Discussion Board

I have been surfing the web over the past several months, searching for opinions on the proper way for runners to train for a race. I've seen different training plans and different opinions about what pace runners should train at.

For example, if you look at Hal Higdon's training plans, most of the runs are designed to be at a conversational pace, a pace at which you could carry on a conversation with your running buddy. This means that you should not do these training runs fast, but should only worry about covering the distance.

However, running coaches Joe English and Dean Hebert both emphasize something called Goal Pace running. They say that if your goal is to run at an average pace of, say, 9 minutes per mile in a race, you should do the bulk of your training runs at 9 minutes per mile. The purpose is to get your body accustomed to the stress of this pace so that your body can adjust to it.

Runners World has training programs that feature a fair amount of speed work. Even Hal Higdon's intermediate and advance training plans tend to include a lot of pace running and some speed work.

However, there are some coaches who tell their runners to do almost all of their training at a relatively relaxed pace, a conversational pace, also known as an aerobic pace.

This brings up another divide in the running community: Heart Rate Monitors. Do you wear a heart rate monitor when you run? If so, do you use it to fine tune your training paces? In other words, do you slow down if your heart rate is higher than a certain level? Do you speed up if your heart rate falls below a certain level?

Some coaches swear by heart rate training, claiming it is an objective measure of how hard your body is working during your training and that this prevents training too hard or not hard enough. Other coaches say that heart rates don't provide the kind of information that your really need because heart rates are influenced by the weather, ones stress level, lack of sleep, how nervous the runner is and on and on.

So, how do you deal with these issues when you do your training?

Do you basically wing it or do you try to closely follow a training plan leading up to your race?

Since I started with the Maffetone Method last year, I never run without a heart rate monitor. I strictly follow his 180 formula for Maximum Aerobic Function for all of my training runs. I slow down and walk when I need to. When the school year ends and life stress decreases, I may include higher intensity training, but for now I reserve all intensity for race day only. Maffetone argues that in any endurance event, most of the energy is produced aerobically, so it makes sense to train aerobically until you completely max it out. This takes a long time. Any high intensity training is very taxing to the body and hard to recover from. Overtraining, illness, and injury are the results. I have experienced all of these first hand. But training aerobically I have watched my time on a particular training run decrease by 30 seconds a week for months. All at the same comfortable intensity. I always feel great while I train and afterwards. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

For more info, visit my blog. I write about this regularly, and there are a lot of links for more info. Nothing I have ever tried in my years of sport has paid off so much, so quickly, and with so little stress. Highly recommended.

I love to race but I don't obsess about these details. I let my body lead me on each day. I follow a total weekly mileage plan but no specific training plan. I run fast when I want to and do easy runs when they're needed. I have placed top 5 females in almost every ultra I've ran using this method. But that's ultra running... And time on your feet is the most important aspect when your race takes 5 PR more hours on trails in the mountains. When I did marathons however I still used this method and ran 3:43 as a PR (early in my running... Like the 4th month of running. Before I found ultras).

This is one of the things I hated about road running... The obsession with pace, splits, time, mileage... Numbers numbers numbers. I love running and trails and just being! I love pushing and working hard but I like to listen to my body and just run.

But hey, clearly I run ultras. A day in the mountains is good enough for me

Been years since I've been in a race, but I am trying to get back to a mindset of a marathon within the next 12 months (the first in 20 years). In my experience, the best training is the stuff I like the least. I remember one of the big names in race prep being asked how many times he did some type of training, and he answered, "Once," which actually meant that he tried to incorporate all of the main training techniques once per week. One day he'd do hills, another he'd do intervals, another slow distance,... I always found that intervals, which I hate, provide the most bang for the buck. I'd do like 6 440s at 1:15 - 1:30, with a walk lap in between. My race pace was 8:10, so that was a pretty good pace for me. But what I found was that it affected the whole training regimen. When I'd do a 3 or 5 miler, I'd go out much faster than I would have otherwise, and that, in turn, pushed the training higher, and I was able to do a lot of other runs more easily. Almost every aspect of running has a sort of rose patina associated with it; the horrible hangover of 20 mile marathon training runs; the ascents of the Dipsea,..., all are fond memories. But I never could get over the unpleasantness of track intervals. I should really get back to them now, but I just can't get my spirit to do it. I'm starting to get comfortable with a couple of 7 mile runs each week, so maybe it's time to think about pushing the speed a bit. I'm running the longer runs at 9:00 miles and I need to get back to 8:00. I don't think I'll get there just by adding more mileage at the same slow pace. I'd never push the pace in a run longer than like a 5K. If you're training for marathons or even halves, you need to find a pace you're comfortable enough with to feel like you can go all day. I don't think you can get there by just trying to push your pace on every run. The last thing I'd ever want to do is to remove the joy fom my running. I could go through the suffering of worrying about my pace one night a week, maybe, on a track if necessary, but only if it contributes to my enjoyment of the daily jogs. Life's too short. I'd be worried about getting hurt, too. I usually slip or trip or something when I'm pushing the pace.

At least that's the way it looks to me right now. If I start getting more ambitious it could change. But I think if you do a set of speed drills once a week it will translate into faster times for all your running.


Mark

vgpedlr, veganontherun, hazelrah,

Thank you so much for your very enlightening and very diverse responses.

I tend to the subscribe to the argument that in order to be able to run fast, you must run fast, meaning that speed work is essential to getting faster.

But my 51 year old uncle recently told me that had been doing speed work and ran a half marathon in 1 hour and 45 minutes.

Then he adopted a program that uses a heart rate monitor and focuses on aerobic conditioning, keeping ones heart rate down in the 120s, 130s and 140s.

After about 2 years on this program he ran a half marathon in 1 hour and 38 minutes. No speed work was involved. However, he is a tri-athlete, not a pure runner. So, his program does feature lots of swimming and biking, along with the low-intensity running.

Still, I found his results interesting. His running mileage was in the low 20s. Certainly the aerobic benefits of the swimming and biking help to some extent. But cross-training can only help you so much when it comes to running speed.

It makes me think that for this fall's race, on November 3rd, (if I can get healthy again and remain uninjured), I might try to do a training program focused 100 percent on aerobic work and zero speed work.

Just as an experiment to see what happens.

I have just started running again recently, after not running with any regularity for 8 - 10 years. Prior to that I ran (for fitness) for nearly all of my adult life - I am 57. I had quit running due to back problems which are basically resolved - long story, I won't go into it! Anyway, I started about 6 weeks ago, and am able to run nearly all the way now, (about 5 -6 Km) but conk out on the hills in the park where I run. I don't wear a monitor, but check my HR regularily and think I am running anaerobically instead of aerobically, because when I am pushing to improve, my HR is about 95% of my maximum according to the standard formual ie 220 - my age x %. So should I focus on walking more til my heart rate can stay in the 75% range? Advice would be appreciated. Thanks! PS I SO HAPPY to be running again!

Well, the 220 minus age is just a broad guess of what your maximum heart rate is. Probably based on averages of millions of people. So, it might be off for you.

However, you could certainly try to keep your heart rate in the 65 to 75 percent of your current estimated maximum heart rate and see how it goes.

I will warn you, however, that you might find that in order to remain "in the zone" you are likely to be running slower than you are used to, perhaps significantly slower, perhaps so much slower that you decide to "give" yourself a few extra beats per minute on your heart rate (above 75 percent of max).

However, having recently tried the opposite method, that is, lots of fast running, and seeing it blow up in my face, I am now a believer in lots of slow running.

I think that if you run slower than you are accustomed to running, you will be able to run for a longer distance. And on the next day, you won't be as wiped out. So, you will likely be able to run more miles per week.

In fact, when running coaches introduce speed work (a.k.a. speed drills) they almost always reduce the number of miles that their runners run because of the fatigue associated with running hard.

As you run more miles, you will find that you will be able to run faster while still remaining in the same heart rate or so I am told.

Now, if what I am saying is true, why do so many running coaches say that in order to run fast, you must run fast and long, slow distance running makes for slow runners?

It's because there is some truth to this as well. But for low mileage runners like us, their advice might not apply as much.

We might benefit from just doing more aerobic running (65 to 75 percent of maximum heart rate). Once we get to the point (and I am not saying you have to) where we are running 40 to 60 miles per week and we notice that we aren't improving our speed then perhaps it is time to consider adding some speed work.

Caution: I am winging it here.

I don't necessarily know what I am talking about.

Thanks for your thoughts Spiral. I walked more on the hills this morning, and kept my heart rate a bit lower - I guess I'll have to do some reading about this - I haven't read anything for many years on this subject. Edited to add: in case it's of interest to anyone, I have found that I have to run 2 days in a row, at least, instead of every other day, (which was recommended to me to start) in order to make aerobic progress - it's always been like that for me, so yeah, I guess we're all different.

This is where a heart rate monitor shows its true value. I have been thinking about this puzzle (while running of course) of "to run faster you must run fast, long slow running keeps you slow". This is true, but that's not how I train. Pace is independent of heart rate. I train exclusively at Maffetone's Maximum Aerobic Function as derived from his 180 Formula. I use the same conservative intensity by relying on my heart monitor, but my PACE increases each week. I know this because I test it every week with a certain running route. Using the same heart rate range I have improved my time from 57 min to 47 minutes in four months. To maintain the same intensity, each week I have to run faster. What felt unbearably slow back in Feb. now feels great. If I ran by pace, then each week I would be able to run at a lower heart rate. By controlling heart rate, my overload comes from running increasingly faster.

The take away here is not to confuse Pace (speed) with Intensity (heart rate). Many methods will work; but I have found that focusing on building a great aerobic base pays off the most.

I raced my mountain bike yesterday, and cut off a couple of minutes from my lap times a mont ago. Now I amp up for two 8 hr MTB races and an off road triathlon for June. All powered by plants.

Good luck to everyone's training and racing!