training schedule for jan marathon?



M

Marcus Holmes

Guest
Just finished my first marathon yesterday (MCM, 4:30 with some gastro problems and cramping towards
the end, but it was fun!) and would like to do the Disney marathon on jan 11.

How much time should I take off before running more than 3-4 miles again and what should my ramp up
look like? Start with long runs of about 15 and work my way up?

Thanks!

Marcus
 
Congrats on the M but you're making a Mistake. You got your first marathon under your belt @4:30 and
you want to do it again in 10 weeks? Why?...so you can run 4:45:00 or 5:00:00?

From one site, "Experience shows that marathoners actually benefit from taking one or two seasons
off from running marathons in order to concentrate on anaerobic threshold training and 10K racing to
improve their speed. There is a direct correlation between bringing down your 10K time and improving
your marathon time".
--
Forget about any Marathons. Focus/concentrate on 10Ks and some 1/2Ms and then maybe do it again
in 6 months.
 
[email protected] (Globaldisc) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...

> From one site, "Experience shows that marathoners actually benefit from taking one or two seasons
> off from running marathons in order to concentrate on anaerobic threshold training and 10K racing
> to improve their speed. There is a direct correlation between bringing down your 10K time and
> improving your marathon time".

What kind of marathoners do you think are being addressed here?

And why shouldn´t the original poster be able to equal or better his time in a second marathon
after 10 weeks?

I can understand your love of speedwork and shorter races, but there is no reason why a novice
marathoner wouldn´t improve their speed in the course of a marathon training program, or why running
two marathons within such a short time should be a bad idea.

(Not that I would´ve done it myself, but...)

BTW thanks for the pointer to: http://www.rrca.org/publicat/publicat.html

Anders
 
In article <[email protected]>, Anders Lustig wrote:
> [email protected] (Globaldisc) wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
>
>> From one site, "Experience shows that marathoners actually benefit from taking one or two seasons
>> off from running marathons in order to concentrate on anaerobic threshold training and 10K racing
>> to improve their speed. There is a direct correlation between bringing down your 10K time and
>> improving your marathon time".
>
> What kind of marathoners do you think are being addressed here?

Not very bright ones, apparently.

> And why shouldn´t the original poster be able to equal or better his time in a second marathon
> after 10 weeks?

Maybe he will, maybe he won't. But it's hardly a wise strategy. If he does get a faster time, it
will only be by a very slim margin.

IMO he'd be better off with shorter races if he wants to race as frequently as this.

> I can understand your love of speedwork and shorter races, but there is no reason why a novice
> marathoner wouldn´t improve their speed in the course of a marathon training program, or why
> running two marathons within such a short time should be a bad idea.

There is certainly a reason -- you don't have time to adequately prepare for the second marathon.

What the hell, maybe he should forget about adequate preparation and just run a marathon every day
(or every 10 weeks if you like) until he burns out.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
 
Donovan Rebbechi <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> > What kind of marathoners do you think are being addressed here?

> Not very bright ones, apparently.

That too, perhaps, but more importantly marathoners who are no longer novices and have higher goals
than having fun.

> > And why shouldn´t the original poster be able to equal or better his time in a second marathon
> > after 10 weeks?

> Maybe he will, maybe he won't. But it's hardly a wise strategy. If he does get a faster time, it
> will only be by a very slim margin.

That would appear to depend on how much the gastro problem hurt his time in the first marathon and
how well he can avoid a recurrence in the second one.

And even the very slim margin would more than meet his goals, which those who answer him should IMHO
accept as they are.

> IMO he'd be better off with shorter races if he wants to race as frequently as this.

Most runner would be better off with shorter races (and more) of them), but I couldn´t infer any
intention of making a habit of running a marathon every 10 weeks:)

> > I can understand your love of speedwork and shorter races, but there is no reason why a novice
> > marathoner wouldn´t improve their speed in the course of a marathon training program, or why
> > running two marathons within such a short time should be a bad idea.

> There is certainly a reason -- you don't have time to adequately prepare for the second marathon.

That is an answer to the second question, but not the answer, as what constitutes "adequate"
preparation for a subsequent marathon must depend on what the goals for it are.

The first question was left uncommented by Andrew as well:)

> What the hell, maybe he should forget about adequate preparation and just run a marathon every day
> (or every 10 weeks if you like) until he burns out.

You possess a truly strange combination of being able to discuss in a reasaonable manner
(which displays a wealth of reading on the subject) one minute and to sink into complete
silliness the next!

Anders
 
Donovan Rebbechi <[email protected]> wrote:

>> And why shouldn´t the original poster be able to equal or better his time in a second marathon
>> after 10 weeks?
>
>Maybe he will, maybe he won't. But it's hardly a wise strategy. If he does get a faster time, it
>will only be by a very slim margin.

Unless, as a "debutante" marathoner, he has now a wealth of personally acquired information about
pacing, refuelling, aiming too low so as not to explode or whatever, and will immediately knock 15
minutes off with no further training whatever.
 
In article <[email protected]>, Anders Lustig wrote:

>> Not very bright ones, apparently.
>
> That too, perhaps, but more importantly marathoners who are no longer novices and have higher
> goals than having fun.

I think that's a big part of it. Seriously, the guys who want to run a lot of marathons all the time
without doing serious training are for the most part a bunch of morons.

This should come as no surprise, because marathoning frequently on inadequate training is a recipe
for burnout and injury. Even elites can and do get burned out and injured from overracing.

>> There is certainly a reason -- you don't have time to adequately prepare for the second marathon.
>
> That is an answer to the second question, but not the answer, as what constitutes "adequate"
> preparation for a subsequent marathon must depend on what the goals for it are.

Well I suppose if your goal is to run a shitty time, burn out as quickly as possible and have a very
short running career, like most marathon tourists, then his approach certainly addresses the goal.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
 
In article <[email protected]>, steve common wrote:
> Donovan Rebbechi <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> And why shouldn´t the original poster be able to equal or better his time in a second marathon
>>> after 10 weeks?
>>
>>Maybe he will, maybe he won't. But it's hardly a wise strategy. If he does get a faster time, it
>>will only be by a very slim margin.
>
> Unless, as a "debutante" marathoner, he has now a wealth of personally acquired information about
> pacing, refuelling, aiming too low so as not to explode or whatever, and will immediately knock 15
> minutes off with no further training whatever.

Maybe, but I don't see what the hurry is. It seldom happens that the impactient novice marathoner
acquires a brief flash of wisdom that must be acted on before it expires. I don't think his newly
acquired wisdom has an expiration date (-; In other words, even the best case scenario has him
giving a decidedly mediocre performance compared to what he'd do if he waited.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/
 
Donovan Rebbechi <[email protected]> wrote:

>Maybe, but I don't see what the hurry is.

Having lived the same sensations, it's just rage and disappointment and "I want to do it right now I
know what it's like". Nothing rational whatever I would expect :)

>It seldom happens that the impactient novice marathoner acquires a brief flash of wisdom that must
>be acted on before it expires. I don't think his newly acquired wisdom has an expiration date (-;
>In other words, even the best case scenario has him giving a decidedly mediocre performance
>compared to what he'd do if he waited.

Given all the rest, I'm with you on this one.
 
Donovan Rebbechi <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> I think that's a big part of it. Seriously, the guys who want to run a lot of marathons all the
> time without doing serious training are for the most part a bunch of morons.

What they are and what you think of them is IMHO not relevant when we´re dealing with a guy who has
only expressed a wish to do a second marathon in 10 weeks (and when we´re tackling the question what
might not be a proper reply to such a guy).

> This should come as no surprise, because marathoning frequently on inadequate training is a recipe
> for burnout and injury. Even elites can and do get burned out and injured from overracing.

This is certainly so but so far there hasn´t been any reason to assume that his training before the
first marathon was or that his training before the second one cannot be but inadequate.

> > That is an answer to the second question, but not the answer, as what constitutes "adequate"
> > preparation for a subsequent marathon must depend on what the goals for it are.

> Well I suppose if your goal is to run a shitty time, burn out as quickly as possible and have a
> very short running career, like most marathon tourists, then his approach certainly addresses
> the goal.

His goals, if we accept his premises, could extend as far as having fun _and_ running a decent time.
I saw absolutely no reason to portray such a dismal future for him - at least not before he posts a
question about doing a third marathon in March:)

Anders
 
Globaldisc wrote:

> After the Marathon: Generally, it takes a minimum of two to three weeks for the body to recover
> from the strain of running 26 miles 385 yards. Return too quickly and you increase your risk of
> injury. Some experts suggest resting one day for every mile you run in the marathon, thus 26 days
> of no hard running or

Probably good advice for the beginner or those that do minimal training and therefor need the
longest recovery. For those that do them more often and know their recovery rate, it's not a
reliable guide.

> racing! Others suggest one day for every kilometer, thus 42 days rest. - A Marathon Training Site
>
> Anders....this runner's wisdom applies to runner's of all levels. This first time Marathoner doing
> it again 10 weeks is not allowing for their body to recover, regroup/strategize...and retrain for
> their next marathon. It's not wise to compress in 10 weeks what merits 20-24 weeks.

For the first time marathoners I agree, 10 weeks is too close in general and especially if you don't
know what went wrong with the first.

Andrew, anyone...You coming up to do the After the Leaves race this Sunday????

--
Doug Freese "Caveat Lector" [email protected]
 
I ran my first marathon in the middle of Jan last year in 4:35, took a week off, went back to
training, got in a half marathon in mid feb in under 2 hours, continued working, and in March ran my
second marathon in 3:58 ... so I don't think he's doing any harm by pressing on, especially from a
first to a second marathon .. just the confidence of knowing you can do it will generate a faster
pace ... the running season down south is short, cram in all you can comfortably do .. Play by the
rules that work for you, everyone is an experiment of one. Doesn't mean other people are wrong to
tell you to back off, because that's what works for them, but if you feel good, I see no reason to
artificially shut yourself down. Go for it.

This season I ran a 50-miler this month and have half marathons in Nov. and Dec., the Disney
marathon in Jan, another half in Feb and another 50-miler in April. And I expect my times to
continue improving, since my training runs are getting faster.

As for Disney .. I hope you're already signed up, registration closed last month, they're full. ...
But Florida does offer marathons in Jan/Feb in Tampa, Miami, Ocala and Clearwater.

run on!
 
[email protected] (Globaldisc) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...

> After the Marathon: Generally, it takes a minimum of two to three weeks for the body to recover
> from the strain of running 26 miles 385 yards. Return too quickly and you increase your risk of
> injury. Some experts suggest resting one day for every mile you run in the marathon, thus 26 days
> of no hard running or racing! Others suggest one day for every kilometer, thus 42 days rest. - A
> Marathon Training Site

This is all very nice, although too generalized and, at the extreme position, perhaps a bit
exaggerared - but at least it is a partial answer(1) to the poster´s questions.

(1) Unlike the soapbox speech (on an issue close to your heart, but fairly remote to his situation)
you gave him:)

But even with 26 days of recovery (and limited training) will leave him quite a bit of time to train
(and taper) for his marathon in 10 weeks.

There will also be plenty of time for him to notice whether he, his leg muscle tissue, his
neuromuscular, immune and other systems are not sufficiently recovered - and we don´t have to assume
that they won´t be.

> Anders....this runner's wisdom applies to runner's of all levels. This first time Marathoner doing
> it again 10 weeks is not allowing for their body to recover, regroup/strategize...and retrain for
> their next marathon. It's not wise to compress in 10 weeks what merits 20-24 weeks.

This is hugely individual also - maybe especially? - for the first time-marathoner, and it´s not as
if completing the marathon suddenly puts him in a position where, after a recovery period, he is
back in "Square One"; his desire is to ran a marathon in January because the first one "was fun"
and, presumably, he hopes to do without the gastro problems and the (possibly resulting) cramps.

It is as if he has the intention of doing the Niagara Falls in a barrel and we can and must strongly
advise against it instead of considering a relevant answer.

If and when he some day posts a question: "I am trying to improve my marathon PB, but for the past
two years I seem to have hit a plateau. What should I do?", you will have a pretty good answer ready
for him, though:)

Anders
 
[email protected] (Globaldisc) wrote:

>After the Marathon: Generally, it takes a minimum of two to three weeks for the body to recover
>from the strain of running 26 miles 385 yards.

In fact it takes more like 8 weeks. But if he trained correctly for the first marathon, the second
can be used as a "spring board" for another marathon at T+5 weeks as long as he only tries this
once per year.

My marathon training program is 12 weeks but can be shortened to 8 if the first 4 week strength
building cycle is left out. So 10 weeks is no big deal for a second marathon.

That said, it doesn't seem wise to try more than 3 *fully competitive* marathons per year, two being
a more reasonable option.
 
steve common wrote:

> [email protected] (Globaldisc) wrote:
>
>
>>After the Marathon: Generally, it takes a minimum of two to three weeks for the body to recover
>>from the strain of running 26 miles 385 yards.
>
>
> In fact it takes more like 8 weeks. But if he trained correctly for the first marathon, the second
> can be used as a "spring board" for another marathon at T+5 weeks as long as he only tries this
> once per year.

This is good conservative advice, Having said that, after some years at doing thons or longer, 8
weeks is a long time. Many on the ultra circuit do very well racing once a month. Look up the 'grand
slam' which is 4 100's in four consecutive months and many(16) did it this year. I won't point out
one female that did 20+ 100's(some very hard ones), and did well in each of them, in a single year.

I race a 50k and 50 mile in the spring which are two to three weeks apart and do just fine in both.
Soo, it's relative to your base and your individual recovery rate.

--
Doug Freese "Caveat Lector" [email protected]
 
Doug Freese <[email protected]> wrote:

>This is good conservative advice, Having said that, after some years at doing thons or longer, 8
>weeks is a long time.

In fact this was a figure taken from some research where the clever person tracked chemical evidence
of "damage repair systems" activity. It was really suggested that it was necessary to take that much
time off, rather that the muscle damage due to a marathon was only completely healed after 8 weeks.

>I won't point out one female that did 20+ 100's(some very hard ones), and did well in each of them,
>in a single year.

Good 'eavens! And I expect those 100's are milers not 100km's too. Wow.
 
steve common wrote:

> Doug Freese <[email protected]> wrote:
>

>
>>I won't point out one female that did 20+ 100's(some very hard ones), and did well in each of
>>them, in a single year.
>
>
> Good 'eavens! And I expect those 100's are milers not 100km's too. Wow.

http://www.ultramarathonworld.com/uw_archive/n11no01a.html

Note that the record of 20 that she broke had been set the previous year by a 60-yr old male, and
she *only* did 16 that year.

Dot

--
"Success is different things to different people" -Bernd Heinrich in Racing the Antelope
 
Dot wrote:

> steve common wrote:
>
>> Doug Freese <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>
>>
>>> I won't point out one female that did 20+ 100's(some very hard ones), and did well in each of
>>> them, in a single year.
>>
>>
>>
>> Good 'eavens! And I expect those 100's are milers not 100km's too. Wow.

Not only 100 miles but some run entirely in elevation from 9 to 14 thousand feet.
>
>
> http://www.ultramarathonworld.com/uw_archive/n11no01a.html
>
> Note that the record of 20 that she broke had been set the previous year by a 60-yr old male, and
> she *only* did 16 that year.

I would assume that's Hans-Dieher Weisshaar. I met and ran with Hans this year at Vermont and only
beat the 63 year old by 10 minutes. Let me note for those recommending lengthy recover times for
every one, that Hans not only did the infamous Western States 100 three weeks before but just to add
some spice, did Hardrock(100), one of the hardest ultras in 47:45(that's hours) the week before.
That old goat was gliding along with the ease and form(you can bet your ass that at this level bad
form would crush you) of a gazelle.

While I'm pointing to some exceptions with Monica and Hans there are dozens of others that run these
races well about one a month. If their recovery times weren't fast from training and or racing they
would be injured or dead. I will agree that the elites(top 10) do race less often and I'm sure
that's to allow some additional recovery.

--
Doug Freese "Caveat Lector" [email protected]
 
On 29 Oct 2003 14:03:33 GMT, [email protected] (Globaldisc) wrote:

>Andrew, anyone...You coming up to do the After the Leaves race this Sunday????
>____
>
>Found some nice pix of that race from a couple years ago...(any of you Doug) ?
>
>http://www.milanrunning.com/mrcindk6.htm
>

Those are some of the worse quality pics I've ever seen on the net. Are we supposed to be able to
make out faces? You can't even tell the men from the woman (although that's a rather common problem
amongst runners anyway.)
 
Globaldisc wrote:
> Andrew, anyone...You coming up to do the After the Leaves race this Sunday????
> ____
>
> Found some nice pix of that race from a couple years ago...(any of you Doug) ?

I always hide when I see a camera. The only shot that doesn't look like I'm one of a million others
is at: http://www.nhbungalow.com/images/b2b.jpg

I'm on the right. It's a few years old but I have not changed other than running slower.

> Sure, I'd like to be in that race....but it looks like I'd actually have to run on dirt....no? Not
> 100% sure I could cope and manage that...besides...I don't have any Timberland boots.

I thought animal life was the deterrent. I left the RD specific instructions to shoo away the
mountain lions, tigers and bears so the big city contingent would show for the race without packing
their hand guns. ;)

> I'll have to pass. Besides...this Sunday I'm registered to run in what has morphed into the "P
> Diddy Classic" here in New

:)

--
Doug Freese "Caveat Lector" [email protected]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom Back