Jack, I bought that book too, but is following that formula consistent with multi-sporting? Sure, you can get your run times down but is it at the expense of bike & swim training time?
I bought both the JD book and the FIRST "Run Less, Run Faster" book. The latter spells out some very specific 3 runs a week programmes to be augmented with cross-training in between. My instinct is that this programme is consistent witn reducing run times and spending time on the other disciplines.
is following that formula consistent with multi-sporting? Sure, you can get your run times down but is it at the expense of bike & swim training time?
I'm trying to find out!
I think the principles are key
1) Understand physiology, and why you do specific types of training (i.e. what systems you are stressing)
2) Time+Quality, not volume is important
3) Run to pace (not distance, HR etc)
You can take these and apply them to whatever programme you are doing. Your run will improve - but, perhaps not as much as if you were doing purely running.
The time element is important - and you have to divide up your time between the different disciplines - getting appropriate balance.
There is a good overlap between running and cycling.
Long slow runs are there for the Cardio Vascular system, strengthening ligaments etc. etc. This can be achieved by typical longish runs on the Bike (see the recent Simon Lessing article in one of the May Tri Rags - T+?) for an example.
I'm currently experimenting with adapting the techniques to the bike - if you look for some of my postings about turbos - I've attempted to work out what power equates to a specific VO2 Max - then take the formula and, instead of pace (because that varies depending what gear you are in), use specific power outputs. So I have the equivalent of my VO2 Max pace, LT pace, M Pace etc. in terms of power. Don't know if it will work - or if I am doing it right - but it is quite fun to do[:)]
Once I've got the feel for what the specific power output is on the turbo (still learning, injury is preventing progress at the moment) - how it maps to my heart rate is also a clue, I'll take that out on the road. Fartlek runs will be replaced by hilly routes. Possibly intervals by going up and down the same bl**dy steep hill, although these will be on the turbo mainly. M Pace runs by longer distance rides. I also suspect that I'll multiply the cycling times over the running times - so, a 1 hour run might be a 4 hour ride. Not quite decided how to do that. HR is lower on the bike, so I might look at what the HR calories are for a given activity, and use that to what out some factors. Or might just use a scale of "Perceived level of being knackered at the end" to work out the equivalent times. So an M-Pace run in JD might be either a 1 hour M-Pace run, ore, say a 3 hour M-Power cycle. Or whatever.
I'll take the basic pattern - i.e. what you do in specific weeks, and have a go at interspersing cycling and running - runs to pace, cycles to power, and see what happens.
I don't expect to apply the principles to swimming - because I'm nowhere near good enough - for me, swimming will be all about technique - i.e. just try to swim more efficiently/effectively. Maybe in a year or two when I understand swimming a bit better, I might have a go at working it a "formula".
Anyway, the original question was "how to run faster". And I think that JD is probably the best approach for someone who has already been running (i.e. has a race time to determine the VDOT), and wants to improve.
I'm working my way through Friel's training bible. There is a lot of overlap in the principles - I'm pretty sure that Friel will have read JD. I've not got my head around it enough to form a detailed opinion though.
Another important principle in JD is "not getting injured". That's the lesson that I don't seem to be able to learn.
[I'm sure there are lots of other people trying the same approach - and it is will documented - but I'm really enjoying working it for myself at the moment! When I hit a brick wall, I'll start looking for more experienced/proven methods]
I must get stuck into the JD book more, though I found it a bit text-bookish.
I didn't like the JF "Bible" book so much. Very informative but I think following the book rigidly would take all the fun away from training. I still refer to it, but it's dull.
I do like the FIRST "Run Less Run Faster" book. It describes the physiological aspects well (VO2 Max, lactate threshold...), the principles of training (exact same as JD) and is full of useful charts that show you what time you can expect to achieve in a marathon from your most recent 10k time and that sort of thing.
It's full of letters from Runners World readers endorsing the programme which is good for motivation.
It doesn't get as technical as VDOT or anything like that. It ignores heart rates totally - I knind of like that but in a way I'd like to use HR measurement & analysis a secondary factor, just to check progress etc.
What is really useful for me (as I'm planning my first marathon in October - Dublin) is that having extrapolated my target time from my current 10k times it then gives me a specific interval, tempo and long-run programme to keep to. I tried the first session last week and it was bang on what I'd call hard but not too hard so the pacing tables are accurate.
Interesting to have confirmed that a long bike can do the same for your endurance fitness as a long slow run. With 2 triathlons in July I want to be able to interchange my long runs with a long bike and then resume my long run focus at the end of July for the marathon.
It gives programmes for anything from 5k, 10k, HM to marathon, but a possible weakness in the book is that it is probably too marathon focused.
A key principle is the 3 runs plus 2 (or more) cross-training, mainly for injury prevention but also to cut out training that won't serve any real purpose (junk miles I guess).
Anyway, after years of an "intuitive" rather than disciplined and focused running programme I'm looking forward to seeing if replacing quantity with quality yields results.
10K on sunday........legs are feeling ok today (were sore yesterday)........i'm gonna try to put in a 45 min run........never ran 10k competitively before........
I wanted to post so that it encouraged me to go harder......
I never run against anyone but myself. I have a PB and run against that. Don't judge yourself against others. Don't worry, I'll post any PBs I get on here!
10K on sunday........legs are feeling ok today (were sore yesterday)........i'm gonna try to put in a 45 min run........never ran 10k competitively before........
Well, you've got the fitness. And judging from the videos, the form. Just need to get the "head" right.
A 45 min 10k is the equivalent of a 21:45 5K. Which is a bit quicker than the 5Ks on your tris have been. You've looking at 7:14 for each mile, 4:30 for each K. Don't go to fast to start with - a bit above 4:30 pace - but look to get below for the last half.
Good luck - be interested to hear how you get on. And I hope the legs hold up OK - 45 minutes of whacking them down on the road might make them moan and grumble a bit. Who can blame them.
We see a lot of these "how fast should I be doing my.... " posts here and in other places.
As a total slow coach who can say that tri has if not saved my life, at least seriously extended my one time expectations I think before you can honestly answer that question you have to FIRST ask the question
"what is my goal?" for the distances/events/etc.
I would then further say (purely IMO natch) that "my goal" cannot and should not revolve around what anybody else does until you are entering the realms of seriously challenging for a podium position. What "my goal" may revolve around is previous PBs, consideration of the environment the run/bike/swim will take place in, the resources available to you.
e.g. If my PB for a 10K is 1:01:52 (yes that IS a leading "1" for one hour) then there is absolutely no point whatsoever my worrying that for males aged 46 I "should" be doing 10K in 44 minutes or whatever... i am just so NOT going to achieve that. So - my goal for a 10K is sub 60 minutes. 59:59 would be a "good" time for me ... at which juncture I can then readdress my goals and thus a "good time".
e.g. If a 750m pool swim PB is for example 13 minutes, then would the same person expect a similat rime for a 750m sea swim? "Good times" are dependent on many, many factors.
e.g. if someone on a MTB does a 10 mile TT in 36 minutes, there's not much point in them knowing that "most" people do that in (say) 26 minutes. They just are SO not going to manage to knock 10 minutes off in any time frame worth worrying about - but IF they go and get a road bike, or better stil of course a T/tri bike, then the "normal" time may be very feasible very quickly.
In short, IMO, talk of "what is a good time" is totally redundant in any capacity other than what it means to an individual compared only to themself and the resources available to them dependant on conditions and evironment at any one time.
Your all gits. I wish I could run that quick. At Blenheim last year I was 400 something out the water, about the same on the bike. Then near enough last on the run.
My last olympic Tri I did a 10K in about an hour:(
Well, you've got the fitness. And judging from the videos, the form. Just need to get the "head" right.
A 45 min 10k is the equivalent of a 21:45 5K. Which is a bit quicker than the 5Ks on your tris have been. You've looking at 7:14 for each mile, 4:30 for each K. Don't go to fast to start with - a bit above 4:30 pace - but look to get below for the last half.
Good luck - be interested to hear how you get on. And I hope the legs hold up OK - 45 minutes of whacking them down on the road might make them moan and grumble a bit. Who can blame them.
Head right - er no! All went wrong when the markers were in Miles NOT km?? Why mark a 10k race in miles???? Anyway, this was enough to blow my mind and i set off too quick, at about 2.5 miles i realised i had to slow (or die), then just got through the mid-section before getting a little stronger towards the end. Time was about 46:40 which is not fast enough......Daniels' Running Formula book ordered from Amazon no more than 3 minutes ago.
By the end of this year i want to be much faster.....maybe 40 mins.......is that doable?
running fitness and speed is as much in the mind as it is the body. I have never been quick until Benny who used to post on here left me with the most amazing sentence which is now my signature. Only the mind sets the limits.
If you go around thinking you can onlu do a 77 min 10K that is what you will do.
i dont know if you saw my thread on my last 10 K. I was really dissapointed with my 49 mins. I was hoping for a 42 min super run!
i wont go into detail as I have done that but you need to set a race plan and stick to it. I now run with a HRM and know my limits and I now love the running.
running fitness and speed is as much in the mind as it is the body. I have never been quick until Benny who used to post on here left me with the most amazing sentence which is now my signature. Only the mind sets the limits.
If you go around thinking you can onlu do a 77 min 10K that is what you will do.
i dont know if you saw my thread on my last 10 K. I was really dissapointed with my 49 mins. I was hoping for a 42 min super run!
i wont go into detail as I have done that but you need to set a race plan and stick to it. I now run with a HRM and know my limits and I now love the running.
was only joking, but i do the same, my hrm gives agood guide as to how hard i'm working as it knows before i do that i'm working hard. As you say only the mind sets limits, and i seem to have lost mine somewhere along the way
This will sound dumb, but: to get fast you have to run fast. And by that i mean get out of your comfort zone. Run tempo sets where you want to stop; interval sets where your eyes are bleeding; hard hill repeats (but be careful as they can do your back in if not done right).
One workout that really works for me is the 5k balls out run. Pick a route and simply run it as fast as you can every now and then.
If you've done the base training, your body should be ready to make withdrawals from your 'fitness bank' and should be able to handle it.
That was basically my approach and I have gone from 41 - 42 min 10k to consistantly running sub 40. I'm no coach, but like i said, it worked for me.
By the end of this year i want to be much faster.....maybe 40 mins.......is that doable?
For you, yes. Will take work and focus.
Problems - 1) Injury, 2) you might not be able to focus so much on the other disciplines.
However, as running is your weakest area, so spending a season focusing on one aspect, especially the weakest, wouldn't be a bad thing. You can learn a lot by trying to get the best you can at one element - and in many ways, running is the simplest discipline (things like technique and equipment don't get in the way so much). Things like racecraft, how to really push yourself to the maximum are all important lessons to learn!
By the end of this year i want to be much faster.....maybe 40 mins.......is that doable?
For you, yes. Will take work and focus.
Problems - 1) Injury, 2) you might not be able to focus so much on the other disciplines.
However, as running is your weakest area, so spending a season focusing on one aspect, especially the weakest, wouldn't be a bad thing. You can learn a lot by trying to get the best you can at one element - and in many ways, running is the simplest discipline (things like technique and equipment don't get in the way so much). Things like racecraft, how to really push yourself to the maximum are all important lessons to learn!
But watch out for the injuries!
Good advice about the injuries. 2 seasons ago I got to 44ish and aggravated an old school knee injury. 2 years later, with the help of tri training I'm getting back to my best. Running fast is brutal. Get good shoes and join a running club if you can. They're everywhere, will get you slightly cheaper into races and give you sooooo much advice. Running hooks people and most club members have done it all their lives. Mix in a few races and you'll understand your body more, as well as learn the craft.
So having read all your suggestions for a good 10k, I am over the moon at my first ever 10k the other week (at the National Dualathlon Championships) of 51mins a PB!! Normally I manage to knock up at least an hour if not more....running obviously, along with swimming not my strong point..& given that this time last year I had NO intention of running further than the bus stop, I'm pretty pleased with my progress!! [:)] Just keep training.......& don't give up - well apart from fags!! [:)]
Jeez Gary, for a start 46:20 is a perfectly respectable 10k time. Don't beat yourself up over it.
Follow the advice: do regular tempo runs, do regular intervals, do hill repeats and do some basic easy long runs. The Daniels book will give you some good sets, and I personally am following a programme from the Runners World Run Less Run Faster book, which sets realistic sessions depending on your ability. Very easy to follow.
But 40 mins from 46 in just a few more months? Don't even try. Set realistic goals. Try and get to 43 or 44 mins this season, or if you're really improving a bit lower. My hunch is that aiming for 40 will only demoralise you if you miss it, and risk injury by pushing yourself too hard.
This is your first year, yes? OK, I accept that it's easier to improve in the early period of your multi-sport life, but 6 minutes' improvenment from 46 is too big an ask in my opinion.
My PB is 43:28 and if I got to 40 mins by next winter I'll be thrilled.
Gary, 40mins is a very fast 10k, and (i hate to say) a lot faster than your current 46 (which is better than my pb at the mo). Do you feel that you can run sub 4min per k at the moment? And can you actually do it? I know that on the dreadmill in the gym straight off the spinning bike i can run a 4:03k. That is all i can hold that pace for. That said, now I know that I can run that speed, it will just be a case of increasin gthe time I can hold that pace for. So tempo runs, intervals, hill repeats. My secret weapon (don't tell anyone) and the easiest way i found to increase speed and stamina for running is to use the cross trainer in the gym at a high resistence and try to keep the cadence what i would do when running +1- so about 90 or 100 strides per min. It is so bloody hard but it works a treat. I managed to use that for most of the training I did for the Great South Run last year and although i missed my target time of 90 mins (due to a calf injury in training) i had the speed to do 8:45 miles for most of it. I finished in 93mins. Oh and the Cross trainer is no impact so you won't get injured on it. Sorry rambling, but i think in short. 40 is achievable, but don't be too downhearted if you don't make it this year, next year you will, i'm sure of it!
@joolzd: Really good! That's a whole 1 minute per K faster. Which is a different type of running altogether - the difference between running and jogging. To lift the speed in that way means that it is really clicking! Superb.
@blinkybaz, @pc_67: What is a realistic target? Given Gary's age, current level of fitness, and more importantly - the amount of time that he is prepared to train, and his attitude: wanting to achieve, then a 40 minute 10K is a realistic target - given the that he will have to focus on the running, and avoid injuries. He should do 43 in his next 10K. Then a high 41. Then towards the end of the year be getting close - and certainly going for, a 40 minute target. He might well not hit the target - but it is worth aiming for.
It strikes me that smaller more acheivable targets throughout his training will keep motavation levels higher. I am not talking about not getting to 40 mins but setting say a 2 min target over a month or two rather than a huge 6 mins!
I think an important thing to keep in mind in Gary's case is that its his first year of running regularly. Until you've got a good amount of time pounding your knees and legs, you're going to be more susceptible to injuring yourself altogether. Your cartilidge and tendons get tougher, but it takes about a year to get it up there.
It shouldn't be an issue to run 5 times a week, but doing 50+ miles a week sustained for months in your first year, that's probably just setting yourself up to get hurt.
If your goal is running 10k races as quick as you can, you'll want to spend most of your time doing fast runs. Once a week I'd recommend doing 1km repeats, on 1 minute rest. That'll build up your endurance for running at speed without you having to slow down to 4:40kms in order to keep going. Another great thing is your hill repeats. This'll force you into a higher cadence if you want to keep moving which is good for your pacing.
Also, the 5km balls to the wall run is a good one to do as well on a set course so you can get a picture of your improvement over time. Don't do it too often and I wouldn't obsess about the times so much as agonizing over 3-5 seconds, but you can get your trending improvement. You can really give yourself a treat if you do this to follow up immediately after your steady 6-8mile run to get used to running in tired legs, like you will be at the end of a longer event or in an OD tri.
Have a look at a local Parkrun, www.parkrun.co.uk they provide a race over a confirmed distance every week, and therefore monitoring performance and times is easy.
Comments
If you haven't come across it yet, Jack Daniel's Running Formula may be the thing for you!
Well worth a look - lots of great ideas and things to do to get faster.
I bought both the JD book and the FIRST "Run Less, Run Faster" book. The latter spells out some very specific 3 runs a week programmes to be augmented with cross-training in between. My instinct is that this programme is consistent witn reducing run times and spending time on the other disciplines.
Thanks to Hamilton for the post above by the way.
I'm trying to find out!
I think the principles are key
1) Understand physiology, and why you do specific types of training (i.e. what systems you are stressing)
2) Time+Quality, not volume is important
3) Run to pace (not distance, HR etc)
You can take these and apply them to whatever programme you are doing. Your run will improve - but, perhaps not as much as if you were doing purely running.
The time element is important - and you have to divide up your time between the different disciplines - getting appropriate balance.
There is a good overlap between running and cycling.
Long slow runs are there for the Cardio Vascular system, strengthening ligaments etc. etc. This can be achieved by typical longish runs on the Bike (see the recent Simon Lessing article in one of the May Tri Rags - T+?) for an example.
I'm currently experimenting with adapting the techniques to the bike - if you look for some of my postings about turbos - I've attempted to work out what power equates to a specific VO2 Max - then take the formula and, instead of pace (because that varies depending what gear you are in), use specific power outputs. So I have the equivalent of my VO2 Max pace, LT pace, M Pace etc. in terms of power. Don't know if it will work - or if I am doing it right - but it is quite fun to do[:)]
Once I've got the feel for what the specific power output is on the turbo (still learning, injury is preventing progress at the moment) - how it maps to my heart rate is also a clue, I'll take that out on the road. Fartlek runs will be replaced by hilly routes. Possibly intervals by going up and down the same bl**dy steep hill, although these will be on the turbo mainly. M Pace runs by longer distance rides. I also suspect that I'll multiply the cycling times over the running times - so, a 1 hour run might be a 4 hour ride. Not quite decided how to do that. HR is lower on the bike, so I might look at what the HR calories are for a given activity, and use that to what out some factors. Or might just use a scale of "Perceived level of being knackered at the end" to work out the equivalent times. So an M-Pace run in JD might be either a 1 hour M-Pace run, ore, say a 3 hour M-Power cycle. Or whatever.
I'll take the basic pattern - i.e. what you do in specific weeks, and have a go at interspersing cycling and running - runs to pace, cycles to power, and see what happens.
I don't expect to apply the principles to swimming - because I'm nowhere near good enough - for me, swimming will be all about technique - i.e. just try to swim more efficiently/effectively. Maybe in a year or two when I understand swimming a bit better, I might have a go at working it a "formula".
Anyway, the original question was "how to run faster". And I think that JD is probably the best approach for someone who has already been running (i.e. has a race time to determine the VDOT), and wants to improve.
I'm working my way through Friel's training bible. There is a lot of overlap in the principles - I'm pretty sure that Friel will have read JD. I've not got my head around it enough to form a detailed opinion though.
Another important principle in JD is "not getting injured". That's the lesson that I don't seem to be able to learn.
[I'm sure there are lots of other people trying the same approach - and it is will documented - but I'm really enjoying working it for myself at the moment! When I hit a brick wall, I'll start looking for more experienced/proven methods]
I didn't like the JF "Bible" book so much. Very informative but I think following the book rigidly would take all the fun away from training. I still refer to it, but it's dull.
I do like the FIRST "Run Less Run Faster" book. It describes the physiological aspects well (VO2 Max, lactate threshold...), the principles of training (exact same as JD) and is full of useful charts that show you what time you can expect to achieve in a marathon from your most recent 10k time and that sort of thing.
It's full of letters from Runners World readers endorsing the programme which is good for motivation.
It doesn't get as technical as VDOT or anything like that. It ignores heart rates totally - I knind of like that but in a way I'd like to use HR measurement & analysis a secondary factor, just to check progress etc.
What is really useful for me (as I'm planning my first marathon in October - Dublin) is that having extrapolated my target time from my current 10k times it then gives me a specific interval, tempo and long-run programme to keep to. I tried the first session last week and it was bang on what I'd call hard but not too hard so the pacing tables are accurate.
Interesting to have confirmed that a long bike can do the same for your endurance fitness as a long slow run. With 2 triathlons in July I want to be able to interchange my long runs with a long bike and then resume my long run focus at the end of July for the marathon.
It gives programmes for anything from 5k, 10k, HM to marathon, but a possible weakness in the book is that it is probably too marathon focused.
A key principle is the 3 runs plus 2 (or more) cross-training, mainly for injury prevention but also to cut out training that won't serve any real purpose (junk miles I guess).
Anyway, after years of an "intuitive" rather than disciplined and focused running programme I'm looking forward to seeing if replacing quantity with quality yields results.
I wanted to post so that it encouraged me to go harder......
Well, you've got the fitness. And judging from the videos, the form. Just need to get the "head" right.
A 45 min 10k is the equivalent of a 21:45 5K. Which is a bit quicker than the 5Ks on your tris have been. You've looking at 7:14 for each mile, 4:30 for each K. Don't go to fast to start with - a bit above 4:30 pace - but look to get below for the last half.
Good luck - be interested to hear how you get on. And I hope the legs hold up OK - 45 minutes of whacking them down on the road might make them moan and grumble a bit. Who can blame them.
As a total slow coach who can say that tri has if not saved my life, at least seriously extended my one time expectations I think before you can honestly answer that question you have to FIRST ask the question
"what is my goal?" for the distances/events/etc.
I would then further say (purely IMO natch) that "my goal" cannot and should not revolve around what anybody else does until you are entering the realms of seriously challenging for a podium position. What "my goal" may revolve around is previous PBs, consideration of the environment the run/bike/swim will take place in, the resources available to you.
e.g. If my PB for a 10K is 1:01:52 (yes that IS a leading "1" for one hour) then there is absolutely no point whatsoever my worrying that for males aged 46 I "should" be doing 10K in 44 minutes or whatever... i am just so NOT going to achieve that. So - my goal for a 10K is sub 60 minutes. 59:59 would be a "good" time for me ... at which juncture I can then readdress my goals and thus a "good time".
e.g. If a 750m pool swim PB is for example 13 minutes, then would the same person expect a similat rime for a 750m sea swim? "Good times" are dependent on many, many factors.
e.g. if someone on a MTB does a 10 mile TT in 36 minutes, there's not much point in them knowing that "most" people do that in (say) 26 minutes. They just are SO not going to manage to knock 10 minutes off in any time frame worth worrying about - but IF they go and get a road bike, or better stil of course a T/tri bike, then the "normal" time may be very feasible very quickly.
In short, IMO, talk of "what is a good time" is totally redundant in any capacity other than what it means to an individual compared only to themself and the resources available to them dependant on conditions and evironment at any one time.
didds
My last olympic Tri I did a 10K in about an hour:(
Your a git jasonB ;-)
I do a straight 10K in about an hour... god alone knows how long it will take me after a 1500m swim and a 40K bike ride...
... I'll let you know on July 26th!
didds
Didds by then you'll be sub 50 and making the rest of us (me...) look bad.
Head right - er no! All went wrong when the markers were in Miles NOT km?? Why mark a 10k race in miles???? Anyway, this was enough to blow my mind and i set off too quick, at about 2.5 miles i realised i had to slow (or die), then just got through the mid-section before getting a little stronger towards the end. Time was about 46:40 which is not fast enough......Daniels' Running Formula book ordered from Amazon no more than 3 minutes ago.
By the end of this year i want to be much faster.....maybe 40 mins.......is that doable?
Yes.
In my dreams mate, in my dreams!
didds
running fitness and speed is as much in the mind as it is the body. I have never been quick until Benny who used to post on here left me with the most amazing sentence which is now my signature. Only the mind sets the limits.
If you go around thinking you can onlu do a 77 min 10K that is what you will do.
i dont know if you saw my thread on my last 10 K. I was really dissapointed with my 49 mins. I was hoping for a 42 min super run!
i wont go into detail as I have done that but you need to set a race plan and stick to it. I now run with a HRM and know my limits and I now love the running.
Hope it helps.
Does that mean your HRM sets limits?[:D]
One workout that really works for me is the 5k balls out run. Pick a route and simply run it as fast as you can every now and then.
If you've done the base training, your body should be ready to make withdrawals from your 'fitness bank' and should be able to handle it.
That was basically my approach and I have gone from 41 - 42 min 10k to consistantly running sub 40. I'm no coach, but like i said, it worked for me.
For you, yes. Will take work and focus.
Problems - 1) Injury, 2) you might not be able to focus so much on the other disciplines.
However, as running is your weakest area, so spending a season focusing on one aspect, especially the weakest, wouldn't be a bad thing. You can learn a lot by trying to get the best you can at one element - and in many ways, running is the simplest discipline (things like technique and equipment don't get in the way so much). Things like racecraft, how to really push yourself to the maximum are all important lessons to learn!
But watch out for the injuries!
Good advice about the injuries. 2 seasons ago I got to 44ish and aggravated an old school knee injury. 2 years later, with the help of tri training I'm getting back to my best. Running fast is brutal. Get good shoes and join a running club if you can. They're everywhere, will get you slightly cheaper into races and give you sooooo much advice. Running hooks people and most club members have done it all their lives. Mix in a few races and you'll understand your body more, as well as learn the craft.
First was 48mins which I was well chuffed with for my first attempt in ages.
Then improved a minute each time, down to 46.
Might have another try after work on Thurs, shall let you know how I get on.
Follow the advice: do regular tempo runs, do regular intervals, do hill repeats and do some basic easy long runs. The Daniels book will give you some good sets, and I personally am following a programme from the Runners World Run Less Run Faster book, which sets realistic sessions depending on your ability. Very easy to follow.
But 40 mins from 46 in just a few more months? Don't even try. Set realistic goals. Try and get to 43 or 44 mins this season, or if you're really improving a bit lower. My hunch is that aiming for 40 will only demoralise you if you miss it, and risk injury by pushing yourself too hard.
This is your first year, yes? OK, I accept that it's easier to improve in the early period of your multi-sport life, but 6 minutes' improvenment from 46 is too big an ask in my opinion.
My PB is 43:28 and if I got to 40 mins by next winter I'll be thrilled.
Get to 43 first, then improve on that next year.
@blinkybaz, @pc_67: What is a realistic target? Given Gary's age, current level of fitness, and more importantly - the amount of time that he is prepared to train, and his attitude: wanting to achieve, then a 40 minute 10K is a realistic target - given the that he will have to focus on the running, and avoid injuries. He should do 43 in his next 10K. Then a high 41. Then towards the end of the year be getting close - and certainly going for, a 40 minute target. He might well not hit the target - but it is worth aiming for.
It shouldn't be an issue to run 5 times a week, but doing 50+ miles a week sustained for months in your first year, that's probably just setting yourself up to get hurt.
If your goal is running 10k races as quick as you can, you'll want to spend most of your time doing fast runs. Once a week I'd recommend doing 1km repeats, on 1 minute rest. That'll build up your endurance for running at speed without you having to slow down to 4:40kms in order to keep going. Another great thing is your hill repeats. This'll force you into a higher cadence if you want to keep moving which is good for your pacing.
Also, the 5km balls to the wall run is a good one to do as well on a set course so you can get a picture of your improvement over time. Don't do it too often and I wouldn't obsess about the times so much as agonizing over 3-5 seconds, but you can get your trending improvement. You can really give yourself a treat if you do this to follow up immediately after your steady 6-8mile run to get used to running in tired legs, like you will be at the end of a longer event or in an OD tri.