Tapering: Evolved Perspectives?

LSmith said:

I've read it all, gurus saying 3 week taper to no taper at all. My
posture toward tapering for a marathon last year was 2 weeks. Some
considered that aggressive - now I am rethinking that - and feeling I
can't see more than a 10 day taper.

I'm a follower of Hanson Training, the Michigan Runnign guys, amd I
think it's them that says it takes about 10 days for the benefits of a
training session to show up in the body and performance? Any opinions
on that?

Based on that I'm thinking 10 day taper coming off 5 weeks of 100
miles/week training. And even a 10 taper seems long - why not 7? I
just can't see my body needing more than a week to be 100% recovered /
rested - yet all the while poised and peaked to race. My whole
tapering perspective has evolved to where 3 weeks strikes as
ridiculous for any level of runner. 2 weeks max. Anyone else
readjust their view/perspective on tapering for a marathon?

I'm really interested in opinion on how long it takes to gain the
benefits of a training session - is it 10 days as the Hanson Bros,
say , before the benefits show up?

LSmith said:

I've read it all, gurus saying 3 week taper to no taper at all. My
posture toward tapering for a marathon last year was 2 weeks. Some
considered that aggressive - now I am rethinking that - and feeling I
can't see more than a 10 day taper.

I'm a follower of Hanson Training, the Michigan Runnign guys, amd I
think it's them that says it takes about 10 days for the benefits of a
training session to show up in the body and performance? Any opinions
on that?

Based on that I'm thinking 10 day taper coming off 5 weeks of 100
miles/week training. And even a 10 taper seems long - why not 7? I
just can't see my body needing more than a week to be 100% recovered /
rested - yet all the while poised and peaked to race. My whole
tapering perspective has evolved to where 3 weeks strikes as
ridiculous for any level of runner. 2 weeks max. Anyone else
readjust their view/perspective on tapering for a marathon?

I'm really interested in opinion on how long it takes to gain the
benefits of a training session - is it 10 days as the Hanson Bros,
say , before the benefits show up?

It sounds as if you are pretty close to 2nd tier pro? Not knowing much
about your performance, or what trainings you are doing, I can offer
what my coach tells me regularly:

"Any training inside the 2 week window is completely void of results
for your race. Maintenance miles are key". My last hard workout
(tonight) 10 mile tempo, and then 6 x 800's at 5k race pace tommorow.
Outside of that - and tapering down to 40 miles / week, all of my runs
are snail pace. I usually take this as an opportunity to run with
friends, my wife, etc.

I turn around your querstion " I cant see my body needing more than a
week to recover" - Ok - Under that phillsophy , do you race a week
after your marathon? I personally hold off on racing for two whole
weeks - ironically, the same as my taper. If you think your body
recovers that quickly, definitely think about hte above thoughts.

I understand everyone is different , but unless you are part of the
Brooks Hanson Distance Project, I assume you are mortal at the very
least.
Its the aggregate of workouts that reap benefits in my eyes (one can
argue against long runs maybe...) , not one workout. Therefore, if you
include the week of the training that you are claiming as beneficial,
perhaps 10 days seems a little more like... say 14?

Just my .02

"LSmith" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

I've read it all, gurus saying 3 week taper to no taper at all. My
posture toward tapering for a marathon last year was 2 weeks. Some
considered that aggressive - now I am rethinking that - and feeling I
can't see more than a 10 day taper.

Off the cuff, I agree with you. Yet, I 've heard from some very good
runners (like Marty Liquori) who ran great using a 3 week taper, although I
don't know the particulars.

When I was younger and faster I would back off the prior weekend, and taper
down to a 2 mile jog the day before a marathon. Before my first sub 2:40, I
even did half of a speed workout on the Thursday before the race (5 x 440) a
tad easier than normal. Now as a 55 year old, I wouldn't do that.

I know on the warm-up jog if I've got it on race day. The strange thing is
that off the same taper I used to use (fairly agressive with light speed the
week before the race), some times I'd feel fantastic, and sometimes (my last
marathon) I felt totally crappy.

I've learned that if I don't have good spring in my legs on the Wednesday
before the race, I'm gonna have a lousy race. So for my next real taper, if
I'm not stronger on Wed than I was on Tuesday, I'm just going to abort the
workout and take the rest of the week off.

Quoted message said:

I'm a follower of Hanson Training, the Michigan Runnign guys, amd I
think it's them that says it takes about 10 days for the benefits of a
training session to show up in the body and performance? Any opinions
on that?

I've noticed that a week after my first speed workout (doing the same
workout so I can compare), that I'm almost always faster. I've noticed this
effect for over 25 years. So I disagree a bit with Hanson/Michagoss there.

After shorter races races (5-10k), I also notice a super-charging effect
after about a week, which I take to be the training effect of the race as a
hard workout.

So I'd say a week for a not-too-hard hard workout, for me anyway.

Quoted message said:

Based on that I'm thinking 10 day taper coming off 5 weeks of 100
miles/week training. And even a 10 taper seems long - why not 7? I
just can't see my body needing more than a week to be 100% recovered /
rested - yet all the while poised and peaked to race.

Yeah, I've never tried the 3 week thing, mainly out of anxiety that I'd lose
fitness. I've always had good results with an 8-10 day taper (and a few bad
results!), and am leery of increasing it.

lance said:

I've read it all, gurus saying 3 week taper to no taper at all. My
posture toward tapering for a marathon last year was 2 weeks. Some
considered that aggressive - now I am rethinking that - and feeling I
can't see more than a 10 day taper.

This overview touches on tapering at the end:

http://runningtimes.com/rt/articles/print.asp?id=9906

They mention Brad Hudson's thoughts, but I'd rather know what Vigil
and Mahon of Team Running USA think, considering the success of their
runners. Guess I'd listen to the Hansons too - they do consistently
get a lot from their relatively second-tier guys.

"Charlie Pendejo" wrote
| runners. Guess I'd listen to the Hansons too - they do consistently
| get a lot from their relatively second-tier guys.

I am not sure about the 'second-tier', one of the runners is in top 5
for the Olympic trials.

Quoted message said:

Pendejo wrote
| Guess I'd listen to the Hansons too - they do consistently
| get a lot from their relatively second-tier guys.

I2Run said:

I am not sure about the 'second-tier', one of the runners is in top 5
for the Olympic trials.

[a] Stress *relatively*.

[b] But Brian Sell illustrates the point nicely - like some of his
compadres, he's come a long way with the group. He was not a top N
guy in high school or college. The Hansons don't attract the hyped
Ritzes and Rupps of the running world, they've got to work with the
guys they do attract, and they seem to do a heck of a job.

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

Quoted message said:

I've read it all, gurus saying 3 week taper to no taper at all. My
posture toward tapering for a marathon last year was 2 weeks. Some
considered that aggressive - now I am rethinking that - and feeling I
can't see more than a 10 day taper.

Once again taper times are based off averages and who ever fits those
curves. You have to find out what works for you. I'm sure you know taper
is not just a number of days but quality and quanity. FWIW I don't think
going to 10 days is a good idea.

Quoted message said:

I'm a follower of Hanson Training, the Michigan Runnign guys, amd I
think it's them that says it takes about 10 days for the benefits of a
training session to show up in the body and performance? Any opinions
on that?

I haven't any idea how a single day can be measured. Progress is series
of efforts and rest periods.

Quoted message said:

Based on that I'm thinking 10 day taper coming off 5 weeks of 100
miles/week training.

You're doing 100 a week? Why am I so skeptical?

Quoted message said:

And even a 10 taper seems long - why not 7? I
just can't see my body needing more than a week to be 100% recovered

You're going from bad to worse.

Quoted message said:

rested - yet all the while poised and peaked to race. My whole
tapering perspective has evolved to where 3 weeks strikes as
ridiculous for any level of runner.

For any runner? Trolling a little to strike up a discussion?

Quoted message said:

Anyone else
readjust their view/perspective on tapering for a marathon?

A gross generalization - for experienced and or high mileage 2 weeks may
be enough but I'd opt for a smarter gentler three and really be ready
race day, especailly if coming off 100 a week. Less than two and I
don't think you are really recovered, only feeling better because you're
doing less. That's a long way from fully recovered and likely to find
that out at 20 miles.

Quoted message said:

I'm really interested in opinion on how long it takes to gain the
benefits of a training session - is it 10 days as the Hanson Bros,
say , before the benefits show up?

Do you really think there is an answer to this? If the Hanson Bros
think they know the answer, they better share some of that weed.

-Doug

Doug Freese said:

Do you really think there is an answer to this? If the Hanson Bros
think they know the answer, they better share some of that weed.

-Doug

Judging by your posts lately, you've got plenty of your own ;?)

Cheers,
Elford

Quoted message said:

Doug Freese said:

Do you really think there is an answer to this? If the Hanson Bros
think they know the answer, they better share some of that weed.

Quoted message said:

-Doug

Judging by your posts lately, you've got plenty of your own ;?)

Cheers,
Elford

"Charlie Pendejo" wrote
|> Pendejo wrote
| >| Guess I'd listen to the Hansons too - they do consistently
| >| get a lot from their relatively second-tier guys.
|
| I2Run wrote:
| > I am not sure about the 'second-tier', one of the runners is in top 5
| > for the Olympic trials.
|
| [a] Stress *relatively*.
|
| [b] But Brian Sell illustrates the point nicely - like some of his
| compadres, he's come a long way with the group. He was not a top N
| guy in high school or college. The Hansons don't attract the hyped
| Ritzes and Rupps of the running world, they've got to work with the
| guys they do attract, and they seem to do a heck of a job.

There is a nice article about the brothers in Sept/Oct M&B.
It is awesome what they have been doing.
Do they actually coach? Or have others do it?
They do stress a lot on group training and seems to be paying off.

[quote="'I2Run'"]"Charlie Pendejo" wrote
|> Pendejo wrote
| >| Guess I'd listen to the Hansons too - they do consistently
| >| get a lot from their relatively second-tier guys.
|| I2Run wrote:

| > I am not sure about the 'second-tier', one of the runners is in top 5
| > for the Olympic trials.
|
| [a] Stress *relatively*.
|
| [b] But Brian Sell illustrates the point nicely - like some of his
| compadres, he's come a long way with the group. He was not a top N
| guy in high school or college. The Hansons don't attract the hyped
| Ritzes and Rupps of the running world, they've got to work with the
| guys they do attract, and they seem to do a heck of a job.

There is a nice article about the brothers in Sept/Oct M&B.
It is awesome what they have been doing.
Do they actually coach? Or have others do it?
They do stress a lot on group training and seems to be paying off.[/quote]