
Following with interest as I am starting to lineup my races for 2019... And probably Dopey 2020.
I am considering running my first Marathon in 2019 and the one that interests me is 12 weeks before Dopey!
2017 Dopey Challenge Training Plan
Took two weeks off. 12 weeks of training prior to Dopey. First week back was pure easy. Only 2 runs over 2 hours (once at max of 2.5 hrs). Finished in 43rd at Dopey with PRs at 5k, 10k, *HM cancelled, and M.
2018 Dopey Challenge Training Plan
Marathon was 10/1/17. I took off from 10/2 through 10/9. I had 14 weeks of training between the return to running and Dopey. The last three weeks prior to my October marathon were 62 miles (8:05), 50 miles (6:41) and 28.75 (4:00, not including marathon). I then returned to running with 32 miles (4:30), 44 miles (6:00), and 54 miles (7:15). Those first two weeks upon returning were pure easy. Then the plan progressed as normal from there. I only hit the max duration (2.5 hrs) once during that cycle and only 2 runs over 2 hours. I ended up finishing in 20th overall place at Dopey with PRs at 5k, 10k, HM, and 2 min off October M PR.
So your timeframe would be a bit more truncated, but it's certainly possible. All about expectations. If the goal is a hard "A" marathon, and then PR attempts at all Dopey races (like you attempted recently with your 5k/10k/HM), then you might consider pulling back on that marathon 12 weeks out to a little further. If the goal is something other than PR at all Dopey, then you should be good to go with the cumulative training done from the prior marathon cycle. It's all about the individual recovery you have from the event.
I have to say I am enjoying the conversation on training and on eating to run- it is why I lurked here for quite some time- but the BBQ, Pizza, Ice Cream, and Alcohol topics keep me on the edge of my seat.
I want to ask about the cumulative fatigue idea and the lack of a requirement to train at full race distance. Is there a distance at which this no longer holds? Why am I interested? Life prevents me from running much more than an hour on a weekend, and that is dependent on what else we are doing (can I make 4 birthday parties, get groceries and pack lunches for the week AND sleep sufficiently? If not, running goes). So I tend to stack hour long runs during the week on my lunch hour or early AM and sometimes work and life foul this up and I end up running 4 days on 2 or 3 off, and I am surprised how much more sore my whole body is by day 4. I am a bit fuzzy on the math of "7 LR + 11 LR on the weekend. That 11 LR isn't like training for miles 0-11 of the marathon. Because of the fatigue from the 7 mile LR the day prior, it's more like training for miles 14-26. " where the second run is more stressful than if the 7 & 11 had been run as 18. I understand little of the strategy of training or recovery, but I imagine it can only help make my time more enjoyable if I do.
This is kind of on the opposite end of the spectrum. How little can I train and still run distance x?
In my opinion, it all comes down to time. As I've said before I don't focus much on mileage. It's merely the function of the two things that matter more in my opinion. Relative effort (or pace) and duration. When you multiply duration * pace, you get the stimulus of the training run. This so happens to equal mileage, but that's all relative.
Like this example from some time ago:
Two kinds of impressive: The person who finishes first may not be the most impressive, it could be who finished last.
Now, how much "time" matters. The body responds to different amounts of time differently.
60 min or less = endurance building and recovery runs
60-90 min = starting to push the endurance a bit more
90-120 min = starting to challenge the muscle glycogen use system
120-150 min = starting to challenge one's runner economy
In my view, there are four main pillars to training. This is the long version:
Eureka! The Quintessential Running Post
VO2max = speed
Lactate Threshold = ability to hold speed
Running Economy = ability to hold LT
Psychobiological Model of Endurance = the mental aspect centered around motivation
With shorter workouts of 60 min or less consistently, you can challenge your VO2max and LT (dependent on pacing). But what you'll lack is the ability to challenge RE. The VO2max and LT play a much larger role for a 5k and 10k, and somewhat for the HM. But a lot of the HM and M depend on RE. It's like building a resiliency to fatigue. If you don't challenge yourself with runs beyond 60 min, then you're going to find it hard to build that resiliency (or to be able to hold your lactate threshold at a certain pace for a longer period of time).
So what happens if you were to train at 60 min or less all the time, and raced say a HM? It could be done, but you would likely be putting yourself at an injury risk. You'd be running the race for completion purposes and should have no time goal. You should plug in your 5k/10k into a race equivalency calculator and expect to be 10-20% slower than the HM time shown.
Even if you could stretch your 60 min cap to a 90 min cap every third weekend, you would significantly improve your chances at a HM. It's only an extra 30 min of sleep every three weeks. But believe it or not, it would make a pretty big difference. And if you could get 1-2 runs between 90-120 min, then you would be in an even better place.
The other consideration is double days (doing more than one run in a single day). But that gets super tricky and is not something I recommend doing unless you really understand the concepts. It's the super truncated recovery cycle that could yield a similar effect to runs longer than 60 min, but I can't be certain the body would respond in the same manner. So this is me saying don't do double days unless you know what you're doing.
Thanks. Just to make sure I'm getting closer to the same page, if followed perfectly the Galloway plan for a 10K/Half challenge will have you running 30-45 minutes on Tuesday/Thursday, and 4 miles on Saturday 3 weeks before the race weekend and 30-45 minutes on Tuesday/Thursday and 5 miles on Saturday and 14 miles on Sunday 2 weeks before the race weekend. Galloway has you running 3 times a week during the "easy" weeks and 4 times a week during the mileage buildup weeks.
Whereas if I'm beginning to process your plan, I'll be ideally running 5-6 days a week every single week regardless of if it's an "easy" week or "hard" week. Or am I still wandering out in left field somewhere?
I setup the amount of training based on one's personal ability to train. I base it on how much they've done recently (last few months, and more specifically last three weeks). I also base it on their availability on a daily basis (both days per week and time per day). So there's no set pattern necessarily. Some people do 4 days. Some do 4/5 days alternating. Some do 5 days, etc. I do my best to write the plan around the person rather than the person around the plan.
Yes, Galloway alternates 3/4 like that because he's trying to induce extra recovery from the super long run. I instead pull back on the super long run, and can incorporate more training stimulus over the course of the training. Two different methodologies to try and get a similar effect in the end.
I do oscillate my plans, but generally I do the oscillation based on the weekly mileage (duration) more so than days per week. So most people do a set number of days per week and then I manipulate the amount of training per day to get the easy, medium, and long weeks.