VLM 2014 Thread

99 watchers

Pedro_Perez Apr 2014 7:52pm, 23 Apr 2014 1,453 posts	0 Pedro_Perez Welcome MelanieM, nothing wrong AT ALL with walking, its a bloody long way! The comments from people who have never run a marathon/spectators are quite frankly amazingly stupid, only today I got to running is bad for you, its just one of the joys of being a runner. Smile to yourself safe in the knowledge that you did it and they didn't. Well done!
RevBarbaraG Apr 2014 7:56pm, 23 Apr 2014 2,028 posts	0 RevBarbaraG Who's up for some controversy on the subject of walking during running, then? I offer you some thoughts from Jeff Galloway:- - That human beings are actually not biomechanically designed for long-distance continuous running (even though we can adapt to it) - That the early foot races were just that - foot races, not running races - and walk breaks were just about universal. - That just about everyone will cover a marathon or half quicker with the right walk/run ratio than they can do it with continuous running - That regular walk breaks greatly decrease fatigue and risk of injury, and therefore enable people to train more consistently and perform better. You make your own judgements, of course. What I know is that, although I started my marathon training with the intention of training to run it non-stop, apart from taking water, I was stymied in that effort by injury. I adopted RWR in order to enable me to run it at all. I'm pretty sure that, had I tried to return to continuous running, I would not even have been able to build up to the longest run I did (18 miles); there's a good chance I would have got injured again, and either not started, or not finished. Next time - which will probably not be for a few years - I would anticipate doing a greater proportion of running, and also going faster. But I no longer feel the need to run non-stop in order to be a proper runner.
Jon_T Apr 2014 7:59pm, 23 Apr 2014 4,503 posts	0 Jon_T Welcome to Fetchland Melm, as has been said, it's ok to walk, I did for the last 4 or 5 miles, I was broken by then with savage cramp, you can't run that off! Enjoy the site, it's fun
Bazoaxe Apr 2014 8:08pm, 23 Apr 2014 6,681 posts	0 Bazoaxe Rev , While Galloway makes 3 very reasonable points, I do not agree with this one: - That just about everyone will cover a marathon or half quicker with the right walk/run ratio than they can do it with continuous running There will be some people for whom a run/walk strategy will lead to faster times, but there will be others for whom walk breaks would slow down times. I think he needs to define that 'just about everyone' a bit more clearly
Lordy Lumpkins Apr 2014 8:39pm, 23 Apr 2014 152 posts	0 Lordy Lumpkins I think each to their own - you can't predict your outcome or what you experience on the day. Last year on my first marathon I got calf muscle cramps around 18 miles and couldn't run for at least 5 or 10 minutes until it had eased off slightly - in London this year I ran all the way through to 23 miles, then had to stop for the loo and stomach cramps (different bloody cramps!). Having said that I've already entered another with a view to running it all, but I still don't know if I will actually do it on the day.
RevBarbaraG Apr 2014 9:11pm, 23 Apr 2014 2,030 posts	0 RevBarbaraG Bazo - OK, I was paraphrasing freely :). Two slightly more accurate citations are (Galloway's figures) that there is an average of 13 minute speed up on marathon time when a continuous runner switches to the correct walk/run ratio, and he knows of over 100 runners who have cracked 3 hours for the marathon for the first time after switching to RWR. Of course, if someone speeds up between one marathon and another, it's all but impossible to say what is responsible for the improvement. It could be RWR.... or just being a regular runner for longer... Or doing speed work... Or the course... An interested person could collect data on people who have adopted a RWR strategy vs those who have attempted a continuous run (since many who aim to run continuously will end up walking part of it - that doesn't count as RWR in Galloway's thinking, since they didn't take regular walk breaks from the start), correct for other variables such as training mileage, and analyse out whether there really is an advantage.... I would be interested to see what would happen to someone who's done a decent marathon time, such as our own PP, if he adopted RWR next time. I doubt I'll have much success persuading him, though. Anyway - each to their own, innit?
Bazoaxe Apr 2014 9:25pm, 23 Apr 2014 6,684 posts	0 Bazoaxe I agree, each to their own.... But, the only people who broke 3 hours at VLM and included walking were people who are either capable of much faster and got injured or started too fast and blew up...and even then they would have struggled to break 3 hours. I dont believe anyone broke 3 hours with a planned run walk strategy - but would be happy to hear from anyone who did that on just how they did so. I reckon breaking 3 hours is just about my maximum achievement. Ive been close with 3:03 ands 3:04, albeit 5 and 4 years ago. I ran 3:10 at VLM, Ok I got the pacing wrong, but if I built in walking breaks totalling lets even say 1 mile which I did in 12:52 that means I have to make up 6 mins in the other 25.2 miles which is about 13 seconds per mile (I think) to break 3 hours. That would mean I would med to run 6:39mm for the rest. The more I walked, the faster the running would need to be. My fastest half marathon was at 6:28mm.
Bazoaxe Apr 2014 9:31pm, 23 Apr 2014 6,685 posts	0 Bazoaxe However, I am sure if I had an RWR strategy in my marathon debut I would have had a faster time that day...and also in another marathon wher I ran against physio advice with injury and ended injured and walking anyway What I am saying is that there is a place for walking, but if its achieving a marathon of near your potential best ,then thats not it.
RevBarbaraG Apr 2014 10:01pm, 23 Apr 2014 2,031 posts	0 RevBarbaraG Galloway suggests different run/walk ratios based on pace. For 7 minute miles (just outside 3 hour marathon), it is run 6 minutes/walk 30 seconds OR walk for 40 seconds each mile. I couldn't find it when I looked, but I think I've seen him say that even very fast runners can benefit from taking a 20 second walk break each mile. The logic is, Bazo, that if you were taking a short walk break each mile, then you WOULD be able to maintain a faster running pace the rest of the time. Only one way to find out..... Galloway also says "I will never drag anyone kicking and screaming into RWR". He's big on each person being "captain of their running ship" - no-one can tell you you shouldn't walk, and no-one can tell you you should, either.
Bazoaxe Apr 2014 10:08pm, 23 Apr 2014 6,688 posts	0 Bazoaxe Rev, I stull dont get it. 3 hr marathon is 6:52mm If I walk for 40 seconds every mile I have to run the rest of that mile in 6:12...that is very nearly my flat out 5k pace ,certainly much faster than my 10k pace. 25 times over. Even walking 20 seconds per mile is still a pretty hard effort , interrupted with stopping/stating. Has he any evidence to back this up.....say a garmin trace of someone doing this and evidence that its not a 2:30 runner who did it to prove a point ?