Dec 2010
4:09pm, 15 Dec 2010
1,143 posts
|
P.E...
KB/MTR interesting thoughts on the long run. I read somewhere about the Hansons (Brooks-Hansons project fellows) have in their plans runs of up to 16-18 but believe the volume to be more important than say hitting 20 miles which is just a round figure isn't it? I mean is it that much of a step from 18 to 20???
I'm not so sure mysel and would always lean towards doing as many 20's as I could more to mentall prepare myself than anything. Those that follow the Noakes theory will agree convincing the mind is half the battle!
|
Dec 2010
5:42pm, 15 Dec 2010
684 posts
|
Tiger
Sounds like I need to dig out my HRM for my long run this week then. So I'll aim for up to 85% MHR for the marathon paced section. Fortunately I did a max test earlier in the year, I don't really fancy having to repeat that!
Having seen the great results Mrs Jigs has got from the up to 70mpw plan, that'll be good enough for me
|
Dec 2010
7:50pm, 15 Dec 2010
641 posts
|
Rockin around the RichyC
I can see why some would want to follow the plan exactly but for me the point of tweaking it is because we are all different! With different strengths and weaknesses, over and above what goes on in our lives that make tweaking it essential. I consider myself to have a natural leaning towards shorter distances 10k-half, based on where I've performed best so far in my running career. I don't find long runs particularly comfortable yet in the way that Matt does so that's why I would add some extra long runs. The point about 20m is fair enough, it's just an easy number to say, but for me it's more about time on feet so if it's 20 or 22 or whatever, it's about spending time on feet closer to your marathon goal time which I wouldn't get by doing just 18m.
|
Dec 2010
6:37pm, 16 Dec 2010
2,327 posts
|
Bazoaxe
I did 11 miles home from work last night with 6 recoery miles to work this morning, so just 12 hrs apart. This morning felt quite tired and sluggish, but the bonus is that I get 36 hrs before tomorrow 9 miles.
I am thinking this may be my approach to getting the midweek long run done without either getting up at silly o'clock or impacting the familt of an e vening
|
Dec 2010
9:23am, 17 Dec 2010
693 posts
|
MattTheRat
Bazo: That's my normal method. I work through lunch on a Wednesday, leave early and do a long run home. Then I jog back in to work the next morning.
Easy 6 miles yesterday before our work Xmas dinner. Really nice dinner is a local veggie cafe with BYO wine and then a few beers in the pub. Not too bad but starting at 4:30 means a long drinking session. WFH today as a result. 10 easy miles is the plan. Cold here, but no snow.
|
Dec 2010
9:37am, 17 Dec 2010
130 posts
|
~Ed~
Those plans are pain and suffering. The mid week "medium long" runs get a bit monotonous. Did 70-85 last year almost to the letter, am trying the 85+ plan this time but will spice it up a bit I think.
Good luck Matt!
|
Dec 2010
10:12am, 17 Dec 2010
694 posts
|
MattTheRat
Yes, but those MLRs are the key to success of the plans.
|
Dec 2010
10:22am, 17 Dec 2010
131 posts
|
~Ed~
Why do you think they're the key to success?
|
Dec 2010
10:49am, 17 Dec 2010
696 posts
|
MattTheRat
Because almost all other plans have a long run, a tempo/threshold run, some speed work and the rest is easy/recovery runs (or xtraining for Furman FIRST). But I don't think this is sufficient for good marathon endurance. It builds up the long run into such a focus for the week that you go easy into it and recover afterwards. Adding in the MLR changes the training stress significantly. It makes a 12-15 mile run feel quite normal, to the extent that the long run is less daunting, and that enables you to focus more on the tempo/MP sessions which should be the most challenging runs
Take two otherwise almost identical weeks, but instead of running 20 miles on Sunday, run longer midweek:
0, 6, 7, 6, 10, 4, 20 4, 6, 13, 6, 10, 6, 18
The 2nd plan is longer, but partly because the long run effort is spread out over two decent sessions, thus allowing more overall training. In the first (more typical) example, the long run is 38% of the week's miles, in the 2nd, it's only 29%, which allows a recovery run the next day, and less need to run easy the day before.
And n a personal level, when I introduced them after running two marathons on RW plans, I improved massively.
|
Dec 2010
11:05am, 17 Dec 2010
132 posts
|
~Ed~
Is 18 months too long??
I'm not sure I improved much between February and April this year. Good PB at Wokingham half but then London was probably just equivalent to the half time not a step up.
Maybe more intense training for just 12 weeks works better?
|