General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Running frequency and IM training Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 3
 
 
2011-05-07 10:14 AM
in reply to: #3486608

User image

Extreme Veteran
568
5002525
PaaMul QRoo, MX
Subject: RE: Running frequency and IM training

gadzooks - 2011-05-07 10:03 AM
brown_dog_us - 2011-05-07 6:24 AM Is the key to folks success after switching to the "BarryP" approach because of 6 runs per week (more frequency) or because they run slower (less intensity)?


I think its an interesting question and I can only find one word that helps me answer this... Balance.    In addition to a balanced week of running my easy runs simply are a great way for me to work on form and my technique.  Moderate runs are not "slower" and my long runs are not "slower" then the paces I was training at before.  I've used my HR paired with the McMillian? Calculator to see where I could be.  Intensity is there as well.  The balance that helps me is that I am not overloading my weekly long run without the proper miles in my legs to support it.  

So maybe the first 2-5 weeks of the program I am running slower overall, but as my fitness improves I'm running much faster.  Pace is dropping and HR is staying in the same or similar ranges.  

Hope this helps.     

 

yes.  The BarryP plan also has you running much slower and using the McMillan calculator.  It isn't JUST 1:2:3.



2011-05-07 12:39 PM
in reply to: #3486608

Subject: ...
This user's post has been ignored.
2011-05-07 8:23 PM
in reply to: #3406492

Master
2563
20005002525
University Park, MD
Subject: RE: Running frequency and IM training
I'm a newcomer to the run little-but-often approach, but I'm liking it so far. Something that I'm curious about: *why* is this method so effective (for fitness/speed, not only for injury prevention)? It's presumably not the fastest way to build a great aerobic engine -- the long-intervals used in bike training are probably better for that. So is it the case that there's another physiological limiter that we undervalue, and that frequent running is particularly good at developing? 
2011-05-07 10:04 PM
in reply to: #3487222

Master
2404
2000100100100100
Redlands, CA
Subject: RE: Running frequency and IM training

colinphillips - 2011-05-07 6:23 PM I'm a newcomer to the run little-but-often approach, but I'm liking it so far. Something that I'm curious about: *why* is this method so effective (for fitness/speed, not only for injury prevention)? It's presumably not the fastest way to build a great aerobic engine -- the long-intervals used in bike training are probably better for that. So is it the case that there's another physiological limiter that we undervalue, and that frequent running is particularly good at developing? 

IMO, when you run daily (or close to it) your body adjusts to running as a part of daily life and it just doesn't seem as stressful on my body.   Last week I had a hamstring pull, took 3 days off running and I'd swear the impact on my legs felt horrid, my body just seemed out of tune.  So, in essence its not speed or fitness you are building but tolerance.  Kinda like Jean Claude Van Damme when he kicks the coconut tree for months to harden his shin, but on a much less awesome scale *linked for reference*.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-uJUQe80AY

I don't want to put people on the kool aid too much because admittedly I'm not doing big weeks. 

2011-05-08 7:34 AM
in reply to: #3487340

Expert
1296
1000100100252525
Subject: RE: Running frequency and IM training
furiousferret - 2011-05-07 11:04 PM

I don't want to put people on the kool aid too much because admittedly I'm not doing big weeks. 



I think this is the good thing.  Your not doing big week... However, your doing the miles that your body can handle at this point in time.  As you adapt and get stronger your weeks will get longer and you should, stay healthy and be able to hand it.  

This isn't something you measure in terms of weeks.... Think long term, months, YEARS of development.... 
2011-05-09 1:44 PM
in reply to: #3487222

Master
3546
2000100050025
Millersville, MD
Subject: RE: Running frequency and IM training

colinphillips - 2011-05-07 9:23 PM I'm a newcomer to the run little-but-often approach, but I'm liking it so far. Something that I'm curious about: *why* is this method so effective (for fitness/speed, not only for injury prevention)? It's presumably not the fastest way to build a great aerobic engine -- the long-intervals used in bike training are probably better for that. So is it the case that there's another physiological limiter that we undervalue, and that frequent running is particularly good at developing? 

The premise of the BarryP method is to get you to high weekly mileage without getting injured.  To get you there, he starts you out with frequent but short runs.  What I think this does is allow for the non-engine adaptations (think chassis) to occur in less dramatic fashion.  If you have the heart/lungs to jog 6 miles you have the heart/lungs to jog 12 miles a little slower... but you get injured.  That injury is not to your engine, but most likely to some sort of structural/connective tissue (tendon, ligament, bone, etc).

The reason you get faster while logging all those relatively non-fast miles is that you are building endurance and running economy... in other words you are becomming more efficient at running, and you are able to keep going and going and going.  And that's something that's very hard to do without logging big miles, but logging big miles is something very hard to do without getting injured.

That, imho, is the genius of the program.  And it's why so many people who were chronically injured as low mileage runners have so much success running high mileage without injury under the BarryP method.  We were, in the past, hurting ourselves by trying to run hard despite being inefficient and having poor running economy.  We quit running hard -- for months -- and had faith in the plan even when it took discipline to go as short and easy (and frequent) as the plan said... and eventually we got the the point where we were like "holy crap I'm running 50+ mpw and uninjured"... and low and behold we could go hard and long without it hurting us at all... because we were economical runners.

Somewhere along the way, many of us end up falling in love with running.  There's something that just feels wonderful about running economically.  There's a beauty and a comfort in it that is so much more enjoyable than shuffling or stomping around on shin splints.



2011-05-10 10:42 AM
in reply to: #3486728

Master
1420
1000100100100100
Reston, VA
Subject: RE: Running frequency and IM training
Fred Doucette - 2011-05-07 1:39 PM

gadzooks - 2011-05-07 11:03 AM
brown_dog_us - 2011-05-07 6:24 AM Is the key to folks success after switching to the "BarryP" approach because of 6 runs per week (more frequency) or because they run slower (less intensity)?


I think its an interesting question and I can only find one word that helps me answer this... Balance.    In addition to a balanced week of running my easy runs simply are a great way for me to work on form and my technique.  Moderate runs are not "slower" and my long runs are not "slower" then the paces I was training at before.  I've used my HR paired with the McMillian? Calculator to see where I could be.  Intensity is there as well.  The balance that helps me is that I am not overloading my weekly long run without the proper miles in my legs to support it.  

So maybe the first 2-5 weeks of the program I am running slower overall, but as my fitness improves I'm running much faster.  Pace is dropping and HR is staying in the same or similar ranges.  

Hope this helps.     

I am pretty happy with my coach's approach this year, but next year I may well have a look at the BarryP plan as it really sounds like it has worked for you Mike. Happy that you are getting into kickazz mode for Eagleman



Similar to Mike I had numerous running injuries (calf, ITB, Soleus, etc) over 3-4 years and I could not get my volume over 30ish miles per week (usually around 20) because of running injuries. I built my frequency from 3-4 runs to 5-6 runs/week and have not been hurt in over a year and finally have my volume in the upper 30's/lower 40's, which is what I have time to do. My times have improved and I enjoy running much more.
2011-07-17 1:18 PM
in reply to: #3406492

Extreme Veteran
568
5002525
PaaMul QRoo, MX
Subject: RE: Running frequency and IM training

to update this thread, I used BarryP's program for my HIM, never going longer than 90 minutes in a single run (and only the last 2 weeks of training for the HIM), and topped out at 24, 48, 72 and since I'm slow, that 90 min run was only 12km.  I had No Problem with the HIM 1/2 marathon (longest I'd ever run in my life) at 50 years young and was actually PASSING people on the run.  Much Younger People. 

My highest week was 4.5 hours of running and I finished the HIM with just under a 2.5 hr 1/2 marathon.  I have to give credit to Barry and Desert Dude for their program.  I"m now using it for my IM and figuring out where to stash the long runs now. 

New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » Running frequency and IM training Rss Feed  
 
 
of 3