Plateau in Run Results
I just did my 5k run test, closing out my Get Faster Plan which followed a November OS plan. I am a bit disappointed with my results and feel like my run has so we hat plateaued.
I'm 43 years old and have been running consistantly for the past 3 years. I've seem a lot of improvement over that time, and in Oct I had a great pr in a half mary - 1:36. The OS started a few weeks later and I tested a 5k running a 20:05, bringing my VDOT to 49 (from a 48 of where I was previously). I've been very good about following my wko's, and rarely miss them. Also, I usually do not have problems hitting my prescribed intervals.
Today I tested and really struggled to finished in 20:20, not matching my test from the beginning of the Nov OS of 20:05 on same run route. My pacing was not optimal. My splits got slower as I progressed: 6:31, 6:35, 6:40. Heart rate was higher than normal....not sure why or if this was a factor?
I realize that 1 day does not mean much, but since that test dating back 6 months ago, I've tested a few times with similar results. These are not actual races and I understand that it's tough to test solo, but I've done many of these and just feel a bit stale in terms of results.
My question is, do I drop my VDOT back to 48 as my test reflects? And, for all of you that have been running many years, is this normal to plateau? Or, am I just getting too old to improve?
I'm 43 years old and have been running consistantly for the past 3 years. I've seem a lot of improvement over that time, and in Oct I had a great pr in a half mary - 1:36. The OS started a few weeks later and I tested a 5k running a 20:05, bringing my VDOT to 49 (from a 48 of where I was previously). I've been very good about following my wko's, and rarely miss them. Also, I usually do not have problems hitting my prescribed intervals.
Today I tested and really struggled to finished in 20:20, not matching my test from the beginning of the Nov OS of 20:05 on same run route. My pacing was not optimal. My splits got slower as I progressed: 6:31, 6:35, 6:40. Heart rate was higher than normal....not sure why or if this was a factor?
I realize that 1 day does not mean much, but since that test dating back 6 months ago, I've tested a few times with similar results. These are not actual races and I understand that it's tough to test solo, but I've done many of these and just feel a bit stale in terms of results.
My question is, do I drop my VDOT back to 48 as my test reflects? And, for all of you that have been running many years, is this normal to plateau? Or, am I just getting too old to improve?
0
Comments
I find there are three phases I notice:
- "getting back in shape", i.e., back to my baseline within ~1 VDOT of my "normal" racing range at 5K
- extending that 5K VDOT out to longer distances (e.g., for a half marathon while training for HIM or for an open half marathon or marathon)
- "getting better"
The first two or three cycles, you almost don't notice the first of these phases because you're still getting closer to your maximum potential in big leaps. In other words, if you've never run a 21 minute 5K then maybe in season 1 you struggle to get to 20:30...then in season 2, you get to 19:45, then in season 3 you get to 19:15 after noticing when you hit that 19:45 range...and then in season 4 you kill yourself trying to get to sub 19 and may or may not make it. (Actually, this describes me pretty well...)
So that's linking phases 1 and 3... Phase 1 only becomes noticeable after you've done this a couple of times....because in the first couple cycles, you're just getting so much better.
Phase 1 and/or 3 is what we generally do in OS, then try to do Phase 2 in a Get Faster or HIM plan, or maybe the last few weeks of OS if you're planning on a 13.1 race.
If this sounds like you, I think all we are finding is that when you near that "genetic potential plateau", it gets a lot harder to get faster. It certainly gets harder to stay super fast at all distances. You almost have to choose. (The same is true for bike power, in my experience, BTW.)
Another anecdote: I'm running Boston in a couple of weeks. 6-8 weeks ago, I KNOW I could have gone under 19 min for 5K. I did a couple of sub-40 10K in workouts. But now that I've shifted out to lots of long runs, I am still sure I could set a 5K PR, but I don't think it would be as fast as it was even those 6-8 weeks ago. But, on the other hand, I'm going to run a marathon in a couple weeks, and that's what I'm trying to peak for now.
So, I don't like the term "rut"; but I recognize that if I want to set any PRs these days, I have to focus completely on that distance...I'm just too close to the upper bounds of what I can do any more for it to be otherwise. I hope that you've got a bit more room left than me, but this is a bit of a reality for us 40-sometthings once we have been in the game for a while.
Prof Jenks gives a good outline of what to expect. My experience was similar. Never ran a step until age 50, then began getting "PRs" (who know what I would have done when younger) quite easily for the first 3-4 years, finally getting to 20:07 for 5K @ age 55. Stuck there for 3-4 years, then inexorably started to slide after age 58.
So there is the issue of chronological age, as well as "training age". Anyone, no matter how old, or how young, will see improvement during the first 5 years +/- of structured training. Then, any gains will be micro incremental, and, after age 37 or so, actual age will start to take its toll, once you've maxed out your current potential after those first 5 years or so.
By structured training, Im talking about using tempo runs and fast interval runs as a routine part of your running program. Folks who have "jogged" for years, never gone hard or fast before, should consider themselves at year "0" when they start the kind of stuff we do during more disciplined training.
OK, I can see that. I've been doing the marathon hack the past 10 weeks along with the OS, and while it does have a lot of "speed" work - e.g., last weeks track session was 4 x (1200, 400, 2x200) @ TP, which is 8K worth of "fast" stuff - it didn't seem to me like it was geared to getting faster at the top end, like for a 5K. More like building strength for the end of a marathon.
I could see it being helpful for a 10 K or a half marathon, but not for a 5K.
As Jenks said, if you've been running with intention for a few years, you really won't see improvement in race times unless you train specifically for that distance, Getting faster @ 5K is different than the "speed" stuff we do in the OS or for a marathon. More sessions, less long runs with tempo, and shorter intervals at faster speeds, faster even than 5K pace. The coaches call it "getting faster" but I see it as getting faster for one hour time trials in biking and running, not getting faster for 20 minute TTs, which is a 5K. We then are expected to translate that "fast" into sustained speed for 2-6 hours.