How to run as slow as Pace Calculator says?
I'm doing my Week 13 IM training plan long run simulation this week. I am supposed to take my Z1/LRP pace (10:48) and add 30 seconds to that for the first 6 miles. The problem is, I've never run that slow in my life. TBH, it doesn't even seem possible to run that slow, I feel like I'm practically jogging in place with teeny tiny steps. I don't want to over-reach or blow up or anything, but trying to achieve this in practice sessions, I feel like I have to walk part or all of each mile to hit a pace this slow. I know I'm not a fast runner, generally averaging a steady 9:50 - 10 minute miles in a HIM, but I didn't expect to be trying to hit a 10:45 - 11:15 pace in an IM.
FWIW, this pace would put me doing this IM as slow as I did the last one, and I had my big toe dislocated in the swim of that race, and spent a fair amount of time limping/hobbling along for the run. Plus I had to stop and throw up repeatedly from the Ibuprofen I (stupidly) took to keep the swelling down in my foot. I was kinda thinking I could go faster than THAT this time! I seriously can't imagine going that slow on purpose??
Practicing the slow pace, with 30 walking steps per mile the slowest I am comfortable going is about 10:30 pace, beyond that it just bogs down.
So, what to do? Running that slow (10:48 - 11:13) feels so unnatural I'm worried I'm going to hurt something with the awkward gait. So: run/walk combo? Or go at my slowest comfortable running pace and call it good? Or take extra walking breaks for the first 6 miles and then transition to my slow comfortable pace?
Comments
We will ask you to do many things on race day. This one of adding 30" per mile for the first 6 miles works and has been proven across thousands of athletes. Note that you're not going to run this pace for the whole race. After 6 miles you'll drop into to Z1/LRP pace. So, in the end, I'm asking you to give us 30" per mile for 6 miles, or a total of 3'. Just give us 3 minutes then you can do your own thing (we hope it's continue to listen to us and run LRP/Z1). But that 3 mintues will make your race.
And if it helps, if you're walking about 20-30" every mile during that first 6 miles then you actually get to run a little faster when you're actually running...but we still highly recommend you take these walking breaks with the net effect of running Z1/LRP+30" for the first 6 miles. You can use the run/walk calculator to game this out, dialing in what pace you need to see on the dial in order to net out this pace with the 30" walking breaks.
Pretty cool to see the conversations in the space shift from training to racing. What we do, as a team, very, very well is teach people how to race better than they ever have before.
Thanks Rich. I totally get the notion of the plan, and sticking to it. Have been watching the 4 keys video and all that. The main question for me is HOW. I literally cannot run an 11:15 pace. It feels so awkward. So do I run a minute, walk a minute or what to achieve this pace? Even 10:48 feels too slow to actually be running. My cadence drops so far, my feet are practically planted on the ground. I am taking teeny tiny steps, my feet start to hurt. I worry about giving myself some weird injury from running a pace that I literally never ever run at. At 10:30, which feels SLOW, it is doable as far as a jogging-Z1 feeling. But I can't seem to make that work at 10:48 - 11:15. So it's more about how to do it than why.
This is my second year with EN. Last year, I blew up on an Oly and failed to execute properly at a fall HIM. With that under my belt, I've decided that this year I will try it the prescribed way. Old habits are so hard to change. It doesn't register with me that I could run 'that slow' and end up with better a TRIATHLON time.
It's a huge leap of faith. And, once I see it happen (hopefully this year, if I can change my ways), I think I will be more confident for each race execution that follows.
Keep practicing it. Like Rich mentioned about his buildup to Wisconsin last year, he made many runs in the last 6-8 weeks where he 'rehearsed' what his run would be like on race day. I would have to think that if you practice this, even for short recovery type runs, that the mental block will lessen.
Keep us posted, cuz I'm right there with ya.
Robin, Chris, I can't recall if either of you have done an Ironman before. My own experience is a sense of wonder that, after swimming and biking for about 7 hours, when I start running at what _feels_ like an 8:30 pace is _actually_ a 9:30 pace. The only time I'm ever able to run that slow is either in an IM, or after the second race rehearsal assuming I've paced that properly. My advice is: instead of shooting for the exact (slow) pace on these long runs, focus more on just letting yourself warm up at the start of the long runs. It should feel VERY easy for the first 2-6 miles (myself, I can't go that easy any longer than about 2 mles.)
thx Al.
Great advice Al, thanks. That makes sense. I played some with my paces today on the run and came to the conclusion that anything over 10:35 is not workable for me. I get foot cramps, hamstrings start to get tight, and my knee started hurting. It's hard to hold good form at a slower jog than that. So if I want to go slower, I'll need to stick to that pace and add in some more walking to come up with a slower pace.
I have done an IM before, but I don't think my experience from it is very relevant. In a nutshell: I had my big toe dislocated in the swim and had to set it in T1 and again in T2. I spent the entire bike ride thinking I probably wouldn't be able to run. One good side-effect is that I had a very conservative bike because I was just enjoying myself, not knowing if that was all I was going to get out of the day. When I got off the bike and realized I could run, My legs felt GREAT. Far from what I expected to feel at 7 hours into a race. However, the other side effect of the toe thing is that I had taken a lot of ibuprofen and I started throwing up profusely. And then my foot started hurting again. So the marathon was kind of a pain/barf/pain/barf slog for most of it. I ended up extremely dehydrated as well and passed out after the finish line, needing a lot of IV fluids. So not a lot to go on, experience-wise
On the other hand, I have about 20 HIMs under my belt in the last couple of decades, all of which I have run between 2:06 and 2:13 for the run portion, depending on heat and hills. Generally, pacing is not a big issue for me. But again, I only have one full IM to go on and it doesn't give me much in the way of info toward future planning.
I definitely plan to start the run out feeling like I'm running as SLOW as possible and adding some walking in if I need to. I appreciate your input.
Basically, the first 6 miles should be at do no harm, I can go all day, totally hanging out and friggin' bored, when can I actually start running, oh look at all of these people hammering the firs 6 miles of the run, I'm only "giving up" 3", nothing matters until Mile 18, I don't make anything happen until Mile 18...pace
Okay, I totally get the WHY, I'm still wrestling with the HOW
I am even more confused after today's 110 minute run simulation (IM Advanced Plan, week 13)
I'm looking at my splits, and then looking at my target HR Zones and Pace Zones and it doesn't seem to be adding up. I'm below the Z1 target HR numbers, yet I'm faster than my target paces. After 110 minutes, my HR never went above 130, even at 20+ seconds per mile faster than my target Z1 pace.
I'm guessing my HR will be higher in the IM after all that biking (I can't remember what my HR data was for last IM, though I wore the monitor). I guess if I want to go slower, I'll just have to walk more.
First, my zones:
Here's my first six miles (as slow as I could possibly run, plus I added in 60 strides of walking instead of 30 for further slowness):
Target pace: 11:18:
Split HR
10:55 117
10:47 113
10:49 114
10:48 112
10:54 111
10:47 113
Then there's my next five miles, where I tried to run at a more comfortable, yet still slowish pace with 30 strides of walking:
Target Pace 10:48
Split HR
10:25 123
10:26 126
10:20 129
10:23 127
10:25 129
Although they fall faster than my official zones, all of this felt within the bounds of very comfortable, so could this be a workable pace plan for IM, given that the HR data seems to support that? Or should I just plan on walking 1 - 2 minutes per mile in the 1st six to make it match the Pace data targets?
Or maybe your VDOT in reality is higher than 34?
Robin - I think Al is on to something. When was your last running test? How did it go? Did you leave any gas in the tank or were you really spent? Did you negative split it?
I'm going to admit that I have a similar problem. In fact, I don't think I've ever actually run at my Z1 pace. All of my easy runs have been at least Z2...
That being said, I've never actually tried to run at Z1. Most of my running has been in Z2 mostly because I want to keep my paces in the 7:xx range, as opposed to 8:xx. Silly I know, but I think that's a psychological remnant of my beginner days when I was really picky about getting faster and not slowing down at all
. I've been able to get away with that for a while mostly because I race short course, but I'll definitely need to do Z1 long runs for my IM preparation (which as a matter of fact, is going to start pretty soon for me!)
So I understand that getting a good feel for Z1 pacing is crucial for IM running, but from a fitness standpoint, is there any significant difference between "easy" running done in Z1 or Z2?
And as for Anson's theory about z1 or z2, I'll take Daniels on this one. Run what is prescribed. If you want to run faster, test faster. Check your ego at door.
Wow, Tucker, that's pretty harsh words there... I
It's not about ego, believe me when it comes to running I don't have one! There's nothing like 25 years of getting out first in the water, entering T2 off the bike with the women's race leaders, and then getting smoked on the run year after year to erase any ego about my running pace.
If you read what I said below, it's that I'm struggling with HOW to run that slow, not WHY (I feel like I'm repeating myself here). 10:45 is literally as slow as I can possibly go (and that includes a minute of walking) without my running actually hurting. Something bad happens to my form at slower speeds than that and I get foot, hamstring, and knee pain. The only way for me to run slower would be to walk more.
FWIW, I can't swim slower than a 1:35 pace either. If someone told me I had to swim a race at a 1:40 pace, I couldn't do it. If I go that slow, I sink. So in any sport, for a given athlete, there's a pace at which their form breaks down and it just doesn't work. I can't extrapolate from my swimming pace to others because they have different experiences and different form. Plenty of people manage to make a 1:40 pace work for them in the pool.
I was hoping to hear from some of the slower runners (surely I'm not the slowest one here??) about how they manage their IM runs if they are 4:30-ish+ for IM paced people.
I am considering a re-test to check my zones though, thanks Al and others for suggesting that... the HR data seems to think I shouldn't be running this slow.
I like your plan of running a set comfortable pace (10:15? 10:30?) and increasing the walk portion to make sure the mile splits are appropriate. If you go to Race Central there is a spreadsheet calculator you can download to do this math. This is essentially what I have to do when, on race day, I want to run 7:15s but I am running 6:45s...I just walk longer...until my body settles in.
Hope that helps!
Thanks Coach, that is what I was looking for. I definitely want to hold good form and not injure myself, I'll check out the spreadsheet to see what I need to do walking-wise to hold appropriate intervals.
Interesting discussion here. I'm one of the slower guys and I'm struggling with a similar situation. Recently I've been exchanging pm's with William Jenks about run cadence (goal= 90+) and how does it apply to slower/taller (me) guys vs. faster shorter guys. After much discussion w/William we decided the taller guys 90 cadence will feel different (less effecient) than the shorter guys due to leg length - and that's just physics. My vDot has z1=9:59 ... IM 1st 6 mi @ 10:30. I've spent the last several months working on run form/cadence trying to achieve the elusive 90+ consistently. @ Z2 (8:30) and higher not a problem but @ z1 & IM 1st 6 it is a real chore, feels really awkward and not energy effecient (as everyone claims it should be). If I drop cadence to 86-88 - z1 & IM paces are ok. So I've come to the conclusion I'll need to accept 86-88 z1 cadence or get used to a "shuffle off to buffalo" if i want to get 90+ @ z1. I seem to have a sweet spot @ 9:00-9:30 where 90 works well and HR looks about right - but I know that is probably a recipe for disaster (and a punch in the nose from coach P) on race day.
Jeff
@Jeff, I have the same issue. While I'm not particularly tall (5'7"), I have a 32" inseam, so very long legs for my height (my bike fitter's worst nightmare, LOL). In Z1, I can hit 86, whereas I'm typically 88 - 90 in Z2 and above. I just can't make it happen at slower paces, it feels like I'm taking teeny tiny baby steps if I aim for 90 at Z1.
just to chime in a bit here, there's two points that I consider important to think about on this topic.
1) there's almost nothing you can do in training (short of the two race simulations) to mimic how you'll feel getting off the bike. So, trust that it's just going to feel different. Most people go out running too hard, and the benefit to the +30" guidelines is that you'll be thinking about that for 6 miles while everybody else is doing damage to themselves. So, don't get wrapped around the axle as to whether it's exactly 30" slower, etc. Just focus on trying to keep yourself well in check.
2) mechanics: keep your cadence up, and drop your stride length to a teeny, tiny shuffle. Focus on picking your feet up as soon as they hit the ground, and as little as possible. It will almost feel like prancing. It does feel ridiculous, but it's the correct way to do it. If you're hitting an 86 cadence in Z1 and a 90 in Z2+, then you're overstriding as you're slowing down. Practice it, as it will serve you well on race day.
Also, just to back up Tucker, you ought to frame the question as "is my Z1 pace really the slowest pace I'm capable of running, whatsoever?" I would think when put that way, the answer probably ought to be "no", since most people find themselves warming up on a cold day slower than Z1. Personal example, I'm a 8:00 Z1 runner, but am happy jogging alongside my dad at 12:00 pace. Just really short steps, that almost feel rejuvenating to the legs.
Hope that's helpful!
I'm like Mike! (always wanted to say that) I can jog slower than my Z1 and it feels good unlike Anson and Robin I guess. Not sure why but my Z1 is about same as Mike's in case absolute speed is a factor.
My Z1 cadence is about 89 (trails) or 90 roads. My open 5K cad is 97 and my 10K run during last week's Oly tri was 96 on hilly course. I'm 6'1" and have a 34.5 inseam so not sure what to make about the height/cadence ratio...
I will say that I do trust the calculators as I did cook my pacing on the bike a little in HIM Miami last year and then also went out harder than the guidelines in the first 3-4 miles of the run and I paid for it pretty severely. I will not make that mistake again at IMFL and plan on sticking to the pacing guide no matter how slow it is.
@ Mike - your point #1 - great!
#2 - not sure i want to be "prancing" around for 26.2 but i get your drift :-)
i just got back from my 100' long run - plenty of time @ 10:00-10:30 - i can hit 90 but find myself drifting back to 86-88 - takes lots of concentration to keep it high - those short strides almost seems like i'm NOT getting much "knee drive" - more like a leg swing w/not much bending of knee
i'm a believer in the EN pacing guide i'm just trying to find the best way to execute it
Yes Atilla I was wondering same thing about cadence vs VDOT. Any data out there?
Yes Jeff, agree it is hard to keep turnover high at slower than Z1. I wear a metronome set to 184 bpm to remind me to step quickly and lightly. Have you guys ever tried that? Picked it up from Evolution running.
Here is the reference chart for setting the time correctly to get to the magic 90+ cadence: http://www.finisinc.com/tempotrainerpro/TempoTrainer-Run-Cadence-Sheet.pdf
It seems that Al et al. were right on the money about retesting the VDOT. Splits just got posted from my Sprint triathlon last week (where I had a borrowed watch and didn't get my splits) and show a 5k of 24:51 for new VDOT of 39. Interestingly, this puts my Z1 at 10:22 and Z1+30 of 10:52, which is almost exactly where I felt "comfortable" on my long run pacing exercise. It seems that my body knew what it was doing, even if my brain did not
Cool Robin, nice job on the VDOT bump! I suspect it might even be a little higher if you use a time from an open 5k, as opposed to a tri run split.
I've been reading William Jenks' thread on cadence vs. velocity, and it got me thinking about the biomechanics of running at different speeds, particularly at the slower end. Now I can't say I'm any sort of expert on this, and I think this varies from person to person due to individual factors such as leg length, etc., but I think running at a "very slow" pace (whatever that may be) will generally feel a bit awkward because of the change in form involved.
Recall that speed = (cadence) x (stride length). Reducing speed means reducing one or both of those factors, and you can only reduce it so much before it feels funny. Since running is essentially a series of smoothly connected "jumps" from foot to foot, you can only slow down cadence so much before the "jumps" become jerky and disconnected (less "air time" beteen steps). Or you can keep a relatively high cadence and really reduce your stride length, which has the effect of turning your "running" into more of a shuffle. I think the net is that since running "fast" requires a good biomechanical efficiency, slowing down drastically requires you to intentionally introduce inefficiencies into your running form. So I guess it shouldn't be too surprising that it's harder to run slowly, even though it should be easy from a fitness standpoint. Your body is so ingrained into running efficiently that it's difficult to break that habit. Kind of like how you (Robin) find it difficult to swim slower than some crazily efficient speed.
Hope that makes some sense and that I'm not just making stuff up...
Most awesome! Congrats. VDOT Might be higher as I am never as fast in a tri as I am running an open 5K!
@Anson, I think you're on to something - that's how it feels to me: that at a certain pace it just becames more and more inefficient, and eventually just plain biomechanically wrong. It could be that there's something in there I could be doing better when I need to run slow, but I don't know what it is.
@Jeff, I think most people definitely see a faster open 5k time than a 5k in a tri. For some reason, that's not true for me. I've never run a 5k as fast as I can run in a triathlon (or a 10k either for that matter). Then again, I've done all my 5k's by myself on a track, so there's no competition or race "feeling" to it. It's possible that if I signed up for an actual 5k run that I could turn in a faster time. For now, I think I'll stick with the paces from the triathlon split, as they seem to work out well.
Very nice! And I would encourage you to use every remaining long run to wrap your head around Z1, Z2 paces, and walking ~30" every mile. I did a lot of modeling with Matt's run/walk calculator, my VDot paces, etc and really, really practiced this stuff on every long run. For about the last 8wks every long run was an RR for me. It was very valuable on race day.