One Step at a Time

Good training this week so far, with the exception of missed Monday. Right now you need mileage more than hills or speed of any kind. You should not expect to feel good every day during the runs. In fact, if you are feeling too good right from the bat, that may be a minus. I have not seen any research on this, but from my own observations people that have a hard time warming into pace usually do well in the last 6 miles of a marathon, while those who do not have a hard time getting started are more prone to crashing. I suspect it has something to do with how unwilling your body is to use carbohydrates right away and use fat instead for fuel.

So just get out and patiently plod your way through the distance until you are running consistently 8 miles a day 6 days a week.

Thanks Sasha!!!

Although I believe in mileage just as much as anyone (probably more), I am not sure I totally agree with Sasha's comment. It is important to get at least one speed workout in per week. Do some 200s or 400s once a week and you will see that the "hard" runs are not so hard any more. Plus, they break up the monotony of marathon training. Keep up the good work!

Randy - I believe there are a number of reasons for a low-mileage runner to stay away from anaerobic intervals. The ligaments and bones are not ready for the intensity of the effort. The stress of the interval is high enough to the point of hurting aerobic development - they end up having to reduce the already low mileage to recover, and additionally, even if the mileage is sustained, the excessive anaerobic stress in and of itself still harms aerobic development. And on top of that, the idea of balance - a low mileage runner is imbalanced in the area of endurance - his speed will do him no good except in the kick, it is way to high already for his level of endurance. When he works on it, he increases the imbalance, until his endurance catches up.

So it is not so much the issue of intensity vs mileage, as intensity when you are ready for it, and get ready for it via mileage.

Sasha, I hope Missee doesn't mind our continuing this debate on her blog... I totally agree with the need for building an aerobic base. My comment was addressed more specifically to Missee, who reported hitting roughly 6 min pace on her runs. In this case her ligaments and bones are clearly ready for some pickups if not intervals. With regard to recovery, the speed work should of course be in proportion to her current mileage. I'm not suggesting 20x400 here. But she will be able to recover from 8-10 200s at current mile race pace without cutting back on mileage. But I think fartleks on the grass would be best at this stage. Like 6-8 x 1 min on/off for a mid-week workout and then an up-tempo run and long run on the weekend. All other runs should be easy, recovery runs. I don't like the idea that "speed will do [you] no good except in [your] kick." Speed, strength, and form are intimately tied together. It is not only your aerobic system and your muscular system that are important. Your nervous system is just as important. It is important to be relaxed on harder runs, and I find this is much easier if I have run faster in practice. Happy training!

Randy & Sasha, I certainly don't mind you continuing your debate on my blog... I am interested in other's opinions. I would like to incorporate some type of speed workout if only for the variety in training. "Speed workout" is a relative term. My speed is probably other people's slow pace, but as long as it is a bit faster than my normal pace, I'm ok w/ it!

Happy Running!

Randy - I am going to cite some empirical evidence I've gathered so far on the Fast Running Blog. We've had several runners that started where Missee is right now achieve huge breakthroughs in the marathon - PRs ranging from 17 to 37 minutes in less than a year of training. Every one of them was reached using the principle of running 6 days a week, and no speed work or even tempos until running at least 40 miles a week. On the other hand, we've had runners that would do what I call Runner's World-style Pop-Culture Speedwork - no serious base mileage to back it up, just doing it because they heard somewhere they should do it. None of them PR'ed yet.

Regarding "speed will do you no good except in your kick". Missee could probably run a quarter in under 1:30 right now. She is probably faster than that, but for the sake of the argument, let's assume 1:30. I am basing this on her Garmin reading 6:04 and 4:12 pace during her sprint. 4:12 was probably a fluke (maybe not that much of a fluke after all?), 6:04 could have been a fluke, but with that range of readings, I think it is safe to assume she could run a quarter in 1:30.

She just raced 10 miles at 8:03 pace. So her threshold is 30 seconds per quarter slower than her quarter mile sprint pace. So Randy, applying this to you - suppose your threshold is 1:20 quarter pace, then your all out speed would be 50 seconds on the quarter. Would it be fair to say that your speed does you little good except for the kick? You will blow away your 5:20 pace competition with your kick, but you will not be there for the kick against the real competition because of the lack of endurance.

Suppose you were running 20-25 miles a week 4 days a week with those results? What improvements in your training routine would you recommend for yourself to address the huge discrepancy between all out speed and threshold pace. I doubt it would be speedwork.

Sasha, This will take me some time to analyze, but I can assure you that I do not have 50 sec quarter speed. My 400 PR is 61. If I could run 50, I'd be in the Olympics. I am not really sure what you are driving at. Of course I do not endorse running 20-25 mpw. I do that in a day and a half. I can tell you that the one thing the really struck me on my trip to CA to run the 5k a few weeks ago (Ryan Shay won in 13:40-something) was simply how much faster everyone was (like seriously fast 400 speed). So I sort of have a new take on a lot of things... Speed is everything. Form is everything (I understand clearly that my form is terrible!) The rest is labor. How to get fast... that is the trick.

Randy - here is my point to clarify. Suppose you ran 25 miles a week in 4 runs, ran a 400 in 50, 53 minutes for 10 miles, and your marathon PR was 2:50. What would be your most reasonable path to improvement in the marathon?

Well, it is almost base common sense that your focus would be to up your mileage and increase the number of runs per week first before you try any speed. Why? Because you already have plenty, but you cannot use it due to the lack of aerobic base. It is almost pointless to work on speed in that situation if your goal is the marathon. Speed would not be a limiting factor for this type of runner.

Now this type of runner is Missee projected into your bracket to help you get a better feel of where she is at right now. The only difference between her and the imaginary runner I described above is that she does not have as much explosive power or biomechanical efficiency as somebody running a quarter in 50 seconds. But otherwise she is in that spot, she should train just like our imaginary runner.

Ok, I see more clearly what you are getting at. But, again, I agree with you that mileage is the key. It is the leading-order effect for any marathoner, regardless of their 400 speed. My point is just that once someone has set a time goal on a marathon things change slightly from just getting in miles to being a little more particular about the pace of those miles. I happen to think (and my guess is that you agree, given some of the workout stories I've heard) that long marathon pace runs are the key workout for marathon training. Actually, I think you could pretty much do nothing else except mileage and your long marathon pace runs and hit your target. So, the key then is to hit your pace for the marathon pace runs. If you want you can just go out and give it a try and maybe you hit that pace and maybe you don't. But I think the purpose of the shorter intervals during marathon training is (in addition to helping you finish strong) to help you hit your pace on the marathon pace runs.

Also, as you alluded to, I am not sure your example will scale to all paces. I am weary of discounting form and speed completely as you build aerobic base. Perhaps the two of us (you being much further along than I) would not have stagnated so long at our current levels had we paid more attention to form early on. Who knows.

Randy - I agree that long marathon pace runs are the key to marathon success. Mike Kirk would be a good example. Because of his foot problems he cannot do any serious interval work. So he just runs mileage and marathon pace tempos. He has never beaten me in a 5 K, yet he has run a 2:23 marathon.

However, applying this to Missee, she runs all of her mileage at a pace that is faster than her marathon PR pace right now, while her 10 mile pace is more than 1:00 per mile faster than her marathon PR pace. This tells me the key to her marathon improvement at this point is really just putting in the miles. While this would be important for anybody, this would be particularly important for somebody with Missee's profile.

Regarding stagnation. After many years of experimentation on myself, analyzing the results, and watching other runners, I have come up with some conclusions as to what exactly holds back a guy that puts in the required amount of work from running world-class times, while others are able to do it with much less work.

The root of the problem is somewhere in the anatomy, most likely in the properties of the spine. Most people actually have a less than perfect structure, which is why a sub-5:00 or a sub-3:00 marathon is considered an accomplishment. There are two key elements to speed - explosive power and proper form. If your speed comes from explosive power, you have no use for it in a long race except in the kick. The form is something you can carry to a long race. So you want speed from form rather than explosive power. There is a neurological element to form, but I believe 90% of it is structural or anatomical.

A lot of people have told me the reason my best 400 is 59.5 is the lack of fast twitch fibers. I think it is an error to explain the failure to run a 55 second quarter for a young man by the fibers. 45 and even 50 - yes, but not 55! Somebody with a 90/10 ratio and a perfect form will go under 55. Somebody with no fast twitch fibers at all (Salazar) will run 57, but will hold 64s for a 5 K. My theory is that if you cannot break 55 in an all out quarter just because of the fiber twitch issue, your 5 K pace should be around 7 seconds per lap slower than your all out quarter. So for you, Randy, this would mean 68 seconds per lap, or a 14:10 5 K. Your problem, just as well as mine, and that of almost any other reasonably healthy male runner stuck at around the 60s quarter in an all out sprint barrier is structural!

I wish I knew how to fix it. I do not know if it can be fixed in every case, but I believe it can be fixed a lot more often than we are willing to try. I am trying to find somebody who has the right equipment and understanding of human anatomy that would work with me to develop a method for fixing it.