*2017. Three years ago?! Where goes the time?
*2017. Three years ago?! Where goes the time?
Exactly—the long version of my everyday run...and no concrete goal. Regarding splits...in my everyday runs, I check when the watch dings at each mile, mostly out of curiosity, and VERY rarely do I look at the current pace. In general, this is also how I have run my marathons.
I want this race to be VERY much like an everyday run, or more precisely, a “bibbed flyer,” as Coach Jeff might say. The way I see it, if the pace is not getting faster naturally, then it probably is not my day. If it is, then look out. In all of my better training runs and races, the pace gets faster without me even trying. That is really the best way I can put it.
Allen1959 wrote:
*2017. Three years ago?! Where goes the time?
With 2020 being a lost year, the time has really slipped.
going faster miles an hour wrote:
Coach: Not intended to be a leading question, but curious about your sense of the risk/reward on doing the track session at the risk of aggravating the heel/compromising the long run? (Recognizing of course that speed work does have a place in marathon training and that it’s not necessarily a requirement to get in a long run every week.) Hope the heel is healing.
By all means, lead away.!
The original plan was to do that track work on Friday so I would have a day in between. It's all just a work in progress, so I'm actively gauging how much recovery I need after all out running until the heel is back under control. I'm very sure the answer is not 24 hours! Plus, I had done 22 miles last week so I wasn't gonna go nuts on the long run last week anyway.
The heel is not getting any worse... it's just not getting any better. I can do daily easy runs with just the normal level of discomfort. I can run easy with normal discomfort 24 hours after a T workout WITH ibuprofen. I cannot go easy 24 hours after intervals even with ibuprofen.
I'm going to be on the starting line with this issue, so I'm just really exploring what I need to do and how much I can get out of it.
Be happy everybody.
Allen1959 wrote:
BHViking: "Back to back 100+ mile weeks." Congrats on the mileave PR! At age 43, pretty amazing, not just because of your age, but all the competing commitments I assume you have in life. It astounds me whenever I see stats like this, and try to figure the math. From my experience -- "60 hours working, 12 hours commuting, 30 hours home repair/restoration, 10 hours lawn and landscaping, 14 hours basic chores, 50 hours sleeping, ?? hours equipment maintenance, ?? hours watercolor/oil painting, ?? hours guitar/piano practice, ?? hours furniture-making, ?? hours just hanging with the kids ..." Running/training? Hoo boy.
Allen,
I'm glad you mentioned this. I don't know how anyone does it. I've had 2 straight weeks of relatively no distractions so I took advantage of that one day at a time. The most likely way to maintain 100 mpw for me in the long term would be to do it in singles. This means sacrificing sleep. I estimate I'd have to get up 40 minutes earlier in the morning. That would be on days that I either know I can't double or simply don't want to. Granted, in the winter time, it's quite easy for me to hop on the treadmill for 40 minutes in the evening while watching sports on TV.
I'm curious how many miles per week you were running when you were running your fast marathons? Also in your back and forth with OR about miles per week at MP, was MP really that hard in training? What I mean by that is, what did it feel like to you (breathing and legs)? The reason I ask is that in the buildup to my most recent (and best) marathon at CIM, I ran several runs over 10 miles averaging very near my eventual marathon pace (6:28).
A few notable runs:
10 Miles @ 6:11 (3 weeks out)
17 Miles @ 6:28 (4 weeks out) This was my eventual marathon pace!
13 Miles @ 6:37 (5 weeks out)
17 Miles @ 6:35 (6 weeks out)
More of the same leading up to that. All of those were by feel and not overly difficult. It could be that I simply was not adequately prepared for the marathon due to not enough weekly mileage. I averaged 69 miles per week in the 12 weeks leading up to the taper.
Side note: I did not bonk in the race but I did slow down in the last 8 miles due to massive blisters. It could be argued that my feet were not durable enough for the distance,
BHV - I find this helpful, and I thank you for extending this discussion and providing specific details. In the last several weeks I have had a number of similar runs to yours, and three runs last week that were decent examples of what we are talking about...
11+ at 6:39
11+ at 6;36
15.5 at 6:39
Off the top of my head, I know I ran that 12.13 at 6:30 recently, finishing with what I call double fives" (two sub-6:00 miles...5:57, 5:50, I believe) That one felt really good...pace came very naturally. So, we will see how 6:25 pace feels at Harrisburg...
*Correction...12.33 at 6:39. I did have a 16.5 at 6:37 in there in the last couple of weeks, and so perhaps I confused it with that one.
OR - If it helps, I was barely doing anything sub 6 at all. I remember occasionally hitting an odd mile near the end somewhere in the 5:50's for a mile split with a slight net downhill. Almost all of those runs were slightly uphill (against the flow of the creek) and slightly downhill on the way down so the first part would be "somewhat" slower than the second half (like 6:40's out and 6:20's back or something). So I was pretty steady effort beginning to end and wasn't really dropping the hammer at the end like you do. The fact you are able to do that so easily must mean something. :)
Has/does anybody use/used the Pegasus Turbo 2 as a tempo day shoe?
I found a pair in my size for sale and was wondering if I should snag them.
I usually use an old pair of VaporFlys, but am thinking that contributed to my recent injuries and want to go back to regular trainers for those kinds of workouts going forward.
I'd also be open to any other tempo-day shoes, as well.
I had a pair of the Turbos. Had pop but I bottomed those things really fast .. like 150 miles .. and was 155 at the time. I know stone has really liked them in the past .. may have just been an off pair?
I really like the NB Fuel Cell rebel .. and do almost all my faster running in them.
I like the the turbo 2s. They are a solid tempo day shoe. I could wear them up to LT pace if I wasn’t biased towards the emerging set of trainers with plates.
I find I reach for the Turbos now when I want to run a slightly more uptempo easy day with some progression (usually 7:30s down to 6:30s for me).
I probably wouldn’t pay the $180 sticker price on them but if you can snag a pair for $130 or less I think it’s good value.
I've had 3 pairs of the turbos. First one was great but bottomed out quickly (<250mi). Second one didn't feel as great but lasted longer (350ish). Third ones I have right now, picked up on a big sale (I refused to pay 180 for them because of the durability questions). They don't feel near as good as the first pair I had, maybe not even as good as the second pair.
I don't love the feel for tempoing until they're a little beat down, but I like a generally more firm shoe for fast running. The Rebel is a good choice, as is the Zoom Fly. I've also heard good things about the Brooks Hyperion Tempo.
BHViking wrote:
I'm curious how many miles per week you were running when you were running your fast marathons? Also in your back and forth with OR about miles per week at MP, was MP really that hard in training? What I mean by that is, what did it feel like to you ...,
My 16 week average MPW prior to my PR marathon (2:40:30) was 42 miles, with a peak week of about 70. Long runs, some speed work (5K PR 16:04 was set a week before marathon PR), LOTS OF REST.
The PR marathon was my third marathon in three months, so there were maybe eight tapering and recovery weeks with very low mileage. Actually all three were PRs -- 2:47 in Sept, 2:45 in Oct, 2:40 in Nov. Previous best was 2:52 the previous autumn.
Prior to that "marathon season," weekly mileage was still only about 40. Fewer long runs and more quality stuff. But never any runs over 6 or 7 miles at MP or faster. I would often close the last couple miles at sub-6, but average only 6:30 or so for a hard 10 miler.
At your age, 43, I ran 17:10 for 5K and a 2:56:03 marathon. By far my best medium-long run was a few weeks out, one loop on the actual marathon course: 14 miles at 7:02 pace. That was a hard effort, and I was super happy with it! WAY faster than any other continuous runs I had done.
MP on race day was 6:44.
Again, average mileage for 16 weeks prior was about 42 MPW, with a peak week at around 60 miles.
Regarding "how does it feel" when maxing out in training, I'd say just generally at the edge of being able to maintain pace. Push any harder, and breathing wouldn't keep up, "lactic" buildup in legs, etc. ace day magic is good for 15 or 20 seconds per mile!
@runrincerepeat, @highhoppingworm, @rucker - Thanks for the quick responses! Being a bigger runner (6'2, 176), I worry a little bit about the durability issues of that shoe. I found that the Hoka Rincon, which I did enjoy when I had them, bottomed out around 200-225 for me, which was a let down.
I’m the same height and about 10-15 pounds heavier. My last pair lasted 300+ miles and my current pair has 240 and still feel awesome for what it’s worth.
One note, they seem to harden up way more in the cold than other react shoes for some reason... not sure why that is and it may not be an issue for you given you are a swamp creature but I will stay away from them this winter.
Nike has a sale on them right now if you are a Nike+ member.
@highhoppingworm - I guess I never looked at your height or weight before when you posted. Interesting. Bigger runners of the world, unite! That gives me more hope about the Pegasus Turbo 2 then. And I am a Nike Plus member.
Tyler_Runs_Lifts wrote:
@runrincerepeat, @highhoppingworm, @rucker - Thanks for the quick responses! Being a bigger runner (6'2, 176), I worry a little bit about the durability issues of that shoe. I found that the Hoka Rincon, which I did enjoy when I had them, bottomed out around 200-225 for me, which was a let down.
I'm 5'8 and 165 (wrestler's build)/way too much upper body. The Rincon is another go-to for me, but I similarly get very little mileage out of them. If I had to choose Rincon vs Turbo, I would take the Turbo (once I've flattened them a little). I stopped buying the Rincon unless they were heavily discounted, same with the Turbo. I got more miles out of the Rebel but it didn't have the cushioning of the other two, so maybe they were dead earlier but I didn't notice anyways.
Heavier runners of the thread unite!
Honestly... a part of me wants to just get back up to 200 and see how I do on the Clydesdale circuit.
I think they got the Turbo wrong with putting the react on the bottom layer and the zoomx on the top layer .. it would be more stable and faster imho if they flip flopped it.
and it appears from this thread and people i have talked to ... the QC or durability varies wildly
highhoppingworm wrote:
Honestly... a part of me wants to just get back up to 200 and see how I do on the Clydesdale circuit.
I thought about that (if there were Clyde races here) would be fun having to balance the gym and staying heavy aka making weight ... with running well.. I have been both.... low of 147 at 6 ft in November 2018 .... 158 in November 2019 ... 189 high in March 2020 (beer food and weights and no cardio will do it) .. 179 now ... 172 would be a prime race weight imho.. Day to day stuff other than running I feel 10000% better at 180 than 150.
(before started running in Jan-Feb 2016 I was 215+ and it wasnt muscle!)