The Running Thread--2024

[kps7795]

For me, because the R interval is short, I don't use the GPS. So instead of programming it around distance, I'd program it around time and then use the lap button to denote early finishes. For example,

View attachment 867960

In the above workout, I'm doing 5 x (30 + rest + 30 + rest + 120 + rest). But let's assume my actual start/finish lap goal was more like 25-28.0 seconds. So then when I start my interval, I'd hit the lap button. Then once I hit my predetermined finish, then I'll hit the lap button to stop the rep. This occurs before the 30 seconds are up because I've hit it in 25 seconds. Then I jog back to the start to do the next rep and repeat.

Alternatively, you can just set everything to lap button press and just start/stop and ignore any time presets.

Lastly, you could set everything to a pre-determined time length (say 30 and 120 seconds) and just run fast from the same start line for that duration period and then compare where you finish. This option makes it less comparable post run on an interval to interval basis.

I like that approach a lot more than relying on the GPS once you have it mapped out as you had previously suggested. How does it work between each interval? Do you press the lap button and then it starts the next interval? Also, do you use the numbers from the VDOT calculator for your interval times? My VDOT is 40, so I believe that my R times should be 53 seconds for the 200 and 1:46 for the 400.

At what distance would you trust your watch's GPS instead of going by time?

 

[DopeyBadger]

How does it work between each interval? Do you press the lap button and then it starts the next interval?

Yes. It supersedes what was suppose to happen. So it's an either/or. You either hit the 30 sec time limit on the rep before you hit the predetermined finish line OR you hit the lap button and it moves you to the rest interval. You can always hit the lap button early in an interval and it'll move you to the next interval in sequence.

Same for hitting the lap button on a normal run. When I do my Jack/Jill route, its something like 17 total miles up and down the same hill that's about a mile in length. But from my house to the top of the hill is 0.5 miles. So it would be annoying to try and keep track of the uphill vs downhill splits when they'd always be split down the middle. So I hit the lap button at 0.5 miles into my run. It's just tracking 1 mile intervals like normal, so the next update on my splits will come at 1.5 miles not 1.0 miles. This way I can track the pace variance of each of the ups separate from the downs.

Also, do you use the numbers from the VDOT calculator for your interval times? My VDOT is 40, so I believe that my R times should be 53 seconds for the 200 and 1:46 for the 400.

Yes for the most part. When I write plans for others, I'll either use Daniels R value, or just mile pace. They tend to be close for most but not all. My R pace was 5:43 or 39s 200s. When I actually carried out the plan I was doing 150m splits which were around 30s, 300m splits around 60s, 450m splits around 90s, and 600m splits around 120s. So I was scheduled for 5:43 pace, but I was being consistent with around 5:14 pace. Since I was consistent, then I kept working in that area. I did do two workouts with Daniels Interval reps beyond 1000m in the 5:45 range as well.

But when I write training plans I don't tend to write them in distance per se. Rather I calculate what that person's R pace distance would be for 30, 60, 90, and 120 seconds. Then I tell Person A to do (100, 100, 200) and Person B to do (200, 200, 400) but if Person A and B compared their plans they may find that their workouts are the same (60, 60, 120) just as an example. Somewhere in the 3rd edition book Daniels suggests not going beyond 2 min of R pace.

At what distance would you trust your watch's GPS instead of going by time?

Around 2-3 min at the soonest. So whatever distance you cover in 2-3 min is the distance that I'd start to trust the GPS as more reliable than <2 min. There's always caveats where GPS can be inaccurate for other reasons. But for the purpose of collecting enough data that I'm satisfied in looking at it, it's going to be around 2-3 min of distance.

 

[kps7795]

@DopeyBadger I feel silly that I did not look through the entirety of the Jack Daniels' 5K training plan before starting out this block. It's the same attitude as starting to bake or cook without reading through the entire recipe. I have learned that you should always read through the entire recipe before you begin the actual process. Same here.

I was rather surprised that Phase III has two hard workouts on back-to-back days. Is it me or is that a really bad idea because you're not giving your body any time to recover from the hard sessions? In my humble opinion, it's even more important for the Masters runner (God, I hate that term!). Perhaps this is appropriate for a teenage cross country athlete, but it seems like a recipe for getting injured. What are your thoughts?

 

[flav]

for the Masters runner (God, I hate that term!)

I hate the definition even more than the term… From the World Master Athletics website:
The masters athlete is typically defined as older than 35 years (as this is the age at which cardiovascular issues tend to become a greater cause of morbidity) who either trains for or takes part in athletic competitions often specifically designed for older participants.

Fortunately, some other associations are more perky on their descriptions

 

[Kerry1957]

I hate the definition even more than the term… From the World Master Athletics website:
The masters athlete is typically defined as older than 35 years (as this is the age at which cardiovascular issues tend to become a greater cause of morbidity) who either trains for or takes part in athletic competitions often specifically designed for older participants.

Fortunately, some other associations are more perky on their descriptions

That means I'll be a double master (or master squared?) in a couple of years. Perhaps the recommended workout will be to walk to a park bench, sit down, and wave at the under 35s as they run by.

 

[PrincessV]

Perhaps the recommended workout will be to walk to a park bench, sit down, and wave at the under 35s as they run by.

I’m basically there now, and it’s GREAT!

 

[Zutroy]

I hate the definition even more than the term… From the World Master Athletics website:
The masters athlete is typically defined as older than 35 years (as this is the age at which cardiovascular issues tend to become a greater cause of morbidity) who either trains for or takes part in athletic competitions often specifically designed for older participants.

Fortunately, some other associations are more perky on their descriptions

I’ll take the term “masters” any day over the medical term for women who have kids at age 35 and up—geriatric pregnancy. If I was 36 running a race in the geriatric division, I would have a hard time not rolling into a ditch and letting the vultures take me.

 

[DisneyParrothead]

I’ll take the term “masters” any day over the medical term for women who have kids at age 35 and up—geriatric pregnancy. If I was 36 running a race in the geriatric division, I would have a hard time not rolling into a ditch and letting the vultures take me.

How about those above a certain height and/or weight: Clydesdale division.

 

[SheHulk]

That means I'll be a double master (or master squared?) in a couple of years.

Grandmaster

 

[camaker]

I hate the definition even more than the term… From the World Master Athletics website:
The masters athlete is typically defined as older than 35 years (as this is the age at which cardiovascular issues tend to become a greater cause of morbidity) who either trains for or takes part in athletic competitions often specifically designed for older participants.

Fortunately, some other associations are more perky on their descriptions

That means I'll be a double master (or master squared?) in a couple of years. Perhaps the recommended workout will be to walk to a park bench, sit down, and wave at the under 35s as they run by.

I've been watching the arms race of age categorization in Ultimate Frisbee with amusement for a while. When Ultimate took off in popularity in the late 90s and early 00s, there were 3 competitive groupings, Open, Women's and Mixed. As the players from that initial boom aged and were overtaken by the younger crowd, they established Masters' categories at age 33 for men. Well, people kept playing as they got older and soon enough they needed a Grand Masters category for men 40+. After a while, that wasn't enough and Great Grand Masters was established for the 50+ crowd! Note that Women and Mixed got the same categories, just at different ages.

I played on a Grand Masters team for a while, even qualifying for the national championships. Unfortunately, we weren't able to make the trip. I'm just watching it from a distance now eagerly anticipating the implementation of Great Great Grandmasters for the sexagenarians still around.

 

[flav]

And for those under 35 y.o. laughing right now…
« USATF (and other associations) adds the age divisions 30–34 as Sub-Masters, and 25–29 as Pre-Masters to give athletes just past college age more opportunities to compete. »

 

[PrincessV]

Proposed QOTD…

Can we please talk SHORTS? How the heck does one find a pair of old-school, mesh brief liner, lightweight shorts that don’t bunch and chafe?! I’ve been trying for years and have come close, but still haven’t hit the jackpot. Yes, I can go the tight, bike-style shorts instead, but I don’t like how confining those feel, either. I want room to move, space for air flow, but also no creeping up and bunching. Is this like searching for a unicorn lol?!

As a woman, I find that if I size by waist circumference, the hips wind up too wide and I have all this extra material… it hit me today that maybe I need to try men’s shorts, instead? But then I can’t find any with a waist smaller than 30”, which is too big. 30ish years ago, I inherited a couple pairs of the Dolfin trunks my ex husband used for triathlons, and they were PERFECT! They had to be either XS or S size - have men's shorts just gotten bigger since then, or is 30” in men’s not really 30”???

 

[GollyGadget]

Proposed QOTD…

Can we please talk SHORTS? How the heck does one find a pair of old-school, mesh brief liner, lightweight shorts that don’t bunch and chafe?! I’ve been trying for years and have come close, but still haven’t hit the jackpot. Yes, I can go the tight, bike-style shorts instead, but I don’t like how confining those feel, either. I want room to move, space for air flow, but also no creeping up and bunching. Is this like searching for a unicorn lol?!

As a woman, I find that if I size by waist circumference, the hips wind up too wide and I have all this extra material… it hit me today that maybe I need to try men’s shorts, instead? But then I can’t find any with a waist smaller than 30”, which is too big. 30ish years ago, I inherited a couple pairs of the Dolfin trunks my ex husband used for triathlons, and they were PERFECT! They had to be either XS or S size - have men's shorts just gotten bigger since then, or is 30” in men’s not really 30”???

I hope someone has ideas for you. I gave up on that style of shorts years ago. I see a lot of elite runners in split shorts these days. I wonder if those are less likely to bunch? My thighs demand fabric between them so I’ve never given them a try.

 

[Professor_Cookie]

How about those above a certain height and/or weight: Clydesdale division.

I’ve never been in a race with a Clydesdale division. I’ve done the math but never made it down to a six pack which I figure I would be 205# minimum for me.

I was very disheartened to find out that a lot of guys who entered and won Clydesdale division were below weight because nobody was checking and it was easy hardware for little guys. Or gals, with the Athena division.

 

[DisneyParrothead]

Proposed QOTD…

Can we please talk SHORTS? How the heck does one find a pair of old-school, mesh brief liner, lightweight shorts that don’t bunch and chafe?! I’ve been trying for years and have come close, but still haven’t hit the jackpot. Yes, I can go the tight, bike-style shorts instead, but I don’t like how confining those feel, either. I want room to move, space for air flow, but also no creeping up and bunching. Is this like searching for a unicorn lol?!

As a woman, I find that if I size by waist circumference, the hips wind up too wide and I have all this extra material… it hit me today that maybe I need to try men’s shorts, instead? But then I can’t find any with a waist smaller than 30”, which is too big. 30ish years ago, I inherited a couple pairs of the Dolfin trunks my ex husband used for triathlons, and they were PERFECT! They had to be either XS or S size - have men's shorts just gotten bigger since then, or is 30” in men’s not really 30”???

I use Lululemon hotty hot 4” inseam shorts but I wear bike shorts underneath. I have soccer thighs and shorts alone means I chafe. I’ve also been through a lot of different shorts. Oiselle used to be good, but they starting doing a different cut that don’t work for me. UA is too tight based on my waist.

If I don’t wear my Lululemon shorts I’m wearing running skirts.

 

[gosalyn_mallard]

Proposed QOTD…

Can we please talk SHORTS? How the heck does one find a pair of old-school, mesh brief liner, lightweight shorts that don’t bunch and chafe?! I’ve been trying for years and have come close, but still haven’t hit the jackpot. Yes, I can go the tight, bike-style shorts instead, but I don’t like how confining those feel, either. I want room to move, space for air flow, but also no creeping up and bunching. Is this like searching for a unicorn lol?!

As a woman, I find that if I size by waist circumference, the hips wind up too wide and I have all this extra material… it hit me today that maybe I need to try men’s shorts, instead? But then I can’t find any with a waist smaller than 30”, which is too big. 30ish years ago, I inherited a couple pairs of the Dolfin trunks my ex husband used for triathlons, and they were PERFECT! They had to be either XS or S size - have men's shorts just gotten bigger since then, or is 30” in men’s not really 30”???

Baleaf 5 inch running shorts on Amazon work well for me.

 

[Zutroy]

AQOTD:

I’m currently frustrated by the size creep in men’s clothing. Right now most running shorts (e.g. Nike) have small sizes at a waist of 30-32”, medium 32-35”, and large at 35-38”. I’m technically a small, where in the past that same size was a large. Getting the right fit is tough because the clothing manufacturers I guess assume the people wearing that size have no butt.

If you’re looking for an old-school mesh running short that has smaller sizes, I’d recommend the Tracksmith Van Cortlandt. It’s a 4” short made out of 2:09 Mesh, which is anti-microbial so it doesn’t stink.

 

[SheHulk]

I’ve never been in a race with a Clydesdale division. I’ve done the math but never made it down to a six pack which I figure I would be 205# minimum for me.

I was very disheartened to find out that a lot of guys who entered and won Clydesdale division were below weight because nobody was checking and it was easy hardware for little guys. Or gals, with the Athena division.

The one time I registered for a race that had an Athena division, I did register in that division in good faith, but I did wind up being under the weight on race day. It turned out not to matter because the cutoff was 150 lb and there were some 5'10" and taller gazelles that entered in that category, and beat me by a lot! It turned out my place would have been better if I had just registered normally, because I would qualify for age group (it was one or the other: If you registered Clydesdale or Athena, that was your division and you were ineligible for the age divisions, All of that said, nobody was there with a scale, checking. I'll bet you would get strange looks if you were clearly under the weight and went up there to pick up your award, however. No idea if they would have the nerve to question you.

 

[SheHulk]

AQOTD:

I’m currently frustrated by the size creep in men’s clothing. Right now most running shorts (e.g. Nike) have small sizes at a waist of 30-32”, medium 32-35”, and large at 35-38”. I’m technically a small, where in the past that same size was a large. Getting the right fit is tough because the clothing manufacturers I guess assume the people wearing that size have no butt.

If you’re looking for an old-school mesh running short that has smaller sizes, I’d recommend the Tracksmith Van Cortlandt. It’s a 4” short made out of 2:09 Mesh, which is anti-microbial so it doesn’t stink.

View attachment 868533

Looks like you're going to have to check out the kids' department
My DS age 24 has a similar problem, it's hard to find pants for even a 28-29" waist these days. When it's not athletic wear, you can at least cinch a 30" with a belt.

 

[dobball23]

Baleaf 5 inch running shorts on Amazon work well for me.

My go-to is Baleaf 7-inch running shorts (men's). My wife cuts the lining out since I prefer for them to not have it.