I think the Galloway programs are very dependent on the leader of the
program that you're involved with. I was enrolled in a program in 2000 here
in SE VA--and was quite unhappy with the program I was involved with, and
made my complaints known to the Atlanta headquarters, and got my money back.
I found that the team leader was quite supportive to the 4 hour marathoners,
who were most of the group. I was a *second time marathoner* and a 5 hour
marathoner at that--and I and another woman who was slightly faster than me
got the short end of the stick and were left largely on our own on the
longer runs. Things improved slightly when a woman who had attended one of
Jeff Galloway's running camps out West came on to assist with the group--but
it still ended up that I was left in the dust on the 2 longer runs (16 and
18 miles) I finished before leaving the group. I did the last 10K of each
of those runs totally on my own.
There's a different team leader for the Galloway group in Virginia Beach
now, and hopefully there's more success with the program now. I think the
team leader when I was involved was asked to leave the program later that
fall. In any case, there is a different group leader down there now.
Folks who can start from nothing and successfully complete a marathon in 5
hours (and especially closer to 4 hours) or less I think are individuals who
are somewhat athletically and genetically gifted in the first place--they
are biomechanically efficient (generally *neutral* runners with only slight
pronation) and probably have a better than average VO2 Max and lactate
threshold. They also are more likely thinner rather than larger boned, or
even overweight. Even though I had done previous running and was coming to
the program with being able to run 60 minutes at a 10: 30 to 11:00 pace, the
weekly increase in mileage was too much for me and I didn't do the Richmond
Marathon that fall as I wanted to.
The *rest* of the population who fall outside the optimal parameters ( like
me) will have more problems with Galloway's or *any* marathon training
program that purports to advertise *completing a marathon* in 6 months or
so. Being less than efficient in form, body type or cardiovascular ability
serves to put undue stress on the body, eventually causing nagging
injuries--like what happened with me. I aborted the program in 2000, and
trained mostly on my own the next year, and completed the Chicago Marathon
in 2001 in 5:24:39. I went ahead and did that race even though I was unable
to complete the very long runs--I only did four 14 to 15 mile runs before
that race, in addition to the rest of my weekly running. I felt that I
was probably close to the best shape I could realistically hope to be in,
and that time and age were working against me (I'm in my late 40's). I also
made *second running career* PR's in 5K and 8K that year, and haven't come
close to those times since.
5:24:39 is my *marathon PR*--my 2 other completions (Boston in 1996 and NYC
in 2002) are even slower. Many of you would sneer at a 5:24 PR marathon
time, but most likely that will remain my PR. Since then I've had many
injuries and a weight gain--and I'm back to square one as far as my running
is concerned. My marathon days are probably over, and I'll be very happy to
work back to running my local 5K and 10K races, and doing the Rock n' Roll
1/2 Marathon in Virginia Beach every September. Being on my feet for over 5
hours for a marathon is too much wear and tear on my body!
If running and completing a marathon were so easy, everyone would be doing
it!
My two cents on this issue--
YMMV--
Jean in VA
"Tony" <qtrader2@(remove)hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:qG3Tc.1$ZY3.0@trndny08...
> I don't know the Galloway marathon method specifically, but I was
interested
> in Galloway because he experimented with different combinations of
frequency
> / duration / intensity in the past. I looked at "Galloway's Book on
> Running" 2nd ed., and I liked the philosophy and training programs in
there,
> though in that book he end a 1/2 marathon program. It's very similiar to
> how I usually break up my week, with cross training or rest on mon / wed /
> fri, and runs on tues / thurs / sat (long), with rest on sat.
>
> The other thing he talks alot about is walking breaks for long runs in
> particular, and for races as well. To me this makes a great deal of sense
> when you don't feel particularly strong or over difficult terrain when
> continuous running would make the overall effort level too high. Also, it
> would have a general interval effect, allowing the body some recovery and
> over time adaptation to being on the feet longer. For those interested in
> serious competition Galloway's ideas may or may not work. For me some of
> these ideas suit my training style and help my ability to complete long
runs
> under control. At the very least I think many recreational runners I see
> huffing and puffing around the lake here would be wise to do some walking
> breaks. For ultra distances walking breaks are a proven technique, if not
> for the recent speedy champions like Scott Jurek, for most others, and for
> past distance champions of the 6-day races.
>
> - Tony
>
> David Stracener wrote in message
> <120820042039493084%[email protected]>...
> >I ran the Marine Corps Marathon last year and was impressed with the
> >Galloway groups (even though in the early miles I thought they were a
> >menace). They were passing me easily in miles 20-23. I'm hoping to
> >run faster than 3:30 this year and am interested to hear your thoughts
> >on the Galloway method of pacing/finishing the marathon.
> >TIA
> >
> >--
>
>
