Yesterday- I felt pretty good. I think my pains were more from the single XC race rather than mileage. The long run seemed to make my legs feel better. I jogged very lightly for 3 miles/ did elliptical for 2 miles/ aqua-jogged 2 miles. Then lifted weights for just 10:00- mainly core stuff but I like to do light weight (like I can do anything else!) leg lifts to fire the muscles and increase blood flow. Then dry sauna for 20:00 with self massage for my legs.
Kerrie asks: "I find the heart rate stuff interesting as I really know little about it...is the 10 beats below LT for marathon race pace kind of a common knowledge thing? That seems fast...or how do you arrive at those numbers? Why are you doing the majority of your long runs 15 beats or so below that?"
Kerrie- This question has books for answers but I'll try to outline the concepts as I understand them.
The 10 beats below lactate threshold is not common knowledge. The numbers I am using come from lab results that tell me at what HR I produce 2.0 mmol of lactate. This intensity is my aerobic threshold (or AeT- this is close to what Arthur Lydiard called "steady state".. this term has been around for a very long time), or the point at which I am (roughly) utilizing an equal amount of glycogen and fat. The pace at which I reach my AeT is a very trainable aspect. I need to train my body to more readily produce the enzymes that break down fat (lipids) and I do this by spending as much time at my AeT as possible. Athletes that run too hard will actually inhibit their bodies ability to use lipids and will teach their body to favor glycogen.. increasing their chance of "bonking" and limiting their endurance. This is why athletes who complete a proper periodized year need to go back and retouch their base training. My AeT HR is 165 and this is what I plan to race the marathon at. This effort is too high to train at all the time so I drop back to a HR range of 145-155 (this is closer to MAF- or max aerobic function used by Dr. Maffetone) which still stimulates my body to favor fat as fuel and still allows a higher volume of mileage. From what I understand of this concept, my goal over the next few years will be to not increase my running volume but rather increase my volume of time spent at my AeT.
Russ comments: "First off, I really admire your life view and your training ethic. I was a little surprised at you calculating mileage to get to a weekly milestone (ie 4 to get to 100). Seems to be everything you are against".
Russ- Thanks for the good word. I hope too that I surpass my expectations.
I set numerous goals each week- small daily ones and over-all big picture ones. My original goal last week was to run 140 miles. I bagged that in favor of resting. My thoughts on running just 4 miles on Sunday (to get 100) was closer to a coincidence than anything else. A 30:00-50:00 jog is nearly the ideal recovery run. If I was hurting too much to run long I was going to do a recovery run- 4-7 miles.. which would have put me at 100 by default.
BUT- I will be the very first to admit that I am OCD in regards to miles. Read back in my entries and you will see it. 100 is always going to be the "gold" standard for a beginner marathoner on my level. Talk to some "elite" marathoners and their- and soon to be my own- gold standard is the metric 200k- or ~120 miles.. I do like to be more fluid, a little more "zen" with all of this- but sometimes my obsession with "more is better" creeps back in!
Thanks for the reminder!