Random Running Questions

aquinn

Tom.D.BJJ wrote: »

I'm plodding my way through C25K. As part of my last run on week 6, I did a parkrun (42mins, with one 60 second walk break at 28mins). The morning following the parkrun the inside my left knee was quite sore. I simply rested for a few days and used a bit of voltarol. I did my second run of week 7 yesterday (25mins, no intervals) and it went fine. Felt the same pain in my left knee last night, right knee no issue. I suspect its because i roll my left foot from outside (heel) to inside (big toe).
Is there any recommendations on a specialist i can go to to get my knee checked, as I'm not sure my GP would be the best person to speak to?

Well done on the running.

Your runners may not suit your run style so aggravating the problem. Get shoes fitted with a specialist running shop and they will do a gait analysis and advise on the correct support for your running form.

Physio visit advisable also.

Tom.D.BJJ

Thanks guys. Has anyone been to a physio they can recommend. I don't want to waste time going to the wrong one

aquinn

Tom.D.BJJ wrote: »

Thanks guys. Has anyone been to a physio they can recommend. I don't want to waste time going to the wrong one

Where are you based so people can advise?

I have a rake of people on call, depending on which woe is at me.

Tom.D.BJJ

aquinn wrote: »

Where are you based so people can advise?

I have a rake of people on call, depending on which woe is at me.

Im in Dublin but can travel 😀

aquinn

Tom.D.BJJ wrote: »

Im in Dublin but can travel ��

I had knee surgery so was using Santry Sports clinic.

https://www.sportssurgeryclinic.com/services/

Highly recommended also around these parts:
https://www.dublinsportsclinic.ie/physiotherapy/

I also go to the physio company as handy for work.

Make sure they are a chartered physiotherapist.

Damo 2k9

I've went to a physio because he was close to me and didn't sort anything. Went to Aidan Woods in Pearse Street Physio and he had me ready for the marathon with only 3 weeks to work with, would highly highly recommend him.

davedanon

aquinn wrote: »

Make sure they are a chartered physiotherapist.

I wouldn't get hung up on that. A 'chartered physio' isn't necessarily any better than a 'physio'. It's not a guarantee of quality, just an extra qualification that has to be paid for but which pays off in higher chargeable fees. Far more important is multiple and independent word-of-mouth sources, imo. You can know the names of every single muscle in the human body, but if you don't have the touch and the skill it's all for sh*t.

Hannibal_Smith

davedanon wrote: »

I wouldn't get hung up on that. A 'chartered physio' isn't necessarily any better than a 'physio'. It's not a guarantee of quality, just an extra qualification that has to be paid for but which pays off in higher chargeable fees. Far more important is multiple and independent word-of-mouth sources, imo. You can know the names of every single muscle in the human body, but if you don't have the touch and the skill it's all for sh*t.

With a chartered one you can claim back on your health insurance. With a registered chartered one you can claim back on your Med 1.

Testosterscone

Hannibal_Smith wrote: »

With a chartered one you can claim back on your health insurance. With a registered chartered one you can claim back on your Med 1.

Many complementary therapies are included in most health insurance plans these days with the likes of Aviva or VHI depending on the qualification they hold (up to each educational institute to meet the minimum requirements of the insurers to be included on the list of approved therapies)

Itziger

I've been thinking about this since last Sunday when I ran my 13th marathon (Valencia, Spain). I finished in 3.04 after a less than perfect training lead up. This is almost exactly 5 minutes off my PB which I did in Cork after a very good prep. I have also done very similar times in 3 previous marathons: 03, 04 ,05. The last almost a controlled, focused training run.

My question is; How big a difference in your race performance does a great training block make? And how well can you perform with little prep? A few years ago I did Lux marathon, hilly, tough last 10k in 3.17 with practically zero preparation. I was in ok shape but with no specific marathon training done. In fact, 6 days before I did a slow 30k run.

I don't know whether to find this depressing or reassuring. All that extra work for a few minutes?? Or should I think, wow, I have a good base if I can just knock out a 3.05 marathon. What are your experiences? Are there people who can go from an out of season 3.45 to a well-trained 2.5x? Or maybe more extreme, 3.45 to 2.45!

And perhaps most importantly...... Am I doing something wrong?

Slow_Runner

Itziger wrote: »

I've been thinking about this since last Sunday when I ran my 13th marathon (Valencia, Spain). I finished in 3.04 after a less than perfect training lead up. This is almost exactly 5 minutes off my PB which I did in Cork after a very good prep. I have also done very similar times in 3 previous marathons: 03, 04 ,05. The last almost a controlled, focused training run.

My question is; How big a difference in your race performance does a great training block make? And how well can you perform with little prep? A few years ago I did Lux marathon, hilly, tough last 10k in 3.17 with practically zero preparation. I was in ok shape but with no specific marathon training done. In fact, 6 days before I did a slow 30k run.

I don't know whether to find this depressing or reassuring. All that extra work for a few minutes?? Or should I think, wow, I have a good base if I can just knock out a 3.05 marathon. What are your experiences? Are there people who can go from an out of season 3.45 to a well-trained 2.5x? Or maybe more extreme, 3.45 to 2.45!

And perhaps most importantly...... Am I doing something wrong?

I think there are waaaaay to many variables to definitively say whether a good training cycle equals a good marathon, your previous marathon cycle will have a bearing your current cycle and it also depends on the day. I had a dream training cycle for Rotterdam this year and got a 12 min pb, then went and had a nightmare in Dublin running 26 minutes slower with a decent (but not as good) training cycle - for me I think my body (and mind) was just tired from the 2 intense training cycles inside 10 months.
Other things to take into consideration is the level you are at - for your 2nd or 3rd marathon you'd expect big gains however as you progress those gains will get smaller. From reading some of KC's post he alludes to the need to change up your training plan to achieve greater gains when you plateau.
Btw well done on your 3:04 :)

Itziger

Slow_Runner wrote: »

I think there are waaaaay to many variables to definitively say whether a good training cycle equals a good marathon, your previous marathon cycle will have a bearing your current cycle and it also depends on the day. I had a dream training cycle for Rotterdam this year and got a 12 min pb, then went and had a nightmare in Dublin running 26 minutes slower with a decent (but not as good) training cycle - for me I think my body (and mind) was just tired from the 2 intense training cycles inside 10 months.
Other things to take into consideration is the level you are at - for your 2nd or 3rd marathon you'd expect big gains however as you progress those gains will get smaller. From reading some of KC's post he alludes to the need to change up your training plan to achieve greater gains when you plateau.
Btw well done on your 3:04 :)

Valid points SR. You're right, there are so many variables. I do think it would be interesting to see how others fare though. I guess it depends a bit also on what you do in the 'off' season. I train fairly regularly so I suppose there's always a decent level of fitness and it doesn't take a massive amount to get up to a certain point. However, it does strike me as a very narrow window in my case between 'Meh' and PB.

Slow_Runner

Itziger wrote: »

Slow_Runner wrote: »

I think there are waaaaay to many variables to definitively say whether a good training cycle equals a good marathon, your previous marathon cycle will have a bearing your current cycle and it also depends on the day. I had a dream training cycle for Rotterdam this year and got a 12 min pb, then went and had a nightmare in Dublin running 26 minutes slower with a decent (but not as good) training cycle - for me I think my body (and mind) was just tired from the 2 intense training cycles inside 10 months.
Other things to take into consideration is the level you are at - for your 2nd or 3rd marathon you'd expect big gains however as you progress those gains will get smaller. From reading some of KC's post he alludes to the need to change up your training plan to achieve greater gains when you plateau.
Btw well done on your 3:04 :)

Valid points SR. You're right, there are so many variables. I do think it would be interesting to see how others fare though. I guess it depends a bit also on what you do in the 'off' season. I train fairly regularly so I suppose there's always a decent level of fitness and it doesn't take a massive amount to get up to a certain point. However, it does strike me as a very narrow window in my case between 'Meh' and PB.

For me prior to the Rotterdam training I ran DCM with the mrs (5:30 finish) so I did a lot of slower base miles training for that and I really believe this was the reason my training went so well - big pbs in 10mile/HM along the way. 
I do think training load prior to proper marathon training kick off has a huge bearing

hot buttered scones

Itziger wrote: »

I've been thinking about this since last Sunday when I ran my 13th marathon (Valencia, Spain). I finished in 3.04 after a less than perfect training lead up. This is almost exactly 5 minutes off my PB which I did in Cork after a very good prep. I have also done very similar times in 3 previous marathons: 03, 04 ,05. The last almost a controlled, focused training run.

My question is; How big a difference in your race performance does a great training block make? And how well can you perform with little prep? A few years ago I did Lux marathon, hilly, tough last 10k in 3.17 with practically zero preparation. I was in ok shape but with no specific marathon training done. In fact, 6 days before I did a slow 30k run.

I don't know whether to find this depressing or reassuring. All that extra work for a few minutes?? Or should I think, wow, I have a good base if I can just knock out a 3.05 marathon. What are your experiences? Are there people who can go from an out of season 3.45 to a well-trained 2.5x? Or maybe more extreme, 3.45 to 2.45!

And perhaps most importantly...... Am I doing something wrong?

The bit in bold was my reaction when I saw your run in Strava. Well done by the way! To be fair to yourself, you trained very well for Cork and were very driven to go sub 3 at home with all the family watching, as you said yourself. Don't underestimate that sort of motivation. Also I remember your race report from Cork - didn't the 3 hour pacers when asked about the switchover say something like "sure we would have had to train for that! "
I think sometimes we can outperform our expectations, which then leads to dissatisfaction when we can't reproduce similar performances repeatedly, even though we know we haven't trained as well or are not at our peak.
But a first sub 3 on a hot day on a toughest course followed by a 3:04 with a less than perfect training block - that's a great year in my book and leaves with plenty to build on.
Maybe your getting into marginals gains territory (or is it diminishing returns?). Perhaps it's time for a new approach just to shake things up bit and see how you get on? Nothing wrong with a bit of experimentation.
I know what you mean too about all that extra work for just a few minutes - although those thoughts usually come to me when I'm in the depths of some torturous session. At least it's better than all that extra work for nothing.

hot buttered scones

A question or five on training paces.
I'm going too have a go at one of the P+L plans (multiple race distances). I worked out my training paces from the table in the book based on my current half marathon time and the paces seem a bit on the fast side. I did some LT intervals last night, but decided to go off HR rather than pace just to see were I was at. In short, I ran each interval much too slow, and with my HR too high.

I'm not worried about this - I'm not long finished Dublin, and I've not run a whole lot in the intervening weeks (plus one or two other things). I did the same workout last year at a similiar time and it appears that I'm back were I started (again not worried - yet)

When I plug in either my marathon time or 5k time the paces seem to be more manageable, although I still wouldn't have hit the correct paces last night - but am I underselling myself here?

So should we base our training paces on our best recent performance or what we think was our last good performance?

Does it even make sense to base our training off performances where all the stars aligned and we far outperformed our expectations? (Example - Ran a half with a goal of <1:30, ran 1:26:xx). Should we instead base them off a performance were with achieved a result more in line with our goals? (Example - Marathon goal time :10, ran 3:09:xx)

Should I just forget about pace altogether for the next few weeks, and just go off HR alone for a change?

Also - sometimes when I'm in the middle of a good training block I get a good "feel" for all my training paces - in that I could almost guess what HR range I'm in based on perceived effort. After a few weeks of easy running, especially post marathon I seem to loose my "calibration" and my judgement of effort becomes way off. Does this make sense to anyone?

I know it's still early days since Dublin (for me anyway), but I'd rather be tipping away doing a few sessions a less than optimum pace. My head would have been wrecked if I'd have run last nights session in the middle of a serious training cycle, but I really enjoyed putting in a bit of extra effort last night. My legs were fine, it's just the engine that couldn't keep up, but I expected that to be the case.

El Caballo

Itziger wrote: »

I've been thinking about this since last Sunday when I ran my 13th marathon (Valencia, Spain). I finished in 3.04 after a less than perfect training lead up. This is almost exactly 5 minutes off my PB which I did in Cork after a very good prep. I have also done very similar times in 3 previous marathons: 03, 04 ,05. The last almost a controlled, focused training run.

My question is; How big a difference in your race performance does a great training block make? And how well can you perform with little prep? A few years ago I did Lux marathon, hilly, tough last 10k in 3.17 with practically zero preparation. I was in ok shape but with no specific marathon training done. In fact, 6 days before I did a slow 30k run.

I don't know whether to find this depressing or reassuring. All that extra work for a few minutes?? Or should I think, wow, I have a good base if I can just knock out a 3.05 marathon. What are your experiences? Are there people who can go from an out of season 3.45 to a well-trained 2.5x? Or maybe more extreme, 3.45 to 2.45!

And perhaps most importantly...... Am I doing something wrong?

Fitness is easier to maintain than it is to gain. Once you reach a level of fitness, it becomes easier to run a small bit below your best off of limited training. I could run faster now with no training for a year than I could a couple of years ago with intense training.

It all goes back to traininig effect. When you train, you have something called baseline fitness and peak fitness. The increase in baseline fitness is whst drives the majority of your performance and doesn't erode very quickly. For instance, a guy who runs 100mpw for a couple of years and then takes a break for 2 years doing nothing, when he gets back to training, He'll still be able to ramp back up to 100mpw fairly quickly because his body remembers. This is a bit exaggerated to make a point as his performance will probably have taken a big drop in that time but he'll find it relatively easy to get back a lot of that past fitness.

Peak fitness from specific traing is the icing on the cake and will only give you so much, it will never move a huge amount from baseline fitness and it will erode much faster too. Once you are giving your body some stimulus like you were since Cork, you really won't lose that much baseline fitness.

As for 5 minutes being worth it, that is your choice but 5 minutes is a lot especially when not too long ago, you would have killed for those 5 minutes to go Sub-3. There is also the chance with taking training up a notch to add a new stimulus that you can have a breakthrough performance and chop even more time off.

A stonecutter can hit a stone 99 times to no effect but on the 100th try, it can split clean in half.

Itziger

El Caballo wrote: »

Fitness is easier to maintain than it is to gain. Once you reach a level of fitness, it becomes easier to run a small bit below your best off of limited training. I could run faster now with no training for a year than I could a couple of years ago with intense training.

It all goes back to traininig effect. When you train, you have something called baseline fitness and peak fitness. The increase in baseline fitness is whst drives the majority of your performance and doesn't erode very quickly. For instance, a guy who runs 100mpw for a couple of years and then takes a break for 2 years doing nothing, when he gets back to training, He'll still be able to ramp back up to 100mpw fairly quickly because his body remembers. This is a bit exaggerated to make a point as his performance will probably have taken a big drop in that time but he'll find it relatively easy to get back a lot of that past fitness.

Peak fitness from specific traing is the icing on the cake and will only give you so much, it will never move a huge amount from baseline fitness and it will erode much faster too. Once you are giving your body some stimulus like you were since Cork, you really won't lose that much baseline fitness.

As for 5 minutes being worth it, that is your choice but 5 minutes is a lot especially when not too long ago, you would have killed for those 5 minutes to go Sub-3. There is also the chance with taking training up a notch to add a new stimulus that you can have a breakthrough performance and chop even more time off.

A stonecutter can hit a stone 99 times to no effect but on the 100th try, it can split clean in half.

Yeah, that makes sense. And you're right about the 5 minutes being fairly big! Cork was a 4 minute 20 second PB, but given that the previous ones were 1 min 10 and 1 min 10, yes, 4 mins + was huge! I probably will try something kinda different soon alright but I might repeat the Cork plan for the next one. If there is a next one. Was talking to Mcphisto in Valencia and he'd just done a cracking 10k time and he as fresh as a daisy that night. No hobbling or limping about. Tempting.

ThebitterLemon

Itziger wrote: »

Yeah, that makes sense. And you're right about the 5 minutes being fairly big! Cork was a 4 minute 20 second PB, but given that the previous ones were 1 min 10 and 1 min 10, yes, 4 mins + was huge! I probably will try something kinda different soon alright but I might repeat the Cork plan for the next one. If there is a next one. Was talking to Mcphisto in Valencia and he'd just done a cracking 10k time and he as fresh as a daisy that night. No hobbling or limping about. Tempting.

At your age isn't limping and hobbling just an everyday occurrence

TbL

achilles

Speaking of fitness I see Strava now show your fittness levels. How accurate do you think it is? I was 96 on it this time last year but a disaster of a year with injury saw me drop below 20 I'm now 44 on it. I still feel I'm miles off from where I'd like to be but would it be a good indication of fitness?

Krusty_Clown

Itziger wrote: »

My question is; How big a difference in your race performance does a great training block make? And how well can you perform with little prep? A few years ago I did Lux marathon, hilly, tough last 10k in 3.17 with practically zero preparation. I was in ok shape but with no specific marathon training done. In fact, 6 days before I did a slow 30k run.

Your experience is quite similar to my own.
18/20 week block of training (assuming you're not starting from scratch) = you put yourself in a position to legitimately target a PB = run a marathon faster than you have ever done before = lifetime achievement.
4/5 week block of good training or longer block of less focused training = run a maintenance marathon = PB + 5% = a decent run out, but nothing that you'll remember in a couple of years time.

The problem is that those 18/20 weeks of focused training take a hell of a lot out of us, so for most of us, that means we can't lay down a long block of this type of training immediately after completing the same level of training - so it's perfectly acceptable not to go straight back into it, with huge drive and commitment. For most of us we can't be 'on point' all of the time (particularly those of us of a senior disposition (GOH excluded)), so we can't expect to run from one marathon PB to the next. What you do between these committed blocks becomes more important though, as when you do decide to commit fully again, you need to put yourself in the best position possible (e.g. have worked on speed, or have taken a short break and come back energized and ready to take it on again).

So maybe follow your 10k plan and try to run a cracking 10k PB. Whether you succeed or not, the training will leave you in a great position to tackle the marathon again (from a capability and hunger perspective), and instead of looking for 5 minutes, look for more. Aim for sub 2:50. Maybe you'll get there - maybe you won't, but you won't regret trying.

Itziger

Jaysus Krusty sub 2.50... I don't know if I'd have the 'cojones' to go for that. I was thinking more 2.57 ðŸ˜.

cloudatlas

Recommend a good youtube video that shows how to foot strike.

ariana`

After being injured in the run up to DCM i joined an s&c gym to build up my core and glute strength. The plan is/was to do 3 sessions per week, mon/wed/fri.

I am also hoping to start a track session which runs on Thursday evenings.

But today i find myself feeling pretty sore (DOMs in the glutes and quads in particular) having done Mon & Wed in the gym already this week and a very easy run on Tuesday (5k).

So I'm wondering if the track session is too much on top of all the s&c? Would i be better to cut the s&c to 2 days to do the track session or stick with 3 x s&c without the track for a while and then introduce it or just go for it and do the 3 x s&c plus track after which i have a feeling i won't be able to walk :eek:

RayCun

That sounds like a lot of new sessions a week - whether it's 3 S&C, 2 S&C and 1 track, or 3 S&C and 1 track.
It's like adding 20 or 30 miles onto your week in one go.

ariana`

RayCun wrote: »

That sounds like a lot of new sessions a week - whether it's 3 S&C, 2 S&C and 1 track, or 3 S&C and 1 track.
It's like adding 20 or 30 miles onto your week in one go.

Interesting way of putting it, thanks. The advice i got re. the s&c (from both physio and the gym guy who assessed me) was to hit the s&c hard over the 3 months of the Winter and then reduce the intensity of the sessions come the Spring and build the mileage again. But maybe i need to build up to 3 big s&c sessions? I'd love to do the track but again maybe it's not the wisest thing right now until i'm more used to the s&c work

RayCun

ariana` wrote: »

Interesting way of putting it, thanks. The advice i got re. the s&c (from both physio and the gym guy who assessed me) was to hit the s&c hard over the 3 months of the Winter and then reduce the intensity of the sessions come the Spring and build the mileage again. But maybe i need to build up to 3 big s&c sessions? I'd love to do the track but again maybe it's not the wisest thing right now until i'm more used to the s&c work

What adjustments are you making to the rest of your week to compensate for this increased work?

ariana`

RayCun wrote: »

What adjustments are you making to the rest of your week to compensate for this increased work?

In fairness i'm running sweet f* all The priority is s&c.

For the next few weeks until Christmas my plan is
Mon: s&c
Tues: 5-8km easy/talking pace.
Wed: s&c
Thurs: Track session
Fri: s&c + very easy 5km
Sat: LSR (building 10-16km)
Sun: REST

If i don't do the track session then i'd probably make Tuesday's run a bit more tempo?

RayCun

ariana` wrote: »

In fairness i'm running sweet f* all The priority is s&c.

For the next few weeks until Christmas my plan is
Mon: s&c
Tues: 5-8km easy/talking pace.
Wed: s&c
Thurs: Track session
Fri: s&c + very easy 5km
Sat: LSR (building 10-16km)
Sun: REST

If i don't do the track session then i'd probably make Tuesday's run a bit more tempo?

Ah, well then I'd do a few weeks of 3 x s&c and only easy running, and then introduce more faster running when those sessions are taking less out of you.

In general, though, do you intend to keep up three hard S&C sessions every week?

ariana`

RayCun wrote: »

Ah, well then I'd do a few weeks of 3 x s&c and only easy running, and then introduce more faster running when those sessions are taking less out of you.

In general, though, do you intend to keep up three hard S&C sessions every week?

Plan is after the initial 3 months i'll be able to keep up 3 sessions but they will be 15-20 minutes sessions done at home, or possibly 1 good pilates/gym class and 2 shorter sessions. Time wise 3 hours in the gym a week won't work for me long-term. Like a lot of us i've young kids and a full time job so something has to give. As you can see from my plan above the mileage is very low at the moment so that's the sacrifice which I'm willing to make right now to hopefully make myself stronger so when i do build it up again i won't fall apart at the seams

Does that sound reasonable?

RayCun

Sure, you're reducing in other areas to allow for this, and you have a long term plan of how things will balance eventually