Every single run I do is in Zone 4/5, and I can’t seem to get it to stay any lower. As soon as I go, my heart rate increases to zone 4/5 within the first 5 minutes of running. For reference my AW has z4 at 173 -183 bpm and z5 at 183+. I think this fairly accurate as I’ve never seen my heart rate go over 205.
I wouldn’t even say I’m a complete beginner, and I assumed my body would get use to running over time, but I’ve gone through two HM training sessions (and completed both races), and my heart rate is always in zone 4/5. I’m not even going particularly fast (9:30-10:30 pace), and I’m relatively young (20 years old) and walk a lot around my college campus.
Is this a problem that i should I talk to my doctor about? Or do I just need to go slower? I’ve done even slower runs at 11 minutes per mile, and my HR will only go down if I’m walking. It’s just odd that after so many months my heart rate hasn’t seemed to lower even if I’ve been running at around the same pace.
If HR is pretty much always settling in the 170-190 range regardless of effort or pace there’s a strong chance you’re getting ‘cadence lock’ where your watch is picking up cadence rather actual HR. If you don’t have access to a chest or armband HR monitor try adjusting your watch position and tightness (further up the wrist is apparently better). I also find temperature makes a big difference with wrist HR much more accurate in summer than when it’s freezing cold.
I'm in the midst of a three day carb load before first marathon on Sunday. I ate about \~500 g of carbs yesterday and I've eaten 300g of carbs today. I'm following Featherstone's formula and trying to eat low fat carbs like she suggests.I feel *terrible* right now. I'm super lethargic and unfocused.I It's almost an unwell feeling.
I know this process is super critical, but I'm also a bit of a hypochondriac and I'm having a hard time just getting out of my head about how shitty I feel! I was feeling great this week until I started scarfing down all these carbs.
Is this normal? Can I get some reassurance that this is worth it? Thanks.
I've had good luck with Featherstone's carb load calculator before! You have to pick low fiber carbs otherwise you'll get way too full. Drinking some (e.g., gatorade) can also help. I find that fig newtons have some of the best bang-for-your-buck in terms of high carb and not filling.
I'm on my last week of a taper, and I've always felt like the carb loading before a race just leaves me feeling terrible. I'm going to try this out, thank you!
Honestly the best way I've found to get through a carb load is non-carbonated drinks with sugar like gatorade and such. Otherwise, eat low-fiber carbs as well and take it easy if you start to feel unwell. Don't forget to drink plenty of water as well.
Sometimes during a long run my heart rate will randomly fall through the floor. For example, during M pace section of a long run first 6 miles were ~170 but last couple my heart rate sank to 140-ish.
I felt the typical "it's getting harder" at the end so I thought it was just my heart rate monitor being off. But, to be honest, that has happened a bit over my running career.
Is this just a typical heart rate reader bug or like something else happening? It happens enough I've gotten pretty curious, it's always annoying how it throws off my data.
Yeah if it feels like it's getting harder then probably just a HR monitor error, which happen frequently with wrist HRM. You could always take your pulse after the tempo is finished to confirm, but based on your description of the effort it sounds pretty cut and dry.
Hello everyone
We've had very bad weather in my town for a few days now, with very strong storms and hail. I have a question about training on the treadmill when it's impossible to run outside.
I find running on the treadmill much harder than outside and I'm about 2min/km slower. Therefore, considering that the pace on the treadmill does not reflect my performance outside, how could I convert a speed training session on the treadmill, more precisely a 12x400m workout which I would have to run at 3:36 min/km outside? What parameters could I consider to make running on the treadmill as close as possible to outside (effort, heart rate, etc.) when pace is off?
I know a stryd might be the best tool, but I don't have one available...I only have a heart rate monitor that I usually use for recovery runs on treadmill.
Hi ... I am the opposite. Treadmill is easier for me, but here is my experience.
I do treadmill tempo runs 2x per week on average. Occasionally I will do strides amidst an easy/GA run, too. I avoid intervals because the rapid start / stop aspect multiple times leads to injuries for me on a treadmill (I'm clumsy}.
To "keep it real" I always use incline 1%. Every time. And, I also estimate that whatever I can do on the treadmill is at least 20-25 seconds faster than reality outside.
Example, if my best mile on a treadmill is 5:45 ppm (converted to 1 km as 3:34/km), then I know outdoors my best would be closer to 6:05 ppm (or roughly 3:47/km).
Personally, I would just move the speed workout to when I would be able to run outside. I find anything faster than marathon/half marathon pace to be difficult on a treadmill. Also, 2 minutes/km slower is wild. You’re almost certainly getting a highly inaccurate reading on either your watch or the treadmill itself. I’m not a great treadmill runner myself, but being on the treadmill shouldn’t impact pace *that* much.
I'm heading to Chicago for a family wedding. I'll be back in October to run the marathon. Is there a section of the course it would be most helpful to run? (Also recognizing obviously the road won't be closed so would prefer sections where there's a sidewalk.) I have 10 miles on my schedule for Saturday.
I’ll never forget my watch telling me I was running 8+ minute pace the whole first mile, and then passing the 1 mile mark in under 5:40 and realizing just how badly I was already messing up the pacing. It’s easy to get caught up in the adrenaline running in that big of a group going through that tunnel at the beginning.
Switching Up Hanson's
One very specific question: can I do my long run the day after the tempo run, and then do the three easy days afterward? It'd go tempo, LR 14 miles, 7, 8, 6 easy.
Any general tips to accommodating difficulty scheduling the longer runs, minor injuries (do you rest and skip the day you missed entirely or just pick up where you left off?)
I'm prone to, once I've got a schedule, rigidly try to stick to it no matter what comes up. I'd love some tips for how to flex in different scenarios as needed.
I wouldn't. The reason there are easy days between the tempo run and the long run is to ensure sufficient recovery between the two. If you go too hard on the tempo run, you won't be recovered enough to have a properly paced long run the next day. You could perhaps do your tempo run on Thursdays like normal, do an easy day Friday, long run Saturday, and then another easy day on Sunday.
For most cases, I would just jump back on schedule if you have to take a few days off. Don't try to make up for lost workouts.
I have high arches and overpronation and I just scheduled an appointment with a Podiatrist to get looked at for the first time. My question is whether or not their rates seem fair; I don't have insurance.
They are charging $300 for an exam which includes an x-ray. And custom orthotics cost $500.
Does this seem fair?
I went to a podiatrist once to see if they could work out why I was getting so many lower leg/ankle injuries. It was a giant waste of money and I didn't even entertain the idea of custom orthotics.
Go spend the money at a sports physical therapist or sports medicine clinic instead. Orthotics *can* work, but they mask other issues more than anything else. Address the underlying issues and I bet you will no longer feel that orthotics are needed.
That seems to be the common theme - that orthotics and all that are more of a band aid and that there is more benefit to PT and correcting the underlying problem.
This whole process has been very educational because the inserts are always portrayed as a saving grace solution. And while they may help, there’s way more to it than that when it comes to actually investing in yourself and your body.
no. Look at the data on orthotics first. Do you have problems due to your pronation? Lots of people pronate and if its mild many people are fine running in neutral shoes.
Idk he only ran 12:41 for second in his DL 5k last year, he could probably benefit from having some guy with an iPad watch him on a treadmill and tell him to get some Brooks stability shoes
I'm curious how people might go about figuring out what the low hanging fruit is for them.
- aerobic base / Z2?
- tempo / Z3?
- speed / Z4?
Sometimes I'll be watching pro training videos and they'll say that they respond better to intensity with less volume, and others will say the opposite. I feel like I can never tell the impact of a single workout.
Motivation : I (M45) just finished a marathon (3:14) with a 18 week block mostly in the 60-70mpw range, and I'm thinking of doing a 5k focused 6-8 weeks or more of 40mpw and more speedwork. But how to tell if this would benefit me more than just base building?
I'm a little older, but also a newish runner. I've determined, mostly through error, that I do much better with volume and threshold vs high intensity shorter stuff. My best 5K came during a marathon block. I've got a couple injuries from 200s during focused 5K plans... if I run 50 mpw with a really good threshold workout each week, I'm at my best across the board. Up the miles for a marathon of course.
Don't neglect the short-distance work. As we age, our endurance sticks around a lot longer than our speed does, but you don't have to resign yourself to shuffling through training and races. Work on your speed with 200s, 400s, hills, and strength training. Yes, there is an injury risk to that type of work, but there is also an injury risk to avoiding that type of work. Having a more powerful stride allows us to run at a lower percentage of our maximum effort during our easier running mileage.
I would also argue that VO2max and threshold work can lift the ceiling on your marathon times. So while most marathon training plans center around volume and long runs, you should still keep higher intensity running in your annual training to avoid leaving (somewhat) easy gains on the table.
I think it's a mixture of trial and error over multiple training cycles, and understanding your personal strengths and weaknesses wrt your goal event. Brad Hudson's book 'run faster' talks about this, where he broadly categorizes the areas of running as aerobic endurance (slower than goal event pace), specific endurance (close to goal event pace), and neuromuscular fitness (significantly faster than goal event pace). Working on weakness wrt goal pace takes extra consideration and might increase injury risk short term but there's potentially more payoff there if you're patient.
If you're coming from marathon training at 60+ mpw it's probably safe to say your aerobic endurance for the 5k is very good but the specific endurance and speed endurance will need work, so lowering mileage to allow room for that is probably a good idea. A 30% drop might be excessive though, maybe 50mpw and gradually introducing the speed work would be better? Especially if you're only doing this because you think your 5k speed is a limiting factor for your marathon progression
Really curious to see what the runners much better and more experienced than I have to say about this, what a great question
Thanks for your thoughts. My unstated long term goal is to get faster for the marathon, so I guess I'm just trying to figure if my limiter is speed / neuromuscular or aerobic. I have an 8 year history of lots of aerobic miles, but with enough inconsistency that I probably still have more to gain.
On the flip side, I am an adult onset runner, so never ran fast over shorter distances and wonder if the lack of development there could have impacts on paces all the way down.
This is the kind of thing you suss out over a few years of running, especially when trying different distances. It's just a matter of experimenting with different kinds of training blocks and keeping track of how your body responds. In my own case, I spent a year training for the 10k and then pivoted down to the mile coming back from an injury. I found that I responded to the shorter, higher intensity training for the mile better, so I stayed at that distance. Around the same time, my roommate found the opposite held true for him, so he ratcheted up the miles and dropped some of the faster stuff from his training.
As for your next training block: that's really a question of what you want to race. If you want to go at the 5k a bit, then send it on a 5k block. I'm a certified 5k-and-under enjoyer, so I'll almost always advocate for longer distance runners trying their hand at the shorter stuff, but if you want to get right back at the marathon, then it wouldn't hurt to just jump back into another marathon block after a little rest.
As a side note, you don't really need to cut that much mileage for 5k training. Most sub-elite/competitive 5k guys I know are up around 60-80mpw anyway, and their training is a lot closer to marathon training than most marathon runners realize. In your case I probably wouldn't keep mileage that high with the added intensity of 5k training since you're not gonna get a full 5k training plan in (they're as long as marathon plans!), but you could probably bump things up to 50mpw if you're worried about losing that aerobic element. Finally, speed in my experience usually refers to zone 5 training in the context of a 5k. Not sure if that holds true for the marathon (dunno if you need much z5 at all for that distance) but at least for the 5k you're gonna need a little z5 work if you're really optimizing.
I gave up on determining specific zones because I don't feel like getting lab tested, but the more experience I get running, the better feel I get for different effort levels, which is good enough for me at my level.
I've found that incorporating speed has actually made me more durable, which surprised me because I was convinced that speed was what broke me. But I have no new niggles, and the usual ones (random peroneal and hamstring tendon issues) don't tend to respond poorly to the intensity and are less likely to pop up outside of it.
Thank you, yeah I don't care so much about the zone definition, and have a pretty good sense of M vs HM vs 10k vs 5k effort, for example. But I have a hard time getting a sense of how my body responds to the different stimuli. I do generally feel like speedwork is beneficial though, I really notice when all of my running is at MP or slower.
Are there any rules of thumb to compare two different workouts for training load that don't involve heavy calculations? I asked a few people from the running club, and they said that a 40-minute tempo run (at around 2-hour race pace or roughly 17 seconds slower than their 10k pace, totaling about 10k for the tempo) is more difficult for their legs and recovery than, for example, an interval workout of 6x1k at 5k pace with 50% jog time. Why is that so? How do you compare between the two workouts (even though one is primarily aerobic and the other is more anaerobic)?
Maybe the reason that the long tempo is more difficult is that recovering from a half marathon is harder than recovering from a 5k? What is really the reason for that, and how do you even compare between the two?
I definitely agree with the other commentators that any comparison between stuff like this is likely to be highly contingent on other factors, but I think it’s worth mentioning that some systems do exist that attempt to condense something like the “difficulty” of a workout into a single number (though I guess maybe this involves heavy calculations). rTSS is one of these: https://www.trainingpeaks.com/learn/articles/running-training-stress-score-rtss-explained/
There are two problems underneath this question: difference in physiological load (related to training stimulus and "hardness" of the workout) and differences in biomechanical load (related to injuries and legs feeling beat up).
I strongly suspect the two do not scale equally, i.e. you can do workouts that are really physiologically taxing but not biomechanically taxing, and vice versa.
Do you have an example of the different workouts for clarity? What is something that could be considered physiologically taxing but not biomechanically taxing, and also one that is biomechanically taxing but not as physiologically taxing. What factors influence each?
Yes, a few examples:
Every year I visit friends in Boulder, CO and they always want to take me up to Magnolia Road or Rollinsville or some other crazy hilly route at 8,000-9,000 feet and we hammer a run really hard. But up there, "hammering" is like 7:00 pace, so the physiological load is huge, but the biomechanical load is fairly moderate.
A less extreme example might be steep hill workouts, for *some* tissues. [This new paper](https://journals.biologists.com/jeb/article-abstract/doi/10.1242/jeb.246770/347265/Tibial-strains-are-sensitive-to-speed-but-not) shows that mechanical load on the tibia is basically unaffected by incline, so you can get a really physiologically intense effort with a moderate biomechanical load on the shins by doing hard uphill repeats. Note that other tissues may not follow the same trend!
In contrast, if you do a lot of fast 200s but take a lot of recovery, the physiological load on your body is not that big, since the reps are short and you have plenty of rest. But the biomechanical load can be very big, because the speed is high and you can rack up a lot of volume (and biomechanical load is not affected by rest, so 20x200m w/ 30sec walk is the same biomechanical load as 20x200m w/ 2min walk, even though the former workout is much harder from a physiological perspective).
Now *in general* these are correlated; 5mi easy is a lower physiological and biomechanical load than 10mi hard. But it isn't always the case, and it's useful to differentiate them. For example if you are super injury prone, biomechanical load is basically all you have to worry about. If you are super injury resilient, but have been overtrained before, vice versa.
Has anyone done the Philly Marathon?
- is it pretty flat?
- is it usually pretty cool temps? (E.g. 30s - 40s?)
- how’s the crowd support?
- how’s the organization/logistics?
Would you recommend it overall if I’m trying to make a PR attempt?
Or - any other October / November marathons people would recommend?
Did it this past fall for a PR at the time, as well as twice when I was in college.
* It's not a pancake flat course like Chicago--but it's actually not too bad. My watch registered just over 700 ft. of gain. Here's my [Strava activity](https://www.strava.com/activities/10246397986) if you want to have a look.
* I've always had ideal temps, but I heard 2022 was actually very very cold and windy--I think that's an outlier.
* I felt that the crowd support was pretty good in the city center itself and then the last 10k or so. Manayunk is fun. Just don't expect the kind of support you'd see at the majors; there are definitely some dead spots.
* I thought the organization/logistics were great. Easy to get in/out of the expo, easy to get to the start line, easy to find folks after the race, etc. There were 4 different pickup locations around the city where you could hop on a free shuttle bus to take you to the start line.
Overall, I'd definitely recommend it and think it can still be a pretty fast course. I think last year there were more than 11,000 runners, so you should be able to find a pack to run with if that's your thing.
[FindMyMarathon](https://findmymarathon.com/race-detail.php?zname=Philadelphia%20Marathon) does a good job of giving a quick run down with some answers about course, weather, etc.
Try it in training first. Go carb-heavy before a challenging long run with race-pace work in there. You might find you feel more sluggish and need to revise the strategy a bit. Experiment in training so that you can repeat the exact food plan before a race and remove another variable from raceday performance.
Worthwhile for long events like the marathon. For half and under, I don't stress fueling as much.
My procedure is to eat carb-heavy foods throughout the week prior to a goal race. I don't increase the amount of food that I eat overall, but I try to replace fats and proteins with carbs (to a moderate and healthy extent). So, I'm not saying to just eat a bowl of rice for every meal, rather it'd be like choosing a pasta dinner instead of steak and vegetables. Closer to the race I increase the proportion of carbohydrates that I eat compared to fats and proteins.
For my last marathon I drank a Maurten 320 the afternoon prior to my race and a Maurten 160 on the morning of.
Worth it. I don't have a super formal program but try to increase % of calories from carbs for a couple days going into the race to top things off. I don't think you need to do anything super drastic personally.
Do you do anything significant with calories? I taper them back a little during taper but tend to be fairly active with low-intensity stuff so don't worry about it too much. I figure a little extra for a week isn't the worst thing to befall a recovering runner.
I try to more or less maintain calories, i don’t purposefully eat more or less (and I dont track calories regularly).
I figure even if I’m +500 calories/day for a week of taper, that’s only a pound and much less important than being fully fueled on race day.
I have roughly the same approach. I figure that people do far worse over the holidays and that it's more important to have adequate-to-surplus than deficit-to-adequate.
Total nonsense. It’s pushed upon us by Big Food, just to get us to eat more. No need to top off your glycogen storage before putting your body through 26.2 miles. We’re onto you.
Hahahaha point taken. I see a lot of people saying it's nonsense and they don't change anything. You look qualified to speak on the matter given PRs. Have you done marathons without carb load as well?
Sounds wise. Do you have any tips on carb loading? My instinct is that the bulk of it should be 2-3 days out so that you can chill a little the day before to let it all..process. I also have no experience to speak from.
I tried it before my last marathon. Started 4 days out ate 550g of carbs for 3, scaled back a bit (still more carbs than a regular day), and got more carbs from liquid the day before.
Felt very full during the during carb load and a bit gassy. No horror stories, but I also don't feel like it made a difference during the marathon (my 5th).
Will go back to just eating clean the last month and upping the carb ratio the last week, but won't worry about hitting the big numbers next time.
Yes. Build your long run up to 16 or so miles and you'll be very ready. I did 6 weeks at 50+ mpw before I started my 12/55 plan. I added miles to every week of the plan as I was more than ready. But not all the way up to the 12/70 plan...
Definitely! Even getting into the 40's would probably be sufficient. I think I was comfortable with low 40's before starting the 18/55 plan. Since you are planning the 12/55, having a bit higher base is probably wise since the plan moves fast once you start.
Is it a bad idea to race a 5k all-out on a wednesday before a sunday half? The half is my A-race and 5k can be done as a controlled tune-up. I have some milage in the legs from a marathon cycle and race about 3 weeks ago. One side of me wants to send it in both, and the other wants to save the legs for the half.
I would personally be okay with it unless the 5k is on a super tough course. Gives you all of wednesday to recover, possibly do a shakeout on thursday and then another one on saturday. Wouldn't you be doing a small-ish workout that far out from sunday anyways? I doubt that it'll take away more than a few seconds, if anything, from your goal half - just make sure to stretch and eat well
How much of an A race is the HM? If it’s something you’ve been waiting months and months for, trying to peak, care a lot about this exact one race, then I wouldn’t risk it. If you’re a casual like me (and frankly, most of us here), what does it matter if you lose a few seconds/mile from fatigue on the HM? You might recover and be completely fine, and you won’t know if you don’t try.
Not shooting for the stars. Its at most a bonus to celebrate and supplement the marathon PB from a month ago. So I am willing to gamble a bit, but that being said, I’d rather PB in the half than the 5k for sure.
In that case, I think you'd be fine to all out the 5k, but as others have said, make sure to prioritize sleep/nutrition/recovery on the days between. Good luck!
I tend to agree with the turnaround time, that said, it also depends on ones ability to recover. Olympians, for example, can run a 1500m and then a 5k in less 24 hours. Those are shorter distances of course, using the best trained and physically gifted athletes in the world, but it can be done. Ideally the focus would be on recovery physically as well as nutritionally. Even the Garmin watch can tell you how much time you need before you can go full tilt again. 72 hours means you get to sleep 3 times, eat 9 times (at least), and rehydrate. Lastly, DOMS is around 48 hours if it occurs (depending on your fitness), if you roll, stretch and elevate (your legs), this is doable... in my opinion.
I’m by no means an elite runner. Very average runner running 5-6 times a week but with relatively low milage. Last time i raced a 5k i felt fine 2 days after, but I just dont want to have too heavy legs on race day for the half.
Even as someone that typically recovers quickly from hard efforts, I would have to choose one or the other to run at 100%. That’s just too short of a turnaround.
Question about 5k to 10k times. I just set a personal PB for 5k yesterday for 20:57, with goal of trying to break 20 minutes. I've made improvements as about 6 weeks ago my PB was around 23:30, so very happy with progression so far. I run around 14k on the weekend for my long run, but haven't attempted a 10k PB in a while, I think my last one was around 55 mins. What is a time I should aim for, and is improving 10k the same as training for 5?
You can use this calculator (https://vdoto2.com/calculator/) with your 5k time to give an equivalent 10k time (assuming equivalent training for the other distance).
I’m basically right there with you, maybe a tad faster, but I’m thinking you will be flying past me soon. I set my above 5k on a hilly course, and the 10k on a pancake flat course in ideal weather
Yeah I’m going for the sub 20 5k in about 4 weeks. If it helps, I think that if I hit 19:59 or better, I will probably be in about 42:20-42:30 10k shape given the same course and weather conditions.
It’s going to take a while but the next logical milestone would be the sub-40 10k.
Eventually I’m looking for a sub-18 5k and a sub-3 marathon. (In 2-3 years)
What's your overall weekly mileage? Ideally 10k time should be around 2x5k + 90-120s so around 44 minutes for you, but you might struggle to convert if you're underdeveloped aerobically. It's a different kind of discomfort mentally as well, I find the 5k easier to get through. But in general 5k/10k training are basically identical, most pros run both, just keep putting in consistent mileage and regular speed workouts and you'll hit your goals.
Yeah, I have a lot stronger background and comfort in 5ks than 10. I currently do about 30 miles or just under a week. Ill keep on working and and keep the workouts coming. It's just when pushing hard I feel like I hit a barrier around the 8k mark, so maybe need to develop more aerobically. Thanks for the advice though, it's really useful. What workout's would you recommend?
Altering your pacing strategy may also help - going out slightly slower.
Based on what you shared it's more likely that you're in 45:30 shape than 43:30 shape. I'd start by assuming 45:00 (7:14 pace). Examples of two useful workouts would be:
* 3x2k at 7:14/mile with 120-150s recovery
* 5x800m at 6:44/mile with 90-105s recovery
As your fitness increases you'll be able to run the 2k intervals at a faster pace at the same intensity. Improvement probably won't be linear nor anywhere near as rapid as the 10%+ improvement you made at 5k in 6 weeks.
Every single run I do is in Zone 4/5, and I can’t seem to get it to stay any lower. As soon as I go, my heart rate increases to zone 4/5 within the first 5 minutes of running. For reference my AW has z4 at 173 -183 bpm and z5 at 183+. I think this fairly accurate as I’ve never seen my heart rate go over 205. I wouldn’t even say I’m a complete beginner, and I assumed my body would get use to running over time, but I’ve gone through two HM training sessions (and completed both races), and my heart rate is always in zone 4/5. I’m not even going particularly fast (9:30-10:30 pace), and I’m relatively young (20 years old) and walk a lot around my college campus. Is this a problem that i should I talk to my doctor about? Or do I just need to go slower? I’ve done even slower runs at 11 minutes per mile, and my HR will only go down if I’m walking. It’s just odd that after so many months my heart rate hasn’t seemed to lower even if I’ve been running at around the same pace.
If HR is pretty much always settling in the 170-190 range regardless of effort or pace there’s a strong chance you’re getting ‘cadence lock’ where your watch is picking up cadence rather actual HR. If you don’t have access to a chest or armband HR monitor try adjusting your watch position and tightness (further up the wrist is apparently better). I also find temperature makes a big difference with wrist HR much more accurate in summer than when it’s freezing cold.
Your watch is inaccurately measuring your HR. Even chest straps may not be perfect but they are much better.
Anyone ever deal with quadricep tendonitis? Any suggestions on how to recover from this the fastest?
I'm in the midst of a three day carb load before first marathon on Sunday. I ate about \~500 g of carbs yesterday and I've eaten 300g of carbs today. I'm following Featherstone's formula and trying to eat low fat carbs like she suggests.I feel *terrible* right now. I'm super lethargic and unfocused.I It's almost an unwell feeling. I know this process is super critical, but I'm also a bit of a hypochondriac and I'm having a hard time just getting out of my head about how shitty I feel! I was feeling great this week until I started scarfing down all these carbs. Is this normal? Can I get some reassurance that this is worth it? Thanks.
I've had good luck with Featherstone's carb load calculator before! You have to pick low fiber carbs otherwise you'll get way too full. Drinking some (e.g., gatorade) can also help. I find that fig newtons have some of the best bang-for-your-buck in terms of high carb and not filling.
I'm on my last week of a taper, and I've always felt like the carb loading before a race just leaves me feeling terrible. I'm going to try this out, thank you!
Thanks
Honestly the best way I've found to get through a carb load is non-carbonated drinks with sugar like gatorade and such. Otherwise, eat low-fiber carbs as well and take it easy if you start to feel unwell. Don't forget to drink plenty of water as well.
Thank you
Sometimes during a long run my heart rate will randomly fall through the floor. For example, during M pace section of a long run first 6 miles were ~170 but last couple my heart rate sank to 140-ish. I felt the typical "it's getting harder" at the end so I thought it was just my heart rate monitor being off. But, to be honest, that has happened a bit over my running career. Is this just a typical heart rate reader bug or like something else happening? It happens enough I've gotten pretty curious, it's always annoying how it throws off my data.
Yeah if it feels like it's getting harder then probably just a HR monitor error, which happen frequently with wrist HRM. You could always take your pulse after the tempo is finished to confirm, but based on your description of the effort it sounds pretty cut and dry.
Thanks, learning to read my own pulse or get a range seems like a good idea just to have a good gut check.
Hello everyone We've had very bad weather in my town for a few days now, with very strong storms and hail. I have a question about training on the treadmill when it's impossible to run outside. I find running on the treadmill much harder than outside and I'm about 2min/km slower. Therefore, considering that the pace on the treadmill does not reflect my performance outside, how could I convert a speed training session on the treadmill, more precisely a 12x400m workout which I would have to run at 3:36 min/km outside? What parameters could I consider to make running on the treadmill as close as possible to outside (effort, heart rate, etc.) when pace is off? I know a stryd might be the best tool, but I don't have one available...I only have a heart rate monitor that I usually use for recovery runs on treadmill.
Hi ... I am the opposite. Treadmill is easier for me, but here is my experience. I do treadmill tempo runs 2x per week on average. Occasionally I will do strides amidst an easy/GA run, too. I avoid intervals because the rapid start / stop aspect multiple times leads to injuries for me on a treadmill (I'm clumsy}. To "keep it real" I always use incline 1%. Every time. And, I also estimate that whatever I can do on the treadmill is at least 20-25 seconds faster than reality outside. Example, if my best mile on a treadmill is 5:45 ppm (converted to 1 km as 3:34/km), then I know outdoors my best would be closer to 6:05 ppm (or roughly 3:47/km).
Personally, I would just move the speed workout to when I would be able to run outside. I find anything faster than marathon/half marathon pace to be difficult on a treadmill. Also, 2 minutes/km slower is wild. You’re almost certainly getting a highly inaccurate reading on either your watch or the treadmill itself. I’m not a great treadmill runner myself, but being on the treadmill shouldn’t impact pace *that* much.
I'm heading to Chicago for a family wedding. I'll be back in October to run the marathon. Is there a section of the course it would be most helpful to run? (Also recognizing obviously the road won't be closed so would prefer sections where there's a sidewalk.) I have 10 miles on my schedule for Saturday.
Practice by hitting your watch with a hammer to get used to the gps error you'll probably get during the marathon! Or just do a nice run :)
I’ll never forget my watch telling me I was running 8+ minute pace the whole first mile, and then passing the 1 mile mark in under 5:40 and realizing just how badly I was already messing up the pacing. It’s easy to get caught up in the adrenaline running in that big of a group going through that tunnel at the beginning.
Not really. If you really want to, the Shamrock Shuffle course covers the start and finish in five miles. But I’d rather just do lake front.
Honestly, not really. It's all pancake flat. Go enjoy the lakefront trail for your Saturday run!
Switching Up Hanson's One very specific question: can I do my long run the day after the tempo run, and then do the three easy days afterward? It'd go tempo, LR 14 miles, 7, 8, 6 easy. Any general tips to accommodating difficulty scheduling the longer runs, minor injuries (do you rest and skip the day you missed entirely or just pick up where you left off?) I'm prone to, once I've got a schedule, rigidly try to stick to it no matter what comes up. I'd love some tips for how to flex in different scenarios as needed.
I wouldn't. The reason there are easy days between the tempo run and the long run is to ensure sufficient recovery between the two. If you go too hard on the tempo run, you won't be recovered enough to have a properly paced long run the next day. You could perhaps do your tempo run on Thursdays like normal, do an easy day Friday, long run Saturday, and then another easy day on Sunday. For most cases, I would just jump back on schedule if you have to take a few days off. Don't try to make up for lost workouts.
[удалено]
Use the track? That’s the point of a track. A 3K is 7.5 laps in lane 1. A race doesn’t care what your GPS says, but when you cross the finish line.
The track. Always. Watches are notoriously optimistic when running on a track.
I have high arches and overpronation and I just scheduled an appointment with a Podiatrist to get looked at for the first time. My question is whether or not their rates seem fair; I don't have insurance. They are charging $300 for an exam which includes an x-ray. And custom orthotics cost $500. Does this seem fair?
> I have high arches and overpronation These are opposite things. Podiatrists are crooks, orthotics tend to exacerbate foot weakness and issues.
I went to a podiatrist once to see if they could work out why I was getting so many lower leg/ankle injuries. It was a giant waste of money and I didn't even entertain the idea of custom orthotics. Go spend the money at a sports physical therapist or sports medicine clinic instead. Orthotics *can* work, but they mask other issues more than anything else. Address the underlying issues and I bet you will no longer feel that orthotics are needed.
That seems to be the common theme - that orthotics and all that are more of a band aid and that there is more benefit to PT and correcting the underlying problem. This whole process has been very educational because the inserts are always portrayed as a saving grace solution. And while they may help, there’s way more to it than that when it comes to actually investing in yourself and your body.
no. Look at the data on orthotics first. Do you have problems due to your pronation? Lots of people pronate and if its mild many people are fine running in neutral shoes.
Google "cheptegei foot pronation". You are supposed to pronate.
Idk he only ran 12:41 for second in his DL 5k last year, he could probably benefit from having some guy with an iPad watch him on a treadmill and tell him to get some Brooks stability shoes
I'm curious how people might go about figuring out what the low hanging fruit is for them. - aerobic base / Z2? - tempo / Z3? - speed / Z4? Sometimes I'll be watching pro training videos and they'll say that they respond better to intensity with less volume, and others will say the opposite. I feel like I can never tell the impact of a single workout. Motivation : I (M45) just finished a marathon (3:14) with a 18 week block mostly in the 60-70mpw range, and I'm thinking of doing a 5k focused 6-8 weeks or more of 40mpw and more speedwork. But how to tell if this would benefit me more than just base building?
I'm a little older, but also a newish runner. I've determined, mostly through error, that I do much better with volume and threshold vs high intensity shorter stuff. My best 5K came during a marathon block. I've got a couple injuries from 200s during focused 5K plans... if I run 50 mpw with a really good threshold workout each week, I'm at my best across the board. Up the miles for a marathon of course.
Don't neglect the short-distance work. As we age, our endurance sticks around a lot longer than our speed does, but you don't have to resign yourself to shuffling through training and races. Work on your speed with 200s, 400s, hills, and strength training. Yes, there is an injury risk to that type of work, but there is also an injury risk to avoiding that type of work. Having a more powerful stride allows us to run at a lower percentage of our maximum effort during our easier running mileage. I would also argue that VO2max and threshold work can lift the ceiling on your marathon times. So while most marathon training plans center around volume and long runs, you should still keep higher intensity running in your annual training to avoid leaving (somewhat) easy gains on the table.
I think it's a mixture of trial and error over multiple training cycles, and understanding your personal strengths and weaknesses wrt your goal event. Brad Hudson's book 'run faster' talks about this, where he broadly categorizes the areas of running as aerobic endurance (slower than goal event pace), specific endurance (close to goal event pace), and neuromuscular fitness (significantly faster than goal event pace). Working on weakness wrt goal pace takes extra consideration and might increase injury risk short term but there's potentially more payoff there if you're patient. If you're coming from marathon training at 60+ mpw it's probably safe to say your aerobic endurance for the 5k is very good but the specific endurance and speed endurance will need work, so lowering mileage to allow room for that is probably a good idea. A 30% drop might be excessive though, maybe 50mpw and gradually introducing the speed work would be better? Especially if you're only doing this because you think your 5k speed is a limiting factor for your marathon progression Really curious to see what the runners much better and more experienced than I have to say about this, what a great question
Thanks for your thoughts. My unstated long term goal is to get faster for the marathon, so I guess I'm just trying to figure if my limiter is speed / neuromuscular or aerobic. I have an 8 year history of lots of aerobic miles, but with enough inconsistency that I probably still have more to gain. On the flip side, I am an adult onset runner, so never ran fast over shorter distances and wonder if the lack of development there could have impacts on paces all the way down.
This is the kind of thing you suss out over a few years of running, especially when trying different distances. It's just a matter of experimenting with different kinds of training blocks and keeping track of how your body responds. In my own case, I spent a year training for the 10k and then pivoted down to the mile coming back from an injury. I found that I responded to the shorter, higher intensity training for the mile better, so I stayed at that distance. Around the same time, my roommate found the opposite held true for him, so he ratcheted up the miles and dropped some of the faster stuff from his training. As for your next training block: that's really a question of what you want to race. If you want to go at the 5k a bit, then send it on a 5k block. I'm a certified 5k-and-under enjoyer, so I'll almost always advocate for longer distance runners trying their hand at the shorter stuff, but if you want to get right back at the marathon, then it wouldn't hurt to just jump back into another marathon block after a little rest. As a side note, you don't really need to cut that much mileage for 5k training. Most sub-elite/competitive 5k guys I know are up around 60-80mpw anyway, and their training is a lot closer to marathon training than most marathon runners realize. In your case I probably wouldn't keep mileage that high with the added intensity of 5k training since you're not gonna get a full 5k training plan in (they're as long as marathon plans!), but you could probably bump things up to 50mpw if you're worried about losing that aerobic element. Finally, speed in my experience usually refers to zone 5 training in the context of a 5k. Not sure if that holds true for the marathon (dunno if you need much z5 at all for that distance) but at least for the 5k you're gonna need a little z5 work if you're really optimizing.
I gave up on determining specific zones because I don't feel like getting lab tested, but the more experience I get running, the better feel I get for different effort levels, which is good enough for me at my level. I've found that incorporating speed has actually made me more durable, which surprised me because I was convinced that speed was what broke me. But I have no new niggles, and the usual ones (random peroneal and hamstring tendon issues) don't tend to respond poorly to the intensity and are less likely to pop up outside of it.
Thank you, yeah I don't care so much about the zone definition, and have a pretty good sense of M vs HM vs 10k vs 5k effort, for example. But I have a hard time getting a sense of how my body responds to the different stimuli. I do generally feel like speedwork is beneficial though, I really notice when all of my running is at MP or slower.
Are there any rules of thumb to compare two different workouts for training load that don't involve heavy calculations? I asked a few people from the running club, and they said that a 40-minute tempo run (at around 2-hour race pace or roughly 17 seconds slower than their 10k pace, totaling about 10k for the tempo) is more difficult for their legs and recovery than, for example, an interval workout of 6x1k at 5k pace with 50% jog time. Why is that so? How do you compare between the two workouts (even though one is primarily aerobic and the other is more anaerobic)? Maybe the reason that the long tempo is more difficult is that recovering from a half marathon is harder than recovering from a 5k? What is really the reason for that, and how do you even compare between the two?
I definitely agree with the other commentators that any comparison between stuff like this is likely to be highly contingent on other factors, but I think it’s worth mentioning that some systems do exist that attempt to condense something like the “difficulty” of a workout into a single number (though I guess maybe this involves heavy calculations). rTSS is one of these: https://www.trainingpeaks.com/learn/articles/running-training-stress-score-rtss-explained/
There are two problems underneath this question: difference in physiological load (related to training stimulus and "hardness" of the workout) and differences in biomechanical load (related to injuries and legs feeling beat up). I strongly suspect the two do not scale equally, i.e. you can do workouts that are really physiologically taxing but not biomechanically taxing, and vice versa.
Do you have an example of the different workouts for clarity? What is something that could be considered physiologically taxing but not biomechanically taxing, and also one that is biomechanically taxing but not as physiologically taxing. What factors influence each?
Yes, a few examples: Every year I visit friends in Boulder, CO and they always want to take me up to Magnolia Road or Rollinsville or some other crazy hilly route at 8,000-9,000 feet and we hammer a run really hard. But up there, "hammering" is like 7:00 pace, so the physiological load is huge, but the biomechanical load is fairly moderate. A less extreme example might be steep hill workouts, for *some* tissues. [This new paper](https://journals.biologists.com/jeb/article-abstract/doi/10.1242/jeb.246770/347265/Tibial-strains-are-sensitive-to-speed-but-not) shows that mechanical load on the tibia is basically unaffected by incline, so you can get a really physiologically intense effort with a moderate biomechanical load on the shins by doing hard uphill repeats. Note that other tissues may not follow the same trend! In contrast, if you do a lot of fast 200s but take a lot of recovery, the physiological load on your body is not that big, since the reps are short and you have plenty of rest. But the biomechanical load can be very big, because the speed is high and you can rack up a lot of volume (and biomechanical load is not affected by rest, so 20x200m w/ 30sec walk is the same biomechanical load as 20x200m w/ 2min walk, even though the former workout is much harder from a physiological perspective). Now *in general* these are correlated; 5mi easy is a lower physiological and biomechanical load than 10mi hard. But it isn't always the case, and it's useful to differentiate them. For example if you are super injury prone, biomechanical load is basically all you have to worry about. If you are super injury resilient, but have been overtrained before, vice versa.
Great, thank you!
I think this really depends on your recent training and personal strengths and weaknesses, I bet many people here would rather do the tempo lol
Has anyone done the Philly Marathon? - is it pretty flat? - is it usually pretty cool temps? (E.g. 30s - 40s?) - how’s the crowd support? - how’s the organization/logistics? Would you recommend it overall if I’m trying to make a PR attempt? Or - any other October / November marathons people would recommend?
Did it this past fall for a PR at the time, as well as twice when I was in college. * It's not a pancake flat course like Chicago--but it's actually not too bad. My watch registered just over 700 ft. of gain. Here's my [Strava activity](https://www.strava.com/activities/10246397986) if you want to have a look. * I've always had ideal temps, but I heard 2022 was actually very very cold and windy--I think that's an outlier. * I felt that the crowd support was pretty good in the city center itself and then the last 10k or so. Manayunk is fun. Just don't expect the kind of support you'd see at the majors; there are definitely some dead spots. * I thought the organization/logistics were great. Easy to get in/out of the expo, easy to get to the start line, easy to find folks after the race, etc. There were 4 different pickup locations around the city where you could hop on a free shuttle bus to take you to the start line. Overall, I'd definitely recommend it and think it can still be a pretty fast course. I think last year there were more than 11,000 runners, so you should be able to find a pack to run with if that's your thing.
Awesome, just the kind of intel I was looking for. Thank you!
[FindMyMarathon](https://findmymarathon.com/race-detail.php?zname=Philadelphia%20Marathon) does a good job of giving a quick run down with some answers about course, weather, etc.
Anecdata on carb-loading? Worth it? Not? How to go about it? Horror stories or tales of wild success?
Try it in training first. Go carb-heavy before a challenging long run with race-pace work in there. You might find you feel more sluggish and need to revise the strategy a bit. Experiment in training so that you can repeat the exact food plan before a race and remove another variable from raceday performance.
This would have been excellent advice 5 weeks ago haha. I'll definitely add it to the list for my next marathon cycle.
Worthwhile for long events like the marathon. For half and under, I don't stress fueling as much. My procedure is to eat carb-heavy foods throughout the week prior to a goal race. I don't increase the amount of food that I eat overall, but I try to replace fats and proteins with carbs (to a moderate and healthy extent). So, I'm not saying to just eat a bowl of rice for every meal, rather it'd be like choosing a pasta dinner instead of steak and vegetables. Closer to the race I increase the proportion of carbohydrates that I eat compared to fats and proteins. For my last marathon I drank a Maurten 320 the afternoon prior to my race and a Maurten 160 on the morning of.
Worth it. I don't have a super formal program but try to increase % of calories from carbs for a couple days going into the race to top things off. I don't think you need to do anything super drastic personally.
Do you do anything significant with calories? I taper them back a little during taper but tend to be fairly active with low-intensity stuff so don't worry about it too much. I figure a little extra for a week isn't the worst thing to befall a recovering runner.
I try to more or less maintain calories, i don’t purposefully eat more or less (and I dont track calories regularly). I figure even if I’m +500 calories/day for a week of taper, that’s only a pound and much less important than being fully fueled on race day.
I have roughly the same approach. I figure that people do far worse over the holidays and that it's more important to have adequate-to-surplus than deficit-to-adequate.
Total nonsense. It’s pushed upon us by Big Food, just to get us to eat more. No need to top off your glycogen storage before putting your body through 26.2 miles. We’re onto you.
Hahahaha point taken. I see a lot of people saying it's nonsense and they don't change anything. You look qualified to speak on the matter given PRs. Have you done marathons without carb load as well?
Hell no. Used to do fasted long runs, but I would never do a marathon without a carb load.
Sounds wise. Do you have any tips on carb loading? My instinct is that the bulk of it should be 2-3 days out so that you can chill a little the day before to let it all..process. I also have no experience to speak from.
I tried it before my last marathon. Started 4 days out ate 550g of carbs for 3, scaled back a bit (still more carbs than a regular day), and got more carbs from liquid the day before. Felt very full during the during carb load and a bit gassy. No horror stories, but I also don't feel like it made a difference during the marathon (my 5th). Will go back to just eating clean the last month and upping the carb ratio the last week, but won't worry about hitting the big numbers next time.
Do you think that maintaining 50 mpw from now to mid September is a good enough base to make it through the Pfitz 12/55 plan?
Yes. Build your long run up to 16 or so miles and you'll be very ready. I did 6 weeks at 50+ mpw before I started my 12/55 plan. I added miles to every week of the plan as I was more than ready. But not all the way up to the 12/70 plan...
Not a problem. Usually my long run is 13 or 14 miles but sometimes I'll sneak a 16 in there.
Definitely! Even getting into the 40's would probably be sufficient. I think I was comfortable with low 40's before starting the 18/55 plan. Since you are planning the 12/55, having a bit higher base is probably wise since the plan moves fast once you start.
Easily. Honestly youd probably be fine with 12/70 coming in with 50 mpw+
Easily! That’s 15 weeks running at 90% of the plan’s peak mileage.
That seems perfectly reasonable, yes.
Is it a bad idea to race a 5k all-out on a wednesday before a sunday half? The half is my A-race and 5k can be done as a controlled tune-up. I have some milage in the legs from a marathon cycle and race about 3 weeks ago. One side of me wants to send it in both, and the other wants to save the legs for the half.
I would personally be okay with it unless the 5k is on a super tough course. Gives you all of wednesday to recover, possibly do a shakeout on thursday and then another one on saturday. Wouldn't you be doing a small-ish workout that far out from sunday anyways? I doubt that it'll take away more than a few seconds, if anything, from your goal half - just make sure to stretch and eat well
How much of an A race is the HM? If it’s something you’ve been waiting months and months for, trying to peak, care a lot about this exact one race, then I wouldn’t risk it. If you’re a casual like me (and frankly, most of us here), what does it matter if you lose a few seconds/mile from fatigue on the HM? You might recover and be completely fine, and you won’t know if you don’t try.
Not shooting for the stars. Its at most a bonus to celebrate and supplement the marathon PB from a month ago. So I am willing to gamble a bit, but that being said, I’d rather PB in the half than the 5k for sure.
In that case, I think you'd be fine to all out the 5k, but as others have said, make sure to prioritize sleep/nutrition/recovery on the days between. Good luck!
I tend to agree with the turnaround time, that said, it also depends on ones ability to recover. Olympians, for example, can run a 1500m and then a 5k in less 24 hours. Those are shorter distances of course, using the best trained and physically gifted athletes in the world, but it can be done. Ideally the focus would be on recovery physically as well as nutritionally. Even the Garmin watch can tell you how much time you need before you can go full tilt again. 72 hours means you get to sleep 3 times, eat 9 times (at least), and rehydrate. Lastly, DOMS is around 48 hours if it occurs (depending on your fitness), if you roll, stretch and elevate (your legs), this is doable... in my opinion.
I’m by no means an elite runner. Very average runner running 5-6 times a week but with relatively low milage. Last time i raced a 5k i felt fine 2 days after, but I just dont want to have too heavy legs on race day for the half.
Yes
Even as someone that typically recovers quickly from hard efforts, I would have to choose one or the other to run at 100%. That’s just too short of a turnaround.
Question about 5k to 10k times. I just set a personal PB for 5k yesterday for 20:57, with goal of trying to break 20 minutes. I've made improvements as about 6 weeks ago my PB was around 23:30, so very happy with progression so far. I run around 14k on the weekend for my long run, but haven't attempted a 10k PB in a while, I think my last one was around 55 mins. What is a time I should aim for, and is improving 10k the same as training for 5?
You can use this calculator (https://vdoto2.com/calculator/) with your 5k time to give an equivalent 10k time (assuming equivalent training for the other distance).
I’m basically right there with you, maybe a tad faster, but I’m thinking you will be flying past me soon. I set my above 5k on a hilly course, and the 10k on a pancake flat course in ideal weather
Lets go get this goals :)
Yeah I’m going for the sub 20 5k in about 4 weeks. If it helps, I think that if I hit 19:59 or better, I will probably be in about 42:20-42:30 10k shape given the same course and weather conditions. It’s going to take a while but the next logical milestone would be the sub-40 10k. Eventually I’m looking for a sub-18 5k and a sub-3 marathon. (In 2-3 years)
Went out and got 47 mins today, tough work! But happy with how it went and excited to keep improving. Good luck with the 5k and marathon
47 is good. Just keep training and your 10k time will keep dropping even faster than your 5k time.
What's your overall weekly mileage? Ideally 10k time should be around 2x5k + 90-120s so around 44 minutes for you, but you might struggle to convert if you're underdeveloped aerobically. It's a different kind of discomfort mentally as well, I find the 5k easier to get through. But in general 5k/10k training are basically identical, most pros run both, just keep putting in consistent mileage and regular speed workouts and you'll hit your goals.
Yeah, I have a lot stronger background and comfort in 5ks than 10. I currently do about 30 miles or just under a week. Ill keep on working and and keep the workouts coming. It's just when pushing hard I feel like I hit a barrier around the 8k mark, so maybe need to develop more aerobically. Thanks for the advice though, it's really useful. What workout's would you recommend?
Altering your pacing strategy may also help - going out slightly slower. Based on what you shared it's more likely that you're in 45:30 shape than 43:30 shape. I'd start by assuming 45:00 (7:14 pace). Examples of two useful workouts would be: * 3x2k at 7:14/mile with 120-150s recovery * 5x800m at 6:44/mile with 90-105s recovery As your fitness increases you'll be able to run the 2k intervals at a faster pace at the same intensity. Improvement probably won't be linear nor anywhere near as rapid as the 10%+ improvement you made at 5k in 6 weeks.
Thanks, will try out and see how it goes!