Letsrun. Help me break 2.12 for a marathon.

Drop the second Monday run. Be more flexible with the schedule. I don't see much that bridges intervals and the long efforts.

But Rodgers was almost certainly doing those runs at the same effort; 7:00 pace became 6:30 pace. Hodgie-san would be in a better position to comment.

Hodgie-san wrote:

A lot of commentary so far about the pace. Why not just run as you feel and don't even think about it. Let the pace come to you.

You get your pace work in on the track.

And in races. Perhaps you would be so kind as to explain...

non compos mentis wrote:

But Rodgers was almost certainly doing those runs at the same effort; 7:00 pace became 6:30 pace. Hodgie-san would be in a better position to comment.

No, Rodgers actually made a decision, based on his disappointing race results, to change his training program from one that had consisted mainly of 7:00 miles. His typical sessions shifted from a pace that he described as "very easy" to what he described as "steady."

But the point is that, when Rodgers was in shape to run sub-2:12, the bulk of his miles were about 6:00 - 6:30 pace. (He was also running more miles per week than the original poster.) When he was running 7:00 pace in training, he was not in sub-2:12 shape.

I don't know why the original poster was planning to do most of his running at 7:10. It is certainly not the kind of training program that one would reasonably expect from someone who is serious about breaking 2:12 within four months.

fdg = Nate Jenkins

non compos mentis wrote:

Hodgie-san wrote:

A lot of commentary so far about the pace. Why not just run as you feel and don't even think about it. Let the pace come to you.

You get your pace work in on the track.

And in races. Perhaps you would be so kind as to explain...

I'm not sure what you want me to explain, so let's try this in answer also to Avocado.

BR in my opinion/observation did not go out the door for the majority of his runs thinking that he needed to decide his exact specific pace. His increase in pace came naturally over the early years of high volume because he simply got fitter.

Even in races for example the Boston Marathon there were no official mile splits in the 1970's. No one wore a watch and checked their splits constantly they ran by feel and experience.

You learned pacing on the track and from races, many of the road races did not have mile splits. You learned to measure your effort without ant exact calibration.

You can come to understand your body much better without any reliance on the watch, GPS etc. I think todays runners could benefit by simply competing.

This OP runner can run 2:12 easily in my opinion if he does not get all bollixed by overthinking every move.

re:

trying to do considerably more total mileage than he is currently capable of running productively.

What is this?... are we afraid of running "junk miles"? Is there such a thing? High mileage is supposed to be good mileage- that is, for a marathoner it is an intrinsic good. Like hodgie says above, the pace will come with fitness. And Noakes, among others, advocates "distance first, then speed".

Put another way, quantity before quality. The volume of training itself becomes the challenge.

Hodgie-san wrote:

This OP runner can run 2:12 easily in my opinion if he does not get all bollixed by overthinking every move.

a downhill course to run it like you did

Gojall out wrote:

Ok, I have drawn up a schedule using Canova's philosophy.

Any advice with this one?

Why don't you also draw up a schedule based on Geoffrey Mutai's "BREAD AND BUTTER TRAINING PLAN". G. Mutai is the other new breed of marathon runner; one of his training partners in the G. Mutai training camp is a guy named Dennis Kimetto who is planning to chase the WR in Berlin this fall.

Sciatica Road wrote:

Gojall out wrote:

Ok, I have drawn up a schedule using Canova's philosophy.

Any advice with this one?

Why don't you also draw up a schedule based on Geoffrey Mutai's "BREAD AND BUTTER TRAINING PLAN".

To give you a head's start, most of G. Mutai's large volume of miles are logged at 8:00 minute pace.

Cheers.

Former noncontributor wrote:

now if only i can find wrote:

a downhill course to run it like you did

The 1980 OTC Marathon in Oregon was downhill? I don't remember this being the case.

i stand corrected

1980 Nike OTC Marathon

1. Quax 2:10:47

2. Hodge 2:10:59

3. Smith 2:11:09

4. Anderson 2:12:03

5. Buhman 2:12:38

6. Boilieau 2:13:38

7. Foster 2:14:04

8. Graham 2:15:04

9. Atkins 2:15:09

10. Beardsley 2:15:11

Hodgie-san wrote:

non compos mentis wrote:

And in races. Perhaps you would be so kind as to explain...

I'm not sure what you want me to explain, so let's try this in answer also to Avocado.

...

You can come to understand your body much better without any reliance on the watch, GPS etc. I think todays runners could benefit by simply competing.

...

This is was I was hoping you would explain -- the benefits of working in regular races as part of the long-term approach to marathoning. I am aware that there were other reasons for this (e.g. like to race, need new alarm clock, etc.), but it certainly seems to me that training though these races got you to the starting line of the big races prepared to race.

How can a 28 minute 10k runner not get a coach? Especially one who has World Championship potential. I am nowhere near as fast as the OP but I could easily get a coach. I would think a coaches would be kicking down the OP's front door to get their hands on him.

1 you need more tempo runs 2 you need at least one weekly speed workout (like mile repeats, I'm not talking 2*400m, 2*600m, 2*800m, 2*400m) 3 runthemhillsboy 4 I would peak at more than 132 miles in a week if I were you

90s Slower 10k, Faster 26.2 PR wrote:

newname wrote:

Shooting for 2:12 is fine. I could name 20 guys who ran in the area of 2:10-2:12 for a legit course or a Boston and ran "just" 28:30 or slower for 10k on the track.

Randy Thomas

Dick Beardsley

Ben Durden

Bob Hodge

Pete Pfitzinger

...

See?

But even though they had slower 10ks, how did their marathon and half marathon PR's stack up to the OP? If someone is slower over the HM distance but much faster over 10k, what does that say about their marathon potential?

Also, I see very little MP running in there, which is the key to a good marathon. Your 2:19 PR shows you burn carbs at too fast of a rate. You need more miles and more specificity.

I am not sure what you are asking here? They did not have slower 10ks than the OP.

Of the top of my head I think it was this:

Thomas 28:49 / 2:11:42 Boston?

Beardsley 29:XX ? / 2:09 at Grandma's; 2:08 at Boston; 2:10-2:12 on certified courses

Durden 29:XX ? / 2:09 Boston; 2:10-2:12 certified

Hodge 28:24 / 2:10:59 certified 2:11-2:12 certified

Pfitz 28:30 ? / 2:11:42 certified

The half marathon was not run frequently back then and when someone has a big disparity between their 10k and HM and marathon it is usually because they did not run all three distances at the same fitness level ... or didn't run some of them well or at all.

There are very few examples of people who have run a 28:31 track 10k and could not run under 2:14 for the marathon. It is just my opinion and not worth talking about.

malmo wrote:

jjjjjjjjj wrote:

Your tempo pace is only 12 seconds faster than your marathon pace. My 4M tempo pace is at least 40 seconds faster than my marathon pace. My 6M tempo pace is still probably 30-35 seconds faster than MP. At least 20 seconds faster would be better. That's more of the modulation. And I don't know that you really want to be doing that many of your miles at just 7:10 pace. That seems about a minute too slow for your level.

Dont boast that you are doing everything wrong.

It is posts like this that make it worth wading through 200 threads without seeing anything entertaining ... and then suddenly BAM!!

Former noncontributor wrote:

The 1980 OTC Marathon in Oregon was downhill? I don't remember this being the case.

Flat as a pancake.

Exactly. The OP hasn't a clue how he is going to feel tomorrow. So how the hell is he going to know how he is going to feel three weeks for now?

1) Do not listen to a piece of paper. Listen to your body.

2) Grasshopper not chase pace. Let pace chase grasshooper.

3) You're counting your future miles today. Count today's miles today. Count future miles in future.

sure, listen to your body, one of the vaguer pieces of advice anyone can think of. the body says it wants to sit around and eat cheeseburgers. you have to set goals to make yourself work while paying close attention to, e.g., whether you are tired all of the time, whether you are really struggling on your recovery and easy runs, whether you have aches or pains that you can fix with exercises before you get injured, whether you are able to run at goal pace for a significant distance and so forth. but the generic "listen to your body" doesn't tell you squat about training.