Jack Daniels' Running Formula isn't working for me.

Try moving from the 20 mpw white plan to the ambitious red intermediate plan. Scary, I know, but you can do it; sack up!

Try to figure out what did and didn't work, and next cycle when you try a different approach, consider keeping elements you responded to.

Are you working too hard, not recovering enough (in which case, workouts too hard, or easy days not easy enough)? Or workouts too easy? Too many or not enough miles per week?

I've done better with more quantity, less quality than Daniels' program (1st edition) - more focus on longer slower tempos, more emphasis on miles and doubles and a lot less VO2 interval stuff, but kept the fast full-recovery reps which have always helped a lot. I'm older and slower than most of his audience and my experience is consistent with some of his advice in the book, that older runners often do better with more tempo, fewer intervals.

You dont know jack wrote:

i don't follow the plans exactly.

Then you don't know if they work for you now do you?

common cents wrote:

You dont know jack wrote:

i don't follow the plans exactly.

Then you don't know if they work for you now do you?

My thought exactly. Although, I'm not a fan of DRF.

Well, the same here. Tried two times and two times I even recorded slower race-times than before.

(btw, I used the 1st edition).

I improved again by using slower (and longer) tempo-runs, easier easy-runs (as far as I know the 2nd edition slowed down the easy runs),

and real recovery runs on days after hard work-outs, e.g. runs far slower than easy-pace.

For interval-work I used paces around 10k pace instead of I-pace.

Well, I listened more to my budy than blindly following a formula. But don't get me wrong, I still believe that Mr. Daniels wrote a great book. It just seems not to work for everyone.

DRF is a joke

I think it is a better book the more elite you are. The training philosophy is solid, but will confess to running my worst marathon when training out of that book.

I think that the rational and philosophy behind his training concepts are great and I apply them to my own training and have had success with it. However, I have not even come close to following his plans. I simply took what I was doing, and adjusted it slightly to hit different paces with different rests.

I actually have not used any workotus from his plans, nor do I like their set-up.

It worked for me. I return after a several year break and a knee operation and got within 9% of my college PR in the 1500 as a 42 year old.

No program is a one size fits all. However, I like it because using the VDOT and the weekly mileage it felt customized to me. I actually e-mailed Jack and he e-mailed me back to clarify some things.

It seems odd the OP says it didn't work but he didn't follow it. weird.......

I found it doesn't work for me. I like the principals but I found so many fast intervals/reps led to a decrease in performance and/or injury

I work best with just rep work and tempos then as I move toward peaking I start replacing the rep work with a bit longer interval work - not paying attention to times or number of intervals, mostly going by feel

so maybe that is close to his philosophy but I found sticking to his prescribed workouts did not help me at all.

GermanRunner wrote:

easier easy-runs (as far as I know the 2nd edition slowed down the easy runs),

and real recovery runs on days after hard work-outs, e.g. runs far slower than easy-pace.

His "easy paces" are a guideline for the UPPER END of the aerobic zone, NOT the "average" easy pace. I'd be screwed too if I tried to run that pace on every easy run!

I think the OP should get his/her ferritin tested and probably needs to slow down the easy runs.

2 of my best marathons have come from Daniels plan. What works for some, doesnt for others. Pick a different training plan from someone else if you dont like his.

my former high school, shenendehowa, has had tremendous success using a purely daniel's plan (the coach ran for cortland under daniels). they are posed to make their 3rd consecutive NTN appearance this year.

when fully understood and utilized, daniel's is a fantastic system.

The DRF is a great book for theory but practically want be not for everyone. Would really like to see some of JD's actual training from his college teams or elites he advises. Hopefully jtupper can respond. Thanks.

Wait a minute here.... let me rephrase the OP's complaint: the training I'm NOT doing isn't working for me.

Did I get that right? wtf?!?

It is impossible to write a program that applies best to everyone, but that is often what people want to hear about. How does a person coach? (1) doing what was done to him her as an athlete? (2) doing what the current champion does (which is what many tend to talk abut at coaching clinics)? (3) doing what the current world-record holder does? (4) following the "eggs-against-the-wall" theory, by pushing everyone as hard as possible and hope that one now and then doesn't break? Other ways also I am sure. So, I have tried to explain some principles related to stressing the body in different ways to hopefully achieve some improvements in body function. How often, how much, how hard to do the various things must be tailored to each individual, so you take the principles and apply them in the way that brings the most success for each runner. I am a big believer in treating each runner as an individual, while trying to follow some basic principles of training. As far as specific workouts while at Cortland, I had quite a variety of runners, including a girl who won XC nationals never having totaled 30 miles in any week (also won 10k on the track that spring). Another (national champion) ran 70 a week every year. Another arrived with a 2:38 800 PB and went on the win Penn Relays 10k in 33:01 (and never went over 40 a week throughout college). Then there were Lisa and Ken Martin who ran more mileage and Lisa got Silver in the marathon in Seoul & Ken ran 2:09 in NY City. Jerry Lawson liked mileage and often did 160 and had good success with a couple 2:09 marathons at Chicago. Peter Gilmore and Magdalena Lewy Boulet are both inclined to run a lot of mileage. I think you have to be in touch with what the runners like and what they respond to, so you are constantly revising and adjusting, while trying to stick with some solid principles.

I fully agree with the whole how "some people respond to workouts differently than others". And lots of time I see people idolizing runners and thinking, well if they can do that, I have to do that or I am not going to be successful.

Right now I run at Shippensburg and find myself struggling. My coach recently started using the JDRF the past two years. During this training I found myself struggling and having absolutely horrible races. But once it came time for conferences and post season stuff, I peaked at the right time and had some great races.

Of course I'm not saying that the JDRF will work for everyone, but I do know what some of you feel like when you think its not working for you. But maybe you'll come through and have that one good race and the training will pay off. IF not then maybe try and do some research. What I found is that its good to several things and blend them. Take stuff that works for you and modify it with another training plan. My coach used stuff that worked for him and blended it with the JD stuff. Anyways, keep the faith and keep running. Good luck.

not an expert here, and Jtupper certainly is (it's his system obviously). however, i've found that it works if you understand it perfectly well and can monitor what the athlete does. if it's just you and you're using it to train yourself, it's much easier, compared to me using it to train 10 collegians, where i can't monitor each and every mile run.

i've been using the Lydiard system for 3 years and have seen a lot of success with it. it's approximatly 95% lydiard with the differences being true speed based upon an athlete's 400m time instead of 200m time, and adapting it to the American Collegiate seasons, compared to the New Zealand/ international seasons.

I have used DRF for years, and I think it is an excellent guide.

I have learned that

1) I need to run my easy days way slower than the guidelines based on my racing. I can run 5:10 in the mile, but my easy days are mostly 8:45 to 9:30 pace;

2) I can't do three quality sessions in a week. Did it in 2002, ran fast once, and ended up trashing my immune system and was out of racing for over a year. But if I combine my Sunday long run with a tempo or intervals, I can usually get in two such sessions. Every few weeks I will ease back to just one session. The key is *never* to run a quality day until you feel completely recovered. And, as Daniels points out in the book, if you are getting slower you need less stress, NOT more.