transition from Ironman to Marathon due to injury

Just finished the 140.6 and wanted to post an update.

Horrendous day with high winds, low 50s, rain and sleet. I spent 20 minutes in a heated trailer at mile 35 hoping for SAG to roll by. I decided to bag it and just save my legs for the 26.2 in 6 wks. Never found SAG, so I limped from aid station to aid station until I was closer to continue than to turn back. When I hit T2, I saw I could still do an easy 3:45 and finish sub-11, so I went out.

10:45 with a 3:37 run. I paced a little poorly with a +9' split. I spent 92" at a freaking train at mile ~20 and never got back in rythm. I started getting off form at 23, so I backed off trying not to dig much of a hole. Walked a lot of 25 knowing I had met my goal and trying to lessen the damage.

Unfortunately, my legs are still trashed. We had a lot of standing in lines and walking around the finish area after the race, so not ideal recovery. Tomorrow is 5 6/7ths weeks from showtime. We shall see.

I have read a few articles saying the 10%/wk increase rule was bunk. I guess I will just crank the volume as much as I can tolerate. This volume bit will be new to me.

Bump in 6 weeks.

2:59:12

Passing out for the night. Details tomorrow. Couldn't be happier with my results. Hope I can knock another 10' off by next year's race. :-/

BTW, a 2:59 open 26.2 is much, much harder than a 10:45 140.6.

borden wrote:

2:59:12

Passing out for the night. Details tomorrow. Couldn't be happier with my results. Hope I can knock another 10' off by next year's race. :-/

BTW, a 2:59 open 26.2 is much, much harder than a 10:45 140.6.

As somebody who has always been amazed at the length of the Ironman (but who has never done a triathlon) and who has gone sub 3 in the marathon, I'd like to hear you elaborate on this point.

Harder in what way? You feel worse at the end or the training needed to get there is harder? (e.g. a super fast 100m won't leave you dieing at the end, but the dedication to training must be total).

Anyway, I'm glad you're happy with your result. That's always a great feeling.

borden wrote:

2:59:12

Passing out for the night. Details tomorrow. Couldn't be happier with my results. Hope I can knock another 10' off by next year's race. :-/

BTW, a 2:59 open 26.2 is much, much harder than a 10:45 140.6.

Congratulations. The details will be interesting.

First, thanks to you guys for throwing rocks. I had a few buddies telling me it wasn't in the cards for me, and I tapped into all that when the world started closing in.

A quick run down of how I attacked the marathon training after the Ironman.

Link to the training log:

http://www.beginnertriathlete.com/discussion/training/index-monthly.asp?type=train&year=2011&month=12&day=1&memberid=192802

I took off 2 days after 140.6 and started running again. Everyone I talked with said this was a mistake. It took me about a week to feel good again, but by day 8, I was able to do 90' Tempo that felt good.

My basic training week looked like:

theshold (3x1mile@TP),

Tempos (90' as 15 easy, 60@MP, 15 easy),

Long runs capped at 150' as 30'@Easy, 60'@MP, 30'@Easy, 60'@MP

Every other day was a 45' Easy run except for a few off days.

2 weeks out from the race was a local 10k (38:44) that I worked in to a long-ish run.

My weekly milage went:

140.6

25

50ish

55ish

70ish as 4 Easy, 2 tempo days, 1 Long

taper

taper-Rocket City Marathon, Hunstville Alabama

I logged my resting heart rate and bagged the work sessions if my RHR>30dRHR. This was arbitrarily set as standard because I couldn't find a lot of info to go on. I knew I needed some meteric to base my recovery off to limit the stress but allow my to push.

I had little experience with taper, so I picked up a copy of "Consistent Winning" by Ronald D. Sandler. I used the 5 day cycle at the end of my 2 week taper. I hit the course feeling like a caged beast.

I will spare you guys the race report, but I hit 13.1@1:29:10, waited until 16 to wick it up. 18 before I noticed I was tired and 22-23 before it really hurt. 23 is the hilly mile (530' course total) and it zapped me. The last 5k was a bargaining game to keep the pace, and I was in a dark place the last 0.5 miles, but I hit the chute with 2:58:xx rolling and took some time to enjoy the finish. I always hammer through the chute but this one just felt like it deserved my attention.

It was a small race 1190 finishers and I landed a 5th M30-34 medal. I gotta say that I really liked getting the dinky hunk of metal. I know its lame, but it really brought a smile to my face when I found out.

Garmin connect file:

http://connect.garmin.com/activity/134152892

Post-26.2 included a rest day on Sunday and an easy 3 today, Monday. Legs are coming back, slowly. 2 more 26.2s before Valentine's Day, then its Tri season! I am breaking out the cycle trainer tomorrow, but this little journey has me looking at Ultra's over IronMan. Maybe there is a runner in here somewhere after all?

*edit*

that should be 10k 4 weeks out from race day, not 2.

Why don't you quit being a puss and pick a race to run. Stop all this nonsense about tapering and "pain caves." You guys are such nancies.

Sub 3:00 sucks. Are you fat? Are you a woman? My wife ran 3:17 last fall on 8 weeks of training and she isn't even a runner. She had a kid 14 months ago.

As somebody who has always been amazed at the length of the Ironman (but who has never done a triathlon) and who has gone sub 3 in the marathon, I'd like to hear you elaborate on this point.

Harder in what way? You feel worse at the end or the training needed to get there is harder? (e.g. a super fast 100m won't leave you dieing at the end, but the dedication to training must be total).

140.6 @ 10:45 with a 3:37 run split

and of course, the open 26.2 @ 2:59

I love the training. I love to pedal and I love to run. (I tolerate swimming.) I have a lot of trouble patiently building my volume because I want to ride/run all the time. I have to constantly reign myself in. That being said, I got tired of those long weekends. Those long rides just bore the crap out of me. On my own, I can go climb or ride with a group, but during iM training, its specificity, redundancy, and day dreaming. The training could be a lot tougher for the iM if you dont love the bike.

I love to race, too. But the 140.6 and 26.2 are totally different animals. The whole iM is spent thinking "Go easy, do no harm, slow down, easy does it." If you can resist the urge to hammer the swim, bike , and beginning of the run, you find a nice comfortable pace and just wait on the last 10k. If you go out too hard, you simply end up walking.

Poor desicions are what determines the suck factor. But it seems the suck hits so hard for those that make bad decisions that most just walk. There isn't as many folks going-for-broke. I imagine its like hitting the wall at a marathon at the 10k mark. You just chill out and enjoy the stroll.

My experience with run-only races have all been at higher RPE levels than anything I experienced at iM. Every race starts out harder than the iM, gets painful sooner, and stays painful longer. 5k-26.2, I dig a deep hole. At the iM, I went in respecting the distance and finished without having to really visit the dark place. I hit a low spot at 23, but I just backed my 8 flats down and finished the last 5k.

I have only done a few 70.3s and the one 140.6, so maybe I just dont have the experience yet.

Regardless, anyone can do the ironman, 17 hours is a long time. It just comes down to if you want it enough to do the training. Think of it as training for a sub-3 hr 26.2 and jogging out a 3:30.

Now, a sub-10 iM may be different. I hope to tell you next Fall.

Why don't you quit being a puss and pick a race to run. Stop all this nonsense about tapering and "pain caves." You guys are such nancies.

Sub 3:00 sucks. Are you fat? Are you a woman? My wife ran 3:17 last fall on 8 weeks of training and she isn't even a runner. She had a kid 14 months ago.

Awesome response.

Bonus points for being anonymous.

poor scores for originality.

sub-3 was really tough for me. It took everything I had and left me feeling like a hero. I was 33/1190, top 3%. I couldn't be happier about it.

I have a couple of questions for you.

Do you not believe in taper? Or hurting during a race?

I feel like anyone competing against the clock is out there hurting about the same. I bet there was a guy chasing a 4hr mark that felt just as bad as the guy looking for a 2:40.

As for picking a race, I did. I chose the Ironman and unfortunately was injured in my final weeks of race prep. I wasn't going to just click over to the offseason and wait to train again.

I found out I really like running. But man you guys have a high douche bag ratio in your sport.

Congrats on the wife's kid and her 3:17.

Thanks for you help!

I wouldn't take too much offense in the post. If you notice his username, you'll see that he is just parodying the community.

Still, I think it goes without saying the faster runners hurt more, look better, make more money, have more successful careers, drive nicer cars, fvck prettier women, fvck more women and weigh less but have more muscle than slow runners.

Also, tapering is kind of for pu$$ies, I have to agree with the guy.

I think that if running <70mpw taper should probably be very minimal, certainly not the 2 to 3 weeks that some insist on. Counterproductive. In your case, having done a IM right before, I have no clue how to have improved your performance!

But congratulations on hitting your goal. Go get 'em on your next marathon.

Tapering is for (i) ?

Every plan I've seen has a taper. I've read DRF, not mention of the pu$$ factor. I'm in Advanced Marathoning now. The plans at the back of the book all have tapers.

I hate the taper. It drives me crazy. I'd love to skip it.

Can either of you explain your personal thoughts?

I'd love to read more about it.

Can you post a link to some info?

Thanks

Congrats Borden

I never saw the original thread, but your training certainly predicted a marathon around 3 hours. Because you mentioned you were doing a triathlon some of the posts were even harsher than usual. Most of the idiots on here have an aversion to anyone not like them such as triathletes, ultra marathoners, or trail racers. They think everybody should only run on the track or road so just discount those posts.

The purpose of the taper is to just be as rested and ready to run on race day as you can. I never saw the need to take more than 3 or 4 days for this unless the program you are on had you overtraining (which I think many people do). Then you would need more time to recover.

i run 31 mpw in 2 runs wrote:

Congrats Borden

I never saw the original thread, but your training certainly predicted a marathon around 3 hours. Because you mentioned you were doing a triathlon some of the posts were even harsher than usual. Most of the idiots on here have an aversion to anyone not like them such as triathletes, ultra marathoners, or trail racers. They think everybody should only run on the track or road so just discount those posts.

The purpose of the taper is to just be as rested and ready to run on race day as you can. I never saw the need to take more than 3 or 4 days for this unless the program you are on had you overtraining (which I think many people do). Then you would need more time to recover.

This. I typically run about 60mpw and do some occasional 70-80mpw weeks and I 'taper' by taking it easier the last week before a marathon. Some strides and whatnot but that's it. I train normally before this last week. I'm 50 and still run well under 3:00. In my case at least, 2 or 3 week taper is completely unnecessary and would have me stale. I ran 2:54 two Sundays ago and ran a 10K race 10 days out and a 3.5 mile very hilly race 7 days out. Perfect last quality work for me. You'll have to figure out what works best for you. Guys doing 100+MPW will need to taper more and better than someone like me to become fresh but not stale.