Page 2 of 4
Posted: Fri Apr 10, 2009 7:14 am
Hey Mathwiz, I had forgotten until yesterday, I think I had sent you a message a while back via the Private Message on here. You might want to check and make sure.
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 12:42 pm
Tex, I read the message but will respond later. Thanks for sending.
Quickly (unlike my race), I ran my 5k this morning and blew it. Felt good on the warmup and was ready to go. We sat on the starting line for at least 10 minutes and since there was no where near the start to do striders (because of the MASSIVE hill that I'm about to tell you about), everyone stood in place.
As stated, the first mile of the course was straight up a very steep hill for probably 1000m. Literally, I began the race with 25m of flat ground and began my ascent. There was another uphill climb from about 1200m to the mile mark, which I hit in a lackidasical 6:07. The unique thing about this course is that you run up the hill, dance around top for a moment (where the mile mark is located) and then go straight back down that same hill, so my second mile was great! Hit the 2 mile mark in 11:42, which puts me at 5:35 for the second mile! At that point I was toast from being out of breath for mile one, and then having my legs pounded to death for mile two. I let the stellar female that was with me and the high shcool kid go battle it out while I intentionally gave up and dropped back. There was no one close to being behind me and the competition was a girl and a high schooler with basketball shorts.......so my confidence and legs were done at that point. Last mile was a "jog" in 6:25 as I finished in 18:48, which was good for 6th overall and first for my 25-29 age group. I probably could have mustered a 6 flat last mile if my life depended on it, but at the time, I simply thought that it would be better to be humbly defeated by these two rather than making it a photo finish to the tape. Either way, I gave up, and had I ran a 6 flat instead of 6:25 for the last mile, I would have still only run 18:23 -- still a disappointment.
I'll have more time later to post and respond, but for now this is the quick-and-dirty synopsis. I'm not sure if it was just not my day, that the course was darn difficult, OR I'm just not in sub 18 minute shape (or a combination of all three). The positive part of all of this is that I actually responded to having run such a slow first mile by actually being competitive and tearing away down hill and running 5:35 with gravity's help. The negative side is that my time, and therefore place, was pathetic by my standards.
Thoughts? I'll be back later today to post again.
Posted: Sat Apr 11, 2009 1:09 pm
In both race descriptions you have provided you appear to give up in the race when it looks like you are unlikely to meet your goal time / come highly placed. If you're not careful mailing in races is going to become a habit.
From the sidelines it looks to me that you think if you do certain workouts then you feel that automatically qualifies you to run a certain time. You still have to do the hard bit and that's run as hard as you can and maintain the intensity throughout and past the finish line. In short, you still have to earn it.
Hope this has come across as constructive as that was my intention. Good luck with your racing.
Posted: Sun Apr 12, 2009 7:14 pm
I asked for critisism and I meant it; however, I still believe that there should be some sort of direct correlation between workouts and races and that my problem isn't simply psychological. With the training that I've been doing and the 8k from two weeks ago, 18:58 and 18:48 remain my 5k reference points for the year. Each performance is WELL under-acheiving compared a sub 30 8k, and well below the caliber of workouts that I've been doing. I was wiped out at the two mile mark of the race yesterday and the average pace was only 5:51 per mile...6 minute pace on the track feels like a glorified jog, so it's hard for me to understand why running faster by 9 seconds per mile increases my exertion by such a large margin.
My legs are shot and I feel as if the workouts that I'm doing are more eye-opening than the actual races. Sorry to vent, but I'm simply frustrated with volitale performances, sore legs the day after sub-par races, and the idea that hard work will pay off when it's obviously not happeing for me, for whatever reason.
Thanks for the comments and sorry if I'm coming across as a complainer.
Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 4:16 am
I had a similar problem when I was training a few years ago and I think it was due to the fact I had so much more speed than endurance. I found shorter workouts easy as I could use my speed on every rep. String them together in a race and the tank would just run dry.
Although you seem to have good stamina judging by your workouts and 8k time. Perhaps the answer lies in the relationship between your PRs at 1500 / 3000 / 10000 and 10m?
I think if I were in your position I might try a 2m paced time trial (or better a 3k race). i.e. a distance that is between your typical mile rep distance and your goal distance.
Your workouts are impressive - I'm sure it will come together for you soon.
Posted: Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:47 am
This is not to criticize you, but to help you out. The biggest problem you have is, not speed or endurance but self-coaching. Just because we read this or that book, does'nt mean we are capable of coaching ourself. If you are really trying to run fast get a coach.
Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2009 11:03 am
Can you elaborate on why you think that I need a coach? It seems as if years of looking at logs/training schedules, as well as reading Tinman's recommendations, should get me within 5% of my capabilities. I haven't had a coach in a long time, so what do you think that such a person would provide me that my experiences in training couldn't?
Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2009 11:33 am
On another note, my plan was to run no races this weekend and to race an 8k on the 25th. After the 5k from a few days ago, I feel an urge to "prove" myself by running a track time trial of 2400m or another 5k during my upcoming off weekend. Would this be a wise idea? I honestly think that I could run 82 seconds per lap for 2400m, which by Tinman's charts equates to a 17:50 low 5k.
Thanks for all of the help!
Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2009 1:08 pm
I think Jman is right. Other runners on this website have posted about how much better their running is going once they got a coach. A good coach is objective, has trained many runners and has acquired a breadth of contextual knowledge that you could never gain on your own. John Walker, when asked whether he could coach himself, in 1978, said, "Yes, I could. I've learned a lot from years of training at the top level. But, I am smart enough to know that a runner can never be objective about his training. My heart is too involved to make all the right decisions. I have a coach because he isn't me. He can see things I can not."
If you really want to reach a higher level, then hire a coach. It doesn't have to be me. Hire a good coach, though, if you don't want to look back 10 years from now and say, "I blew it. I had my time to shine and I blew it."
Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2009 5:14 pm
If your going to use Tinman training system, why not hire him to take you under 16 flat. I was blessed to have good Coaches and training partners through out my careere. I asked Joe Douglas to train me for 11 years in the 800 meters.
The only problem was you had to live in Santa Morica, Ca, because the track club trainned six days a week. Tinman is right, you donit want to look back ten years later and wonder what could have been. I had to B Stander for the Olp Trails in the 800 in 92 and 96.
Posted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 10:24 pm
Working on trying to find a coach. In the mean time, today I ran the following times and I based the training zones on the 29:56 8k effort from almost three weeks ago, not the recent 5k:
1 mile warmup
3 miles at 6:48 pace on rolling hills (around estimated Tinman tempo pace), 5 minute jog
3 x 1 mile at 6:07, 6:03, 5:56 on rolling hills with a 2:30 jog recovery -- was hoping to touch the Critical Velocity training zone
5 x 200 @ 5 minute pace (mile race pace)
1.5 mile cool down
The plan is to run along side of some friends as a bandit in a local half marathon on Saturday, just to have a change of scenery -- nothing fancy -- we are going to just have fun running 7:30 miles the whole way while accumulating around 15 miles for a long run through Ritzy neighborhoods. With the exception of strides, I won't be running hard again until Tues/Wed of next week. Next Saturday, the
25th, I'll race another 8k. Goal is to break 30 minute again, and preferrably run under my time from 3 weeks ago.
My shoes are shot. Thankfully my new discontinued Asics 1130s came in the mail today. No part my run today was difficult, except for the noticable beaten up legs that now will be happier since upgraded shoes have arrived. Is it just me or do most other runners just KNOW when a pair of kicks has bitten the dust?
Posted: Thu Apr 16, 2009 10:53 pm
Glad your running is going well. I know when my shoes are just about done. Pretty much when i finish my runs and feel it in my feet that they are gone past expiration.
Haha, its amazing though...like you can go for a 5 mile run on tuesday and on wednesday after 8 mile run be like "shoes are dead" when day before you thought life was still in them
Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2009 4:48 pm
It’s my pet peeve to read others’ posts and never see the end product (did the suggestions pay off?). Here’s an update.
After running two lackluster races and a 5:04 1-mile time trial in past weeks, I did run a 18:05 5k two weekends ago, hitting 5:45, 5:46, and 6 flat for the last mile, on a flat and fast course. I was lulled to sleep by the person in front of me over the last mile of that race and didn’t realize that he was slowing down. No part of that race was an extreme strain, so I have hope that I can finally pull out a sub 18 minute 5k this Friday night on a fast out-&-back, course in a 9pm race.
This past Thursday I ran a 5 mile run at about 6:50 pace.
Two days later (on Saturday) I did the following:
2 mile warm up
1 x ½ mile in 3:09 (ran into a mud pit on the greenway and had to stop watch and start over --- that’s why this repeat is here)
2 x 1 mile in 6:17 avg. (MLSS - 75 sec jog rec)
4 x ½ mile in 3:01 avg. (CV pace - 75 sec jog rec)
1 x ½ mile in 2:52.5 (5k pace; 4 minute jog)
8 x 220 yd in 37-38 (mile pace; 45 sec rec)
2 mile cool down
Not sure what the workout for this week will be.
I’ll do better at making updates periodically.
Posted: Sat Jun 13, 2009 12:26 am
17:58 for my 5k tonight! First time under 18 since right before I started graduate school. It's been a LONG road back!!
Splits: 5:42, 11:40 (5:58), 17:27 (5:47), :31 for last 1/10 mile.
It was a 9pm race so it was hard to see the 3 mile split, but knew that I had to take off to get under 18. I was focusing on the finishing clock so much that I actually beat someone in the final 100 yard (blew his doors off).
This week's training up to the race was as follows:
Sat 6/6 - (the long progressive workout in the post above)
Sun - easy 50 min
Mon - easy 50 min
Tues - 1.5 mile warmup, 3 x mile in 6:02, 6:03, 6:01 (2:00 jog rest b/w miles); 3 minutes jog rest, 1/2 mile @ 2:43 (3k pace) 3 minute jog, 2 x 1/4 mile in 73 each (projected mile race pace) 2 min jog b/w; 2.5 mile cool down
Wed - very easy 60 minutes
Thurs - very easy 2 miles with strides & quick pick-ups
Friday - 7AM - 1.5 mile very slow jog; 9pm - 5k race
Posted: Sat Jun 13, 2009 1:22 pm
I like the training you executed in the lead-up to the 5km race. I noticed you did not make the mistake of tapering. Kudos! Also, the workout early in the week was step-down fashion, which isan excellent workout structure. Starting with longer intervals at slower than race-pace and ending with shorter work intervals at faster than race-pace has proven time and time again to work well for a variety of runners. I used to call that set-up "mixed intervals" or a "combo workout".
Keep up the good workout; don't overtrain (be sure to run slowly, on distance days, between faster workouts and race). I believe you could be knocking on 17:30 by autumn.