Random Running Questions

Singer

Zipppy wrote: »

recommend me a smart watch that I can use to connect to strava and easily see my pace and distance on screen....please

Garmin Forerunner 25 (cheap and simple, no heart rate monitoring)

Garmin Forerunner 235 (bigger screen, heart rate monitoring, lots more features)

Lots more options here:
http://thesweethome.com/reviews/best-running-watch/

Sunny Dayz

Are 1,000 mile socks worth the splurge?
Have gotten a blister on my big toe after my last two lsr's. My feet didn't feel a bit sore, on both occasions I didn't notice the blister at all until I spotted it later. To be honest my running socks could do with replacing, they are penneys brand and I've probably had them a while.

Was looking at something like these:
http://www.elverys.ie/elverys/en/Elverys/Women/Footwear/Sports-Socks/1000-Mile-Trainer-Liner-Women%27s-Run-Sock%2C-Pink/p/000000000001046981_PINK

aoboa

Strides after all easy runs - yay or nay?

Seems to minimise the amount of post run stretching I need but wondering if it's wise during marathon training.

cullenswood

Sunny Dayz wrote: »

Are 1,000 mile socks worth the splurge?

No, there are similar double layered ones in Dunnes for 3 for €5, which are equally as good as the 1000 mile ones. I actually prefer them.

rainbow kirby

I swear by the Decathlon socks myself tbh, they're around 4 quid a pair and last ages.

hot buttered scones

Sunny Dayz wrote: »

Are 1,000 mile socks worth the splurge?
Have gotten a blister on my big toe after my last two lsr's. My feet didn't feel a bit sore, on both occasions I didn't notice the blister at all until I spotted it later. To be honest my running socks could do with replacing, they are penneys brand and I've probably had them a while.

Was looking at something like these:
http://www.elverys.ie/elverys/en/Elverys/Women/Footwear/Sports-Socks/1000-Mile-Trainer-Liner-Women%27s-Run-Sock%2C-Pink/p/000000000001046981_PINK

I bought these recently (well the mens version) and I find them quite good:

more miles socks 5 pack

I'd generally look at my shoes if I was getting blisters, and maybe a spot of vaseline on any areas where I was blister prone.

pgarr

hot buttered scones wrote: »

I bought these recently (well the mens version) and I find them quite good:

more miles socks 5 pack

I'd generally look at my shoes if I was getting blisters, and maybe a spot of vaseline on any areas where I was blister prone.

I second scones recommendation. I've put in a lot of mileage in a steady rotation of more mile socks and all of my pairs are still in good nick.

No blisters wearing them , and no real feeling of foot friction.

BeepBeep67

+1 for Decathlon and the last few batches of Lidl socks have been decent and have become 'go to' pairs.

Zebra3

Started a new job recently in the midst of my Dublin marathon training and it involves a fair bit of cycling.

Is there a rule of thumb for how many cycled kms equal jogged ones?

Damo 2k9

Sunny Dayz wrote: »

Are 1,000 mile socks worth the splurge?

BeepBeep67 wrote: »

+1 for Decathlon and the last few batches of Lidl socks have been decent and have become 'go to' pairs.

I tried the 1000 mile double layer after being recommended them, dont know if its because it was the first time wearing them but I felt turning corners etc they were a bit slippy, as in the two layers sliding. Will know better after a second time wearing them. I also bought a pair of the HILLY socks and found them brilliant! Really comfy for my LSR on the weekend.

LIDL has its running stuff this weekend, including the socks.

https://www.lidl.ie/en/special-offers.htm?articleId=982

TFBubendorfer

Zebra3 wrote: »

Started a new job recently in the midst of my Dublin marathon training and it involves a fair bit of cycling.

Is there a rule of thumb for how many cycled kms equal jogged ones?

I do a fair bit of cycling for my commute but I don't count it towards training. There is a rule of thumb that 4 km on a bike equate to 1 km running but personally I found that to be nonsense. Specificity is important. If you want to get good at running, you need to run.

Sunny Dayz

Damo 2k9 wrote: »

I tried the 1000 mile double layer after being recommended them, dont know if its because it was the first time wearing them but I felt turning corners etc they were a bit slippy, as in the two layers sliding. Will know better after a second time wearing them. I also bought a pair of the HILLY socks and found them brilliant! Really comfy for my LSR on the weekend.

LIDL has its running stuff this weekend, including the socks.

https://www.lidl.ie/en/special-offers.htm?articleId=982

Aww thanks a mill, I send the hubbie into Lidl to get me a few pairs on Thurs morn on his way to work.

ariana`

Sunny Dayz wrote: »

Are 1,000 mile socks worth the splurge?
Have gotten a blister on my big toe after my last two lsr's. My feet didn't feel a bit sore, on both occasions I didn't notice the blister at all until I spotted it later. To be honest my running socks could do with replacing, they are penneys brand and I've probably had them a while.

Was looking at something like these:
http://www.elverys.ie/elverys/en/Elverys/Women/Footwear/Sports-Socks/1000-Mile-Trainer-Liner-Women%27s-Run-Sock%2C-Pink/p/000000000001046981_PINK

Damo 2k9 wrote: »

I tried the 1000 mile double layer after being recommended them, dont know if its because it was the first time wearing them but I felt turning corners etc they were a bit slippy, as in the two layers sliding. Will know better after a second time wearing them. I also bought a pair of the HILLY socks and found them brilliant! Really comfy for my LSR on the weekend.

LIDL has its running stuff this weekend, including the socks.

https://www.lidl.ie/en/special-offers.htm?articleId=982

I swear by Lidl running socks. I love them. I have several other brands but always go back to my Lidl pairs especially for long runs. I have Pennys, Pro Touch, 1000 miles, Kalenji and a few others that i can't think off but none compare to the Lidl ones. It's probably a personal preference but they are worth a try.

BKWDR

Signed up to DCM. Training now usually consists of some shorter runs and speed work and light weights during the week but do a long run on the weekend,usually Saturday morning.
Not eating rings around myself during week but want to get as much energy for the long weekend run.... What would anyone reccomend eating on the Friday or what do you find helps energy levels. Long run =13k +

Cheers

Zebra3

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

I do a fair bit of cycling for my commute but I don't count it towards training. There is a rule of thumb that 4 km on a bike equate to 1 km running but personally I found that to be nonsense. Specificity is important. If you want to get good at running, you need to run.

Thanks, just I cycled just over 50km yesterday and went out jogging and managed just over 8km despite strolling through a 21km run the day before at a decent pace.

TFBubendorfer

Zebra3 wrote: »

Thanks, just I cycled just over 50km yesterday and went out jogging and managed just over 8km despite strolling through a 21km run the day before at a decent pace.

Ok, let me clarify.

Doing a long cycle will leave you tired, just like any other endurance workout would. It does help develop basic endurance. If your endurance level is low then cycling will indeed help your running performance, simply by making you a fitter person overall.

But you cannot replace, say, a 30k long run with a 120k cycle as part of your marathon training and think that would be the same. It's not, because you need to train your running muscles if you want to become a better runner. You cannot replace specific running adaptions, that can only be done by running.

That's why I said that 4-to-1 rule of thumb is nonsense. It doesn't work that way. If you follow a training program then you need to follow it properly by running the workouts, not substituting them with another kind of exercise.

v6e5qzawyrc3jn

This post has been deleted.

Bananaleaf

BKWDR wrote: »

Signed up to DCM. Training now usually consists of some shorter runs and speed work and light weights during the week but do a long run on the weekend,usually Saturday morning.
Not eating rings around myself during week but want to get as much energy for the long weekend run.... What would anyone reccomend eating on the Friday or what do you find helps energy levels. Long run =13k +

Cheers

Replying to this mainly because I want people to see it again as I would appreciate any advice on same, but ..

I have read up a lot on nutrition for distance running and from what I understand - it kind of depends. Whatever works for you. I don't know if I'm doing it right, but I eat more carbs before long run - night before or that morning and I would do all of my hydration the day before it too. My longest run has so far been 12.5k. Not really 'long' in the scheme of things, but I'm getting there. I learned from it that I had eaten enough but that about 9k in I did get dizzy and would have benefited from a few jelly beans or something, so next time I will bring them just in case.

Here is an article that might help - https://runnersconnect.net/practice-long-run-nutrition/

I think it's trial and error with those runs. Learning from each one about what to eat, when to eat etc.

Hopefully someone with more info and experience can weigh in and set us straight!

jonnner

You don't need to stock up too much before runs of this length.Your body will have enough glycogen to run for about 2 hours. But it would be good to practice nutrition for when the runs get longer.
I'd suggest a Pasta dinner or rice the evening before. Theres no need to have a much bigger portion than usual. People tend to over eat and put on weight during marathon training!
In the morning have something thats easily digested like a bagel or white toast with peanut butter, and if possible have it at least an hour before heading out.
You could bring a sports drink or gel with you on the run. If you start to feel a bit drained even the taste of some carbs can give you a lift.
When the runs start getting longer you can practice your gels (if you plan on using them during race), and also take on alot more fluids.

Bananaleaf wrote: »

Replying to this mainly because I want people to see it again as I would appreciate any advice on same, but ..

I have read up a lot on nutrition for distance running and from what I understand - it kind of depends. Whatever works for you. I don't know if I'm doing it right, but I eat more carbs before long run - night before or that morning and I would do all of my hydration the day before it too. My longest run has so far been 12.5k. Not really 'long' in the scheme of things, but I'm getting there. I learned from it that I had eaten enough but that about 9k in I did get dizzy and would have benefited from a few jelly beans or something, so next time I will bring them just in case.

Here is an article that might help - https://runnersconnect.net/practice-long-run-nutrition/

I think it's trial and error with those runs. Learning from each one about what to eat, when to eat etc.

Hopefully someone with more info and experience can weigh in and set us straight!

El Caballo

jonnner wrote: »

You don't need to stock up too much before runs of this length.Your body will have enough glycogen to run for about 2 hours.

This is a myth. For some people, their glycogen strides could be an hour and 40 minutes and others could be 3 and a half hours. Glycogen is burned through intensity, if I go out and run right now at 11 minute pace, it might be 10 hours or even more until I burn out my stores as the intensity is so low that my body will be using fat predominantly over glycogen so my stores last longer.

Take me for instance, I weigh around 70kg which means my body can hold roughly around 500g of glycogen which is about 2000kcal and I burn 110kcal per mile. At a glycogen:fat ratio of 100:0, I could still run 18 miles at that ratio.

Just some rough examples:

At 50% of Max HR: Your body burns 60% fat and 40% glycogen

At 75% of Max HR: Your body burns 35% fat and 65% glycogen

Amazingly, the overall calorie expenditure per mile remains almost the same at both intensities as the effort of running faster is cancelled out by the of the lower intensity lasting longer. So if one mile equals 110kcal of total energy expenditure at 65% glycogen, that means I roughly burn 70kcal of glycogen per mile.

So fully fuelled with my glycogen stores maxed, I should be able to run 30 miles at 75% of Max HR which I can guarantee, will take me a lot longer than 2 hours.

If the 2 hour glycogen rule is true, The very best marathon runners in the world would be able to run a marathon purely on glycogen which means they wouldn't ever bonk during a marathon as they only run for a couple of minutes over 2 hours but they do bonk and coincidentally enough, it happens to be around the same distance as the 3, 4 or 5 hour marathon runners even though the elites hit 20 miles in an hour and 35 minutes and the 5 hour marathon runner takes 3:30 or so.

It's not a coincidence, If it takes you 2200 total calories to run 20 miles which is roughly what it takes a 2.05 marathon runner and a 4:30 marathon runner of the same weight and both have being running at an intensity that burns 90% or 100kcal of glycogen or per mile, they both bonk at 20 miles. The 2 hour rule is a made up myth and doesn't hold any water in fact. intensity by distance is the deciding factor in calculating how long your glycogen stores last when fully topped up hence why you pace yourself during long races.

Not taking anything away from your overall point which I agree with. If you keep your glycogen stores topped up all week, you should never really have an issue unless you are doing mega mileage. If you are getting dizzy spells after 9k of a long run, the issue is most likely not with fueling during the run but your diet in general. You shouldn't need to carbload or take on sugars during a run of that length.

The Bin Man

El Caballo wrote: »

This is a myth. For some people, their glycogen strides could be an hour and 40 minutes and others could be 3 and a half hours. Glycogen is burned through intensity, if I go out and run right now at 11 minute pace, it might be 10 hours or even more until I burn out my stores as the intensity is so low that my body will be using fat predominantly over glycogen so my stores last longer.

Take me for instance, I weigh around 70kg which means my body can hold roughly around 500g of glycogen which is about 2000kcal and I burn 110kcal per mile. At a glycogen:fat ratio of 100:0, I could still run 18 miles at that ratio.

Just some rough examples:

At 50% of Max HR: Your body burns 60% fat and 40% glycogen

At 75% of Max HR: Your body burns 35% fat and 65% glycogen

Amazingly, the overall calorie expenditure per mile remains almost the same at both intensities as the effort of running faster is cancelled out by the of the lower intensity lasting longer. So if one mile equals 110kcal of total energy expenditure at 65% glycogen, that means I roughly burn 70kcal of glycogen per mile.

So fully fuelled with my glycogen stores maxed, I should be able to run 30 miles at 75% of Max HR which I can guarantee, will take me a lot longer than 2 hours.

If the 2 hour glycogen rule is true, The very best marathon runners in the world would be able to run a marathon purely on glycogen which means they wouldn't ever bonk during a marathon as they only run for a couple of minutes over 2 hours but they do bonk and coincidentally enough, it happens to be around the same distance as the 3, 4 or 5 hour marathon runners even though the elites hit 20 miles in an hour and 35 minutes and the 5 hour marathon runner takes 3:30 or so.

It's not a coincidence, If it takes you 2200 total calories to run 20 miles which is roughly what it takes a 2.05 marathon runner and a 4:30 marathon runner of the same weight and both have being running at an intensity that burns 90% or 100kcal of glycogen or per mile, they both bonk at 20 miles. The 2 hour rule is a made up myth and doesn't hold any water in fact. intensity by distance is the deciding factor in calculating how long your glycogen stores last when fully topped up hence why you pace yourself during long races.

Not taking anything away from your overall point which I agree with. If you keep your glycogen stores topped up all week, you should never really have an issue unless you are doing mega mileage. If you are getting dizzy spells after 9k of a long run, the issue is most likely not with fueling during the run but your diet in general. You shouldn't need to carbload or take on sugars during a run of that length.

This is pretty close to the mark but if somebody is genuinely fat adapted (Enduro-I think- and Zach Bitter would be good examples) they can run much longer at higher intensities. The Faster Study showed this and changed the science; Bitter was involved in the study. Also, you can function perfectly well on very low glycogen stores, if you are genuinely fat adapted (not what most runners think of as fat adapted: I can run without breakfast so I'm fat adapted) or operating on ketones; there is a difference between fat adapted and working off ketones, as opposed to operating off glycogen. But yes, it's a myth about the 90 min 'rule'; intensity and fat adaptation play a role.

davedanon

To be strictly accurate, it was never 90 minutes. It was 2 hours at least. And the OP was incorrect to state that 'the body has enough glycogen for 2 hours running' - as in any old running. It's specifically marathon pace running. So he wasn't propagating a myth: he was just being a little bit wrong.

Dealerz

Jaysus, is there anything as frustrating as a running injury?

Started running in January this year, have ran 3 10k's, the rock n roll was supposed to be my first half, ran an 11 mile LSR on Friday and I got heel pain the next day, physio thinks its plantar fasciitis...no running since Friday and the half Sunday week is probably in doubt!

IvoryTower

sounds like too much running too soon tbh, probably mostly on roads as well

Dealerz

IvoryTower wrote: »

sounds like too much running too soon tbh, probably mostly on roads as well

Probably....but running is so addicitive, and yes all my running was on roads.

Hopefully I will be able to do the frank duffy 10 miler if the next weeks half marathon is off the cards.

IvoryTower

Ive seen people out injured with for plantar fasciitis for months on end, thread carefully, do everything the physio says

jonnner

I was just trying to give an uncomplicated answer to a question that hadnt been answered.
I said "about" 2 hours. Shouldn't have mentioned that it at all, but was just trying to get point across about not needing to go crazy eating for the length of runs they're talking about.

davedanon wrote: »

To be strictly accurate, it was never 90 minutes. It was 2 hours at least. And the OP was incorrect to state that 'the body has enough glycogen for 2 hours running' - as in any old running. It's specifically marathon pace running. So he wasn't propagating a myth: he was just being a little bit wrong.

Lazare

The Bin Man wrote: »

This is pretty close to the mark but if somebody is genuinely fat adapted (Enduro-I think- and Zach Bitter would be good examples) they can run much longer at higher intensities. The Faster Study showed this and changed the science; Bitter was involved in the study. Also, you can function perfectly well on very low glycogen stores, if you are genuinely fat adapted (not what most runners think of as fat adapted: I can run without breakfast so I'm fat adapted) or operating on ketones; there is a difference between fat adapted and working off ketones, as opposed to operating off glycogen. But yes, it's a myth about the 90 min 'rule'; intensity and fat adaptation play a role.

Where can I learn more about this?

The Bin Man

Lazare wrote: »

Where can I learn more about this?

Here's somewhere you can start:

http://www.vespapower.com/the-emerging-science-on-fat-adaptation/

Cartman78

Has anyone ever gone to a dietitian or sports nutritionist for advice?

Would be interested to hear any feedback.

Am generally happy with my diet but have the occasional dip in energy mid-run for no apparent reason