Matt,

You need to be more specific and include details on your background.

g

I'm specifically not being specific....

I'm looking more for a "Rule of thumb" type of thing I guess.

Let's say for example some just ran a 4hr hour marathon. What is a feesible goal to train for for their next one.

Obviously this is a VERY generic question. Also obviously many factors come into play such as Age, how long you've been training, how fast are you now, how loing do you have before the next race etc etc. But it would seem that there must be some "generic" answer. Something like "90%" of your previous time or something like that. Something that can get one "In the ball park"

Again I'll use Yasso's as an example. Let's say someone just did a 4hr marathon. What would be a "ball park" realistic goal to do the Yasso's at starting with the buildup to the next race? 3:55,3:30,3:00?

~Matt

Jack Daniels running book has tables where you look up your last race then gives paces for various training run based on that.



Styrrell

Thanks

I thought I had seen something like that before...hell I've even read the book. Borrowed it a few years back and haven't seen it since though...

~Matt

I'm training for an oly which I hope to do in sub 2:25.

Here's how I derived at my running goal pace.

I'm a slow swimmer so I'm figuring on 31 minutes, even if it's a wetsuit swim.

I figure both T-1 and T-2 should be a total of 4 minutes, have no way of knowing right now but that's a safe guess.

I should be able to do the 40-k bike at about 23 miles per hour pretty easily so that's 65 minutes.

That would leave me somewhere around 45 minutes for the 10-k or about 7:15 miles.

So that's my goal pace. Obviously it has to be a pace that I'm comfortable running in order to achieve my goal. I'll build my running training around that mile per minute average.

I'll run my tempo runs at about 7:25 and my 1/2 mile intravals at about a 7:00 pace.

If you follow this link:

http://wls3.com/...ing/calculators.php/



You can download a little program (VDOTER) that has all of the tables built into it along with race predictions and training intensity paces ... pretty cool

---

-------------
"Knowledge is good" - Emil Faber

That's pretty close to what I do as well.

I will know what I am capable of doing while in training so I can guestimate where I should be racing at and set my goals from there.

I also look at my split times at each discipline compared to the field to find out what my weakest event is and need to work on the most. (It's allways the run)

jaretj

Daniels is a great resource -- a key point, there is no 'goal' pace. You train based on paces derived from actual performance in races. This is a key aspect of his protocol. "If you want to train faster then prove it by racing faster."

Athletes that have weak relative run splits often have a pacing limiter, not a run fitness limiter. These same athletes will tend to do their run training too fast, in an effort to 'speed' up their run performance.

As a tri-coach, the Daniels charts are 'too fast' for many of my athletes -- my MOP/BOP athletes that were most challenged by the magnitude of an IM race -- the ability to simply keep moving at a low aerobic level. For my own run training, I found that my key run session paces fit quite well into the charts. My easy runs were, generally, done slower than his paces.

Hope this helps,

g

Jack Daniels?! It's a book?!?!?!

I had always assumed the other........

No wonder my times suck.

"You train based on paces derived from actual performance in races."

That's pretty much what I was shooting for. I ran, biked, or swam "X" pace in "Y" race. The next race I want to go faster, but how much is "realistic". Dropping from a 1:50/100yd pace in one race to a 1:05 is not "realistic" and woudl likely end up doing exactly as you stated, having the athlete training to fast. Same for running going from a 44min 10K to a 35 min 10K in the next race...not realistic, intervals, long runs, tempo's alll would end up to fast.

Thanks for the info, all...

~Matt

Daniels is the best exposition of this topic.

Here are some links for ya to check out:

http://www.coolrunning.com/...ne/4/4_1/index.shtml

http://www.teamoregon.com/publications/wizard.php

http://www.sportalaska.com/...aceTablesNumbers.htm



I've been using the Team Oregon one (I forget who originally posted that link here, so thanks to them for that!), and it's kinda cool - you can plug in your race info, and get pacing and HR zone estimates, or even better, you can plug in your GOAL race time, and see what it recommends for the various training distances and intensities.

The Daniels one is pretty similar, less HR info. I find that I do my Easy run pace more like Daniels than TO recommends (theirs is crazy slow, at least compared to the HR zone info, for me).

Hope this is what you were looking for.

-M

---

float , hammer , and jog

Definitely agree that some of Daniel's training paces and predictions run a little fast, but for a reason. For example Daniels defines threshold pace as the pace you should run for a continuous 20 minute effort. Others (e.g., Pfitzinger) define it as somewhere between 15k and 1/2 mar. pace, or the max effort that you can sustain for an hour. That said, the easy/long pace makes for a tough long run and more correlates to my general aerobic pace for up to 10-12 miles.

The other thing with predictors is that it assumes that you are adequately trained for the distance you are predicting. I don't know many people who meet or exceed their marathon predictions if they enter the tables with a hard PR time at 1/2 marathon or 10K.

---

-------------
"Knowledge is good" - Emil Faber

I don't have the book handy but I'm pretty sure Daniels threshold pace is also the 15k - 1/2 mary pace also.

greg

Try this handy dandy little calculator.

http://merv.stanford.edu/runcalc

Remember it is based upon the supposition that you've done the required training. If you train specifically for 5Ks and run a 16:20 and the calculator tells you that there's a 2:40 marathon in your legs, it is presupposing that you have done the required marathon training.

For what its worth, that calculator hits my PRs almost to the second all the way from 5K to the marathon.

---

----------------------------------------------------------
"A society is defined not only by what it creates, but by what it refuses to destroy."
John Sawhill

Those are some great resources. My question is that for those of us who are on the slow side (25 min. 5K), the easy run pacing can get a little ridiculous. I'm not sure it's possible to run 16-20 miles at a 12 or 12:30 pace. Are those supposed to be averages, with walk breaks for heart rate recovery?

The "Tem Oregan" thingy seemed a bit on the slow side for me in the long run department as well. The VDOTer program mentioned in another post seems pretty close though. For a 25min 5K it's recommending a 10:13 long run pace and predicting just under a 4hr mary....FWIW.

~Matt

Yup - the TO thing was "slow"** for me too for easy runs. I think I only ever did the suggested easy pace once; since then I've just used the HR zones they suggested (which happened to correlate well to zones I got from doing a VO2 max test earlier this year), and run whatever pace I can while staying in a given HR zone.

** If I were to run by the suggested easy pace (instead of the corresponding HR zone) I'd have an actual HR well below the suggested range, so I usually go by HR and let that dictate the pace I can (or can't) run at.

Of course, then you get the fun problems of, when it's hot or humid, do you stick w/ the HR zone, or allow yourself to hit a bit higher #'s, since you would otherwise hafta slow down (perhaps considerably) due to the additional stress. But that's fodder for another thread I imagine. Maybe it is really hot and humid in Oregon? ;-)

What I found interesting, is that pretty much all of the various calculators suggest I could do a 1:25 half mary, give or take maybe a minute, based on my open 10k time. So FWIW, they all seem to be pretty much in a similar ballpark in that regard. I'll find out later this year....

Of course, and as always, YMMV.

---

float , hammer , and jog

I would choose a goal pace for your next race based on how much you PR'd by in your last race.

Let's say you PR'd by 2 minutes in your last race. If we assume that your training volume and quality will stay the same as what got you to that PR, I would estimate that you can expect to PR in your next race by about 50%-75% of your previous PR improvement. In the example above you might knock another minute off your PR (50% of 2 minutes). Most people show great improvement at first, but eventually the gains get smaller and smaller.

If you're looking for an absolute rule of thumb, I think 1-3% time improvement is not unreasonable for most recreational athletes. Obviously if you're very new to a sport or even just new to a very long distance (1/2 IM and IM), PRs of 10% or even higher are definitely possible. For a pro athlete an improvement of less than 1% might be the difference between winning and not being on the podium at all.

Both methods assume that you continue to train with at least as much volume and quality as you did for your recent PR.

However you determine your goal pace, your training performance will be the best way to evaluate whether you have chosen a good goal. If you are consistently unable to complete standard workouts based goal pace you should consider revising your pace downward. Or if a very tough workout is "easy" for you when you're still 3-6 months out from your race, perhaps your goal pace is too slow. Experience training and racing is the only way to really evaluate. Even then, it's as much art as it is science.

Good luck!

Hello Gordo,

Sorry to dig this old post...

When you say that you use Daniels formulas for your various paces... do you input your standalone marathon time or IM marathon time.

Thanks,
Alex

---

---
First with the head, then with the heart. -- HG

For my own training, I use a range of techniques for determining paces. When I "back fit" my actual race performance (say Half Marathon) and use Jack's table -- I found that I was a good fit to training paces for workouts where I wasn't just "running easy".

When I do something similar, with my 10+ hour IMers, I find that the answer is a bit quicker than I'd like them to be running. Even a 10 hour IM is considerably slower than a <9 IM // so, generally, the areas where I'd like my athletes to get tired are different.

When I fit with a 13+ IMer, the paces are too quick for where I'd like them to focus day-to-day // see my four pillars article on my tips page. There's not a lot of 'pace' work there.

g