DFW running club mark 3!! ALL ARE WELCOME!!

Simplycynical

Morning everyone; hope you are all out enjoying a nice early run!!

That HR is impressive km - you must really have been working:rotfl::rotfl:

Becky/Rich - I've been having a think about this fartlek/formal intervals issue and have decided that it might help if I 'come clean' about my goals :eek: (are you listening evab?)

As we know goal (a) this year was to get off the treadie and run outside - I think that we can tick that one off the list.

Goal (b) was to run a marathon before my 50th birthday - well, I've entered Abingdon, training appears to be going well so unless I get ill/injured I should, hopefully, make that one. Which leads to me to ........

Goal (c) - To run a sub 04:00 marathon by August 2010. :eek: I've been looking at the VLM website and if I've interpreted it correctly (and they don't change the criteria) that should secure me a GFA in the 2011 VLM. Please feel free to correct me if I've misunderstood this.

There I've confessed now; so intervals or fartleks???????

Idiophreak

Simplycynical wrote: »

There I've confessed now; so intervals or fartleks???????

Which is better? There's only one way to settle this...



Fight!

RichOneday_2

Simplycynical wrote: »

Morning everyone; hope you are all out enjoying a nice early run!!

That HR is impressive km - you must really have been working:rotfl::rotfl:

Becky/Rich - I've been having a think about this fartlek/formal intervals issue and have decided that it might help if I 'come clean' about my goals :eek: (are you listening evab?)

As we know goal (a) this year was to get off the treadie and run outside - I think that we can tick that one off the list.

Goal (b) was to run a marathon before my 50th birthday - well, I've entered Abingdon, training appears to be going well so unless I get ill/injured I should, hopefully, make that one. Which leads to me to ........

Goal (c) - To run a sub 04:00 marathon by August 2010. :eek: I've been looking at the VLM website and if I've interpreted it correctly (and they don't change the criteria) that should secure me a GFA in the 2011 VLM. Please feel free to correct me if I've misunderstood this.

There I've confessed now; so intervals or fartleks???????

Thats what we like to see - a bit of ambition!!!:D:D:D:D

Yep, it looks like you've interpreted it correctly, although it depends on when you reach the appropriate age!

As for whether fartlek or intervals are best your targets dont really have any effect on the answer.

I far prefer intervals because I can predict accurate race times from the intervals and can see exactly how things are progressing. You can get just as much benefit from fartlek sessions but you just wont know in a measurable way quite how much benefit you are getting.

To aim for something like a 4:00 marathon it is important to understand the shorter distance targets you will need to hit along the way to make the target realistic. In this case, we are looking at (approx):

5K 21:42 (7:00/mile)
10K 45:50 (7:20/mile)
10 Miles 1:16:40 (7:40/mile)
1/2 Marathon 1:45:00 (8:00/mile)

Hitting these targets, along with the appropriate distance work, would give you every chance of getting under 4:00.

It is important to work on the shorter distances at the same time as the distance work when going for such targets. The relationship between distances is very accurate and to give an idea; a best 5K time of 23:30 would almost rule out an attempt at 4:00 as being realistic.

But with a following wind and your now renowned consistency you have every chance - and that will be an achievement that you really will feel proud of yourself for. You are looking at a 65% WAVA marathon performance!:D:D

becky_rtw

There are different things for different aims

Nothing like sitting on the fence

But essentially intervals are needed if your pace isnt as high as you need it to be and you want to improve it in about 2-3 months...what they do is get your body adujsted to running at speeds faster than you ever would in a race so you get fitter than you need to be essentially then you can run for longer at just off that pace. Intervals put you at a high risk of injury so arent suitable for beginners.

Fartlek wont have the same effect but its very good for increasing general fitness (hence why its good for everyone from beginners upwards)and for trying out different paces and seeing what they feel like - but you very quickly tend to get stuck at the same 'fast' and 'slow' paces for these (mines 8 min/miles and 10 min/miles when I am fit ), also its fun and not 'difficult' like interval sessions can be!

becky_rtw

Its funny that doesnt work for me though Rich - my shorter distance time are all over the place:
5k 24:40
10k 54:00
10 miles 1:24
Half 1:56
Mara 4:31....

The 24:40 and the 1:24 are roughly in line as are I think the 54 and 1:56 but the two pairs dont line up and then mara is miles out (okay I was ill at the time but still!!) - I have to be a freak right

becky_rtw

And whooop on your aims Simply - aim high and you'll get fit trying

I think you'll do it - consistent regular training and a long term goal are sooo the keys to running well

RichOneday_2

becky_rtw wrote: »

Its funny that doesnt work for me though Rich - my shorter distance time are all over the place:
5k 24:40
10k 54:00
10 miles 1:24
Half 1:56
Mara 4:31....

The 24:40 and the 1:24 are roughly in line as are I think the 54 and 1:56 but the two pairs dont line up and then mara is miles out (okay I was ill at the time but still!!) - I have to be a freak right

So, taking your 5K time as the base, you would expect:

5K 24:40 (7:57/mile)
10K 51:27 (8:17/mile)
10 Miles 1:24:30 (8:27/mile)
Half 1:52:55 (8:37/mile)
Marathon 4:04:00 (9:20/mile)

Because of all the variations in courses/conditions etc and the stage of training at which each race is scheduled, it takes a large number of races for the distances to fall into line. But yours arent far away from what would be expected and you've only had one run at 10 miles and a couple at 10K so far.

The quicker the times become, the more accurate the relationship and the tighter the differentials - at the elite end a differential of only 12 secs/mile per distance would be expected.

In this recent build up mine look like this:

5K 18:37 (6:00/mile) (1 week ago)
10K 39:10 (6:18/mile) (8 weeks ago)
10 Miles 1:10:00 (7:00/mile) (23 weeks ago)
1/2 Marathon 1:27:45 (6:42/mile) (1 week ago)
Marathon 3:24:17 (7:52/mile) (12 weeks ago)

So the 3 recent races are perfectly 'in line' with each other and the other two stick out like sore thumbs as needing some serious correcting next time out!

becky_rtw

Actually 1 10k so far the evil Sevenoaks one , I am sooooo getting under 50 mins there next year if it kills me!

Simplycynical

RichOneday wrote: »

Thats what we like to see - a bit of ambition!!!:D:D:D:D
To aim for something like a 4:00 marathon it is important to understand the shorter distance targets you will need to hit along the way to make the target realistic. In this case, we are looking at (approx):

5K 21:42 (7:00/mile)
10K 45:50 (7:20/mile)
10 Miles 1:16:40 (7:40/mile)
1/2 Marathon 1:45:00 (8:00/mile)

But with a following wind and your now renowned consistency you have every chance - and that will be an achievement that you really will feel proud of yourself for. You are looking at a 65% WAVA marathon performance!:D:D

Ha, ha when you put it that way I've got no chance. Ah, well as Becky says at least I'll get fit trying!!! :rotfl:

RichOneday_2

Simplycynical wrote: »

Ha, ha when you put it that way I've got no chance. Ah, well as Becky says at least I'll get fit trying!!! :rotfl:

I wouldn't be so sure - if you keep progressing I would expect 65% to be within your sights.

Why does it look out of reach? Because you haven't done it before? Well, just look at all the benchmarks you've achieved so far that you hadn't done before and never thought you would!;)