EPTRunning Thread 2014 - Page 27
| Forum Index > Sports |
|
JinDesu
United States3990 Posts
| ||
|
caznitch
Canada645 Posts
| ||
|
Bonham
Canada655 Posts
| ||
|
L_Master
United States8017 Posts
On September 11 2014 03:54 Bonham wrote: Aw, you guys have just never enjoyed a nice runner's high before. You've got it still to come! How does an 18:30 guy beat a 15:30 guy? Are you talking about the aerodynamic shenanigans afforded by the peloton or something else? Yea basically. It's like track racing but on steroids. In a track race it's pretty hard to win if you lead and push the pace the entire way. You do spend a little more energy being out in front both mentally and not getting shelter, and at elite level that difference obviously matters and is why we get so many diamond league jogfests. In cycling though, the drafting benefits are significantly greater. Good shelter can provide a 30-40% reduction in necessary wattage. That's like running 7:00 effort and being able to run with guys on pace for 12:55 5k. Now, obviously it takes a specific type of guy to take advantage of that. Even if I got to race at 7:00 pace and be at the bell with the diamond league elite I would still get smashed by 4-6 seconds. But if I was an 18:30 guy with 50 second speed...we'll I'd be competitive to win DL events, and certainly would have no trouble smashing 15:30 guys, as most have no where near 50 second closing ability. Now that all starts to change when you get to hill climbs or to a lesser extent hilly road races. At that point, the drafting benefits decrease a bunch, and it ends up being much more similar to a running race in that pure fitness wins. For crits (sort of the bike equivalent of a track race) and flatter road races, it's much more about efficient tactics and being able to put out 10-20 seconds at somewhere between 1100-1600W depending on the level of racing you are at. One other thing about cycling though is that there are two types of "pure fitness". The first is the time trial specialist, and the second is the climbing specialist. Time trialists usually can climb ok, but not as good as pure climbers, but they are generally slightly bigger guys pushing higher wattages. On flat ground when cycling weight is completely irrelevant, which is different from running. So, in the case of flatter stuff (which time trials generally are) pure watts are more important. An 80kg rider than can push 450W for an hour will beat a 60kg rider who can push 360W for an hour. It's not quite pure watts, as your Cda (basically drag area) does tend to increase with size, but it's a subtle effect. However, once you hit the hills though, it's all about w/kg. Smaller riders generally have slightly better w/kg and thus are advantaged as the road turns up. Personally, I haven't observed that in running, there is a slight trend in running to be bigger as the race distance gets shorter, but people of all profiles succeed at shorter races (at least 800 and up). There is no such thing as a 60 kg time trial champion in cycling though. | ||
|
L_Master
United States8017 Posts
On September 10 2014 20:00 micronesia wrote: To someone like me this seems to ridiculous lol... Running hasn't ever been like that for me. It takes a while. I never noticed that until I started to get fairly fit and was running a good 30-40 mpw. I forget how much you are training, but I think it's significantly less common to get that feeling if you are only running a few times a week; you just don't get in tune enough with your body to enable it to happen, and it's also possible to just not have the fitness and as such almost every run is challenging, especially if there are any hills. | ||
|
Don_Julio
2220 Posts
On September 11 2014 04:44 caznitch wrote: Got a 10k race this weekend. Aiming for 42:xx to beat my race earlier this summer at 44:xx. It hurts to think about how much training it takes to shave 2 mins off my 10k time. Then again I suppose sprinters slave away for years trying to shave off milliseconds - it could be worse. 2 minutes in a few months is a huge improvement. If you can pull this off it means that your earlier race was terribly paced and you had a bad day or that you're still far away from plateau and we'll see a sub 40 next year. Well, good luck this weekend and make sure to report back. _______ I have a question about my half marathon trainingplan and how I can fit in a 10k race 17 days before the half. The plan is a generic one by Asics. I'm pretty sure that it's crap now but it did suit my needs perfectly (4 running days,16 weeks, no HRM required). There is no elegant option to export the plan so I made a screenshot. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ljnZLcD.png) So there's a local 10k race coming up and I'd like to run it to get a feel of what I'm capable of atm (no race for two months). It's a October 2nd. My training plan schedules a "comfortable" 13,5k run for that day but more importantly a fast 18k three days later as the last big workout before the tapering phase. Asics seems to put a lot of emphasis on these fast 18k runs. What I consider right now is to race the 10k and run the 18k+ at an easy pace instead. Any opinions? Will it impact my HM performance? PS: 1:34 is not my goal time. My actual goal is around 1:37. It's just what Asics' little app calculated after I told it that my 10k PR is 44:00. Getting close to 1:35:00 might be possible if everything works out perfectly. | ||
|
L_Master
United States8017 Posts
So there's a local 10k race coming up and I'd like to run it to get a feel of what I'm capable of atm (no race for two months). It's a October 2nd. My training plan schedules a "comfortable" 13,5k run for that day but more importantly a fast 18k three days later as the last big workout before the tapering phase. Asics seems to put a lot of emphasis on these fast 18k runs. What I consider right now is to race the 10k and run the 18k+ at an easy pace instead. Any opinions? Will it impact my HM performance? Well, you're racing 10k, so once you throw in WU/CD you'll be at 13.5k. No reason to take the 18k run at an easy pace, three days is more than sufficient recovery time to be ready for another workout. Just remember to actually take it easy the two days in between. PS: 1:34 is not my goal time. My actual goal is around 1:37. It's just what Asics' little app calculated after I told it that my 10k PR is 44:00. Getting close to 1:35:00 might be possible if everything works out perfectly. Those 18k runs, is the entire run at that quicker listed pace, and are you running them at 4:32 pace? | ||
|
Don_Julio
2220 Posts
Yes. It sais I'm supposed to run at a consistent pace out of my comfort zone. 4:32 is the optimal pace but it's not dramatic if I run slower. I just came back from a very fast 13,5k + warmup, which I finished in 1:00:00. It hurt but was manageable. It's basically another breakthrough and a huge confidence boost so I might get there eventually. | ||
|
caznitch
Canada645 Posts
On September 12 2014 02:20 Don_Julio wrote: Yes. It sais I'm supposed to run at a consistent pace out of my comfort zone. 4:32 is the optimal pace but it's not dramatic if I run slower. I just came back from a very fast 13,5k + warmup, which I finished in 1:00:00. It hurt but was manageable. It's basically another breakthrough and a huge confidence boost so I might get there eventually. I have no advice to give but please let me know how you found your training plan after you run your HM. I'll be looking for a new one soon (those requested fast paces defs seem too high for me though). | ||
|
caznitch
Canada645 Posts
I think I may just run a 10k at race pace by myself and see what happens. Next 10k I can run is in Nov. so it looks like I can just restart the 10week program I was using from week one. | ||
|
L_Master
United States8017 Posts
On September 12 2014 02:20 Don_Julio wrote: Yes. It sais I'm supposed to run at a consistent pace out of my comfort zone. 4:32 is the optimal pace but it's not dramatic if I run slower. I just came back from a very fast 13,5k + warmup, which I finished in 1:00:00. It hurt but was manageable. It's basically another breakthrough and a huge confidence boost so I might get there eventually. If you can run 4:32 for 18k you can sure as heck run better than 1:35. I'd be thinking 1:32 give or take a couple minutes based on that. Heck 3x5km @ HMP is considered to be a very challenging workout. 18k straight at HMP...well like I said if you can run 18k at "HMP" in training...that isn't HMP. | ||
|
Don_Julio
2220 Posts
On September 12 2014 06:52 caznitch wrote: I have no advice to give but please let me know how you found your training plan after you run your HM. I'll be looking for a new one soon (those requested fast paces defs seem too high for me though). http://myasics.us/my - click on Get Started. As I said the plan is far from ideal. I chose it because it fitted my weekly mileage and running days. There is no option if you want to run more than 4 days which you should. (I'm going to move up to 5-6 days over the winter.) On September 12 2014 13:05 caznitch wrote: Yar! So, living in the hellhole that is Calgary, my race was cancelled due to a snow storm. The heavy snow ripped down so many trees and branches that the park slated for the course was closed. I think I may just run a 10k at race pace by myself and see what happens. Next 10k I can run is in Nov. so it looks like I can just restart the 10week program I was using from week one. Shit. Snow storms in september should be forbidden. I's be so mad. On September 12 2014 13:59 L_Master wrote: If you can run 4:32 for 18k you can sure as heck run better than 1:35. I'd be thinking 1:32 give or take a couple minutes based on that. Heck 3x5km @ HMP is considered to be a very challenging workout. 18k straight at HMP...well like I said if you can run 18k at "HMP" in training...that isn't HMP. I haven't done any of the fast 18ks yet so we'll see how it works out. My mood switched from worried if I can meet my goals to excitement for the race over the last week. I'm already excited and the race is 5 weeks away ... | ||
|
WoolySheep
Canada82 Posts
A little background, I was never a distance runner as a kid, and in high school/university years I was running 3 miles at a modest 7 min/mile pace, with basically no training (I'd come home from work and run 3 miles in 21 minutes, then be done with it, 2-3 times a week. Fast forward 7 years later, I'm 27 and have a half marathon under my belt (Ran May 2014, 1:44 - 8 min/mile pace) and at 10K PR of 45 on a treadmill. I really want to be able to do a sub-40 10K, and have been consistently running, etc over the past several months since my half marathon. I ran a crappy 6M race in 48 minutes back at the beginning of August with little training before hand, and am running another 10K October 19th. Today I ran a 5K at the track in 21:26 (mile splits of splits of 6:53, 6:54, 6:48, 51 more seconds to go half a lap). I was really looking for the 19:11, but expected this would probably happen. I am feeling kinda of dejected because I have been running longer mileages over the past 6-7 weeks following this training program: plan (just finished up week 7). Basically I feel like I am seeing no results. I can consistently do 880 repeats in 3 min. My longer runs are run at an 8 min pace, and I've calculated I have about VO2 of about 44-46 (both numbers feel paltry). Is that schedule any good? I used a similar one on that site for my half marathon and while I missed their goal defined by the schedule by 5 minutes, I felt good about it being my first big race. I just finished Advanced Marathoning (highly educational), and was wondering if next time I should grab a schedule from their book, and reduce it? Each training plan the detail is for marathoners, but could I scale it down for a 10K? If so, would I do a quarter of each workout, or maybe half? Sorry for rambling - I feel at a loss for my non-improvements. Maybe I was just tired still and will do better once I've tapered. I made a new goal of 10K in 42, but after today I don't even know if that is doable  Thanks for any advice you could lend! | ||
|
mtmentat
United States142 Posts
On September 13 2014 21:20 WoolySheep wrote: + Show Spoiler + Well guys, I'm not sure what to make of this. I was hoping I could post some information and get you guys to point out anything I am doing wrong. I apologize for any incoherent rambling. A little background, I was never a distance runner as a kid, and in high school/university years I was running 3 miles at a modest 7 min/mile pace, with basically no training (I'd come home from work and run 3 miles in 21 minutes, then be done with it, 2-3 times a week. Fast forward 7 years later, I'm 27 and have a half marathon under my belt (Ran May 2014, 1:44 - 8 min/mile pace) and at 10K PR of 45 on a treadmill. I really want to be able to do a sub-40 10K, and have been consistently running, etc over the past several months since my half marathon. I ran a crappy 6M race in 48 minutes back at the beginning of August with little training before hand, and am running another 10K October 19th. Today I ran a 5K at the track in 21:26 (mile splits of splits of 6:53, 6:54, 6:48, 51 more seconds to go half a lap). I was really looking for the 19:11, but expected this would probably happen. I am feeling kinda of dejected because I have been running longer mileages over the past 6-7 weeks following this training program: plan (just finished up week 7). + Show Spoiler + Basically I feel like I am seeing no results. I can consistently do 880 repeats in 3 min. My longer runs are run at an 8 min pace, and I've calculated I have about VO2 of about 44-46 (both numbers feel paltry). Is that schedule any good? I used a similar one on that site for my half marathon and while I missed their goal defined by the schedule by 5 minutes, I felt good about it being my first big race. I just finished Advanced Marathoning (highly educational), and was wondering if next time I should grab a schedule from their book, and reduce it? Each training plan the detail is for marathoners, but could I scale it down for a 10K? If so, would I do a quarter of each workout, or maybe half? Sorry for rambling - I feel at a loss for my non-improvements. Maybe I was just tired still and will do better once I've tapered. I made a new goal of 10K in 42, but after today I don't even know if that is doable Thanks for any advice you could lend! I think you're still on track for a good time with your 10K, and that SUB-42 IS DOABLE AND THAT YOU WILL SURPRISE YOURSELF. A single track workout during what is close to the "peak" of your training schedule is simply going to be disappointing, unless your training hasn't been pushing your ability enough. Your body is probably tired, there may be other factors like diet/dehydration/recovery contributing to a single slower-than-expected 5k. Plus, unless you were running it with someone you won't have had the push/pull of truly "racing." Your training plan includes a bit of taper in the last two weeks, and it's going to feel great.  Good luck, and keep us informed. Sleep well, eat well, stretch and massage muscles when you can. Enjoy how light and quick the racing flats will feel on the day, don't worry about it until then. | ||
|
LuckyFool
United States9015 Posts
I got through it but I was dead the last few miles. One more 22 miler in a couple weeks and then I should be all set. I'm going to approach the 22 miler exactly how I'll approach race morning, so hopefully I'll run and feel out a more accurate time. | ||
|
Bonham
Canada655 Posts
Also, when is your marathon again LuckyFool? I hope you're giving yourself enough time to absorb the benefits of these big runs and recover from them. | ||
|
LuckyFool
United States9015 Posts
Planning on shorter more race pace specific running 2-3 weeks out with the taper beginning about 2 weeks out. | ||
|
Bonham
Canada655 Posts
Also, if this is your first time doing a taper, know that the mental side of things is more than half the battle. Maintain intensity while lowering volume in your training, and do whatever you can to ward off insanity. | ||
|
L_Master
United States8017 Posts
Probably the hardest thing I've ever done physically, definitely harder than running up the mountain. Though my gearing may have played a roll as 34-27 is my lowest gear, which makes for some serious grinding. It's like doing leg presses all the way up the mountain. Really was battling with myself not to quit in those last 2 miles where it ramps up to 13% or so at 13000'. Pissssseeed at strava/phone though. Started the recording and got to the top with 2:31 on the clock, but the display read 0 miles and 0 mph average speed. Seems the GPS or something failed, despite having a signal according to the app. Guess that means I'll just have to do it again sometime  Pretty psyched to get back to running though, hopefully I'll be reasonably fit as I've maintained decent mileage over the summer and obviously have supplemented with an extra 8-12 hours of cycling per week. One more week left of heavy cycling because the Y where I work is having a competition between branches for most miles ridden, and I figured throwing up 400-500 miles over 2 weeks should get the job done. Then back to runnniingggg!!!! | ||
|
Yorkie
United States12612 Posts
| ||
| ||
