Mopac,
You weren't in the States with the PM were you? Glad to see you hitting Roo Hill!
Igy
Mopac,
You weren't in the States with the PM were you? Glad to see you hitting Roo Hill!
Igy
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Mopac,
You weren't in the States with the PM were you? Glad to see you hitting Roo Hill!
Igy
No. Scomo and I don't see eye to eye on many things so I didn't get an invite.
Roo Hill has been upgraded slightly. I managed to push through a lesser track and have made it a bit shorter and a bit steeper now. Plenty of macropod marsupials to keep me company still though. All good fun. I took a crew up there during my 60th birthday party. They seemed to enjoy it.
Sat. Nov. 23 -- i think it's always on the weekend closest to when JFK was killed.
planning to run a "practice" marathon next sunday on C & O canal towpath [though much closer to DC than the part you run in middle of JFK 50] -- won't help with tech trails and staying upright, but I thought it might be a good way to get a long run in and tolerate possible boredom of running the towpath that long, as well as practicing some ultra-like behaviors [walk thru aid stations, eat actual food, wear belt on my hip with spare carb blocks.....]
--Dave
[quote]MikeF wrote:
dhaaga, when is your 50 mile JFK trail race??
Mopac wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Mopac,
You weren't in the States with the PM were you? Glad to see you hitting Roo Hill!
Igy
No. Scomo and I don't see eye to eye on many things so I didn't get an invite.
Roo Hill has been upgraded slightly. I managed to push through a lesser track and have made it a bit shorter and a bit steeper now. Plenty of macropod marsupials to keep me company still though. All good fun. I took a crew up there during my 60th birthday party. They seemed to enjoy it.
Mopac,
We have some hills and trails with somewhat less colorful names like “Darrel’s Demise” or the “Loop of Death.” Early this morning with headlamps I ran with some mates some rolling hills in the “Orchard.” A nice trail with fewer tripping hazards.
Igy
KCgeezer wrote:
RF reader wrote:
.
So I need to run more, and run longer "long runs." The longest I ran this cycle was 14 miles (and only once). I need to run 15-16 miles multiple times with progression
.
If I can ask, what’s your weekly mileage? Are you planning to break the rule about your long run not exceeding 25% of total mileage?
I am thinking about something like 50-55mpw for this cycle, That means I cannot follow the 25% rule. But I have always thought of it more as a rule of thumb. For example, I cannot follow it if I am doing 20 mile runs in preparation for a marathon.
Here is my "recovery" week.
M: off.
T: 30 min elliptical.
W: 3 miles.
R: 4 miles.
F: 5 miles.
SA: 6 miles.
SU: 9 miles.
My legs were still sore on Tuesday. So I did elliptical instead of running. And then, I tried to run on Wednesday, but legs were still sore, so I quit after 3 miles. My legs finally started feeling normal on Friday. I used to feel recover more quickly after a half marathon, but I also used to be younger.
amkelley wrote:
RF reader, too bad your half-marathon didn’t go as you’d hoped. I’m not so sure about needing longer runs. For many years when that was the longest distance I raced, I almost never ran beyond 14 miles and didn’t feel I lacked stamina at the end of races. But we’re all an experiment of one, and extending the training runs a bit may help you.
I used to run a decent half with no long run more than 14 miles. But then, I was running 35-40mpw with weekly track intervals. (I was basically a 5k/10k runner making transition to half.) I was also nearly a decade younger. So my training has changed as my body. I think I handle volume better than intensity these days, so I won't be going back to my speed-oriented training.
RF,
I would think you have banked years of volume that would make the 25% rule somewhat less important. Also, as you get older I think some flexibility in schedule makes more sense. That is, more rest prior, and after a long run. Allen1959 did some innovative micro cycle using a 10 days versus 7 day schedule.
Igy
Another related thought, if one can train more specifically for the activity, by running more, or more intensely, and not get injured, of course that is preferred. As one can see, the population that can manage that narrows over time. Therefore, it makes more sense to compromise to stay in the sport. That is more of a mental adjustment then a physical one.
Igy
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
RF,
I would think you have banked years of volume that would make the 25% rule somewhat less important. Also, as you get older I think some flexibility in schedule makes more sense. That is, more rest prior, and after a long run. Allen1959 did some innovative micro cycle using a 10 days versus 7 day schedule.
Igy
What is the 25% rule?
Update on the Vaporfly 4% experiment.
Last Thursday 4.6 miles at 7:02 in Mizuno flats. Completely dead next day, which ended up being 4 miles of running/walking in about 40 min.
Sunday 4.6 miles at 6:56 in Vaporfly 4%. Today was able to do a slow recovery 4.6 miles at 7:50.
So just two days inbetween - Vaporfly 30 secs faster over 4.6 miles in more windy conditions. Felt easier, HR 9 beats lower, and much better recovery.
Leaving out the philosophical question about whether they are a bridge too far in technology, it appears that they work, and my experience is that I don't have to alter running mechanics, and that they cause less soreness the next day. Not science, but interesting anecdotal experience.
I think I would race in them. My logic is that they are legal and available to all, and not (like doping) health threatening (my main argument about PEDs - sport is supposedly a healthy recreation, PEDS nearly all having side effects destroy that notion). Virtually any shoe is a technological improvement over what I had 45 years ago, this is just a question of degree, but a more radical jump, like a aluminium (or titanium or whatever they have now) racket v wood in tennis .
Cavorty wrote:
I think I would race in them. My logic is that they are legal and available to all, and not (like doping) health threatening (my main argument about PEDs - sport is supposedly a healthy recreation, PEDS nearly all having side effects destroy that notion). Virtually any shoe is a technological improvement over what I had 45 years ago, this is just a question of degree, but a more radical jump, like a aluminium (or titanium or whatever they have now) racket v wood in tennis .
Others have made the argument comparing the 4% to the movement from wood to metal in tennis racket technology. The argument is false because the standard of measurement is different: in tennis it matches won, in running, the standard of measurement is time ran.
The biggest change in tennis rackets was actually changing the shape, adding 1 inch to the width. The metal rackets reduced the weight and increased the speed the players can swing. Again, the measurement is winning, not how fast they can hit the ball.
Probably course records in Golf would be a closer analogy. Golf tech has allowed longer drives and much lower scores. So maybe Nike should change their justification argument to Golf…hint hint….
Of course, the rub there is Golf Courses have been lengthened, but still close enough an argument to convince more folks.
Since EVERY shoe manufacture will soon have this tech, legality means nothing, just whatever feels good and reduces injury.
PauI wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
RF,
I would think you have banked years of volume that would make the 25% rule somewhat less important. Also, as you get older I think some flexibility in schedule makes more sense. That is, more rest prior, and after a long run. Allen1959 did some innovative micro cycle using a 10 days versus 7 day schedule.
Igy
What is the 25% rule?
The traditional weekly long run should be no longer than 25% of your weekly volume.
Cavorty thanks for the info on the vapor fly. I am following with interest.
Shoes
If the vp reduces impact damage without negative side effects I would use it for training but not racing. Only because I want to keep it apples to apples.
PEDs
That is the sad part about drugs like epo which so many master runners use. EPO makes you a lot faster and helps you recover faster but long term use is deadly. Of course maybe that is the punishment cheaters deserve?
Soon there will be anti aging drugs that make you faster enhance recovery and and improve your health
Will these be banned ?
Should these be banned ?
Would you take them ?
PauI wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
RF,
I would think you have banked years of volume that would make the 25% rule somewhat less important. Also, as you get older I think some flexibility in schedule makes more sense. That is, more rest prior, and after a long run. Allen1959 did some innovative micro cycle using a 10 days versus 7 day schedule.
What is the 25% rule?
The rule of thumb is that the "long run" should be no longer than 25% of one's seven-day total mileage.
As Igy mentioned, in my late 50s I scheduled a longer "week" -- nine days. I suppose that would increase the long run percentage figured on any given 7-day stretch, but I've never been concerned with that figure.
During my 20s and 30s, some years my long run was 100% of my weekly total. To prep for my annual marathon, I would run just once a week -- working up to an 18- or 20-miler.
At 57, my marathon training was just 2 or 3 runs per week, maxing at a 23-mile long run. That was more than 50% of total mpw. I ran 3:25 for the marathon.
After that result, I upped my mileage and experimented with the 9-day cycle. That allowed more days between long runs. It also made it possible to include TWO workouts in each "week" (9 days) -- VO2max repeats AND a lactate threshold workout (like 3 x 2 miles or a 4-mile run at 1-hour race pace).
That schedule got me to sub-19 for 5K and a 3:07 marathon during an 8-month period. Both of those races age-graded better than my lifetime PRs of 16:05 and 2:40:30.
Those eight months also included a couple 3-week periods of reduced running, due to injuries.
Over 40 masters or grandmasters/seniors and above? How prevalent do you think EPO use is with the grandmasters + groups (I can't think of any grandmasters off hand that has been caught for EPO use).
It seems crazy to think that even one grandmasters competitor would use EPO considering the risk of high Hgb levels (polycythemia). It's definitely the endurance drug of choice by the elites (look at all the Kenyan positives for EPO plus this recent scandal reported by ZDT right before Doha). But the elites are usually under a doping doctor/coach who monitors blood values (both for health reasons and navigating around the ABP). It seems a grandmaster messing with EPO would be dangerous and foolish.
T, HGH, SARMS, androgens, etc. are already banned.
For competitors at the state, regional & national level, they would have to be to ensure fair completion. However, for masters & amateurs who compete at low-level competitions there's a little known Recreational Competitor Therapeutic Use Exemption (RCTUE). According to USADA, the athlete would have to show a medical need for the drug (e.g., medically prescribed testosterone) and that they're unlikely to actually win any of the races they compete in:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/prescription-steroids-get-a-quiet-exemption-1461365753Charlie wrote:
Cavorty thanks for the info on the vapor fly. I am following with interest.
Shoes
If the vp reduces impact damage without negative side effects I would use it for training but not racing. Only because I want to keep it apples to apples.
PEDs
That is the sad part about drugs like epo which so many master runners use. EPO makes you a lot faster and helps you recover faster but long term use is deadly. Of course maybe that is the punishment cheaters deserve?
Soon there will be anti aging drugs that make you faster enhance recovery and and improve your health
Will these be banned ?
Should these be banned ?
Would you take them ?
I think on the shoes, as long as they are ruled legal, and are equally accessible to everyone, it's a matter of personal choice. I was very cynical about the effectiveness of the 4%, but tried them because of the rigid plate that meant you could get toe-off without the toe flexing, where my calf/ankle is too weak to do that. Subsequently, it turns out that for me, they seem to be faster, without any conscious change in form v a medium weight racing flat.
SoCalPete drew the line on them on the basis of having to change form, which is a personal choice I respect, although I didn't find either the need to change form or suffer the soreness Pete had (although I'm running a fair bit slower). Similarly, I understand where you are with apples to apples. If I wear them and run 19:00 instead of 19:20, I'll accept that the difference is down to equipment. but the same thing might be true of a pair of ultra light NB 5000 (I think that's the shoe) v what I wore 30 years ago. I wouldn't complain if rules came about that listed specific shoes that were acceptable for competition though.
On PEDs, it's always been fairly simple to me. I'm not going to take anything that is banned. I'll experiment with beet-juice and legal supplements (I think an NAD supplement has been positive to me). I'm not going to take anything that has a negative health side effect legal or not to improve performance. So I wouldn't take testosterone unless it was clinically necessary for me to function.
I'm against a 'free for all' approach that some have suggested, as I think it destroys the very ethos of sport - a recreation that promotes health, and healthy competition (that some people just happen to be good enough at to earn a living). Legalizing PEDS turns it into some kind of gladiatorial freak-show where those who are most willing to push the envelope for short-term gain will prevail.
If health-promoting anti-aging supplements/medications become available I suspect there would be no reason to ban them. If they are health-promoting and legal, I'd take them. If they are health-promoting and not legal, then I have to make a choice between continuing to compete, or better health/longevity. I think that's a really unlikely situation, however, as I can't think why a healthful supplement would be banned if it was universally available.
Are you talking about elites or masters? With elite sport, where "some people just happen to be good enough to earn a living," it's not about promoting health and healthy competition - but simply winning. Elites have sponsors who demand success in order to market their products. If they don't perform the sponsors will find someone else. That's why PED use is so rampant with the elites. For example, the entire mid-d, long distance & race walking success with Russia was built entirely on a state-sponsored doping program. That's why they're banned for Rio and looks like there's a likelyhood they'll be banned for a unprecedented second Olympics with Tokyo (in fact, the Russians believe they can't be successful without doping - an old Soviet doctrine). And Kenya, the world's best distance runners, has a major doping problem and are on the IAAF's "most likely to dope" watch list. I don't think the Kenya runners give one hoot about promoting health and healthy competition, they need to earn a living to feed their families and try to escape poverty. It's all about the money at the elite level...nothing new there.
For masters, I don't have any idea how prevalent PED use is. There hasn't been any studies or surveys done or anything like that (maybe some on this forum have an idea). But if there's a fair amount of PED use with masters then it could be that so much emphasis is placed on performance vs participation. It seems like there's a lot of big time masters competitions worldwide where the winners are put on a pedestal and glorified (recognition & interviews in runner's publications and so forth). It seems these days a high value is placed on performance with middle-aged runners, even at the local level. Everybody likes a winner even with old folks. I'm 60 and if I come on this forum and post that I ran a 4:30 marathon it will get yawns compared to another 60 year old who runs a 3 hr marathon who will be glorified and the talk of the town. I'm usually a back of the pack runner in my age-group at local races, and invariably I'll be asked why I don't run as fast as the top 3 or so in my age group (because I'm old, slow and injured frequently. Lol).
Again, I don't know the prevalence of PED use with masters but if there is PED use then obviously some runners are putting a premium on the glory & recognition of winning over anything else.
I've met many of the top age group runners in the US and world over the past couple of years. You don't get a lot of recognition unless you are breaking age group records. As far as PEDs I don't think anyone I know is using them, but who knows. I'd like to see more in competition and random testing. For race shoes I'm sticking with the Adizero for now, but might upgrade my XC spikes.
OldGuyII, Jamul Toads, + Anyone Else in the know...
Can you confirm USATF Winter Cross-Country Nationals is January 18th & in San Diego? Jan 18 seems a good two weeks earlier than most years. Selfishly, I'm trying to plan a separate boondoggle with my wife and could use more confirmation than the USATF website. Thanks.
KP
Got it from a friend. Jan 18 2020.
RIP: D3 All-American Frank Csorba - who ran 13:56 in March - dead
Great interview with Steve Cram - says Jakob has no chance of WRs this year
RENATO can you talk about the preparation of Emile Cairess 2:06
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
Hats off to my dad. He just ran a 1:42 Half Marathon and turns 75 in 2 months!
adizero Road to Records with Yomif Kejelcha, Agnes Ngetich, Hobbs Kessler & many more is Saturday