I ran 5 marathons ages 41-47 in times ranging from 2:43-2:58. Average pace for long run was in neighborhood of 60-80 sec slower than marathon pace, which was a little quicker than my average daily run. It was a fairly common occurrence to run within 30-40 seconds of M pace, but I almost never went any faster than that. I also tended to run them steady rather than progression or fast finish. I?m not saying it was the best way to do it, but it was what I knew and did ok with on limited mileage. If would have had access to running forums then I might have done things differently. I always drank nothing but water too, whether it was a training run or race. If I ever race one again I?d use one of the sport drinks. I?ve always raced a lot at other distances, so I think that helped me get away with a less than ideal approach to marathon training. My last was in ?93 when I was 47.

Now at 61 I?m back running about as many total miles as I ever have, but long runs have only been in 12-14 mile range. I?d like to run one more marathon before I?m through but will wait and see how next few months go before making any decisions. My most recent races between 10k and HM say I have a chance to run in neighborhood of 3:05-06 for 26. I?m ok with running an easy pace a lot of the time but LHR training is not for me. It just doesn?t sound like much fun.

quote:<HR>Originally posted by Ewart Harris:
jp
What is your average weekly miles in marathon season and outside?<HR>

I tend to be a low mileage guy, and would like to increase it (still taking a day off). Last year, I peaked at 65 before NY. In retrospect, I regret not having a 12-15 miler regularly on Thursdays. I did speedwork on Tuesday and my long runs on Saturday or Sunday (but I also had an interruption for Reach-the-Beach in September).

It happens that last week was my longest week in a while, and that was about 55.

------------------
Me[/URL" target="_blank">

Ewart,

I should be clear that I'm not an experienced marathoner, unlike other who have responded. 2006 New York was 23 years after my prior one. But I think I learned much from the experience (esp. what I think I did wrong in both prep and on race day) and from other sources, and hence am foolish enough to post.

In the schedule, you have speedwork on Tuesday and a medium run on Wednesday. Even if you recover well, that may be too ambitious. That's why I would go one speed, one (instead of two) medium, one long. But I think it is important to get in the miles, and if you can do that without getting injured and you're monitoring yourself to avoid overtraining, why not?

Out of curiosity, what type of HR do you have on your various runs? I did a run last night with my HRM and was at or below my MAF (135 = 180-50+5) which was less than 30 secs. off my MP (and well faster than what I'm supposed to do).

Wow 8:00 mile pace is pretty fast for an easy pace. 22 milers at that pace is kinda insane.

quote:<HR>Originally posted by jpgarland:
Ewart,

I should be clear that I'm not an experienced marathoner, unlike other who have responded. 2006 New York was 23 years after my prior one. But I think I learned much from the experience (esp. what I think I did wrong in both prep and on race day) and from other sources, and hence am foolish enough to post.

In the schedule, you have speedwork on Tuesday and a medium run on Wednesday. Even if you recover well, that may be too ambitious. That's why I would go one speed, one (instead of two) medium, one long. But I think it is important to get in the miles, and if you can do that without getting injured and you're monitoring yourself to avoid overtraining, why not?

Out of curiosity, what type of HR do you have on your various runs? I did a run last night with my HRM and was at or below my MAF (135 = 180-50+5) which was less than 30 secs. off my MP (and well faster than what I'm supposed to do).<HR>

Just curious,If you can run substantial miles at just 30 sec off MP at MAF,then that MP probably doesn't reflect your current fitness??It is probably 1 to 2 min faster than MAF pace??

quote:<HR>Originally posted by easytarget:
sounds like complete BS to me<HR>

Thanks for your time.

quote:<HR>Originally posted by sortarunner:
Just curious,If you can run substantial miles at just 30 sec off MP at MAF,then that MP probably doesn't reflect your current fitness??It is probably 1 to 2 min faster than MAF pace??<HR>

I just used the HRM for a 7+ mile run, and the numbers were a pace of 6:32 for 3+ miles I had an average HR of 135. On a 20 miles I wouldn't be nearly that fast; maybe 7ish, but I haven't worn an HRM for that. I was thinking more in terms of if I run relaxed with an HRM, what would it be, and I might have picked it up a bit to get my HR up to the 135.

My MP was 6:24 (with a few stops). I interpret this to mean that someone who's been running 35+ years is likely to have a sufficient aerobic base and sufficient efficiency-of-motion that she can run pretty quickly even at a low heart rate. It was in response to the principle in low heart rate training that over time you will go significantly faster at the same (low) HR.

This is from Mark Allen[/URL" target="_blank">:

quote:<HR>To keep my heart rate below 155 beats/minute, I had to slow my pace down to an 8:15 mile. That's three minutes/mile SLOWER than I had been trying to hit in every single workout I did! My body just couldn't utilize fat for fuel.

So for the next four months I did exclusively aerobic training keeping my heart rate at or below my maximum aerobic heart rate, using the monitor every single workout. And at the end of that period, my pace at the same heart rate of 155 beats/minute had improved by over a minute. And after nearly a year of doing mostly aerobic training, which by the way was much more comfortable and less taxing than the anaerobic style that I was used to, my pace at 155 beats/minute had improved to a blistering 5:20 mile.<HR>

quote:<HR>Originally posted by easytarget:
RH,
i'm calling BS on 3 day a week sub 3hr marathons

you sound like our resident looney that pops up here and other running sites from time to time, our dear friend Richard, only he doesn't claim to run 3 hr marathons, just that anyone who wants to would get a top performance only running like 3 days a week (i don't recall exactly, he may even of said something as stupid as 2 days a week)

you'd be his wet dream come true, so you better pray to god he doesn't read this thread or you'll have a cyber-stalker for life

http://This message has been edited by easytarget (edited Jul-15-2007).<HR>

Huh? I don't understand this post. Are you saying that I am not telling the truth or are misleading?