Galloway Experiences

Support | Event Directors & Organizers

Search Cool Running Community

Browse Cool Running

CoolRunning.com > Cool Running Community > Jeff Galloway >

1 2 3 Previous Next Go to original post

aurang

1,362 posts since
Jun 26, 2003

30. Dec 27, 2007 3:15 AM

in response to: ventura43

In other words, if you can run faster than 1:31 for a half, you don't need the breaks. What the **** has all this **** been about elite runners benefiting and the possibility of qualifying for Boston through walk breaks?

JUST ABOVE THAT CHART, he makes the claim that "even sub-three hour marathoners continue to take their walk breaks to the end." So, you don't need walk breaks at faster than 7:00 pace, but people running 6:00 pace use it just to make others feel better.

http://This message has been edited by aurang (edited Aug-10-2005).

quevin

31 posts since
Dec 6, 2004

31. Aug 10, 2005 10:02 AM

in response to: ventura43

I have no knowledge about elites and their experiences with Galloway's method, but I have first hand knowledge of two people who ran sub-3:30 and BQ'd, one of them in their first marathon attempt, in full Galloway training mode. There are three other runners who are 3:30ish and are part of my regular running group that uses Galloway for Sunday long runs.

I have no financial interest. I don't even have the book. I gave it to a friend who was interested and who is now following the program, hoping to complete her first marathon this fall. I ran 5 marathons before lapsing into three years of no running. When I got back to running I signed up with this Galloway training group primarily because I was looking to benefit from running with a group and because I had read about Galloway and thought it would be a good way to avoid injury.

I have been pleased with the results as my marathon times are getting faster and I'm running more miles than ever. Earlier this year I ran three marathons in 6 months (one of them was actually a 50K) and this fall I'm doing a 50K, the MMC and, hopefully, the JFK 50 Miler. I will stick to what got me to this point. That's just my experience.

Guest

32. Aug 10, 2005 11:45 AM

in response to: ventura43

I love it. I really like it. This forum captures the raw beauty of capitalism in action. This forum is all about the buck and nothing more. I had never seen the stuff on jeffgalloway.com about the supposed benefits of walk breaks before. I just checked out jeffgalloway.com for the first time. Lord, that stuff doesn't even PRETEND to be rooted in physiology, but that doesn't matter, because there are many unthinking people in the world. Man, the stuff is so obviously untrue but most people are too dumb to notice. I guess people can overlook the built in bullcrap factor...you can almost hear the author, I mean he was an OLYMPIAN, snickering as he types...and hold tight to the fact that the Galloway training method "got them to the finish." I imagine people see only that they got their medal for completing 26.2 miles and nothing else, including obvious areas their training could be improved. Hey, if you're starting from scratch, chances are good that any half *** regimen and race "strategy" will do the same. You know, if you're inexperienced, doing pretty much any "style" of training will get you from A to Z in one piece even if it takes all day. You don't know this but Galloway Productions does. Most of you have no clue but the vendor is well aware of it. On the other hand then again this says "A COMMERCIAL FORUM" and is meant as a promotional vehicle so people asking running based training questions here should not expect anything more on the house for free than what they're getting, which are posts that start with "From Jeff Galloway" and go in to include a bunch of copied cut and pasted baloney malarkey.

CSuzette

290 posts since
Apr 8, 2005

33. Aug 10, 2005 12:09 PM

in response to: ventura43

My concern is that the method seems to be a violation of the Lydiard method...the latter proven to work by several Olympians and rooted in basic physiology.

I have one of the early J. Galloway books because someone told me that he was a follower of Lydiard. Now that I am more into the physiology of running I can see that even that earliest book was not really following the teachings of Lydiard.

The increases come from running lots of miles in the "steady state" so as to put pressure on the circulatory system causing it to grow new mitochondria and capillaries.

This method would seem to not be as efficient...because just as you put sufficient pressure on the system you start walking to rest. It is possible that you even start going into reocvery during that time. So, then you start running again, but you are in a mini-recovery so that running is not as efficient and then you rest again.

If you are really slow and your pulse starts to rise above the steady state and you can't run slow enough to bring it down then you should start walking...but that is the only time.

There must be something I am missing here.

Suzette
Boston, MA

Guest

34. Aug 17, 2005 5:31 PM

in response to: ventura43

My experience:

First marathon (ran the whole way, no walk breaks): 4 hours, 49 minutes;

Second marathon (Galloway method): 4 hours, 37 minutes.

I shaved 12 minutes off my time with the Galloway method. Additionally, after the first marathon, I was very nauseous, went home and went to bed. After the second (Galloway) marathon, I went out for burritos and partied for hours.

Thank you for the Galloway method!

gallowayproductions034

8 posts since
Jul 30, 2005

35. Aug 19, 2005 3:35 PM

in response to: ventura43

quote:<HR>Originally posted by CSuzette:
My concern is that the method seems to be a violation of the Lydiard method...the latter proven to work by several Olympians and rooted in basic physiology.

I have one of the early J. Galloway books because someone told me that he was a follower of Lydiard. Now that I am more into the physiology of running I can see that even that earliest book was not really following the teachings of Lydiard.

The increases come from running lots of miles in the "steady state" so as to put pressure on the circulatory system causing it to grow new mitochondria and capillaries.

This method would seem to not be as efficient...because just as you put sufficient pressure on the system you start walking to rest. It is possible that you even start going into reocvery during that time. So, then you start running again, but you are in a mini-recovery so that running is not as efficient and then you rest again.

If you are really slow and your pulse starts to rise above the steady state and you can't run slow enough to bring it down then you should start walking...but that is the only time.

There must be something I am missing here.

Suzette
Boston, MA<HR>

I don't pretend to know the inner workings of muscle physiology. I've successfully trained over 170,000 runners using my methods--during the last 30 years. The principles work for large numbers of runners. The average time improvement when runners shift from running continuously to
taking walk breaks is 13 min faster with walk breaks. I've heard from over 100 runners who could not break 3 hours by running continuously, who all improved between 5 and 10 minutes when they used my run-walk-run method. The fastest time improvement was reported by a young guy who improved his time from 2:33 to 2:28 when he used short walk breaks every mile--his only change.

The principle we're dealing with is "conservation of energy" and is explained further in my GALLOWAY'S BOOK ON RUNNING SECOND EDITION & MARATHON YOU CAN DO IT. If you don't conserve at the beginning of a marathon, you will slow down at the end. Most of our runners either maintain pace or speed up. That is where the average 13 min of improvement comes from. It has been known for decades that if you use muscles the same way continuously, they fatigue more rapidly. This is why you can do more work in an interval workout--than from running a fast pace continuously.

By taking walk breaks, the muscles revive
themselves, and fatigue is erased instead of accumulated. This is a form of interval training, a very well established method.

zpoint2

88 posts since
Sep 27, 2003

36. Dec 27, 2007 3:15 AM

in response to: ventura43

quote:<HR>Originally posted by runningrabbit:
My experience:

First marathon (ran the whole way, no walk breaks): 4 hours, 49 minutes;

Second marathon (Galloway method): 4 hours, 37 minutes.

I shaved 12 minutes off my time with the Galloway method. Additionally, after the first marathon, I was very nauseous, went home and went to bed. After the second (Galloway) marathon, I went out for burritos and partied for hours.

Thank you for the Galloway method!

<HR>

I edited this post. I initially claimed that the Galloway
method may have slowed you down. I would expect that
a novice runner training for his/her second marathon
would expect to see a big improvement based on experience
and higher mileage alone. But since I don't know the stats
I'm reserving judgement. I'm taking an informal poll in
Basic Training.

My first marathon was 3:38 and my second was 3:02. Ran
the whole way both times.

http://This message has been edited by zpoint2 (edited Aug-19-2005).

sedentiary

52 posts since
May 3, 2005

37. Aug 21, 2005 6:44 PM

in response to: ventura43

quote:<HR>Originally posted by Dept of Redundancy Dept:
I love it. I really like it. This forum captures the raw beauty of capitalism in action...... pasted baloney malarkey.<HR>

Many participants in a marathon are in the same situation as a reasonably trained marathoner faced with a 75 mile run.
Imagine yourself in such a run. You probably would stop repeatedly to stretch yourself. You will admit that a loss of 30 seconds stretching yourself is pretty immaterial if you go such a distance.

In fact for a guy doing 3:30 on a marathon a loss of 30 seconds is not really a big deal, he might actually gain in the long run (pun intended) by briefly stretching himself once.

So maybe there is something to the method for these runners.

1 2 3 Previous Next Go to original post

New Runners

Training

Competition

Age Groups

Fitness

The Lighter Side

Feedback

Related Links