calculator and math do what our Lydiard said and that was run by feel.