I’ve been reading each of these books, and I’m curious what your take is on how they compare. It seems to me that Daniels advocates running very fast, much faster than Advanced Marathoning. In terms of marathon training, each plan basically has the same weekly structure: one long run and one fast day, with the other days being fillers in increase weekly mileage.
Last season I ran a 3:02 off Advanced Marathoning training. This season I want to break 3:00 in the marathon, but I’m concerned that running at the speeds Daniels suggests will lead to injury or burnout or overtraining.
Your thoughts? Why do you like Daniels? Why do you like Advanced Marathoning? Which do you prefer and why?
Daniel’s book is considered kind of like the modern day running bible (analogous to Friel’s cycling and tri books). I kind of like Pfitzinger’s Road Racing for serious runners rather tne Advanced Marathoning, though they both are pretty much the same. I think I do best off of Pfitzinger’s type of plan and that is how I train for marathons. No real need to hit the track much for a marathon.
I like daniels and Hudson on their approaches. both advocate some good running to build running economy and I believe this to be an essential tool when training for the marathon. I think in order to develop correct running form and the knee lift and foot turnover that will help you keep pace over 26.2 miles the speed work put in there is amazing for developing long sustainable efforts and the slower tempo/marathon pace runs that is advocated in advanced marathon training. I recently just ran my first marathon in 2:39 after last year PRing the half marathon in 1:19:00. my favorite workout that I did was 20x400 at 10-5k race pace with a 400 meter jog. I also did about 6-7 workouts throughout the cycle that were fast effort 800s, 1000s, 1200s, and mile repeats. The 800s to 1200s were all done at 5k pace with equal recoveries to the intervals because you are running really fast. I felt the fast running kept me from burning out because it is much more fun and makes time go by faster.
i also believe you have to build up to really hard intervals and speedwork with fartleks and some hill repeats in order to develop stronger muscle/tendon connections so you don’t get injured. I do feel the most important runs for me were the long tempos but i feel that the paces were more manageable because I had developed better running economy doing the faster stuff.
The answer to your question is likely found in your 3:02 marathon performance. Either plan will likely get you the 2% improvement you need for your goal. It is a matter of where you feel you have the most opportunity for gains and your previous response to training methods.
For many, once you have been running a bit the fast stuff (400’s) is not going to get you much on the physiological end for a marathon save some economy as pointed out by OP.
A bump up in weekly mileage over the core 8 weeks of your program with some quality long tempos and negative split long runs will do the trick (economy/LT). Go to the track if you must, but I would stay over 800’s unless you feel you are weak on power.
The point being your LT as a percent of your VO2 and running economy will be easier gains and likley better associated with an improved maratrhon performance. I lean towards Pfitz with specific additions on weak spots.