10K PR: break-through or fluke?

Discussion in 'General Fitness' started by Eno, Mar 15, 2004.

  1. Eno

    Eno Guest

    Yesterday, after nearly 2 years of injury-fraught running, but culminating 4
    months of injury-free training (and a nice 1/2 marathon PR 2 months ago), I
    had a Yahoo experience. I ran the Torrance, CA Shamrock N' Roll 10K and came
    away with an out-of-my-mind PR. Somehow, I slashed more than 4 minutes of my
    best 10K and running at an average sub-nine pace, something I have never
    done even in training runs for that long a distance. Anyway, I'm scratching
    my head as to how I could have run so well yesterday, wondering whether I
    should push harder on my speed work-outs. Here's a typical week for me:

    Monday: Easy-to-tempo: 1 mile easy, plus 2.5 to 3 at tempo
    (~9:13 pace) Tuesday: Upper-body weights Wednesday: Odd
    weeks hill training; even weeks speed 800x6-8 @ 8:57 ~4.5
    miles Thursday: 2-3 miles easy plus 10-15 minutes of
    elliptical training Friday: Lower-body weights Saturday: 10
    mile slow run (10-11 min/mile). Sunday: Go to church +
    afternoon nap :)

    So... would you be surprised if I told you I ran the 1st 3
    miles of that 10K at in 26:18, the next 3 miles in 24:19
    (mile 5-6 in 7:43), managing to sprint the final .21 at 6:24
    pace? I was!!!

    Not wanting to re-injure myself, I have been very
    conservative in my training by establishing a solid base
    rather than piling up volume and intensity. Has it paid off
    this well? And should I now get a little more aggressive
    about developing speed?

    BTW, during the race, I missed mile markers 1 and 2, and I
    also didn't wear my heart rate monitor, like I usually do.
    When I got to mile 3 and noticed I had been averaging sub-9
    minute miles, I told myself I had gone out too fast and
    prepared myself for the bonk. Ironically, missing those
    first few mile markers probably made my race: I would have
    slowed myself down if I saw I ran the 1st mile in less than
    9 minutes (or if my HR went above 160, as it will do when I
    reach those "speeds").

    --
    ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º
    eNo
    "If you can't go fast, go long."
    ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º
     
    Tags:


  2. In article <[email protected]>, eNo wrote:
    > Yesterday, after nearly 2 years of injury-fraught running,
    > but culminating 4 months of injury-free training (and a
    > nice 1/2 marathon PR 2 months ago), I had a Yahoo
    > experience. I ran the Torrance, CA Shamrock N' Roll 10K
    > and came away with an out-of-my-mind PR. Somehow, I
    > slashed more than 4 minutes of my best 10K and running at
    > an average sub-nine pace, something I have never done even
    > in training runs for that long a distance.

    (-; that's a good sign -- your races are *supposed to be*
    much faster than training runs of a comparable distance. The
    only runs I do that are faster than half marathon pace are
    my tempos.

    4 months of consistent injury free training is bound to
    produce a big jump in performance over 2 months. The smart
    money is on continued improvement if you keep it up.

    > Anyway, I'm scratching my head as to how I could have run
    > so well yesterday,

    Disbelief -- it is a natural response to running a
    breakthrough. It will take a while to sink in, but let me
    congratulate you on a brilliant performance.

    > wondering whether I should push harder on my speed
    > work-outs.

    "Don't mess with success".

    I'd recommend seeing what you can squeeze out of your
    current training. You're already doing plenty of speed work,
    hardly any milage, and fairly infrequent training -- so if
    anything, you'd be better off doing easy runs after your
    weights sessions to increase milage.

    More further down:

    > Not wanting to re-injure myself, I have been very
    > conservative in my training by establishing a solid base
    > rather than piling up volume and intensity. Has it paid
    > off this well?

    <flashing neon sign> YES! </>

    This disbelief is the reaction everyone experiences after a
    breakthrough.

    > And should I now get a little more aggressive about
    > developing speed?

    No. You're already doing adequate speed work. You will
    almost certainly continue to make progress on your current
    training schedule. You don't train very frequently, so this
    is the main avenue for improving your training schedule.

    When you do push the speed work, you need to approach it
    judiciously. Serious, structured speed sessions (for
    example, 4x1200m at just under 5k pace) are very demanding
    physically and psychologically, and it's very exhausting to
    maintain them year round. So when you're ready to take it to
    the next level, it helps to periodise. For example, the
    Daniels program has 4 phases (and other coaches who suggest
    periodisation use similar buildups)

    base building: easy miles, some strides. Some authors
    suggest tempo runs here. early quality: mostly short
    anaerobic intervals and tempos, quality: long intervals of
    about 4min duration, tempos. This phase is the hardest.
    final quality: short anaerobic intervals, races, less
    milage. The workouts in this phase should be easier than
    the races.

    There are variations on this theme, but the "conventional
    wisdom" is that periodisation involes a gradual escalation
    of intensity after base building, which may be followed by
    backing off the training load for important races.

    > BTW, during the race, I missed mile markers 1 and 2, and I
    > also didn't wear my heart rate monitor, like I usually do.

    If your goal is to run slowly, wear a heart rate monitor. I
    don't recommend it for races (-;

    > When I got to mile 3 and noticed I had been averaging sub-
    > 9 minute miles, I told myself I had gone out too fast and
    > prepared myself for the bonk.

    Trust your instincts. By the half way mark, your body will
    tell you if you're tired. If your body doesn't tell you that
    you're tired, then you probably aren't.

    Cheers,
    --
    Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
     
  3. Eno

    Eno Guest

    Donovan Rebbechi <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > Trust your instincts. By the half way mark, your body will
    > tell you if you're tired. If your body doesn't tell you
    > that you're tired, then you probably aren't.

    I was feeling pretty good at that point, but I knew miles
    4-6 had a couple of rolling hills in them, so I was bracing
    for them. I felt pretty stressed at mile 5 to the end, but
    as you can see from my splits, I managed to keep up and even
    increase the pace.

    Thanks for all the advice, Donovan. I'll keep at what I'm
    doing with a gradual build up. After the Sunday race and an
    easy run on Monday, I was actually feeling a bit thrashed
    last night, so today (Tuesday) I took a day off. I do have a
    1/2 marathon coming up at the end of April, so I'll put in
    one or two LSDs above 10 miles, but no more.
     
Loading...
Loading...