Daniels Tables Excel Worksheet v3.01.00

Hey!! Thanks for updating your spreadsheet. I found it 7 or 8 years ago, I think, and have used it as the basis for my self-coached running 'career' ever since then. It's been VERY useful and I still refer to it even though I'm not much of a racer these days. Thanks again.

Great to see this update. I’ve been using this spreadsheet for years.

This is great, thank you eblues!

One observation about how the mile race pace is calculated. My 5k VDOT is 53.3, which translates to a mile race pace of 5:33, and my 10k VDOT is 52.2 and it shows mile pace as 5:32. Shouldn't it calculate a faster mile pace for the higher VDOT?

Ummm.... You're given extra credit for the longer distance? lol.

in 12 years of using this tool, I've never thought to compare times in that way, but you're right... that's an unexpected result. I did tweak the 1 mile and 3k factors a little to get them to line up better, but this discovery of yours goes deeper than just the one mile. Comparing a 5k and 10k with the same VDOT, a small discrepancy of a couple seconds per mile can be seen across all distances. The discrepancy is greater at the mile, I suppose because of the tweak.

A two second per mile error is pretty minor in this application, but I wouldn't expect it to be there.

It will take some time to look into this, but I'll report back with my findings.

Thanks for all the work on this. I really like the race log feature.

One race log feature that might be nice is an Age Graded percent column, something like MTEC timing uses in their race results (from the Twin Cities Marathon and other area races). How difficult would it be to add in something like that? I've given some thought to trying to add that myself, but I thought I'd mention it here too as a form of user feedback.

My AG% is bigger than your AG% wrote:

Thanks for all the work on this. I really like the race log feature.

One race log feature that might be nice is an Age Graded percent column, something like MTEC timing uses in their race results (from the Twin Cities Marathon and other area races). How difficult would it be to add in something like that? I've given some thought to trying to add that myself, but I thought I'd mention it here too as a form of user feedback.

This should be fairly easy to add, it's just some simple math, using data already in the sreadsheet... Your time divided into the Age Group standard time. I can probably squeeze it into the next release of the Tables. Could easily be added to the Race Log as well, but that sheet is getting pretty wide, so maybe the thing to consider is replacing one of the existing fields, rather than adding more width. The AG percentage might appeal to more folks than the place percentages currently taking up space.

In regards to the VDOT/race time projection discrepancy issue pointed out by Sobo, I'm still investigating options. I think maybe the factors can be feathered in a little finer, but it may not be possible to completely get rid of the small differences.

Ditto this, it's been my go-to for years as well. Thank you!

Paul2432 wrote:

Great to see this update. I’ve been using this spreadsheet for years.

I have never seen this. What a powerful tool! Thank you for sharing.

Thanks a lot for sharing this, it's very useful!

Will this work in Google Sheets instead of Excel?

This is amazing! Thank You!

Have you read the 3rd edition of his book?

It's available here:

http://libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=10BD73EDA12B4A9E941D9CEFA4F43913

Awesome! Nice work!

One thing I personally wonder about - easy running pace/HR. It's hard for me to say my actual max HR, I use a chest strap on every run, so I am familiar with my training HRs, and in warmer weather my HR has hit maybe 195 in workouts/tempo efforts, but with the cooler weather the last few months I have not been that high in some time. I estimate max HR to be around 200bpm - I've hit 190 in a 40deg 5k, and 194 in a warmer one (and apparently 200bpm before I started running consistently, but with a different/cheaper HR strap).

What I find is that easy running HR is much higher than predicted. For example, in colder weather I know that my HR is somewhere around 186bpm after three miles at 7:22 pace (workout). M-pace efforts have hit about 173bpm/7:58 pace after 9 miles. Both align well to the spreadsheet and Daniels' explanations in the 3rd edition. On a good day, 9:00 pace (current "easy" running) will have an HR of ~160 after maybe 4 miles, but the spreadsheet (and the book) would predict about 145bpm at that pace... I've only been running consistently for a few months, so is that just lack of aerobic base?

shortcut to using google spreadsheets (unlikely the auto-embed here will handle this properly)

docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.electricblues.com/archive/DanielsTables3-01-00.xlsm

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http://www.electricblues.com/archive/DanielsTables3-01-00.xlsm

Firstly, thanks to everyone for the Kudos!

Mikey A, I consider HR a good source of training feedback, especially once you get to know your own HR patterns. But I treat it as a secondary source because, as you observed, HR can vary for factors other than pace or effort.

I haven't read Daniels' 3rd edition, but in his 1st and 2nd editions training paces are focused around a recent race performance, not HR. He also advocates training at your current ability, not some future hopeful goal. An M-Pace of 7:58 implies a 3:30:00 Marathon, 45:30 for 10K, and 21:50 for 5K. (3 mile Tempo runs at 7:22 pace implies even faster race times). Are you capable of those times currently? If not, then my suggestion is to get in line with that philosophy.

On the other hand, if you have a couple of recent races that support your current training levels, then yes, it does seem that your HR on an easy run should be closer to 145-150 range (assuming your max is 200) . Could be a personal trait, something about your environment, lifestyle, over-training, any number of variables.

One thought is an idea I read in the LetsRun forum by a much respected coach who went by the forum name Hadd. He stated that if one does not do their easy aerobic training at the proper effort (HRmax -50bpm) and in significant volume, they would not maximize their aerobic potential, and thus might have to work harder than expected at aerobic pace.

In other words, if you short-changed your aerobic capacity by training too hard early on, or rushing through your aerobic base training a bit to get where you are, that's one possible explanation. If this is your situation, you might try holding your current easy pace where it is, and look for the HR to drop over time (weeks or months, not days), rather than looking for further increases in pace.

I will say from experience that it takes a serious amount of diligence for someone just starting out to stay at 75% of HRmax. It will feel *really* slow, because it will be really slow.

Good luck.

I've suspended downloads temporarily while I work on a few adjustments. Should be back online in a few days at most.

TheGoog wrote:

Will this work in Google Sheets instead of Excel?

Apparently does not work currently work properly in Google Sheets. I will look into this while downloads are suspended.

Any updates?

Are you claiming to be Jack Daniela?