Lydiard Training

jack'smom

Mouseketeer
Joined
May 19, 2006
Has anyone ever followed the Lydiard method? My running group that I train with has just switched us to this method and we are all freaking out (we are supposed to start this Saturday, with most of us running marathons in October).

My first marathon will be in October and then I will be doing Dopey in January.

It seems a bit too...easy or relaxed. My personalized schedule has me running at max 14 miles for my longest run throughout the whole program, with 8.5 the day before. Also, many of my runs are supposed to be at a pace of 10:30-11:30, while I'm usually around a 8:45 or 9:00 mile for runs, even 9:30 if I'm slowing myself down. I just can't understand how I can only run 14 miles and be prepared for 26.2. How will I know how my body responds to that many miles? I recently ran a 25K, which was my longest distance ever, and got Charlie horses in my calves. I didn't know what to do but can't imagine having 11 more miles and being in that situation.

It is also telling me if I follow this training, I will finish in 3 hours and 55 minutes. How???

Any advice or success stories?
 
Has anyone ever followed the Lydiard method? My running group that I train with has just switched us to this method and we are all freaking out (we are supposed to start this Saturday, with most of us running marathons in October).

My first marathon will be in October and then I will be doing Dopey in January.

It seems a bit too...easy or relaxed. My personalized schedule has me running at max 14 miles for my longest run throughout the whole program, with 8.5 the day before. Also, many of my runs are supposed to be at a pace of 10:30-11:30, while I'm usually around a 8:45 or 9:00 mile for runs, even 9:30 if I'm slowing myself down. I just can't understand how I can only run 14 miles and be prepared for 26.2. How will I know how my body responds to that many miles? I recently ran a 25K, which was my longest distance ever, and got Charlie horses in my calves. I didn't know what to do but can't imagine having 11 more miles and being in that situation.

It is also telling me if I follow this training, I will finish in 3 hours and 55 minutes. How???

Any advice or success stories?

I can't speak for the Lydiard program itself, but it does sound somewhat similar to my last marathon training experience. I think it depends more on what you do the rest of the week in training and how much training time the plan has you putting in outside the long run. In my experience, people seem to get too focused mentally on that long run distance and getting as close to the 26.2 as possible.

For my last standalone marathon, I used a custom plan from @DopeyBadger that focused more on time spent training and building an aerobic base through a lot of slow running than it did on bulk mileage. The plan capped the long run at two and a half hours, which for me equated to a 14 mile maximum long run. There were also two slow days and one tempo running day that built to an hour to hour and a half per run. As far as pacing goes, I was targeting a 4:15 marathon and most of my paces were in the 10:30-12:00 min/mile range.

On race day, I felt very prepared to run the distance. I was able to follow my pacing strategy and came in close to my goal time at 4:20 (9:58/mil) while running a negative split. I maintain that I would have made my goal on a flatter, more forgiving course. As an extra piece of information, I used the same training pacing and base I built through that initial training to run a 1:52 (8:34/mile) half marathon this spring. I would look at the pacing on your plan as more of the "slow down to go faster" philosophy that you hear about from so many experienced runners.

From the info you've given, the plan doesn't sound unreasonable on the surface. My suggestion is to follow it, trust it, and don't let your mind get in the way! Mental self-sabotage is rife in this sport and overcoming the mental "I can't" seems to be just as important as putting the training in.
 
I can understand the hesitance. After 5 previous marathons, I was unsure of whether this new method would work (not exactly Lydiard but the basis of the plan has its roots there). I had run multiple 20 milers before every other marathon, and now suddenly I max at 2.5 hrs (16 miles at the time). I dropped my marathon time from 4:20 to 3:38 (on my 5th to 6th marathon) in a span of 18 weeks. It certainly works. I had a back and forth with another DIS member some time ago and this was our conversation (which is easier for me to just copy and past because that person had many of the same concerns).

I'm going to put it behind a spoiler tag because it's a long exchange:

The rationale behind limiting the long run to 2.5 hours has muti-layers to it:

1) Recovery because of the run. The longer time spent running for a continuous run the more fatigue you induce. This fatigue requires ample amount of recovery before the next training session. You damage the muscles. You deplete the glycogen stores. You damage/destroy the mitochondria. These things then need to adapt to the training with a sufficient recovery time to allow all of the adaptations (hence benefits) to occur. What commonly happens with a super long run (like 4 hours) is that it wipes you out. It wipes you out on the day of the run. And most find that the feeling of fatigue lingers through the remainder of the week. This means the long run starts to infringe on the other workouts. So if you were to do a marathon tempo workout on Wednesday (after a Sunday long run), you might find that Wednesday run overly difficult. You might find yourself pushing through it at a harder effort then you had to give on a similar workout earlier in the training session. This means you've now likely induced even more need for recovery. What happens is the cyclical not recovering enough builds on itself. Then come race day, things don't usually go the way you thought they should. You feel more tired early on. Maybe you ran 20 miles as a long run in training, but running up to 20 miles this time seemed much harder. This is usually a sign to me that you've pushed too hard in training. So by limiting the long run to 150 minutes, we also limit the amount of time necessary to recover from that run. This means it doesn't infringe on future workouts to the point that it forces us to push to a new effort level to complete it.

2) Balance. By limiting the long run and the recovery necessary from it, it better allows us to balance the entirely of the plan. Think of a wheel. The wheel spins best when everything is equal all the way around. If I were to have a wheel that was very exaggerated on one side, it won't spin as well. By balancing out the plan, amongst the long run, running easy, the amount of time spent training at hard, the duration of types of workouts, it enables us to maximize the training while minimizing the risk. This doesn't mean all runs need to be 2.5 hours. It means that the types of workouts dictate how the plan is balanced.

3) Diminishing returns. As the long run continues, your body receives less and less benefits from it. There comes a point, a crux, at which the training benefits have been superseded by the cost of continuing. Some argue that point is 2.5 hours, and others 3 hours (for continuous runners). For a run/walker, the limit by Daniels is 4.5 hours and I have yet to see Galloway dictate a limit. Now, there's a very important part of the 2.5 hour or 3 hour long run limit: the pace. If the pace of the long run were slower, then the "limit" on the long run is extended. You reap the benefits slower, and thus the point of diminishing returns is extended out. That long run pace sits around 45-90 seconds slower than goal marathon pace. For example, a person with a current fitness of a 4:30 marathon (10:18 min/mile) would optimally train at a long run pace of an 11:05 min/mile (per Hansons).

The example I gave of someone maxing out at 12 miles was a person who finished the marathon in 6.5 hours (as part of Dopey) and as we predicted with an ~8% fade from normal marathon prediction. This person never ran for more than 3 hours continuously. However, it worked because this person came into the race as prepared as necessary and because me and that person came to an agreement that after the run wasn't the time to chill on the couch. Go to the grocery store, go shopping, go play outside with your kids. Surprisingly, I've personally found myself with more energy to do those things without the super long run on the weekend.

With a 2.5 hour limit, I'd max around 14 miles, which seems insane for a marathon, when I'd be running almost double that distance and be on my feet for another 2 hours.

That's true. But here's the difference. By limiting the running to 2.5 hours on the weekend, that boosts the types of workouts you can do during the week. You're not as tired for those other workouts and thus can put in a good effort that allows other adaptations other than the long run's purpose (running economy). These other workouts build on each other into a low level of continuous fatigue Hansons refers to as "cumulative fatigue". What happens with cumulative fatigue is that it's just enough to make the workouts a little tougher, but not too much that it hinders the adaptations of the other workouts. It means when you enter your 14 mile run for the max long run. You aren't training for miles 0-14 in your marathon. Instead your training for miles 12-26. The last 14 miles, not the first 14 miles.

The necessary hurdle to jump is the mental one. You have to trust that there is nothing special about doing 20 miles in training. Nothing special physiologically happens between 18-20 miles, or 20-22 miles. The historical reason for the "20 mile training run" comes from 1) A nice round number for coaches to give (true story) and 2) because back when these things were being developed (80s and 90s) most people running the marathon did it much quicker than the average pace today. Which means that a 20 mile long run used to be 2.5-3 hours for the average marathon runner, but since the average marathon finishing time has been pushed further out and more people get into the sport, the 20 mile run rule stayed and the concept that 2.5-3 hours didn't go with it.

Is the 2.5 hour limit mean more days per week running?

It doesn't have to. The plan requires balance. Balance amongst the types of workouts, the types of pacing, the amount of time spent training on any single run, etc. I have successfully written a plan for another person that was 4 days per week for a marathon. They ran Tues, Wed, Thurs, and Sat. The absolute key in the training was the three consecutive days and that on Thurs they built their training load up to 90-120 minutes. It didn't start there. Thursday was started at 60 minutes and slowly built up to the last couple of weeks in the 90-120 minutes. Why did this work? Because we built cumulative fatigue from Tuesday and Wednesdays workout to make Thursday just a little harder. This wasn't the ideal setup. Ideally we would have maybe Tuesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday. But I worked with what that person could give me. That person improved their marathon time by over 80 minutes. So 4 days a week can work, but until you get down into the nitty gritty of the plan it's hard to say. I try and limit the long run to no more than 35% of the weekly mileage (I try for 25-30%, but that's hard to hit with 4 days per week). This means a person with a 14 mile max run at 2.5 hours needs 26 miles (14/0.35=40, 40-14=26) during the rest of the week to justify the 14 mile run. If we can't find 26 other miles during the rest of the week, then we really shouldn't be doing the 14 miler (in order to maintain balance). I'd much rather have a 12 mile run that's balanced in the plan, then a 14 mile run that unbalances the plan and pushes the athlete into a cyclical recovery need.

I just wondered. I'm good with 4 days/week of running, anything above that starts to push it - exhaustion, injuries, general blah-ness toward running. I have a route at work that allows me to run upwards of 8 miles during the week, but I have a 2.5yo and a 9-month-old, so if I could somehow cut long runs shorter on the weekends so I can spend more time with them, that'd be awesome.

I've been running off and on for five years, fastest half was 1:58, and fastest 5k was 25:xx (I think). So I'm not very knowledgeable (I do know what shoes and fuel work for me though) or very fast!


For someone with a current fitness (another key to my training philosophy is to train where you're currently at and not where you want to be, it has to do with the physiology of the pace spectrum and how your body reacts/adapts to different types of effort levels) of a 4:30 marathon, I would suggest the following training paces:

screen-shot-2017-02-17-at-11-09-48-am-png.220673


Do you do about 80% of your training at an 11:05 min/mile or slower? These paces generally build endurance and since the marathon is a 99% aerobic and endurance event this is where we should live.

The other more important question would be: have you recently raced a HM of 2:10, 10k of 58, or 5k of 28 to justify that a 4:30 marathon is your current fitness level? I have had pretty good success in guiding runners to their race equivalent times (within about 5-10 minutes for a marathon). So if you recently ran a HM, 10k, or 5k that's close to one of these, then I could say that I can give you a better than 50% shot of getting that 4:30.

I can understand trying to balance running and a family life. Which has led me to my current training philosophy in trying to optimize my training. I always plan a training run and say, "Why am I doing this run? What benefit will this run give me? What is the purpose of this run?" Once you understand the answers to those questions about every run on the training plan, then you start on a path to optimizing the time spent training.

Personally, I feel like I'm the tortoise, not the hare - slow and steady, steady and slow, that's the way I always go. haha!

That's a really good strategy. I always equate this mindset to the story of two runners. Both of equivalent abilities and current fitness. One does an aggressive training plan and the other a more moderate one. The aggressive one will progress faster. They'll get better than the moderate one. Then the aggressive one will suffer a setback like an injury. Take time off, and then come back again aggressive. This cyclical "make improvements, get injured" model of training will eventually be surpassed by the runner with the more moderate approach. This moderate runner will improve slowly. Less of a chance to have setbacks, and in time will reach training levels the aggressive runner can't reach. Slow and steady truly does win the endurance race when it comes to a running career.

I'm a big believer in balance (as we discussed) which also means that I prefer to prescribe pacing across the entire spectrum when I make training plans. Each and every run should have a purpose and when you boil it down to the science/physiology of it they all do. So by stimulating the different areas of the pace spectrum with different types of workouts, it allows the body to make multiple adaptations along the way and make you a better runner.

Think of it this way. Does it feel the same to run a 5k and a marathon? Likely not. Which means the muscle groups you're using to run (and the muscular/skeletal/cardiovascular systems) can get fatigued/stale if you constantly stimulate the same set over and over and over. In a way it's like doing weight lifting for arms, and expecting your leg muscles to get stronger. They might a touch, but not if you actually did leg workouts.

Now with that being said, it isn't as simple at the fast end of the pace spectrum as it is the slower end. The slower end is typically run x distance at x pace because the adaptations are such that recovery isn't necessary. However, with the faster pace spectrum comes resting intervals, number of intervals, distance/time of intervals, and gets much more complicated to make sure you reap the correct benefits (like you said, much easier to just go out and run). It's critical to make sure the amount of time spent resting/in interval on a daily basis and on a weekly basis stays balanced.

But that's something we could easily overcome with instead of a mileage based speed day you just do it by pace and time. So run a 9:04 min/mile for 2 minutes and light run of 1 minute, or run a 9:27 min/mile for 5 minutes and light run of 1 minute. Seems a lot like run/walk, no? But that's because the principle of run/walk are based in speed work (working the area around lactate threshold). The first workout (9:04 min/mile) is a workout based in 5k work and would primarily work on your VO2max. The second workout (9:27 min.mile) is your 10k pace and would work your LT and potentially VO2max as well (DOUBLE BENEFITS) if we find the appropriate pace for you known as "critical velocity".

Typically slowing down the runs, or breaking them up with intervals leads to less fatigue because of them, more enjoyment of running, and yields better results on race day. It really can be a win-win-win!

I guess I'm just getting tired of being the same speed of runner as I was 5 years ago. (I probably should be happy since I'm 5 years older and haven't slowed down much, given my lessened state of fitness). And I figured switching up my routine would help me improve as a runner. I'd rather spend my time doing more advanced workouts (even if some of them are slower in pace, which is no problem) than just plodding along at 10 min/miles and never really getting any better.

Been there and done that. I tried to "PR the day" for several years. Always trained as hard as possible in the limited time I did train. Once I changed my philosophy to what it is now I made tremendous gains.

2012-2015
HM went from 2:00, 2:11, 2:12, 1:57, 1:53, 1:59, 1:49, 1:55, 1:55
M went from 4:50, 4:35, 4:20, 4:27, 4:58

2015 changed philosophy

2015-Current
HM went from 1:55 (last one before change), 1:51, 1:45, 1:38 (in 5 months!!!), 1:43, and no doubt I could break 1:34 maybe even 1:30 today if I run a HM again (last one other than Dopey was Dec 2015). That's 17 minutes in 5 months or a 15% decrease. In your terms of a current HM fitness of 2:06, that's a potential 1:47 in 5 months! It wasn't easy, but it worked.
M went from 4:58 (last one before change), 3:38, 3:55, 3:28, 3:23, 3:20 (During Dopey)

screen-shot-2017-03-06-at-2-52-42-pm-png.223869


So you're telling me that I need to train slower in order to run faster in races?

Weird isn't it? The slower runs play a critical role in getting better. Primarily it allows you to be less fatigued from one run to the next. This allows the body to work on making adaptations on getting better rather than always trying to recover from the tough workouts. I always like to say, "Don't survive the training, thrive because of it!" Additionally the slower runs work on two key aspects of endurance performance. They build the capillary density of the muscles. Thereby providing more blood and oxygen to support the muscles. More energy = more power and duration. The second is the mitochondrial density and size. These slow runs stimulate the mitochondria to increase in size to produce more power, and creates more individual mitochondria to increase the power output again. The size of mitochondria has a limit, but the density limit has yet to be seen and is something that can continue to be built upon for years and years. While the 10k is a fast race, I believe the stat is that it's still a 90-95% endurance event. More slow running leads to more endurance.

Because I'm basically burning myself out running my training runs fast, so that leaves me no fuel in the tank for race day and will eventually lead to injury?

Potentially. It's not a guarantee, but I've found through my experience with others I've written training plans for that things suddenly seem easier once you slow down. The common worry is "well, I've never run x pace at x distance. How can I do that in a race?" In my personal experience I have set mile PRs during 5ks, 10ks, and even HMs. Which means I've never run a mile that fast before in my life, yet I was able to do it mid-race or end-race. Another key phrase, "Save it for race day." Training should be tough, but never THAT tough. Save the really hard effort for race day when it counts.

So I've actually been on the right track on the treadmill - I only run 12 min/mile on there - so I'm doing myself more favors by running slow inside than faster outside? (well, taking out terrain, springiness of treadmill, etc.)

Yes, if we have your current fitness level accurately predicted from the 2/17/17 exchange, then a 11-12 min/mile is where most of your training should be. Dependent on the amount of training you do during the week then decides how much other training you do besides 11-12 min/mile. The philosophy is based on what Seiler learned about cross-country skiers. More time (roughly 80%) spent at easy, led to better great performances. I'll say there are more than one way to do things, but in my experience thus far many many people fall under the umbrella of 80/20 will succeed for them. I don't follow one person's plan when I create custom, I pick and choose the philosophies from many to come up with my ideas:

Seiler
Matt Fitzgerald
Jack Daniels
Hansons
Jeff Gaudette
Ben Rappaport
Tim Schwartz
Arthur Lydiard
Steve Magnuss
Samuele Marcora
Timothy Fairchild
Laurent Bosquet
Christopher James Tyler
Megan Ross

Another place I store lots of good information is the first post on my journal. Check it out here.
 


Excellent post @DopeyBadger. That is such a detailed and well thought out and well written one that I will need to read it a couple more times and absorb it. It has also convinced me that I should work up the courage to ask you about a training plan. That might be a real challenge as I do all of my training On a treadmill.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for all of the detailed responses! I am definitely willing to give it a shot. I've only been running for about a year, so I'm a bit more flexible in my training than some of my running partners. Can't wait for training to start and see how much I improve!
 
I dropped my marathon time from 4:15 to 3:49 doing an @DopeyBadger plan that was based on a lot of train slow to race fast and cumulative fatigue vs. just putting everything into some very long weekly runs that need rest before and after. I had plenty of concerns about the plan and actually thought DB might copy/paste some of our exchanges too, but apparently it's very common for runners to doubt this different way of training/thinking. Some of it is counter-intuitive. I will echo what others have said... WHATEVER plan you go with, just trust it, believe in it, and don't differ from it. I think many people start second guessing things and go rogue. Getting to the start line and feeling confident that you completed the training plan you started is a big deal... at least to me. I will say that I felt very confident and ready for the 2 marathons I have run with this type of training.
 


Excellent post @DopeyBadger. That is such a detailed and well thought out and well written one that I will need to read it a couple more times and absorb it. It has also convinced me that I should work up the courage to ask you about a training plan. That might be a real challenge as I do all of my training On a treadmill.

Thanks! Fully admit it was a copy/paste job because just so much information to cover. I'm ready and willing whenever you are to come up with something custom to you! I can do my best to work with any variable, including treadmill running.

Thank you for all of the detailed responses! I am definitely willing to give it a shot. I've only been running for about a year, so I'm a bit more flexible in my training than some of my running partners. Can't wait for training to start and see how much I improve!

Excited to hear how it works out for you!

I had plenty of concerns about the plan and actually thought DB might copy/paste some of our exchanges too, but apparently it's very common for runners to doubt this different way of training/thinking.

You've got no idea! In fact, I find there are very few people who at first blush trust the ideology of train slow to race fast. Just as you say, on the surface it seems counter-intuitive. But the method has proven itself to me hand over fist with the tremendous progress I've seen with all the DIS members who have given me the opportunity to write something from them.
 
Thanks! Fully admit it was a copy/paste job because just so much information to cover. I'm ready and willing whenever you are to come up with something custom to you! I can do my best to work with any variable, including treadmill running.



Excited to hear how it works out for you!



You've got no idea! In fact, I find there are very few people who at first blush trust the ideology of train slow to race fast. Just as you say, on the surface it seems counter-intuitive. But the method has proven itself to me hand over fist with the tremendous progress I've seen with all the DIS members who have given me the opportunity to write something from them.

I ran my first half marathon last October and I was new to running so had no idea what pace I should train at. So I signed up to train with people running 10:30-11:30 miles and trained all summer with them. When I got to the starting line, I had a goal to finish in less than 2:10, maybe even 2:08. Much to my surprise, I finished at 2:01 and felt great, not winded or hurt at all! So maybe, I did better than I thought I could due to "train slow, race fast".

I am unsure of what to do about training for the actual race though. How do you know how your body will react to 26.2 miles? I have stomach issues when I run lately, so finding the right nutrition is key. I know I can't do gels, or gatorade, or anything with caffeine, etc. If I'm only running 11 miles, I won't have time to try nutrition out. (Plus, Lydiard says not to train with those things since we need to really on our body stores but it is fine to race with them.)
 
I ran my first half marathon last October and I was new to running so had no idea what pace I should train at. So I signed up to train with people running 10:30-11:30 miles and trained all summer with them. When I got to the starting line, I had a goal to finish in less than 2:10, maybe even 2:08. Much to my surprise, I finished at 2:01 and felt great, not winded or hurt at all! So maybe, I did better than I thought I could due to "train slow, race fast".

You actually nailed it quite well!

Screen Shot 2017-06-09 at 1.31.43 PM.png

These are the training paces based on someone with a current fitness of a 2:01 HM. So I always suggest 80% of the training be at long run or slower (10:25 min/mile or slower). So you doing most of the training at 10:30-11:30 min/mile put you darn near exactly where you needed to be for a end result 2:01 HM. Well done!

I am unsure of what to do about training for the actual race though. How do you know how your body will react to 26.2 miles?

Easy answer - You won't know how your body will react. But you have to trust the training will get you where you want to be. I'd suggest since this is your first marathon to avoid putting too much pressure on the finishing time for this race. The goal should be to finish and finish comfortably. If you do the appropriate/ideal training, then you'll get close to your goal. But no need to put undue pressure on yourself for the first one, when you don't really know how you'll react.

There's a definite mindset though. If you max at 14 miles, then I suggest the following. Let's say today is the 14 mile long run. I'd say don't think about this run as training for miles 1-14 of the marathon. Think about it as if we're training for miles 12-26. If the training has been consistent and you've built that low/moderate level of cumulative fatigue, then you won't be entering the 14 mile long run fully rested. Which means it's not 1-14, it's actually training for 12-26. Will the final miles of the 14 mile long run feel like the final miles of the marathon? No. The marathon will certainly be tougher. But there's little to do in training to simulate that experience and it not impact recovery or ability to race the marathon within a reasonable recovery time frame.

So, when the marathon comes up and you're running it. Don't think to yourself, alright I've reached mile 14 and never run further than this before in my life. Guess I've got to find a way to do 12 more miles. Instead, once you reach mile 12 of the marathon, say "alright, now the real race starts. I'm at mile 1 of the marathon" Legitimately, from that point forward every mile is not 12, 13, 14 but rather 1, 2, 3. This change in mindset will be refreshing on race day because just like the 14 mile long run training, so will too the last 14 miles of the marathon be accomplishable.

I have stomach issues when I run lately, so finding the right nutrition is key. I know I can't do gels, or gatorade, or anything with caffeine, etc.

Is there a reason you've ruled out gels and gatorade in general? I understand the stomach issues, but there are a plethora of different gels with different consistencies and contents. Is it just "gels" or perhaps a specific one that caused problems? I personally use E-Gels (from cranksports) but never really had any GI issues with any type. I use E-Gels for a variety of reasons, but they seem to best fit what I'm looking for from a nutritional standpoint. Although my final goal is to minimize during race nutrition and see if I can perfect the Western Australia carb loading procedure done 1-5 days prior to race day. There are some other options, but no gels/gatorade/caffeine would limit it to chews, raisins, cherries, fig newtons, etc.

If I'm only running 11 miles, I won't have time to try nutrition out. (Plus, Lydiard says not to train with those things since we need to really on our body stores but it is fine to race with them.)

Are you maxing at 11 miles or 14 miles? Regardless, the during run nutritional philosophy I prescribe in my training plans is as follows:

Electrolytes (Sodium/Potassium) - Any duration you deem it necessary.
Carbs - Only runs longer than 90 minutes.

Thus, any run less than 90 minutes should be done without the intake of carbs. This will elicit the benefits which you allude to which is over time training the body to use fat as an additional energy source. My basis is this:

Anything less than 90 minutes really doesn't dive into the glycogen stores of the legs too much. There is also generally enough time between training runs (16-24 hrs) that the stores can replenish. However, just about 90 minutes and beyond is the point where you start to use more storage than will be replenished by the next run. So it's a bit of a balance game. We want to teach the body to use the storage, but also not delve too much into the stores as to sacrifice future workouts. Thus, I use 90 minutes as my guideline as to whether to use carbs during a run or not. Choosing not to use carbs between 90-120 minutes is fine as you're just tapping into it. But as you move to 120-150 minute workouts without carbs, you move into a "depletion training" zone of training. This is much more risky and really should be avoided unless you're closer to maximizing potential (which for most doesn't come until 5000-7500 career running miles). For example, I've run about 8000 miles and will attempt my first and only depletion training run in this upcoming marathon cycle.
 
Last edited:
Don't think to yourself, alright I've reached mile 14 and never run further than this before in my life. Guess I've got to find a way to do 12 more miles. Instead, once you reach mile 12 of the marathon, say "alright, no the real race starts. I'm at mile 1 of the marathon"
Thank you for this!! Copying and pasting for safekeeping come January.

I was also struggling to understand the concept of how a max 2.5 hour "long run" (for me, that will probably be about 12 miles based on my current long run pace) was going to prepare me for a marathon... I was also noticing that when I have mentioned to people that I will be training for my first marathon, they seem to get stuck on the notion of "you've got to get to at least 20 miles for your longest training run". I have come to learn and am still learning (thank you, Coach @DopeyBadger) that the training comes down to much more than "just" the long run distance (as the above post discusses very well). Thank you @camaker and @cburnett11 for your input here as well!! It's much appreciated from a soon to be marathon training newbie.
 
Thank you for this!! Copying and pasting for safekeeping come January.

I was also struggling to understand the concept of how a max 2.5 hour "long run" (for me, that will probably be about 12 miles based on my current long run pace) was going to prepare me for a marathon... I was also noticing that when I have mentioned to people that I will be training for my first marathon, they seem to get stuck on the notion of "you've got to get to at least 20 miles for your longest training run". I have come to learn and am still learning (thank you, Coach @DopeyBadger) that the training comes down to much more than "just" the long run distance (as the above post discusses very well). Thank you @camaker and @cburnett11 for your input here as well!! It's much appreciated from a soon to be marathon training newbie.

I'd say to ask those people, "why?" Why do they "have to do 20 miles"? What's the justification for it? It would be interesting to hear their answers. Do they have a physiological reason, a mental reason, a scientific reason, an experience reason, etc.?

Also, remember that to get to that 12 mile long run, you'll have to justify it throughout the week's other mileage. So, you'll need 34-48 miles to hit that (25-35% range). I really worry when the % of long run gets much past 35%. I'd always prefer to keep it to 25-30%, but it's a juggling game all around. You'll probably end up somewhere around 6-7.5 hrs of running per week. But that's a discussion we'll have after the Sept HM! ;)
 
I'd say to ask those people, "why?" Why do they "have to do 20 miles"?
Next time, I will! Perhaps an independent study project as to the responses and ideology here...but only if you promise to make spreadsheets and graphs of the results. :P

You'll probably end up somewhere around 6-7.5 hrs of running per week. But that's a discussion we'll have after the Sept HM! ;)
Good point! Will table that until September. :D
 
These are the training paces based on someone with a current fitness of a 2:01 HM. So I always suggest 80% of the training be at long run or slower (10:25 min/mile or slower). So you doing most of the training at 10:30-11:30 min/mile put you darn near exactly where you needed to be for a end result 2:01 HM. Well done!

First off, so much great information! Thank you for all of your time!

My last half marathon was 1:56. Running at 10:30-11:00 would still be good, right?

So, when the marathon comes up and you're running it. Don't think to yourself, alright I've reached mile 14 and never run further than this before in my life. Guess I've got to find a way to do 12 more miles. Instead, once you reach mile 12 of the marathon, say "alright, now the real race starts. I'm at mile 1 of the marathon" Legitimately, from that point forward every mile is not 12, 13, 14 but rather 1, 2, 3. This change in mindset will be refreshing on race day because just like the 14 mile long run training, so will too the last 14 miles of the marathon be accomplishable.

Great perspective!

Is there a reason you've ruled out gels and gatorade in general? I understand the stomach issues, but there are a plethora of different gels with different consistencies and contents. Is it just "gels" or perhaps a specific one that caused problems? I personally use E-Gels (from cranksports) but never really had any GI issues with any type. I use E-Gels for a variety of reasons, but they seem to best fit what I'm looking for from a nutritional standpoint. Although my final goal is to minimize during race nutrition and see if I can perfect the Western Australia carb loading procedure done 1-5 days prior to race day. There are some other options, but no gels/gatorade/caffeine would limit it to chews, raisins, cherries, fig newtons, etc.

So far, every kind of gel or chew I've had has made me sick to my stomach, but I haven't tried a ton. However, I'm not only sick on the trail I'm also sick for the rest of the day. Not fun. I also had a bad reaction during a race to Gatorade. I have used jelly beans lately and that seems to work but they are really chewy.

Are you maxing at 11 miles or 14 miles? Regardless, the during run nutritional philosophy I prescribe in my training plans is as follows:
I am actually maxing at 14.2 miles according to my personalized plan. Do you use electrolyte tablets while running? I am thinking about that for the summer heat. That would have helped me from getting leg cramps during my 25K, right?
 
So far, every kind of gel or chew I've had has made me sick to my stomach, but I haven't tried a ton. However, I'm not only sick on the trail I'm also sick for the rest of the day. Not fun. I also had a bad reaction during a race to Gatorade. I have used jelly beans lately and that seems to work but they are really chewy.

Have you tried Huma Gels? Most gels upset my stomach after more than one, but Huma doesn't bother it at all. It's chia seed based, but don't let that worry you. They are about the consistency of applesauce. Good luck finding a solution that works for you. Nutrition needs and tolerances are very individual.
 
Have you tried Huma Gels? Most gels upset my stomach after more than one, but Huma doesn't bother it at all. It's chia seed based, but don't let that worry you. They are about the consistency of applesauce. Good luck finding a solution that works for you. Nutrition needs and tolerances are very individual.
Unfortunately I have. That was the first 1 I got sick off of and then I decided to try honey stinger chews. Those worked for a little while but now not at all.
 
First off, so much great information! Thank you for all of your time!

Happy to help!

My last half marathon was 1:56. Running at 10:30-11:00 would still be good, right?

So these are the paces for a 1:56 HM current fitness.

Screen Shot 2017-06-09 at 6.58.47 PM.png

So the 80% mark would be 9:58-11:05 min/mile. So just a touch faster, but not by much. However, this does put your marathon estimate closer to 4:01 than 3:55 (but again don't worry too much about that at this point).

In addition, these would be the temperature + dew point adjustment I would suggest considering.

Screen Shot 2017-06-09 at 6.59.13 PM.png

This is a general starting point for figuring out how much to slow down, but it helps. The gold standard is perceived effort. The effort of marathon tempo at a T+D of 80 should feel like the same effort at a T+D of 145. The difference is at 145 you are likely slower than at 80.

So far, every kind of gel or chew I've had has made me sick to my stomach, but I haven't tried a ton. However, I'm not only sick on the trail I'm also sick for the rest of the day. Not fun. I also had a bad reaction during a race to Gatorade. I have used jelly beans lately and that seems to work but they are really chewy.

You might try fig newtons. I've never tried them, but I've heard they are another alternative.

Do you use electrolyte tablets while running? I am thinking about that for the summer heat. That would have helped me from getting leg cramps during my 25K, right?

I don't use electrolyte tabs because I've never felt the need for them. Although, I do live in Wisconsin. So it doesn't get terribly hot here (tops out around a T+D of 165 of so). Hard to say definitively that electrolyte tabs would have helped prevent the cramps in the 25k, but it's definitely a possibility.
 
So far, every kind of gel or chew I've had has made me sick to my stomach, but I haven't tried a ton. However, I'm not only sick on the trail I'm also sick for the rest of the day. Not fun. I also had a bad reaction during a race to Gatorade. I have used jelly beans lately and that seems to work but they are really chewy.

Try Tailwind. It's a powder you mix with water which gives you all the fuel, electrolytes, salt, etc., you need without causing any stomach or GI issues. Terrific stuff!

http://www.tailwindnutrition.com

Do you use electrolyte tablets while running? I am thinking about that for the summer heat.

Two good options for electrolytes (if you opt not to use Tailwind or something similar) are BASE Salt and Salt Stick. BASE is an electrolyte salt you carry in a small plastic test tube and take a lick of every 45-60 minutes. Salt Stick makes capsules you eat once an hour or so.

https://www.baseperformance.com/products/base-electrolyte-salt-4-vials
http://saltstick.com/product/saltstick-caps/
 
@DopeyBadger not sure if I should pm you but I want to try and BQ. My current 5k race pace is 24 min (I want to go under 23). I have done two 5Ks recently and 24 is the pace I am now. I did the Donald virtual half in Jan 1:52 and my full marathon in Feb in 3:54. I am targeting an end of Oct marathon to try and BQ. At that point I age up and the cutoff is 3:55, of course I have to do better. Would like to target 3:45 for the full. Currently nursing a pain in the butt, but it is getting better just slowly.

Any suggestions? I know I am close and I am signed up for the 10k and the full at WDW in Jan. I would love to have the BQ in oct so I can push the 10k and enjoy the full.
 
@DopeyBadger not sure if I should pm you but I want to try and BQ. My current 5k race pace is 24 min (I want to go under 23). I have done two 5Ks recently and 24 is the pace I am now. I did the Donald virtual half in Jan 1:52 and my full marathon in Feb in 3:54. I am targeting an end of Oct marathon to try and BQ. At that point I age up and the cutoff is 3:55, of course I have to do better. Would like to target 3:45 for the full. Currently nursing a pain in the butt, but it is getting better just slowly.

Any suggestions? I know I am close and I am signed up for the 10k and the full at WDW in Jan. I would love to have the BQ in oct so I can push the 10k and enjoy the full.

Looks like your 5k PR of 24:xx is either equivalent to a 3:50 or a 4:00 marathon dependent on whether it's 24:00 or 24:59. Interestingly enough, your HM and marathon (1:52 and 3:54) are near equal race equivalent to the 24:xx 5k. So, I'd say your endurance and speed appear to be relatively even. Which means you have the choice of doing either more endurance work or some aggressive speed work to lower that marathon time. However, with that being said, since your goal is an October marathon, then you want to do endurance in this cycle. This comes down to the rule of specificity. As you can spend time getting faster (like I did with my spring 10k training), but it won't help you race a marathon at the end of the cycle. The speed cycle has to be followed by a marathon cycle to still race a marathon quickly. If the ultimate goal is a 3:55, then I'd aim for a 3:50 on race day, not a 3:45 (if prepared for a 3:50) because it increases the odds of hitting a BQ.

I'd be happy to come up with something more specific if you want to send me a PM.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!





Top