Training Discussion Thread - outsiderunner

I’d like to note that “high caliber” is of course relative. If you are looking for advice from the best athletes you can get it from, you should ask Bird, stat, or Smoove (maybe others too), who are all better performers/trainers than me. I do, however, empathize with you somewhat and can offer you a perspective. Even if it’s direct, please know it’s all with respect...

5:46 is not fast. With a bit of focused training, you can probably run that pace for 10 miles. Maybe a half-marathon with a great buildup. Paces from “CV” to “Half-Marathon” feel gratifying. They are achievable on a regular basis even when a little tired, can happen for short periods “organically” during/at the end of normal runs, feel super efficient, don’t leave you feeling depleted, and give you that someone-liked-your-post type emotional boost when you see a “good” number come up on your watch. Some days, getting to this zone feels easy or even automatic.

I’m a runner - of course I can relate to that feeling. It’s fun to feel like you’re hammering without digging deep. But this is lazy. Wouldn’t it be quite a coincidence if the most fun way to train was also the best way to get faster?

The best training involves unpleasantness, pain, and monotony. It is work. It involves cycles of pushing beyond your comfort zone and reigning yourself in.

But again, it’s all about what you want to get out of your relationship with this sport. I certainly don’t always train according to the best way that I know how. At this point in my life, I run for fun, to spend time with friends/my gf, and as structured relief from a stressful job. I like to race and race hard, but am comfortable with the thought of never PRing at a track distance again, and I’m ultimately happy with what I get out of the sport. Are you?

If you are happy with your relationship with distance running, and with seeing where your preferred approach gets you (even if it’s not complete fulfillment of potential), then please free yourself from this hand-wringing and asking for advice. If not, then take the advice. Doing either half way makes no sense.

Either way, you’ll be okay. Whether or not it is optimal, you are clearly both training and racing well. Sub 2:50 at 50 is an awesome accomplishment.

I must say, I am pleasantly surprised at the response to this thread. I was worried that it had the chance of being overtaken by jerks. Quite the opposite.

The fact that this online community has chimed in in such a positive way with incredibly sound advice across the board (Smoove, GT, Allen, HRE, gfmah, HRE, slo, Fascinating, etc) goes to show that we want to see one of our own succeed. And be happy with his running.

I do plan on making some general training recommendations when I have a little more time to sit down and organize my thoughts.

I did just want to add a couple thoughts now. Up until this fall, OR had never really redlined a long race while employing his current method of training. The 2:52 he ran last year and the 2:49 he ran earlier this year were both substantial negative splits where he admittedly held back. He ended both races feeling fresh.

Rather than giving too much credit to any radical changes in training since the spring - because there were no radical changes as Smoove points out - I would give a large credit to OR’s breakthrough in his 20 miler this fall to the fact that he finally went for it from the gun. He had a group of guys to work with, had great conditions, and the perfect atmosphere to be pushed. He put it on the line that day, slightly positive split, but honestly had little if any room for improvement with that performance.

He also admitted that he does not know how much harder he can train than he has been training. And he is right. He can’t progress much more than he does on his fliers. He can’t add more volume without slowing down the pace.

In short, we finally have a much better gauge of where his ability lies off his current style of training. And it’s right about where I thought it was last winter - 2:45.

If you want 2:40:29 or sub 2:40 you are gonna have to mix up a couple things. Not revolutionarily overhaul your program, but make some tweaks.

You can’t do things half way, as Fascinating wisely pointed out.

You know my training, OR. You know I have been on the mend for a good 6 weeks from this plaguing back issue. Would it surprise you if I told you that I did a nice little 5 x 1k workout this morning with 1:00 recovery jogs at 3:34/km (5:45/mi) average? It felt like I held back, it felt exhilarating, it felt controlled - much how you describe your fliers.

But as Fascinating would also point out, while that was a light introductory workout for me, I did 3.1 times the work of your one mile at that effort. Which will improve my ability at that pace. Which will make marathon pace easier. Which will buffer the 1:00/1:00 fartleks I am doing at even faster effort.

In short, I worked less hard, to get in more efficient work at your fastest training pace. And I enjoyed 3.1 times that flier sensation than you did. And I will extend that workout to at least twice it’s curre volume.

There is a way to uphold the integrity of the OR training method by implementing small tweaks to make major improvements.

Are you really finally interested? If not, keep doing your thing. But don’t “halfway”your thing by wondering what if, or continually asking why you aren’t faster than you are...

Are you ready for sub 2:40?...

Will Boston 2019 feature a head to head matchup of Stonecutter vs Outside Runner?

slo-twitch wrote:

Will Boston 2019 feature a head to head matchup of Stonecutter vs Outside Runner?

I’m training Mrs. Stone to crack 3:30 at Boston this year, and will be running that race with her. I will instead be looking to PR at the Philly Love Run in March (HM) a couple weeks prior. Then I am taking a serious swing at 2:40 myself at CIM 2019.

OR should win the Boston head-to-head by a good 10k+.

Greatness.

I have been reading RRT thread for more than a year now, my take on ORs training an OR himself.

- OR is a talented runner

- OR is stubborn and is unlikely to change his training. At best he will comment how his training already incorporates any training aspect (tempo, cv, vo2, you name it)

- OR will continue asking training advices

- OR will continue improve for a few years at least as his running age is still young (more cumulated lifetime miles), barring injury

- OR training works for him to certain extent (partly because he seems to be remarkably durable)

- OR would run better (significantly) with good coach and polarized training program*

*If he really bought into program and believe the effectiveness of it. Listen to somw Alex Hutchinson podcast or read his books. It is of extreme importance to be confident in your training (what OR certsinly has), then even suboptimal training will still work quite successfjlly.

I think that if one really wants to reach his/her limits, then the person will experiment and try various ways on the way. There is no one way, I think that stimulus have to evolve with athlete. The best example is any high level coach, usually that coach will be the one most interested and best example of being student of the game. Learning never stops.

I do not think that OR will make meaningful changes, though. He seems to be stupidly stubborn and set in his ways.

Fascinating wrote:

The best training involves unpleasantness, pain, and monotony. It is work. It involves cycles of pushing beyond your comfort zone and reigning yourself in.

This can be true but is not necessarily true in all cases. If you want to read a direct contradiction to the above statement, hop on over to this week's RR&T thread and check out darkwave's comments. If we're going to help OR then we have to quit being so dogmatic about things. Look, I have very strong beliefs about the effectiveness of Lydiard training. But even I have to admit that this may not be the best training for him. So be careful when you say "the best training..." or when you call OR "stupidly stubborn." That's where we begin to lose our way in this discussion.

Sometimes "stupidly stubborn and set in his ways" is a description other people use for someone who is determined and who believes in what s/he is doing. From what I can gather, this is sort of the case with OR. It seems to me that he's had success doing things his way and is looking to tinker with it rather than go in a different direction. But I'm new here.

In this case, as you will see unfold through this thread or by reviewing any past threads, the “stupidly stubborn and set in his ways” description is spot on. It’s an unique combination of his compulsive desire to ask others for training advice and then his complete unwillingness to take any of it.

There used to be a guy in the thread that would hammer 10 miles in the low 7s on a treadmill about 4-5 days a week and that'd be all his training (maybe a low 2:50s guy if I recall correctly and if he ever ran an honest road race?). Called himself run2death. Sometimes he added some really long weekend runs or back-to-backs to prepare for ultras. He did pretty well for himself. He recognized he probably was training differently than most, could be considered non-optimized, but no one ever tried to change him or started new threads to debate his methods because he was comfortable and confident in what he was doing. No questions asked.

Sounds like too hot 3 found a new username? More than a little jaded, my friend. Anyone else would see that Stonecutter genuinely wants to help OR.

I actually love this new thread all about Outside Runner. It sounds like he is really serious about taking it to the next level. His running is an inspiration to us older harriers.

And I love the other training thread about many runners’ training.

For me it is way more clear to have both. And it’s great to see contributors like HRE weighing in.

Thank you Stonecutter! Go Outside Runner!

Right, but unlike Outside Runner, Run2Death was not constantly asking for advice and ways to change his training.

Exactly.

The Stone Cutter

While I have to say that I too chuckled at Black hole’s post about OR, I think the tone of the conversation is precipitously teetering in the danger zone. I would like to discuss with OR some possibilities regarding alternatives for his training. However, I don’t want it to come at the expense of the regular training thread.

I am creating a new thread specifically designed to continue my conversation with OR

Others on this thread are welcome to join, and this new thread is not designed with the intent to discourage OR or anyone else to continue regularly posting on the RRTT.

Just, I think we need a separate outlet to carry on what I hope to be respectful, back-and-forth, meaningful dialogue about OR’s training.

Tone stutter's comment is a little uncalled-for imo, The Stone Cutter started this thread because he thought the OR discussion was dominating the RRTT and it would be easier and better(for focused discussion) to start a stand alone thread on it. I believe he was right with this thought. I do understand the comment about not asking for ORs permission whether he wanted this thread to be started. OR raise any objections?

Since ive joined RRTT I have always been interested in OR training because it is so different. I believe it has been made pretty clear that he is a valuable addition to the thread and is not discouraged by this separate thread to stop posting in RRTT.

Apart from the comments below, OR I suppose this thread has the intent to both discuss your training and acts as a response to your request for feedback. What are you now thinking about your training style? and will you take any action now that there has been a decent amount of comments (whether it be sticking with what works, tinkering, or taking risk with larger changes). I believe we can all agree the common intent is for you to be fitter/faster/happier then ever before. The challenge comes in the best way to achieve that.

All the Best,

-RunnerSam

RunnerSam - You are such a thoroughly nice guy and a valued poster here and elsewhere on LR. Your comments are always interesting, and never anything but nice. Indeed, I have much to think about, but I am ready to give a general answer: yes, I am ready to go to the next level, and am very encouraged by Stone’s offer and am VERY interested to see what he has in mind.

fascinated - You are right. Spot-on right, in fact. 5:46 is not fast. When I mentioned Monday’s and yesterday’s closing paces, I was just tryning to describe a difference that I felt in my legs, trying to see if any of you other fine runners have ever felt something that specific...something that kind of sneaks up on you as you finish a run.

Stone - I have not taken offense to you starting this thread, as I can find nothing ingenuine in your intentions, and so no harm or foul at all in not asking me. I have taken for granted that your interest in me is nothing but positive, and in a decidedly “fraternal” spirit. I think you would be a fine coach/director for me...though I can tell you now, I think I would stink at intervals. I realize that, to a cetain extent, they must be done, but I have never been that great with them (actually, a 6x800 is usually pretty tolerable for me, but I would probably stink up the joint with mile or two-mile reps.). That is just my take on it, and I am not trying to sway you or change your approach. You have shown me that you know what you are doing, and that you understand me as a runner (as well as one could via the Internet).

So, wow, sub-2:40...that would be pretty awesome. Even 2:40:29 would give me a massive high. :-) And if I have not said it yet, I want to mention that I am flattered that you have such confidence in me.

All the best to you, Stone, and to everyone else here.

OR-

So I have given a lot of thought to your feedback over the past 11 months since I re-joined the thread. Here is what I have gathered:

You had some bad experience(s) early in your running career, especially with the use of a coach. He had you try “traditional” training (speedwork, intervals, tempo runs, long runs) at a variety of paces that you either did not enjoy and/or did not lead to the results you desired. I believe you had negative experience(s) with the marathon early on as well - hitting a wall and dramatically slowing toward the end of the race(s). I believe you also mentioned that you had an injury very early in your running career, but you have been remarkably durable since. It was only after switching over to your current training method of running high end aerobic progression runs on a daily basis that you started seeing a drop in your race performances, most notably the marathon. Not only did you break 3 hours (which was the original goal a few years back), but you have PR’d at least 3 marathons in a row, progressing from 2:52 to 2:49 to now 2:46.

I think you would acknowledge, however, that it wasn’t until your impressive 20 miler this fall (and then your subsequent PR marathon several weeks later) that you actually went to the well in a race. Up until those two races, you held back at your races, especially the long ones - most likely I would suspect out of the fear of blowing up like you had earlier in your career. It is a satisfying and gratifying way to end a race on a high note. I gather that’s how most of your daily runs lead you feeling as well. Finishing on a positive note.

Well now you have actually gone to the well. Twice. After several impressive years of building your mileage, running it consistently week after week, and gradually progressing the pace of your daily runs. Whereas before you might end a run with the last mile or so in the low 6:00s, you have gotten to the point where you can (several times a week even) crank out 2 to 3 miles in the 5:50s or even 5:40s at the end of your runs. But now you can see where going to the well will get you. About 2:45 for a marathon. And I am guessing about 1:18 for HM if you were to race one right now. And you are in agreement with me that going to the well in a 5k would probably get you in the low 17s to high 16s.

So what now? How do you keep progressing with your current method of training? Train HARDER? How does that look - averaging 6:00-6:20/mi for your daily runs? Progressing to 5:30s or 5:20s at the finish? Knocking out 80-90 mpw at your current paces? You are not physically able to do any of those. You know that. You are hitting up against a ceiling. Which, BY THE WAY, IS FINE. All that means is you have put in the necessary aerobic work over the last few years to MAXIMIZE THAT COMPONENT OF TRAINING.

So as others on this thread have already alluded to, you need to find an alternative way to accomplish the end of getting even faster.

If you are sincere in targeting 2:40, which I believe you have the talent to do, you need to tweak the method. I don’t believe you need to overhaul it. But you do need to tweak it.

I would take all of the things you enjoy about running and keep them in your training plan. I would target the general pace (5:40-5:50/mi) that gives you that “flier” feeling and incorporate more of it in a more structured way. I would never put you on a track for faster efforts, but I would employ those hills you enjoy for fartlek running and hill repeats at approximate 5k effort, relying on a feeling (“fast”) versus any designated pace. I would keep in tact the progression run but use it in two altered specific forms: I like you using it on your daily runs but at a slower pace. I also like you using it on some of your long runs with the purpose of finishing the run at and around marathon pace.

Going faster miles an hour practically recommended the schedule I would recommend for you. Which is based on the classic Kenyan schedule. Six days a week with an optional seventh day. One “faster” run, one “tempo” run and one “longer run” per week. For you, since you enjoy running and have responded well to adding that seventh day, I might recommend rotating a 6 day week with a 7 day week. So that you are running 13 out of every 14 days. For the week that you run 6 days a week, I would make the long run end with a quality progression - the way you love ending your runs. For the weeks that you run 7 days a week, I would make the long run a more traditional easy long run.

So how does this look?

Week 1

M- 6-10 miles easy

T- 8-10 miles incorporating fartlek of 10-15 x (1:00 “fast”/1:00 “easy”).

W- 6-10 miles easy

Th- 10-12 miles incorporating 6-8 miles of tempo running (6:00-6:15/mi), either continuous or broken.

F- 6-10 miles easy

Sa- 14-18 miles easy

Su- 4-6 miles easy

Total: 54-76 miles

Week 2

M- 6-10 miles easy

T- 8-10 miles incorporating 300-400m hill repeats. 8-14 x hill (“fast”) with easy jog down recoveries.

W- 6-10 miles easy

Th- 10-12 miles incorporating 8-12 x 1km at 5:40-5:50/mi with :75 recovery jogs.

F- 6-10 miles easy

Sa- 14-18 miles with the last 6-8 miles at marathon effort (6:05-6:15/mi).

Su- Rest

Total: 50-70 miles.

Rinse and repeat.

So what does “easy” mean? As practically everyone on this thread has chimed in “EASY” is an effort, not a pace. But easy is going to naturally be slower the more you add in structured, faster workouts. How easy? That’s really up to you. Easy enough so that you feel recovered enough to do the next quality session. I would recommend for you to even keep the progression “formula” for your easy runs, starting the first mile or so very slowly (probably 8:00ish for you) and then progressing as it only naturally unfolds. But I would limit you for now to a top end speed of 7:00/mi for your easy runs, even if you feel the urge to go faster. So a typical easy run might progress from 8:00/mi → 7:00/mi and average around 7:30/mi. Bear in mind, while this does represent about a minute per mile slower for you then your daily runs now, it also represents about 6 to 10 more minutes worth of running for you for a 6 to 10 mile run. Those additional minutes are time in the bank, and are also performed at a much gentler and more absorbable pace so that you are primed and ready to go on “workout” day. Also bear in mind that some “easy” days might naturally slow to 8:00/mi with NO progression. Your body will tell you the right pace.

Some questions from you that I can anticipate. How to do the fartleks? I do them this way (similar to gfmah): run easy for ten to twenty minutes as a warmup, and when the watch hits a round minute (say 20:00), I will run “fast” until the watch hits 21:00, and then I will run “easy” until the watch hits 22:00, and so on. If I am doing 10 ons/offs total, I know that represents 20:00 of total fartlek running, so I will be done with the fartlek at 40:00 of that particular run (the 20:00 warmup and then the 20:00 of fartlek). If I am doing 15 ons/offs, I know that is 30:00 of total fartlek running, so I would be done with the fartlek at 50:00 of that particular run. I NEVER know the paces of the on or offs of the fartlek. I focus on running fast and relaxed for the minute “on”; I focus on running what feels like a jog and controlling my breathing for the minute “off.” I don’t know and don’t care what the splits are. That way you don’t have to think about anything. Your overall average pace of the run will give you enough feedback.

How to do the tempo runs, broken or continuous? That is really a matter of preference and how you are feeling. Again, I like to start with 15:00-20:00 of easy running to warmup up. Then you can either do either a straight tempo (say 6 miles of 6:00-6:15/mi), a straight progression tempo (how you generally prefer them, like 6:15-->6:00/mi), or a broken tempo like 6 x 1 mile, or 3 x 2 miles, or 2 x 3 miles, with a brief recovery period (generally about 1:00 recovery for every mile run). Most runners can safely absorb a little more quantity doing a broken tempo - so instead of doing a straight 6 mile tempo, doing an 8 x 1 mile or a 4 x 2 mile tempo instead. It is that concentrated volume at the right pace that makes the big difference from what you are doing now. You could also experiment with doing alternating tempos like 4x (1 mile at 6:20 / 1 mile at 5:50) for a total of 8 miles of running, but I am not sure if that is too much thinking or too much work for you. I would rather you find the method that is the most enjoyable for you.

You may have some questions after reading all of this, which I would be happy to answer as I can. You may still decide to hold off on changing anything with your training right now, which I understand. Above all, I want you to find continued happiness and success with your running. And above all, if you are going to go "your own way" - believe in it and stop asking for input. I say that with all respect. You need to believe in what you are doing.

Happy running...

Stone Cutter has been so patient in doing above. The biggest insult would be to not try his recommendations after all of that "If he would have me" BS. Prove me wrong Outsiderunner. Prove me wrong.

Stone Cutter- you're a very patient, helpful person. I think your support would be better served helping out others on the forum who actually listen.

The Stone Cutter wrote:

So what now? How do you keep progressing with your current method of training? Train HARDER? How does that look - averaging 6:00-6:20/mi for your daily runs? Progressing to 5:30s or 5:20s at the finish? Knocking out 80-90 mpw at your current paces? You are not physically able to do any of those. You know that. You are hitting up against a ceiling. Which, BY THE WAY, IS FINE. All that means is you have put in the necessary aerobic work over the last few years to MAXIMIZE THAT COMPONENT OF TRAINING.

Stone, excellent response. However, as you know, there are many ways to skin a cat. I don't necessarily agree that OR has maximized the aerobic component of his training. I would not suggest that he increase the pace of the progressions runs any further but I might suggest that he increase the volume and slow down as necessary to adjust to the increased workload. That would be a compromise on what he is doing currently but something worth considering especially if running a marathon as far below 2:40 as possible is more important to him than running fast at the shorter distances. Someone mentioned earlier that 5:40 pace is fast but not super fast. In a similar way one could say that 70 miles per week is significant but it's not a CEILING.

Good analysis, as well. I do not disagree with your principle at all. I just don’t know if OR is up to running 80 to 100 mpw with the bulk of those miles being dramatically slower than he is accustomed to. Which is why I recommended the types of changes that I did. They keep intact his general method of training, without sacrificing the parts he enjoys the most, but adding some key elements which are currently missing. If he is open for a higher volume of mileage at a slower pace, I may modify some of my recommendations.