dum dum dum dum wrote:
Whats the point of 22 miles easy 8 weeks out from a marathon?
If you read Eliud Kipchoge training log. A week leading up to Berlin, he did a 40k tempo at slightly slower than marathon pace.
Again where is the 30k-40k tempo at a bit slower than marathon pace?
Qwerti wrote:
I kind of thought Ryan Vail was done. So I looked through his blog site. In the “Bio” section under the list of achievements, he’s claiming an 8th place finish in the 2018 Berlin Marathon. No joke. Apparently he’s prescient. No mention of Boston 2018, though, so I guess he’s not going to do too well there.
He finished 8th in the 2017 Berlin marathon. Is a typo really that unheard of?
fartleks and bagels wrote:
dum dum dum dum wrote:
Whats the point of 22 miles easy 8 weeks out from a marathon?
If you read Eliud Kipchoge training log. A week leading up to Berlin, he did a 40k tempo at slightly slower than marathon pace.
Again where is the 30k-40k tempo at a bit slower than marathon pace?
Fartlick with Kegels demands to know: Where is the tempos?
fartleks and bagels wrote:
dum dum dum dum wrote:
Whats the point of 22 miles easy 8 weeks out from a marathon?
If you read Eliud Kipchoge training log. A week leading up to Berlin, he did a 40k tempo at slightly slower than marathon pace.
Again where is the 30k-40k tempo at a bit slower than marathon pace?
You do know that the marathon is 42.195 km right? How much slower is "a bit slower than marathon pace" to you Master Coach? To me, a "bit slower" is 10 secs per mile and that would mean he puts in 40km at 2:13 marathon pace if he is targeting 2:09:00.
Do you really think that is smart? I don't think :20 per mile slower is really close enough to marathon pace to matter. I feel like 30km at marathon pace is smart and would really only be going "deep into the well" for the last 10km and 30km at 5:05 pace (for him) also makes sense.
But I think 40km at "close to" marathon pace is too stressful for almost anyone. I DO realize that Eliud Kipchoge (greatest marathoner ever) says that he did it. But I don't know how fast he went and neither do you, plus I don't think the training for the best ever is right for everyone. You do clearly, but I do not.
1) that's not quite how 70's 10k runners trained. Yes, the volume was around the same, but there would have been fartleks, or 20x440, or 12x880, or 6xmile in there somewhere. Probably 20x220. Or some sort of 440 hard 110-220 easy for 6 miles.
Plus, he'd be doing lots of races. Road races, shorter track races.
If he translated it to today, then he'd do 20x400:)
They did not call them tempos, but 70's runners did things like 6-8 miles hard (e.g. 3/4 pace).
2) many of today's American runner are following something like Canova. Most are faster than Vail at 10k. Other than Rupp many of those runners are slower than Vail in the Marathon. So....it's kind of working for me. He's doing "70's" training (kind of), with 70's 10k times and 70's marathon times. Other Americans are doing todays training, with today's 10k times, and 60's marathon times.
"It's kind of working for me"....change that "him". It might have worked for me if I was a 10k runner in the 70's/80's instead of a mile/1500 guy from 76 to 84.
well, who cares about this nobody
fartleks and bagels wrote:
http://ryanvail.blogspot.com/2018/02/8-weeks-to-boston-marathon-last-weeks.htmlWeekly Total
9 120 Sunday 2/11/2018 Long run 22 miles easy
Monday 2/12/2018 off
Tuesday 2/13/2018 Tempo 5 miles by effort on roads then 5 min rest, 4 mile, 3 mile on track @ 70-71, 4 min rest
Wednesday 2/14/2018 AM: 14 PM: 6 + strength
Thursday 2/15/2018 12 x 200m or hills
Friday 2/16/2018 AM: 12 PM: 6
Saturday 2/17/2018 AM: 14: PM: 6
I mean hasn't he heard of Renato Canova training? Where is the 30k to 40k tempos at a bit slower than marathon pace?
If you’d like, you can ask Ryan yourself:
http://www.rundoyen.com/ryan/The Overexplainer wrote:
But I think 40km at "close to" marathon pace is too stressful for almost anyone. I DO realize that Eliud Kipchoge (greatest marathoner ever) says that he did it. But I don't know how fast he went and neither do you, plus I don't think the training for the best ever is right for everyone. You do clearly, but I do not.
What are you on about? Of course we know how fast Kipchoge went.
ThatAverageRunner wrote:
The Overexplainer wrote:
But I think 40km at "close to" marathon pace is too stressful for almost anyone. I DO realize that Eliud Kipchoge (greatest marathoner ever) says that he did it. But I don't know how fast he went and neither do you, plus I don't think the training for the best ever is right for everyone. You do clearly, but I do not.
What are you on about? Of course we know how fast Kipchoge went.
I am talking about how fast he did the 40 km training run at "close to marathon pace". Not truly possible to know how fast he went to within 5 secs per mile, even with a GPS.
The Overexplainer wrote:
ThatAverageRunner wrote:
What are you on about? Of course we know how fast Kipchoge went.
I am talking about how fast he did the 40 km training run at "close to marathon pace". Not truly possible to know how fast he went to within 5 secs per mile, even with a GPS.
Uhhh, what?
It was timed on a 40km route.
[quote]rojo wrote:
(Kipchoge) do a 40K as his training run, and if he had done the extra 2K he would have clocked in at a 2:08 marathon, and this is at altitude as part of his training."
I like to let the stats speak for themselves.
So let's do the math.
2:08 could be 2:08:59 which is 4:55.2 pace. World record pace is 4:41.4. So he ran 13.8 seconds slower than marathon WR pace for slightly less the distance.
Canova training isn't a thing at all.
It's the same old,
With implied PED use.
blort wrote:
1) that's not quite how 70's 10k runners trained. Yes, the volume was around the same, but there would have been fartleks, or 20x440, or 12x880, or 6xmile in there somewhere. Probably 20x220. Or some sort of 440 hard 110-220 easy for 6 miles.
Plus, he'd be doing lots of races. Road races, shorter track races.
If he translated it to today, then he'd do 20x400:)
They did not call them tempos, but 70's runners did things like 6-8 miles hard (e.g. 3/4 pace).
2) many of today's American runner are following something like Canova. Most are faster than Vail at 10k. Other than Rupp many of those runners are slower than Vail in the Marathon. So....it's kind of working for me. He's doing "70's" training (kind of), with 70's 10k times and 70's marathon times. Other Americans are doing todays training, with today's 10k times, and 60's marathon times.
From another guy who remembers the 'running boom' and an era of European-American prominence in events 10km and up, blort is exactly right. Hodge can (and often does) weigh in on what he and his peers did, but what stands out to me is how much better they were at marathons than today's Americans.
I know a lot of you think Rupp is a big deal but believe that is because no other American has done another even remotely noteworthy at the distance since Rupp ran the Trials. His rise to marathon success coincided with a period of struggle for Ritz. I mean, there are a total of two currently active US marathoners who could have beaten Bob Hodge in his prime.
Ward is cool in some ways but would have been marginally recognizable by hardcore running fans had he performed the same but done it 30 years earlier. You may point out that he made an Olympic team, but he wouldn't have if Pfitz, BJ, Durden, Sandoval, and of course any one of Shorter,Rodgers, or Salazar were in the race during their primes.
The US is embarrassingly shallow at longer distances. Whatever has changed in American training has led to great success up to 10km. Rupp actually was pretty good at that distance. A few have done great 5ks recently too. But whatever the 70s guys were doing worked better at the marathon than whatever our best are doing now. Maybe worse at common track events, but better at the marathon.
ThatAverageRunner wrote:
Uhhh, what?
It was timed on a 40km route.
Well , that settles it. The route (in Kenya) was 40km.
The time that I ran 24:28 for 5 miles in training seems like the same thing? And when I ran 51:44 for 10 miles in training. Those courses were 5 miles and 10.
You are remarkably dense.
Not McFly wrote:
blort wrote:
1) that's not quite how 70's 10k runners trained. Yes, the volume was around the same, but there would have been fartleks, or 20x440, or 12x880, or 6xmile in there somewhere. Probably 20x220. Or some sort of 440 hard 110-220 easy for 6 miles.
Plus, he'd be doing lots of races. Road races, shorter track races.
If he translated it to today, then he'd do 20x400:)
They did not call them tempos, but 70's runners did things like 6-8 miles hard (e.g. 3/4 pace).
2) many of today's American runner are following something like Canova. Most are faster than Vail at 10k. Other than Rupp many of those runners are slower than Vail in the Marathon. So....it's kind of working for me. He's doing "70's" training (kind of), with 70's 10k times and 70's marathon times. Other Americans are doing todays training, with today's 10k times, and 60's marathon times.
From another guy who remembers the 'running boom' and an era of European-American prominence in events 10km and up, blort is exactly right. Hodge can (and often does) weigh in on what he and his peers did, but what stands out to me is how much better they were at marathons than today's Americans.
I know a lot of you think Rupp is a big deal but believe that is because no other American has done another even remotely noteworthy at the distance since Rupp ran the Trials. His rise to marathon success coincided with a period of struggle for Ritz. I mean, there are a total of two currently active US marathoners who could have beaten Bob Hodge in his prime.
Ward is cool in some ways but would have been marginally recognizable by hardcore running fans had he performed the same but done it 30 years earlier. You may point out that he made an Olympic team, but he wouldn't have if Pfitz, BJ, Durden, Sandoval, and of course any one of Shorter,Rodgers, or Salazar were in the race during their primes.
The US is embarrassingly shallow at longer distances. Whatever has changed in American training has led to great success up to 10km. Rupp actually was pretty good at that distance. A few have done great 5ks recently too. But whatever the 70s guys were doing worked better at the marathon than whatever our best are doing now. Maybe worse at common track events, but better at the marathon.
The young bucks just don't have the love for the distance like the old timers. They scared.
fartleks and bagels wrote:
dum dum dum dum wrote:
Whats the point of 22 miles easy 8 weeks out from a marathon?
If you read Eliud Kipchoge training log. A week leading up to Berlin, he did a 40k tempo at slightly slower than marathon pace.
Again where is the 30k-40k tempo at a bit slower than marathon pace?
So first you wanted him to do Canova training, and now you want him to do Sang training? You realize they're VERY different, don't you? Kipchoge' sling runs are significantly slower than MP.
In any event, long, hard MP runs have to be spaced out. Few athletes can do one every week.
The Overexplainer wrote:
ThatAverageRunner wrote:
Uhhh, what?
It was timed on a 40km route.
Well , that settles it. The route (in Kenya) was 40km.
The time that I ran 24:28 for 5 miles in training seems like the same thing? And when I ran 51:44 for 10 miles in training. Those courses were 5 miles and 10.
You are remarkably dense.
Are you saying you don't know how to measure distances?
The Overexplainer wrote:
ThatAverageRunner wrote:
Uhhh, what?
It was timed on a 40km route.
Well , that settles it. The route (in Kenya) was 40km.
The time that I ran 24:28 for 5 miles in training seems like the same thing? And when I ran 51:44 for 10 miles in training. Those courses were 5 miles and 10.
You are remarkably dense.
Be gone, troll.