Training Week Ending 2/9/2003

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

Greetings, rec.runners! Please tell us about your training week and goals.

cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton, ON) www.angelfire.com/nc/swstudio/2003.htm (my schedule)
www.soundclick.com/allfalldown (my band's website)

Goals: make it through another week of training without injury; any amount of progress
(better/stronger/faster/etc); fun. All goals were achieved this week.

M: 1M WU, 4x800 with 3min rest between (3:45/3:36/3:48/3:44), 1M CD
N: 3M (9:25)
O: 1M WU, 3M tempo (8:02), 1M CD
P: 5M (10:14)
Q: dnr Sa: 3M (9:09) Su: 10M (9:32)

Total: 30.7 miles

This week I started working again after about 8 months of idleness. I also joined a local running
club. I'm really not much of a joiner, but with the new job I no longer have the luxury of running
intervals wherever and whenever; I now have to run them in the dark, and since this club has legit
access to a local track I decided to join up. The club also has some excellent runners, so maybe
I'll be able to learn something from them.

Good week all

Karen

SwStudio wrote:

> Greetings, rec.runners! Please tell us about your training week and goals.

Hey, David, sorry to hear about your knee woes! Hope you recover soon.

Goals: National Capital Marathon (May, Ottawa, Canada); probably the St Patrick's Day 10K (Mar 15th,
Ottawa), though I notice that they've moved the course and won't have the famous uphill finish, sigh
(whether of relief or despair, not sure yet); enjoy training, avoid injury, enjoy life. 2 out of 3
ain't bad.

Training week:

Mon: 5K easy plus 3 x 1K hilly loop at good effort; 1:15 Ashtanga yoga class in the evening (whew)

Tue: DNR, planned rest day. Did some weights, including quads -- don't usually do any leg things,
this was an experiment

Wed: Hills (5 x); weights again (including quads again - so far, so good?); windy (-10C, -23C with
wind chill), but sunny

Thu: DNR, unplanned

Fri: 10K steady; weights (upper body)

Sat: skate on the Rideau canal; ice is in good shape

Sun: 19K LSD, great day (-8C, some wind, but good footing and mixed sun/cloud); sore left hip
(ITB? :-( )

db (in Ottawa)

Shit week for our club.

Didier Lacam (the 66yo half-marathon vice champion of the world), who was recovering from a heart
attack in intensive care, had another attack.

He was re-animated again and we were all just keeping fingers crossed for him when, on Thursday
evening, the club's vice-president and trainer, Jean-Luc Assemat (39yo, 2h11 marathon at London in
1991) died of heart failure during training...

Feeling completely empty and unreal and had no desire to run this weekend.

Jean-Luc's performance was still the 14th best all-time by a French runner

http://www.athledunet.com/Statistiques/Bilans-TT/France/Outdoor/Hommes/Marathon.htm and was the
regional record (Midi-Pyrénées League).

For those who read French http://lmpa.athle.org/asp/esp_actualites/act_dtl.asp?actid=1826
http://www.vo2.fr/depeches.php3?cat=2&art=5476

He was a great bloke too. Funeral tomorrow (Monday) at 2:30pm local time.

Last long and hard (yeah bill, I know,...I know) week of my Marathon training, beginning taper next
week! Fighting a head/chest cold (again) pretty much all week :( I used to practically never get
sick,...now that I've started running, and running hard, and eating much better, I seem to have
problems now,...cripes...hopefully my body will adjust soon!

Mon: DNR

Tues: 6 miles (7:46)

Weds: 7 miles (8:25)

Thurs: 5 miles (8:33)

Fri: DNR

Sat: 20 miles (9:02)

Sun: 2-3 mile walk

The 20 miles on Saturday was amazing...even with a moderate cold, it was a very low-effort run over
a long course with some pretty decent hills too. Happy to report that I encountered absolutely zero
ITB pain this time out, possibly due, in part, to taking copious amounts of ibuprofin during the
week(?). Can't comment on the effectiveness on the patt-strap, as it simply was never needed.

Let the tapering begin (and hopefully the cold healing too)...

Goal: Week #18 of 21, training for first marathon March 2 (Napa Valley), hopefully 3:30:00 -
3:39:00 or so

Bio: M, 31yo, 6"1', 150lbs, just started running september '02, joined YMCA marathon training
program group as a personal challenge to myself.

Easy week after last Saturday's Marathon

Monday 7 easy Tuesday 5.5 Wednesday off, Thursday 8 Friday 5.5 Saturday 7.5 Sunday 10 mile race @
1:12, about 3 miles warmup/cooldown about 46 total

Winter into Spring Goals
1. raise mileage to 60 - 70 a week, I'm there, may go higher if the weather moderates and can run on
trails again, after Marathon recovery.
2. get weight down to 165 - 170 range, I'm there
3. Sub 20 minute 5K in the spring or sooner - 20:21 getting closer, waiting for a 5K
4. 3:15 Marathon in the spring, Boston or Vermont City
5. Stay healthy and get stronger

"SwStudio" <shhhh_secrets@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:17f1a.69836$lj.3076913@read1.cgocable.net...
> Greetings, rec.runners! Please tell us about your training week and goals.
>
>
>
>
> cheers,
> --
> David (in Hamilton, ON) www.angelfire.com/nc/swstudio/2003.htm (my schedule)
> www.soundclick.com/allfalldown (my band's website)

SwStudio wrote:

> I have a bit of a nagging knee injury that I'm trying to get rid of. It's really affecting my
> chances of having a decent run at the ATB race; or a spring marathon for that matter. I always
> seem to get injured around this time of year if at all, for some reason :(

If you keep a log book and record how you feel along with miles, hard/easy etc. etc., you may find
there is a pattern of training that stands out. Look for insufficient rest cycles or trying to ramp
back too quickly from a rest cycle with speed or hills.

--
Caveat Lector "the further you go outside, the further you go inside" - B. McKibben Doug Freese
dfreese@hvc.rr.com

David, You might consider doing some water running in place of land running. I've heard many elite
triathletes and runners use it when injured (Kevin Sullivan used it years ago at the pool I worked
at - pre 1996). I've also used it and was surprised how well it transferred over when the injuries
were gone. I know Bennetto pool has running belts available so I assume other Hamilton pools may
have them as well and pool cost is affordable ($2-3 per session, although with the recent city
budget stuff that might not hold). Dan

"SwStudio" <shhhh_secrets@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Ivh1a.59243$L47.9709437@read2.cgocable.net...
> "SwStudio" <shhhh_secrets@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > Greetings, rec.runners! Please tell us about your training week and goals.
>
>
> My running for the past 2 weeks has been less than 20km per week, and so I haven't been bothering
> to post any of my own training, if anyone is wondering.
>
> I have a bit of a nagging knee injury that I'm trying to get rid of. It's really affecting my
> chances of having a decent run at the ATB race; or a spring marathon for that matter. I always
> seem to get injured around this time of year if at all, for some reason :(
>
>
> cheers,
> --
> David (in Hamilton, ON) www.angelfire.com/nc/swstudio/2003.htm (my schedule)
> www.soundclick.com/allfalldown (my band's website)

"Jonathan Sydenham" <sydenham@mail.dk> wrote in message
> You have my sympathy. I hope you recover in time to train for a spring marathon at least. Jonathan

Thanks! I was hoping to have built up a lot of mileage this winter, but it's not looking that way.
Oh well, at least I can run a little, which is better than nothing at all!

cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton, ON) www.angelfire.com/nc/swstudio/2003.htm (my schedule)
www.soundclick.com/allfalldown (my band's website)

In article <17f1a.69836$lj.3076913@read1.cgocable.net>, SwStudio <shhhh_secrets@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Greetings, rec.runners! Please tell us about your training week and goals.

Goal: Health, fun, rebuild base. Reality: Not so healthy or fun, base is, at best, holding even

Sun: 66 minutes (as planned) Mon: off, travel for work Tue: off, meeting kept me occupied until it
was too late to run. Wed: ca. 45 minutes total between a stationary bike that kept trying to pitch
me off over the handlebars and a treadmill that refused to believe me when I put in the pace and
slope (consistently and unpredictably slowing down and flattening out) Thu: Off Fri: Off, return
travel Sat: 35 minutes slightly up tempo. Turned out that the scratchiness I was having from Tuesday
onward was not just the dry air at elevation. Lungs trying to go substantially asthmatic on me.

ca. 140 minutes on the week, 180+ was the plan. Sinuses are not happy with me.

Arrgh!

--
Robert Grumbine http://www.radix.net/~bobg/ Science faqs and amateur activities notes and links.
Sagredo (Galileo Galilei) "You present these recondite matters with too much evidence and ease; this
great facility makes them less appreciated than they would be had they been presented in a more
abstruse manner." Two New Sciences

lustig <lustig@rocketmail.com> writes:
: Larry McMahan <mcmahan@spike.cup.hp.com> wrote in message
: news:<QGh2a.16$N92.13@news.cpqcorp.net>...

:> AHR MHR 152 169 long run 157 173 moderate 5 miler 161 173 harder 5 miler

: Your long run HR is rather close to your 5-miler HR. IMHO it should be at 65-70% of your HRmax;
: the general idea is supposed to be that you put money in the bank or recharge the batteries - you
: get the picture?

: The 5-milers can be 70-80%, one of them could contain faster bits, strides, or consist of, say, a
: 70% first half and a 85-90% second half.

Grustig lustig, (entschuldigung)

If I make the not too outlandish assumptions that my RHR=45 and my MHR=185, then 70% is 143 and 75%
is 150. My last long run was an AHR of 148. Yes, maybe that is a little fast for a long run, but I
really can't imagine going much slower than that.

For the 5 milers, 80% would be 157. My splits on that are 147, 158, and 164 for the easy one, and
152, 163, and 166 for the hard one. (2.5 km splits) I think those are pretty much in the ball park
and fit your 70% first half 85% second half suggestion.

BTW: On all the shorter runs (3 or 5 miles) I always try to sprint the last 400 m, pushing my HR as
high as possible. I can consistently hit 170 and have hit 175. Tha's just above 90%.

:> 160 168 10 K time trial

: Not necessarily a bad day, just a less than perfect week:-)

I didn't show the 10 k splits, but they went from 75% to about 87% on the 4 laps. I did the first
lap about 10 sec too fast, and didn't manage a negative time split overall. I think I was pushing a
little too hard to get a good time. :-)

: Anders

The main thing I see in your suggestion is to take the long run a bit slower. However, the things
that make me resist that area:
1. After the long run, I did not feel tired and I recovered fairly quickly.
2. No soreness, aches, or pains, and I felt ready to run the next day. That does not mean your
suggestion is bad. :-)

Larry

Lorne <lornesundby@removeshaw.ca> wrote:
> On 10 Feb 2003, Andrew T Hass <ahass@mspacman.gpcc.itd.umich.edu> wrote:

>> Tues- 10 total; 3X900-3X600-3X300m w/100m jog between repeats(short!), 400m jog between sets.
>> About 2:50 on 900s, 1:48 on 600s, and 48 on the 300s. And 7 @ 6:45 pace in AM too.
>>

> I don't often see repeats of this distance - 900/600/300 - usually in multiples of 400 - is this
> just for variety, to be different, 'cause it doesn't matter, something else?

> Curious...

> --
> Lorne Sundby

---Variety is the spice of life, right? Training improved you by stressing the body and then letting
it adapt to that stress. If you run nothing but 400s and 800s, what new stress is applied? Not only
is running odd distances once in awhile keep things more interesting, but it stressed the body in
new ways and hopefully leads to greater gains. Andy Hass

Lorne <lornesundby@removeshaw.ca> wrote:
> On 11 Feb 2003, Andrew T Hass <ahass@rygar.gpcc.itd.umich.edu> wrote:
>> ---Variety is the spice of life, right? Training improved you by stressing the body and then
>> letting it adapt to that stress. If you run nothing but 400s and 800s, what new stress is
>> applied? Not only is running odd distances once in awhile keep things more interesting, but it
>> stressed the body in new ways and hopefully leads to greater gains. Andy Hass

> Sounds great. I can see the variety in your speedwork over a period of weeks. Looks fun. (the
> volume would kill me, fortunately it's applicable at lower mileages...)

> --
> Lorne Sundby
---The volume is taking its tole a bit, it snuck up on me. That or I'm fighting off one of the colds
going around work. Either way this week is going to be very easy except for the weekend. Andy Hass

In article <b2ef96$1dl$1@news1.radix.net> bobg@radix.net (Robert Grumbine) writes:
>In article <b28etg$6p6$1@noao.edu>, Teresa Plymate <teresa@noao.edu> wrote:
>
>>Tues: First Speedwork. Ever. No Kidding. Ran 1.8 mi to the jr high track, then ran 4 x 220s (half
>>a lap). Then half a lap recovery jog, then 1.8 mi home. Results:
>
> Whee! Welcome to the track.

Thanks Robert!

> It is nice to know that the legs do have more speed than you thought. I'll add a few notions
> about track-type work for your consideration. 220s are typically for half mile, rather than mile.
> In preparing for the half, you'd be looking at 8-12 of the 220s at half mile pace with the 220
> jog recovery. For the mile, you typically wouldn't do 220s at mile pace (half mile pace as
> before), but if you did try mile pace, you'd take recovery time of less than the running time (no
> more than a 110 jog). In late season for half mile, you'd be hammering those 220s with equal
> _time_ recovery. Trust me, this is not fun. (Worked well for me, in that I dropped another 8
> seconds off my PR, but fun is not the word.)

Good info! I'm actually not training for short races at all, at least not yet. First off, I did just
want to see if the feet were okay with a little speedwork, or if they weren't up to it yet. They
seemed to have survived it okay. So tuesday I ran 2x220, 2x440, then 2x220 again. So far, the
shortest distance I'm racing is the 5k, so I know I really need to do the longer ones. But the 220's
gave me some confidence
w/o killing me right off. (And I got to blow by some women, younger than me by far, out walking
the track, hehe). And, a biggie I think, h the short ones seem to have already helped with my
running form at speed (since I'm concentrating very hard on these to run with correct form). My
fastest 220 this week was 6:13 pace and it was much less of an effort than just last week. But,
I really did feel winded in the 440s. I did manage to keep almost the same pace as in the 220s
for the 440s.

> Not that you should go out and start doing those sorts of practices immediately, especially not
> with injury concerns. Just some considerations for later workouts.
>
> I'm a big believer in easier workouts than the late season types. It permits me to prove to
> myself that I do indeed have the leg speed, while being easy enough that I can do all the
> repetitions in good form and control. Maybe next time out you can try 4x440 with a full lap jog
> recovery. Controlled fast pace, but not flat out.
>
>Robert Grumbine http://www.radix.net/~bobg/ Science faqs and amateur activities notes and links.

Yep, next week I'm going to try four of the 440s (chewing on fingernails). I guess a goal for me
is to get up to doing half-miles, then trying to bring the time down on them. It's too bad,
though, that there's not another track close by, this one isn't in the best shape which is a bit
annoying (like shallow holes in the curb lane, and rocks and trash on the track). Maybe sometime
when I have a chance I can drive out to the Jr College and try their clean and maintained
rubber-surfaced track....

THANKS!!

Teresa in AZ (it's raining! Finally some moisture!! Yahoo!!)

In article <b2gevv$num$1@noao.edu>, Teresa Plymate <teresa@noao.edu> wrote:
>In article <b2ef96$1dl$1@news1.radix.net> bobg@radix.net (Robert Grumbine) writes:
>>In article <b28etg$6p6$1@noao.edu>, Teresa Plymate <teresa@noao.edu> wrote:

[snip]

>Good info! I'm actually not training for short races at all, at least not yet. First off, I did
>just want to see if the feet were okay with a little speedwork, or if they weren't up to it yet.
>They seemed to have survived it okay. So tuesday I ran 2x220, 2x440, then 2x220 again. So far, the
>shortest distance I'm racing is the 5k, so I know I really need to do the longer ones. But the
>220's gave me some confidence
>w/o killing me right off. (And I got to blow by some women, younger than me by far, out walking
> the track, hehe). And, a biggie I think, h the short ones seem to have already helped with my
> running form at speed (since I'm concentrating very hard on these to run with correct form). My
> fastest 220 this week was 6:13 pace and it was much less of an effort than just last week. But,
> I really did feel winded in the 440s. I did manage to keep almost the same pace as in the 220s
> for the 440s.

Let's call it intro, brushup, or confidence track work. I do like
to do it more or less regularly, even if I'm really aiming at, say,
a 10 miler. As you found, it's good for your form. Don't worry about
the speed of those 440s, just practice holding good form throughout.

[snip]

>Yep, next week I'm going to try four of the 440s (chewing on fingernails).

Relax. Again, pace is not the point here. Hold good form and run a pleasantly hard 440. Find out
by observation what the pace is for a 'pleasantly hard' 440.

Fingers crossed, though, that you don't get so enamoured of the track work that you charge in
to injury.

>I guess a goal for me is to get up to doing half-miles, then trying to bring the time down on them.

Depends on your racing goals and paces. If you're looking at marathons, halves are not terribly
important. If you're thinking of 5k's, then they're pretty important, and to be done at 5k pace or
maybe a bit faster.

Either way, the occasional short stuff is a good idea to remind your legs (and you) that you can
indeed crank up the pace.

>It's too bad, though, that there's not another track close by, this one isn't in the best shape
>which is a bit annoying (like shallow holes in the curb lane, and rocks and trash on the track).
>Maybe sometime when I have a chance I can drive out to the Jr College and try their clean and
>maintained rubber-surfaced track....
>
>THANKS!!

Most welcome! Maybe we'll get you out there racing the half (mile, not marathon)!?

--
Robert Grumbine http://www.radix.net/~bobg/ Science faqs and amateur activities notes and links.
Sagredo (Galileo Galilei) "You present these recondite matters with too much evidence and ease; this
great facility makes them less appreciated than they would be had they been presented in a more
abstruse manner." Two New Sciences

lustig <lustig@rocketmail.com> writes:
: Larry McMahan <mcmahan@spike.cup.hp.com> wrote in message
: news:<a1x2a.61$9_2.31@news.cpqcorp.net>...

:> Grustig lustig, (entschuldigung)

: The name´s Swedish, not German:-)

Sorry. As you probably know, lustig is "funny". I was trying to maek a very bad pun.

:> If I make the not too outlandish assumptions that my RHR=45 and my MHR=185, then 70% is 143 and
:> 75% is 150. My last long run was an AHR of 148. Yes, maybe that is a little fast for a long run,
:> but I really can't imagine going much slower than that.

: There should IMHO be a clear difference, more than 15 beats in HRavg, between the intensity of the
: long run and the harder 5-miler (which shouldn´t be too much above 80%).

What do other say about this much difference? Yes? No?

:> For the 5 milers, 80% would be 157. My splits on that are 147, 158, and 164 for the easy one, and
:> 152, 163, and 166 for the hard one. (2.5 km splits) I think those are pretty much in the ball
:> park and fit your 70% first half 85% second half suggestion.

: If your pace on those runs is even, it puzzles me why the HR should increase that much (but as you
: must know, I really don´t have a clue about physiology...).

Actually negative splits with a full out sprint at the end:
2/03/03 HP Loop 37:23.2 7.90 07:36.9 157 173 split 11:59.1 2.50 07:42.8 147 152 split 11:57.7 2.50
07:41.9 158 161 split 11:46.4 2.50 07:34.6 164 165 split 01:40.0 0.40 06:42.2 170 173

However, at this pace, I would get at least a 5 beat rise per 2.5 km even without the
negative splits.

: BTW if you like to play with data, there is an interesting calculator which will give you a VDOT -
: don´t ask me what it
: is:-) - based on either a recent "race performance" or the HR during a training run of certain
: time and distance. You will then get more food for thought by entering the VDOT!

: http://www.math.fu-berlin.de/~cschultz/cgi-bin/daniels.cgi

Ach! Ich spreche nur ein bischen Deutsch! Ich muss meine frau fragen, diese seite zu ubersetzen
helfen! Sie is Deutscher. Ich nicht!

: Anders

Larry

In article <b2gk3u$8o3$2@news1.radix.net> bobg@radix.net (Robert Grumbine) writes:
>>>In article <b28etg$6p6$1@noao.edu>, Teresa Plymate <teresa@noao.edu> wrote:
>
> Let's call it intro, brushup, or confidence track work. I do like
> to do it more or less regularly, even if I'm really aiming at, say,
> a 10 miler. As you found, it's good for your form. Don't worry about
> the speed of those 440s, just practice holding good form throughout.

OK! I can do that...

>>Yep, next week I'm going to try four of the 440s (chewing on fingernails).
>
> Relax. Again, pace is not the point here. Hold good form and run a pleasantly hard 440. Find out
> by observation what the pace is for a 'pleasantly hard' 440.

Will aim for.

> Fingers crossed, though, that you don't get so enamoured of the track work that you charge in to
> injury.

I'm limiting myself to once per week on the track. I have lots of really nice trails for long runs
that beckon. And the fear of injury will (hopefully) keep the over-do enthusiasm in check.

>>I guess a goal for me is to get up to doing half-miles, then trying to bring the time down
>>on them.
>
> Depends on your racing goals and paces. If you're looking at marathons, halves are not terribly
> important. If you're thinking of 5k's, then they're pretty important, and to be done at 5k pace
> or maybe a bit faster.

The next several races are 5 and 10ks. We have a lot of those around here, but I've rarely seen
mention of shorter races.

> Either way, the occasional short stuff is a good idea to remind your legs (and you) that you can
> indeed crank up the pace.
>
> Most welcome! Maybe we'll get you out there racing the half (mile, not marathon)!?
>
>Robert Grumbine http://www.radix.net/~bobg/ Science faqs and amateur activities notes and links.

It's kind of fun to see that one can open up and go fast. And that it really won't kill you. I'll
try to remember that come the end of the next race!

Thanks very much for the info and help!

Teresa in AZ

Larry McMahan <mcmahan@spike.cup.hp.com> wrote:

>lustig <lustig@rocketmail.com> writes:
>: Larry McMahan <mcmahan@spike.cup.hp.com> wrote in message
>: news:<a1x2a.61$9_2.31@news.cpqcorp.net>...
>
>:> If I make the not too outlandish assumptions that my RHR=45 and my MHR=185, then 70% is 143 and
>:> 75% is 150. My last long run was an AHR of 148. Yes, maybe that is a little fast for a long run,
>:> but I really can't imagine going much slower than that.
>
>: There should IMHO be a clear difference, more than 15 beats in HRavg, between the intensity of
>: the long run and the harder 5-miler (which shouldn´t be too much above 80%).
>
>What do other say about this much difference? Yes? No?

My easy/recovery runs are at around 65%-70%. Long runs from 65-75% Light resistance/aerobic
capacity/whatever you want to call it, 85%-90%

I do practically no work in the 75-85% range except some "marathon pace practice" near the end of a
12 week schedule...

lustig@rocketmail.com (lustig) wrote:

>Tut gar nichts! Just deal with the numbers (and with the thoughts that may ensue):-)

Tut mir leid, you mean ;-) The numbers are yet again pointing to me as an underperformer at
marathons :-(

Distance 10000 21097 42195 Prediction 36:41 1:21:06 2:49:27 PBs 36:21 1:21:59 2:55:00

Got any calculators which show me getting it right? ;-))