Re: Roots. Sewickley Heights Park looks beautiful!!!
The first photo transported me back to the trails in Wissahickon Valley Park, on the other side of the state. Surrounding oneself with Mother Nature on easy runs is the restorative cherry on top of the recovery ice cream. (Not my best metaphor...although, recovery ice cream, yum...)
Re: Light v long on the down week. No wrong choice, for a one-off switcheroo? If you had run the 12.4 miles Sunday night instead of Monday, then the mileage would have looked different on paper, but would it have been so different on body?
In any case, we've got lives to live (and plan around)! I've read that hard workouts targeting a given "system"---VO2 max, lactate threshold, and distance---should be run at least four to five days apart, to allow the body sufficient time to recover from one workout and be able to fully benefit from the next. As it happens to happen, this corporal constraint fits rather neatly into the social constraint of the seven-day week. Hence, for example, a speed workout Tuesday, a tempo workout Thursday, a long run Sunday, rinse and repeat for, oh, sixteen weeks :) Within this framework, transposing two runs while respecting the corporal constraints seems minor.
Most important is how the body reacts to and adapts to the training. We can collect and analyze tons of data, but this assessment is probably always going to be fuzzy and individual, so we also learn the fuzzy and individual skill of how to listen to our body, beyond the data. A great skill, for race day!
Re: Super shoes, iron, and periodization. I love the mini-lessons in your posts! It's like you're a pro educator or something. Keep 'em coming!
These reflections are becoming a highlight of my week. Not to make it a continuing task for you, but I wanted you to know how much they are appreciated.
I want to spend more time with the spacing of workouts question because what you're suggesting implies two hard sessions per week and right now I have 3-4. A preview of next week's post: Tuesday's workout this week was *awful*, and I am wondering if I need to pull it in future weeks. One thing I am proud of is keeping easy days easy.
And love that you're loving the quick hits — they're very fun to write.
haha Re: Continuing task. If it's a task, then it's a fun one :) Continuing? To be continued...
Re: Workout spacing. To clarify my understanding: Space workouts stressing the *same* system at least four to five days apart; space workouts stressing *different* systems as the body can handle. (For me, in the middle stages of marathon training, overall fatigue enters into the equation with greater weight.) I got this rule of thumb from the book "Advanced marathoning" by Pfitzinger and Douglas (page 56 in the second edition). So, for example, your training last week of speed Tuesday, tempo Thursday, and long run Sunday is consistent with this rule of thumb: three hard sessions, two to three days apart, but each stressing a *different* system. In contrast, had all three workouts been tempo, that would have "broken" the rule of thumb.
I want to emphasize, in my view, it's just a rule of thumb (though one that's worked well for me, and presumably athletes the authors have trained), and we should listen to our bodies. The authors themselves indicate that the rule of thumb is a tradeoff between allowing full recovery (around eight to ten days---hence the longer taper leading into the race) and exposing the body to beneficial stresses that cue adaptive response. Or, more simply, this rule of thumb is their best guess at optimizing the ever-changing general framework of "stress + rest = growth", as preached by Magness and Stulberg.
Earlier in the Pfitzinger and Douglas book (page 27 in 2e), the authors recommend the number of hard training sessions per week to be two to four, depending on the athlete (and, presumably, her point in the training cycle). So your three to four hard sessions per week is in line with this recommendation. Personally, I err on the side of caution, especially if I'm ramping up weekly volume simultaneously. Two high-quality hard sessions per week may bring more overall benefit than four mediocre ones. Plus, it's faster for me to add another hard session if I'm feeling great---OK, let's be realistic: during marathon training, if I'm feeling not totally ground down---than to recover from overtraining.
In closing, I have no magic formula, so let me invoke Deena Kastor's autobiography and say, Learning what the body can handle and is capable of is part of the fun! Carry on :)
I love the names of those special shoes: alphaflyes!
Trail running sounds so much more enjoyable than track. 😊
Fun names for very fun shoes!
Re: Roots. Sewickley Heights Park looks beautiful!!!
The first photo transported me back to the trails in Wissahickon Valley Park, on the other side of the state. Surrounding oneself with Mother Nature on easy runs is the restorative cherry on top of the recovery ice cream. (Not my best metaphor...although, recovery ice cream, yum...)
Re: Light v long on the down week. No wrong choice, for a one-off switcheroo? If you had run the 12.4 miles Sunday night instead of Monday, then the mileage would have looked different on paper, but would it have been so different on body?
In any case, we've got lives to live (and plan around)! I've read that hard workouts targeting a given "system"---VO2 max, lactate threshold, and distance---should be run at least four to five days apart, to allow the body sufficient time to recover from one workout and be able to fully benefit from the next. As it happens to happen, this corporal constraint fits rather neatly into the social constraint of the seven-day week. Hence, for example, a speed workout Tuesday, a tempo workout Thursday, a long run Sunday, rinse and repeat for, oh, sixteen weeks :) Within this framework, transposing two runs while respecting the corporal constraints seems minor.
Most important is how the body reacts to and adapts to the training. We can collect and analyze tons of data, but this assessment is probably always going to be fuzzy and individual, so we also learn the fuzzy and individual skill of how to listen to our body, beyond the data. A great skill, for race day!
Re: Super shoes, iron, and periodization. I love the mini-lessons in your posts! It's like you're a pro educator or something. Keep 'em coming!
These reflections are becoming a highlight of my week. Not to make it a continuing task for you, but I wanted you to know how much they are appreciated.
I want to spend more time with the spacing of workouts question because what you're suggesting implies two hard sessions per week and right now I have 3-4. A preview of next week's post: Tuesday's workout this week was *awful*, and I am wondering if I need to pull it in future weeks. One thing I am proud of is keeping easy days easy.
And love that you're loving the quick hits — they're very fun to write.
Hugs!
haha Re: Continuing task. If it's a task, then it's a fun one :) Continuing? To be continued...
Re: Workout spacing. To clarify my understanding: Space workouts stressing the *same* system at least four to five days apart; space workouts stressing *different* systems as the body can handle. (For me, in the middle stages of marathon training, overall fatigue enters into the equation with greater weight.) I got this rule of thumb from the book "Advanced marathoning" by Pfitzinger and Douglas (page 56 in the second edition). So, for example, your training last week of speed Tuesday, tempo Thursday, and long run Sunday is consistent with this rule of thumb: three hard sessions, two to three days apart, but each stressing a *different* system. In contrast, had all three workouts been tempo, that would have "broken" the rule of thumb.
I want to emphasize, in my view, it's just a rule of thumb (though one that's worked well for me, and presumably athletes the authors have trained), and we should listen to our bodies. The authors themselves indicate that the rule of thumb is a tradeoff between allowing full recovery (around eight to ten days---hence the longer taper leading into the race) and exposing the body to beneficial stresses that cue adaptive response. Or, more simply, this rule of thumb is their best guess at optimizing the ever-changing general framework of "stress + rest = growth", as preached by Magness and Stulberg.
Earlier in the Pfitzinger and Douglas book (page 27 in 2e), the authors recommend the number of hard training sessions per week to be two to four, depending on the athlete (and, presumably, her point in the training cycle). So your three to four hard sessions per week is in line with this recommendation. Personally, I err on the side of caution, especially if I'm ramping up weekly volume simultaneously. Two high-quality hard sessions per week may bring more overall benefit than four mediocre ones. Plus, it's faster for me to add another hard session if I'm feeling great---OK, let's be realistic: during marathon training, if I'm feeling not totally ground down---than to recover from overtraining.
In closing, I have no magic formula, so let me invoke Deena Kastor's autobiography and say, Learning what the body can handle and is capable of is part of the fun! Carry on :)
Two high-quality hard sessions per week may bring more overall benefit than four mediocre ones << a lesson learned this week :)
Thanks for this response, including book citations. A copy of Advanced Marathoning is on its way to my house.