Moving Forward Faster

blockic

TRR wrote: »

Do you have a LSR the weekend as well as the 2 * MLRs?

Yup, tough enough one at that. 20 with 9 MP in there somewhere.

Thinking of splitting the second MLR into a double day?

RunningKing

if you're on P&D (as I am) the PMP are every 2nd week up to 6 weeks out - and only 3 in total (3 PMP in LSR) (unless you've adapted)?

I'd be interested to hear thoughts on doubles' as I'm not sure if the double day will get the benefit from the 2nd MLR? (running on tired legs in a glycogen depleted state).

blockic

RunningKing wrote: »

if you're on P&D (as I am) the PMP are every 2nd week up to 6 weeks out - and only 3 in total (3 PMP in LSR) (unless you've adapted)?

I'd be interested to hear thoughts on doubles' as I'm not sure if the double day will get the benefit from the 2nd MLR? (running on tired legs in a glycogen depleted state).

Yeah mine is pretty much like that alright.

Reason, I am thinking of a double is that the LSRs really are the be all and end all of a marathon programme i feel. The key is to nail them, especially when they have MP miles in there too. If sacrificing the second MLR to ensure you are better prepared for the LSR and you get a better performance in it, then that is definitely something to consider I think.

But as you say, I'd think (but could be wrong) that a double wouldnt give you the same benefit as the 2nd MLR... decisions decisions...

statss

you ain't selling the higher version of the plan to me at all!!

RunningKing

blockic wrote: »

Yeah mine is pretty much like that alright.

Reason, I am thinking of a double is that the LSRs really are the be all and end all of a marathon programme i feel. The key is to nail them, especially when they have MP miles in there too. If sacrificing the second MLR to ensure you are better prepared for the LSR and you get a better performance in it, then that is definitely something to consider I think.

But as you say, I'd think (but could be wrong) that a double wouldnt give you the same benefit as the 2nd MLR... decisions decisions...

Thinking about it more, if you done a 5m am and a 10m PM may work as the 10m would be longer than 1 hour.
I think when I get to that particular week I'll probably take a rest day!

blockic

statss wrote: »

you ain't selling the higher version of the plan to me at all!!

No pain, no gain!

RunningKing wrote: »

I think when I get to that particular week I'll probably take a rest day!

Nothing new there then.. *cough* k club *cough*

RunningKing

statss wrote: »

you ain't selling the higher version of the plan to me at all!!

Week 1 was tough, just back off holidays and stupidly through in some off plan higher intensity stuff.
So far week 2 is going pretty well! Throw in 2 kids, work, running another business with wifey and doing an MBA - plus I'm old - so I reckon it'll be a doodle for you!

RunningKing

blockic wrote: »

No pain, no gain!



Nothing new there then.. *cough* k club *cough*

I do recall finishing the KClub

blockic

RunningKing wrote: »

I do recall finishing the KClub

Sh!t, I had some AMS there for a sec. (April Memory Loss )

pconn062

13, 15 and 20 mile runs in the one week seems like overkill to me blockic, and could be a recipe for injury. Is that taken directly from the P+D plan? I would be inclined to split the 13 mile run into two, 5+8, or I would cut it down completely to maybe a single 8-10 mile run. You already have your two long runs of the week done and I think another long run would only leave you fatigued. IMO marathon training should be simple: 1 long run, 1 medium long run alternating tempo and MP miles and then all other runs are easy and up to 10 miles in length. That's just my assessment, I'm not a marathon runner but I've done a good bit of reading on the topic so take it with a pinch of salt!

blockic

pconn062 wrote: »

13, 15 and 20 mile runs in the one week seems like overkill to me blockic, and could be a recipe for injury. Is that taken directly from the P+D plan? I would be inclined to split the 13 mile run into two, 5+8, or I would cut it down completely to maybe a single 8-10 mile run. You already have your two long runs of the week done and I think another long run would only leave you fatigued. IMO marathon training should be simple: 1 long run, 1 medium long run alternating tempo and MP miles and then all other runs are easy and up to 10 miles in length. That's just my assessment, I'm not a marathon runner but I've done a good bit of reading on the topic so take it with a pinch of salt!

Not taken directly, but P&D does have 2 MLR and and LSR generally in one week for the P&D 55-70 miles plan.

This week was 12,14 and 17 with 10 at PMP officially but I've added to that to give a 13,15 and a 20 with 9 at PMP.

Yeah, think I'm going to go for 5+8 or 4+9...something like that. Nice one for the advise pconn. btw, always had a feeling you were a rocker alright! Nice leaving cert advise there! :P

ThePiedPiper

What is your PMP now anyway blockic? Are you going to keep it relatively conservative and run for a safe sub 3? Based on the shape you were in at the half, 2:50 wouldn't be a huge stretch?
the approach I took last year for Budapest training was doing a range of paces for the PMP miles, from 6:37-6:55, leaving me feeling comfortable at any pace in that range. You tempted by the sub 2:50 boards train? Go on, you know you want to...

Peckham

RunForestRun wrote: »

You tempted by the sub 2:50 boards train? Go on, you know you want to...

I've been thinking the same thing about your situation. You're in as good, if not better, shape than me and I'm still on the sub-2:50 train (although just about hanging onto the back of it at the moment).

Tough decision as I know how much of a psychological barrier that 3:00 is (having missed it twice before eventually achieving it). After all though, it's just a number

belcarra

RunForestRun wrote: »

What is your PMP now anyway blockic? Are you going to keep it relatively conservative and run for a safe sub 3? Based on the shape you were in at the half, 2:50 wouldn't be a huge stretch?
the approach I took last year for Budapest training was doing a range of paces for the PMP miles, from 6:37-6:55, leaving me feeling comfortable at any pace in that range. You tempted by the sub 2:50 boards train? Go on, you know you want to...

Peckham wrote: »

I've been thinking the same thing about your situation. You're in as good, if not better, shape than me and I'm still on the sub-2:50 train (although just about hanging onto the back of it at the moment).

Tough decision as I know how much of a psychological barrier that 3:00 is (having missed it twice before eventually achieving it). After all though, it's just a number

Hopefully you will all go for and easily achieve sub 2:50 and we will have a great chance at winning a team prize!:pac:

blockic

RunForestRun wrote: »

What is your PMP now anyway blockic? Are you going to keep it relatively conservative and run for a safe sub 3? Based on the shape you were in at the half, 2:50 wouldn't be a huge stretch?
the approach I took last year for Budapest training was doing a range of paces for the PMP miles, from 6:37-6:55, leaving me feeling comfortable at any pace in that range. You tempted by the sub 2:50 boards train? Go on, you know you want to...

Peckham wrote: »

I've been thinking the same thing about your situation. You're in as good, if not better, shape than me and I'm still on the sub-2:50 train (although just about hanging onto the back of it at the moment).

Tough decision as I know how much of a psychological barrier that 3:00 is (having missed it twice before eventually achieving it). After all though, it's just a number

I knew that this would come up sooner or later!

It's a tough one to call/decide but I'm going to run PMP at 6:40 and train towards a 2:55 marathon.

Yes, it is only a number, but I really just want to make sure of it this time and give myself the best possible chance of getting it. I'd a 1:21 going into Rotterdam and didn't go sub 3 so anything can happen and it's a totally different ball game between the half and full.

So not too tempted by the 2:50 train yet, fear of a blow up more than anything, we'll see how the next 4 weeks go.

Initial plan at the moment is to run the first half bang on sub3 pace (really conservative) and kick on for a strong second half and negative split to get as close to 2:55 as I can.

drquirky

blockic wrote: »

.

Initial plan at the moment is to run the first half bang on sub3 pace (really conservative) and kick on for a strong second half and negative split to get as close to 2:55 as I can.

I really like this approach but not sure I have the balls to try it.

Peckham

blockic wrote: »

Initial plan at the moment is to run the first half bang on sub3 pace (really conservative) and kick on for a strong second half and negative split to get as close to 2:55 as I can.

That would be a ridiculously huge negative split (90-85), so much so that it would leave you wondering whether you had undersold your potential. TRR always says to run the marathon as if it will be your last one, and that's good advice.

If you're in 2:55 shape (which you probably will be), then run a 2:55 split to halfway.

Gavlor

Peckham wrote: »

That would be a ridiculously huge negative split (90-85), so much so that it would leave you wondering whether you had undersold your potential. TRR always says to run the marathon as if it will be your last one, and that's good advice.

If you're in 2:55 shape (which you probably will be), then run a 2:55 split to halfway.

100% agree. If you run the first half in 89.45 then you leave absolutely no room for error in the second half a la me in limerick....

Your split should be based on 2.55

blockic

Peckham wrote: »

TRR always says to run the marathon as if it will be your last one, and that's good advice.

If you're in 2:55 shape (which you probably will be), then run a 2:55 split to halfway.

That's what I done the last time and it almost was my last one!

I know it's conservative, but a conservative start and a strong finish I find really suit me.
I reckon I've a better chance of getting a 2:55 by running say an 89-86 rather than an 87.5 - 87.5, much more risk of a blow up starting off at that pace.

Food for thought anyway.

btw, 2:55 is not the target, sub 3 is the main aim here with anything else a bonus.

blockic

Gavlor wrote: »

Your split should be based on 2.55

That's blow up central for me, I don't think you should be building up room for error in the first half of a marathon?

As I said will wait until taper time anyway before decision is made.

belcarra

In fairness for most people this HTFU commentary would be fair game but with the man in question I think it's fair enough to let him decide on the 90-85 strategy given his experience in Rotterdam.

Let us all put the pressure on him when he is 2:55 going for sub 2:45 next year!:D

ThePiedPiper

Blockic, I've been where you are before, having had a couple of major slip ups at sub-3, and don't for a second regret the relatively conservative way I ran Seville 2011 for my first sub-3. That day I ran 7:50 for the first mile, then 6:45 solid for the next 21 before dipping into the 6:30s for the last few. I made the huge mistake of running for a 2:55 in Berlin 2008, staying on that pace until 20 miles before a spectacular blow-up and 3:05 finish. I absolutely 100% agree with running fairly conservatively and getting the monkey off you back.

TRR

After the grief I got <snip> for "pushing" you to chase a sub 3 in Rotterdam I'm loath to advise but 90 minutes is probably a little too conservative. I'd go with 89 and then see what happens. Worse case scenario you hold the pace for a 2.58 but I think you need a little leeway in case you need to stop for a pi$$, your lace opens etc etc

ThePiedPiper

Good point actually TRR. In both of my 2:58s, I had a couple of issues. In Seville, the first very slow mile was due to disastrous congestion getting out of the stadium, so despite running 6:40-6:45 for the next 13, passed halfway in exactly 1:30:00. In Budapest, I actually did have to stop for about 30-40 seconds to fix a shoe issue, so despite running 6:40s on average, was at halfway in 1:29:08. Not much margin really. Paris 2008 haunted me for years. The 30 odd seconds it took me to take a leak was the main reason I finished in 3:00:21.

However, I still firmly believe from what I saw a couple of weeks ago that you are in way better shape than I was for any of those races, so I don't think you're going to have major issues.

Dilbert75

Blockic my advice is to read everyone's advice and then make up your own mind. You know how you're feeling and how you're running - let that guide you.

Jeez you'd swear it was on tomorrow!

ncmc

Dilbert75 wrote: »

Blockic my advice is to read everyone's advice and then make up your own mind. You know how you're feeling and how you're running - let that guide you.

Jeez you'd swear it was on tomorrow!

That's a good point Dilbert, but I think you're forgetting the most important opinion...

*paging Big Logger to Blocky's log*

Dilbert75

ncmc wrote: »

That's a good point Dilbert, but I think you're forgetting the most important opinion...

*paging Big Logger to Blocky's log*

Jesus don't wake the beast.

Gavlor

ncmc wrote: »

That's a good point Dilbert, but I think you're forgetting the most important opinion...

*paging Big Logger to Blocky's log*

Sure she's sitting beside him reading it, whilst making the rabbit casserole

Steroo

I'd say go 2:45

RunningKing

dont bother doing it at all - we all know you can do it, so just post the race report tomorrow and take the next few months off. Simples.