Sub 1:10 Half Marathon Training

The mileage won’t be your problem. That looks fine on paper. The problem, if any, will be how you incorporate the right amount of intensity flavored towards the event you are peaking for.

I'm considering running Gasparilla that day (but I'm more likely than not going to run it at goal marathon pace).

Yeah, I do most of those workouts out on the gravel roads. The ones that I used the most during this training cycle were very flat and very fine gravel roads, so that alone definitely doesn't account for ~20 seconds per mile.

When I take absolutely everything into account, it probably does add up to that much though. Before I ran the half, that true LT pace is based on a 5k race on a 300m indoor track with good pacing, good competition, racing flats, etc.

So transitioning to a workout outside, all of the following will affect my perceived effort: training alone, training surface, weather of any kind, hills (even if they are just slight inclines/declines in Pittsburg, KS), and training shoes. All those little things can add up to quite a big difference.

Anyone know of a fast half marathon with a decent field in April, May or June?

Smoove wrote:

I'm considering running Gasparilla that day (but I'm more likely than not going to run it at goal marathon pace).

I might see you there, I'm still undecided between gasparilla or Sarasota. Gasparilla will be loaded with great runners as well as extremely busy that entire weekend, Sarasota won't be as loaded with runners but will make traveling less hectic as well as a bit more time to train. Are you running Boston this year?

heyyo wrote:

Anyone know of a fast half marathon with a decent field in April, May or June?

I'll be attempting to break 1:10 at the Eugene half marathon in late April. I'm dealing with an achilles injury right now though so I might have to adjust my goal.

Yep, I'm signed up and have a hotel arranged, so I'm commmitted at this point.

Hoping for a cool day with a tailwind - I don't care if it's legit under those conditions or not, I'd like a new PR.

Smoove wrote:

Yep, I'm signed up and have a hotel arranged, so I'm commmitted at this point.

Hoping for a cool day with a tailwind - I don't care if it's legit under those conditions or not, I'd like a new PR.

+1 to that. The weather is rarely every good for Boston - let's just hope it's not hot. 2015 (cold and rainy) would be great compared to the last couple years.

I'd also say any time ran at Boston is a legitimate PR....

Well good luck to you! I seen your splits on Strava from Houston, I think you've got a really great chance at sub 70 still. Like you said just need the right weather for it. As you already know the weather can flip a switch down here.

san diego rock n roll in early june. 200 ft net loss. elites show up and there's pretty good depth for times into high 60's and low 70's. if you have a sub-1:11 time then you get free entry

San Diego rock n roll sounds perfect! Thanks!

Do people here think we should merge this 1:10 half thread with the 2:30 Boston full thread? Those are basically equivalent times and there are some people posting in both threads as it is.

Honestly, I'd take that Houston weather for just about any race. It was cold, but it didn't negatively impact my times at all; and I honk it's the best weather I've had for a half. If I could pay $500 to get that weather in Boston but with no wind at all, or $1000 to get that weather with the wind coming from the west, I would sign up to pay it today.

The only downside of the weather really related to the need to get in the corals early - my warm up routine got kind of screwed up by a bad choice of port-a-potty lines, so I was late in getting warmed up and had to shorten my warm up some. It definitely didn't impact my race, but it would have been nice to get a good warm up in on a cold day justvto make the coral experience a little better.

Csfhjkbxsyjk wrote:

What part of South Florida? I’m close to your range in fitness maybe you can hook up with our training group.

yes. Hook up. that is happening..

Ben Congrats on your race!

I was reading your thoughts about LT runs and how now a 1:07 HM equates to a 5:07 LT pace. But isn't that for 20mins worth at LT?I don't believe LT pace is fixed but rather changes the longer one runs at LT pace. If you're doing 5 to 6 miles at LT the pace is suppose to drop for every 5 mins spent at LT? I don't know the exact formula, I believe you add 5 to 10 sec per mile average pace for every 5mins spent over the 20 min mark. So a +/-5:20 LT pace run in 40 mins spent at LT effort for a 1:07 HM. By going conservative you probably made the best choice to ensure you weren't over spent for the race though. And if it ain't broke don't fix it. Great race again.

denver runner wrote:

heyyo wrote:

Anyone know of a fast half marathon with a decent field in April, May or June?

I'll be attempting to break 1:10 at the Eugene half marathon in late April. I'm dealing with an achilles injury right now though so I might have to adjust my goal.

At the end of that time frame is Grandmas in Duluth, MN.

I'll be shooting for sub 70 at eugene also. see you there.

Yeah, that's my general understanding of LT pace, but that pace is still pretty tough for me to imagine for a 4 mile LT run. I suppose that's mainly because I never do LT runs on the track and I've always got those things that increase perceived effort and whatnot.

Here's the way I think of it (which is exactly what you just described, but in different words). LT is really measured by effort, and there is a certain level of effort that will put you right at the LT line for ~20-30 minutes or so depending on how well-trained you are. At some point, other factors will come into play for fatigue, and running that same pace will put you at a higher effort which will put you over the LT. So like you said, if you want to go for a longer period of time, I think it's best to start at a slower pace, but eventually that slightly slower pace will put you right at the LT without going over during that extended time compared to the shorter LT run.

So that's my reasoning for doing moderate paced long runs and why they are so beneficial for true distance runners. If you average ~40 seconds slower than LT pace for a long run, let's say an 18 miler. Running ~40 seconds slower than LT pace will not be very difficult for quite a while. Since you're doing a long run though, that effort will eventually creep up to the LT and you will spend a good amount of time right around that effort for the seconds half of the run. Then you're getting all the benefits of a long run plus the benefits of working the LT.

So why do I pick 40 seconds slower than LT pace? Well, that's just purely anecdotal evidence. I'd hear about some different great runners doing several long runs at x:xx pace when they have certain PRs, and I compared that long run pace to what their LT pace would be, and it was pretty common to be around 40 seconds slower. It seemed to work really well for me this cycle.

I might be way off base, but anyways, that's how my mind comprehends this topic. Thanks for the congrats!

My take is that 40 seconds is too much time for an LT adaptation even over 18 miles, butbthat there may be some benefit that doesn't fit on the easily identified spectrum of physiological spectrum. I personally avoid those kinds of workouts because I tend to want to get a very direct and specific adaptation for the lowest possible physiological cost. If I were in my mid 20s instead of my mid 40s, I would probably mix things more and rely upon my ability to recover to make up for any potential inefficiencies from that approach. Or maybe I would just get in a third conventional workout.

Different strokes for different folks, but I really want to have a specific benefit that I can identify from each hard day.

I am a notorious Daniels oriented guy, so I tend to view things through that lens, so take whatever I say on these boards with that in mind. Still, I think a lot of people would agree that Daniels research can provide a good launching point for pace analysis if you are looking for a specific adaptation.

Now not everyone is looking for a single, specific adaptation, and not everyone will quite fit into the Daniels model since there are outliers, but I think using his research on lactic acid build up rates is a useful guide. For someone who has a "standard" LT pace of 5:13, they would add 19 seconds per mile (5:32 pace) to get the desired LT adaptation from a 60 minute tempo run. He adds about 2 seconds per mile for every additional 5 minutes (after some bigger bumps from 20 to 25 and from 25 to 30 minutes). So if you were to run 1:45, you would add on another 18 seconds based on that rate (although that 2 seconds per 5 minutes might further contract some later in the effort). That would get you to about 5:50 pace for an 18 miler if your "normal LT threshold" was 5:13. If It is closer to 5:07, my guess is that Daniels would establish 5:45 pace as the baseline for such a run (although I am not sure he would actually prescribe such a run).

Again, there are outliers and the Daniels research is a great rule of thumb, not a mandate, but I thought it would be interesting to work through the numbers for illustration purposes.

Another alternative - and this is something that I do a fair amount of in my marathon cycles, and it comes right from Daniels - is to include bouts of 20 minute LT pace in the beginning and end of your long run. So you might do a 2 mile warmp up, roll into 2 x 2 miles of threshold work at "standard" LT pace with a 2:00 jog in between, roll into 8 miles easy, then finish up with a 20 minute tempo run at "standard" LT pace. This would get you some great LT adaptation, get you your long run, and really help with mental toughness late in longer races as it mimics that higher degree of mental effort required to maintain pace late in those longer races.

Not saying this should be done as a weekly workout or replace the long steady state run, just offering it up as food for thought and for consideration as part of a long term training plan that includes various types of long run efforts.