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 2017 Mentored Novices Thread
Options
Comments
-
If of any help to the novices and no science behind it I'm a novice from 2015 I was aiming for the 4.30 time so my runs did bring me to the 4 hour mark. I think for while I felt it was time on my feet it was also good for my head to know that I could stay on my feet for that time. As they say round these parts trust in the plan and stick to the plan. I followed Dave carries plan from Irish runner magazine which also brings you to 22 miles on your longest run. Again there was a lot of discussion around the benefits of this but for me it's as much a head game thing as anything else as your mind will be tested as much as your body on the day. I'm no expert but I think for novice marathon runners who are building up that base you need to do that 4 hours on your feet. Anyway it stood me well on the day crossing the line at 4.31. Trust in your plan and it will get you there. We are all here to prove it. Good luck in your last few weeks of long runs
+1 to this
Any novice/first marathon plans I've seen include the long runs.... most of us here are at the slower end of the spectrum (4 hours +) so it's impossible to keep to the '3 hour rule' if doing the long run at the right (slow) pace. So while El Caballo might be right about the physiological benefits, it's not all about that for a first marathon. It's about training yourself for the distance.
The idea of attempting a first marathon without having done as many of the long runs as possible on the plan seems mad to me. As a novice, I did HH1, a very basic plan but enough to get me round and appropriate for the amount of running I had under my belt.
My second time out, I did the meno plan (from boards) which had 2 x 22 milers (i think i only did one) and lots of 18-20 mile runs.... i was much stronger and more prepared going into the marathon after that.
As Mrs Mc says, the psychological benefit of knowing you can run 20 miles in training, or 22 miles... is huge. And you'll need all the psychological benefits you can get on the day 0 -
-
AuldManKing wrote: »I need to do some research on this to get it right and might put a feeler out to Testostercone for some help with this.
For now - lets follow the plan as is.
My thoughts would be that if we were setting out a plan so the longest runs would max out at 3 hours, then there would be another longish run on the preceding day to mimic the fatigue effect - but I need to verify that.
As our plan is set out, lets follow it as laid down - it hasn't hurt previous Novices (that I'm aware of )
that means running longer than 3 hours, so prepare for it well.El Caballo wrote: »The 3 hour long run rule does hold water. There is an issue when it comes to novice runners in that regard in that many people who enter the marathon are starting from scratch or a low level of base fitness which is not ideal to be honest but is the way things are so you have to work around these things in that situation.
The reason behind this 3 hour run is that aerobic benefits fall off a cliff around the 2:30-3 hour mark. The goal of the long run is to build aerobic endurance through strengthening of the heart, improving mitochondrial density and building new capillaries all of which help with oxygen transport between the lungs, heart and muscles. With everything else in life, there comes a point of diminishing returns where your body simply can't absorb the training as well anymore and the risks start to outweigh the benefits. Let's look at this way, say you have a runner who is doing their long run at 7 min/mile easy pace for 20 miles, that works out at 2 hours and 20 minutes. Then you have a runner who is doing their long runs at 11 min/mile easy pace for 20 miles, that works out at 3 hours and 40 minutes. Who has the higher intensity here? The person who is running 11 minute miles so effectively the person with the lower level of aerobic fitness has a harder run and thus a higher level of injury risk all other things being equal. That last bit is a little off topic from the OP but just trying to get a point across. The 20 Mile run is one that is steeped in folklore from the days of the 70's and 80's when there really wasn't too many novices running marathons and is something passed down to now even though times have changed.
Many elites will run for 2:30- 3 hours in training but they will cover something close to 30 miles in that time, you might see some sub elites cover 25-26 in training and your 3 hour runner might get 22 down in that time because they still get good benefit up to that point. It has being shown that a 2:30 run will almost give you the same benefits as a 3:45 run but the risk of injury is much greater in the 3:45 run as the muscles/form breaks down and this will generally be a bigger issue for novices as the will generally be structurely weaker than experienced runners. Many novices will be running a harder long run than seriously quick marathon runners and that will cause a double whammy effect because they are aerobically weaker thus won't recover as quickly from a 3 hour run never mind a 4 hour run.
This is the general science to it but obviously there is the psychological benefit of covering a decent chunk of the race distance in training even if physiologically, maybe there isn't much to be gained. There is probably a few counters to this through raising midweek mileage(I cannot state just how important this is to running a good marathon), back to back weekend runs to stimulate fatigue like ultrarunner do and alternating a longish steady run with the long run biweekly would be a few things I think could benefit a novice. It's a tricky one for sure and probably deserves a decent debate on the pros/cons of the current way vs some other approaches that may work.If of any help to the novices and no science behind it I'm a novice from 2015 I was aiming for the 4.30 time so my runs did bring me to the 4 hour mark. I think for while I felt it was time on my feet it was also good for my head to know that I could stay on my feet for that time. As they say round these parts trust in the plan and stick to the plan. I followed Dave carries plan from Irish runner magazine which also brings you to 22 miles on your longest run. Again there was a lot of discussion around the benefits of this but for me it's as much a head game thing as anything else as your mind will be tested as much as your body on the day. I'm no expert but I think for novice marathon runners who are building up that base you need to do that 4 hours on your feet. Anyway it stood me well on the day crossing the line at 4.31. Trust in your plan and it will get you there. We are all here to prove it. Good luck in your last few weeks of long runs+1 to this
Any novice/first marathon plans I've seen include the long runs.... most of us here are at the slower end of the spectrum (4 hours +) so it's impossible to keep to the '3 hour rule' if doing the long run at the right (slow) pace. So while El Caballo might be right about the physiological benefits, it's not all about that for a first marathon. It's about training yourself for the distance.
The idea of attempting a first marathon without having done as many of the long runs as possible on the plan seems mad to me. As a novice, I did HH1, a very basic plan but enough to get me round and appropriate for the amount of running I had under my belt.
My second time out, I did the meno plan (from boards) which had 2 x 22 milers (i think i only did one) and lots of 18-20 mile runs.... i was much stronger and more prepared going into the marathon after that.
As Mrs Mc says, the psychological benefit of knowing you can run 20 miles in training, or 22 miles... is huge. And you'll need all the psychological benefits you can get on the day
Thanks all for taking the time to reply. It's great to hear from you folks who have followed the plans previously. I find the science stuff really interesting, must be the geek in me
but all the replies point to the psychological benefit of having run 20 miles especially for a 1st marathon and i've said it myself on this thread previously that i can't imagine not going out on d-day knowing that i can at least run 20 miles! As it is 6 miles still seems like a leap but i know i'll be more rested after tapering and the excitement/adrenalin of the day and support of the crowd will help with that 6 miles. I ran a half marathon having only run 11m and the last 2m didn't bother me so i feel 20-26m is comparable-ish :cool: but i wouldn't like to have any less than 20 done for this time anyhow. 0 -
AuldManKing wrote: »I've given up trying - I cant even figure out what gender some of you are!
LOL this gave me a giggle :pac:
I've only paired up 3 people and 2 of those aren't even novices :pac: but i have figured out the gender of everyone... or at least i think i have 
:eek: 0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
Thanks all for taking the time to reply. It's great to hear from you folks who have followed the plans previously. I find the science stuff really interesting, must be the geek in me but all the replies point to the psychological benefit of having run 20 miles especially for a 1st marathon and i've said it myself on this thread previously that i can't imagine not going out on d-day knowing that i can at least run 20 miles! As it is 6 miles still seems like a leap but i know i'll be more rested after tapering and the excitement/adrenalin of the day and support of the crowd will help with that 6 miles. I ran a half marathon having only run 11m and the last 2m didn't bother me so i feel 20-26m is comparable-ish :cool: but i wouldn't like to have any less than 20 done for this time anyhow.
You dont need to have run 20 miles before your first marathon.
My first year (and only year), I didnt train on a plan. I was fairly fit from football so I had a great baseline fitness (was very used to running 10ks too).
I only ever ran 22km a couple of times in the run up after advice from a guy in my job. He always said Id be grand on the day considering my fitness. From reading on here that doesnt seem to be great advice but it served me grand on the day as I ran it in under 4 hours. So its possible not to run 20 miles in training and still complete the marathon.0 -
-
yes there is food alternatives Jellies , dried apricots or or you can make yourself a drink Isotonic or hypertonic to do the same thing, I am trying to avoid gels and try other options myself my tummy is a bit sensitive.
here some recipes for making the drinks.
Isotonic =
5ooml orange or apple juice
500ml of water
1/4 teaspoon of salt
Hypertonic =
400ml of orange or apple juice
1 liter of water
1/4 teaspoon of salt
I am studying sports nutrition and we have covered nutrient timing but are looking more in to it on Thursday so I let you know after the class
Thinking of preparing this for after FD10. Is the juice meant to be anything special, or is any bog standard "made from concentrate" juice from the supermarket okay?0 -
You dont need to have run 20 miles before your first marathon.
My first year (and only year), I didnt train on a plan. I was fairly fit from football so I had a great baseline fitness (was very used to running 10ks too).
I only ever ran 22km a couple of times in the run up after advice from a guy in my job. He always said Id be grand on the day considering my fitness. From reading on here that doesnt seem to be great advice but it served me grand on the day as I ran it in under 4 hours. So its possible not to run 20 miles in training and still complete the marathon.
I've no doubt it's possible and you are proof of that and i am sure there are many others who've done it too... but that doesn't mean it's the best option for me right now or for many others. Horses for courses and all that
I wouldn't be very confident or young or of natural athletic ability (i could go on but i'd only depress myself :pac::pac::pac:) so for me i would like to line up on d-day with the confidence that i can at least run 20m.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
I've no doubt it's possible and you are proof of that and i am sure there are many others who've done it too... but that doesn't mean it's the best option for me right now or for many others. Horses for courses and all that
I wouldn't be very confident or young or of natural athletic ability (i could go on but i'd only depress myself :pac::pac::pac:) so for me i would like to line up on d-day with the confidence that i can at least run 20m.
Listen its not the best option for me this time around, maybe 5 years ago it worked but I have no doubt that a similar approach this time around would be an awful idea.0 -
-
-
-
-
AuldManKing wrote: »I need to do some research on this to get it right and might put a feeler out to Testostercone for some help with this.
For now - lets follow the plan as is.
My thoughts would be that if we were setting out a plan so the longest runs would max out at 3 hours, then there would be another longish run on the preceding day to mimic the fatigue effect - but I need to verify that.
As our plan is set out, lets follow it as laid down - it hasn't hurt previous Novices (that I'm aware of )
that means running longer than 3 hours, so prepare for it well.
Hmmm... A man who has been immense help to us all with motivation, tips and a great knowledge base has suggested that Testostercone's input would be valued. To me that means I would place great store in any such advice. So when Testostercone suggests that his opinion is to consider not doing long runs of such lengthy duration I would be very inclined to listen.
I understand the psychological angle too but personally (and I'm very aware we are all different) I would have more worries about my body letting me down on the day than my mind.0 -
I heard that one too but reading back over a couple of years threads a smaller proportion of those who did a 1:50 half managed a 4 hour full. I didn't look at other times. Actually I became very doubtful about breaking 4 after seeing how many people were outside their target time last year.
It also made me wonder whether most people use 'target' as meaning their best possible or their reasonable expectation?
I know there'll always but a few outliers but my friend ran a 1:50 HM and followed it up with 3:38 in Dublin for her 1st marathon attempt last year but i'd say that was the exception rather than the norm.
Last year was quite warm which may have effected people who don't like running in the heat (this would be me) or weren't properly hydrated, it was a beautiful day for spectators but possibly not ideal running conditions by 11am. But i'm sure ideal running conditions are a rarity :rolleyes:
I think our 10m and/or HM races will give us a better indication of what time to target but there will always be other variables on the day to consider such as weather. And for me anyhow as a first marathon the beauty is it will be such a thrill just to finish. The a goal will be a time goal yet to be determined but the b goal will be to finish feeling good and the c goal will just be to finish :cool:
Speaking of 10m and HM races. It now turns out that i can't do the HM which i had penciled in and i can't find another which suits me, which means i am going to race this weekend's 10 mile :eek: And it will be my last and only race before DCM :eek: I'm not sure if this is wise or not, i would have really liked to have a done a HM but right now i can't see an option that suits
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
Hmmm... A man who has been immense help to us all with motivation, tips and a great knowledge base has suggested that Testostercone's input would be valued. To me that means I would place great store in any such advice. So when Testostercone suggests that his opinion is to consider not doing long runs of such lengthy duration I would be very inclined to listen.
I understand the psychological angle too but personally (and I'm very aware we are all different) I would have more worries about my body letting me down on the day than my mind.
He was answering the question as asked regarding the benefits of running longer than 3 hours - not 'should this group of novices ignore the plan'
If the plan was designed with only 3 hours running in mind, it would be a lot different.
I'd encourage you to follow the plan as designed.
I had a look at multiple plans from different sources for Novices (about 12 of them) and I reckon that most of them would have you go beyond the 3 hour mark, with the exception of the Hansons plan - but that is a very specific plan that builds fatigue in other ways.0 -
I must apologise for opening the can of worms with the 3 hr query I was never suggesting we all suddenly ditch the plans that have been put together for us and have a proven track record. In fact i'm not really sure why i brought it up when personally i know i want to run 20m, preferably twice, no matter how long it takes, before Oct 29th to give me that psychological boost. Anyhow, if it's ok, i declare the subject closed, or at least i'll opt out of the conversation on the subject. (though i can't promise not to raise it again somewhere on this forum in x yrs time when i'm training for maybe my 3rd or 4th marathon
as if that's going to happen :pac:) 0 -
-
I must apologise for opening the can of worms with the 3 hr query I was never suggesting we all suddenly ditch the plans that have been put together for us and have a proven track record. In fact i'm not really sure why i brought it up when personally i know i want to run 20m, preferably twice, no matter how long it takes, before Oct 29th to give me that psychological boost. Anyhow, if it's ok, i declare the subject closed, or at least i'll opt out of the conversation on the subject. (though i can't promise not to raise it again somewhere on this forum in x yrs time when i'm training for maybe my 3rd or 4th marathon as if that's going to happen :pac:)
That's what these boards are for. Questions and discussions. I enjoyed reading through the science behind the pros and cons. Good stuff even if I'm personally adopting a "forest gump" approach of just running.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement