So who wrote this book? It says Luke Humphrey on Amazon. Some woman on Twitter is claiming she wrote the book with the Hanson coaches.
So who wrote this book? It says Luke Humphrey on Amazon. Some woman on Twitter is claiming she wrote the book with the Hanson coaches.
Luke - are you going to make this available for the kindle or some e-book format?
I would like to see it in an e form of some sort. However, that's up to Velopress. I think that it will eventually be there, but can't give you a time frame.
Kevin Kwilinski wrote:
I am a masters runner who had a PR of 3:06:34 and I hired Luke a year ago as an online coach to help me go sub 3. I can tell you that in my build up I was averaging close to 75 mpw and peaked at 85 and my longest run was a moderate paced 20 but it followed a long easy run the day before. (The big point is that there are optimal durations for the long run so you need to be faster to run a longer long run. A typical beginning marathoner isn't going to have the speed to complete a 20 mile run in a time that is beneficial to training.) Anyway I just ran sub 2:58 at Chicago so I am a believer in the method.
I have already read the book and I think it does an excellent job of explaining both what to do and why you are doing it... right down to the physiological adaptations that are taking place... all at a readable level. I had already read Daniels (several times), Pfitzinger, and others so I had a pretty good background but this book still explained some things that I didn't yet understand. I wish I would have read it a year ago and it would have saved Luke from answering a lot of questions that I would email him.
Anyway there are other good books out there and other methods that will work but this method worked very well for me so I thought I would share my experience.
Thanks for the first hand experience post.
I'm not a -thoner, but I reserved a copy for in-store pickup anyway. I love reading about any kind of distance training.
Wow people are actually going to buy this book. After reading the two (or was it three?) articles of crap from Hanson' s on marathon training I was under the assumption people were aware of the Hanson's half baked ideas on training. Pretty much train the opposite of these methods and you will run well. Incorporate the ideas of hard days that are more specific to the marathon and recovery days. And reread the threads by Renato Canova and you will run a better marathon and not waste 12 to 15 dollars.
Shills humphrey wrote:
Wow people are actually going to buy this book. After reading the two (or was it three?) articles of crap from Hanson' s on marathon training I was under the assumption people were aware of the Hanson's half baked ideas on training. Pretty much train the opposite of these methods and you will run well. Incorporate the ideas of hard days that are more specific to the marathon and recovery days. And reread the threads by Renato Canova and you will run a better marathon and not waste 12 to 15 dollars.
Yikes. Credibility lost due to hostility and bitterness.
This book is way overdue. I have followed the Hansons System for 3 years now and have run a PB in 6 straight marathons. This came after 15 years of struggling with traditional methods.
Saw this too. If her name isn't in the book, she didn't write it.
Come on the hansons have had huge success with their pro team. 70 some athletes through the program and what, two Olympians? That's success. Throw a dozen eggs against the wall, one miraculously doesn't break and pow, your credible. Simply another moneymaker.
You sound like a grumpy old jealous person. It's kind of sad. Hope your life improves.
so, i bought the book and have read sections here and there. does that mean i may now race in a Hanson's singlet?
Actually I'm 27 and running better than ever since leaving
I saw the new issue of Competitor and it has an article on the book. It's not on the site but I assume its in the online edition. Anyway, the article has an explanation of their 16-mile long run. It's only purpose is to train you to run the last 16 of a marathon. The other training is supposed to make you feel like you've already run the first 10 when you start the 16. That article might clear up some questions. Maybe that's an old hat idea but its their explanation for their style of long run.
There is nothing magical about 20 mile long runs (or 100 mile weeks). Stefano Baldini´s typical long run was 30 km (I did an interview with the guy for Swedish television). Like somebody else said: 20 miles will take to long for most non-elites to be beneficial. For an elite it may take 2 hours, for a slower runner 3 hours. That is just too long for a regular long run.
redux wrote:
I saw the new issue of Competitor and it has an article on the book. It's not on the site but I assume its in the online edition. Anyway, the article has an explanation of their 16-mile long run. It's only purpose is to train you to run the last 16 of a marathon. The other training is supposed to make you feel like you've already run the first 10 when you start the 16. That article might clear up some questions. Maybe that's an old hat idea but its their explanation for their style of long run.
This is the part that is hard for me to understand. The same can be said about the 20 miler. It trains you to run the last 20...
If the dual purpose is to speed up recovery. This makes a little bit more sense.
shirtless wrote:
so, i bought the book and have read sections here and there. does that mean i may now race in a Hanson's singlet?
Who really cares? Is it not right for NFL, NBA, etc. fans to wear jerseys? Why do people make such a big deal out of this. It's just a piece of clothing.
For those interested, we did about an hour, in-depth interview with Luke about the book and some of the training principles discussed. It's available as a podcast if you have a long drive (or you run to music - not my cup of tea though). Check it out here: http://runnersconnect.net/luke-interview
Michigan Man wrote:
I think you guys are getting a little to worked up about the 16 miler long run. Its not really necessarily 16 miles. In the Hanson plans, its all about the purpose(the intended stimulus) of the workout. The purpose of the long run is to build strength, endurance, gain time on your feet(confidence) and cause the physiological changes such as increasing glycogen stores, improving vo2max, capillary growth, etc. 16 miles is not an absolute in their plans. The necessary stimulus is 2-3 hours MAX length of run. After 3 hours, its just overkill. The number of miles is based on your speed. The speed should be moderate(MP +30 sec) to easy(MP + 45-60 sec). Therefore someone running a 6:00 avg pace marathon will have a lot different length of long run than someone running an 8:00 average pace marathon. They also do not want long runs exceeding 25%-30% of your weekly mileage. This and the cumulative fatigue effect(going into the long run already tired) tend to keep the long runs on the shorter side of 2-3hours. As an example, if you are a 6:00 average marathoner, 20-22 miles might be a good long run length as its over two hours assuming you run it at 6:30 pace. If you are running at that speed you are also likely training over 65 miles per week. which has your long run close to the max 30% of weekly volume.
I agree with this, having read the book.
Shills humphrey wrote:
Wow people are actually going to buy this book. After reading the two (or was it three?) articles of crap from Hanson' s on marathon training I was under the assumption people were aware of the Hanson's half baked ideas on training. Pretty much train the opposite of these methods and you will run well. Incorporate the ideas of hard days that are more specific to the marathon and recovery days. And reread the threads by Renato Canova and you will run a better marathon and not waste 12 to 15 dollars.
Wouldn't long runs of ~3 hours duration, long tempo runs at goal marathon pace, and strength intervals run at 10 seconds faster than goal marathon pace all be considered to be "specific to the marathon"?