Hadd training vs doing a ton of miles

I think what you're describing are really, really close to the same thing. The classic Hadd program does have a lot of miles. So doing that with two moderate, uptempo runs a week should net similar results to "just doing a bunch of miles with 1 or 2 relatively light workouts a week."

However, I have not done both. So I can't say for sure. I am in the middle of building up after some time away and then an injury. I use the HR a lot to make sure my easy days are easy and my current hard days are not too hard. But I mix in some different workouts than what Hadd says (like some fartlek/stride days instead of more 60 mins @HR whatever).

Ditto what the other guy/gal said. I am wrapping up 5 months of HADD training and am certainly aerobically fit (heading into a marathon block for boston). The HADD HR stuff was helpful for backing off of intensity during the 100 degree summer and fall days here in sw Georgia, and I was able to keep running consistent mileage without burning out. However, compared with high mileage, higher intensity blocks in the past, I’m not sure there is a substantial difference. As long as both are consistent in terms of weekly mileage, and each have once or twice weekly uptempo workouts, you are going to see aerobic improvement in both.

theotherwhitehead wrote:

Ditto what the other guy/gal said. I am wrapping up 5 months of HADD training and am certainly aerobically fit (heading into a marathon block for boston). The HADD HR stuff was helpful for backing off of intensity during the 100 degree summer and fall days here in sw Georgia, and I was able to keep running consistent mileage without burning out. However, compared with high mileage, higher intensity blocks in the past, I’m not sure there is a substantial difference. As long as both are consistent in terms of weekly mileage, and each have once or twice weekly uptempo workouts, you are going to see aerobic improvement in both.

Nice work on the 5 month buildup. And a great idea for summer. I often tend to ditch my HR in the summer and consequently end up running too fast and getting run down in the heat and humidity. Not next summer!

Coming off the solid aerobic work of the fall, what kind of program/buildup are you planning for Boston?

thoroughrice wrote:

Is there any real aerobic advantage to actually following Hadd's base training over just doing a bunch of miles (100mpw+) with 1 or 2 relatively light workouts per week for the same period of time? Assuming you won't get hurt either way. Specifically looking to train for the marathon but just asking about aeorobic development in general, essentially for the base phase

Especially interested to hear from those who have tried both methods.

Where, if anywhere, are the HADD principles distilled into a side of A4?! I’m a busy woman...

Run as many easy miles as you can and do some moderate tempos. Looks like this:

M, easy

T, moderate tempo 60 mins up to 10 miles (total miles on the day are more with warmup/cooldown)

W, easy

Th, easy

F, moderate tempo same as T

Sa, easy

Su, long and easy and sometimes with some moderate tempo

The easy runs are all at around 65% max HR. The moderate days start at around 75% max HR. When you're comfortably holding that effort and there is no loss of pace on your runs, you bump it up to about 78% or so. Hold until comfortable. Bump to the low 80s. Hold for a while. Repeat this until you are doing 10 mile tempos at best possible marathon HR (88 to 90%).

Easy runs stay the same. They will most likely get faster, but the percent of max will stay low. It might even get lower as you get fitter.

There are many more nuances to it. Look up the "hadd running document" on google sometime. It's a good read.

samealmost wrote:

M, easy

T, moderate tempo 60 mins up to 10 miles (total miles on the day are more with warmup/cooldown)

W, easy

Th, easy

F, moderate tempo same as T

Sa, easy

Su, long and easy and sometimes with some moderate tempo

The easy runs are all at around 65% max HR. The moderate days start at around 75% max HR. When you're comfortably holding that effort and there is no loss of pace on your runs, you bump it up to about 78% or so. Hold until comfortable. Bump to the low 80s. Hold for a while. Repeat this until you are doing 10 mile tempos at best possible marathon HR (88 to 90%).

There are many more nuances to it. Look up the "hadd running document" on google sometime. It's a good read.

Cheers ears

Here’s how you run...

MOSTLY run at an easy effort

OFTEN run comfortably fast

OCCASIONALLY run in pain

Simple but true wrote:

Here’s how you run...

MOSTLY run at an easy effort

OFTEN run comfortably fast

OCCASIONALLY run in pain

I would say that is at least 90% of it. Great job!

Samealmost:

My plan was to do a standard 18 week plan with the first 8-10 weeks dedicated to 10k and the last eight dedicated to marathon. A local 10k lined up perfectly on the transition. But I’ve had some trouble transitioning to faster running. I ran a 15k in the classic HADD “couldnt run faster but could go around again” (even though his comment was typically reserved for 5k), and followed it up with a mile repeat workout a few days later at LT - 10s. Probably too fast. My hamstring has been tight for the last two weeks. I’m going to keep mileage up and dial back intensity until the tightness is gone (daily foam roll, etc) then slowly SLOWLY dial intensity back up. In the near future I will err on the side of too slow and not too fast. Still hoping to PR at boston. PR was from 8 years ago when I was in grad school. I’m no longer interested in also trying to pr at 10k and half distances though.

For easy run, it seems 65% HR a bit low. Say, if your max HR is 180, 65% of that is 117 - seems too low to me. I would think 70-75% be better, No?

When I am in sub 3 marathon shape, my HR is about 130-135 with 8'30" pace run, so roughly 70%, with a max of 185-190. To get HR to sub 120, I would need to slow down to 9-9'15ish - that seems too slow for a sub 3 marathoner.

That sounds like a good plan, theotherwhitehead. I think the one thing that keeps me from completely following Hadd is the lack of varied paces. So in my current rebuild/base phase I'm mostly doing easy miles, one classic Hadd tempo a week, a long run, and strides or a fartlek at least once a week (or strides twice a week). I'm hoping this mix will keep me from that can't go faster feeling (or quad/hammy strains). Still early days, though. Good luck in the Boston buildup!

TxMaster, I think the texts might say 65-70%. I just typed that all from memory. He does highlight how his philosophy of easy running is often way, way easier than most people are used to, though.

Do strides a few times a week with hadd, his training for base is great but you need some zip in those legs too or your top end will suffer from experience.

TxMaster wrote:

For easy run, it seems 65% HR a bit low. Say, if your max HR is 180, 65% of that is 117 - seems too low to me. I would think 70-75% be better, No?

When I am in sub 3 marathon shape, my HR is about 130-135 with 8'30" pace run, so roughly 70%, with a max of 185-190. To get HR to sub 120, I would need to slow down to 9-9'15ish - that seems too slow for a sub 3 marathoner.

Hadd actually says it should be 70-75% of max. In the example he gives, the guys max is 193 and so he set his easy days at a max HR of 145 (75%), or lower. It should also be noted that as you build your mileage, you can add a little intensity. In the example, Hadd shows the runner doing 2 runs per week at 145 HR, 2 runs at 160 ("tempo"), the long run at 155, and the last 2 runs at a 150. He also sometimes has the long run include time at 160 as well (up to an hour)

The idea is that the two tempos start a bit higher, for the example, he has "Joe" start with the "tempos" being between 155-160 (10-15 bmp higher than your easy days should be good), with the goal being to get these up to 175, which was his goal marathon HR (15-20 beats below max). So he might start off with 3x15 mins at HR of 155-160, then 2x25, 3x20 etc until you can do 75 mins or 10 miles at this HR, still feel good and the HR should stay even at 160 the whole time, it shouldn't drift near the end but still average 160, that doesn't count. Once you can do this, you up it by 5 bpm, so now you try to do the same thing with 165 bpm and so on until you hit your target marathon HR for 10 miles (or 75 mins, whichever comes first). It will take a while to move this up, in the example, Joe took 12 weeks to move from 160 to starting 170.

Hadd also does add some workouts every once in a while. After 8 weeks, he introduced a 200/200 fartlek, where you run 200 meters at 5k pace, then 200 meters at 5k +12-15 secs, do this for 10k total.

Below is the summary at the end of the Hadd, document, but I strongly suggest anyone read the document in full (it's not that long) if they are interested in using it.

If your HRmax is 193 OR HIGHER, then the following applies:

HRmax: 193+ (even if over 200)

Best possible HRmarathon: 175-177 HRav (note, this is the average taken from mile 5 to mile

25, not the peak. Your HR might peak to 181 in the final miles as you throw everything onto the

fire).

Suggested training HR's: Easy every day running: 145 HR or lower (If you begin really unused

to this form of training, initially you might start at 150, but as soon as the pace at this HR

improves, it is recommended that you reduce your easy running HR to 145 or lower). This can

often feel very slow to begin with, but should improve within 3-6 weeks and continue to improve

for months. You may do as much running as you wish at this HR/intensity (always being careful

to avoid overuse injury).

Initial LTHR (initial lactate threshold heart rate): As with Joe in the example, begin at 155-160

and do not let the HR rise on the run. Build up the distance you can run for, over time, to 10

miles. At first, you may have to slow down within the run to maintain HR, but over the weeks

and months, you should note that the running speed begins to remain more stable and you do not

have to slow down (so much) to stop your HR rising. In time, the running pace at this HR (and

all other HR’s above it) will also improve. Only move this HR up when your running pace vs HR

is rock steady and you (easily) are able to run 10 miles at this HR without loss of pace or rise in

HR. At that point, only move the HR up by 5bpm and begin again. The slower you build up the

first time, the better your pace at HRmarathon will be. Remain at each HR as long as you are

seeing improvement on the 2400m test and definitely until your pace vs HR is stable. You are

trying to reach a state where your predicted/expected marathon pace and your 170 HR pretty

much coincide in the 2400m test. And that this pace per mile can be maintained in training for

10-15 miles at 170-175 HR without rising effort or rising HR.

For example training weeks (60, 70, even 80+ mpw), go back to Part V (B) and plug your

numbers into the example weeks given for Joe's training. (Want to run more mileage? Add in

some extra miles at 140-150 HR. This can be as doubles on some days, up to 8miles in the

morning and 10 miles at night. All easy aerobic running.)

Rid yourself of any sign of impatience and just knuckle down to the work. Remember, a

constantly dripping source of water will eventually erode solid rock. For this to work, you need

your muscles to change, and change takes time. Mitochondrial growth takes ~6 weeks. So look

for small change every 3 weeks or so, and significant change every 6 weeks or so. It is not

suggested you 2400m test more regularly than every 6 weeks. More often is just frustrating, like

someone who is trying to lose weight, jumping on the scales every morning hoping to see the

pounds drop off. Just do the work and give it time to have an effect. Farmers don’t pull up their

potatoes every five minutes to see if they are growing…

One other thing, the 200/200 workout is only done every 3-4 weeks once added.

Who’s Jarod Word?