|
Nov 2011
10:50pm, 22 Nov 2011
15,621 posts
|
SPR
If you do strides at the end of all your easy workouts, you're getting quite a bit of speedwork in. Strides are a form of speedwork. McMillan is an advocate of this approach.
Sounds like you're trying to hedge your bets by trying to get miles as well as speed in the same session. Not what I would do. Maybe that's why you were lower on the HR at speed but no recovering enough.
If you need to more recovery time, then your 100m recovery run needs to be slower.
|
|
Nov 2011
9:53am, 23 Nov 2011
31 posts
|
Ninky Nonk
Not sure if I can go slower without walking...
Gonna have another go tonight, but shorter warm up I think. Might sneak some static stretches in when no-one is looking.
|
|
Nov 2011
10:40am, 23 Nov 2011
15,622 posts
|
SPR
You can run on the spot right? All you have to do is make sure you move a little forward as you run on the spot.
Pirie can see you 
In all seriousness, static stretch has never been good before activity. I do some yoga but wouldn't do it immediately before running. Dynamic stretching is where it's at.
|
|
Nov 2011
8:47pm, 23 Nov 2011
32 posts
|
Ninky Nonk
Dynamic stretching. I think I was doing that last time I tore my groin, and pulled my hamstring in one easy movement. Maybe I wasn't quite doing it right.
Anyway my long legs and short arms do mean I can't touch my toes. They didn't call me Tyrannosauras at school for nothing.
Gave the strides a miss today. Pencilled in for Friday.
|
|
Nov 2011
10:01pm, 25 Nov 2011
33 posts
|
Ninky Nonk
So had another go today. 1 mile warm up. Went a bit faster and then a bit slower. Seemed to work a bit better.
1) - 0.06m - 22(5:55/m) - 141bpm avge - 177bpm max - 4cal
2) - 0.12m - 1:30(12:17/m) - 150bpm avge - 177bpm max - 18cal
3) - 0.06m - 19(5:09/m) - 131bpm avge - 138bpm max - 4cal
4) - 0.11m - 1:30(13:45/m) - 142bpm avge - 156bpm max - 15cal
5) - 0.06m - 21(5:42/m) - 141bpm avge - 157bpm max - 4cal
6) - 0.13m - 1:30(11:44/m) - 148bpm avge - 164bpm max - 20cal
7) - 0.06m - 19(5:04/m) - 148bpm avge - 158bpm max - 4cal
8) - 0.13m - 1:30(11:27/m) - 143bpm avge - 162bpm max - 20cal
9) - 0.06m - 17(4:32/m) - 132bpm avge - 136bpm max - 3cal
10) - 0.11m - 1:30(13:21/m) - 142bpm avge - 157bpm max - 17cal
11) - 0.06m - 15(4:09/m) - 130bpm avge - 133bpm max - 3cal
12) - 0.13m - 1:30(11:54/m) - 144bpm avge - 163bpm max - 20cal
13) - 0.06m - 16(4:20/m) - 143bpm avge - 147bpm max - 4cal
14) - 0.12m - 1:30(12:18/m) - 149bpm avge - 168bpm max - 18cal
15) - 0.06m - 17(4:30/m) - 137bpm avge - 139bpm max - 3cal
16) - 0.12m - 1:30(12:24/m) - 148bpm avge - 164bpm max - 19cal
17) - 0.06m - 16(4:21/m) - 134bpm avge - 137bpm max - 3cal
18) - 0.12m - 1:30(12:16/m) - 149bpm avge - 166bpm max - 19cal
19) - 0.06m - 17(4:36/m) - 143bpm avge - 150bpm max - 3cal
20) - 0.13m - 1:30(11:07/m) - 156bpm avge - 170bpm max - 14cal
|
|
Nov 2011
10:12pm, 25 Nov 2011
1,949 posts
|
daviec
This kind of session will not build you an aerobic base. You'd be better off ditching this and just doing as many easy miles as you can to build a base. Doing this kind of session once a week after an easy or recovery run will help with form and turnover but you need to do more easy running.
|
|
Nov 2011
1:43pm, 26 Nov 2011
34 posts
|
Ninky Nonk
Daviec - I don't have any more time to do easy running.
I thought the point of training was to stimulate a physiological effect. To promote a positive response in terms of fitness, it must be necessary to exceed your current capacity so that when recovered from this you are fitter.
If I can only train one hour a week and constantly run that hour session at the same pace - I will plateau and no longer see any improvement. To improve I must either increase duration, number of sessions or intensity. For this session I only had 35 mins available at lunch. I could have plodded round but this would probably have been a waste of time - I've already done three long slow runs this week - but I take at least an hour to do these, and this wasn't meant to be a recovery run.
Intervals have been shown to improve aerobic capacity and anaerobic capacity - so to say long slow runs are the only way to do this - I don't think is right.
You could probably argue that isn't base work - but maybe build phase? And you are probably right - given unlimited time for training I may be best doing endless long runs for years before even considering speedwork. But I'm not training for a marathon.
Saying all that there are loads of people on here who agree with you - and there all better runners than me!!!
|
|
Nov 2011
1:46pm, 26 Nov 2011
35 posts
|
Ninky Nonk
Sorry - they're all better runners than me.
|
|
Nov 2011
2:05pm, 26 Nov 2011
15,641 posts
|
SPR
Maybe do as Daviec says for a while, adding strides at the end of the runs then start doing speedwork. Pirie didn't do the intervals instead of doing other running, it was part of the package.
Must stress though that the Pirie intervals are not about anaerobic capacity. Intervals are not just one thing, changing the variables (speed/recovery/length) will change what you are targeting.
The session you posted looks too fast to me, 15 secs for 100m, I'm guessing is close to your limit, and if you are trying to do a Pirie session then that is not what it is about. What it is about is getting your recovery quicker, speed increases as you can run faster (and longer) before you hit the top limit of 180. That is how you know your aerobic condition is improving, you recover quicker.
Pretty sure your HRM was playing up yesterday, as I'm pretty sure your HR would have gone over 180.
|
|
Nov 2011
2:37pm, 26 Nov 2011
36 posts
|
Ninky Nonk
This was sandwiched between mile long warm up and downs.
You might be right about heart rate monitor, but I'm not sure how effective heart rate is to monitor these short runs. By the time I've run them heart rate is only just starting to respond the peaks occur in recovery - bit like in a max heart rate test you get the max reading a bit after you've stopped as heart rate catches up.
Like daviec says these definitely helped with form - even had my heels clipping my backside! And was tired at the end.
Might tweak it to 200m next week - I think this would get the heart rates up, and better match the recoveries.
So am I the only person silly enough to do this type of thing or does anyone else bother? Should say as well I do appreciate ALL of the opinions people are putting forward.
|
