Most complete explanation of training protocols I've seen yet

Glad you liked it too. Keep in mind that his suggested paces presume training at the distances for which the paces are given:

"Do keep in mind that a 5K runner is unlikely to run the equivalent time in the marathon off of 5K training. The runner would obviously need to train for the marathon to accomplish this equivalent time."

So for example, if I can run a mile in 7:40, I should be able to run a half mary in a little over two hours, according to McMillian's formula. But I can't really, because I haven't worked up to that distance yet. I would imagine I would have to run 12-15 miles once a week for several months before my mile time would translate well into my half marathon time.

BTW, I'm also thinking about a half marathon in April or May next year, if I can make good progress in the meantime. Right now my farthest run is 8-9 miles, but it's a bit of a strain on my left knee, so I think I need to back down a bit for a while before I try to push distance again. Good luck on your training!
There is that too.

However, I was thinking more of the suggested training paces, which it was my understanding are the paces I should be running at now during my training runs. He even suggests updating your numbers in the pace calculator every 6-8 weeks so as to ensure your training paces are updated in line with your progress. Taking the long run pace as an example, right now I could not keep that pace up for more than 15-20mins without my HR going above 70% of MaxHR. Yet he suggests long runs should be a minimum of 1.5 hours.

I think it will just be a matter of improving my endurance(I have been working almost exclusively on bettering my 5km time lately) and trying to get a more accurate idea of my MaxHR. I might find I have a higher than normal MaxHR and what my HR is at the suggested pace is actually close to 70% of my MaxHR. Failing that, improving my endurance will mean I can keep the pace up longer. So either way I'll come out ahead.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sid and Bare Lee
There is that too.

However, I was thinking more of the suggested training paces, which it was my understanding are the paces I should be running at now during my training runs. He even suggests updating your numbers in the pace calculator every 6-8 weeks so as to ensure your training paces are updated in line with your progress. Taking the long run pace as an example, right now I could not keep that pace up for more than 15-20mins without my HR going above 70% of MaxHR. Yet he suggests long runs should be a minimum of 1.5 hours.

I think it will just be a matter of improving my endurance(I have been working almost exclusively on bettering my 5km time lately) and trying to get a more accurate idea of my MaxHR. I might find I have a higher than normal MaxHR and what my HR is at the suggested pace is actually close to 70% of my MaxHR. Failing that, improving my endurance will mean I can keep the pace up longer. So either way I'll come out ahead.
Yah, I wasn't sure if my comments were on the mark, since I don't know anything about HR stuff. But the paces definitely seemed to fit my various training runs, based on perceived level of exertion. It could be that your MaxHR is above average, either by nature or if you haven't been running for that long. But I wonder if you should see a doctor about this?
 
Yah, I wasn't sure if my comments were on the mark, since I don't know anything about HR stuff. But the paces definitely seemed to fit my various training runs, based on perceived level of exertion. It could be that your MaxHR is above average, either by nature or if you haven't been running for that long. But I wonder if you should see a doctor about this?
It just so happens the fire brigade is currently doing its free complete health check clinics they offer each year. They don't specifically check for MaxHR but they do hook you up to one of those heart machine thingys to check for any abnormal rhythms and such. I haven't done one in 2 years so I've already booked in. Assuming no red flags pop up this time I'll then think about doing some sort of MaxHR test through the fitness coordinator just to see what it is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sid and Bare Lee
right now I could not keep that pace up for more than 15-20mins without my HR going above 70% of MaxHR. Yet he suggests long runs should be a minimum of 1.5 hours.

I think it will just be a matter of improving my endurance(I have been working almost exclusively on bettering my 5km time lately) and trying to get a more accurate idea of my MaxHR.
It seems that McMillan is saying that his calculator should be accurate if one puts in the months (or even years) of work for one to gradually reach their potential.

"The Calculator Race Times indicate what you could run for various distances if you are properly trained for that distance. In other words, a runner who is optimally trained for a 5K would have to perform proper marathon training in order to expect to run the predicted marathon time. And, the farther apart the distances, the less accurate the Race Times may be. That is to say that a half-marathon performance is a better predictor of your marathon time than is a mile performance."

"I always suggest that during your first workouts, just shoot for the slow end of the range. Training too fast, too soon is the quickest way to failure. As you do more and more workouts, you should find that the same effort level results in faster and faster times until you are running at the fast end of the range. If the slow end feels too fast or the fast end feels too slow, then it's likely that you are in worse or better shape than the race performance you entered in the calculator. Another race might help refine your estimates of your current fitness level."

I must say I like his calculated race paces though! Says I should be able to do the Marathon in 3:35 which I'd be totally stoked with.
Good luck!
As for myself, my actual 10K time is 4 minutes slower than the prediction based on my actual 5K. My half mary is 23 minutes slower than the prediction based off my actual 10K and 32 minutes slower than the prediction based off my actual 5K. So clearly, I need more work to reach my potential, but that's not my personal goal right now.

Edit: I'm really glad that I ordered the refurb Garmin 305. Trying to figure out my times is a pain with Nike, since they don't actually show you the data!
 
  • Like
Reactions: PKFFW and Bare Lee
As for myself, my actual 10K time is 4 minutes slower than the prediction based on my actual 5K. My half mary is 23 minutes slower than the prediction based off my actual 10K and 32 minutes slower than the prediction based off my actual 5K. So clearly, I need more work to reach my potential, but that's not my personal goal right now.
Here's how I'm using the calculator. I go down to the local HS track and time a mile. Last week I ran one in 8 minutes. To get to my goal of sustaining that pace for an hour (= running 7.5 miles, the distance of my Como Lake route), I need to be able to run a mile in about 6 minutes, 50 seconds, according to the pace calculator. Meanwhile I'm working on my stamina (cruise intervals, tempo runs) and endurance (long and steady) during my training runs, setting pace alerts roughly in line with McMillian's formula. Every week or two, I'll keep going down to the track and see where my mile time is. When it's close to 6:50 mm pace, I'll make a final push on my Como Lake route runs until I can do it in an hour or less.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sid
Well perhaps it was a case of simply pushing too fast to begin with. Today I went for a run at his "easy pace" and felt good and my HR stayed right around the 70-75% mark, which is what he says it should be. I was really conscious of just trying to keep my pace at the lower end of his suggestion and it seemed to work. I think the fun I've had lately trying to better my 5km mark has got me to running faster than I should for most of my runs.

Thanks for pointing out that passage Sid as I think I didn't pay enough attention to it first time around.

As for times......my 10km is 7.20 slower than his mark right now but that doesn't bother me as I've not been working on that lately. I honestly think I could probably shave 3-4 mins off my best right now without even trying too hard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sid and Bare Lee
So the 305 has smart recording, which shows up as really jagged and seems inaccurate compared to the Nike GPS, as it was off by more than 3/10 of a mile over 13mi. I used the 305's 1 sec recording on tonight's run and it seems much more comparable to the Nike GPS, within 1/10 over 19mi.

Unfortunately, the 305 only has 4 hrs of recording time with 1 sec recording. The 310XT isn't much better at about 5 hrs (Edit: supposedly, it will get up to 20 hrs!). One needs get the $400 910XT which will store up to 48 hrs with 1 sec recording. $400?! Good grief!

Edit: Looks like the 910XT has firmware issues. So, if I ever run a marathon, I'll just have to make sure it's a sub-4. Hah...

The Suunto Ambit looks like a sharp watch, but at $500, it's more than I'm willing to invest. Probably going to stick with my 2 watch workaround at this point. Although, I can't pull data off the Nike watch, it does have an 8 hr battery life. I kind of like redundancy too.

Edit 2: Eh, looks like there are several brands that have the 1 sec recording for greater than 4 hours. Still searching for the right watch...

Edit 3: Looks like the Suunto Ambit is the one to get. Oh, so expensive! I sold the Nike watch on Ebay. (That's paves the way for getting the Ambit, as I can't justify owning 3 watches at once!) The 305 should be fine for now, though my last run of 3:39 really pushed the limits as the watch is only supposed to do 3.5 hrs on 1 sec recording!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bare Lee

Support Your Club

Forum statistics

Threads
19,094
Messages
183,434
Members
8,688
Latest member
Jojo9090