Ignoramus4020 wrote in message ...
Quoted message said:Just ran my second, bigger benchmark distance, 5.6 miles, in 50 min 41
seconds, or at 9:04 mpm. That second distance is moderately hilly,
unlike my smaller 2.8 miles distance. (mileage obtained from mapquest)This is better than my 56:30 result that I got on the same exact
distance prior to half marathon.
The HM probably gave you a good training effect. You might have experienced
the race echo - when you have a good performance in you a couple of weeks
after the race.
Quoted message said:
Unlike the previous time, when I thought that my running was "easy", I
would not call it easy this time, although it did not feel like
torture. This time I ran at 3-3 breath cycle, and some 3-2 on hills,
unlike the previous 4-4 time. After finishing, I definitely feel that
I could run quite a bit longer -- not sure how much -- but I also
strongly feel that I could not run much faster.
Actually based on the limits of your training and diet, I think you're
training time today shows you might have good long-distance running
potential.
Quoted message said:
That feeling of a "ceiling" on my speed, by the way, is, quite
possibly, due to my diet and lack of glycogen, and the possibility
that I ran on fat. Perhaps, with more glycogen, I would run faster,
but I also would not be training what I want to train.This is fairly close to the speed that would, if maintained for the
whole marathon, get me to my goal of being under 4 hours. Obviously, I
very likely need quite a bit of training to maintain that speed for
3:50 as opposed to 0:50, but I am hopeful.This is my second run today, and in fact I did not feel like running
the second time. I went out, ran 300 feet, and walked back home. Felt
tired and bored. After 10 minutes of milling aroud the house, I decided
to give it a second try, and here's where I am.
So how much did you run today? Will you be posting your weekly time and/or
mileage in the training log David puts up?
Quoted message said:
Another observation for today is that I ran exactly half the distance
in 24:50, and the second half in 25:50. The first half was slightly
more downhill though.I would like to run more, and longer, at this speed.
As others have said, speed really isn't important until you're sharpening in
the final several months before your race. It will come naturally from more
running. It seems you're trying to do the more quality with less training
approach, which works well for some very fit racers who have done years of
higher mileage before they adopt the low mileage/high quality type of
training.
Quoted message said:
I wonder if, given my present apparent condition -- 2:08 half marathon
and 9:04mpm 50 minute run -- I can expect to be able to run a marathon
under 4 hours if, say, I maintain 20 mpw training, training mostly at
this level of exertion. Any thoughts on this will be appreciated.
If your legs feel fine and you've had no hints of injury, then test yourself
a bit. See how long you can run at that 9:04 pace you like. You did 9:46
miles in your HM. One race calculator says that based on that you can do
10:20mpm for a marathon (4:32), and 11:32mpm for 50 miles (of course both
with more training). If your goal is to run long and burn fat, then run
slow and long for training. Work your long runs slow up to 4 hours every
few weeks, and get some runs in mid-week. Endurance 1st, speed 2nd.
- Tony