van aaken

Bob - I'm around 130 lbs (59K?) - I've had good success in long races without any calories but I can't do it without water.

My best marathons were run only on water with little to no sports drink or food. And they were usually very evenly paced i.e. 2:34:30 (1:17:30,1:17:00), 2:36:50 (1:18:50, 1:18:00). So I wasn't crashing or anything.

One of the most interesting experiences I had was during a 100-miler. Since everybody was eating I thought I had to as well. So I had a power bar and a little food in the 20-30 mile range. By 35 miles I was having trouble and was considering dropping out. A fellow runner handed me 2 cups of water and told me to drink them. He said I looked dehydrated. I told him I had been drinking every 3 or 4 miles but he said that wasn't enough. On his suggestion, I drank a cup of water at the end of every one mile loop. By the 40's (miles that is) I started to feel better and then ran all the way to the finish drinking a cup (6-8 oz?) of water every mile. I finished in 14:11:37 (7:04, 7:07). I'll bet my last 60 miles were all within 5-10 secs of each other (8:30 per mile). The only person who ran a the second half faster was Rae Clarke and he set a North American record of 12:12. I had NO calories - only water -from 35 miles on. Interesting I thought.

The weather for the 100 miler was in the 40's. I always had trouble with the heat and still do to this day.

My general feeling is that you may or may not need sports drink or calories or whatever. But you probably need less than you think. And there's no substitute for being aerobically fit.

All the best,

Paul

Vladimir - if you do an internet search on Ed you can eventually find all that info. He stumbled onto his training methods mostly do to an injury that didn't allow him to run fast. If my memory serves me correctly, he was fast when he was young, he stopped running, and then he picked it up later in life (40's?) - not entirely sure.

Sometimes he visits this forum. Maybe he'll do a pop-in.

You can do a search of the letsrun messages (using Ed Whitlock) and you'll see stuff he said.

Bye for now,

Paul

Thanks for all the replies.

PTF, HRE and Vladimir all reinforced what the good Doctor said. I cannot help, but feel the relatively low bodyweight helped.

I'm aware of the lack of fluids and other items in the 'old days' by reading, not by experience. I particularly recall Arthur Lydiard speak of his experiences in hot weather in 'thons began at noon or later in hot climates. Brutal.

Glad to see you posting after a bit of a hiatus PTF.

This is all very interesting. Unfortunately I am having computer troubles.

Per Schul's book Igloi told Schul, after he had left him, that a coach must experiment. I know Joe Douglas has made modifications too.

By the way, there was no water on the Boston course when I first ran that race.

I do not think that it is that Ed Whitlock is evassive. I think it is that his training is very simmple. I think track training has become far too technical at least for me. I got my best results by just running from my door and racing. Ed has posted now and then on threads on here. What he says is real. He does do a little regimented fartlek very occassionaly and races for speed. I have suggested that he post on OMBTS' thread but so far he has not done so regularly. He has great genes, took a long break from running and has great mechanics. He knows himself.

I did not mean evassive in a bad way. Perhaps he has been asked the same quesiton by so many people that it is now causes an irked response. I have the greatest admiration for his running and only want to learn more. I also went thru a techinical period. My training diary used to have time I started run; time I finished; weight before and weight after; morning pulse; pulse before I ran; pulse after I finished; pulse 30/60/90 minutes after run; what I ate that day (divided by items, calories, fat, protein). Water consumed, other liquids consumed during the day. Hours of sleep (at what start and finish time). How many times I used the bathroom (even in depth as to weather it was clear or not- as well as if it floated -- was supposed to tell if you were hydrated-- more liquid in (*&*(*(&( it will sink. That was way too techinical-- I was spending more time writing things down than running. I once showed it to Bob Campbell and he had a great laugh over it and he Kurt Steiner, and Joe Klinerman used to call be the techinical kid- I was running the experiment on myself-- by the way my run to pick up my car was 96:20-- damn stop lights.

Vladimir - re Ed Whitlock

http://www.personalbest.ca/Articles/article001.htm

Excellent article. We all should strive to follow his example.

I don't get irked by questions, I find it much easier to answer questions than give a straight presentation. The link given by PTF to an article written by Mike McGowan is now several years old, a few things have changed but it is still generally valid. Mike McGowan was an excellent runner in his own right, winning the Detroit marathon I believe. I have gradually extended my long runs since the article, but I think I am at the limit now. My weight is lower than when the article was written. My training is very simple and relatively non structured, maybe I could do better if I had a professional coach, manager, masseur, dietician, trained at altitude, took supplements etc etc but I am neither entirely convinced or motivated to go that route. It would be nice if the whole T&F scene could get back to the simpler days of old, unrealistic though. It does still exist to a large extent in the English harrier club tradition though. One of the reasons I am proud to wear a Ranelagh Harriers club vest, a club now 125 years old.

Ed, thanks for jumping in this discussion. We need more individuals such as yourself that show that there are not right answers to the training quesitions. That which works for you and to a smaller degree me; show, that everyone is not responding to the same training. You mentioned going longer how much longer? Finally in the hope that you have a sense of humor- I think that you joining the club could have something to do with the fact that when you call up the website under training all it mentions is ladies. Thanks once again for sharing your aspects of running- hopefully some day we will all be running in the 70's and beyond.

vladimir wrote:

Ed, thanks for jumping in this discussion. We need more individuals such as yourself that show that there are not right answers to the training quesitions. That which works for you and to a smaller degree me; show, that everyone is not responding to the same training. You mentioned going longer how much longer? Finally in the hope that you have a sense of humor- I think that you joining the club could have something to do with the fact that when you call up the website under training all it mentions is ladies. Thanks once again for sharing your aspects of running- hopefully some day we will all be running in the 70's and beyond.

Up to 3 hours now intead of 2 when the article was written. Well I don't train with Ranelagh, they are about 3000 miles from here, I only visit on occasion.

Ed - thanks for the visit - do you pretty much run the same thing every day, day after day? Do you plan any variety or do you just go how you feel?

How do you handle it when things go awry - minor injuries, not feeling good, not responding etc? I'm assuming they do now and then.

It's interesting how similar your training is compared to that recommended by Dr Van Aaken. Yet it's my understanding that you came to your methods on your own.

Sorry for so many questions. I didn't want to miss the opportunity. Again - thanks.

All the best,

Paul

Coach Clay Van Aiken?

bumper

I'd like to thank everyone who's participated in this great thread. It's been inspiring. I have the RW book, The Van Aaken Method, and also a Tafnews book, Long Distances, with an article by Van Aaken. And an old RW booklet, Runner's Training Guide, has an article on EVA by Manfred Steffny as well as an article by Orville Atkins, "Long-term Comparison," on his 3 different approaches to the marathon. I must have read Orville's article 30 years ago, and it's stuck in my mind ever since.

I've used EVA's run350/walk50 workout for years as recovery: tens laps in one direction, ten laps in the other--in lane 8, so its actually run400/walk45. An autoimmune problem has made running difficult for me these past few years, but I still get out each morning to jog/walk for at least 10,000 steps. Now I'm motivated to do more.

A photo in the Tafnews article bears the caption: "Future champions will probably be between 5-11 and 6-3, and weigh between 128 and 143." I'm 5'9, 130, and I can recall standing next to Ismael Kirui after he ran a world best 10-mile at Cherry Blossom and feeling like a giant.

Dave Black

PTF wrote:

Ed - thanks for the visit - do you pretty much run the same thing every day, day after day? Do you plan any variety or do you just go how you feel?

How do you handle it when things go awry - minor injuries, not feeling good, not responding etc? I'm assuming they do now and then.

It's interesting how similar your training is compared to that recommended by Dr Van Aaken. Yet it's my understanding that you came to your methods on your own.

Sorry for so many questions. I didn't want to miss the opportunity. Again - thanks.

All the best,

Paul

Most days is just a long slow run. The plan is to get in 60 runs of 3 hours duration in the weeks 2-20 before a marathon. Also to get in 20 races and faster training sessions during that period. I try to run every day so the other days are taken up by days like yesterday when I would have run for 3 hours but the wind was so strong and running so difficult that I cut it short at just over 2. A couple of weeks ago I took 2 days off because of a stomach upset. etc etc. I try to get in 15 hours running a week.

This regime has been more or less self developed but of course I was generally aware of others advocating LSD long before I got into my current regime.

You have a better memory than I do daveback. I wonder what I thought back then and whether my thoughts on training have evolved much.

Orville: You compared your training with Crothers and Kidd in Canada, with Igloi, and post-Igloi, when you did fewer repetitions and more LSD. To quote you: "Now what does all this prove? There certainly has been a variety in the quality and quantity of training. And yet the results have not been that different. In fact, the hardest work seems to have gotten the poorest results. Looking back, I realize that I could never endure Method Two again. Method One on a modified basis can be fun, but the other runners must be available as company and there is a risk of injury which may even increase as one grows older. Method Three can, at times, be monotonous. But running mates are easier to find, and it is the easiest method for me."

You describe a week of summer training in Canada, prior to two 2:31 marathons two weeks apart, as follows:

Sun. rest, short walk

Mon. 10x440 in 70-72, jog 220s

Tue. slow, steady run of 6 miles

Wed. 3-mile race, 14:47

Thu. 50-min. steady run on road

Fri. 45 min. steady on grass

Sat. 45 min. steady grass

Light training by modern standards! Reminiscent of my high-school running.

daveblack,

Thank you. That brings back memories. One thing that is misleading is that my regular training, when I ran with Coach Foot, was about double that shown there. My training, except that with Coach Igloi, consisted of from 45 to 70 miles a week. I ran under 2:35 using all three methods and closer to 2:30 before and after Igloi.