You must be swift as the coursing river (as long as it's the Lazy River) - comments welcome

[flav]

Congratulations

 

[The Expert]

I said to myself, "Let's f---ing go."

And by "said to myself" I really mean "screamed as loud as possible, for motivation." I was kind of thinking this might also motivate the people around me, but I'm pretty sure they actually just thought I was crazy. Oh well. I felt motivated.

In that moment, "Go the Distance" came up on my playlist and I almost cried. I'm pretty sure I'm now 3/3 on hearing this song at this point in the marathon, and really, what more could you ask for?

I LOVE THIS! Amazing race report and congratulations.

 

[nancipants]

See, if you yelled that during a Disney race, there's a non-zero chance you might have some Deadpools or Wolverines around you to join in.

 

[superchime]

Way to go!!

 

[avondale]

What an amazing race! Congratulations! That was a huge negative split. I'm so glad that all your hard training paid off so well.

@nancipants might think you look like you're dying in the photo before the finish, but I think you look remarkably cheerful!

 

[Mr_Incr3dible]

Here is your Osprey photo, second pass when they had the rotors down for speed (picture from last year).



Other comments:

• Kudos! And great race report
• I was pleasantly surprised at the open "corals" and how most people were honest in where they placed themselves, at least further back in the Team Slow(er) corals....
• Yeah, those rolling hills, especially in the first half of the race. Would be interesting to see your time on a flat course, all else being equal.
• The Blue Mile was/is sobering
• I loved the Mall part of the course
• By mile 17 last year I was really questioning being there and other life decisions...
• Storming the hill to the Iwo Jima memorial is so symbolic, but yes a total PITA at the finish.

 

[WillRunForPizza]

Marine Corps Marathon: Post-race reflections
In which I somehow still have more to say

Ha, you thought I was done. I was not. The recap was just really long already, and "next time, BQ" seemed like a good place to end it. But wait, there's more! In no particular order, some post-race thoughts:

I was so, so sore the rest of Sunday and most of Monday. My dad texted me on Monday to ask how I was feeling, and I just responded with that Nike commercial from after Chicago because it was a 100% accurate representation.

My neck was also sore from trying to keep my head from falling off in the last few miles, and I really did have a bruise on my waist from my water bottle. (I may need to look into other hydration options for my next marathon.) However, while I can't say for sure that I'll keep all my toenails, surprisingly I don't think any of them are in danger of falling off currently.

Three days later, I feel mostly recovered (at least in terms of soreness). My calves are still a bit sore (thanks, hills) and so is my neck. I ended up doing quite a lot of walking Monday and Tuesday, which probably helped (though the three hours of standing Tuesday evening probably didn't). I'm already kind of looking forward to running again - but don't worry, I'll wait until at least next week.


Dog transition! Someone was hovering while I was stretching, so I got this great photo of his chin wrinkles

It's funny how different marathons can feel. Last time, I attributed most of the differences to not having actually raced the first one. I figured it just seemed harder because I was working a lot harder, even relatively speaking. But now that I have raced two marathons (and run a third), I can say that different marathons are actually really different experiences.

For example, after Space Coast, I had a huge headache and felt terrible. The headache made me nauseous, and then I couldn't eat, which probably made the headache worse, and it was a whole cycle of crap. I spent most of the two days after the race asleep or at least laying down.

This time I didn't have a headache, which was a relief. (I'm guessing the headache came from insufficient salt intake, which wasn't as much of a problem at MCM because it was a lot cooler and less humid.) However, my legs felt way more sore.

For some reason I've also been sleeping kind of terribly. Especially on Sunday night - I expected to sleep like the dead, but I couldn't fall asleep for the longest time, and then I kept waking up in the middle of the night. I think I've gotten about six hours of sleep for the last three nights, which is unusual even when I haven't just run a marathon. On the other hand, I slept a ton after Space Coast. It's weird.

The race itself felt different too. I don't remember my legs hurting that much during Space Coast, but at MCM it started less than 10 miles in. Granted, I managed to run the rest of the marathon like that, but it was unexpected after my last experience. (I wonder if I should try a more aggressive taper - I barely ran at all in the two weeks leading up to Space Coast because of my Achilles, but I did a normal taper for MCM )


The MCM medal opens up: On the left it says, "Molly Marine serves as a symbol of pride for the women, past and present, who have earned the Eagle, Globe, & Anchor" and on the right it has a picture of a woman in a Marine dress uniform and "Celebrating Women in Service | Run with Purpose, Finish with Pride" around the outside.

I'll probably do another MCM - maybe even next year - and there are a few things I would do a little differently next time. First, I would try to arrive maybe 15-20 minutes earlier. I didn't quite have enough time before the race this year. I would also wait to use the port-a-potties until after security, like I said in the recap. And I wouldn't worry much about getting to the starting line more than a few minutes before the race, because it turns out you can just sneak in where you're supposed to be.

As far as the actual race goes, I don't know that there was too much I would change. Not having to pee would be ideal, of course, but I only have so much control over that. I would keep my gloves if it's cool, because I definitely wanted them again. I would also not wait so long to switch to music if I feel like crap - it made a huge difference.


My dog waiting impatiently for his banana. You can see the drool streaming from his jowls

I don't understand how this works at all, but my body is actually quite good at pacing races. This skill does not extend to workouts - running like 6:20 pace for a minute is extremely hit or miss (mostly miss). But for running X distance as fast as possible, I can just let my body do its thing and not think about it too much. (Thinking about it too much is actually where I mess things up, as in my last 5K.) It is pretty cool. If you normally race while staring at your watch and adjusting based on what it tells you, maybe let your instincts give it a try sometime.

To be clear, I do absolutely look at my watch during a race. It's a good check to make sure I'm not doing something totally crazy. But as long as what my watch tells me is within a pretty wide range of reasonableness, I just let my body do what it wants. And somehow that works.


My friend caught a picture of me mid-chew as I was refueling after picking up my gear bag

According to the official race time, I ran 26.2 miles in 3:32:25, or 8:07 pace on average. According to Strava, I ran 26.64 miles in 3:32:30, or an average 7:59 per mile. So if I'm trying to run a marathon in less than 3:30, that's technically 8:00 pace, but I guess I actually want to be able to run like 7:52 pace. Of course, if I'm running by feel, that's less of a factor in the race itself, but it's relevant for training purposes.

It's too bad you can't count unofficial times, though. Because of the extra running, Strava has my marathon (26.2) PR at 3:28:47. Apple somehow came up with 3:23:31, and I have no idea how it got there . But that would almost definitely get me into Boston!

 

[avondale]

For some reason I've also been sleeping kind of terribly. Especially on Sunday night - I expected to sleep like the dead, but I couldn't fall asleep for the longest time, and then I kept waking up in the middle of the night.

I this problem, too, sometimes even after long training runs. No idea why, but it's frustrating. Sometimes my legs are twitchy, and then calf sleeves help, but that's not always it.

 

[Herding_Cats]

Marine Corps Marathon: Post-race reflections
In which I somehow still have more to say

Ha, you thought I was done. I was not. The recap was just really long already, and "next time, BQ" seemed like a good place to end it. But wait, there's more! In no particular order, some post-race thoughts:

I was so, so sore the rest of Sunday and most of Monday. My dad texted me on Monday to ask how I was feeling, and I just responded with that Nike commercial from after Chicago because it was a 100% accurate representation.

See. What those people don't know in the video, is that the trick is to walk down the stairs backwards.

 

[WillRunForPizza]

See. What those people don't know in the video, is that the trick is to walk down the stairs backwards.

I feel like this would just add a broken neck to my list of maladies, though...

 

[Herding_Cats]

I feel like this would just add a broken neck to my list of maladies, though...

Yes. It feels extremely uncoordinated, but was sooo much kinder to my legs when I tried it.

 

[DopeyBadger]

Incredible! You continue to make tremendous progress and I'm so happy to see all the hard work of this training cycle paid off. To twice have what would have been 5k PRs occur in the later stages of the marathon is nothing short of remarkable. Way to go!

 

[kps7795]

What a great race report and an incredible accomplishment. Congratulations on the HUGE PB! I am confident that you're going to get a BQ in your next attempt.

 

[WillRunForPizza]

October 28 - November 10, 2024
In which I feel surprisingly normal. Physically.

• M-W: nothing!
• T/F: yoga
• S: lower body strength
• S: off
• M: 2 miles + PT
• T: upper body strength
• W: 3 miles
• T: off
• F: 4 miles
• S: travel
• S: 6 miles

Week 1: 1h 21m, 0 miles
Week 2: 3h, 15.8 miles

Following the marathon I took a full week off. Since I was feeling pretty good at that point, I did a short run, which went surprisingly well. I still wanted to play it safe, so I did a mile more on the next two and no back to backs this first week, and then an hour today.

The hour today was a little tougher because we traveled down to Orlando yesterday, and it's a lot hotter here . Otherwise, all felt pretty good considering. My legs definitely had some lingering fatigue, and my HR was a bit higher than normal. But my pace was close to my pre-marathon easy runs, and I didn't feel like I had never run before, which is how post-marathon running felt previously. Maybe my aerobic base is now good enough to race a marathon and get back to running without it being terrible! That would be exciting.

I'll probably stick with four days of running next week, plus some more strength training. Later in the week I might throw in a few strides for the neuromuscular stimulus, but I don't think I'll do more than 8 miles or so for my longest run. It's tempting to do more since I feel reasonably good, but I'm pretty sure I still need to recover

In the meantime, I want to do a marathon training review, and then I need to start thinking about my Princess plan! Not that I'll start really training for at least a few more weeks, but I have to, you know, write the plan first.

 

[WillRunForPizza]

Marathon training in review
In which I have some questions about emoji availability

Well, it has been two and a half weeks since I ran a marathon, which means it's time to take a look back at how my training went before I forget all of it. (Okay, I already forgot most of it, but good news, I wrote it down.)

First, though: some fun and exciting numbers and such!

During my 16-week plan, I ran 801 miles (not including the marathon). I ran all of the times I was supposed to, though not necessarily exactly the run I was supposed to do.

I also did most of the strength training I was supposed to, although I missed a couple of planned sessions. Maybe next time I'll track this in a way that gives me a number at the end for that too.

I ran 1 race during training, though I didn't actually race it. However, I was very happy with how my M-pace HM went.

Summer training was all kinds of fun I think the T+D for my hottest runs was around 160, which is especially great for your workouts/long runs. It was much nicer towards the end when the temperatures started to drop!


A few weeks ago I was making Oreo cheesecake, and the dog REALLY wanted some Oreos. (In fairness they do smell delicious.)

What I learned:

Marathon training is exhausting. Looking back at my training, every couple of weeks I went, "Ahhh I'm so tired." Fortunately my schedule is flexible enough to allow for naps most of the time, but it's still a lot. I'm sticking with my commitment to about one marathon a year max. I was happy that I could more or less handle the volume, though.

For the most part I felt like the balance of easy and hard was good. I managed not to destroy myself in any of my workouts, though I did feel like I was going to die during one or two of the summer speed sessions.

I did plenty of hill sprints, but in retrospect I think it would have been good to include a few more hill-focused workouts like this one:

Is it kind of boring to run up and down the same half mile of hill over and over? Yes. Did it make me moderately less bad at running uphill? Also yes. And since I am quite bad at running uphill, I need all the help I can get.

A couple of the podcasts I listen to recently talked about the difference between hill sprints/hill strides and longer-duration hill work. In essence, they all said that hill strides (meaning 20-30 seconds generally) are good for power but don't necessarily help you run hills better. If you want to get better at running hills at race effort, you have to run some hills at or around race effort.

This is a very helpful takeaway now that I am back to running where it is almost entirely flat.

Overall I think I did okay with progressing workouts, but there were a couple of misses. The one that sticks out in my mind is this descending ladder:

I don't think it was enough for week 13 of a 16-week marathon plan. The total volume of work was only about 4 miles, and it wasn't that fast on average, so it didn't necessarily accomplish much. I think this workout would have been better earlier in the plan, during the taper, or basically doubled (i.e. going back up the ladder).

Speed work is important. Much as I dislike running at 3K/mile pace, I'm pretty sure I have to keep doing it consistently if I want to keep getting faster.

There's all this training advice about working on your weaknesses. For I while I was like, "But how do I know what my weaknesses are?" and eventually I realized it's just the stuff I hate doing, i.e. running fast and running uphill. Long, grindy intervals? No problem. Short, fast reps? No thank you. So if you, too, are scratching your head on your running weaknesses, just think about which days make you go "ugh." It's those ones.

I ended up with about 2 hours of non-running activity (lifting/core/yoga) per week. I think the volume was okay, but I might distribute it a little differently in the future. Instead of

I think I would do upper body, lower body, off, total body, core, off, yoga. I just felt like I should be hitting muscles more than once a week. I think I might also shift to doing more running-focused lower body strength in particular. Much as I still love Fitness Blender, their workouts typically don't include as much single-leg/isometric/eccentric work as I think I'm starting to need.

I do still plan to use them for upper body at minimum, since that's more about balance/overall health, and I still 100% recommend them for getting started and beyond. I just feel like I've reached the point where I'm doing enough running volume that some of my strength work has to be more focused to correct imbalances and prevent injuries.


I got the dog a very large wagon so I could wheel him back from the vet while he was still woozy. He's practicing laying down in the wagon (in exchange for treats obviously).

Despite a few areas for improvement, I'm quite satisfied with how my training went. I did the work, didn't get injured, and came away with a race I was very happy with. I'm still learning, but so far I don't seem to have screwed this up too much Many thanks to Billy for pointing out the workouts that were too much workout and keeping me from breaking myself trying to do them. And thanks to everyone for following along!

 

[jmasgat]

Great post-training assessment. Also, for a minute, I thought the dog was lying inside a suitcase!

 

[azrivest]

Despite a few areas for improvement, I'm quite satisfied with how my training went. I did the work, didn't get injured, and came away with a race I was very happy with.

As you should! Congratulations again

 

[WillRunForPizza]

Maybe I have a training philosophy now!
In which...I apologize in advance

I feel like all my podcasts have been talking about training philosophy, and it got me thinking. Do I have a training philosophy?

On the one hand, it seems like my knowledge of training principles consists mainly of bits and pieces from various sources that I have sort of stitched together into a not-entirely-cohesive whole. It's like a quilt! A quilt made of occasionally clashing pieces, with a few holes. Does a messy sort of metaphorical blanket count as a training philosophy?

On the other hand, after making four or five plans now (depending on how you count), I think I have developed a certain style, if you will. Which is kind of like having a training philosophy. And if I didn't have a training philosophy, there would be no reason for me to write my own plans - I could just use someone else's.


Trying to take a selfie with my dog is a whole process.

On that note, time for a slight detour! I want to take a minute (update from later Kate doing the proofread: this ended up being way longer than a minute) to talk about other training philosophies and why I don't just use those plans, which would be a lot easier, though obviously less fun for everyone (because I'm sure all of you love seeing yet another training discussion in my journal ).

Higdon: I would call this the "just the basics" training philosophy. I have used one of his plans (the novice 2 HM plan, according to this journal, which I had to check because it was two years ago and I forgot). I think his plans are fine, ish, especially if you're just starting out. The plan I used was pretty boring, which is a big reason I didn't try any others. Plus, the only non-easy running in the plan was at HM pace, which I think isn't the best strategy (variety is good, and running faster than race pace is important). I know some of his other plans have a little more variety in paces, but they still seem pretty formulaic, which I don't find very engaging.

Daniels: I would say Daniels is systems rather than race-pace focused, which is a philosophy I've started to incorporate more into my own plans. In other words, most of his workouts include running at threshold and/or VO2 max and/or marathon pace (which is I think more a substitute for aerobic threshold/LT1 than actually targeted at the marathon specifically). I do actually use many of his workouts and theories as a basis for my own, but his plans can be kind of confusing and contradictory. Plus, he doesn't really seem to do cutback weeks, which I think are important, especially during marathon training.

Hansons: The Hansons basically invented the "cumulative fatigue" approach. It's interesting - capping your long runs at 16 miles during marathon training seems kind of crazy - but I do think it can work. I thought about doing this one for my marathon training (the first time), but it also has a few flaws. First, there's a weird jump in mileage maybe a third of the way through the plan, which I didn't like. Second, I think 16 miles is a little short for what I want from marathon training. I've found 18 to be fine, but I've really felt a difference in fatigue over those last couple of miles in training. I think the extended pounding does prepare you better without noticeably increasing injury risk. And finally...this plan is also kind of repetitive. There are essentially three workouts - strength, speed, and tempo - and you just do different intervals/durations of those over the whole plan. I also don't love having two workouts a week in addition to the long run.

Pfitz: I don't have the book here in Orlando, so I can't necessarily go into much detail because I don't remember it all that well, but his plan is definitely geared towards fast runners. I didn't use it because doing a 7-mile threshold run, which is a real thing that he calls for, would be pretty stupid for someone with my paces.

Matt Fitzgerald (a la Run Like a Pro): Matt Fitzgerald of course popularized 80/20 training in the running world. And for the most part I actually liked his marathon plan, which had a lot of variety in workouts. The main problem I had with it was that the level 1 plan had zero marathon-pace runs, and while the level 2 and 3 plans did have some M pace, they also called for 7 days a week of running, which I am strongly opposed to doing. Rest is important.

Galloway: Okay. Before I get myself in too much trouble here, let me clearly separate the Galloway method from Galloway training. The Galloway method (i.e. run/walk/run) is great. It's not for me, but I'm happy that it works well for so many people for all different kinds of reasons. There's nothing inherently better about continuous running; run/walk is just as valid. That said, is it terrible if I think the basic Galloway training plans are just...bad?

Let me splain.

https://imgur.com/E74kgc7

First, I don't think three days a week is enough to train for a marathon unless you're also cross-training. Four, okay, possible. Five, no problem. Six, perfect (not that I'm biased or anything). Three just doesn't let you accumulate enough mileage. Also, running up to 26 miles in training?? I do think the run/walk method helps with recovery, but not enough to have one run make up...what is it, like 70% of your mileage for the week? Yeesh. And I've heard Jeff Galloway on Rise & Run several times, and he seems like a lovely person, but he keeps talking about how hill sprints are enough strength training for runners. (This is objectively incorrect. Running is catabolic, meaning it breaks down muscle. Strength training is anabolic, meaning it builds muscle. You cannot use catabolic training for anabolic purposes. What you get from hill sprints is practice using explosive power, which is good but not a substitute for lifting heavy things.) Maybe customized training is better, but based on the free plans, I would not recommend this training to anyone. Maybe if you just want to finish, but even so. Definitely not if you want to actually get faster. Run/walk yes, training plan no.

I know there are other popular plans out there - McMillan comes to mind - but I don't have access to them so I can't really talk about the philosophy behind them. From the articles I've read on his site, McMillan seems focused on mini-cyles of training (speed, strength, specific, etc.) within a training block. I think it's important to touch on all those aspects of running, but I'm not sure you want to separate them like that. I've certainly taken principles from him, though, and all of these coaches (except for Galloway, unless you count principles of what not to do ).


Some early practice with the wagon

Anyway, back on track, now that I've gotten a whole rant off my chest. Let's say I have a training philosophy, ish! So...what is it?

First, there are the basic things. Balance of easy and hard running. Strides. Occasional cutback weeks. Fueling for runs that take more than 90 minutes. Rest days. I guess these aren't necessarily universal, because I just talked about how the plans above didn't do them, but they're pretty common. And they're part of my training principles too.

But what sets my "training philosophy," such as it is, apart?

Relatively high mileage. By "relatively" I mean I run 8-10 hours a week during marathon training (and a bit less as goal distances get shorter), which I get the impression is kind of a lot for a recreational runner. I think this works pretty well for me, though I have tended to pick up nagging aches and pains late in the marathon training cycle. However, I would also note that my easy paces have typically gotten faster as I get further into a training plan, even at similar HRs. Sometimes that's because the weather is also getting cooler, but not always. So on balance, I think higher mileage works for me.

Variety is the spice of life. (A rainbow (variety) was the best I could do for this one. I looked for a spice shaker, but that's apparently not an emoji that exists.) If I just ran at my goal race pace every time I did a workout, I would be super bored. And it wouldn't be very helpful. I think you have to run faster than goal pace, or goal pace feels too hard. And you want to run slower too, to build more speed endurance. And you, or at least I, want to change up the workouts even using the same paces, because if I'm doing the same thing every week, what is even the point? I particularly like mixing multiple paces into one workout, as you might have observed.

Run long. I like long runs. Is that weird? I like long run workouts and I also like just going out and running for two hours or more at a relaxed pace. (Usually, anyway.) But even if I didn't like long runs, I would still do them, because even a 5K is mostly aerobic. Building your aerobic endurance will make you faster overall (as long as you're not overdoing it). So even for a 5K, I'm probably doing some two-hour long runs, despite this being approximately four times farther than a 5K. On the opposite end of the spectrum, though, I haven't done any 20-milers in training ever, because I feel like I run enough throughout the week that 18 is sufficient for a marathon. I will probably include 20-milers in marathon training at some point in the future, but my experience tells me it's not essential. It might even be counterproductive for some people - while I don't think there's necessarily a hard limit on what percentage of your weekly mileage your long run should be, I doubt it's great to have it be more than 50%. So I would argue you'd need to be doing significantly more than 40 miles a week to make a 20-mile long run a good idea.

To go faster at races, build faster systems. To your body, there's nothing particularly significant about 5K pace or half marathon pace or whatever. But your body does have paces where things shift physiologically. (I did a whole post about this a while back.) If you can make those physiological paces faster, your race paces will get faster as a result. I tend to do most of my workouts with these "systems" paces (e.g. lactate threshold, VO2max, etc.). I'll do some work at race pace for practice, but for me this is complicated by the fact that I really don't know what my race pace will be until I actually run it. I've kind of shifted away from time goals overall - I still think about them, but I try not to race with them in mind. I'd rather let my body decide how fast it can run on race day. I feel like I have a better sense of where my physiological paces are, so I'm better off training at those paces. Which leads to a corollary:

Yes, you have to run fast. And by "fast" here I mean "faster than 5K pace." Even if you're training for a marathon. Some people probably only need a little bit of fast sprinkled into their training. For me, it's more like every couple of weeks, because speed is not really my strong suit. But just as two-hour long runs will make you better at 5Ks, short intervals at mile pace will make you better at marathons. Sure, you could run a 5K without a significant long run, and you could run a marathon without running mile pace once, but they will help you get better. Sad but true.

Strength training is part of run training. Now, I don't think strength training necessarily makes you a faster runner directly. But it does make you a more resilient runner, and help you improve your form. So you're less likely to get injured and therefore more likely to be able to keep running consistently, which does make you faster. And again, you cannot replace strength training with more running - they have completely opposite impacts. Actually, probably the more running you do, the more strength training you need, because you need to rebuild what the running broke down. That means lower body strength and core work, in particular, are essential. I guess you could skip upper body strength if you really wanted, but then you'd be all unbalanced and that would be weird . So: strength training is not cross training. Other aerobic training is cross training. Strength training is a complement, not a substitute.

Races are special. I think a major reason why I've set a PR in almost every race over the past two and a half years is because I don't race all that often. I do run in more races than I actually race, but I really only go all-out a few times a year. First, that allows me to build up to my goal race without having to recover from other races in the middle of a training block. And second, human bodies only have a few full-out efforts to give a year. I could race more often and probably even set more PRs, but I think less racing makes the racing I do better. This is of course a matter of priorities - some people really enjoy racing, so they do it lots, and that's fine too. But my goal is to get faster at racing, so I'm very selective about when I do it.

In summary, I'm all about mileage, long runs, lots of different workouts at systems paces, and strength training. And I don't see these opinions changing significantly going forward. However, I'm always learning more from various podcast and occasionally books. If you're interested in the science behind training principles, I would highly recommend Some Work, All Play, which is giving me lots of new things to think about, like uphill treadmill finishers, steady-pace additions to workouts, high-carb fueling, and more. (Also David and Megan are fun to listen to.) So I'm sure if I came back to my theoretical training philosophy in a year, I would have more to add.


When I finish a container of peanut butter or yogurt, I give it to the dog to clean. He gets really into it.

I would also say that the details are maybe 5% of getting faster. The biggest key overall is running consistently. If you're only training in the 16 weeks or whatever before a race, your progress is going to be slower. Then when it does come to specific training plans, it's mostly just picking a plan and sticking to it. Questions like "Should I do an 18 or 20 mile long run?" and "How much speed work do I need?" make a pretty small difference compared to 1) having a plan in the first place and 2) following the plan.

And what works well for me might not be the best option for other people. In other words, you do you. If you like Hansons, great. If you really, really want to use a Galloway plan, go ahead. Those 0.1% differences are significant for the people competing at the very top level, but they're not such a big deal for the rest of us. While there's probably no one out there who shouldn't be doing strength training or who should run 60% hard in a week, the smaller differences between plans aren't that important in the scheme of things. It's more about finding what works for you.

I guess I could conclude from all that that my training philosophy doesn't really matter, but I think it's more that my training philosophy is for me. Your training philosophy could be totally different, and that's fine. If it is, tell me about it, because maybe there's something I hadn't thought about, or maybe we'll just have an interesting conversation. As you might have noticed, I like talking about training principles. If you're still reading, hopefully you do too. Or maybe you're just here for the dog photos

 

[avondale]

This was a really great post. I haven't done as much research as you into the various training plans. I did sort of follow a 80/20 plan for awhile, but then I got into plans from DopeyBadger (who has his own mash-up philosophy) and from there got into trail running - there aren't nearly so many "formulae" for trail running plans. But there are a lot of general guides, and I've read many of those.

But I really agree with pretty much everything you said - just applied to the trail running sense, because that's my focus.

I do think the run/walk method helps with recovery, but not enough to have one run make up...what is it, like 70% of your mileage for the week?

This is something I've struggled with in trail running because a lot of trail races are longer both in distance and in how long it takes to complete them, because the paces are longer. But trail running has some similarities to run/walk/run in that because most trail running is hilly, there is necessarily a lot of changes in pacing and gait, including some walking for uphills. I think that the variety helps enable longer long runs.

A pretty common suggestion for long trail races is that your long run should be about 75% as long IN TIME as you expect to take to complete your race. (Time instead of distance because the distance will vary a lot based on hills and other things.) So my 50k training had two 6-hour runs because I was hoping to complete the 50k in 8 hours. Definitely my long runs in that part of the training cycle were a big fraction of my weekly time and mileage training. It worked out ok, but again for that long of an effort, you're only in the lowest zones.

I mean I run 8-10 hours a week during marathon training (and a bit less as goal distances get shorter),

That's definitely quite a bit for a recreational runner. This reminded me of "The Uphill Athlete" by House, Johnson, and Jornet (as in Kilian Jornet). They say that you're a "beginner" mountain runner if you train fewer than 400 hours/year. Assuming all 52 weeks in a year are spent training, that's about 7.5 hr/wk. ALL YEAR. Of course, with time off and easier parts of a training cycle, that means many weeks need a LOT of time to get out of what they call "beginner" territory. I doubt I'll every really do that. But it puts what elite runners do into perspective, for sure.

because speed is not really my strong suit.

Says the woman who ran a little over a 3:30 marathon. But I know what you mean.

Questions like "Should I do an 18 or 20 mile long run?" and "How much speed work do I need?" make a pretty small difference compared to 1) having a plan in the first place and 2) following the plan.

THIS is the big thing. I'm not on social media much, which is probably limiting for this, but the trail runners that I have connected with, such as on Garmin, have so little in the way of plans for their training. They do some running and sometimes throw in hill repeats or then BAM have this super long run for no real reason...and then sign up for a 50k or more with tons of hills and then DNF or death march it. I guess it depends on what people want...some folks are happy to just do whatever kind of run day-by-day and have fun, but I am always looking to improve things, which means a plan. Also gives me more accountability.

Anyway, so I figure as long as I keep training consistently and try to improve from what I did in the previous cycle, it is progress.


Definitely enjoy reading your thoughts on the subject! I'll be interested to hear about your next plans.

 

[garneska]

Kate I enjoyed your post and philosophy as well as those dog pictures. One thing I might add is to remember to be flexible what is working now might not work in the future, for any number of reasons. Keep the flexibility part.