The Running Thread Vol 2

[ewenm]

Obviously in your mileage for the week it's still 12k regardless of whether you do it as 1x12 or 2x6 but the overall fatigue should be lower on 2x6 for a given pace. The rule of thumb for fast vs slow is that no more than 25% of your weekly mileage should be fast. This is harder to stick to the fewer runs you do a week as with the extra recovery you feel good so are tempted to go faster.

[cwis]

ewenm said:

Obviously in your mileage for the week it's still 12k regardless of whether you do it as 1x12 or 2x6 but the overall fatigue should be lower on 2x6 for a given pace. The rule of thumb for fast vs slow is that no more than 25% of your weekly mileage should be fast. This is harder to stick to the fewer runs you do a week as with the extra recovery you feel good so are tempted to go faster.

Obviously! But hopefully my form would be better on the second 6K (as you say fatigue will be lower) so less likely to be overusing secondary muscles so less likely to break myself.

The issue I have currently is I can run hard 3 times a week and I'm pretty much OK. But when I tried to increase my volume by running more frequently I broke myself.

But if I want to get better at running I need to increase my volume... Ideally I'd run around 5 times a week which means running on consecutive days, so I really do need to put a cap on the speed.

Frankly I was amazed by the gains I seem to have made in December in hill climbing ability (I've still not tried to go fast) whilst not doing any fast running at all - it's shown me my all out approach whilst on a run is counterproductive.

So I'm going to try going more often, going slow, and going longer on my long run. I'll push a bit going up hills but keep the cadence high and back off at the top and recover.

[Rich_W]

Changing thread slightly

Friend of mine got through the regular Ballot for VLM for 2016. She's not able to train for it (Unrelated operation) And she doesn't seem keen deferring it. Think she got caught up a bit in the excitement of the ballot. She's not historically a runner or even massively sporty person.

So she asked if she could get the place transferred to me.

VLMs site says "No" But I suspect that might be without their authority. She wondered how they would know I wasn't her! Obviously I've been asked for Proof of ID at other events I've done.

Can it be transferred by them. Or do they now insist you either defer it or give it up? Anyone transferred their place in the past? Think it would help if we mentioned that we were going to do fundraising for a charity dear to her and her families heart?

[Cybertronian]

Rich_W said:

Changing thread slightly

Friend of mine got through the regular Ballot for VLM for 2016. She's not able to train for it (Unrelated operation) And she doesn't seem keen deferring it. Think she got caught up a bit in the excitement of the ballot. She's not historically a runner or even massively sporty person.

So she asked if she could get the place transferred to me.

VLMs site says "No" But I suspect that might be without their authority. She wondered how they would know I wasn't her! Obviously I've been asked for Proof of ID at other events I've done.

Can it be transferred by them. Or do they now insist you either defer it or give it up? Anyone transferred their place in the past? Think it would help if we mentioned that we were going to do fundraising for a charity dear to her and her families heart?

Just a suggestion - I don't approve of such behaviour I hasten to add!

You can get around the ID problem by getting your friend to write you a letter, detailing that you're her nominee that will be picking the number up for her. If you take the letter to the expo, and she gives you a copy of her ID, there shouldn't be any questions asked.

Obviously, you would appear as your friend in the results. As long as you're not super fast and likely to win/break any age category records, you'll slip through the system undetected.

[fiatpower]

My current GPS running watch (Garmin Forerunner 10) is dying a death which means I tend to lose the data of my longer runs (ie. over 12km) which isn't great for the half marathons and marathon I have coming up. I'm also starting to look into taking part in a few triathlons so I would like the new one to be multisport. Finally it would also be nice if the new watch has a HRM built in. My budget is around £150-£200, any suggestions?

[Rich_W]

Cybertronian said:

Obviously, you would appear as your friend in the results. As long as you're not super fast and likely to win/break any age category records, you'll slip through the system undetected.

I figured there'd be a "work around"

But 1 of my "life goals" is to complete all 6 Marathon Majors. So need to do it under my own name so I get the certificate.

[Cybertronian]

fiatpower said:

My current GPS running watch (Garmin Forerunner 10) is dying a death which means I tend to lose the data of my longer runs (ie. over 12km) which isn't great for the half marathons and marathon I have coming up. I'm also starting to look into taking part in a few triathlons so I would like the new one to be multisport. Finally it would also be nice if the new watch has a HRM built in. My budget is around £150-£200, any suggestions?

Garmin 910XT is a couple of years old now, but still a damn good watch. Doesn't have some of the fancier bells and whistles of the newer Garmins, but has plenty of stats and I'm satisfied by what I get from mine as a proper data nerd. Price seems to fluctuate quite dramatically, where before Christmas, I saw it for as little as £160 on Amazon but now comes in over £220!

One of the TomTom multisport watches has built in HRM, but not familiar with their ecosystem versus Garmin Connect, though guess you could always export the data to Strava if it's not much cop. Comes within budget at around £150, too.

[Smitters]

cwis said:

ewenm said:

Obviously in your mileage for the week it's still 12k regardless of whether you do it as 1x12 or 2x6 but the overall fatigue should be lower on 2x6 for a given pace. The rule of thumb for fast vs slow is that no more than 25% of your weekly mileage should be fast. This is harder to stick to the fewer runs you do a week as with the extra recovery you feel good so are tempted to go faster.

Obviously! But hopefully my form would be better on the second 6K (as you say fatigue will be lower) so less likely to be overusing secondary muscles so less likely to break myself.

The issue I have currently is I can run hard 3 times a week and I'm pretty much OK. But when I tried to increase my volume by running more frequently I broke myself.

But if I want to get better at running I need to increase my volume... Ideally I'd run around 5 times a week which means running on consecutive days, so I really do need to put a cap on the speed.

Frankly I was amazed by the gains I seem to have made in December in hill climbing ability (I've still not tried to go fast) whilst not doing any fast running at all - it's shown me my all out approach whilst on a run is counterproductive.

So I'm going to try going more often, going slow, and going longer on my long run. I'll push a bit going up hills but keep the cadence high and back off at the top and recover.

As another perpetually injured runner, I second ewenm's 25% rule. The only way I've managed to minimise injury in 2015 is to stash my ego and stick to what at times feels like a really conservative plan. I only get three runs a week max, so I found that inserting the quick bit into the middle of a six or eight miler that has an easy start and easy finish was the way forward.

It really has taken years of repetitive stupidity for me to get to this stage. Every year I set out with good intentions, get fitter, a bit quicker, get giddy and go out for a fast run without recovering from the last run, get a niggle, then spend weeks managing it. I also found that setting actual training data against the training plan showed me really easily where I'd overdone it. In hindsight, of course! I used to colour a run green if I'd stuck to plan and red if not. That told a story sometimes! The real trick is to learn from it I think. Good luck.

ETA - also, I'm going full Walt tomorrow and finally running that famous route over Pen-Y-Fan with a mate. First weekend of January for bonus hardness. Blow it all if I don't find there's a race on the same route on the same day! We'll see how we get on. We're going against the flow of traffic of the race which is good news, but it won't be as peaceful as I'd hoped. 26km and 1000m of climbing should be fun!

Edited by Smitters on Friday 8th January 08:52

[ewenm]

Yep the Fan Dance race is on tomorrow. Got a few mates doing it and I should be in the area but probably not until after the race finishes. Good luck! Walk the steep climbs, run the flats, tumble the descents

[Smitters]

ewenm said:

Yep the Fan Dance race is on tomorrow. Got a few mates doing it and I should be in the area but probably not until after the race finishes. Good luck! Walk the steep climbs, run the flats, tumble the descents

Between my lack of climbing legs and his lack of descending experience, the only bit we'll be running is the top of PYF! Hoping for sub three, but we'll see how the weather treats us. Looking forward to plummeting off to Storey Arms while the folk lugging heavy bags are puffing up though.

[onedsla]

fiatpower said:

My current GPS running watch (Garmin Forerunner 10) is dying a death which means I tend to lose the data of my longer runs (ie. over 12km) which isn't great for the half marathons and marathon I have coming up. I'm also starting to look into taking part in a few triathlons so I would like the new one to be multisport. Finally it would also be nice if the new watch has a HRM built in. My budget is around £150-£200, any suggestions?

Assuming you're transferring data over to Connect / Strava / similar, have you tried deleting your history? I've never had a FR 10, but various models I've had start running poorly once memory fills up as they have to delete old data as it's storing new.

I'm looking at the FR225 (with built in wrist HRM) instead of replacing the HRM strap battery for my old watch (I was in no hurry as it was upsetting me with such a high HR / slow pace after resuming running following broken foot!), but not sure it's any good for multisport.

[onedsla]

cwis said:

Obviously! But hopefully my form would be better on the second 6K (as you say fatigue will be lower) so less likely to be overusing secondary muscles so less likely to break myself.

The issue I have currently is I can run hard 3 times a week and I'm pretty much OK. But when I tried to increase my volume by running more frequently I broke myself.

But if I want to get better at running I need to increase my volume... Ideally I'd run around 5 times a week which means running on consecutive days, so I really do need to put a cap on the speed.

Frankly I was amazed by the gains I seem to have made in December in hill climbing ability (I've still not tried to go fast) whilst not doing any fast running at all - it's shown me my all out approach whilst on a run is counterproductive.

So I'm going to try going more often, going slow, and going longer on my long run. I'll push a bit going up hills but keep the cadence high and back off at the top and recover.

I increased volume to take two hours off my very first (4:28) marathon. In my view, the trick is to do it as an easy enough pace that you actively recover (which I think in most circumstances is better for recover than complete rest). The way I did it was to use a HRM, and stuck to around 70% of what I know to be my max. It's not easy at first, and can feel uncomfortably slow (perhaps not even running, especially up hills), but that way you know it's not hard on your body. Danger is that your technique may get sloppy, as running faster would generally force a more efficient stride. Hence needs some concentration to keep form.

70% max HR is probably a similar intensity to an unfit person taking a brisk walk (surely a good thing to do regularly?).

I've known many runners over the years, including many injured runners. In my experience it's those who undertake a high proportion of intense training who seem to suffer the most with injury. Pre marriage & kids I'd often train around 100 miles per week. On 15-20 would be 'fast', and <5 of those would be faster than half marathon pace.

[Foliage]

northandy said:

Foliage said:

I do 20km a week got my trainers in july is it time for new ones? had a break over Christmas and come back to running and am getting knee pain. I thought they would last longer than this...

I'd say so, I started getting ankle pain before Xmas and had done 800km on one pair of Asics, when I looked the cushioning was collapsing, new pair (exact same type) for Xmas and I can feel the difference straight away.

Got a new pair of trainers, knee pain is subsiding but the pair I bought in july have probably only done 400-450km (which tbh is more than I thought), so I really cant see how they have failed. These are asic gt-1000. Ive replaced them with a new pair of the same but the new ones are half a size smaller. My previous trainers I had 2 pairs and they lasted a good 18+ months of the same battering and where the cheapest asics you could buy (£35) Hmm thinking about it I was just starting then so I cant imagine c25k fully stressing them over that time. I really don't want to have to buy new trainers every 4 months.

I think I need to see a doctor about my knee but last time I went about an injury I was fobbed off with a nurse and basically just told stuff I already knew (don't run, but don't rest, ice and pain killers for the pain)...

As for my running after having a month off My first run was 29mins for 5km then I couldn't complete a 10km had to stop at 7km, now i'm doing consistent 31min for 5km, my lunges just cant keep up with my legs. I can run a lot faster but just get out of breath.

Edited by Foliage on Friday 8th January 11:54

[RizzoTheRat]

Missed if you've already said this, but where in the knee is it hurting? If it's the outside then it could well be an ITB problem, look up online stretches for the ITB and maybe invest in a foam roller. I used to get a lot of knee trouble but rarely have an issue now I know what's causing it and make sure I give my ITB a good stretch before I run.

[Foliage]

I will look into itb. I should foam roll but it hurt a lot the first time I did it.

ETA - I don't think its ITBS but that's something I will be aware of, I think its runners knee as the pain/itchiness is under and around my knee cap when im not running and it goes away when I run, and is reduced by doing squats.

Edited by Foliage on Friday 8th January 13:28

[cwis]

onedsla said:

I increased volume to take two hours off my very first (4:28) marathon. In my view, the trick is to do it as an easy enough pace that you actively recover (which I think in most circumstances is better for recover than complete rest). The way I did it was to use a HRM, and stuck to around 70% of what I know to be my max. It's not easy at first, and can feel uncomfortably slow (perhaps not even running, especially up hills), but that way you know it's not hard on your body. Danger is that your technique may get sloppy, as running faster would generally force a more efficient stride. Hence needs some concentration to keep form.

70% max HR is probably a similar intensity to an unfit person taking a brisk walk (surely a good thing to do regularly?).

I've known many runners over the years, including many injured runners. In my experience it's those who undertake a high proportion of intense training who seem to suffer the most with injury. Pre marriage & kids I'd often train around 100 miles per week. On 15-20 would be 'fast', and <5 of those would be faster than half marathon pace.

My heart rate target is 70% of heart rate range as described here:

http://runnersconnect.net/running-training-article...

The formula is max HR (I used 200) minus resting HR (54 for me) to get heart rate range - 146.

70% of this added to your resting heart rate is the rate for the long run. so for me it's 54+102 = 156.

Which is all fine and dandy but then I go and do this on the way in to work...



I'm going to set heart rate alarms on my watch I think. I actually felt OK and I didn't feel like I was breathing particularly hard - perhaps it was the cold morning or something.

[Smitters]

Just to add - for those lacking an HR monitor, I've always found that breathing acts as a useful measure. Four footfalls on the in-breath and four footfalls on the out-breath is easy running. Three and three moderate, e.g. HM pace, two and two pushing on, e.g. intervals, decent uphill tackled at pace. In company, the old adage of "conversational pace", able to hold a decent chat holds up well for forcing an easy pace.

[RizzoTheRat]

Foliage said:

I will look into itb. I should foam roll but it hurt a lot the first time I did it.

Same here

I got one of these which I use a lot more than my basic foam roller on the grounds that it's easier and less painful http://www.helisports.nl/products/427024/Trigger-P...

According my Osteopath/Sports-Therapist/Motorcycle-Mechanic it should work as well as normal roller.

[The jiffle king]

Just a note on how I found myself getting faster. I used to do a fair amount of training with a club and we did some great speed sessions which really did help. I then moved abroad and found myself running on my own, so slowly upped the mileage and ran without a watch. 6 months later I was doing 40 miles every week and sometimes more and felt very strong on it. I then started a training plan (P&D) and built to 70 miles a week, but could not do all of the speedwork as it was too strenuous for me.

All of the above means that I agree that less than 25% of your running should be fast.

Now for the counter argument. My wife ran marathons on 3 day a week training plans and did 1 speed, 1 tempo and 1 long run and managed a 3:42 marathon and many under 4 hours... the rule I think is to listen to your body

[MC Bodge]

I'm currently 3 weeks through a self-imposed 4 week ban from running. Anything above a brisk walk is a no-no.

multiple sets of 20 weighted (now up to 30Kg in a rucksack) slow calf raise/lowers with both bent and straight knee and bouncing and skipping are hopefully conditioning my lower legs in a beneficial way.

I'm really hoping that my left soleus will be strong and resilient when I (gently) resume my running regime.