About 10 weeks into it before Boston. Anyone had a big P.R. following the Hanson Plan? Long run stops at 16 miles...
About 10 weeks into it before Boston. Anyone had a big P.R. following the Hanson Plan? Long run stops at 16 miles...
The hansons are probably in my opinion the best marathon coaches in this country. Any marathon program done by them is legit. They've taken no namers to the Olympics.
that "16" is dependent on your mileage. If your mileage is high enough, your long run would be higher. I think the 16 is based off of about 60 miles per week.
16 is dependent on training pace. They recommend a 2 hour long run. The purpose is to avoid going for 3-4 hour long run at 9-11 min pace, or 20+ miles.
The myth of the 20 miler started when everyone running marathons could do 20 miles in 2hrs.
I did 16 in 2:03 yesterday. It was a 66 mile week with two workouts - 3 x mile in 5:40s on Tuesday / 7 miles tempo at 6:25 pace on Thursday. I'm 41 so that was a pretty strong week for me 66 @ 7:20s. Now, the schedule goes up and down with the long runs and the tempos and workouts get longer like up to 10 miles @ marathon goal pace (I'm running them too fast now) and 3 x 2 mile with a 400 rest, that type of thing. Feel good...not dead tired from the 2:30-3 hour runs I've done in the past and doing sensible workouts.
I only have run 1 marathon but I qualified for boston with a 3:02. Prior to this I had only run 2 half's with my PR being 1:34 which was 6 months prior to the marathon.
I'm utilizing it again for a fall marathon in hopes to break 3 hrs, which seems reasonable.
The myth of the 20 miler? What a joke, this thread is another B.S. Hansons propaganda stunt. Sure you aren't tired from doing those long runs because you are doing a glorified 10k base schedule. Yeah most who haven't done much mileage will do okay off that type of schedule,but most would be better served doing 60-70 miles a week with a schedule out of "Advanced Marathoning" by Pete Pfitzinger or going on therunzone and reading Tinman's articles that has more marathon specific workouts.
3:13 best under Pfitz with 3 attempts at the distance
3:09 best under Daniels with 2 attempts
Ran a 2:58 under Hansons but thought it might be a fluke
Went back to Daniels and ran 3:11
Back to Hansons for a 3:01
I will never flirt with any other program.
get a grip in Michighan wrote:
The myth of the 20 miler? What a joke, this thread is another B.S. Hansons propaganda stunt. Sure you aren't tired from doing those long runs because you are doing a glorified 10k base schedule. Yeah most who haven't done much mileage will do okay off that type of schedule,but most would be better served doing 60-70 miles a week with a schedule out of "Advanced Marathoning" by Pete Pfitzinger or going on therunzone and reading Tinman's articles that has more marathon specific workouts.
Yeah, the myth of the 20 miler. I have friends who run 10 min/mile for their long runs and are out there for 3+ hours. They are miserable and have to take days off before and after just to be able to stay on their feet for that duration.
Not everyone needs to run 20 miles in training to succeed at running 26.2 in racing.
I also think that the success the Brooks-Hansons team has had developing runners is a testament to the plan.
Have you actually read the book or are you just spouting off like every other moron on this board?
They have 16 miles as the longest run in their training table for the "advanced" plan. There is also an "elite" sample at the end of the book, but that goes up to 130 miles/week. I wish they would offer something inbetween advanced and elite. Advanced isn't enough mileage for me, but the elite is way too much.
I ran 2:56 under McMillan at Cleveland 2010 and 3:12 on Hansons at Boston 2012, but it might be the course and age. I enjoyed mcMillan's program more. Workouts seem more important in Greg's plan.
TRUTH
get a grip in Michighan wrote:
The myth of the 20 miler? What a joke, this thread is another B.S. Hansons propaganda stunt. Sure you aren't tired from doing those long runs because you are doing a glorified 10k base schedule. Yeah most who haven't done much mileage will do okay off that type of schedule,but most would be better served doing 60-70 miles a week with a schedule out of "Advanced Marathoning" by Pete Pfitzinger or going on therunzone and reading Tinman's articles that has more marathon specific workouts.
get a grip in Michighan wrote:
The myth of the 20 miler? What a joke, this thread is another B.S. Hansons propaganda stunt. Sure you aren't tired from doing those long runs because you are doing a glorified 10k base schedule. Yeah most who haven't done much mileage will do okay off that type of schedule,but most would be better served doing 60-70 miles a week with a schedule out of "Advanced Marathoning" by Pete Pfitzinger or going on therunzone and reading Tinman's articles that has more marathon specific workouts.
Not very intelligent, are you? 20 milers are too long for non-elites. It will probably take them 3+ hours or more.
BTW: "tinman", isn´t that the megalomaniac nutcase who runs his one website because he can´t stand when people are arguing with him, so he retired back to his own website, who has a small number of cult followers.
The essence of it is what everyone was doing 20-30 years ago. I wouldn't call that a joke, would you? Just glancing at the schedule they put online shows a high week of more than 60 and if you are someone who is used to running, say, 80, the program would still work if you add doubles and the appropriate long run.
Rodgers and Malmo, et al, have their logs online and those are not unlike the Hanson's schedule, in essence. Consistent application of appropriate volumes and intensities is really all it is.
In the end, the long run is just another run, another workout. Generally speaking, it is no more important, no less, than any other day on the program.
I PRd using a "Hanson's Plan" but it was before I ever read about them using that method.
I trained for a 10k, tossed in a few long runs, then ran a marathon.
What they dont want is someone running 20 miles on the LR but not doing squat the rest of the week, or being so torn down that they'd cant do anything the rest of the week.
Reading the intro, they seem to be setting up their plan as an antithesis to Higdon, and other similar plans, more than Phitz and other "serious marathoner" schedules. They don't name names, but they repeatedly mention certain plans putting longish pace work on Saturday, then a longer run on Sunday, then very little volume/quality during the week.
The point of the HANSONS MARATHON METHOD is that the long run is overrated. It is far more important what you do the rest of the week. The number one thing in a successful marathon is pacing and this needs to be worked on throughout the entire trainng segment.
well.. wrote:
20 milers are too long for non-elites. It will probably take them 3+ hours or more.
Huh? I am a slow marathoner (3:25 PB), but a 20 mile run NEVER takes 3+ hours. If the only reasons for not doing a 20 miler are (a) you should not run more than 3 hours, and (b) you should not run more than 30% of your weekly total in one run, then there is no reason not to run a 20 miler as long as your weekly total exceeds 67 miles, and you can finish it in 3 hours. And the only people who should limit themselves to 16 miles are those who peak 54 /week or less.
What am I missing here.
I'm 43 and ran 2:53 last year using a variation on Pfitz plan. I don't know much about the Hanson plan, but my problem would be hitting the 2 hour mark and having the little voice telling me "ok now you have to run an hour longer than you did during training." I'm not sure about the physiology, but the mental part would be hard for me if I only did a long run of 16 miles. I've always liked a 2:45 to 3 hour run (assuming I'm shooting for a 3 hr marathon) about a minute to a minute-fifteen slower than goal pace. Its worked for me, but just kinda made up based on feel. I'm usually in the 70 mile/wk range when doing this so next day I'm fine for an easy run and recovered in time for following workouts. Good luck.