Re: Low Carb (Paleo) Half Marathon Report

"Ignoramus12690" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Donovan, you seem to know about running training, although at times we
disagreed. How much time/miles per month do I need to run, in order to
run a sub-4 hour marathon, given my present condition. For simplicity,
assume a more typical runner's diet.

i

Here's a pretty good link on Marathon training ..... I used a similar
article from this site as a beginning runner to go from 0 to 10k:

http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,5033,s6-51-55-0-6946,00.html

--
John V.
LC - on and off, mostly on lately, as of 1/2/04
262/250/175

It isn't dumb when evaluated in terms of Ig's goals which are not your
goals.

In news:[email hidden],
Donovan Rebbechi <[email hidden]> stated
|
| Sure. No-one said it was impossible, many said it was dumb.
|

Ignoramus12690 said:

Donovan, you seem to know about running training, although at times we
disagreed. How much time/miles per month do I need to run, in order to
run a sub-4 hour marathon, given my present condition. For simplicity,
assume a more typical runner's diet.

From what I recall of your times, you have the ability to run a sub 4. A
4 hour marathon is "comparable" on WAVA tables to a 24:30 5k. A reasonable
training volume would bring your 5k times well below that.

The point of going through that exercise is that it demonstrates that you
have the speed for a sub 4 marathon (I'd be less optimistic if you wanted a
sub 3 in the near future)

The main thing a basic marathon training program involves is just getting
in a few good long runs (about 20 miles), everything else is built around
that. So this means that you're going to have a peak weekly milage of around
40 miles. The closer you are to this prior to commencement of the program,
the better. For example, a 40 mile peak off a consistent base of 30 is
reasonable. Since you've got a time goal, there is a place for speed work
in your program, but keep in mind that it is the long runs that are of
primary importance.

I'd recommend some reading on this -- take a look at Bob Glover's "Competitive
Runners Handbook". I'd recommend the "basic competitors" marathon program
from that book.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

FOB said:

It isn't dumb when evaluated in terms of Ig's goals which are not your
goals.

Sure, it's no more dumb than weight training and entering a powerlifting
competition on a low protein diet or a very low calorie diet.

It also strikes me as a tad disingenious that he appears to think he's proven
something -- he has indeed proven that you can run very slowly (comparable to
the older senior masters women in his case) on a low carb diet. But this
isn't news for us.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Ignoramus12690 said:

In article said:

Ignoramus12690 said:

Donovan, you seem to know about running training, although at times we
disagreed. How much time/miles per month do I need to run, in order to
run a sub-4 hour marathon, given my present condition. For simplicity,
assume a more typical runner's diet.

From what I recall of your times, you have the ability to run a sub 4. A
4 hour marathon is "comparable" on WAVA tables to a 24:30 5k. A reasonable
training volume would bring your 5k times well below that.

My 5K was 25:13.

That was wat I recalled (I just remembered it was about 25min).

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The main thing a basic marathon training program involves is just getting
in a few good long runs (about 20 miles), everything else is built around
that. So this means that you're going to have a peak weekly milage of around
40 miles.

That's 400 minutes per week, or, about 1 hour per day. That's a lot
and I am not sure if I want to put up with that, but, it sounds like
just about right quantity for the stated purpose.

That's peek milage, it includes a 20 mile training run on the weekend. A
typical week would be more like 30 miles, which you'd do as (for example)
5 miles four days a week, plus a weekend long run of about 10 miles.

As your fitness improves, your training pace should close in on about 9
minutes per mile (by then you'll be running 5k in more like 22 minutes),
so I'd say you're looking at 4 days of 45-50 minutes, plus a long run that's
about double that.

Quoted message said:

I am leaning towards not preparing for the marathon, purely based on
reward/effort ratio. If I do run it, again, it would be for
experimental purposes wrt my diet and endurance. But, it is not clear
just what it would prove, if anything, that would be of practical
relevance to my life, given that I already know that I can run 1/2.

Goals are up to you, can't really help you here.

Quoted message said:

What my 1/2 proved is that there is quite a lot of endurance in me,
given my low preparedness level, which the diet did not hinder.

What would be the addition to this knowledge from the full marathon?

Don't know. The marathon is usually run at a lower intensity, so you could
probably also run a marathon on the same diet if you were prepared to run
slowly enough. Likewise, if your fitness was good enough, you finish it
on just about any diet. I do 16-22 mile runs at about 7:15 minutes per mile on
a fairly regular basis, and while I'm not exactly on a low carb diet, I don't
do anything special on the day of these runs either. I'm pretty sure I could do
these on an empty fuel tank (sorry, not curious enough to actually try it),
they'd just be a bit slower (I'm guessing 7:30-7:45 or so).

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Donovan Rebbechi said:

Ignoramus12690 said:

1. Saying that I cannot run an extended distance without carbs is
baloney. Even though I am not, by any means, a highly trained athlete.

Sure. No-one said it was impossible, many said it was dumb.

You can also weight-train on a low protein diet. You could do the workouts.
Sure it probably wouldn't be very effective, you'd probably lift less than
a 60 year old woman, much like you ran a time comparable to the midpack 60-65
runners at the local races I compete in.

I'm not knocking your accomplishment, but it doesn't make a very compelling
case for the effectiveness of low carb diets.

One can do Ok endurance-wise on low carb diets. Maybe low carbs
wouldn't be the best idea *if* Ig wanted to win the competition, but
he didn't. For example, Phinney's study
(http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/1/1/2) suggests that

"both observational and prospectively designed studies support the
conclusion that submaximal endurance performance can be sustained
despite the virtual exclusion of carbohydrate from the human diet".

Another article I've seen recently discussed an experiment that didn't
show statistical differences between three groups of soldiers (given
carbohydrate electrolyte, placebo, or water; during 3-d of field
training in hot humid conditions) after looking at absolute or changes
from pretraining values for fluid intake, body weight, climb time, run
time, marksmanship, or mood.

DZ

Donovan Rebbechi said:

Ignoramus12690 said:

The implication of this speculation is
that I could train for good performance on long runs, while running
shorter traiing runs, as long as I eat LC.

You can do that anyway, but you still need some long runs. There is more
to long runs than glycogen depletion.

I'm a prime example of that. When you cut to the chase my problem
today was dissipating heat. If I had stopped at mile 15 or even
16 I would have called it a good run, albeit a bit slow. Two
miles later and I was seriously debating whether I should sit down
and ask somebody to tell the cop about 1/2 mile up that I needed help.

The research from Phinney showed that one can function on a ketogenic diet
(as long as you get sodium and potassium from somewhere). In the case of
the Inuit or the Canadian explorers this was necessary as carb sources were
unavailable to them. The question is why would a person intentionally
remove important nutrients from their diets.

Another criticism I have (that really did not apply to Ig's case) is this
bogus use of endurance as a performance protocol. I wish journals would
stop accepting papers based on this stupid idea.

I am curious for a link or citation for the military study. I am preparing
a talk in a few weeks where that might come in handy since it deals partly
with adventure racers.

"DZ" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Donovan Rebbechi said:

Ignoramus12690 said:

1. Saying that I cannot run an extended distance without carbs is
baloney. Even though I am not, by any means, a highly trained athlete.

Sure. No-one said it was impossible, many said it was dumb.

You can also weight-train on a low protein diet. You could do the

workouts.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Sure it probably wouldn't be very effective, you'd probably lift less

than

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

a 60 year old woman, much like you ran a time comparable to the midpack

60-65

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

runners at the local races I compete in.

I'm not knocking your accomplishment, but it doesn't make a very

compelling

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

case for the effectiveness of low carb diets.

One can do Ok endurance-wise on low carb diets. Maybe low carbs
wouldn't be the best idea *if* Ig wanted to win the competition, but
he didn't. For example, Phinney's study
(http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/1/1/2) suggests that

"both observational and prospectively designed studies support the
conclusion that submaximal endurance performance can be sustained
despite the virtual exclusion of carbohydrate from the human diet".

Another article I've seen recently discussed an experiment that didn't
show statistical differences between three groups of soldiers (given
carbohydrate electrolyte, placebo, or water; during 3-d of field
training in hot humid conditions) after looking at absolute or changes
from pretraining values for fluid intake, body weight, climb time, run
time, marksmanship, or mood.

DZ

DZ wrote in message

Quoted message said:

...
One can do Ok endurance-wise on low carb diets. Maybe low carbs
wouldn't be the best idea *if* Ig wanted to win the competition, but
he didn't. For example, Phinney's study
(http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/1/1/2) suggests that

Interesting (long) article, thanks.

Ignoramus16074 said:

In article said:

Donovan Rebbechi said:

Ignoramus12690 <[email hidden]> wrote:
> 1. Saying that I cannot run an extended distance without carbs is
> baloney. Even though I am not, by any means, a highly trained athlete.

Sure. No-one said it was impossible, many said it was dumb.

You can also weight-train on a low protein diet. You could do the workouts.
Sure it probably wouldn't be very effective, you'd probably lift less than
a 60 year old woman, much like you ran a time comparable to the midpack
60-65 runners at the local races I compete in.

I'm not knocking your accomplishment, but it doesn't make a very compelling
case for the effectiveness of low carb diets.

One can do Ok endurance-wise on low carb diets. Maybe low carbs
wouldn't be the best idea *if* Ig wanted to win the competition, but
he didn't. For example, Phinney's study
(http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/1/1/2) suggests that

"both observational and prospectively designed studies support the
conclusion that submaximal endurance performance can be sustained
despite the virtual exclusion of carbohydrate from the human diet".

I would go a little farther and say that for me, my yesterday's result
was not far from my any-diet maximum.

It was about 13 minutes (a minute per mile) slower than what you may expect
given your 5k times.

Granted, there's no way to tell whether this is due to inadequate training or
inadequate nutrition or a bit of both.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Ignoramus16074 said:

I wonder, how big are the issues of sore feet, etc, for
marathoners.

My hamstrings are killing me (I can't even straighten my left leg
without pain) and some muscles are a little sore if I push on
them, but my feet are fine other than a few blisters.

Were you running on a harder-than-usual surface?

Quoted message said:

I would like to run a marathon, at worst, at the speed of the half
marathon that I ran yesterday.

For reference my paces are:

6 miles 9:30? after warmup (training)
half 10:30-11:00? (racing)
full 12:30-13:00

I was under 12:50 until mile 17, but I had most of the hills
behind me and I planned to give it everything once I got within 4
miles of the finish line. I think Pawel and I also
overcompensated for our natural tendency to take off - we would
crest a hill and would want to maintain the same exertion on the
downhill and level.

I'm sure someone remembers the ratio between half and full times
for athletes who haven't been training for years. I seem to
vaguely recall it's something like 2.5 so a 2:00 half implies a
5:00 full. Flipping it a 4:00 full requires a 1:36 half.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Likewise, if your fitness was good enough, you finish it on just
about any diet. I do 16-22 mile runs at about 7:15 minutes per mile
on a fairly regular basis

You mean 7 hours for 22 miles???

If I did the math right that's 2:40 for 22 miles.

Ignoramus16074 said:

Many (not all) nutrition ideas are basically not well researched, and
are guesses rather than proven facts.

That's true for the general population, but the effects of diet on
top athletes are carefully studied. A more valid question would
be whether that research applies to the casual athlete as well.

Quoted message said:

Recall the idea of "hydration"
forcing exercisers to overdrink, leading to hyponatremia. It would be
good to verify more of these "common sense" hypotheses.

You're overreaching here. Trained athletes, even the guy in a 6
month marathon prep program, know about proper hydration and have
been training with it. They know how much to drink, what to
drink, etc.

It's the recreational runner who decides to enter a marathon
without training who's at risk and it's because he's only heard a
corruption of the real message.

Ignoramus16074 said:

Quoted message said:

As your fitness improves, your training pace should close in on about 9
minutes per mile (by then you'll be running 5k in more like 22 minutes),
so I'd say you're looking at 4 days of 45-50 minutes, plus a long run that's
about double that.

Thanks.

I may try something like this. Get my 1 hour running speed close to or
slightly below 9mpm, while still staying on LC. I will run maybe 2-3
times per week. That's relatively easy, time wise, and in fact can
save me time because I would not need to walk as much.

If I get my running speed under 9mpm, and assuming that I run on fat
oxidation for most of that one hour, then I can experiment with a few
endurance runs of 15-18 miles or so. My hope -- and expectation -- is
that fat based endurance is not limited by mieage as much as carb
based endurance. If my hope turns out to be right and I am able to run
15-18 miles under 9mpm, then I will try seriously preparing for the
marathon.

If you're going to do this, enter a race. 15-18 miles at goal marathon pace
is not exactly easy.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Don't know. The marathon is usually run at a lower intensity, so you
could probably also run a marathon on the same diet if you were
prepared to run slowly enough.

I wonder, how big are the issues of sore feet, etc, for
marathoners.

Don't run marathons, but I've never had sore feet from training runs. I
don't think it should be an issue if you've got proper footwear, and you're
well trained. Running a half-marathon in racing flats makes my calves pretty
sore the next day though.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Likewise, if your fitness was good enough, you finish it on just
about any diet. I do 16-22 mile runs at about 7:15 minutes per mile
on a fairly regular basis, and while I'm not exactly on a low carb
diet, I don't do anything special on the day of these runs
either. I'm pretty sure I could do these on an empty fuel tank
(sorry, not curious enough to actually try it), they'd just be a bit
slower (I'm guessing 7:30-7:45 or so).

You mean 7 hours for 22 miles???

I mean 7 minutes per mile.

Quoted message said:

Did I get that right???

I could walk 22 miles in 7 hours... I am confused.

It's OK, your brain just needs some carbs.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 15:38:58 +0000 (UTC), Donovan Rebbechi <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

On 2004-09-27, Ignoramus16074 <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

As your fitness improves, your training pace should close in on about 9
minutes per mile (by then you'll be running 5k in more like 22
minutes),
so I'd say you're looking at 4 days of 45-50 minutes, plus a long run
that's
about double that.

Thanks.

I may try something like this. Get my 1 hour running speed close to or
slightly below 9mpm, while still staying on LC. I will run maybe 2-3
times per week. That's relatively easy, time wise, and in fact can
save me time because I would not need to walk as much.

If I get my running speed under 9mpm, and assuming that I run on fat
oxidation for most of that one hour, then I can experiment with a few
endurance runs of 15-18 miles or so. My hope -- and expectation -- is
that fat based endurance is not limited by mieage as much as carb
based endurance. If my hope turns out to be right and I am able to run
15-18 miles under 9mpm, then I will try seriously preparing for the
marathon.

If you're going to do this, enter a race. 15-18 miles at goal marathon
pace
is not exactly easy.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Don't know. The marathon is usually run at a lower intensity, so you
could probably also run a marathon on the same diet if you were
prepared to run slowly enough.

I wonder, how big are the issues of sore feet, etc, for
marathoners.

Don't run marathons, but I've never had sore feet from training runs. I
don't think it should be an issue if you've got proper footwear, and
you're
well trained. Running a half-marathon in racing flats makes my calves
pretty
sore the next day though.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Likewise, if your fitness was good enough, you finish it on just
about any diet. I do 16-22 mile runs at about 7:15 minutes per mile
on a fairly regular basis, and while I'm not exactly on a low carb
diet, I don't do anything special on the day of these runs
either. I'm pretty sure I could do these on an empty fuel tank
(sorry, not curious enough to actually try it), they'd just be a bit
slower (I'm guessing 7:30-7:45 or so).

You mean 7 hours for 22 miles???

I mean 7 minutes per mile.

Quoted message said:

Did I get that right???

I could walk 22 miles in 7 hours... I am confused.

It's OK, your brain just needs some carbs.

Which is totally fallacious. Brains run perfectly fine (I would argue
better) on ketones.

--
Bob in CT
Remove ".x" to reply

In article <[email hidden]>,

Ignoramus12690 said:

Donovan, you seem to know about running training, although at times we
disagreed. How much time/miles per month do I need to run, in order to
run a sub-4 hour marathon, given my present condition. For simplicity,
assume a more typical runner's diet.

In your _present_ condition, you cannot run a sub-4 marathon. You
took longer than 2 hours to run half a marathon.

--
Robert Grumbine http://www.radix.net/~bobg/ Science faqs and amateur activities notes and links.
Sagredo (Galileo Galilei) "You present these recondite matters with too much
evidence and ease; this great facility makes them less appreciated than they
would be had they been presented in a more abstruse manner." Two New Sciences

Robert Grumbine said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Ignoramus12690 said:

Donovan, you seem to know about running training, although at times we
disagreed. How much time/miles per month do I need to run, in order to
run a sub-4 hour marathon, given my present condition. For simplicity,
assume a more typical runner's diet.

In your _present_ condition, you cannot run a sub-4 marathon. You
took longer than 2 hours to run half a marathon.

I assumed that he'd figured that out, though I admit it's possible that
I was overly generous in that assumption.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

In article <[email hidden]>,

(Robert Grumbine) said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Ignoramus12690 said:

Donovan, you seem to know about running training, although at times we
disagreed. How much time/miles per month do I need to run, in order to
run a sub-4 hour marathon, given my present condition. For simplicity,
assume a more typical runner's diet.

In your _present_ condition, you cannot run a sub-4 marathon. You
took longer than 2 hours to run half a marathon.

Yeaaaahh. He asked, "Given where I'm starting from, what will it in
terms of future training to run a sub-4 Marathon." In other words, he's
asking how many months and what kind of training during those months
will it take, given jis PRESENT condition. Did you intentionally try to
make him look stupid by answering a question he didn't ask, or did you
just not read what he wrote?

--Harold Buck

"I used to rock and roll all night,
and party every day.
Then it was every other day. . . ."
-Homer J. Simpson

In article <[email hidden]>,

Ignoramus16074 said:

Quoted message said:

Likewise, if your fitness was good enough, you finish it on just
about any diet. I do 16-22 mile runs at about 7:15 minutes per mile
on a fairly regular basis, and while I'm not exactly on a low carb
diet, I don't do anything special on the day of these runs
either. I'm pretty sure I could do these on an empty fuel tank
(sorry, not curious enough to actually try it), they'd just be a bit
slower (I'm guessing 7:30-7:45 or so).

You mean 7 hours for 22 miles???

Did I get that right???

I could walk 22 miles in 7 hours... I am confused.

Yes, you are. 7:30-7:45 min/mile.

--Harold Buck

"I used to rock and roll all night,
and party every day.
Then it was every other day. . . ."
-Homer J. Simpson

Ignoramus16074 said:

I have "flat feet", supposedly. My quads are sore today, but, alas, my
knees are just fine.

Flat feet make you prone to a number of problems (including problems with
your feet). If you're going to do a substantial amount of milage, you should
get yourself fitted with some running shoes that match your gait and foot
type. The conventional wisdom is that people with flat feet should usually
wear a stability or motion control shoe. Since I have very high arches, I'm
not the right person to ask about how well the "conventional wisdom" works
in real life, but I'd advise using it as a starting point.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/