Tribute to 02:20 Marathon

@1500 pace with heart rate 153-160 20 times in a row? What are you smoking??

In my opinion, only You are talking nonsense here. Like a broken record, he lashed out with insults. Are you f@cking okay? You say that JS destroyed the topic, no, you destroy it with your diarrhea. Deal with JS somewhere else and get the f@ck out of here if you don't have anything to say to the point. Your sh@t here nobody cares.

You came here, because of JS, not because you might have some good interest/knowledge/ideas, just to keep trolling and blaming...

In fairness Canefis... your splits were all over the place as was the rest. It wasn't exactly 20x400 in 68 w/ 1' rest or something like that.

I would actually guess that you couldn't run a 4:32 1600 right now so 68 is probably indeed faster than 1600 pace. That isn't a statement about your larger fitness or anything... it just isn't speed based and nothing in your training indicates a fast 1500/1600 time.

We are trying to help you. You need to run (or bike) as far away from JS as possible as fast as possible.

He doesn't even understand basic training methods.

And stop misquoting me. There are several people here saying the same thing as me.

46th week (cycling):

Mo: easy spin 120min

Tu: easy spin 150min,

avg heart rate=134, avg speed=28.8 km/h

avg power=214W

Following by feet gymnastics.

Today I can make small jumps by injured foot on toe side with little discomfort. Can already easy run, but I will keep 2-3 days off in order to be safe and test by jumps until no any discomfort.

P.S.

Conclusions:

Good learning ability and responsiveness to various methodologies it's all connected: surfing, windsurfing, running, cycling, sup surfing, kick boxing, boxing, table tennis, etc...

highhoppingworm wrote:

In fairness Canefis... your splits were all over the place as was the rest. It wasn't exactly 20x400 in 68 w/ 1' rest or something like that.

I would actually guess that you couldn't run a 4:32 1600 right now so 68 is probably indeed faster than 1600 pace. That isn't a statement about your larger fitness or anything... it just isn't speed based and nothing in your training indicates a fast 1500/1600 time.

In the beginning, when I ran on treadmill you said that I am even fake and not exist, than you said that my treadmill is wrong, than you said that my track is wrong length, than you said that I am cheater and on track no completing full lap, than you said that @68 is not a 5K pace, but 1500 pace, does not matter than my avg rest is 91sec and avg pulse 155-160 and I could do it 20-30 times...? so, I made in total 8km at pace faster than @1500m?? Are you serious??? Beginner runner ran 8km in total reps at pace faster than @1500m.... robocop... ???

Dude. Calm down. I thought we actually had a decent relationship going on. I am simply saying that 1500 pace = the pace you can run a 1500 at. If you think you can go out and run 4:13 or whatever converts to 68 pace then by all means do it. I am skeptical that you can at this point in time is all I am saying.

ek87o78o78o wrote:

You know what's sad? I remember you said somewhere that you have a son. One day your son will be a grown up and will want to find out more about his dad. He will google his name and find all these lies.

As a father myself, I find that extremely sad.

There's that and there's all the damage you are doing to all coaches.

You are clearly not lance armstrong.

Canefis wrote:

Corona time wrote:

What interesting things?

The length of the arc of applied power to the pedals has increased, i.e. pedaling has become more circular

Nice! How do you explain how that was possible?

not what we need wrote:

I came to this thread hoping it would be a good training discussion but instead found that like many other threads on letsrun it has been ruined by JS. I never advocate for banning posters but if there was someone to change my mind on that it would be JS, the worlds worst coach and crappiest con man.

Is there anyone who could actually say something good about JS? I think he is either mentally disabled or one of the worst people I have ever come across. He pretends to be people he is not. He gives horrible training advice. He takes over every good training thread.

Mods please get rid of this disease.

How did you come to that conclusion? He is the coach of the OP and nothing is more natural than that he just participates with his expertise in the thread? I think that he shows great knowledge.

Corona time wrote:

Canefis wrote:

The length of the arc of applied power to the pedals has increased, i.e. pedaling has become more circular

Nice! How do you explain how that was possible?

1) Running economy workouts

2) all muscles in the back of the leg are better involved while running

3) motor skills (all is connected in cyclical sports)

46th week: (cycling):

Mo: easy spin 120min

Tu: easy spin 150min

We: easy spin 90min+22min tempo (zone3),

avg heart rate=131, avg speed=27.4 km/h

avg power=210W.

Th: cycling 150min easy spin @119-136

Fri: cycling 90min easy @119-136+20-30min climbing repeat @136-154

Sat: easy run 20-50min @04:40/04:50?

Sun easy run 20-50min @04:40/04:50?

Canefis wrote:

46th week: (cycling):

Mo: easy spin 120min

Tu: easy spin 150min

We: easy spin 90min+22min tempo (zone3),

avg heart rate=131, avg speed=27.4 km/h

avg power=210W.

Th: cycling 150min easy spin @119-136

Fri: cycling 90min easy @119-136+20-30min climbing repeat @136-154

Sat: easy run 20-50min @04:40/04:50?

Sun easy run 20-50min @04:40/04:50?

Canefis, apologies (this thread is a little hard to follow), but are you still aiming for 2.20 next year?

highhoppingworm wrote:

Dude. Calm down. I thought we actually had a decent relationship going on. I am simply saying that 1500 pace = the pace you can run a 1500 at. If you think you can go out and run 4:13 or whatever converts to 68 pace then by all means do it. I am skeptical that you can at this point in time is all I am saying.

I tell you something:

1) I can run 1500 pace, question is how much time? - 200м, 400м, 800м, 900м, 1500м.

2) The time depends on my tried and tested strength (myofibril + neuromotoric) and endurance (mitochondria). Which is what we do here after the base. To begin with, we build up our strength so that we can generally keep the effort that occurs when running at a given pace, OK, we have the strength - we can run 400m at a given pace, but we need to run 1500m or 5000M, how do I do this? - That's right, you need to turn a given strength into endurance. Hence the conclusion that you can keep the pace 1500/5000 in training 400-800 m, but this does not mean that you will keep it for the entire set distance. What are we doing? - we run through repetitions with rest to do more work on time at the right pace, acidify the mitochondria, they grow (the process is not fast 21 days-90% strength, the remaining year-100% strength). We play with the length of the segments, first short, then longer, there are many options, reduce the rest between repetitions. We also work on the economy of running, teach the body to use oxygen sparingly at the right pace. Play with pace : run above/below and so on..

I think what you are saying is that "1500" pace isn't actually the pace you can sustain for a 1500 rather it is the pace you could sustain for 1500 meters once appropriately trained for the distance. In short, goal pace.

I am not sure I agree with that take. Different paces have different purposes right? I would not say my LT pace is 5:10 just because that what I want it to be after I do a bunch of dedicated LT work. To me 1500/3k/5k etc. pace represent current fitness ability at those respective distances.

That said, I don't believe that 20x400 at 1500 pace was the goal of the workout. So this discussion doesn't seem super meaningful. I was simply responding to the comment that I personally think 4:32 mile pace seems a bit steep given where you currently are. It seems like you disagree with that comment. Assuming you are running a 10k in the next couple of weeks as a fitness check that should give a pretty good read on fitness.

HITHEREYOU wrote:

Canefis wrote:

46th week: (cycling):

Mo: easy spin 120min

Tu: easy spin 150min

We: easy spin 90min+22min tempo (zone3),

avg heart rate=131, avg speed=27.4 km/h

avg power=210W.

Th: cycling 150min easy spin @119-136

Fri: cycling 90min easy @119-136+20-30min climbing repeat @136-154

Sat: easy run 20-50min @04:40/04:50?

Sun easy run 20-50min @04:40/04:50?

Canefis, apologies (this thread is a little hard to follow), but are you still aiming for 2.20 next year?

Yes, I am.

If the foot pain can be cured I think sub 2:20 will just be a minor step on the way to a sub 2:15.

I know my stuff, and what Slava has shown so far in training points to at least a talent capacity as I had myself ( 14:20/ 29:51 at 5 k/ 10 k , 1:06 half and 2:22 marathon at tough course in Stockholm). If I had known what I know today I`m 100 % sure I myself had run a sub 2:15 marathon. The main difference in my training back then can be summed in five words,lack of lactate threshold intervals! :)

The Wizard JS wrote:

If the foot pain can be cured I think sub 2:20 will just be a minor step on the way to a sub 2:15

Sweet Mary mother of Jesus!

The Wizard JS wrote:

If the foot pain can be cured I think sub 2:20 will just be a minor step on the way to a sub 2:15.

I know my stuff, and what Slava has shown so far in training points to at least a talent capacity as I had myself ( 14:20/ 29:51 at 5 k/ 10 k , 1:06 half and 2:22 marathon at tough course in Stockholm). If I had known what I know today I`m 100 % sure I myself had run a sub 2:15 marathon. The main difference in my training back then can be summed in five words,lack of lactate threshold intervals! :)

I don't think "lack of lactate threshold intervals" doomed you.

According to VDOT comparison calculators, that 14:20/29:51/1:06:00 matches up quite well. You underperformed in the marathon by 4 minutes with a 2:18:11 projection (I know you said it was a tough course. I wonder how much Stockholm changed their marathon course since the current one looks rathe tame).

Phil - or "Below Average," the athlete you trained for CIM last year - went 15:11/31:39/51:14 (10 mi) during the training block with a 2:33:46 to cap it off. Most of those results project to a 2:25:XX to 2:26:XX full marathon, which again shows a level of underperforming and a wildly "Shoot The Moon" goal of sub-2:19:00.

SpeechIess wrote:

The Wizard JS wrote:

If the foot pain can be cured I think sub 2:20 will just be a minor step on the way to a sub 2:15

Sweet Mary mother of Jesus!

But 20x400@1500m pace is a tough workout dontcha know?

When he recovers from that....

BOOM! Magic Winter :-)))