My overall time at last May's LI Half Marathon was 2:08, which translated to a 9:49 pace. As race paces go, that was fairly slow (even for me). But my 2012 finish time improved almost 14 minutes over the year before. I would have liked to break two hours on the half, but my stretch goal for that race was to break 2:10, and I did that.
To prepare for this year's race, I'd looked at the challenge of running the half marathon as one of stamina, not speed. Interval training can be an effective way to prepare for a 5K, but I knew that the only way I could achieve a credible time for the half would be to train for distance. A lot of distance. Between mid-March and and May, I spent almost every Saturday morning at Bethpage State Park, doing progressively longer runs until I was satisfied with my conditioning.
This volume training was the key to managing my effort across more than two hours of continuous running. There's obviously a big difference in training for a 5K versus a half, but what about a 10K? A 6.2 mile race is double a 5K, but not quite half of a half. There's speed involved, but also enough distance so that endurance can become an issue.
For my upcoming 10K, I've decided to focus on pace during my shorter runs, but work primarily on volume and hills during my longer weekend runs. Hopefully, both strategies will meet somewhere in the middle to allow me to run my best at Cow Harbor.
Monday, August 27, 2012
Sunday, August 26, 2012
Living with GPS tracking errors
Today's run (street): 6.8 miles
My GPS watch always shorts distance, usually by about 3%, but this week the margin of error has been closer to 5%. If the GPS was more accurate, I could know my true performance as I ran. The Garmin FR210 does give me a map of where I ran, and this is useful when I run in unfamiliar places or forget which streets I covered.
An alternate to GPS tracking is the foot pod that, when calibrated, is far more accurate. Its downside, besides the need to calibrate, is the lack of course mapping and the need to affix it to your shoe. Some shoes, like the Saucony Hattori, don't have laces and, therefore, cannot be easily used with a foot pod.
My plan for today's run was to go out easy and stay that way for five to six miles. I pushed hard on my runs during the week and I tried to do the same during yesterday's run. I figured I'd earned the right to ease up on my pace and enjoy the experience today.
Things started well and along the first mile I wondered how long it would be before I broke a sweat. I also knew that runs like these are deceptive, often becoming much harder after a few miles. After 25 minutes I was certainly sweating, but five minutes later I began to feel energized again. I spent half of the run going around the neighborhood that sits directly to the south of mine, and the other half going around local streets.
As I got close to home I saw that I was nearing six miles. I decided to detour north rather than follow my usual roads, in order to get some extra distance. That change added a half mile according to the Garmin. After plotting my run on Gmaps, I saw that I'd actually covered 6.8 miles. If I knew I was that close to seven, I would have run another quarter mile before calling it a workout.
Even though I took it easy, by the end it felt very hard. I was glad to exceed 6.2 miles, which I'll need to do as often as I can before the Cow Harbor race in mid-September.
My GPS watch always shorts distance, usually by about 3%, but this week the margin of error has been closer to 5%. If the GPS was more accurate, I could know my true performance as I ran. The Garmin FR210 does give me a map of where I ran, and this is useful when I run in unfamiliar places or forget which streets I covered.
An alternate to GPS tracking is the foot pod that, when calibrated, is far more accurate. Its downside, besides the need to calibrate, is the lack of course mapping and the need to affix it to your shoe. Some shoes, like the Saucony Hattori, don't have laces and, therefore, cannot be easily used with a foot pod.
My plan for today's run was to go out easy and stay that way for five to six miles. I pushed hard on my runs during the week and I tried to do the same during yesterday's run. I figured I'd earned the right to ease up on my pace and enjoy the experience today.
Things started well and along the first mile I wondered how long it would be before I broke a sweat. I also knew that runs like these are deceptive, often becoming much harder after a few miles. After 25 minutes I was certainly sweating, but five minutes later I began to feel energized again. I spent half of the run going around the neighborhood that sits directly to the south of mine, and the other half going around local streets.
As I got close to home I saw that I was nearing six miles. I decided to detour north rather than follow my usual roads, in order to get some extra distance. That change added a half mile according to the Garmin. After plotting my run on Gmaps, I saw that I'd actually covered 6.8 miles. If I knew I was that close to seven, I would have run another quarter mile before calling it a workout.
Even though I took it easy, by the end it felt very hard. I was glad to exceed 6.2 miles, which I'll need to do as often as I can before the Cow Harbor race in mid-September.
Saturday, August 25, 2012
A good effort but the clock doesn't lie
Today's run (street): 4.3 miles
I had an early appointment that delayed today's run until mid-morning. The temperature at 10:00 AM was a reasonable 77°, but the sun was making it feel warmer than that. My plan was to go out fast and maintain the speediest pace I could, for as long as I could. I followed a route that would take me up and down the streets that run north of my house, and then head further south to round out the course.
I decided to check my watch at the half mile point to see what the Garmin was displaying for pace. The watch said 8:52, which seemed about right, and I figured that I could maintain that for 40 or 50 minutes. I didn't feel too overheated and I thought I was in for a run that was close to, or below, 9:00 per mile.
As it turned out, I began slowing down after passing the first mile. By the time I reached three miles, I saw that my pace was 30 seconds off my targeted range. It bothered me that my performance did not match the level of effort that I was putting into the run. After downloading the Garmin and correcting for distance errors (the GPS accuracy has been abysmal this week), I saw that I'd run the first mile in nine minutes, but my pace had crept up into the mid-nine range until improving near the end.
The combination of heat and effort prompted me to cap my run at 40 minutes, for an overall pace of 9:23. I was disappointed with that result because I felt I'd pushed harder than normal. I wanted to break nine minutes, but I don't think I did all that badly. I'm planning to go longer (and probably slower) tomorrow. It's okay really. After the past week's running, I know what I'm capable of doing.
I had an early appointment that delayed today's run until mid-morning. The temperature at 10:00 AM was a reasonable 77°, but the sun was making it feel warmer than that. My plan was to go out fast and maintain the speediest pace I could, for as long as I could. I followed a route that would take me up and down the streets that run north of my house, and then head further south to round out the course.
I decided to check my watch at the half mile point to see what the Garmin was displaying for pace. The watch said 8:52, which seemed about right, and I figured that I could maintain that for 40 or 50 minutes. I didn't feel too overheated and I thought I was in for a run that was close to, or below, 9:00 per mile.
As it turned out, I began slowing down after passing the first mile. By the time I reached three miles, I saw that my pace was 30 seconds off my targeted range. It bothered me that my performance did not match the level of effort that I was putting into the run. After downloading the Garmin and correcting for distance errors (the GPS accuracy has been abysmal this week), I saw that I'd run the first mile in nine minutes, but my pace had crept up into the mid-nine range until improving near the end.
The combination of heat and effort prompted me to cap my run at 40 minutes, for an overall pace of 9:23. I was disappointed with that result because I felt I'd pushed harder than normal. I wanted to break nine minutes, but I don't think I did all that badly. I'm planning to go longer (and probably slower) tomorrow. It's okay really. After the past week's running, I know what I'm capable of doing.
Friday, August 24, 2012
The secret to running a faster pace: trying
 |
| Pacing well, at least for now |
It's interesting to see how a little extra effort can result in much better performance. Once again, I beat the 9:00 threshold this morning with a run that took exactly the same time as yesterday's. Running this way is not easy by any definition, but I haven't been going all out as I'd do in a race. On average, I'm probably registering a 3 (out of 5) on the effort meter. This week it's been closer to a 4.5.
It's no miracle that my performance this week has improved about 6% over my average for weekday runs at 4:00 AM. Back in 2009, I would beat 9:00 paces regularly. That was probably due to going out with the expectation that I'd run as fast as I could manage. I also used to monitor my pace as I ran, whereas now I only look at elapsed time on my Garmin.
The pace I ran this morning felt a little harder than it did on prior days, and I wondered if I tried to put too many hard runs together in a row. But even so, it wasn't an all out effort. I recovered quickly after I finished, with no residual effects later. I'm going to work on base tomorrow and probably won't be seeing the same pace that I've been able to achieve this week. I do hope the higher cadence and harder running I've been doing will help me when I run greater distances this weekend.
Thursday, August 23, 2012
The significance of breaking a 9 minute mile
 |
| Cow Harbor aspiration |
I had two reactions after I finished today's run. The first was the happy acknowledgement that I'd completed three consective runs under 9:00 a mile (8:55, 8:50, 8:57). Not so hard for many, but a big deal for me. The second reaction related to how hard I'd worked to barely break nine minutes today.
I remember reading a post on the Runner's World Loop a few years ago that defined a "runner" as a person who paced below 9:00/mile. This person declared anyone who ran slower than that to be a "jogger." I rejected that assertion, as did many others through their comments. But since then I've always thought about sub-9:00 runs as a validation of my running fitness. A high percentage of my runs fall into jogger territory, so I feel encouraged with this week's performance.
The reason why I've put more attention toward my speed is that Cow Harbor is weeks away and I want to be prepared to run it competitively. My PR pace for a 10K is 8:48 but that race was run on the flat roads and boardwalk of Long Beach. My hope is to beat my PB for Cow Harbor, which means a pace of 9:12 or better. If it wasn't for the James Street hill, I'd be feeling confident about my chances for doing that. As long as I'm beating 9:00 on my training runs, I know I'll have that possibility.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
