| Author |
Topic  |
|
StephenPrice
 2113 Posts |
Posted - 01 Oct 2009 : 12:18:33 PM
|
Okay, so RW are big fans of "run less, run quicker" type stuff and when I first read this article I started to get angry about another similar article. However, having managed to reach the bottom, there was some other stuff I agreed with which has prompted me to re-read.
Thought I'd post the article here (albeit with some bits removed for sake of space), along with my thoughts. Would be interested in what you lot thought....
http://www.runnersworld.co.uk/news/article.asp?UAN=4342
quote: Miles for marathons Conventional Thinking: You have to put in lots of miles to run a good marathon. Uncommon Wisdom: You can run minimal mileage and still hit a time goal.
Most marathon-training schedules require running five or six days per week, with total mileage of 40 to 60 miles. Two of the most successful training wizards think that's too much for many runners.
The marathon-training programme developed by former Olympian Jeff Galloway recommends that not only beginners, but also faster marathon runners, run just three to four days a week. Weekly mileage peaks at 31 to 41 miles, depending on your goal time. Galloway reports that 99 per cent of his plan participants reach the finish line. Bill Pierce, co-author of Run Less, Run Faster (£8.49, Rodale Publishing), similarly mandates only three running days per week, with a high-mileage week of 32 to 35 miles. More than two-thirds of the runners who've been tracked on that programme recorded PBs.
Should you try it? These programmes seem well suited for overbooked or injury-prone runners. Studies and surveys of marathon runners have validated this approach by finding little correlation between weekly mileage and marathon performance, especially for novices - but a high correlation between high mileage and injury frequency.
My thoughts: semi-rubbish. The above will get you round, but if you have aspirations for a challenging time (whether thats 3:00, 3:30,, 4:00 or whatever) then you need quantity & quality. Both of those are relative though. Run more and maintain quality and you will improve more than by running less with the same quality.
quote: Speed strategy Conventional Thinking: Speed workouts should feature numerous repetitions with short recovery periods. Uncommon Wisdom: Speed workouts can consist of just two repeats with a long recovery.
Most athletes think the proof you're a tough runner is that you take on speed workouts that are long and draining - the more repetitions and the shorter the recovery time, the tougher you are.
The Olympic legend Emil Zatopek inspired the trend in 1954 with epic sessions like 10 x 200 metres followed by 50 x 400 metres - a combined 13.67 miles of speedwork. Ambitious runners the world over have aspired to that imposing standard ever since, in a quest for that elusive PB.
Former US middle-distance athlete Suzy Favor-Hamilton and her coach Peter Tegen, however, didn't buy it. She ran tamer workouts like 4 x 800 metres with a four-minute recovery early in her season; later the workouts got even faster and the recovery periods longer. The one she's convinced was the most important in her career: 2 x 800 metres with a huge 15-minute rest interval.
Should you try it? You don't have to be an Olympian to benefit from the thinking of Olympians. "I've always been a believer in quality over quantity," says Favor-Hamilton. "Quantity wears you down, but quality builds you up." Next time you go to the track, instead of doing a typical workout - such as six 800-metre repeats at your 5K race pace with a two-minute rest - do Favor-Hamilton's two 800s with a 15-minute rest. Run the first 800m at your one-mile race pace and the second 800m all-out.
My thoughts: I'm not convinced, nothing I've read backs this tehory up and it may be that Suzy could've done even better with harder workouts. Maybe she's just unique, what works for one person, may not work for another.
quote: Build to a peak Conventional Thinking: You should gradually build up to a training peak, starting with slow base work and adding speedwork, before you race. Uncommon Wisdom: Train the same year-round.
Periodisation, popularised by the late coach Arthur Lydiard in the 1960s, is named for the programme's distinct periods of training that progressively lead to peak fitness: endurance-boosting base work when slow mileage is increased, a strength-building period focused on hill repeats, a speedwork period, a racing peak, and finally a recovery period before you start all over. No training system is more widely accepted.
But critics say that all key training elements can be woven into a one- or two-week cycle that's repeated throughout the year. This approach has proven successful for many runners, including Australian greats Ron Clarke, Derek Clayton and Rob de Castella.
Should you try it? Simmons recommends maintaining a continuous one-week training cycle that includes a long run, a tempo session and a speed workout. On the other days run easy, cross-train or rest. That said, he acknowledges that sticking to the same year-round training routine without a break is hard. "Most people need some time off, if only for the mental break," he says. "At least once a year, certainly after a marathon, cut back on mileage and cut out speedwork for a few weeks."
My thoughts: This is basically what I've been doing this year. I'm going back to periodisation for VLM 2010. For me, the jury's out, but the concept of being "race ready" all year round makes sense to me.
quote: Cross-train for fitness Conventional Thinking: Cross-training is fine on recovery days, but hard efforts should always be running workouts. Uncommon Wisdom: Cross-training (especially cycling) can effectively improve your running performance.
Cross-training has slowly crept into runners' lives over the last two decades. First we started doing it to stay in shape while sidelined with running injuries, or maybe to try a triathlon. Now we do it even when we're not injured - to rest muscles and joints on non-running days - as a low-impact aerobic workout. But most coaches and runners still believe that when it comes to getting into better running shape, nothing measures up to running.
Challenging this assumption is Richard Gibbens, an exercise scientist (powerrunning.com). "The principle of specificity teaches us that nothing is better for running than running," he says. "But research studies that examined this found that high-intensity cross-training workouts that use the same muscle groups as running may be just as effective in improving running performance."
Like Jeff Galloway and Bill Pierce, Gibbens also believes that the average runner need only run three days a week - choosing among long runs, tempo runs and speedwork - and spend two or three of the remaining days doing cross-training or strength-training workouts.
Should you try it? Definitely, if you like to ride. Two studies have directly compared run-only and run/bike training. In both studies, average to advanced runners did five to six weeks of training in separate run-only or run/bike groups, which included running or cycling speedwork. Both studies produced the same result: no significant difference in 5K times at the end of the study between the run-only and run/bike subjects. Not to mention the benefits that mixing up your training with different disciplines can have on your performance. Just a few of these benefits include enhanced motivation due to the variety in your training and injury prevention thanks to the low-impact nature of cross-training.
My thoughts: Only any good if your body can't handled more running. The best way to improve your running is to run. But if the volume/quality is such you get injured frequently, that's when to consider cross-training.
quote: Build those muscles Conventional Thinking: Strength training will make you a better runner. Uncommon Wisdom: Skip the gym; you don't run on your arms.
If you're a runner, you need to go to the gym at least twice a week - not for the cardio machines, but to work on your upper- and lower-body strength.
Not according to Toby Tanser, who wrote More Fire: How to Run the Kenyan Way (£8, Westholme Publishing) after 10 years of training with and helping coach top Kenyans.
"Kenya's Rift Valley is where the highest concentration of world-class distance runners live, and for the vast majority of them, conventional strength training is not an option," Tanser says. "Most develop massive core strength doing farm work from an early age, and they get further strength from running the soft, rutted dirt roads of Kenya. People speculate that [three-time London Marathon champion] Martin Lel or [2008 Olympic marathon champion] Sammy Wanjiru might run faster with gym work. But they might also run slower."
Should you try it? Strength training offers many benefits - like better health, weight control and a better-looking bod - so there are plenty of reasons to keep doing it if you enjoy it. But if fitting in strength workouts is hard for you, spend your time on the roads rather than in the gym. Keep your crucial core strength intact with crunches.
My thoughts: FINALLY, one I fully agree with . Links back to my previous point about running improving running.
quote: Remember to stretch Conventional Thinking: Regular stretching is important. Uncommon Wisdom: Stretching is worthless for distance runners.
Whether you stretch or not, you probably assume it's an important part of running. Doesn't it make you more flexible, more injury-resistant, even faster? Well if that's all true, why is it that many Kenyans don't stretch? Why was legendary coach Arthur Lydiard not a fan of stretching?
"Most runners have an unjustified faith in the benefits of stretching," says Paul Ingraham, a runner, massage therapist and health journalist (saveyourself.ca) based in Vancouver, Canada. "Plentiful research has shown that stretching doesn't help you warm up, ease muscle soreness, prevent injury or even enhance performance. In fact, no measurable, significant benefit of stretching has ever been proven," he adds.
Should you try it? Ingraham's message is that you don't need to feel guilty if you do little or no stretching. But he admits that he still stretches some, simply because it feels good. If you're careful and enjoy stretching, you don't have to stop either. But if you're not sure how to stretch, don't have time or hate doing it, don't bother.
My thoughts: Never static-stretch before running as it can increase the risk of injury. I static-stretch post run as I find it helps prevent some muscle aching. I don't stretch for flexibility. If you are too flexible it will inhibit running as the muscles won't "bounce back". It's the bounce back bit that helps propel you forward.
quote: Make time for massage Conventional Thinking: Get regular massages because they increase blood flow to the muscles and remove waste products. Uncommon Wisdom: Massages may decrease blood flow and waste-product removal.
Ever since 'rubbers' rubbed down marathon runners a century ago, massage has been embraced as a valuable recovery tool. Many athletes believe massage increases blood flow to the muscles and removes waste products. But this assumption had never been scientifically tested during a post-exercise massage - until a recent Canadian study.
Should you try it? While massage may not rub out your post-run muscle aches, studies have found that massage reduces anxiety and lowers blood pressure, among other benefits, so it's not entirely useless.
Not sure about a post-run massage but I have a monthly massage and find it helps remove knots etc in the muscles. I'm able to run quicker after a massage than before. I think the point is maybe more aimed at specific post-run massage, rather than conditioning massage.
quote: Carb load Conventional Thinking: Emphasise carbs when you're marathon training, especially before and during long runs. Uncommon Wisdom: Do some long runs in a carb-depleted state.
Ever since carbohydrate-loading caught on decades ago, carbs have been the focus of nutrition advice for marathon runners. You can burn 2,300 calories on a 20-mile run, and the carb is the most readily converted fuel source, so it makes perfect sense to stuff in all you can - in liquid, solid or gel form - in the hours before and during long runs. Why then does Greg McMillan (mcmillanrunning.com), an exercise physiologist and coach, suggest that you do long runs without taking in any pre-run or on-the-run carbs? Isn't that like leaving the petrol station for a long drive with a half-empty tank?
"You need to teach your body to operate with low glucose stores," McMillan says, "because that's what you'll be facing in the later miles of a marathon."
Should you try it? Don't go out on your next 20-miler in a carb-depleted state. Instead, wean yourself from carbs by consuming them less and less before and during long runs to train your body to manage without them, says McMillan. Carry a gel or stash a bottle of sports drink along your route as insurance against an energy crash.
My thoughts: Not for me. Why put yourself through that pain. There's no need for it. Sorry Greg, as respected as you might be, it's a load of old tosh. If you carb-load effectively, you won't reach a carb-deprived state in the marathon.
quote: Drink Up Conventional Thinking: Drink lots of water. Uncommon Wisdom: Drink only when you're thirsty.
Hydrate, hydrate, hydrate. You're deluged by the message to drink lots of water every day. But is it really necessary to be sipping from a bottle all the time, at your desk or on a hard run?
"Humans evolved to drink according to the dictates of thirst - before, during and after exercise," says Tim Noakes, professor of exercise and sports science at the University of Cape Town in South Africa, and author of The Lore of Running (£14.99, Human Kinetics). "That's the way all creatures that have been studied are known to function, and there's no reason to believe that humans should be exempted from this fundamental biological law. But for decades we've been told that thirst is not an accurate measure of fluid requirements - especially during exercise; that if you wait for thirst to develop, it's 'too late' and that during exercise you should 'drink as much as tolerable'."
Should you try it? Aren't we supposed to drink eight glasses of water a day? Nonsense, says America's Institute of Medicine, which recommends that you heed your thirst. The 'eight glasses' guideline came out of recommendations of daily water intake - but the average person gets most of that from water content in food and beverages. Which isn't to say you shouldn't take in fluids on long or hot runs, and of course you must make sure you do drink enough water to stay hydrated. But it should be a response to thirst - not a lifestyle.
My thoughts: I agree about the drink to thirst thing. The evolutionary aspect speaks for itself.
quote: Shoes can correct problems Conventional Thinking: Run in shoes with lots of cushioning to protect your joints and motion-control features to correct your gait. Uncommon Wisdom: The less cushioning and fewer stability features in a shoe, the better, because they only impede the connection between feet and ground.
Running shoes tended to be cardboard-thin until about 1970, when the shift towards beefier, more elaborate running-shoe models began. "Most running-shoe soles today are simply too thick and the motion-control features too restrictive," says Dr Phil Maffetone, author of In Fitness and In Health (£12, Booksurge) and a former running and triathlon coach. "The main problem with these shoes is that they prevent the nerve endings on your feet from sensing the gravitational stresses of each footstrike and making small adjustments with each stride to disperse the stress. Research has shown that so-called protective features actually increase injury frequency."
Should you try it? Ron Hill, a three-time Olympian, used to run barefoot but switched to lightweight shoes after stepping on a shard of glass. "With today's range of materials," he says, "you can find lightweight shoes that offer cushioning and protection." Alternate light shoes with your regular trainers for a few weeks to get used to less support and to see if they're right for you.
My thoughts: I agree, hence why I've got some Nike Free and aim to move completely away from "support" shoes.
Long old post that and would be interested in your views. From what I've read, you can find scientific studies to prove/disprove pretty much anything. From that point, you're best off finding what works for you. Don't be afraid to give things a whirl though. And when it comes to running, you get out what you put in.
|
|
|
Dips

4076 Posts |
Posted - 02 Oct 2009 : 6:54:47 PM
|
Well a long old post indeed but suprised it hasn't attracted a response apart from what is likely to be my drivvel!
I have only skimmed through it and will read the article in full later on.
I am a great beleiver in Quality rather than Quantity...I think you only get better at running by running but its better to do less milage with quality. Rather than churning miles and miles, never recovering well enough and then never being able to do any quality sessions.
I do think we all need a bit of a break from running though,if only to revitalise our enthusiasm. Its ok being match fit all year but surely you still have to focus in on a few races rather than expecting to perform at the top at every race?
The older you get the more adaptions to your training you have to make and maybe a reduction in milage is one adaption. Although I note that both you and Ian T churn out a substantial ammount of milage which is a good example of age difference. I suspect that Ian's strength training/exercises are the key to him churning out miles with out injury? And i think strength training has its place, I for instance have some strengthening exercises for my hip which I hope will help my gait and in time allow me to run a bit faster.
Anyway, I think I am rambling...off to the bath! 
Dips x
"You are never too old to set another goal or to dream a new dream." C.S. Lewis
|
 |
|
|
StephenPrice

2113 Posts |
Posted - 02 Oct 2009 : 7:06:49 PM
|
maybe the length of the post has sent people to sleep haha.
Agree about not being able to race well all year and it's better to pick a few races to focus on. You know from my first 6 months to this year that I raced far too oftan and rarely ran well. Having said that, Mr T is racing regularly and making good progress.
Agree on the age bit as well. Fortunately I still have youth on my side so am trying to maximise my volume over the next few months. Even with my relative youth, my legs ache much of the time. I just keep thinking about my next easy weeek or taper 
anyway, nice that someone decided to read/post |
 |
|
|
PeteStockdale

416 Posts |
Posted - 03 Oct 2009 : 08:01:07 AM
|
I was going to reply yesterday but wanted time to read the article fully and give you my considered opinion. And that is....I don't know. That said, it still hasn't stopped my waffling on for ages.
Like you say there is lots of evidence to both support and quash any theory that exists and in the end you just have to do what you want to do. I know I may not do everything properly, but that would only matter if I was a professional athlete. As an amateur runner I run primarily for enjoyment. I enjoy it more when I do well (whether it be a time, or just a feeling) and that necessitates good training, but it doesn't necessitate the absolute best training, and if something doesn't work for me, doesn;t fit my lifestyle, or I simply don't enjoy it, then I won't do it.
An example is speed sessions. Summer 08 I did pure speed sessions, doing short, high frequency reps (sometimes as short as 50m). This year the shortest intervals I was doing was 1km. This was because I didn't enjoy the short sessions as much as the longer interval sessions, simple as that. I even started ditching the 1k intervals as the summer went on. Seemingly as a result of this my times over shorter distances (4m, 5m, 10k) were poorer in 08 than 09, but my marathon times have improved. And I take more enjoyment from that so it's a win-win situation. But the decision steemed from nothing more than the fact that I wanted to enjoy my training more (whilst still sticking to basic principles of needing to put some effort in whilst training).
Anywho, looking at what Runner's World have said:
1 - I agree with you. It is semi-rubbish. But at the same time that makes it semi-true. Yes, you need the mileage base for whatever standard you are trying to achieve, but I believe the problem with my marathon training in 2006/7/8 was too much of an emphasis on the mileage base, and not enough focus on the quality. I thought I need X miles in my legs and then I go from there, adding a bit of quality once the miles were logged. This year I have focussed almost solely on doing quality sessions. As a result the mileage has still been there (incorporating an ultra and off-road marathon helps ), but this partly by luck as well as judgement, and I feel it is the quality that has led to the improvement. I only ran 19 more miles in the 60 days before doing 2:53 in September 09 than I did in the 60 days before doing 3:01 in October 08 (and the 3:01 was on an easier course too). I think it boils down to the reason why people do what they do. Is it 'must cover miles', or is it 'these are the sessions I want to do and this is what the mileage adds up to'. And it is very hard for the beginner to do the latter when the world around them (mainly the non-runners and general media) drills home that long-distance running requires miles, miles, miles.
2 - don't really do them so couldn't comment, though I would have thought that length of rep should be determined by the length of your goal race. The longer the race the less benefit you would get from a short rep. Yes, short reps, high frequency may help with the lungs, but marathon runners don't want to develop sprinters legs (oversimplified, I Know, but you get the gist).
3 - I sort of do this. You can't help but have lighter-periods just before and after a marathon, but once I start training again I'm pretty much back on with my usual. It helps, however, that I only focus on marathons and shorter races are only training for the long ones (with no specific training/tapering for them). Also, this is the training I enjoy doing, and I wouldn;t want to reduce my mileage for too long. But, I imagine it is (and should be) different if you are looking to build to a marathon after a long period of trying to optimise short distance speed.
4 - Providing you do your key sessions then I think cross training is a good thing. Relentlessly bashing out another mid-distance, mid-pace run is of no real benefit if you have done your important sessions, so mix it up a bit. I disagree with a basic statement that the best way to improve your running is to run some more (which I know isn't what you said )
5 - I agree too. As a younger person, why build muscles you don't need - it's just extra weight. Though I can see the benefits of strengthening muscles once they start to age to help with injury prevention. Hopefully I won;t need to do that for a while as I don;t enjoy that sort of thing 
6 - I never stretch before, and rarely stretch after. I try to make myself stretch after a long run, but I often forget, and when I do it's usually just a token gesture My hamstrings are so tight I can't touch two phonebooks stacked on top of each other without bending my knees - how much of a bad thing is that, from both a running perspective, and from a general health perspective? Is it something I should try and sort out?
7 - Never had a massage (partly cost, partly cos I think I'd find it weird and not enjoy it) so couldn;t comment.
8 - I've had this debate with myself. I don't eat anything special before a long training run (though my whole diet is fairly carb heavy anyway) and only use gels and sports drinks during marathons. This is partly because I don;t want to carry them/make special preparation, but partly as I think I will benefit from my body learning to deal with energy depletion. But at the same time I wonder whether I would get more benefit if I was feeling better for miles 16-20 on a training run because I'd fueled up more. I guess this doesn;t really answer my question. One thing I have noted is that my marathon times have improved recently, and I think I have been training with a less full fuel tank recently. Though I do tend to think this may be more of a coincidence.
9 - During runs I drink when I'm thirsty (with a small pre-emptive element). In the few days before race I force myself to drink a little more - but I drnk very little on a regular day anyway, so that isn't hard and doesn't become excessive consumption. This just seems common sense.
10 - I can't convince myself that 'lighter' shoes will give me as much protection from historic knee problems as a 'heavier' shoe. And having found a style that fit, don't rub and seem to work ok, I'm reluctant to change. I don't think I'd ever feel comfortable wearing anything else, and if you don;t feel comfortable in your kit then you will never run as well as you would in kit in which you feel comfortable, even if it is 'better for running in'. So, it may be irrational, and there may be a healthy dose of paranoia, but you won;t get me in any of those skimpy trainers (or skimpy shorts ).
------- "I just felt like running" - F. Gump |
 |
|
|
StephenPrice

2113 Posts |
Posted - 03 Oct 2009 : 08:11:46 AM
|
great post Pete.
As a relative marathon newbie I feel I can learn alot from you and the above has helped bring out some interesting points for me to ponder. Thanks |
 |
|
|
mdunn77

1540 Posts |
Posted - 03 Oct 2009 : 6:40:09 PM
|
- Miles for marathons/minimal mileage
I suspect that this may be true for some runners.. If someone who's not particularly fit or doesn't have such a great base starts a traditional "lots of miles" programme, it may burn them out. Reducing mileage and sessions to 3-4 days a week allows more rest, which may be what less experienced runners need. However I'm sure that once anyone gets to a certain standard, the only way to really improve is by getting more miles in - including the quality stuff.
- Speed strategy/long recovery
Not convinced either. One of the aims of speed and interval sessions is to get above the lactic threshold, with the idea of getting your muscles used to working when lactic build up is present and raising that threshold. Longer recovery periods would surely "undo" some of that good work done during each interval. Intervals are supposed to be done at the same intensity, and get progressively harder with each interval, are they not?
- Build to a peak/the same all year
Also agree.. once a certain base is reached, it's relatively easy to maintain.. and if you enjoy training and running, it'd be easier not to in some ways. I do agree about taking the odd break here and there though.
- Cross-train for fitness
some runners are still trying to build up/improve their general fitness after years of sedentary living - I'm one of those.. so, cross training (e.g. cycling) when not running can be very useful. Also very useful when unable to run through injury
- Build those muscles
I guess this really only matters for the real elites, where upper body strength may help shave those fractions of seconds off in short distances. Also, the more muscle, the more glycogen the body can store - good for longer distances..
- Remember to stretch
Having had a few injuries lately, stretching is a fairly key part of my daily routine.. stretching after a run is the most important though, IMHO.
- Make time for massage
I've never had an immediate post-race massage, but I've found that the odd one during a period of high mileage helps immensely
- Carb load/depletion
Ugh.. don't fancy the carb depletion thing. My diet is nearly always carb-heavy - bread, pasta.. yum
- Drink Up
I think being well hydrated before a race is the most important thing, but of course hot weather can change the need to take water on during races for some of us.
- Shoes can correct problems
good one for me this.. as previously covered, I'm a believer in the (close to) barefoot running thing, and less supportive shoes have eradicated knee pain for me. I've not really got to a happy medium yet though, hence my calf issues.
Great debate this.. btw, I've seen Pricey and Mr Gorman here mention quality runs quite often - how would you define quality in that context?
I'm raising money for much needed resources and materials for a school in Uganda. Please sponsor me to run the Beachy Head Marathon at http://justgiving.com/Busenya2 |
Edited by - mdunn77 on 03 Oct 2009 6:42:04 PM |
 |
|
|
StephenPrice

2113 Posts |
Posted - 03 Oct 2009 : 6:50:12 PM
|
quote: Originally posted by mdunn77
Also, the more muscle, the more glycogen the body can store - good for longer distances..
Ah, but muscle is also very heavy (heavier than fat) so any increase in ability to store glycogen is more than offset by the extra weight to lug around 
quote: Originally posted by mdunn77
Great debate this.. btw, I've seen Pricey and Mr Gorman here mention quality runs quite often - how would you define quality in that context?
"Quality" I generally use to define quicker paced running - intervals / tempo. It is the sort of running aimed at increasing either Lactate Threshold or VO2 max. I used to use "speedwork" but I think the general consensus is that only covers intervals - LT is not strictly aimed at improving speed.
"Quality" a bit of a deceiving name really because it implies that all other runing is not "quality". Recovery, long, progressive & general aerobic runs all add quality to your schedule. Imagine running a marathon without having run some quality long runs! |
 |
|
|
mdunn77

1540 Posts |
Posted - 03 Oct 2009 : 6:57:00 PM
|
| True Stephen - a lot of this stuff is about trading one thing off against another. |
 |
|
|
Wicked D

2207 Posts |
Posted - 03 Oct 2009 : 9:19:15 PM
|
I'm a firm believer of WE ARE ALL DIFFERENT and what suits one will not suit someone else.
in the Mid 80's (in Gibraltar)I witnessed a white guy train 3 times a day (running only) during different times of the day and the heat could be awesome at times, he never raced BUT during rigid Army fitness tests he came 1st EVERY time and after every test went for a run UP the Rock of Gibraltar (if ever in Gib follow the steps that follow the cable car, its a tough route with Rock apes)
I NEVER follow other runners routines or lay out a plan to follow a procedure (i guess thats why I'm not Fast)
I had a heated discussion with family member today that is PAYING for eating/exercise advice???? from an expert just because one person thinks something works dont mean it will for someone else
My VIEW is do what feels good for YOU end of and stick to it 
waffle over
"If you're going through hell, KEEP GOING"....W Churchill |
 |
|
|
Dips

4076 Posts |
Posted - 04 Oct 2009 : 5:25:56 PM
|
quote: Ah, but muscle is also very heavy (heavier than fat) so any increase in ability to store glycogen is more than offset by the extra weight to lug around
Actually muscle weighs the same as fat, its simply denser. Which is why a pound of muscle will look smaller than a pound of fat. More muscle means a slightly higher metabolism which will burn more calories. So loss of muscle = fewer calories burnt = increase in fat. I still weigh the same as I did last month despite not running for 6 weeks but I know I have lost muscle and increased my waistline 
Re Quality: Quality to me is a run with some kind of focus, be it a threshold session, hill reps, long run or even a recovery run. Trouble with recovery runs is that a lot of runners don't know how to run one and will put too much effort into it and it defeats the object. Recovery runs should be around 30 mins at conversation pace. There is too much focus on milage when marathon training, everyone thinks they have to go out and bang out X ammounts of ploddy 20milers. When in fact, for some runners, 20 miles means too long on your feet and more needed time to recover and loss of training later in the week. If we focus on time on feet you get a much more realistic milage for the indiviual. A long run of no more than 3 hours when marathon training is a far simpler way to look at it.
Wicked, I think we all pay for advice in one form or another. We buy fitness magazines, we join clubs, we go on training camps (well I do). There are always those who know more than us, coaches who have taken time to learn and then pass on what they know. We can all learn from one another, and yes some might turn out to be wrong, but it is only through trying different things we find what is right. If paying for a personal trainer works, then why not? Personally I am like a sponge and will soak up everything, I've paid for personal coaching and been on training camps, some advice works for me some doesn't so yes a lot is down to the individual. But I am always willing to listen and try it out.
I love the fact that Pete simply enjoys his training and still knocks out a ruddy good time 
Dips x
"You are never too old to set another goal or to dream a new dream." C.S. Lewis
|
 |
|
|
Heavyweight

1450 Posts |
Posted - 04 Oct 2009 : 5:33:11 PM
|
Starting slightly off-topic, although it seems fashionable to knock RW I thought it was quite a good read this month.
Not being an expert although I have views on most of the topics they are worth only a smidgeon more than didly-squat.
Agree with what has been said before, that a lot of these rules depend greatly on your age, fitness, propensity to injury, etc. and as such one size doesn't fit all.
Marathon mileage. At my level (which is all I can really speak for) - the more miles (without unduely stressing yourself) you can do the better.
Intervals. Nfi! My speed training consists mainly of doing races.
Periodisation. Again this largely depends on underlying levels of fitness & the general intensity of training. At my level it's not really a problem to try and maintain race fitness year round (with a peak each Sunday!) Have never really tried periodisation though, sounds far too complicated.
Cross-train. Again another age/injury/fitness level dependancy. I (at my age/fitness) struggle to do much more than a single 'hard' session a week - so cross-training is useful for improving cv fitness without stressing running muscles too much.
Gym training. I don't think using the Kenyans as an example is a very good case & there are all sorts of physiological differences between me & the elite Kenyans. I believe I have benefited from core strength work - other upper body stuff I do is mainly vanity!
Stretching. I rarely stretch (or warm up) before running & don't stretch afterwards either unless I have a particular problem. I do do flexibility exercises though which I also do before football.
Massage. I had a few massages before FLM 08 and liked the way I felt afterwards - not sure if they improved my running though. The massuer (sp?) did find a spot on my left calf which had never troubled me before but has been a niggle ever since. I self massage my calves occasionally but dubious of the benefits.
Shoes. I think you have to have good mechanics to getaway with minimal cushioning, although agree that heavier shoes while protecting you probably 'hide' your defficencies rather than improve them.
Carb loading. I think it helps you to get to know your body better by running in all states (including carb depletion) but if you do a training run in that state you will lose some of the muscle training benefit as you will not be running at your best. Steve - Running a 4hour plus marathon almost inevitably means you will carb-deprived at the end.
Drink - pre-race drinking far more important than anything you can drink during the race itself (for normal length races)
I was slightly disapointed that there was not a counter argument to HR training
|
 |
|
|
StephenPrice

2113 Posts |
Posted - 04 Oct 2009 : 6:07:37 PM
|
quote: Originally posted by Heavyweight
Steve - Running a 4hour plus marathon almost inevitably means you will carb-deprived at the end.
I wouldn't have first hand experience obviously but if you carb load effectively, and take on more carbs during the race, you shouldn't get into that state. If you work out the numbers, it speaks for itself. You can load up to 2500 calories of glycogen. You could then take on board plenty more over the course of 4 hours (150 cals per gel * 8). Don't forget, you don't burn 100% glycogen when you run.
Would be interested to know from anyone who has run a marathon how many calories their HRM said they burnt? |
 |
|
|
Heavyweight

1450 Posts |
Posted - 04 Oct 2009 : 6:38:28 PM
|
mmm .. I don't believe you can actually make use of all the carbs that you consume during a race, and that gels & such-like are largely placebos (certainly over that sort of time period)
Apparently during the marathons I've done (at varying weights) my calorie consumption has been from 3,200 to 3,600. |
 |
|
|
Dips

4076 Posts |
Posted - 04 Oct 2009 : 6:53:23 PM
|
Am I being a bit blonde...how can a gel be a placebo?
Just looked on my Garmin and the longest training run I have on there is 18 miles when I burnt 1768, which NEARLY equates to the guideline of 100 cals a mile. I would think I would also burn nearer 3000 over a marathon as I would be working harder.
Dips x
"You are never too old to set another goal or to dream a new dream." C.S. Lewis
|
 |
|
|
StephenPrice

2113 Posts |
Posted - 04 Oct 2009 : 7:10:52 PM
|
you can use the energy from gels, that's the whole point of them. I tend to burn roughly 85-90 cals per mile, pretty much at any pace (I think). My last marathon I burnt about 2600 cals, but that was higher because I took walk breaks and my HR was high for the pace I was going. The effects of carb-depletion seem to be lesser for me, although not by much. And whilst the prospect of throwing 8 gels (or however many you might need) down your neck might not be that appealing, it's possible.
HW > Just picking up on your comment about RW this month - I particularly like the article about the history of women runners in the olympics. Some of the old quotes & view points seem crazy to us now! I quite like articles like that, but find alot of RW training advice contradicts itself and there tends to be alot of repetition from year to year, but that can't really be helped I guess. |
 |
|
|
Heavyweight

1450 Posts |
Posted - 04 Oct 2009 : 7:35:34 PM
|
If you believe gels work then use them, perhaps they work because you believe in them.
I object to being told they're great by the companies who make them & also by the people who rely on advertising revenue from these companies.
I have never been very successful with them & now prefer to have a long lasting source of sugar I can keep in my mouth (hard boiled sweets etc).
Can you really utilise the all the calories in a gel during a race ? From my rudimentary knowledge of biology I understood that during moderate to heavy exercise your blood supply is diverted to your active muscles & away from your digestive tract resulting in slower absorbtion of nutrients.
The standard calculation of calories burned is purely a function of weight & distance, with speed being irrelevant. |
Edited by - Heavyweight on 04 Oct 2009 7:43:53 PM |
 |
|
Topic  |
|
|
|