Thursday, February 02, 2006

The Courtship Begins Anew

All my disposable income

It's a date. June 4, 2006 will find me on the start line of the San Diego Rock and Roll Marathon, where I ran my last pre-Lydiard marathon. There is a 2:50:12 to avenge, and I have a 17 week plan sketched out with that purpose. I'm filling in the blanks, then hopefully getting some feedback from Nobby Hashizume, who has been invaluable in helping me understand Arthur Lydiard's teachings.

The first draft:
7 weeks conditioning, 100+ mile weeks with at least two 28 mile long runs, starting next week
4 weeks hills with at least one 28 mile long run
6 weeks anaerobic/track/tapering

It's not ideal. Hell, it's not even finalized at this point. It is penciled into a calendar, and is currently being typed onto an excel-based calendar (thank you Kiera for the template). From there it goes to Nobby, who will hopefully rip it to shreds and point me in the right direction. I'll post the plan as soon as it's closer to being finalized.

Training: 8 miles, 55:50, 6:58 pace


Paul said...

Make sure you double-check the mileage plan when you transfer it from the handwritten calendar to the spreadsheet - just in case Haiden's crayon work included an entry such as "a zilliondy-twelve miles".

Duncan Larkin said...

Mike, why are you starting back into conditioning, then hills, then speed as if you are starting anew or after a long break in running? I would think you have just peaked with a substantial PR and you'd be doing less conditioning, a little less hill stuff, and a lot more speed. Now, this is coming from a dude who just ran a horrendous race after a questionable or a non-schedule, so take my concern at face value, but I'd like to hear your thoughts nonetheless. Either way, that 2:50:12 is going down my man.

Eric said...

Why the addition of 28 mile runs? I'm going to be doing some 30 milers in the next two months due to some different articles and points of view that I have read and agree with, but I'm curious what your rationale is for adding the 28 milers.

Dallen said...

28 miles is an interesting plan. I've got the same question as Eric, where'd you get this idea? I don't think it's a bad idea, especially if you are able to recover from it. The psychological benefit alone would be huge.

Mike said...

Nobby Hashizume, who worked with Arthur Lydiard for 25 years or so has emailed me about longer long runs. He coached a Japanese professional marathon team and this is one of the tools they use. I'm waiting for some feedback from him. Like Dallen said, it's as much psychological as anything, and Ron Daws (very much in the Lydiard mold) advocates the same-22-28 mile runs. Confidence, more and bigger capillaries, mitochondria and such. It's a work in progress. Duncan, I'll get back to you but I think I've lost enough base to make it worthwhile to start again, not to mention I want to run more of the base miles faster (closer to MP) this time around. Eric, you have to write about this stuff!! I'm interested obviously!

robtherunner said...

I like the sounds of the new plan Mike. I am not a 2:30 marathoner to say the least, but I think going back to some base training at a faster pace is a good idea. I look forward to reading the new training schedule and see how it goes this time around.

The Last Runner said...

Trainers train and racers race.
Mike, you are overly in love with training.

If you seized the moment you would focus on getting your 5K & 10K times down and you would run a faster marathon. The fastest marathoners are the fastest 10K runners.

You have your base. You ran a PR marathon. You probably ran your PR 10K. On the equivalent charts it is a better run than your marathon. Now is the time to keep your miles low and work on getting your 5 & 10K times down. Then, later on, you could rebuild and run a faster marathon that you ever thought possible.

Lydiard would be all over you about now for not seizing the moment you have worked so hard for.

I met Lydiard. I heard him talk. He said over and over. We train to race not train to train.

Eric said...

With all due respect, you had better love training if you're going to run fast marathons, because you'll be doing a lot of it.

The idea that speedwork=fast marathon is a very American one, and the kind of idea that took us from a relative powerhouse in marathon running in the 70s to the outhouse we are slowly getting out of in the 2000s.

Finally, the times that Mike ran in both his marathon and his recent 10k are very much equal according to the prediction charts I have looked at (McMillan Running). A 2:39 marathon predicts a 34 minute 10k. More speed at this point might help bring down the 1500 or 3000 time, but nothing helps the marathon conditioning process more than solid aerobic work.

The Last Runner said...


I have over 100,000 miles and well over 1000 races on my legs since 1972. Of course you have to love training.

By the way the Purdy Tables are much more accurate than McMillan.

I guess we could argue this all year.

He is in shape now to race for several months and lower his PR's. That was my point. Sorry, this is probably not the forum for this.

This is a blog not a forum to argue train ing techniques. I'll get out of here.

Good luck Mike.

Eric said...

Beating a dead horse here, but Purdy predicts a 34:10.6 from a marathon of 2:39:58.


Mike said...

Eric, Last Runner, don't make me stop the car. I'll do it! I believe we do train to race, but according to Lydiard once we start racing the training stops. Every intense effort provides a benefit, but it also concurrently extracts a cost. It's when you start to give more than you get that I believe it's time to start over. It might be a little premature, but hopefully more miles will pay off in the long run.

angie's pink fuzzy said...

Sweet! Looking forward to following the journey.