Success with Daniels?

Smoove,

Note my previous comment regarding an alternative way to look at things. I do not discount the importance of M pace. Granted, strictly by effort is not meaningful to many people in this day and age but we can change that. As soon as you change lens through which you look at things, the things you look at change. Yes, it’s difficult to put into words because it’s very much an art form but it can still be taught if the student is willing to subject herself to the process. Can it be frustrating at first? Maybe for the person who is impatient or doesn’t fully trust their body or who is accustomed to speaking a different language in training...sure. But the benefit (or value) to this approach is manifold. You see it as an adjustment factor for heat, hills, etc..I see it as a leading, guiding principle behind all that we do. I see pace or pace ranges as more of a coordinate system that is very often on the mark but effort paints with a broader stroke and I like the way that seems to correlate with the idea that these physiological improvements like LT shift lie more on a spectrum.

Let me play the role of the hobby jogger in this discussion.

A hobby jogger has no idea what anything is supposed to "feel like." We didn't run in HS and college. We haven't been coached for years on end and haven't trained for years under a system that allows us to develop a "feel." It's like eating a foreign food dish for the first time: I can know if I like it or not, but I have no idea if it is actually a good dish of "sukiyaki."

Too hot, you know that I'm not closed-minded. But Smoove's point about needing some metric is not trivial. You may be right that your "effort" based training is the best, but if the athlete is not calibrated, it's just not a useful thing for him or her. It's like giving directions to a blind man, saying "Just follow the roadsigns." Through the discussions on the RRT thread and other places, your emphasis on effort has prompted me to pay more attention to how I'm feeling at a given pace, at a given HR, and I'm now way better than I used to be at gauging that effort. But I have years of experience in hobby jogging and I am an introspective and attentive student of my chosen avocation. It's possible that using "effort" as the primary training metric just isn't going to work for most of us hobby joggers. To us, it sounds a little bit like Yoda telling us to trust the Force: it's good advice if you're Luke Skywalker, but for the rest of us, we're just left out there randomly swinging our lightsabers.

Sorry, OP. This stuff is kind of far afield from your original question. I'm doing Daniels "right" for the first time and I'm lovin' it. I'm training for a marathon and I have been doing and plan to continue to do the M pace work. But on the 2Q plan, it's really a pretty insignificant training pace... once every few weeks. I can't see how doing it or not doing it is gonna make that much of a difference.

Sincerely,

Your Hobby Jogger friend...

CJ

The hobbyjogger has to be fully committed to the process. It takes time. At first, it will seem foreign to you and you will make mistakes. I'm glad you brought up the example of the blind man. A blind man, no matter how determined he is to see, will never be able to see the road signs. But runners with little experience are not blind in the same fashion. They can be taught or coached to "see." I, for one, appreciate your introspective nature Coach Jeff.

TH: "A hobby jogger should run by effort."

HJ: "What does that effort feel like for, say, a marathon?"

TH: "I can't describe it to you."

HJ: "Then how do I know I'm doing the right effort if I'm training on my own and don't have any way to calibrate my effort?"

TH: "You need to be taught or coached to understand the right effort."

HJ: "But you just said you can't describe it to me."

Do you see the problem here?????

Also CJ - I wouldn't worry too much about the OP. This is a thread from 2017. I'm guessing he already finished that marathon cycle by now.

Jeff,

I would note that I am not a strict pace based guy, and definitely use pace as a starting point, not as a mandate.

A good coach can help an athlete home in on the appropriate level of effort in many instances. We can go back to some of the physical cues that I referenced at various paces up above, or you can use other tests - I have mentioned in the past that tempo effort should leave you able to speak a phrase or sentence, but unable to maintain a conversation.

My issue here is that M effort is much more difficult to tie to physical cues since it is intended to be a very high end aerobic/very, very low end anaerobic pace; a pace where your breathing won't change, you won't be driving your arms, etc. The cues that we learn over time, or that a good coach can tell you to focus on just aren't as prominently involved in M pace running.

I know you were working through an issue with too hot here, but I just wanted to be clear that a Daniels approach is not about locking into VDOT pace and ignoring your body (as you have demonstrated with your heart rate approach to Daniels' 2Q program),

Yup, Smoove, I absolutely get where you're at.

As you and too hot also realize, we're having this discussion in public. As a runner seeking guidance, I have gone through a lot of past threads on LRC and learned a wicked lot. I assume someone interested in Daniels train might stumble here in the future; I was anticipating the questions that I would have had on reading this back-and-forth.

I know you, so I know you are not a bible thumping', VDOT citing' evangelist of Daniels orthodoxy. In fact, you constantly encourage people to READ THE WHOLE ACTUAL BOOK rather than simply plug their shite into some online calculator.

As a coach of sorts myself, I have written over a dozen books. I regularly speak in front of large groups of people and present my unique perspective regarding my field of expertise. InEFFINevitably, someone will approach me at the end and try to distill everything I just said into "So all I have to do is XYZ?" No matter how simply you express something, folks wanna distill it further. Daniels is a polarizing coach; I wonder if he would be so polarizing if he had simply let his effort descriptions in the text stand on their own and had never added VDOT tables, thereby giving the simplifiers a convenient and effective bludgeon.

OK, bedtime for me. Daniels 2Q Week 14: Q2 tomorrow.

Smoove,

How likely are you to really structure a Daniels program using Plan A, but instead of miles using 5 minute increments for 1 tempo mile for someone like a female trying to BQ around 3:25?

I guess is the workload much more appropriate if you base the program on time vs. strict mileage, even though you'd be running far less using time?

It really depends on the runner's prior training history.

My wife ran her first marathon in 2017. She was a lifelong exerciser, but not a dedicated runner until maybe 2010, and even then, her running was inconsistent due to the birth of our 2nd and 3rd children. Because she had no meaningful lifetime base when she first started racing 5ks and other shorter races, we kept her volume fairly low (30-35 mpw on 4-5 days) and kept her to just one workout per week in those early years of running, alternating between a tempo session one week and a track session the following week.

For her, because of her historically low volume, we cycled through weeks of 40, 45 and 50 mpw (on 5 days). We also kept her to one workout most weeks, plus a long run. Here were her quality days (not including long runs unless they included portions that were faster than easy distance pace):

Week 1: 2 up; 6 x 800m at 5k pace with 2:30 active rest; 8miles total

Week 2: 5 x 1000m at 5k pace with 3:00 active rest; 10 miles total

Week 3: 4 x 1200m at 5k pace with 3:30 active rest; 10 miles total

Week 4: 2 miles up; 3 x 1.5 miles tempo w/2:00 rest; 2.5 miles down

Week 5: 2 mi up; 4 x 1 mile at tempo pace w/1:30 rest; 10 mi easy - 16 total

Week 6:

1 mile up; 4 miles at tempo pace plus :10; 1 mile down

18 miles easy with miles 8 through 10 at marathon pace

Week 7: 5 mi up; 4 x 1 mile at tempo pace with 1:30 rest; 1 mile down

Week 8:

2 miles up; 5 x 1 mile at tempo pace w/1:30 rest; 1 miles down

12 miles at marathon pace; 17 miles total

Week 9:

1 mile up; 3 x 2 miles at tempo pace with 3:00 rest; 1 mile down

18 miles easy with miles 10 through 14 at marathon pace

Week 10:

6 miles easy; 3 x 1 mile at tempo pace w/1:30 rest; 1 miles easy

20 miles easy with last 2 miles at marathon pace

Week 11:

4 miles up; 5 x 1 mile at tempo pace w/1:30 rest; 1 miles down

2 mi up; 3 x 1 mile at tempo pace w/1:30 rest; 6 miles easy; 3 x mile at tempo pace w/1:30 rest; 2 miles down

Week 12: 1 mile easy; 5 miles at marathon pace

Week 13:

2 miles up; 20 minute tempo run; cool down for 6 miles total

13 miles at marathon pace; 17 miles total

Week 14:

2 miles up; 20 minute tempo run; cool down for 6 miles total

Week 15:

1 mile up; 4 x 1200 at tempo pace with 1:00 rest; 1 mile down

Chicago Marathon: 15 minute BQ

Note that since her T pace was between 7:20-7:30, the rest to work ratio of 5:1 was maintained by extending rest.

Also note that this isn't the 2Q or Training Plan A plan, but it applies the core principles of those plans:

- Early vo2max work

- Shift to threshold work after initial phase

- Mix in a few extended bouts at M pace

- Maintain an inverse relationship between volume and intensity

- Work the second quality session per week into your long run

- Progress the volume of T work in a steady way while mixing in when in the run T sessions come

Some other things that were included but are not really 2Q or Training Plan A inspired:

- A fair amount of shorter bouts at M pace worked into long runs and occasionally done as a stand-alone run

- A fair number of runs with an extended warm up (really a short easy distance run) preceding the cruise intervals

Both of these were concessions to her being a first-time marathoner with very little experience doing these kinds of workouts. I really think having the TLT runs - long runs with cruise intervals early and late and with a moderate distance recovery period in between - are the most important workouts in those plans. But she was simply not going able to do those the way a more experienced runner would be able to. So in an effort to derive some of the mental benefit that those workouts provide, I made sure that she got some workouts in where the cruise intervals came at the end of the run, not at the beginning. Similarly, her inexperience in running at her M pace was what incited me to add those shorter bouts throughout the cycle. Given she was only doing one heavy workout most weeks, she had a bit more "room to play" on her other days, and I thought getting her to key in on how M pace felt mechanically would give her a bit more confidence on race day that she could get the pace right.

For a more experienced runner shooting for a similar time goal, things would probably look a bit different, but the core concepts would remain the same.

You ignored his point wrote:

TH: "A hobby jogger should run by effort."

HJ: "What does that effort feel like for, say, a marathon?"

TH: "I can't describe it to you."

HJ: "Then how do I know I'm doing the right effort if I'm training on my own and don't have any way to calibrate my effort?"

TH: "You need to be taught or coached to understand the right effort."

HJ: "But you just said you can't describe it to me."

Do you see the problem here?????

Coaching/teaching is not a one-way street. It's a relationship like any other. The teacher is a guide. The teacher can help direct your attention to certain cues and describe it in terms that are imperfectly clear. The pupil must then take possession of it and give it their own interpretation. All of training, especially effort-based training , is a process of trial and error. Even without a coach, if you're fully committed to this process there will be increasing familiarity over time resulting in increased proficiency.

For the record, I am not the guy who raised those questions - I've only posted under my Smoove handle here.

The issue I have is that I asked for the cues that you reference, and provided a bunch of cues that I use for various other paces; but you didn't offer any cues at all (the closest you came was saying that maybe cadence might be a cue). This after you saying that I was making finding marathon effort sound much more challenging than it really was.

Ok guys im getting that you are not keen on M pace workouts and you dont really rate them.

I just asked as it is in daniels 5-10k and half marathon plans. can i just ask what would you replace these 9 and 10 mile M pace workouts that he has included every 2nd week through phases 2 and 3?

id like to do some 10k races in the spring, and a half towards end of summer and possibly marathon in autumn. ill make a call on marathon after i see how the first half of year goes and how the body is shaping up.

can you guys recommend what i should replace the M pace workouts with for my 10k plan?

any help much appreciated.

I don't have the 3rd edition of his book, so I am not really sure how to answer that since it really depends on what phase you are in and what the other workouts for the week are.

My guess is that he either prescribes the M paced runs in place of a threshold workout or in place of a long run on certain weeks. To the extent that these runs are providing a stimulus, it is a T stimulus, so I would be inclined to replace them with a tempo run or some cruise intervals at T pace. Another option is simply replace them with easy distance. Really, I would have to see how the rest of the parts fit together to hazard a guess, and even then, how you feel in a given week would also play a big role in what to do for that week. Remember, the training plans are intended to be road maps and a set of directions, not the ten commandments. And just like you have to vary from a set of directions when traffic issues require it, you will sometimes have to vary from your training plan depending on what your body is telling you.

Smoove wrote:

The issue I have is that I asked for the cues that you reference, and provided a bunch of cues that I use for various other paces; but you didn't offer any cues at all (the closest you came was saying that maybe cadence might be a cue). This after you saying that I was making finding marathon effort sound much more challenging than it really was.

I see where we might be having a disconnect. For you, the absence of specific or detailed instruction is challenging. The cues I have offered are not sufficient to you because they are simple, vague and low in number. That, Smoove, is what makes it so open to discovery. The idea is not to pinpoint or nail down a specific pace. The idea is to let that effort come around to you.

Honest question: what cues have you offered up?

What specifically have you told or would you tell an athlete that you are coaching to run a marathon to help them figure out whether they are running at marathon effort?

in the 5-10k plan smoove he includes 2 M pace workouts in phase 2. they replace the weekly long run. in phase 2, he includes 3 q workouts per week. q1 is long run and this is the one he replaces with 10 miler with 9 @ M pace. q2 is a R pace workout and q3 is a mix of R and T paces. on the two weeks he includes the M pace q1, his q3 workout is a mix of E and H eg. 2E+7×2 min H + 2E.

in phase 3 he also includes 3 weeks of 10 M pace. 3 quality workoutd a week. q1 is long run and the M pace workouts are pencilled in here every 2nd week. q2 is I pace and q3 is cruise intervals. q2 and q3 are back to back days.

should i just do longer E long runs for q1 or mix some T pace into my long run of im targeting a 10k in the spring.

His H pace workouts in phase 2 are only 2 minutes. he usually recommends fast pace to be 3-5 minutes. is this just to get ready for next phase where focus is on I pace?

Sometimes we agree Smoove. This is such a time......... ))) Well said!

Smoove wrote:

Honest question: what cues have you offered up?

What specifically have you told or would you tell an athlete that you are coaching to run a marathon to help them figure out whether they are running at marathon effort?

I understand this is a Daniels-influenced conversation and that is fine but I would never tell a runner to go out and run marathon effort, much less M pace. Lydiard used fractional effort terminology. I would use the terms brisk or steady. It would be something that you work into throughout the course of a 60-90 minute run for example. The feeling should be comfortably hard. You’re not out of breath as Lydiard would say and your stride is quick yet economical.

Some interesting questions here on Daniels.

I am starting his 10k plan and will see how that goes before using his marathon plan if all goes ok. I have also heard pfitzinger is an super effective plan.

Like other posters, I am interested in what workouts to use if M pace Q1 workouts are not all that beneficial?

Also do you guys work much off heart rate when training to ensure doing easy work easy enough and T work at the correct 85-90% HR zone?