Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

DCM 2012 Graduates - the next step

Options
1150151153155156189

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 10,459 ✭✭✭✭Murph_D


    Dilbert75 wrote: »
    It's widely acknowledged around here, if nowhere else, that McMillan is not great for inexperienced runners at marathon distance. Based on my 10k time in April it predicted I would do a 3.16 marathon and we know how that ended.

    For others though it's bang on. I went in to DCM last year with a Macmillan prediction of 4:01 based on a 10-mile time run in August. An earlier 5-mile time suggested 4:05. I ran 4:02.

    So it can work for a first timer - it's not unheard of!


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,459 ✭✭✭✭Murph_D


    Gavlor wrote: »
    My work here is done!

    Yeah, four times a week will be good enough for me too after my winter/springtime experience with one of the Hal Higdon >50 mile plans too. Never again.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,934 ✭✭✭AdpRo


    Thanks for all the replys. In my opinion McMillan is too aggressive for me. I am just starting training for DCM and originally had intended to start with 4:15 marathon in mind but after Dubshaughlin I started to think i may as well aim for sub 4, I just wanted to make sure I was not mad in thinking it could be done!!

    After seeing your times ncmc I think I will give it a go anyway, even with the 5 x 10k prediction I would be 4:03! I will know more after the Dublin 1/2!!


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,606 ✭✭✭RedRunner


    Weetabix wrote: »
    Thanks for all the replys. In my opinion McMillan is too aggressive for me. I am just starting training for DCM and originally had intended to start with 4:15 marathon in mind but after Dubshaughlin I started to think i may as well aim for sub 4, I just wanted to make sure I was not mad in thinking it could be done!!

    After seeing your times ncmc I think I will give it a go anyway, even with the 5 x 10k prediction I would be 4:03! I will know more after the Dublin 1/2!!

    I think the HM is a better indicator but there are so many other factors that come into play too. I ran 4:27 last yr off the back of a 1:56 HM. MacM predicted 4:04 but I blew up after 19/20 miles

    If I hit my HM target of 1:45 MacM predicts 3:39. My current DCM target is 3:45.

    I think you should pick a target for HM first . Then if you miss it or blow it away you can still adjust your DCM target then accordingly.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,915 ✭✭✭✭menoscemo


    Yes, I think the HM is a much better predictor than a 10k but you need to know what to look for.
    For example, if your HM is slower (according to McMillan equivalent) than your 10k, then you will likely slow even further going towards Marathon. There is no hard and fast rule but if your 5k PB > 10k PB > HM PB then it is obvious you have some endurance issues and shouldn't expect to hit you Marathon predictor based on your HM....


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭Runchick


    Weetabix wrote: »
    Does anyone have any idea what a realistic time someone would need to be able to run for 10k, 10M, 1/2M in order to give a Sub 4 marathon a go? I remember some talk last year that your 10M time * 3 is a good indicator of marathon time so 1:20 for 10M would be a good indicator but any idea on the rest of them?

    I am ignoring McMillan for this as based on my 10K time from last week he gives me 3:48 for marathon which I know is not going to happen!

    My 10k time 2 weeks before Limerick gave me a McMillan time of 3.46! I was aiming for sub 4 which you would think would have been well within my reach. I learned that plenty of factors other than recent race times will affect marathon performance :rolleyes:

    I thought McMillan based its marathon prediction times on the assumption that the person was running 70+ miles a week and this was why it is fairly optimistic for novice runners? (Murphd77 being the exception ;)).

    All being well though, it sounds like sub4 is very achievable to you Weetabix. I'm not even going to think of a target time until after my HM in Septembe and as you say, you'll have a much better idea after that.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭Runchick


    murphd77 wrote: »
    Yeah, four times a week will be good enough for me too after my winter/springtime experience with one of the Hal Higdon >50 mile plans too. Never again.


    Mmm...I wish I got this but to me I like to get running as much as possible. If my body could handle more I would be doing it! To me its not about the least amount of specific training to achieve the best times or whatever (although admittedly I do get bogged down with paces/times and occasionally runs in the middle of a plan can feel like a chore). I just like to run. I'd actually just like to go for a jog every day just for the craic and with no race in mind...if only I could turn off that wee competitive voice in my head which is always on at me...go faster/ set a PB/ when's the next race :eek:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,915 ✭✭✭✭menoscemo


    Runchick wrote: »
    Mmm...I wish I got this but to me I like to get running as much as possible. If my body could handle more I would be doing it! To me its not about the least amount of specific training to achieve the best times or whatever (although admittedly I do get bogged down with paces/times and occasionally runs in the middle of a plan can feel like a chore). I just like to run. I'd actually just like to go for a jog every day just for the craic and with no race in mind...if only I could turn off that wee competitive voice in my head which is always on at me...go faster/ set a PB/ when's the next race :eek:

    Interesting you say that. According to this article (I was just reading) that would be the best way to improving at all distances. It says 80% of your run mileage should be just jogging (That's what the pros do).
    http://running.competitor.com/2013/06/training/train-slower-race-faster_52242/1


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,181 ✭✭✭Gavlor


    menoscemo wrote: »
    Interesting you say that. According to this article (I was just reading) that would be the best way to improving at all distances. It says 80% of your run mileage should be just jogging (That's what the pros do).
    http://running.competitor.com/2013/06/training/train-slower-race-faster_52242/1

    I'm shagged so. Basically this article says it's best to run slow and run often.

    My theory is to run fast and run rarely!


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,821 ✭✭✭blockic


    Gavlor wrote: »
    I'm shagged so. Basically this article says it's best to run slow and run often.

    My theory is to run fast and run rarely!

    Sure we've been telling you that you're theory has been wrong for years!! :D:pac:


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,915 ✭✭✭✭menoscemo


    Gavlor wrote: »
    I'm shagged so. Basically this article says it's best to run slow and run often.

    My theory is to run fast and run rarely!

    Let's put it this way. A man who can run 27:xx over 5 miles should not be struggling to break 3hrs for a marathon ;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,042 ✭✭✭Runchick


    menoscemo wrote: »
    Interesting you say that. According to this article (I was just reading) that would be the best way to improving at all distances. It says 80% of your run mileage should be just jogging (That's what the pros do).
    http://running.competitor.com/2013/06/training/train-slower-race-faster_52242/1

    Ooh I like this 80/10/10 theory, I could run my poor legs off based on this ;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,181 ✭✭✭Gavlor


    blockic wrote: »
    Sure we've been telling you that you're theory has been wrong for years!! :D:pac:

    Whoa, it's statistically better than yours :cool:


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,181 ✭✭✭Gavlor


    menoscemo wrote: »
    Let's put it this way. A man who can run 27:xx over 5 miles should not be struggling to break 3hrs for a marathon ;)

    I'm stumped! I have no retort to this. Well played













    :mad:


  • Registered Users Posts: 498 ✭✭DOCO12


    Great article Memo thanks for sharing. This is always something that confuses me I must say is how hard or slow I should be going.

    I've upped my mileage significantly over the last month and have this week felt totally burnt out. My legs are just dead. So here's my delimma. I've an important race coming up next weekend. Plan was over tomorrow and Sat morning to get my lsr of 12-13miles and a recovery run of about 5miles in Sat. But after this evenings run/torture I'm debating just resting the next few days. Hate resting totally as the plan was to take next week very easy in prep for my race. So in yer opinions is it better to rest totally until Mon? Maybe doing a medium long run Mon? Just rest tomo and try an lsr Sat morn? Should have said I'm away Sat night that's why Sun isn't really an option.

    Any advice /wisdom greatly appreciated :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,915 ✭✭✭✭menoscemo


    DOCO12 wrote: »
    Great article Memo thanks for sharing. This is always something that confuses me I must say is how hard or slow I should be going.

    I've upped my mileage significantly over the last month and have this week felt totally burnt out. My legs are just dead. So here's my delimma. I've an important race coming up next weekend. Plan was over tomorrow and Sat morning to get my lsr of 12-13miles and a recovery run of about 5miles in Sat. But after this evenings run/torture I'm debating just resting the next few days. Hate resting totally as the plan was to take next week very easy in prep for my race. So in yer opinions is it better to rest totally until Mon? Maybe doing a medium long run Mon? Just rest tomo and try an lsr Sat morn? Should have said I'm away Sat night that's why Sun isn't really an option.

    Any advice /wisdom greatly appreciated :)

    See I am a great believer that there is no need for rest days, just easy days. There is plenty of evidence out there to suggest that active recovery is much better than doing nothing at all. For some that might mean going out and doing an easy cycle or a swim. For us runners it just means doing a nice easy run.

    If you are feeling wrecked I wouldn't be doing a 12-13 miler tomorrow but why not try a short 4-5 miler at recovery pace? By recovery pace I mean really slow....e.g my 5-10k pace is about 6 min/mile but I'd do recovery runs at 9 min/mile. What is your 5k pace? try running a few miles at 5k pace +50%. That should be your recovery pace (more or less). Maybe you are just doing your easy miles too hard?

    Try that for a few days and make sure that all the runs in the week leading up to your race are very slow and not too long. You should be feeling much better in a weeks time.

    If you have to miss your Long run, so be it. The long run would not have helped your performance next week anyway.


  • Registered Users Posts: 498 ✭✭DOCO12


    menoscemo wrote: »
    See I am a great believer that there is no need for rest days, just easy days. There is plenty of evidence out there to suggest that active recovery is much better than doing nothing at all. For some that might mean going out and doing an easy cycle or a swim. For us runners it just means doing a nice easy run.

    If you are feeling wrecked I wouldn't be doing a 12-13 miler tomorrow but why not try a short 4-5 miler at recovery pace? By recovery pace I mean really slow....e.g my 5-10k pace is about 6 min/mile but I'd do recovery runs at 9 min/mile. What is your 5k pace? try running a few miles at 5k pace +50%. That should be your recovery pace (more or less). Maybe you are just doing your easy miles too hard?

    Try that for a few days and make sure that all the runs in the week leading up to your race are very slow and not too long. You should be feeling much better in a weeks time.

    If you have to miss your Long run, so be it. The long run would not have helped your performance next week anyway.

    Thanks a mill for advice. Recovery run it is. My 5k pace is 6.35ish so ill be looking at 9.40ish so?
    I definitely believe that I do allot of my runs which are meant to be easy not so easy.

    It's very interesting this whole 80/10/10 rule. So am I correct in saying if I do 40miles a week , 32 miles of that are easy? And when we say easy is it the same as recovery pace ? Very confusing :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,915 ✭✭✭✭menoscemo


    DOCO12 wrote: »
    Thanks a mill for advice. Recovery run it is. My 5k pace is 6.35ish so ill be looking at 9.40ish so?
    I definitely believe that I do allot of my runs which are meant to be easy not so easy.

    It's very interesting this whole 80/10/10 rule. So am I correct in saying if I do 40miles a week , 32 miles of that are easy? And when we say easy is it the same as recovery pace ? Very confusing :)

    That recovery pace looks good. Yes 80% of 40 is 32. The point of the article ( i think) is that if you did more of your easy runs 'really easy' than you would be able to do more total miles without stressing the body. (as a consequence you will get in more 'quallity' miles too. I.e 20% of 60 is more than 30% of 40).

    Easy pace doesn't have to be as as slow as recovery pace but you really shouldn't be concerned about hitting x pace. Forget about the watch and run at a pace you could hold a conversation or talk on a phone without the other person noticing you are running....We can easily get a distorted view of easy if we are used to running 'comfortably hard' and 'hard'. Comfortably hard seems easy compared to the other but is not actually easy.
    As an example, when I had a maratjon PB of 4:15 I would run most of my 'easy runs' at 8:30/mile. My PB is now 3:04 and my easy pace is about 8:20/mile. Technically 7:40/mile is still 'easy' but I don't get any more advantage from running 7:40 that 8:20, so why should I?

    So Long as I am running my hard miles (20%) really hard, it really doesn't matter what pace the others are.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,459 ✭✭✭✭Murph_D


    Runchick wrote: »
    If my body could handle more I would be doing it!

    Yep, my thinking too. I think 4 days running per week is what my body can handle right now. I can handle distance over the four days, but need more recovery time than some of you younger/fitter people. Happy to add to that with cross training, but not on my feet.


  • Registered Users Posts: 434 ✭✭tomred1N


    looking for a bit of advice.

    thinking of running 10K race this evening but not too sure if its a good idea after running a marathon on June 3rd. Have done about 15-20 miles a week easy since marathon so is it still too soon to attempt something shorter/faster like a 10K with no specific prep. Or is it best to have a crack off it and make use of built up endurance ( if not speed :))Planing on doing a 10K on July 21st as well but thinking I may be back in weekend long run territory again by then


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,821 ✭✭✭blockic


    tomred1N wrote: »
    looking for a bit of advice.

    thinking of running 10K race this evening but not too sure if its a good idea after running a marathon on June 3rd. Have done about 15-20 miles a week easy since marathon so is it still too soon to attempt something shorter/faster like a 10K with no specific prep. Or is it best to have a crack off it and make use of built up endurance ( if not speed :))Planing on doing a 10K on July 21st as well but thinking I may be back in weekend long run territory again by then

    It's not too soon in my book. In fact it is probably perfect timing to start putting the marathon training to good use in shorter distances as you should be almost fully recovered at this stage. What's your body telling ya?

    If you're feeling grand race it all out!


  • Registered Users Posts: 434 ✭✭tomred1N


    blockic wrote: »
    It's not too soon in my book. In fact it is probably perfect timing to start putting the marathon training to good use in shorter distances as you should be almost fully recovered at this stage. What's your body telling ya?

    If you're feeling grand race it all out!

    thanks Blockic

    Body feels ok I think, if anything I feel a bit sluggish like I need a good clearout, did 10 miles tuesday night where I did 6 miles progression in the middle of it. felt great especially afterwards except for little darts in my hamstrings every so often. I guess its worth having a crack off it tonight as it will be good indication of where I am with reagrd to planning for next marathon attempt and setting initial training paces.


  • Registered Users Posts: 498 ✭✭DOCO12


    blockic wrote: »
    It's not too soon in my book. In fact it is probably perfect timing to start putting the marathon training to good use in shorter distances as you should be almost fully recovered at this stage. What's your body telling ya?

    If you're feeling grand race it all out!

    I agree with Blockic, you have nothing to lose from racing this and you can see where your at fitness wise after the marathon, make use of your endurance. Best of luck with it, let us know how you get on :)

    Well I followed Menos advice this morn and did 4 miles at 9.45ish pace. Even at that pace legs were being dragged abit but I have to say I felt very refreshed after it. Cheers meno:)
    If I get up early enough tomo morn (need to get ready for night away before the Lions game :) ) Ill go for more easy miles, distance wise will see, may have to leave the lsr until after next weekends race.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,606 ✭✭✭RedRunner


    blockic wrote: »
    It's not too soon in my book. In fact it is probably perfect timing to start putting the marathon training to good use in shorter distances as you should be almost fully recovered at this stage. What's your body telling ya?

    If you're feeling grand race it all out!

    +1
    I did a 10k 2 weeks after DCM12 and got a nice 3.5 min pb thanks to marathon training. Go for it!


  • Registered Users Posts: 340 ✭✭New runner


    Did limavady 10m last night , though did find it tough from mile 6-9 as I had obviously done 1st 5 mile little too fast,was happy with 77.24. Never did a 10m before so was always going to be a PB. Well organised run, good atmosphere n lovely spread goodies afterwards!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,413 ✭✭✭Steroo


    Hi all, after a 2 month lay off I'm ready to give it another go for dcm, have not done a whole lot really, bit of cycling and core work. Had 600 miles under my belt fom jan to may. Now I'm unsure how much to do first few weeks back. 20 miles a week maybe? I was thinking 2 easy weeks and then into the marathon plan... Sound ok? Thanks


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,934 ✭✭✭career_move


    Steroo wrote: »
    Hi all, after a 2 month lay off I'm ready to give it another go for dcm, have not done a whole lot really, bit of cycling and core work. Had 600 miles under my belt fom jan to may. Now I'm unsure how much to do first few weeks back. 20 miles a week maybe? I was thinking 2 easy weeks and then into the marathon plan... Sound ok? Thanks
    Good stuff Stephen. Have a read of this. Should give you a good idea of how to approach it
    http://www.running-physio.com/returnafterinjury/


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,413 ✭✭✭Steroo


    Good stuff Stephen. Have a read of this. Should give you a good idea of how to approach it
    http://www.running-physio.com/returnafterinjury/
    V good! Thanks ;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,821 ✭✭✭blockic


    Steroo wrote: »
    Hi all, after a 2 month lay off I'm ready to give it another go for dcm, have not done a whole lot really, bit of cycling and core work. Had 600 miles under my belt fom jan to may. Now I'm unsure how much to do first few weeks back. 20 miles a week maybe? I was thinking 2 easy weeks and then into the marathon plan... Sound ok? Thanks

    Great to see you back Stephen. Easy does it. :)


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 340 ✭✭New runner


    Good to have u back on board Stephen, good luck with the return to full fitness!


Advertisement