Hanson's Method

I have used it for my 2 marathons. First time my long runs were16, and Iran a 3hr (laugh if you want) and the second time ran a 2:52. The 2nd time I increased the long runs to 18-19, but I knew what to expect this time around.

Worked for me, but it may not work for everyone.

Thanks and believe me, I'm not laughing at all, well done! I'm 49 and trying to get back under 3 hours after years of injuries...2:38 pr years earlier. I'm looking for anything that will work. Thanks again!

I ran my first marathon in 5 years last year using this plan. PR'd by 6 minutes and felt the strongest and fittest i have so far in a marathon. Though most of my long runs ended up being in the 17-18 mile range.

I haven't used their training plan but have used their philosphy in my own training. My last marathon training consisted of one long run of 17 miles. That was a mistake as I was on an out and back course and turned at the wrong mark. It should have been only 16 miles.

I was able to run sub 3.

It taught me that you don't have to have a bunch of 20+ milers, or any really.

use the search function.

You'll see a lot of threads on this. Lots of success.

aquafina wrote:

use the search function.

You'll see a lot of threads on this. Lots of success.

NO.

You will see a lot of success stories of people who adjusted the long run to 18-19 miles. But that's not what the OP is asking...

The Hanson 16 miler is run a base of accumulating fatigue, including the prior day's run. It makes sense. The density of training matters more than a single run. Their elites run longer than 16, though. I run better when I'm always tired, on the brink of overtraining, and then taper. They are smart guys. 20 shouldn't be a religion. When I was young, I'd run 20 to 24, but a lot faster than I do now. My 16 effort now is about equivalent to that.

Don't focus on the 16 miler as the key to the plan. The key is three hard runs a week (speed, tempo, long). With three hard runs a week, it wouldn't make much sense to run longer than 16 if you're not hitting high mileage as it would be disproportionate to your other runs.

Agree with this...

runner who professes wrote:

The Hanson 16 miler is run a base of accumulating fatigue, including the prior day's run.

If this is the case, it makes more sense to do your long run at the end of a six-day cycle and take the 7th day off.

Running Formula reader wrote:

runner who professes wrote:

The Hanson 16 miler is run a base of accumulating fatigue, including the prior day's run.

If this is the case, it makes more sense to do your long run at the end of a six-day cycle and take the 7th day off.

STOP concentrating on the long run. The off day is also to help you adjust to the Speed days and Tempo days which are every bit as important as the long run. I believe more important. The other days are what taught me to feel the pace. My marathon collapses had more to do with improper pacing than anything else. That has never been the case under the Hanson's plan.

Thanks for all of the great responses and I mean that sincerely.

Yes, my question was about the long run because I truly wondered how many people stuck with that distance as their long run and had success with it.

I used to do a lot of 18-22 milers combined with easy runs and hard runs from 8-10 miles. Going out and running in the low 2:40's was easier then versus now attempting to break 3 hours...many years of chronic injuries:(

Things feel better now, my kids are teenagers and I have more time to train without guilt. Basically, I'd like to do it right and if I come close, there's always next year as I intend on breaking it one way or the other.

Thanks again.

I am believer wrote:

STOP concentrating on the long run. The off day is also to help you adjust to the Speed days and Tempo days which are every bit as important as the long run. I believe more important. The other days are what taught me to feel the pace. My marathon collapses had more to do with improper pacing than anything else. That has never been the case under the Hanson's plan.

What kind of "adjustment" do you need between the Speed days and Tempo days? Would your Tempo day be compromised if you did a 6-8 mile easy run in between? If your purpose of Tempo days is to get used to running at the goal pace, wouldn't it make more sense to do that without complete rest on the day before?

If it is a matter of "believing" in the method, then I guess asking a logical explanation behind it does not make any sense.

All of those questions are answered in the book. Reading is fundamental.

cheap azz can be wrote:

All of those questions are answered in the book. Reading is fundamental.

But if I can save 15 bucks and get the answers for free......

Although it's not directed towards me, for what it's worth I recently got the book.

I've read it in it's entirety and get the "theory" behind the long run of 16 and the work put in the day before that run.

Unfortunately where I live I don't know one person who's used the method at all, let alone successfully, hence my question.

Thanks again.

cheap azz can be wrote:

All of those questions are answered in the book. Reading is fundamental.

No. My question is not answered in the book.

If you insist it is, tell me the page number.