Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Running: how fast should I improve?
Quote | Reply
Well.. To start off with a bit of a background story:

I've been a cyclist for the last couple of years, and have built quite the endurance from that sport. I've participated in lots of mountainbike marathons (e.g. 100km, >3000hm) on a competitive level resulting in some decent top segment finishes. Road cycling in that way is also not new to me. However, due to a knee injury I was temporarily unable (may-november) to do anything cycle or run specific in 2014. During that period I decided I would try a new kind of challenge and perform what was essentially one of my boyhood's dreams. I signed up for the Embrunman which is held on the 15th of august.
And after returning back to serious training in December I have been able to train consistently in the pool, on the bike and running. Mind you, although I did have a cycling background, I practically started from ground up with running and swimming. Currently my goals on cycling are doing fine to my opinion. Swimming is still drastically improving every week (ah, good things about being new to the sport) and running is also going well. The problem is, since I'm new to both running and swimming, I lack a lot of knowledge on materials and technique. I was therefore hoping to find my answer here.

Then for the main question as stated in the topic title, I managed to up my kilometres from as little as 5 to now being able to run some 25km relatively comfortably at a 4:50min/km pace without too much fatigue. Yesterday I performed my first 30km long run with some serious hills (i.e. >400hm). I am a midfoot runner with a neutral/really mild overpronation. All of my previous kilometres have been on the Saucony Omni 11 shoe which to my knowledge is a really 'supportive' ride. Since they are now really starting to wear out, I'm looking for new shoes. However, I think I should make a transition to a little more 'responsive' or 'fast' shoe while still supportive since I'm not the most experienced runner and definitely do not want to try out my luck injury-wise.
I did some research and found that the hoka shoes, scott T2 and/or adidas energyboost/ultraboost could be possible options.
What do you guys think about this with my background in consideration? Will they be suitable for me or are there other shoes that would be more fitting? And will these kind of shoes require a huge alteration of my current running technique and distance?

Hopefully you guys, as more experienced runners, will be able to give me some advice and help me.
Quote Reply
Re: Running: how fast should I improve? [LostCyclist] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Can no one give me some advice :-( ?
Quote Reply
Re: Running: how fast should I improve? [LostCyclist] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Wow, you gave too much information. It was like drinking from a fire house.

If you are coming from a cycling background that is good. Strong upper quads are needed to lift those legs. The inability to lift your legs is what turns you from runner into a walker.

How fast can you improve? You can make fast gains anaerobically and with strength simply by running up a steep hill. Those gains are limited. Aerobically, if you are training with enough volume I would say one second a week as long as you run every week. Over a year if running is your top priority you could take off 50 seconds going from a 8:00 minute pace to 7:10 in training for example.

I went from cycling to running and my first 10K was in the high forties and then I worked down to 32:30 over years of weekly training while only training for running.

Wouldn't trust more than one second a week because I would think that would be coming from anaerobic or sudden strength gains which are limited and which can't be sustained week in and week out. That stuff spikes up, levels off and then comes down and you are back to wondering if you will improve. Good luck.

Indoor Triathlete - I thought I was right, until I realized I was wrong.
Quote Reply
Re: Running: how fast should I improve? [LostCyclist] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Very slowly...otherwise you risk injuring yourself. What distance/event do you want to run? That will make a huge difference in how you train. Build base mileage, or kilometerage in your case :) before you start including a lot of quality runs . I've used Hokas but didn't like them much, I felt they allowed my feet to pronate too much which caused my knees to begin to hurt. I like Saucony Kinvaras as a kind of light, flexible, relatively small heel drop daily trainer. I'll shoot you some good training links once I get back to my computer at home.
Quote Reply
Re: Running: how fast should I improve? [ronniewo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
First of all, thanks for taking your time to help me!

To answer your question ronniewo, the distance/event i'm going to run is the embrunman in the french alps, it's a full distance event with the normal 3.82km swim, but then an abnormal 185km bike with >3500 meters of altitude and then a hilly marathon run (>500 hm).

I've basically only been doing basic mileage and focusing on technique up until now. I'm planning to further increase my mileage for the upcoming 2 months after which I'll start to do some speed training (which is then still 2 months left until the event).

As you said, I'm doubting a bit about how easy the switch between shoes is going to be. However, I feel that I should really look into it, because the shoes i'm using now basically feel like sponges. Was thinking about the kinvaras too but also about the adidas energy boost. Do you have experience with both?

Look forward to your training links!
Quote Reply
Re: Running: how fast should I improve? [LostCyclist] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Here is my history, not exactly answering your question but

2009 was running 15-20mikes per week starting in June. Was a 23: in a 5k
2010 in January went 21:00 in 5k... Started running 20 consistently.
Fall of 2010 upped miles to 25 per week plus an occasional long run.
Jan 2011 did a marathon - epic fail. Splits were 1:40/2:40 by half marathon. Still knew that I was improving based on the half marathon split.
Fall of 2011 ran 25-30 miles per week. Went a 1:31:00 in a half marathon in January of 2012. Ran 30 miles per week that entire year. Went a 1:27:40 in a half marathon in February of 2013.

Started doing real run training - track work, tempo work, long runs. Really started paying attention. Running 30-35 miles per week. January of 2014 I went 1:25:50 in a half marathon. Stayed at 30-35 miles until the fall of 2014 and bumped it up to 40. Ran a marathon for the first time again and went a slightly disappointing 3:08. No biggie I just lack experience. Ran a 37:22 in a 10k as well so I know fitness is better than last year. May of 2015 I turn 39.

Hope that helped. Oh and it is silly but people have a hard time replying when you reference everything in kilos.

One other thing: I was brand new to running in 2009 so I would set PRs all the time. Some random Wednesday I would set a new PR in a 5 k and then two days later PR for 5 miles. That stops happening pretty quickly!
Quote Reply
Re: Running: how fast should I improve? [LostCyclist] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Maybe I missed it but you didn't write your weight. This is a key piece of info when it comes to choosing your next pair.
Even if you land midfoot, beware of drastic drop reductions if you plan to keep running long straight away.

Sr. Salitre
Quote Reply
Re: Running: how fast should I improve? [FranR] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Ah, sorry, I didn't know it was that important. I'm fairly heavy for my size I guess. 1.79 meter or 5'11 and 73 kg or 160 lbs. Can't really reduce my weight though, since I'm already around 8% body fat..

Edit: I figured the drop decrease would make a difference, but in which way? Primarily joint impact / muscle fatigure or does the running technique need to be altered too?
Last edited by: LostCyclist: Apr 7, 15 5:26
Quote Reply
Re: Running: how fast should I improve? [LostCyclist] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The way I started running was to be fitted at a local running store.

After my shoes hit 500 miles I went back, bringing the shoes along. They looked at the wear patterns, which were reasonable and since I had no complaints I bought another of the same shoe.

Whenever I think about switching shoes I go back to a running store with a pair of used shoes. I explain what I like and don't like and what I am trying to accomplish and they make suggestions. Simple enough.

Swim - Bike - Run the rest is just clothing changes.
Quote Reply
Re: Running: how fast should I improve? [LostCyclist] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
LostCyclist wrote:
Ah, sorry, I didn't know it was that important. I'm fairly heavy for my size I guess. 1.79 meter or 5'11 and 73 kg or 160 lbs. Can't really reduce my weight though, since I'm already around 8% body fat..

You may be surprised about weight loss...
Quote Reply
Re: Running: how fast should I improve? [LostCyclist] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My college coach insisted that it takes at least a year to build a distance runner. You have made some impressive improvements in volume but it's hard to translate that to speed without knowing some times. If you had say, a 5k time from when you started obviously you should be well under that now. You may have already picked the low hanging fruit, so your future gains will likely be smaller.

If you are not getting hurt in your current shoes, why change?
Quote Reply
Re: Running: how fast should I improve? [Rambler] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Again, thank you all for responding!


Linhard, I think that would indeed be a good way and I have already considered that. The problem is that I moved to another country 3 months ago in which they speak a tongue I do not understand nor do I think that they will fully understand my english in trying to explain what my demands are.. That was also basically the reason why I'm trying it this way. But it is certainly a good tip if I still were in my home country..

And I do know that it is a bit tricky to up my mileage so fast, without having any background as a distance runner. Therefore I try to do it as safe as possible, really focusing on landing technique and possible upcoming injuries.

Before starting this quest I have done some rare 10k running races, just because someone else I knew was going to compete in it. I did not train for these, since my interest was in soccer and cycling back then, but I did have a running background by soccer.
Last year my time on that 10k was a low 38min if i remember correctly. Haha, it actually caused me to limp from muscle fatigue for some 3 days after because I was so untrained.
My current records during this season (found by a quick algorithm search), which were all during intensive training sessions on hilly courses (but definitely not race pace) are:
5 km : 18.39
10 km: 39.36
half marathon: 1:41.30 (this time is however way off from my maximum, since I did it as a slow endurance run (e.g. slightly above aerobic base level). )

As to the question why I want to change shoes. It's basicallly because I feel like they are heavy spongy things hanging on my foot. I want to improve my speed within a couple of months but by then also want to have picked my ultimate race shoes which I am going to use during the marathon. So I think the faster I can switch shoes, the more time I have left to train proper technique in them.

So, Kinvara's are a good possibility?
Quote Reply
Re: Running: how fast should I improve? [LostCyclist] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I actually have Kinvaras and Adidas Boston Boosts. I prefer the Kinvaras, they seem a little softer, have a smaller heel drop and are about 1 oz lighter. The Boosts are still comfortable and I use them periodically just to run in something different.

I'm a huge fan of Jim McMillan and his training philosophy. I like that he explains not just what to do, but why to do it and how it will help you improve. I highly recommend getting a copy of "You, Only Faster". I don't know how educated you are in regrds to training so I apologize in advance if some of the links seem geared towards a beginner, but they have a lot of great info.

I think the most important thing to do is train at the correct pace. If you haven't used McMillan's calculator, plug in a race result and start using the long/easy paces for most of your running. If you have time for more miles at less intensity, I think it will help more vs less miles at a faster pace. For triathalons, bike fitness is key. You can run 140 km/wk but if you don't have leg strenght left when you get off of the bike, your run fitness isn't going to help you.

https://www.mcmillanrunning.com/tips Links to ten pages of great articles.

https://www.mcmillanrunning.com/...showVideo/1#article3 If you don't read anything else, read this.

https://www.mcmillanrunning.com/articlePages/article/24 Adaptation

https://www.mcmillanrunning.com/articlePages/article/50 Fueling
Quote Reply
Re: Running: how fast should I improve? [LostCyclist] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
As far as a new pair of shoes goes, I'd recommend the Saucony Mirage (4mm drop stability shoe) or the Adidas Tempo 7 (a lightweight, uptempo stability shoe with boost).

As far as training, increase very slowly. You've already made great improvement, but a large chunk of time off for injury will set you back significantly.

When it's feasible, run on soft ground! Helps with taking the pounding off a bit.

You can improve pretty quickly if you keep your training consistent. I went from an untrained 23min 5k to a 18:30 in 10 months, and a 17:45 a few months after that. Right now I'm in about 17:30 shape based off of recent tempo runs.

Running can be fickle with improvement. Some of the guys I started with at 23mins are still around 20, other are under 17. Stay consistent and motivated and see what happens!

"Don't you have to go be stupid somewhere else?"..."Not until 4!"
Quote Reply
Post deleted by kitch [ In reply to ]
Re: Running: how fast should I improve? [ajthomas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ajthomas wrote:
LostCyclist wrote:
Ah, sorry, I didn't know it was that important. I'm fairly heavy for my size I guess. 1.79 meter or 5'11 and 73 kg or 160 lbs. Can't really reduce my weight though, since I'm already around 8% body fat..


You may be surprised about weight loss...

Interesting. I am 6'5", 160. So if he is 8% body fat at 5'11", I must be zero.

.

Dave Campbell | Facebook | @DaveECampbell | h2ofun@h2ofun.net

Boom Nutrition code 19F4Y3 $5 off 24 pack box | Bionic Runner | PowerCranks | Velotron | Spruzzamist

Lions don't lose sleep worrying about the sheep
Quote Reply
Re: Running: how fast should I improve? [h2ofun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Kind of what I was hinting at....
Quote Reply
Re: Running: how fast should I improve? [abrown] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Wow abrown, thanks for your elaborate input! As for the education in training, my (professional) study background involves a fair bit of cell biology, some neuroscience and biomechanics. Apart from that I did some decent research in cycle specific training, but have never even looked at running information (except running technique) to be honest. So I can quickly see the logics in a lot of things, but I do not intend to re-invent the wheel (or shoes for that matter). I like this guy's philosophy already, since his way of explaining things (the why and how) is basically the only way I'll trust his advice. Will definitely look into the big list of articles and the information you sent! Thank you!

As for your pacing advice and as abrown also mentions about being cautious, I totally agree. Always prefer the low intensity above high intensity, especially in long distance events since most of it is going to be aerobic anyways. The 80/20% rule. And it's going to be even less than 20% for me due to my main goal being increasing the mileage.

When looking at shoes again, and considering the kinvaras and mirage, the basic difference seems to be the pronation help the mirage gives, aside from that, it is basically the same shoe. Since I think I'm more of a neutral runner than a overpronator, I tend to lean towards the kinvara at this moment. The good reviews on these shoes also help off course.
Thing is also, it's not my upper legs that seem to tire at all during running. For example, yesterday I did a 3.5hr bike workout followed by a 15k / 9.3 mile run at moderate intensity. No upper leg fatigue whatsoever, however the gastrocnemius/calves were pretty fatigued and sore. And I think that's one of the main reasons I need other shoes, because my landing is overcompensating for the heel to toe drop too much (?), thus landing a bit more towards the front foot, fatigueing my calves. Is this a plausible theory or is this bull****?

As about the comments h20fun and ajthomas made about my weight. Your fat percentage calculation is far from that simple. It totally depends on your build. Lot's of people I know are about the same size and weight, yet untrained at all and have a body fat percentage of >15%. Collegue cyclists from my racing class that are about the same length are mostly some 8 kg's/ 17.5 pounds less then me.In my case, it has to do with the fairly athletic build and my body's tendency of muscle hypertrophy. I have more of a sprinter's looks than of an endurance athlete. The way this percentage was measured was a scientific one by means of skin fold measurements in an academical center and to my knowledge is the only accepted golden standard accepted in clinics. I don't know if your comments were pun intended or not, but I can only state that a lot more variables need to be taken into account aside from weight and length.
Quote Reply
Re: Running: how fast should I improve? [LostCyclist] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
  
Well, I finally bought the kinvara 5's. And to give an update for future people having the same problem. These are my findings after my first 24kilometre / >half marathon run.

- I could immediately feel the weight difference with my old omni's, which you can really feel. I don't know if it's just me, but I felt like my cadence went up by using these shoes (e.g. from 150 to 180).
- The damping is basically the same as the omni's if you land mid foot. However, the omni had an annoying wedge at the medial side of the foot for anti-pronation. In these shoes, you can definitely feel that this wedge is gone and my landing now feels more natural.
- The feeling of speed and flexibility is a lot higher in this shoe. It doesn't feel like a sponge but a lot more responsive. On downhills, you can however also feel that it's a bit more stiff, making proper running technique on downhills even more important (my run had some 370 meters of vertical height in it).
- They really fit well. Fit in front is however slightly more snug than you would expect at first. But no irritation during running at all!
As for feeling differences in impact on joints or muscles. At the beginning of the run I indeed felt that the drop was a bit lower (going from 8 to 4 mm), but this wasn't all too troublesome at all. It did however tire my calves a bit more at first. During the run I also felt that the knees get a slightly bigger impact, especially on downhills. Post-run, the knees also felt slightly more sensitive.
Thus, overall nice shoes. It is a difference from guidance shoes but if you have a proper midfoot / front foot landing technique, the switch shouldn't all be too dramatic in my opinion. I have to admit that this is my first run impression, so it definitely might change in the future. But for me to update, the weather will need to cooperate during the run next time. I hated the wet horizontal snowfall which I had this time..
Last edited by: LostCyclist: Apr 14, 15 7:01
Quote Reply