dragitoff
DIS Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2007
And to me that's the critical part when people compare training plans to each other. If my current fitness pace dictates that my easy pace is an 8 min/mile and I want to do an 80 min workout, then I need to do 10 miles. But if someone else's current fitness easy pace is a 16 min/mile and they do an 80 min workout, then they would need to do 5 miles. On the surface it seems like I did more given 10 vs 5 miles, but based on my training philosophy we put in the same workout. My training philosophy is centered around the basis of relative current fitness pace X duration. Mileage is just a product of that.
This is an old post I made about a year ago but anytime these types of discussions come up I always dust it off:
To me, there are two types of impressive (and neither is necessarily more impressive than the other). My basis for my opinion is the following.
1. I believe in perception of effort. The harder you run the faster you go. But everyone's 75% is equal to everyone else's 75% when relating perception of effort.
2. I believe that time spent running is an important factor, more so than mileage.
3. Mileage is a function of perceived effort x time. If you run faster (effort), or longer (time), then you increase your mileage.
Scenario 1
We have two people standing next to each other. I tell them both to run at 75% effort for 90 minutes. They both complete the workout.
Person A - 75% effort at 90 minutes
Person B - 75% effort at 90 minutes
Which is more impressive? Based on the information given, they are equal.
Person A ran 10 miles
Person B ran 5 miles
Which is more impressive? Based on the information given, Person A is more impressive. Person A's 75% effort is faster than Person B's 75% effort.
Scenario 2
We have two people standing next to each other. I tell them both to run at 75% effort for 13.1 miles. They both complete the workout.
Person C - 75% effort for 13.1 miles
Person D - 75% effort for 13.1 miles
Which is more impressive? Based on the information given, they are equal.
Person C finished in 1:45
Person D finished in 3:00
Which is more impressive? Based on the information given, Person D is more impressive. Person D ran at the same effort level as Person C, yet did it for 71% longer in time than Person C.
So, to me there are two kinds of impressive.
1. It's impressive to me that Galen can run at 75% effort and that equals a 5:00 min/mile. It's impressive because when I run at 75% effort it equals an 7:30 min/mile. Galen is faster than me at the same effort level.
2. It's impressive to me that Person D ran at 75% effort for 3 hours. It's impressive because when I run at 75% effort it equals 1:45. Person D is able to maintain the same effort level as me, but for 71% longer in time.
Hopefully this helps make sense of my idea. So when someone says I ran a 15:00 min/mile for a half marathon, but I gave it everything I got. I come away impressed. That person's perception of effort was the same as mine, but yet they maintained that effort for significantly longer than me.
Look at it one other way. When someone goes out and runs a marathon in 5:00, for me to match the same physical feat (same effort X time) I would have to run 40 miles instead of 26.2 miles. I don't believe I could run 40 miles in 5:00.
So I come away impressed by anyone that's running no matter what. Every one of you impresses me!
As a personal example, I've written 121 training plans to date, and @MommaoffherRocker's Dopey 2017 plan still ranks in the Top 2 hardest plans ever written. Far harder than many of the training plans I use for myself. Her current fitness is a 5:30 marathon, and mine is a 3:02 marathon. Yet, she trains significantly harder than I do because she has shown she can handle a much higher training load then I can. So I may have 30x 10 mile runs and she has 4 for this upcoming Dopey, but our plans are just about equally as difficult.
Somewhat in this same vein, I've had to rethink my training for Dopey. I've completed 2 full marathons and nearly a dozen half marathons. I changed over to a ketogenic diet in 2016 and shaved 12 minutes off my half marathon time after a year of adapting my body and training using this diet plan. I've always been one of those that trained at near race pace until the keto switch. For my last half, I trained at a 7:45 pace, but raced at a 7:22 pace. During that training and post-race, I battled some fatigue in my knees and even had a little hip flexor issues. I realized my best course of action for building my base during the south Georgia summer would be to slow myself down and actually run slower than I had previously been training.
This has resulted in really strong runs (albeit much slower pace than I'm accustomed to) but finishing my long runs feeling good and without pain or even soreness. Up until this past weekend's 16 miler, I had nailed every run and felt good doing them. We won't go into details about my 16...er 13 miler from Sunday, but my point is I realized that pace is secondary to completing Dopey for me. I'm super competitive with myself, but I'm also very driven to complete a task I set out to do no matter what. Training at too fast of a pace could cause injury or cause me to hit the wall much earlier in the race due to faster pacing than what my body is capable of. I'd rather finish Dopey averaging 8:30 for the 4 days than to finish the first three days averaging sub 8's and then bomb on marathon day. It's a tough pill to swallow, but one I'm fighting down one run at a time.