Road Racing and Training Thread (Chicago Edition) - Week Ending 10/7/18

I would caution mistaking a lack of marathon time that lines up on the VDOT chart with a lack of aerobic development. I think the fact that most people have relatively slow marathon times is less about aerobic development and more about the fact that any little thing that goes wrong is exponentially worse in the marathon than in a shorter distance race. If I get a stitch over the last 800m of a 5k, I won't lose much appreciable time - maybe 4 or 5 seconds. If I get a stitch with a 6th of the marathon left, I am losing minutes. Plus bonking. Plus weather. Plus GI distress.

Anecdotal evidence: while most of my races line up fairly closely, from an age graded standpoint, my best races in recent years have been the 15k and the half marathon, and not the 5k and 10k. You can look again at my heart rate data from Sunday and also see that aerobic development was not the culprit in me running a marathon that was not in line with my other PRs. Alternatively, you can look at my other recent races and conclude that my marathon was by far my best performance.

So am I aerobically underdeveloped?

outsiderunner wrote:

RRR - I am sure the opposite case exists, but, in my experience, it is nowhere near as prevalent as the aerocially underdeveloped runner. I mean, it is not even close. In fact, I cannot remember the last time I talked to someone, here or elsewhere, that had clearly better performances at the longer distances than at the shorter ones.

My point was , for anyone to be a well rounded runner they need to work all the intensities at some point..

But yes the aerobic development is the MOST important aspect there is to training... I mean that is all I did for years starting out in 2016. The problem is most people bounce from plan to plan when starting running and just do not go run mileage for a period of time.

Smoove wrote:

So am I aerobically underdeveloped?

No you just lack the mental toughness needed to run a complete marathon without having to stop multiple times.

RRR - Got it, and agreed.

angryjohnny wrote:

Smoove wrote:

So am I aerobically underdeveloped?

No you just lack the mental toughness needed to run a complete marathon without having to stop multiple times.

These are beginning to smack of low blows.. I mean the man is aged and has a medical condition..

Just Cruel .. AJ and GT both..

I know I have been slow to respond to AJ's taunts. It is just so hard to hear them when he's ten minutes away and my back is to him.

I imagine when you're stopped by the side of the road to stretch out your calves on the curb and catch your breath, you're probably more facing sideways though, right? I mean...you've got an ear basically pointed straight at him?

It must be a generational thing. Honestly did you ever talk smack after receiving a shellacking like that? NM you probably never got beat like that.

True, but I stop for less than the 8 seconds or so that it would take for sound to travel the mile and a half between me and AJ.

He means it all in good fun.

Plus, when you take into account his talent level, it really wasn't THAT bad of a beating.

Thank you for using roughly accurate numbers. Science burns are the best burns.

jewbacca wrote:

I get that for shorter distances, but this is the reason I want to do it early in the cycle for marathon training. Once it's done, you can spend the final weeks on race specific work, and like Smoove says, speed maintenance is fairly simple.

From a Lydiard perspective, the increased acidosis from those type of workouts is a problem early on.

Funny exchange here, guys. I love Pappy's use of the word, "shellacking." And Smoove...now that I now that the stops were only 8 seconds in duration, I can answer your question definitively and say that your are clearly not aerobically underdeveloped.

Gordon Tremeshko wrote:

... those of you that PR'd at shorter distances right after a marathon. What did your recovery, turnaround, and return to race situation look like?

GT - I set my masters 5K PR seven weeks after my masters marathon PR, and my open 5K PR was five weeks after running a marathon PR. In both cases, I took a day or two off completely, followed by a low-mileage, easy week. Then I pretty much got back at it.

Here are the weekly mile totals, workouts and races between the two masters PR's:

Masters marathon PR 2:56:03

Week 1 - 23 miles; 1 day off; short runs rest of week

Week 2 - 37 miles; 5 x 200m, 5K race 18:06

Week 3 - 36 miles; 10 x hill sprints; 10 x 600m

Week 4 - 37 miles; 10K race 38:13; 6 x 800m

Week 5 - 41 miles; 10 x hill sprints; 1M race 5:10

Week 6 - 44 miles; 12 x hill sprints; 6 x800m;1M race 5:06

Week 7 - 45 miles; 5K race 17:42; 5K race 17:10

Here are the weekly totals, and the longest runs after a PR marathon, and leading to my lifetime 5K PR. No racing between the two PR runs:

Marathon 2:45:57 (PR at the time)

Week 1 - 39 miles; longest run 14 miles

Week 2 - 62 miles; longest run 16 miles

Week 3 - 56 miles; longest run 14 miles

Week 4 - 72 miles; longest run 18 miles

Week 5 - 41 miles; 5K race 16:04

... and continuing to the next PR race:

Week 6 - 24 miles; longest run 9 miles

Week 7 - Marathon 2:40:30

GT - In my haste, I left off a race and a workout in that Masters schedule. Should look like this:

Masters marathon PR 2:56:03

Week 1 - 23 miles; 1 day off; short runs rest of week

Week 2 - 37 miles; 5 x 200m, 5K race 18:06

Week 3 - 36 miles; 10 x hill sprints; 10 x 600m

Week 4 - 37 miles; 10K race 38:13; 6 x 800m

Week 5 - 41 miles; 10 x hill sprints; 1M race 5:10; 4M race 23:38

Week 6 - 44 miles; 12 x hill sprints; 6 x 800m; 1M race 5:06

Week 7 - 45 miles; 5K race 17:42; 3 x 1600m; 5K race 17:10

Prior to the marathon, I was running 5Ks at about 17:30, so you can see it did take a few weeks to recover and return to racing at that level.

Allen, I wouldn't worry too much about your times lining up across the VDOT table. Hell, look at my races this summer and then look at my race on Sunday. They were probably 2.5 VDOTS away from one another. A big part of that was weather, but not all of it. Some of it was simply the fact that I was more oriented toward the marathon at the time when I ran those races. My times only line up well when you look at them over the course of a couple of years.

Were I in your position, I would do what I always do - start at the end and work my way back from there (which is basically what Pappy did when thinking through your training).

Let's say you want to devote 18-24 weeks to the marathon, including a base period. I would use the time between now and when those 18-24 weeks start to work on some other things. Building overall aerobic volume would be one good use. Building your speed would be another good use. So you might build in a 5k specific cycle to take up some of that time with the idea that if you can get your 5k time down a bit, running at 6:52 pace might seem less daunting.

But you don't need to be able to run 18:00 to run 2:59. You will, however, probably want to get to the point where you can do your threshold work at around 6:30 pace (or a touch faster) at some point in the marathon training cycle. The cycles in between are just a means to an end - everything is done with the marathon in the back of your mind. You don't need 18:00 speed, you just want to improve your speed so marathon training is easier. You don't ever sacrifice health for a touch more fitness during those pre-marathon training cycles. You do what you can during those cycles while making sure you stay healthy.

The only things that are mandates during those cycles are staying healthy and generally growing your "TAUs."

Smoove wrote:

I wouldn't worry too much about your times lining up across the VDOT table.

Thanks, Smoove. I haven't given up yet. My xurrent 5K is 3 VDOT points shy of a 2:56 marathon, and the longer races are even worse. But I still have 51 weeks to work on that! And, this year's racing season was unusually warm and humid, so those 2018 race times are probably not as weak as they appear ...

Allen - We could never associate the word "weak" with you.

Smoove wrote:

I would caution mistaking a lack of marathon time that lines up on the VDOT chart with a lack of aerobic development. I think the fact that most people have relatively slow marathon times is less about aerobic development and more about the fact that any little thing that goes wrong is exponentially worse in the marathon than in a shorter distance race. If I get a stitch over the last 800m of a 5k, I won't lose much appreciable time - maybe 4 or 5 seconds. If I get a stitch with a 6th of the marathon left, I am losing minutes. Plus bonking. Plus weather. Plus GI distress.

I don't know, Smoove. Maybe my experience is unusual, but in my 26 marathons, only ONCE did a factor besides a lack of aerobic development significantly and adversely affect the outcome. That was a horrific headwind in the 1982 Skylon Marathon.

For the other 25 marathons, all good weather, no stitches, no cramping, no significant GI distress (I'm not counting my usual port-a-potty stop). Plenty of bonking over the years, but that was lack of aerobic work, and was always expected.

It seems to me that most marathon participants are grossly unprepared for racing 26.2 miles, even the ones who race well at the shorter distances. I'm counting people like me who train less than 50 miles per week. "Us folks" are the ones OR sees at the store.