HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables: Triathlon Forum: Slowtwitch Forums

Bike Shops Coaches Fitters Race Calendar Running Stores Store Stack & Reach Training Log Triathlon Clubs We Noticed
		MAIN INDEX	RULES & LEGEND	LOG IN

Slowtwitch Forums: Triathlon Forum:
HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables

1 2

View All

Ale Martinez

Nov 8, 06 14:52

Post #1 of 31 (12481 views)

HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables	Quote \| Reply

In the thread What's Considered a Good IM Run? , Paulo wrote:

Quote:

...
Daniels T pace is the functional threshold pace for one hour. SO that means that you can work out what pace as a percentage of functional threshold pace does running a marathon in an Ironman equates to.
Does the approach sound familiar?
...
I would say that it is very similar to cycling. The range might be 75-80% of FT, with the best runners really close to 80%. BTW, I also think that good cyclists can be near 80% of FTP and still run.

I liked the approach but the thread was deleted by the OP, so I started this to continue the discussion.

The table shows the 75-80% range for the IM Run and 90-95% range for the HIM Run using 10k and HM times from Daniels VDOT Tables:

What do you think about these ranges for IM/HIM run times ?

Ale Martinez

TRIDOC

Nov 8, 06 15:36

Post #2 of 31 (12452 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [amartinez] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

where did you find these tables at? Very interesting.

Mike
----------------------------------
COACHED BY ENDURANCE MAX
http://www.ENDURANCEMAX.COM

Ashburn

Nov 8, 06 15:42

Post #3 of 31 (12445 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [amartinez] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

Spot-on for me. (within the ranges that is; it's hard to pin down exactly).

And -- to repeat a theme from the other thread -- the idea is NOT that these are predictions. They represent what a motivated athlete who trains properly ought to hold themselves up against as a benchmark. They represent what is possible, not what is certain.

As always, you gotta do the miles. This has always been the case with the Daniels tables. In order to move across the table from short race performances to longer ones, you have to do the training.

(This post was edited by Ashburn on Nov 8, 06 15:44)

Ale Martinez

Nov 8, 06 15:49

Post #4 of 31 (12432 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [TRIDOC] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

In Reply To:

where did you find these tables at? Very interesting.

Several places, for ex. http://coacheseducation.com/...k-daniels-nov-00.htm

I just added the %FT columns for HIM and IM distances (simple arithmetics)

Ale Martinez

(This post was edited by amartinez on Nov 8, 06 15:51)

TRIDOC

Nov 8, 06 15:52

Post #5 of 31 (12427 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [amartinez] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

Thanks, I have seen some smaller versions of these but that is exactly what I have been looking for.

Mike
----------------------------------
COACHED BY ENDURANCE MAX
http://www.ENDURANCEMAX.COM

Aus(Justin)tin

Nov 8, 06 16:11

Post #6 of 31 (12404 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [amartinez] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

If it matters I did a 77%FT IM run that I thought was good and my wife did a 91%FT half-IM run that she thought was good as well.

I'd be very happy if I could close to 95% and 80%.

----------------------------------
Justin in Austin, get it? :)

Cool races:
- Redman
- Desoto American Triple T

Murphy'sLaw

Nov 8, 06 16:36

Post #7 of 31 (12386 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [amartinez] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

In Reply To:

In the thread What's Considered a Good IM Run? , Paulo wrote:

Quote:

What do you think about these ranges for IM/HIM run times ?

Ale Martinez

I dig that table, man. Nice work. I'll try my hand at the HIM run splits next season. The 'HIM high' is gonna be a tough nut to crack, but it gives me something to shoot for. Thanks for putting it together.

PS - My IM(LP, not Kona) run was actually a tad faster than 80% (at assumed 56 V.DOT, which was probably pretty close to reality, but I hadn't done any stand alone run races for 2.5 months prior). I RULE!!! ;-p

float , hammer , and jog

Murphy'sLaw

Nov 9, 06 4:09

Post #8 of 31 (12316 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [amartinez] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

OK, I had a chance to think on this some more, and I think that your calculations may be wrong....

It is counter-intuitive (at least to my pea brain) that somebody w/ a V.DOT of 40 (BOP'er most likely, or somebody pretty old) would have only a 2.5 minute differential between an optimum open 13.1 and an optimum HIM-High run split, whereas a V.DOT of 75 (World Class Elite) would have a 3.5 minute differential between the 2 optimum splits.

Shouldn't it be the opposite??

Wouldn't a faster runner have a smaller differential, and a slower runner a larger one? Isn't that what seems to actually happen in the real world?

(FWIW, the HIM-Low 90% column seems closer to this, with the lowest V.DOT having a larger differential than the highest)

PS - how do you calculate 95% of a given pace such that you come up with a pace that is slower?? I'm having a hard time wrapping the pea brain around that one too. Do you use the inverse (1/.95) to multiply against the open mary pace time?

float , hammer , and jog

skeeter

Nov 9, 06 6:18

Post #9 of 31 (12257 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [amartinez] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

Thanks for taking the time to do this! And if it's not too much to ask, could you add the predicted marathon time column right next to the half-mary and 1ok times? I know I can do this in my head but it would be nice to see it visually right there since we are talking about IM run. Steve

Ale Martinez

Nov 9, 06 6:50

Post #10 of 31 (12217 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [Murphy'sLaw] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

Quote:

I understand this comes from the fact Daniels formulas consider the relative intensity (as % of vVO2max) that can be sustained for a longer duration is lower, let see:

VDOT=40 -> Open HM pace ~ 97% FT-Pace
VDOT=75 -> Open HM pace ~ 100% FT-Pace

The HIM/IM columns are fixed %FT-Pace, then the absolute difference is lower.

This also corresponds to Paulo�s observation: good runners can sustain higher IFs (in fact they are running a �shorter� event).

Would be interesting to add this correction somehow.

Quote:

PS - how do you calculate 95% of a given pace such that you come up with a pace that is slower?? I'm having a hard time wrapping the pea brain around that one too. Do you use the inverse (1/.95) to multiply against the open mary pace time?

Yes, the fraction is to speed and speed = 1/pace, then Time = (distance) * FT-Pace / fraction

Ale Martinez

(This post was edited by amartinez on Nov 9, 06 6:52)

frankienm

Nov 9, 06 8:11

Post #11 of 31 (12157 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [amartinez] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

wow that table is great. thanks for doing the work
..................................

http://www.elitelifestylefitness.com

aukman

Nov 9, 06 8:36

Post #12 of 31 (12131 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [amartinez] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

what does FT stand for?

Sweet chart though. I'm training for IM Loo next year, and as a IM rookie, these numbers are very instrumental.

thanks

Andrew Coggan

Nov 9, 06 8:52

Post #13 of 31 (12101 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [aukman] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

In Reply To:

what does FT stand for?

Functional threshold (power), a term that I coined in hopes of avoiding confusion with lactate threshold power - see: http://www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com/power411/threshold.asp

FWIW, functional threshold power is to cyclists what Daniels' 'T pace' is to runners...although that was really a rather belated discovery on my part.

Ashburn

Nov 9, 06 9:20

Post #14 of 31 (12064 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [Andrew Coggan] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

Quote:

FWIW, functional threshold power is to cyclists what Daniels' 'T pace' is to runners...although that was really a rather belated discovery on my part.

I was calling it "coach's threshold" before I came across you and Daniels. ;-)

imatopos

Nov 9, 06 9:20

Post #15 of 31 (12063 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [amartinez] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

Thanks for taking the time to do this--I did a version of this in my head just for myself to predict my times, but it's nice to have it worked out for lots of VDOT values.

..

Nov 9, 06 20:11

Post #16 of 31 (11998 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [amartinez] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

Good job Ale! It looks a lot better than the one I've done too :-)

Tom Fort

Nov 9, 06 20:43

Post #17 of 31 (11982 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [Andrew Coggan] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

Have you given up on popularizing Maximal Lactate Steady State instead of using the word "threshold"?

callidus

Nov 9, 06 22:29

Post #18 of 31 (11960 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [amartinez] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

In Reply To:

In the thread What's Considered a Good IM Run? , Paulo wrote:

Quote:

What do you think about these ranges for IM/HIM run times ?

Ale Martinez

Interesting. Thanks.

------------------------------------------------------------
Searching for the bliss of ultimate exertion.

Ale Martinez

Nov 10, 06 10:22

Post #19 of 31 (11898 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [skeeter] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

In Reply To:

Steve, I preferred not to include the predicted marathon times because, IMHO, they are almost impossible to reach without specific marathon training, so I thought they not be very useful for HIM/IM discussion.
OTOH the predicted marathon pace could be a nice target for HIM: it is 94-96% FT-Pace with 95% average, someway addressing Murphy'sLaw concern.

The modified table:
- HIM-High is predicted marathon pace (just double the time to see it)
- HIM-Low is 95% HIM-High
- IM-High/Low are modified in the same way (averaging 75%/80% FT-Pace anyway)

Ale Martinez
www.amtriathlon.com

(This post was edited by amartinez on Nov 11, 06 7:12)

skeeter

Nov 15, 06 14:12

Post #20 of 31 (11796 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [amartinez] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

Al, question for you, I'm having a spirited debate with a buddy of mine and I was wondering if you consider an IM run at closer to 80% FT to be "good"? Or do you think it is a "great" run?

And do you consider IM runs at 75% FT to be "good" or more "ok"?

This goes back to trying to figure out what is a "good IM run....

Because I really do feel that 75% FT represents "ok", it's not bad or horrible, but it's not "good" in terms of running to one's potential. I know this may sound silly and nit-picking but I want to get your take and/or anyone else.

Thanks,

Steve

konaexpress

Nov 15, 06 14:17

Post #21 of 31 (11788 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [amartinez] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

These numbers look very accurate. Bang on for me in the 1/2 and full IM distance.
Barry Dmitruk 31 X IM Finisher / 7 X Kona Finisher
Sponsored by: http://www.facebook.com/...leans.cycles?fref=ts

IM Mont Tremblant 70.3 2013; IM USA Lake Placid 2013

Ale Martinez

Nov 17, 06 16:05

Post #22 of 31 (11711 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [skeeter] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

Steve,

In Reply To:

Al, question for you, I'm having a spirited debate with a buddy of mine and I was wondering if you consider an IM run at closer to 80% FT to be "good"? Or do you think it is a "great" run?

IMHO an IM run at closer to 80% FT is a "great" run.

In Reply To:

And do you consider IM runs at 75% FT to be "good" or more "ok"?

I believe that anything better than 75% FT is a "good" run at AG level.

Ale Martinez
www.amtriathlon.com

(This post was edited by amartinez on Nov 17, 06 16:06)

BarryP

Nov 18, 06 9:01

Post #23 of 31 (11619 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [amartinez] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

Ale,

Nice charts. It looks like I was just a bit slower than your slower predicted time for my first IM (even though I passed 600 people). I hope this merely means I have room for improvement once I get more lifetime training under my belt.

Do you have any idea how %FT and %MaxHR relate during an IM run. For a standalone run they are pretty close, but I'd expect you'd see significant cardiac drift during an IM. I believe my HR was around 80% even though I ran slower than your 75% FT column.
-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Ale Martinez

Nov 19, 06 15:51

Post #24 of 31 (11505 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [BarryP] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

In Reply To:

Ale,

Do you have any idea how %FT and %MaxHR relate during an IM run. For a standalone run they are pretty close, but I'd expect you'd see significant cardiac drift during an IM. I believe my HR was around 80% even though I ran slower than your 75% FT column.

Barry, my experience also is that %FTHR are pretty close with %FTPace at training, on race day running at 76/77% FTPace HR was around 82/83% FTHR ( run by PE & Pace but monitored HR).
Other IM athletes have tell me similar HR behavior but I haven't found any general relationship.

Ale Martinez
www.amtriathlon.com

(This post was edited by amartinez on Nov 19, 06 18:05)

CCF

Nov 19, 06 17:12

Post #25 of 31 (11465 views)

Re: HIM/IM Run Splits and Daniels Tables [amartinez] [In reply to]	Quote \| Reply

Thanks very much for the charts, they are very well done. Now I just have to figure out what the hell VDOT is.

-C
------------------------------------------------------------
Sworn enemy of the Cylons, the Dalek, and all the citizens of Gilder.

1 2

View All