Platypus' Beginners Guide to Running

[rhysduck]

Cardiff Half today. 2:01:13. Gutted that I didn't make the sub 2hrs Happy that I knocked over 5 minutes off last years race though. Humph.

 

[PermaBanned]

@ D.P I'm sorry but I don't know any beginners knocking out 80 miles a week to run a 1:44 half and constantly stating they are knackered or some such. None of it makes sense.

If I was putting in 80 mile weeks I'd be expecting to run under 1:20 for the half. Have you run any full marathons?

The only way any of it makes sense, unless I've missed something, is if you subscribe to the platypus school of reporting your exploits.

Lol, bit harsh? It takes time to make gains, and everyone's physiology is different, really depends on where you started from.

Cardiff Half today. 2:01:13. Gutted that I didn't make the sub 2hrs Happy that I knocked over 5 minutes off last years race though. Humph.

Well done! Not far off though. What does your average week look like?

 

[firstborn]

Lol, bit harsh? It takes time to make gains, and everyone's physiology is different, really depends on where you started from.



Well done! Not far off though. What does your average week look like?

On reflection it was a bit harsh, but honestly the effort in isn't matching the output. I do believe a re-think is required here though.

 

[PermaBanned]

Perhaps. I'm not particularly familiar with DP's history or regime though. Could be a point to get some input from a professional coach.

 

[semi-pro waster]

Good work semi-pro waster.

I've been having a little trouble with my left hamstring since early in the week, finally went yesterday but it's not just went up for my glute instead and hurts even more. Planned for another 10 miles today but now I'm resting instead.

Just when I thought my mojo and motivation was coming back as well.

Cheers, it's a fairly big commitment to go for a marathon but I figure I might as well just go for it while I'm into running and feeling reasonably fit.

Here's hoping a bit of a rest helps out and that you're back out and running soon.

Cardiff Half today. 2:01:13. Gutted that I didn't make the sub 2hrs Happy that I knocked over 5 minutes off last years race though. Humph.

Unlucky, that's very close but also look at how much time you've taken off your previous best. Next time I'm sure you'll do even better.

Lol, bit harsh? It takes time to make gains, and everyone's physiology is different, really depends on where you started from.

I think firstborn is questioning the wisdom of doing that many miles as a relative beginner and is worried about the effect on D.P., not that it's taking time to make gains. However as you say everyone is different so maybe this is the best way for D.P. to train. I'm pretty sure it would be too much for me but there's not necessarily a single correct way to achieve goals.

 

[firstborn]

I think I'll shut up now until I've read up on JD's stuff. I've read loads of stuff, I like the Noakes book. But in the end it comes down to keeping things sensible, which has worked for me to date.

 

[PermaBanned]

I think I'll shut up now until I've read up on JD's stuff. I've read loads of stuff, I like the Noakes book. But in the end it comes down to keeping things sensible, which has worked for me to date.

Probably the most useful thing from JD's books is the VDOT system. Helps a lot to have fairly reliable pace zones rather than just basing everything on feel or heart rate. The training plans themselves are generally pretty solid starting points, although the mileage may be a bit much for a relative beginner. You can quite easily adapt them for lower mileage though, and at a basic level the key principles are lots of miles, roughly 80/20 split between easy miles and harder pace zones and no more than two interval sessions per week.

 

[D.P.]

@ D.P I'm sorry but I don't know any beginners knocking out 80 miles a week to run a 1:44 half and constantly stating they are knackered or some such. None of it makes sense.

If I was putting in 80 mile weeks I'd be expecting to run under 1:20 for the half. Have you run any full marathons?

The only way any of it makes sense, unless I've missed something, is if you subscribe to the platypus school of reporting your exploits.

Now permabanned's post does make sense..

I think you simply don't understand what I am training at then without seeing my logs. I don't do 80 every week, I'm average around 65-70 during me peak weeks, with a bulk of the training at around 55mpw. I built up to this incredibly slowly, far slower than any plan out there because I thought the gains were all ridiculous. I've been building miles for over 25 weeks on a base of 30mp, never gaining more than a few percent week on week. The 80mpw was simply due to it being too unsafe to do my LR on schedule so I did an additional 9 mile. It is always pointless looking at weekly miles as a one off event, due to my schedule change I will only do 60miles next week.

I'm not constantly knackered, I make a post when I get sore legs or run slower than I wanted, I don't make a post for every run that goes easily or I run faster and feel great. I ran my 8 miles Thursday after my harder interval run and I felt great, legs way better at the end than when I started, but it isn't an interesting run to talk about.


As to my Half race time, that is way slower than I am capable of simply because I paced way too slow at the start. Being a beginner I was cautious and didn't want to bonk. If I ran my first 6.5 miles remotely close to the last then I would have finished under 1:40. I already know now I am even faster than that based on the training since then. I made a post earlier saying I did a 12.7 mile run at 15 seconds a mile faster than my HM, over hillier rougher terrain, felt great at the end.


What you can do at 80mpw has very little bearing on what I can do on my actual 60 odd MPW. You are far more experience do at likely, far more efficient stride, better pacing, more neuro-muscular adaptions, different genetics, different weight, height, etc.

 

[rhysduck]

Well done! Not far off though. What does your average week look like?

Not very much at all! September was about 15miles a week. a lot lower than that in the months before with July being 0 miles as I was away.

Monthly Averages from Feb:Sept was 25.05 miles
Longest Month (Distance) was Sept: 65miles

 

[D.P.]

On reflection it was a bit harsh, but honestly the effort in isn't matching the output. I do believe a re-think is required here though.

Now, I can freely admit that my training may not be optimal at all but I don't see how you can judge that based on what I posted. I finished my half within the top 15% of competitors for my first ever race of any kind , a massive negative split and time that could be shortened significantly with a good pace and more race knowledge. I'm pretty sure not a single person overtook me on that race, I overtook countless people because I started too far back not wanting to get in the way of anyone. The last few miles had people dropping like flies on the big finishing hill, I steamed ahead of them with plenty in reserve due to my slow pacing at the start.

I only picked up running last September, so it will just take time and practice to get the full potential form the training I am doing. people I spoke to on other boards said it took them 3-5 years of running to get into their fast times, and their training later on was no more rigorous than at the start, their bodies just adapted, they got more efficient, and they learned to respond to their body. It's the same in any sport, it takes 10,000 hours to be an expert, a lot of training early on just want show the same gains as later on.there is also diminishing returns as miles increase, likely I could cut back 10mpw and that might only change my goal time by a few percent. That is something that is commonly observed. At the moment I have the time to out in those extra miles even if the gains are small.

Now I probably could cut my weekly miles down and not get a drastic cut back. E.g., 1 day a week I run 4-5 miles slowly on a Tread mill to help my legs feel better but mostly as a warmup to then to weights in the gym. Certainly I could cut them and not see any change in training efficiency.

After my marathon in November I will likely try to sign up for a spring marathon and I already know I am going to train less, have fewer days, more cross training (swimming and bike) and concentrate on quality runs over quantity. By then I will be very different to when I started this round, more experienced, more efficient, more adapted and less motivated to run 5 days a week.

 

[D.P.]

Probably the most useful thing from JD's books is the VDOT system. Helps a lot to have fairly reliable pace zones rather than just basing everything on feel or heart rate. The training plans themselves are generally pretty solid starting points, although the mileage may be a bit much for a relative beginner. You can quite easily adapt them for lower mileage though, and at a basic level the key principles are lots of miles, roughly 80/20 split between easy miles and harder pace zones and no more than two interval sessions per week.

Yep, and what I like about JD is a lot of the training plan is based on scientifically backed analysis of professionals, not just anecdotes of marathon coaches from the 70s.

The Milligan is high, and I adapted that by having a very long ramp up time of very easy miles. I've basically been building up to this since the end of April, rather than trying to squeeze into so. 16 week plan gaining 10-12 miles per week. I barely gained 1 mile a week through much of the training.

I stop any run if I feel a joint of muscle stress beyond just tiredness, that hasn't happened since May.

 

[firstborn]

Was just about to buy JDs book but some of the reviews say it lacks references. Is this the case?

 

[D.P.]

Was just about to buy JDs book but some of the reviews say it lacks references. Is this the case?

It does, but many of the thing stated can be backed up with references, unlike a lot of other plans. However, not everything he states has scientific support, but then a lot of the basics of most coaches training plans has no scientific backing.

The FIRST plan for example emphasizes AT/LT as one of the 3 runs yet that is largely discredited, yet the FIrSt plan claims to be scientifically backed.


One interesting thing with Daniels is he only prescribes 2 runs a week, a LR and intervals. The key is the VDOT pace guide, which works best of you do regular races like 10ks. The rest of the work out is up to you.

Since I haven't done any racing I can't get an accurate VDOT value but have tried to make some estimates (running 10ks on treadmills, when running intervals I can see what my fastest lap times are) and use the general principle. Future marathons I will have a better idea.

 

[D.P.]

Should also say I don't follow Daniel's plans religiously. I've read hansons, FIRST, higdon, Pfitziingers and a load of internet sources, tried to find scientific backing and adapted to what I find comfortable or I believe I need as a dedicated beginner.

E.g, I'm a big fan of Pfitzinger's Medium long runs as a key workout. I also like Hidon's moderate run the day before the long run. I don't subscribe to Hanson Max 16m LR, FIRSt AT runs. I do believe in the 80-20 rule and do less speed work than Daniels, and add easy fun running unlike pans like FIRST.
I don't incorporate speed work into my LRs like Daniels, because I perceive as a begginner that increases muscular damage and over training risks. As a beginner I also felt it important to ramp the miles up much seller, have a longer base building period but still have a high peak weekly millage to enforce adaptions and super compensation. Interval work has slightly less priority than most advanced plans because I am not looking to get close to 3hr, I am more concerned with endurance and the ability to run the last 6 miles in relative comfort and speed and get a solid finishing time around 3:45. In a Future marathin it is liekly I will wan to run faster and I will worry about endurance less and I will run harder and longer intervals session, and because of that my weekly Milligan will be lower in future training cycles.

 

[Richie]

I am looking at whats being said and I can see where FB is coming from.

You say that you took up running a year ago but even with that MPW (be it 50 or 80) your half time doesnt seem to match the effort you're putting in... When I did the very odd bit of running and went to do it more seriously, I went from 3 mile runs to a half marathon in 4 months and had a time of 1h54m... The time may have been quicker if it didnt have 1100ft of climbing in the route... I was only putting in circa 20-25MPW as well for that.

I just followed "Higdons Marathon Novice 1" guide as I had a reasonable 3 mile base to start from and it had me running halfs pretty quickly and in an ok time (I was 33 at the time )

 

[D.P.]

I am looking at whats being said and I can see where FB is coming from.

You say that you took up running a year ago but even with that MPW (be it 50 or 80) your half time doesnt seem to match the effort you're putting in... When I did the very odd bit of running and went to do it more seriously, I went from 3 mile runs to a half marathon in 4 months and had a time of 1h54m... The time may have been quicker if it didnt have 1100ft of climbing in the route... I was only putting in circa 20-25MPW as well for that.

I just followed "Higdons Marathon Novice 1" guide as I had a reasonable 3 mile base to start from and it had me running halfs pretty quickly and in an ok time (I was 33 at the time )

I really wouldn't put too much thought into my HM time because it wasn't paced optimally, the last miles I started sprint up a bug ass hill and flying past pro-looking people, and felt great afterwards- went out for a big run the next day. I had a really high fever for night straight the week before and when asking on runners world 1/3rd of people said not to run at all, 1/3rd said run slowly for fun, 1/3rd said go all out. I woke up on race morning with a bad cold so decided on the run for fun at an easy pace, that easy pace happened to be close to 8 min mile, once I got to mile 9 it was obvious I had run too slowed so legged it over the last miles.

I ran 13 miles of hilly forest trail back in early May in 1hr50min without any focused training , which promoted me to sign up for a marathon. So looking at that of course my time didnt I rove much despite a summer of training but I don't think that is indicative of anything. I could barley walk for 2 days after that run, now I can run 12+ miles at a much faster, with a far lower heart rate and go out the next day feeling great for a other 8-10 miles.

When scanning through my training logs my long runs used to be at 9:45 a mile for 14-15 miles and I would have a rest day before and after and the subsequent day was shirt and easy. I can now run 20 miles at near 8:30 mile and maintain a lower heart rate, lower breath rate and feel much better the next day. That is a huge improvement AFAIK.intervals are similar, when I started intervals in July I would aim to do the 0.52 miles around a lake in under 4 minutes and do 4 laps, I can now do it in 3min26 and do 6 laps averaging 3:34. Some of my runs have big hills and I used to aim to go 1/3rd of the way before walking, then half, then all the way but slowly, now I can hill train on them and race up them.


Now, I do agree I am running a lot and I'm certainly not following an optimal training plan. I could probably cut my weekly miles and not loose a huge amount if progression. I do 2 8 mile easy runs a week mostly to bump my weekly millage, and 4-5 miles in a gym warm up before doing weights. Some would say they are "toxic" miles . I certainly agree they are the least important and those are the miles I will drop/skip when my schedule needs adjusting. But I still believe they have a small benefit, typically my legs will feel better after those 8 than before (and not just short term).

When I started formulating my plan as well as reading all the books, scientific literature, online plans etc, I asked/browsed around running forums a lot. What came up time and time again was people saying that their marathon times didn't improve until they increased their MPW form 30 to 50 miles, or 40 to 60, or 50 to 70 miles etc. It seemed most people improved up to around 70mpw and beyond that the returns rapidly diminished and injury risk greatly elevated. This is also supported by scientific literature. So that is what I set as a peak weekly millage.

But all of this talk of race time is stupid. I can almost certainly runs a faster marathon next time with 30% less training than this time! That is just the nature of sports and endurance exercise. When you at e a beginner you have so many disadvantages against you, and a lot of it simply comes down to a curated hours on the road, and the only way to get that is to run. If you took the current world record holder for marathon distance and had him sit in a. Chair for 16 weeks and had me run what ever training plan you want he would still beat me by 90 or more minutes. Just like in my half marathon there were a tiny fraction of women faster than me, because biologically they just don't have the same muscular, neural and skeletal systems.

 

[The Darkness]

Question for Indigo...

If you recall I ran windermere 18 months ago as my first marathon and hit 3h 35m. Had a range of injuries on/off since then, but now looking to train for edinburgh next year (having failed yet again to get in London). I'd love to take 10 mins off my time. I'm running ~20m or so a week at the moment over 3-4 sessions.

You have made massive improvements to your times over the past couple of years and I wanted to ask what have you done differently to enable these gains? Is it volume/more speed sessions/hills? etc. I'm guessing it will be all of the above but wanted to check!

Cheers

D

 

[Indigo]

I do indeed remember. Doesn't feel like it was 18 months ago though, incredible how time flies.

And you're right, first marathon was 4.40 at Windermere 2011 and it's not down to 3.07 at Manchester earlier this year with two others inbetween.

Didn't do much and no magical training plan. Just ran consistently and got myself to a peak of 50 miles a week, 20 mile long runs a few times, added a 10-11 mile run in midweek, a tempo once a week and added hills into my runs as and when I fancied it and took up a little bit of fell running too. I also did some running on the track but nothing major.

Are you running 20 miles a week at the moment due to coming back from injury or were you going that when you trained for Windermere?

Feel free to take a look at my Strava leading upto the Manchester Marathon in April if you like to get an idea of how long and often my runs were. Looking back I could have been more consistent on certain weeks and not cut back so much but some was being tired due to racing, doing my longs runs a little to quickly and not letting the running take over to much as well.

When I trained for Windermere I doubt I ever ran more than 3 times in a week or covered more than 25-30 miles in any given week.

 

[The Darkness]

Thanks Indigo. In the run up to windermere I guess I peaked at ~40m/week. I'm back at 20m/week now due to recovering from injury but that is without a long run at all at the moment.

Looking back I went off too quickly at windermere, but then I guess most folks do on their first one.

I'll post up a training plan when I have found one I like; be interested to see what you and others think.

cheers

D

 

[Indigo]

No problem, always happy to give my opinion or any advice.

Sound familiar to me at the moment doing 20m/week due to recovering. It's a pain but recovery will happen. I've only managed one long run (10miles) in the last 6 weeks or so.

And setting off too quickly is what most people do when racing/running but learning to start a little slower and build up your pace will come naturally the more you run so I wouldn't worry about it too much.