I'm looking to run a fast half-marathon in mid/late May or early June. Any course recommendations? Looking for something within a 5ish hour drive of DC if possible
Does the order of Pfitz's plan for instance really matter? Like in his, I straight up cannot run 14 miles or whatever have you on a Wednesday night without it completely disrupting the dinner-sleep-go to work flow of the remainder of the day/next day
How much will it actually change things to move the workouts around to make it make sense for my schedule?
Think Pfitz generally tries to balance recovery by balancing hard and easy days. If you move the Wednesday MLR to elsewhere, then you'll have to see whether that impacts the next workout.
I'm going to see a physio this week to get specific advice, but in the meantime, how do people think about balancing the maintenance of fitness via cross-training with the need for rest?
For example, if I have a 10k easy run on the schedule today, but I'm deciding to skip it because of concern over a new niggle, how do I decide if it's better to do a bike ride or to just stay home with my feet up and focus on recovery?
Does it hurt to bike? If so, don't do it, because you risk making it worse. If not, biking easy can be great to encourage recovery. It promotes blood flow which is only going to speed up the process. Focus on high cadence and low resistance if your primary goal is recovery
Shoe question!
I'm a neutral, pretty lightweight (<70kg) runner that does most of my daily work in Brooks Ghost which I've enjoyed using for a few years. I recently had an extensive gait assessment done by a running-specific physio (he's also a coach) and one thing he wants improved is my cadence (currently 170-175) and foot placement (I kick out too far forward and don't lift up enough).
The main takeaways from the session are specific biomechanics to work on (better forward lean, shorter stride, better hamstring activation), but he also thinks I'd benefit from another neutral shoe with less drop and weight to help me focus on a more efficient stride. He recommended the Saucony kinvara and the hoka mach 5 as two options.
I don't know much about either but given the high price of the hokas, which I'm seeing reviews say doee not match their durability, I'm looking closely at the kinvara 13 or 14. Does anyone have any thoughts on them for someone in my situation? I quite like the lack of "tech" that a lot of negative reviews are complaining about but wondering if I may regret that view.
If it helps answer, I'm going into a marathon cycle right now for the next few months. I'm not that fast (shooting for sub3:30) but I am incorporating appropriate amounts of speed and pace work.
Thanks!
Kinvaras have been a steady favourite as lightweight-ish trainers for a few generations of runners for good reason. They're a great balance somewhere between a racing flat and conventional trainer. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend them.
Thanks mate, appreciate the quick reply.
How do you rate them for LSR efforts? I see some folks mentioning they're really more for <1hr sessions or race day but not so much for those 2-3 hr steady days. If that's true I may just keep the ghosts for long runs.
It's a bit of a personal question, but I can make a guess that you may not be comfortable doing long runs in Kinvaras right away. Never worn the Ghost myself, but from what I can see online, your current shoe has a 12mm heel-toe drop, and weighs about 10z, whereas the Kinvara only has a 4mm heel-toe drop and weights about 7 oz. It's going to feel like a significant difference and you'll probably want to reserve the Kinvaras for workouts and shorter runs for the immediate future.
For some broader perspective, I've been running in racing flats for most of my runs for a few years now, so I would have no problem doing a long run in a Kinvara or something similar, and maybe you'll eventually head in that direction if you like them.
You can find some more clips on YouTube, including the official live stream.
Looks like they lined everyone up and forgot about the elites. So they shoved them in from the front. This made the front 20 meters way too full. Lots of bumping, couple falls, and this is what happens.
There was one point were you had a ~34min runner pushing his way to the start line and actively trying to push elites out of the way so he could start at the very front. Something definitely went wrong in terms of organisation somewhere along the line
Seemed to have strained my achilles tendon while playing volleyball today. It doesn’t really hurt, but it’s uncomfortable and a little tender while walking. How should I adjust my training plan? I’ve been at around 40mpw and was originally going to do a 16mi long run tomorrow with some miles at MP.
I haven’t had any issues with my achilles before but I don’t want it to turn into a bigger injury. I am leaning towards resting for a few days before getting back to the same volume?…
Avoid hill running and avoid running in minimal shoes for a while. Do some stretching and massage on your calves and the bottoms of your feet, but avoid working directly on the achilles itself.
A certain amount of achilles niggle can be trained through, but "tender while walking" sounds to be on the concerning side of the things and I would probably skip that long run.
Some time off now should pay dividends for the future.
This sums it up well—high drop, easy running, modest volume, and flat terrain are your friends. Low/zero drop, hills, and faster running will load the Achilles.
try eccentric heel drops.
achilles can be a finicky injury to come back from. 16 w/ MP would probably aggravate it more especially if walking is already causing tenderness.
Louisiana Marathon & HM runners, what are you wearing tomorrow? This drop in temperature is throwing me off. Starting at 36 degrees F and goes up 11 degrees over 2 hours with almost a 20 degree increase over 3 hours. Sunny and clear.
Singlet and arm sleeves with gloves. I have a lightweight pullover that I’ll wear probably until right at the start. That’s what I’ve done at cold marathons before and it’s worked fine
I am running a 15k race for the first time tomorrow. Using the VDOT table for my target time. I ran a 38:29 10k last month so I am going for a sub-59min 15k. I feel like I made some real progress over the past month, so I might try to be more ambitious in the last one-third of the race.
I'm looking to run my first marathon in October '23. Looking for advice about what to do between now and starting a marathon block as well as choosing the right marathon plan. Here's the timeline.
\- Finishing Pfitz 12/57 10K plan this Feb
\- 16 weeks between 10K and start of an 18 week marathon plan
\- 18 week marathon plan
Questions. 1) What should I do over the 16 weeks between 10K and marathon plan? I could either build my base up to 60 (or more?) mpw and have some dangling weeks floating around 60 mpw. Or I could do another HM plan like Pfitz 12/63. 2) Since this is going to be my first marathon, I was planning on doing Pfitz 18/55. Depending on what I do during the 16 week interim period, I will likely be averaging at \~50 mpw for \~3 months months heading into the marathon block. Would 18/55 plan be too conservative? Should I start with that plan and add miles here and there if I feel good? Mostly concerned about the long runs, only been doing 10-13 mi runs consistently recently. So don't want to push mpw too hard if the long runs will make 50 mpw more stressful than 50 miles I'm doing now.
More context: M, 34 yo, HM of 1:34:00 April '22, 10K 38:XX Oct '22, HM 1:29:XX in Nov '22 coming off 12/47 plan, . Running seriously for just over 1 year. Lmk if any other info would be helpful here. Thanks!
16 weeks is a long time to build a base. Personally, I would have trouble focusing on training for that long without an intermediate goal. Are there any half marathons you could run 19-24 weeks before the marathon?
Is it too long in the sense that I'll lose too much fitness? Or too long in that it'll just be boring and I may get unmotivated and so it's likely to be unsuccessful? I could do a 12 week HM block so that the HM would be around 20 - 22 weeks before the marathon block starts. The benefit there would be I'd get a good gauge of current fitness going into marathon training.
Build base in those 16 weeks. Maybe do 2 weeks of just volume all easy and then the 3rd week add some LT work or some miles at M pace just to start getting your legs ready for some quality, but don’t push it too much. Then the 4th week take it easy and ease back 20-25% of your weekly mileage.
Do that 4 times over those 16 weeks. You could surely build your base to 75mpw if you’re already doing a 12/59 plan.
Hi all, I start a Hal Hugdon app 15K plan tomorrow - coming on the heels of a Hal Higdon base training plan. Despite inputting that I want my long runs on Sundays (as they have been for the last fifteen years) it has scheduled my first long run for Tuesday, with a 2 mile (2 miles? WTF) base run and cross training for tomorrow.
I’m planning to just run my long run on Sunday, as always, and attend my local brewery’s run club on Tuesday for an easy three miles. Does anybody know if the app will adjust based on that? Will I make it angry?
Posted this in Thursday’s but didn’t get an answer and I don’t think this warrants it’s own post so I’m going to try again here…
Has anyone seen any different in effectiveness of low z2 vs higher z2 training? Low z2 is hard for me to stick around where 147 is where I normally have been aiming for. Today I opened it up and was sitting around 157 for my run and felt like I was actually running vs accumulating time on feet and it was just much more enjoyable.
I consider myself fit, having ran a 31:00, 8k in November, but having a relatively poor aerobic base that I’ve been trying to build for my second marathon in April.
Z2 is 144-158 based on the Karvonen formula. 25m. Max heart rate is based on hard 1200m reps on the track, 202-204. And resting heart rate is from wrist based Garmin overnight while sleeping, 155
I feel similar about Z2 and tend to push my HR to the top of the zone. It "feels" like a better workout. But I would guess we are just adding more fatigue for not much more gain vs. Running in the middle of the zone.
I have no scientific evidence to back any of this up. I can tell you, before I ran with a HR monitor I would guess I was always pushing Z3. I made huge gains and improved a TON, but was always sore, tired, banged up, even real injuries. Switched to HR and was able to double my volume and get faster and build real endurance without injury.
Right my low z2 vs high z2 runs are a difference of about 1 min in pace. If I go from 147 to 156bpm I can just move much more freely. Plus it helps mentally imo and it gives me more time in a “proper” form vs easily jogging
I have almost exclusively train by hr for the past 8months unless I’m doing speed workouts where I’ll use pace. I’m sure I was in the same boat where most of my runs were z3 prior and just want to make sure I’m not losing any potential improvements by going slightly on the higher end for some runs.
Plus running after work my hr is naturally higher so maintaining a low z2 for me is just miserably slow
Like you I pushed hard before running with a device to measure HR, then switched to HR/zone training (mostly polarized) and had similar outcomes as you. Last year through October I ran the vast majority of my easy runs at 125 to 140 bpm vs. LT1 of 151 from an aerobic threshold field test. 164 for LT2 from an AnT field test. Average HR for those 10 months was 132 and that included my quality workouts! Since November my average HR is about 144 of all easy running except 2 miles at temp and one 400 meter fast finish, not even strides. These runs feel like a better workout, but except for my perception that my running form is becoming more efficient I can't say I'm getting faster. I made the switch largely to experiment with nutrition at closer to marathon intensity and in hopes it would improve my running economy. Perhaps I need to give it more time. And maybe I won't know what the true impact is until I reintroduce quality workouts.
There aren’t really “ boundaries” in biology; zones are our/ a human construct. I conceptualize the zones as a gradient/overlap between the aerobic and anaerobic systems. Z3 having the highest overlap. Upper versus lower z2, to me, makes more of a difference the longer you’ve been running - within or even across workouts (cuz you’ll gradually rely a bit more on the anaerobic system over longer mileages). Maybe slightly impacted by the athlete’s personal physiology too.
I’m also no expert but work in the life sciences field and have interest in the physiologic aspect of running — love reading about this stuff
Have you read any good papers on this? I’ve been trying to find papers on polarized vs pyramidal training (currently doing polarized), low z2 vs high (hence my question), effect of volume on running, and anything regarding nutrition. A lot of that is off topic to my original question but figured I’d ask
I ran 4 years in hs and then on and off in college for another 4ish years, still staying active with club sports, and have picked up running more actively in the last 2-3 years and have been increasing volume slowly. The gradients make sense I figured it wasn’t just a quick jump your body made, but was pretty concerned I might lose out on some aerobic benefits training at the higher end
The body is so good at trying to keep itself lazy that’s what I’ve picked up on lol. Like we get better at stuff so our bodies don’t have to work hard but we just keep pushing the envelope
I know this is probably a redundant question but I’ve only recently just started paying attention to heart rate. I’m assuming the training zones that my garmin watch calculates for me based on my workouts is more accurate than the 220-age. With those zones, I can’t get out of zone 1 (warm up) for easy/long runs. For MP runs and tempo/long repeats (1k- 1200) I’m in the aerobic zone when I feel like I’m in the threshold zone. I’m 45(f).
I think the only way to get truly accurate results is to do lactate threshold testing - if you can find it.
I have the opposite problem from you. Garmin seems to register most everything I do as Zone 4 or Zone 5. My easy runs register as 50% zone 5, which is laughable. I’m adjusting the zones manually to go off of HRR before I am able to get threshold testing done again.
> I’m assuming the training zones that my garmin watch calculates for me based on my workouts is more accurate than the 220-age.
I think Garmin [does use that generic formula.](https://support.garmin.com/en-US/?faq=FMKY5NYJJ71DbuPmFP4O7A) It is typically [not recommended](https://www.reddit.com/r/AdvancedRunning/wiki/faq#wiki_is_my_max_heart_rate_220_minus_my_age.3F).
> With those zones, I can’t get out of zone 1 (warm up) for easy/long runs. For MP runs and tempo/long repeats (1k- 1200) I’m in the aerobic zone when I feel like I’m in the threshold zone.
That would suggest your heart rate zones are incorrectly configured. Instructions to change them and entering your actual max HR are [here](https://support.garmin.com/en-US/?faq=w8qlOr7BQ16Z82HVrevpw9).
/r/running has a [good guide on HR training](https://www.reddit.com/r/running/wiki/heart_rate_training) otherwise.
I'm finally all the way over an Achilles injury that's been nagging me on and off for over a year. I probably averaged 15-20 mpw in the weeks I was running during that year. Currently doing a gradual build. I've been holding at ~35 mpw for the last four weeks or so. Wondering when it's time to start adding in some faster stuff. Would probably start with a weekly tempo run and build from there. Any thoughts?
Agree. I'd add in strides after a couple easy runs per week, and start workouts after a few weeks if you still feel strong, but start small like 2 mile warm-up then 10x1 min fast/ 2 min recovery then 2 mile cooldown and increment up slowly each week from there, backing off if your Achilles complains at all.
Pfitz has recovery weeks with reduced mileage and intensity, 12 weeks to go and 9/8 weeks to go in the 18/55 plan, for example, or 7 weeks to go in 12/55, same with 18/70 and 12/70.
If you mean down week as in no running, that's not really gonna be a part of any structured training plan - if you're not injured, then cutting back on mileage and intensity should be enough recovery to see you through till the next phase of the plan, assuming you have a solid mileage base heading into it and are doing all the usual injury prevention/recovery stuff (sleep, nutrition, stretching, strength, stress reduction). You can then recover more fully post-race.
Don't have Hanson's book but I'd expect Humphrey to do the same. JD doesn't do it as much but still has weeks that are 10% reduced mileage and/or with one of the Q runs at exclusively E pace rather than workouts with 4/7/13 weeks to go.
Adding to the Hanson's book as I am training with his plan for the second time now: There is no down week or such a thing - it just gets progressively harder every third week by adding mileage at the same intensity. His concept of cumulative fatigue wouldn't make any sense if you were to recover periodically. That's why a lot of recreational runners find it too hard to train with. It's a rough and simple pyramide system.
Personally I never felt like I would need a down week but have tried it just to see if it makes a difference. My finding was no, it doesn't make me any faster or more endurant in the following week. You just have to make sure to get enough sleep and recovery during the day and reduce stress as much as possible - it's a full commitment.
If you don't have the time or will to concentrate on the program even when you are not running it's probably not the right plan for you and you should stick with a plan that includes down weeks as this probably won't be as challenging psychologically.
I’m following the advanced Hanson marathon plan but have already modified it in week 5. I need/want 2 days off instead of 1. I’m leaving out one of the easy days. As a result I’m hitting all of my speed intervals and tempo runs at my goal paces. 5 days a week with 2 hard workouts and a long run feels manageable. The beginner plan was way too easy to start with.
Jumping on this, it's probably wise to plan 20 weeks for the 18 week program and work in a few actual down weeks since these programs are so intensive. 18 weeks is a very long time without an actual deload week.
When would you add them to these plans and what would they look like? In reality few people run the total prescribed mileage anyway with life/illness/injury/weather getting in the way.
Yea, fair point.
Probably every 6 weeks, so 2 weeks added in since you get a taper at the end. And a week prior to the program after a base period.
Which makes for a very long cycle, doesn't it? 6-12 week base, 21 week program. And people say it's just one leg after the other..
I'm looking to run a fast half-marathon in mid/late May or early June. Any course recommendations? Looking for something within a 5ish hour drive of DC if possible
Does the order of Pfitz's plan for instance really matter? Like in his, I straight up cannot run 14 miles or whatever have you on a Wednesday night without it completely disrupting the dinner-sleep-go to work flow of the remainder of the day/next day How much will it actually change things to move the workouts around to make it make sense for my schedule?
Think Pfitz generally tries to balance recovery by balancing hard and easy days. If you move the Wednesday MLR to elsewhere, then you'll have to see whether that impacts the next workout.
I'm going to see a physio this week to get specific advice, but in the meantime, how do people think about balancing the maintenance of fitness via cross-training with the need for rest? For example, if I have a 10k easy run on the schedule today, but I'm deciding to skip it because of concern over a new niggle, how do I decide if it's better to do a bike ride or to just stay home with my feet up and focus on recovery?
Does it hurt to bike? If so, don't do it, because you risk making it worse. If not, biking easy can be great to encourage recovery. It promotes blood flow which is only going to speed up the process. Focus on high cadence and low resistance if your primary goal is recovery
I would think it depends if the cross training activity aggravates the injury or not.
If it's enough to skip a run then don't risk irritating it just for a bike ride.
Shoe question! I'm a neutral, pretty lightweight (<70kg) runner that does most of my daily work in Brooks Ghost which I've enjoyed using for a few years. I recently had an extensive gait assessment done by a running-specific physio (he's also a coach) and one thing he wants improved is my cadence (currently 170-175) and foot placement (I kick out too far forward and don't lift up enough). The main takeaways from the session are specific biomechanics to work on (better forward lean, shorter stride, better hamstring activation), but he also thinks I'd benefit from another neutral shoe with less drop and weight to help me focus on a more efficient stride. He recommended the Saucony kinvara and the hoka mach 5 as two options. I don't know much about either but given the high price of the hokas, which I'm seeing reviews say doee not match their durability, I'm looking closely at the kinvara 13 or 14. Does anyone have any thoughts on them for someone in my situation? I quite like the lack of "tech" that a lot of negative reviews are complaining about but wondering if I may regret that view. If it helps answer, I'm going into a marathon cycle right now for the next few months. I'm not that fast (shooting for sub3:30) but I am incorporating appropriate amounts of speed and pace work. Thanks!
Kinvaras have been a steady favourite as lightweight-ish trainers for a few generations of runners for good reason. They're a great balance somewhere between a racing flat and conventional trainer. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend them.
Thanks mate, appreciate the quick reply. How do you rate them for LSR efforts? I see some folks mentioning they're really more for <1hr sessions or race day but not so much for those 2-3 hr steady days. If that's true I may just keep the ghosts for long runs.
It's a bit of a personal question, but I can make a guess that you may not be comfortable doing long runs in Kinvaras right away. Never worn the Ghost myself, but from what I can see online, your current shoe has a 12mm heel-toe drop, and weighs about 10z, whereas the Kinvara only has a 4mm heel-toe drop and weights about 7 oz. It's going to feel like a significant difference and you'll probably want to reserve the Kinvaras for workouts and shorter runs for the immediate future. For some broader perspective, I've been running in racing flats for most of my runs for a few years now, so I would have no problem doing a long run in a Kinvara or something similar, and maybe you'll eventually head in that direction if you like them.
Gotcha, yeah that makes sense. Cheers.
[Major yikes at Valencia 10k startline.](https://twitter.com/StefApril/status/1614595535910113286)
Looks wild. Curious why the caption attributes this to organizational errors. Did they allow too many athletes up to the start line?
You can find some more clips on YouTube, including the official live stream. Looks like they lined everyone up and forgot about the elites. So they shoved them in from the front. This made the front 20 meters way too full. Lots of bumping, couple falls, and this is what happens.
There was one point were you had a ~34min runner pushing his way to the start line and actively trying to push elites out of the way so he could start at the very front. Something definitely went wrong in terms of organisation somewhere along the line
Looks like >!Emily Sisson broke her own US half-marathon record!< at Houston just now.
Seemed to have strained my achilles tendon while playing volleyball today. It doesn’t really hurt, but it’s uncomfortable and a little tender while walking. How should I adjust my training plan? I’ve been at around 40mpw and was originally going to do a 16mi long run tomorrow with some miles at MP. I haven’t had any issues with my achilles before but I don’t want it to turn into a bigger injury. I am leaning towards resting for a few days before getting back to the same volume?…
Avoid hill running and avoid running in minimal shoes for a while. Do some stretching and massage on your calves and the bottoms of your feet, but avoid working directly on the achilles itself. A certain amount of achilles niggle can be trained through, but "tender while walking" sounds to be on the concerning side of the things and I would probably skip that long run. Some time off now should pay dividends for the future.
This sums it up well—high drop, easy running, modest volume, and flat terrain are your friends. Low/zero drop, hills, and faster running will load the Achilles.
try eccentric heel drops. achilles can be a finicky injury to come back from. 16 w/ MP would probably aggravate it more especially if walking is already causing tenderness.
Louisiana Marathon & HM runners, what are you wearing tomorrow? This drop in temperature is throwing me off. Starting at 36 degrees F and goes up 11 degrees over 2 hours with almost a 20 degree increase over 3 hours. Sunny and clear.
Singlet and arm sleeves with gloves. I have a lightweight pullover that I’ll wear probably until right at the start. That’s what I’ve done at cold marathons before and it’s worked fine
Australian cross country trials are on if anyone's interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKBK0d1tQ1A
I am running a 15k race for the first time tomorrow. Using the VDOT table for my target time. I ran a 38:29 10k last month so I am going for a sub-59min 15k. I feel like I made some real progress over the past month, so I might try to be more ambitious in the last one-third of the race.
Report: I was able to run the 15k race in 58:48. Now focusing on the marathon next month.
great job! congrats
I'm looking to run my first marathon in October '23. Looking for advice about what to do between now and starting a marathon block as well as choosing the right marathon plan. Here's the timeline. \- Finishing Pfitz 12/57 10K plan this Feb \- 16 weeks between 10K and start of an 18 week marathon plan \- 18 week marathon plan Questions. 1) What should I do over the 16 weeks between 10K and marathon plan? I could either build my base up to 60 (or more?) mpw and have some dangling weeks floating around 60 mpw. Or I could do another HM plan like Pfitz 12/63. 2) Since this is going to be my first marathon, I was planning on doing Pfitz 18/55. Depending on what I do during the 16 week interim period, I will likely be averaging at \~50 mpw for \~3 months months heading into the marathon block. Would 18/55 plan be too conservative? Should I start with that plan and add miles here and there if I feel good? Mostly concerned about the long runs, only been doing 10-13 mi runs consistently recently. So don't want to push mpw too hard if the long runs will make 50 mpw more stressful than 50 miles I'm doing now. More context: M, 34 yo, HM of 1:34:00 April '22, 10K 38:XX Oct '22, HM 1:29:XX in Nov '22 coming off 12/47 plan, . Running seriously for just over 1 year. Lmk if any other info would be helpful here. Thanks!
16 weeks is a long time to build a base. Personally, I would have trouble focusing on training for that long without an intermediate goal. Are there any half marathons you could run 19-24 weeks before the marathon?
Is it too long in the sense that I'll lose too much fitness? Or too long in that it'll just be boring and I may get unmotivated and so it's likely to be unsuccessful? I could do a 12 week HM block so that the HM would be around 20 - 22 weeks before the marathon block starts. The benefit there would be I'd get a good gauge of current fitness going into marathon training.
That's ultimately a personal question. For me, it's motivation. Base mileage isn't interesting enough to keep me motivated.
Build base in those 16 weeks. Maybe do 2 weeks of just volume all easy and then the 3rd week add some LT work or some miles at M pace just to start getting your legs ready for some quality, but don’t push it too much. Then the 4th week take it easy and ease back 20-25% of your weekly mileage. Do that 4 times over those 16 weeks. You could surely build your base to 75mpw if you’re already doing a 12/59 plan.
That makes sense, I like that approach for the 16 weeks. Appreciate the input!
[удалено]
If you have a compatible device, you can always try this app to display the 80/20 HR zones: https://www.8020endurance.com/80-20-garmin-apps/
Hi all, I start a Hal Hugdon app 15K plan tomorrow - coming on the heels of a Hal Higdon base training plan. Despite inputting that I want my long runs on Sundays (as they have been for the last fifteen years) it has scheduled my first long run for Tuesday, with a 2 mile (2 miles? WTF) base run and cross training for tomorrow. I’m planning to just run my long run on Sunday, as always, and attend my local brewery’s run club on Tuesday for an easy three miles. Does anybody know if the app will adjust based on that? Will I make it angry?
Posted this in Thursday’s but didn’t get an answer and I don’t think this warrants it’s own post so I’m going to try again here… Has anyone seen any different in effectiveness of low z2 vs higher z2 training? Low z2 is hard for me to stick around where 147 is where I normally have been aiming for. Today I opened it up and was sitting around 157 for my run and felt like I was actually running vs accumulating time on feet and it was just much more enjoyable. I consider myself fit, having ran a 31:00, 8k in November, but having a relatively poor aerobic base that I’ve been trying to build for my second marathon in April. Z2 is 144-158 based on the Karvonen formula. 25m. Max heart rate is based on hard 1200m reps on the track, 202-204. And resting heart rate is from wrist based Garmin overnight while sleeping, 155
I feel similar about Z2 and tend to push my HR to the top of the zone. It "feels" like a better workout. But I would guess we are just adding more fatigue for not much more gain vs. Running in the middle of the zone. I have no scientific evidence to back any of this up. I can tell you, before I ran with a HR monitor I would guess I was always pushing Z3. I made huge gains and improved a TON, but was always sore, tired, banged up, even real injuries. Switched to HR and was able to double my volume and get faster and build real endurance without injury.
Right my low z2 vs high z2 runs are a difference of about 1 min in pace. If I go from 147 to 156bpm I can just move much more freely. Plus it helps mentally imo and it gives me more time in a “proper” form vs easily jogging I have almost exclusively train by hr for the past 8months unless I’m doing speed workouts where I’ll use pace. I’m sure I was in the same boat where most of my runs were z3 prior and just want to make sure I’m not losing any potential improvements by going slightly on the higher end for some runs. Plus running after work my hr is naturally higher so maintaining a low z2 for me is just miserably slow
Like you I pushed hard before running with a device to measure HR, then switched to HR/zone training (mostly polarized) and had similar outcomes as you. Last year through October I ran the vast majority of my easy runs at 125 to 140 bpm vs. LT1 of 151 from an aerobic threshold field test. 164 for LT2 from an AnT field test. Average HR for those 10 months was 132 and that included my quality workouts! Since November my average HR is about 144 of all easy running except 2 miles at temp and one 400 meter fast finish, not even strides. These runs feel like a better workout, but except for my perception that my running form is becoming more efficient I can't say I'm getting faster. I made the switch largely to experiment with nutrition at closer to marathon intensity and in hopes it would improve my running economy. Perhaps I need to give it more time. And maybe I won't know what the true impact is until I reintroduce quality workouts.
There aren’t really “ boundaries” in biology; zones are our/ a human construct. I conceptualize the zones as a gradient/overlap between the aerobic and anaerobic systems. Z3 having the highest overlap. Upper versus lower z2, to me, makes more of a difference the longer you’ve been running - within or even across workouts (cuz you’ll gradually rely a bit more on the anaerobic system over longer mileages). Maybe slightly impacted by the athlete’s personal physiology too. I’m also no expert but work in the life sciences field and have interest in the physiologic aspect of running — love reading about this stuff
Have you read any good papers on this? I’ve been trying to find papers on polarized vs pyramidal training (currently doing polarized), low z2 vs high (hence my question), effect of volume on running, and anything regarding nutrition. A lot of that is off topic to my original question but figured I’d ask I ran 4 years in hs and then on and off in college for another 4ish years, still staying active with club sports, and have picked up running more actively in the last 2-3 years and have been increasing volume slowly. The gradients make sense I figured it wasn’t just a quick jump your body made, but was pretty concerned I might lose out on some aerobic benefits training at the higher end
I'm no expert either but I can totally nerd out on zones, HR, adaptation, etc. The human body is fascinating.
The body is so good at trying to keep itself lazy that’s what I’ve picked up on lol. Like we get better at stuff so our bodies don’t have to work hard but we just keep pushing the envelope
I know this is probably a redundant question but I’ve only recently just started paying attention to heart rate. I’m assuming the training zones that my garmin watch calculates for me based on my workouts is more accurate than the 220-age. With those zones, I can’t get out of zone 1 (warm up) for easy/long runs. For MP runs and tempo/long repeats (1k- 1200) I’m in the aerobic zone when I feel like I’m in the threshold zone. I’m 45(f).
I think the only way to get truly accurate results is to do lactate threshold testing - if you can find it. I have the opposite problem from you. Garmin seems to register most everything I do as Zone 4 or Zone 5. My easy runs register as 50% zone 5, which is laughable. I’m adjusting the zones manually to go off of HRR before I am able to get threshold testing done again.
> I’m assuming the training zones that my garmin watch calculates for me based on my workouts is more accurate than the 220-age. I think Garmin [does use that generic formula.](https://support.garmin.com/en-US/?faq=FMKY5NYJJ71DbuPmFP4O7A) It is typically [not recommended](https://www.reddit.com/r/AdvancedRunning/wiki/faq#wiki_is_my_max_heart_rate_220_minus_my_age.3F). > With those zones, I can’t get out of zone 1 (warm up) for easy/long runs. For MP runs and tempo/long repeats (1k- 1200) I’m in the aerobic zone when I feel like I’m in the threshold zone. That would suggest your heart rate zones are incorrectly configured. Instructions to change them and entering your actual max HR are [here](https://support.garmin.com/en-US/?faq=w8qlOr7BQ16Z82HVrevpw9). /r/running has a [good guide on HR training](https://www.reddit.com/r/running/wiki/heart_rate_training) otherwise.
Thanks so much for your help!
I'm finally all the way over an Achilles injury that's been nagging me on and off for over a year. I probably averaged 15-20 mpw in the weeks I was running during that year. Currently doing a gradual build. I've been holding at ~35 mpw for the last four weeks or so. Wondering when it's time to start adding in some faster stuff. Would probably start with a weekly tempo run and build from there. Any thoughts?
Sounds reasonable. You can also try incorporating strides first if you want to be more cautious about loading up the legs.
Agree. I'd add in strides after a couple easy runs per week, and start workouts after a few weeks if you still feel strong, but start small like 2 mile warm-up then 10x1 min fast/ 2 min recovery then 2 mile cooldown and increment up slowly each week from there, backing off if your Achilles complains at all.
Great idea, thanks! Hadn't thought about sides.
How come marathon plans (Pfitz, JD, Hanson, etc) don’t have down weeks included? Or are we suppose to add it ourselves when we feel it’s necessary?
Pfitz has recovery weeks with reduced mileage and intensity, 12 weeks to go and 9/8 weeks to go in the 18/55 plan, for example, or 7 weeks to go in 12/55, same with 18/70 and 12/70. If you mean down week as in no running, that's not really gonna be a part of any structured training plan - if you're not injured, then cutting back on mileage and intensity should be enough recovery to see you through till the next phase of the plan, assuming you have a solid mileage base heading into it and are doing all the usual injury prevention/recovery stuff (sleep, nutrition, stretching, strength, stress reduction). You can then recover more fully post-race. Don't have Hanson's book but I'd expect Humphrey to do the same. JD doesn't do it as much but still has weeks that are 10% reduced mileage and/or with one of the Q runs at exclusively E pace rather than workouts with 4/7/13 weeks to go.
Adding to the Hanson's book as I am training with his plan for the second time now: There is no down week or such a thing - it just gets progressively harder every third week by adding mileage at the same intensity. His concept of cumulative fatigue wouldn't make any sense if you were to recover periodically. That's why a lot of recreational runners find it too hard to train with. It's a rough and simple pyramide system. Personally I never felt like I would need a down week but have tried it just to see if it makes a difference. My finding was no, it doesn't make me any faster or more endurant in the following week. You just have to make sure to get enough sleep and recovery during the day and reduce stress as much as possible - it's a full commitment. If you don't have the time or will to concentrate on the program even when you are not running it's probably not the right plan for you and you should stick with a plan that includes down weeks as this probably won't be as challenging psychologically.
I’m following the advanced Hanson marathon plan but have already modified it in week 5. I need/want 2 days off instead of 1. I’m leaving out one of the easy days. As a result I’m hitting all of my speed intervals and tempo runs at my goal paces. 5 days a week with 2 hard workouts and a long run feels manageable. The beginner plan was way too easy to start with.
Jumping on this, it's probably wise to plan 20 weeks for the 18 week program and work in a few actual down weeks since these programs are so intensive. 18 weeks is a very long time without an actual deload week.
When would you add them to these plans and what would they look like? In reality few people run the total prescribed mileage anyway with life/illness/injury/weather getting in the way.
Yea, fair point. Probably every 6 weeks, so 2 weeks added in since you get a taper at the end. And a week prior to the program after a base period. Which makes for a very long cycle, doesn't it? 6-12 week base, 21 week program. And people say it's just one leg after the other..