Training Discussion Thread - outsiderunner

Ha funny idea for thread:-)

I already commented on OR training before but here are more ideas.

Lower average speed-run more

OR is older so his fast fibres are slowing down- that will become a limiting factor once his aerobic development starts to stall out. You need to have some speed to run a fast race. There's a reason Kipchoge ran 2:01 outside of just mileage and talent. Energy is on a continuum, being fast makes moderate paces faster. If I can bench 300lbs, I can probably bench 225 a lot, If I can only bench 230, 225 is a struggle and I'm not going to be able to do it more than once.

The aerobic component of running is huge, it's the most important part of training but you need modulation as well so that you are not letting other systems deteriorate. If you stop training speed, you lose it and that has a knock on effect. You are only as strong as your weakest link so if OR can't ever get his 5k below 17, it will limit how fast he can run over the marathon distance because like the weight analogy above, you ain't ever going to rep 8 and 1/2 5ks at 17:30 pace when you can only run 17:00 for one. Speed will limit a guy like OR eventually because he is a diesel engine operating only on bettering how it consumes diesel. It's only going to lead to a plateau.

As he gets faster, its then going to become harder and harder to do the types of progression runs or race pace runs every day as he is doing because he'll have to rub up closer to higher intensities. i.e if he gets to 2:30 for the marathon and keeps his training the same. His runs will be as fast as Mo Farah's and he won't be training at a pace he can hold for 3 hours anymore but an intensity that he can hold for 2:30 hours and will be inching ever closer to using lactate as fuel thus causing some serious problems with fueling and recovery and eventually breaking down which will further add to plateauing and detraining from time off. Energy systems condense as you get faster and besides this paragraph, that means you need to start scraping at all of them for an inch to improve.

His training would also at that point start recruiting more fast-oxiadative fibres unintentionally and his slow twitch fibres would start to detrain leading to loss of fitness because he won't be able to run as much volume at a low enough intensity to maintain or improve aerobic capacity and the results will suffer.

Seen all this happen a million times before with people who train like that.

Hey, OR, I have just about completed a post, but I decided not to post it. If you're interested in seeing it, email me at

jeffintaipei2014 "at" gmail dot com

OR here is my $.02 worth. I told you before I trained like you. From March my junior year to August before my senior year, I did progression runs 4-5 times a week. I didn't run track. The head track coach had me do 40x400 to punish me for not starting a week earlier even though my intermural basketball team was in the playoffs. My average weekly pace I would guess was somewhere from 6:40-6:20. I ran 55-65 miles a week at that time. Similar to what you did your last marathon cycle.

XC season started and I went back to a more standard workout routine. Probably similar to Daniels, Coe, or some other coach with a bunch of speed work. This was about 14 weeks with a good progression.

After the season I went back to 6:20-6:40 average pace for 65-70 miles. I ran a certified road 5k in 14:57 and a 10k in 31:38. I'm not posting this to brag it was 30+ years ago and I struggle at half the speed now. I'm posting it to show you that there is a very large difference in our race times even though the training averaged around the same pace.

I really don't care how you train. I think you would be very surprised if you switch it up though. I agree with Not a College Runner"I believe an abrupt change in stimulus is often what produces breakthroughs." Even a 4-8 week block of working on improving economy, efficiency or speed could do you wonders for any distance you choose to race.

The Stone Cutter wrote:

By working much less hard and more intelligently than the "hammer away" system you employ. I am not nearly as talented as you are, but my marathon PR is practically the same as yours even though I run 4-5 days a week in the 7:30-9:00/mi range. Why do you think that is? Can you imagine how fast you would be if ran 6 x 1 miles at 5:30-5:35/mi in one session a week, versus periodically progressing to one mile at the pace every so often at the end of a progression?...

Sorry, I'm just butting in here without knowing too much context, but what exactly is the basis for this "talent" claim?Certainly any time us runners make claims about talent it's a bit nebulous, but I've gotta say that the optics of "you're so much more talented than me that I achieve more than you have on far less volume and hard work" are not good. I don't mean to be snide or anything, I just imagine we've all heard from a highschool team mate that if we only ran their superior training plan of 20 miles a week the way they did, we could run 15:30 like them, and how silly our training must be to only achieve 16:30 off of 60 miles a week yada yada.

(Again I'm not trying to accuse you of this kind of foolishness, just trying to justify my excessive concern with these kinds of statements).

First of all, lots of good information and insights here. I really enjoy reading through most of the posts here.

I am on the same boat, 49 going into 50 with a marathon PR of 2:48.

From what I read and observed, there are 2 type of runners: ST and FT dominant (and everything in between). the ST runners succeed with more OR type of training while FT runners benefit greatly with interval + slow(er) recovery runs. So, with the kind of time OR has, I suspect he is the ST type (I am more of FT type though).

So, here is my time from this year for comparison:

400: 58"

800: 2'14"

mile: 5'03"

5K: 17'48"

10K: 38'03"

Marathon: 2:52

All above results from returning to runing for 5 month with weekly mileage: 45-50 with 1 vo2max interval, others are easy in around 7'30 - 8'30.

Clearly, I am under developed in aerobic and believe more mileage at the same slower pace will help. But, nontheless, maybe OR is doing what he need to do with slight change to add different stimula (instead of a drastic change in training style) - just my 2 cents.

TxMaster: Impressive times. Keep it up!

As for OR, I do believe he is more of a ST runner like you suggest from following his running for more than a year. A drastic change was probably not the best wording. Frankly, I don't know if OR is really an ST runner or just chooses to train like one. I think he had a coach that hammered him with intervals in the past and never got over being overtrained like that.

I don't put much faith in doing mostly progressions for workouts. Sure they feel good running and are great for building confidence. I just don't believe the means outweigh the gains. I think close to 50% of most progression runs can be classified as junk miles. Too fast for recovery, too slow for a benefit and hardly ever staying at a pace to build efficiency. With doing mostly progressions the only improvements to be made are to run harder.

Doing 4-6 progressions a week doesn't leave a person anywhere to go. You end up needing that warm up to start feeling good so you can start cutting pace again. It is somewhat a vicious cycle. So to do something else you really need to commit 1 day easy to recover, 1 day to do a different workout, and 1 more day to recover before doing another progression. Running 6 days a week that is somewhat drastic.

A long time ago I suggested he try doing an on/off type workout now and then. Done right on/offs can be just as fun as running progressions. How much of a ST runner OR is can be debated but he sure does seem to enjoy the rhythm of things. I would think they would fit into his style nicely with the ebb and flow and not be a drastic change. The on/offs would also provide him with some different stimulus and they are just as easy to modify during a run. Done the first day of the week would only require 2 days without a progression too.

Boy is this RR&T thread/community fascinating. I don’t always read, but I should probably start. Has this exact conversation been happening repetitively for like two years now?

I think Elixir made a great post - the faster OR gets, the more his paces will get compressed, and the harder it will get for him to make it down to “10k pace” in his progression runs multiple times a week. That’s okay though, seems like he’s having fun. If the marathon is his only goal, he will probably continue to make marginal improvements just by adding mileage (and maybe doubles), keeping his philosophy, and staying healthy.

To the point of this thread... my average training numbers look a lot like OR’s. For a 14 week stretch this year, I averaged 66 mpw with an average pace of 6:25/mile.

The big difference between us: I ran 14:34 and 30:19 this summer.

I mean seriously, is there any debate here? It is obvious that a reasonably-constructed training plan would result in better fitness that what OR has been doing. That’s not even worth discussing. Whether or not he WANTS to do it is a different story. We won’t/shouldn’t convince him to do something he doesn’t want to.

@OR: serious question -

My girlfriend has a very similar profile to you, with PRs of 17:29, 36:11, and 1:18:low. Her 800/1500 speed might even be worse than yours at 2:24/4:53. She will be looking for 2:45:00 in a marathon debut next fall (reasonable, IMO). I’d have to dig through her hand-written log for he details, but I’m guessing her average run pace is around 7:45. Would you be interested in a snippet of her training logs? I think they would seem scary to you. But they’re probably easier on your body than what you’re doing. Would you radically change your training to a more conventional (better) approach if I could GUARANTEE you a 5:00 marathon improvement?

What is your gut reaction to these workouts?

1) 6x1600 cut down from 5:48 to 5:34, 2:30 recovery

2) 10x1k in 3:36-8 with 1:30 recovery

3) 3 miles easy, 8 miles at 6:15, 3 miles easy

Outside Runner,

I’m interested in the thought process that you described (something like “I must be doing something right because I’m beating all these other runners who actually do intervals!”).

For me the thinking would have little to do with how others are running and be more along the lines of “How can I most effectively improve to my full potential?”

Or even something like “how is it that Smoove, who is maybe three years younger than you, is able to run 16 minutes faster in a marathon?” And then objectively take what you can from that.

Focus either on yourself or, to some extent, people who are faster than you. The other line of thinking feels weak to me.

Great thoughts. And you should totally contribute to the RRTT. Maybe get your girlfriend to come, too. I would be interested in hearing about her workouts.

And no, the conversation hasn't been going on for 2 straight years. But it has cropped up often over that period of time.

More like a year and a half, but yes. It's a vicious cycle of him being semi disappointed that his PRs aren't bigger and wondering why people doing 'easier' training in the thread are faster in races. Then when people answer his question he feels attacked and fights back because he loves progression runs and hardish steady efforts. This off-shoot thread started because he asked Stone for his opinion and then his immediate instinct here was to defend himself again. Fascinating in a "can't look away from car crash" sort of way?

Stone made almost exactly the same offer in the spring and we're still at square one. He either doesn't believe you or he enjoys his daily runs too much. Both are his prerogative.

His gut reaction to those workouts is to stress out and obsess over it in the days leading up to a scheduled workout with prescribed paces. If he misses the times he'll wonder what is wrong with him. He could get a lot of the same benefits from just doing sustained fartlek and alternations for set times, or just taking a few days a week easier so he could take a few days harder. That's where plenty of stress free improvement could come, not from giving him a 2s pace window to hit.

Stone Cutter- As nice as you are, I can't believe you still have the patience to keep doing this. Just let him do whatever his thing is. He certainly has some ego issues and the need for validation (as stated in the other thread). If he really wants validation, he should just keep doing what he's doing and shut everyone up by running that sub 2:40.

However, that's not what he wants. He wants to be the center of attention. He likes to hear he is talented. He likes the fact that this thread exists solely for him. He wants everyone to say a few words.

But at the end, there is no change. You all wasted your time. It's like a friend who keeps asking for advice on the SAME topic but never once taking it, yet wonders why his decision to not take the advice hurt him. Except in this scenario, we are all anonymous posters on a running messageboard. Calling each other "friends" is a stretch.

All the best

fascinated wrote:

Maybe get your girlfriend to come, too.

Might check the PNSO thread for help there.

Tin tin - Sorry it has taken me so long to respond. I kind of "grew into" progression runs. When I started running about six years ago, I just went out and ran, usually too fast in the early miles. I did not like how that felt. Thus, I started easing into runs and feeling better. I did for a while, and then was coached for a while, and I noticed along the way that I really liked the feeling of progression run. As has been pointed out, I have been doing them now for two years, and I call my better ones "flyers."

Will get to the other comments here later...some great stuff here...thanks.

Quickly...to the thoughtful poster who offered the 5:00 time cut guarantee, I say my answer is: yes. Black hole may think he is completely right about me, that I am mostly just fixated on myself and on getting attention, but he is wrong on that. Dead wrong. I want to run fast. I do not, though, want to stress over it or have it become too mechanical. But right now, I am more open to other ideas than ever.

This is an excellent post. I will get to what fascinating has discussed later, but for now could you please give me a specific recommendations for a sustained fartlek and alternations? Could the alterntaions be done on the road?...on hilly roads? Also, with track stuff, I am a bit of a simplton when it comes to timed rests...still do not quite get how people can remmber exactly where they left off in a rep. Thus, I use distance-based rests...200, 400, or whatever.

OR, get someone from your store to do a watch tutorial with you. Seems like timed test should just be a matter of hitting the lap button on your watch once your watch is in the proper mode.

moist wrote:

fascinated wrote:

Maybe get your girlfriend to come, too.

Might check the PNSO thread for help there.

Pulling that little snippet out sure makes me look like an ass. Here is the longer version of what I meant.

It would be cool for fascinating to come post his training in the thread as he has some great insights. It would also be super cool to see his girlfriend's training as I would personally be very interested in following someone shoot for the OTQ (and her times, and therefore probably her training, are closer to my own).

Pics NOT required.

outsiderunner wrote:

This is an excellent post. I will get to what fascinating has discussed later, but for now could you please give me a specific recommendations for a sustained fartlek and alternations? Could the alterntaions be done on the road?...on hilly roads? Also, with track stuff, I am a bit of a simplton when it comes to timed rests...still do not quite get how people can remmber exactly where they left off in a rep. Thus, I use distance-based rests...200, 400, or whatever.

If you don't know that you can do alternations on the road you haven't been paying very close attention to other people's training in the RR&T thread. Hilly roads make it harder to compare paces throughout a workout but that's not so big a deal if you're putting in honest efforts and aren't stressing about exact paces. If you were really curious you could sign up for Strava (for free) and link your Garmin (for free) and get an after-run report out of GAP (Grade adjusted pace), which estimates equivalent pace on hills to level ground. Still Improving regularly references GAP in his on-road workouts.

Alternations and fartleks are often done on a time basis precisely because they're easier to keep track of when you are not on the track, using the lap function on your watch as Smoove describes, or pre-programming a workout that you could repeat or reference each week or 2.

Since nobody has responded to Hochschild.. In reference to your talent comment,

It appears you are young since your reaction was to say" ...we've all heard from a highschool team mate...". It does not appear that you took into account that OR is 49 (or 50). Also The Stone Cutter and OR have both been posting/reading their weekly training on the RRTT for years so they have a pretty good idea of each others running. 2:46 at 49 = Talent

In response to the thread in general, OR I suggest you take a cycle and trust somebody (multiple?) from the RRTT that you trust to write out a training plan (not one of those 14 week strict training schedules but an ever changing/adjusting week-by-week plan). Follow it as best you can and give feedback. If you believe it has made you fitter after its over then go from there, if it does not make you fitter then go back to doing what has been working.

I have never spoken negatively of your training style for a few reasons. 1 I don't want to be the one to suggest change then it not work, 2 It has always seemed like you enjoyed it and 3 You have achieved much more than I with my more traditional training style.

I will give some comments defending the OR method

- The hilly routes he runs can act like intervals (on-uphill, off-downhill)

- As I understand it one of the main reasons runners do not 'workout' (or even run harder) everyday is because of the risk of injury, although OR has gotten worried about various aches he (correct me if im wrong) has taken little to no time off due to injury since I've joined the RRTT in June(?). If runners could go hard everyday and not get injured, they would (see cycling and swimming).

- He has gotten PRs in the 5k and Marathon, plus ran a quick 20miler and otherwise has been improving a lot over the past year or so(again, correct me if im wrong here since ive only been around half the year).

Runners have gone hard everyday with injury, you may be too young to remember the 90's or pre-lydiard days but as learned from days, running hard and avoiding injury didn't exactly show in their results compared to the higher volume eras

Cyclists and swimmers do not go hard everyday, I'm not sure where you got this idea but if you go out in the winter with a pro cyclist, you would see them doing hours in the saddle at zone 2 intensites. Citation: A good friend of mine is ranked 8th in the Country, he is not a pro because he is too old to get a contract but reguraly competes with pros and is coached by a pro at continental level. Look at how riders deterioate in a grand tour.