|
Mar 2013
10:19am, 14 Mar 2013
33 posts
|
Dooogs
Right, managed two 10km runs in three days (61 and 63 mins respectively) – a lot slower than 5k pace but a) the runs are longer, obviously and b) my 5k parkrun is close to flat and the 10k routes are a lot hillier. Famous last words but it went better than I thought it would (I didn’t throw up or have to walk half of it)…
Next newbie question: if I want to get weekly distance up from 25k towards 35k+ , should I a)try to increase the number of runs per week or b) keep it to three per week but try to increase the length of those 10km runs towards 15kms each (or even 10km + 20kms)?
|
|
Mar 2013
10:50am, 14 Mar 2013
1,915 posts
|
Autumnleaves
Personally I'd go with increasing the number of runs and extend the length of the longest run you do. I only found my 10k time improved (this year) whilst running slowly and steadily, with a long run of 7-10 miles (sorry I struggle a bit with kms!). I do appreciate it is difficult with small children (my own are teens, I found it very difficult to run regularly when they were small). I find a pattern of two midweek runs and then a short Saturday one (which could be your park run obviously) with a longer one on Sunday is do-able.
|
|
Mar 2013
11:10am, 14 Mar 2013
34 posts
|
Dooogs
Thanks, AL - toddlers are easier than babies in terms of predictability, at least! My original query, before I edited it, was a complete mess of kms and miles and metres overlapping.
In terms of miles, I’m doing about 15 per week (6 + 6+ 3) and want to try to get that towards 20-25 mpw. 4 runs per week sounds less scary than a couple of mega runs (given that I’m not training for any specific races) – the only worry is whether Sat + Sun + Mon sessions could end up without enough recovery time…
|
|
Mar 2013
11:13am, 14 Mar 2013
28,462 posts
|
Hills of Death (HOD)
Equally I found mine got worse the LESS running I did (and more weight I put on)
So from a 30-40 mile week to 15-20 mile week meant 45-47 10k and 22-23 5k to a 49-50 10k and 23-24 5k
Get running 
|
|
Mar 2013
11:19am, 14 Mar 2013
36 posts
|
Dooogs
I need to get some of the lard off too. I’ve dropped about 20 pounds in 6 months but I’m still about 45-50 pounds over a BMI of 22ish (and I’m not big-boned enough to claim that my healthy BMI should be 28 either!)…
|
|
Mar 2013
12:36pm, 14 Mar 2013
50,625 posts
|
Gobi
Running too fast Dooogs
|
|
Mar 2013
12:49pm, 14 Mar 2013
49 posts
|
Dooogs
Hi, Gobi - is 10k in 63mins too fast?
(better than being told it's too slow, I suppose)
What's the downside of the current pace - liability to pick up injuries, or slower improvements? What pace should I be aiming at for now?
|
|
Mar 2013
12:56pm, 14 Mar 2013
50,627 posts
|
Gobi
10.30 to 11mm for easy work/ long work for you
Injury and a lack of aerobic developement .
The clue was in your own comments above
|
|
Mar 2013
1:04pm, 14 Mar 2013
51 posts
|
Dooogs
Right... so for a 10km run, aim for an even pace of somewhere in the 65-68 minute range to complete?
(assuming my dodgy arithmetic works: 6.25m @ 65.5mins = 10.48 mins per mile' 6.25 @ 68.5mins = 10.96 mins per mile)
Lordy knows that you all know a lot more about running / training than me, but does a change from 9-10 mins per mile to 10.30-11 mins per mile make a significant difference?
|
|
Mar 2013
1:34pm, 14 Mar 2013
1,920 posts
|
Autumnleaves
Short answer - yes - Gobi really knows what he's talking about - but I am proof it works - I admit I don't understand why, but it does.
|
