A really great long run, and no water

Welcome! Forums Running Forum A really great long run, and no water

This topic contains 13 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by  finnegan 15 years, 2 months ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #1178

    randys
    Participant

    Yesterday I ran a 20 mile long run. I often break longer runs (18-24 miles) into 2 loops so I can drink water between each.

    In the winter I often run a first loop of 16 miles but yesterday I felt good and figured I would do another 2 miles before stopping. After that, with only 2 left and still felling good, I just knocked off the last 2 as well.

    Thats the longest run I’ve done without drinking any fluids. Yet, under yesterdays weather conditions it was not hard at all. In fact my pace was somewhat faster then planned (2:42, planned for 2:44) with my fastest pace over the last 6 miles.

    I have never understood all the posting I read of runners pratically gearing up for camping trips when doing runs under an hour. Sometimes less than 30 minutes.

    I even read postings complaining of no on course water (and gels) in 5k’s. Or asking how many gels are needed to finish a half. Maybe it comes from reading too many articles in ‘Runners World’ magazine.

    I also discovered how wonderful ‘vasoline’ works on the face when running in windy winter conditions. In winter running I am always far more bothered by wind then cold. I can always add or remove layers but my face always gets an almost sun-burned feel to it from the wind. I have tried face masks but those are better suited to skiers than runners. I read about vasoline on another forum and tried it yesterday. It worked great. I recommend it highly to anyone running in the cold. It not only stopped the ‘wind burn’ feel but kept my face warmer too.

    Randy

  • #13303

    Jeff
    Member

    How warm did the vaseline keep your face? I ask because I’m always trying to find a better way to keep the face warm. I use a face mask now and it is too restricting. I mean at what temp/windchill would you say?

    I like to have something to drink on my longer runs. If nothing else I use it to wash the snot or phlem or what ever that stuff is that collects in the back of my throat, down.

    Jeff

  • #13304

    randys
    Participant

    At the start of the run it was about 8-9 degrees and by the end it warmed up to the low 20’s. Winds were 10-15 mph at the start but increased by the end. Probably to about 20-25 mph.

    I put a lite layer of vasoline over the face. No different then what I would do if I was using it for chaffing. It took the ‘sting’ out of the wind and I felt pretty comfortable.

    Some of my comfort may have been the joy of simply being off the dreadmill. (These past 2 weeks I spent more days on the mill then the roads).

    And after running anf cleaning up my face was’nt dried out and red like it usually is after a cold windy run.

  • #13305

    Ryan
    Keymaster
    RandyS wrote:
    I have never understood all the posting I read of runners pratically gearing up for camping trips when doing runs under an hour. Sometimes less than 30 minutes.

    I even read postings complaining of no on course water (and gels) in 5k’s. Or asking how many gels are needed to finish a half. Maybe it comes from reading too many articles in ‘Runners World’ magazine.

    I’ve done similar runs and had similar experiences with them. In fact, in 2002, I was doing 30 mile training runs in the heat of July and August with only two stops for drinks, at 10 and 20 miles. No problems at all.

    It always blows my mind how dependant people become on fluids or fuel every X or Y minutes. It’s like some people pack a picnic and strap it to their waist just to do a 1:30-2:00 run. When I say that’s not necessary, I get people criticizing me and telling me that I should not run for more than 30-60 minutes without taking in fluids. They actually tell me that I’m hurting my training by not taking in fluids every time I run for over 30 minutes. Well, then why am I an hour or more faster than you in the marathon?

    Let’s be realistic. Am I to believe that the elites are stashing food and fluids or strapping picnics to their backs every time they run for an hour or more? I highly doubt there are water fountains every 2-3 miles in the Rift Valley and, even if there were, I doubt those who run in the Kenyan training camps would be stopping at every one along the way. It’s not going to kill you to run for an hour or 2 without fluids. If you’re well hydrated ahead of time and you rehydrate well afterward, it’s not the end of the world.

    Oh well, if they want, those people can keep spending 30 minutes preparing their food and fluids for every 60 minute run they do. Instead, I’ll just go out and get in a 90 minute run during that time and drink a bunch of water during the rest of the day.

  • #13306

    Peter
    Member

    Couldn’t have said it better myself.

    When I trained for Lakefront last summer, I did make it a point to run my long runs (12+ miles) with accessible liquids every 2 miles or so, b/c that’s what Milwaukee had available. Still, it was 1-2 water bottles that I took a swig or two from, and then put down. I sure didn’t obsess over it.

    Anything up to 90 minutes and I don’t even think about drinking. Besides, I usually have to pee like a racehorse if I drink too much. Plus, the one time I experimented with a water/fanny pack, I did not enjoy the sloshing.

    How’s your running going Ryan? I just took 15 days off and feel refreshed starting back up now. I had a 12-15 month base build up before Lakefront, and plan on using the same approach for Boston 2005. I may even incorporate some of pski’s workouts 😛 Take care…

    -Peter

  • #13307

    Ryan
    Keymaster

    Every time I try to get a footing on building up again, I seem to get sick. I don’t know what it is with me but I seemed to spend every other week in January sick. Hopefully, February will be better. I’m healthy right now after logging an impressive 28 miles while sick last week. Now, the only issue is the crappy snow I’m running on from work that seems to be making me work very hard just to run 30 seconds per mile slower than usual. Oh well, still good workouts, the mileage just doesn’t quite reflect the work put forth. In the end the race times will, though, and that’s what matters.

    The plan right now for me is similar to yours. I’m looking to repeat past success by modeling 2004 after 2002 with a few tweaks. Still debating between Lakefront and Chicago but leaning toward Chicago in order to have the help of a faster field to pull me along to a fast time, as well as having the weather variable not be as big of a factor with the loop course that is pretty well sheltered most of the way.

  • #13308

    Zeke
    Member

    Oh well, still good workouts, the mileage just doesn’t quite reflect the work put forth.

    Anyone every log their mileage based on “effort” rather than “pace” when it comes to running in sloppy conditions?

    For example, say you normally run 10 miles in 80 minutes. You get a foot of snow dumped on you and now the same time and effort only nets you 8 miles. “Technically” speaking, couldn’t you put 10 miles in your log book? I’d rather see someone do that than struggle thru 10 miles because you “gotta get your mileage in.”

    It’s similar to what the Badgers do for recording their Badger miles. They calculate all their easy mileage off of 7:00 pace, even if they may be running closer to 6:00.

  • #13309

    Double
    Member

    My Badger miles are 9:00/8:00. Let’s see who can go the whole winter w/o getting in a 6:00 mile.

  • #13310

    Ryan
    Keymaster
    Zeke wrote:

    Oh well, still good workouts, the mileage just doesn’t quite reflect the work put forth.

    Anyone every log their mileage based on “effort” rather than “pace” when it comes to running in sloppy conditions?

    For example, say you normally run 10 miles in 80 minutes. You get a foot of snow dumped on you and now the same time and effort only nets you 8 miles. “Technically” speaking, couldn’t you put 10 miles in your log book? I’d rather see someone do that than struggle thru 10 miles because you “gotta get your mileage in.”

    Nope, I log the distance covered and note in my log if the effort was greater. For example, the snow was much worse today. I ran 6 miles in 47:35 and it was a hard effort. Far from the effort that the near 8:00/mile pace would suggest. The time and effort would suggest at least 7 miles but it’s going in my log as 6 miles with a note that the snow was total crap.

    I figure I have to get the time and effort in. The mileage is just an arbitrary number that will take care of itself. In a way, you could say I use “Badger Miles” at times. However, on days like today, I just accept the conditions I’m running in and take the slower pace for what it is: a good run with bad footing.

  • #13311

    randys
    Participant

    I agree with Ryan; time and effort; they are the key elements of a training run. A training run of 90 minutes, at an easy pace, seems a better definition of what a ‘mid-week medium long run’ is than to say its xx miles.

    A fast runner might knock off 15 or more miles in the time a slower one might only do 10 or less. Both ran at an ‘easy’ pace, relative to there own ability, and both put in 90 minutes.

    So, if this makes any sense why do so few training schedules, books and coachs speak in these terms?

    It seems the slower guy, trying to follow a schedule calling for a 15 mile medium long run, may have to put in over 2 hours where what is intended is 90 minutes at that effort level. Over time this ‘extra’ effort has to hurt the slower runner and to take its toll the next day he needs to do a quality workout and is too beat up to do it well.

    The answer to my question comes down to the race. If the training is preparing you to race then on race day, fast or slow, we all have to cover the same distance. Training by time will leave the slower runner under-prepared for the distance.

    The slower runner needs to strike a balance between blindly following a schedule with stated milage and learning to adjust it for their ability.

    Randy

  • #13312

    Ryan
    Keymaster

    Randy, good job answering your own question. I was ready to answer that in the exact way you did. A 4+ or 5+ hour marathoner following the training of a 3- hour marathoner by time is going to be going too short to be prepared to cover the distance.

  • #13313

    Zeke
    Member

    Randy,

    I agree with what you are saying, but you’re comparing runner X to runner Y. I’m talking about comparing runner X in good conditions to runner X in poor conditions. I think too many people (myself included) say I have to run 10 miles today – even though the footing is terrible and it’s going to take me 20 minutes more than normal. So even though I ran 10 miles, it was more like a 12 mile run and maybe I’m not ready for that.

    I just had breakfast with a guy at work and he said he did 12 miles on Tuesday (after getting a foot of snow the previous 2 days) in 1:50. That’s about 1:00/mile slower than normal. It’s not a big deal, just thought it’d be interesting to discuss. Sometimes we’re a slave to our log books and getting our mileage in.

    Why do so few training schedules, books and coachs speak in these terms?

    Doesn’t Daniels speak in these terms in his book? Although he does say that marathoners don’t really need to run over 2.5 hours for their long run. That’s great for sub-3 types, but the 4-5 hour types are going to be undertrained. That’s why you have to use the schedules in the books as a guide, especially as you gain more and more experience.

  • #13314

    Jeff
    Member

    What if I go out for a 10 mile run and most of it is with the wind. Let’s say I got done 10-15 minutes early than usual. Do I log 8 miles instead of 10?

    It would have to work both ways wouldn’t it?

    Jeff

  • #13315

    finnegan
    Member

    I learned my lesson about what Randy and Hillrunner were talking about above in regards to mileage vs. time running. I run most of my miles slow, log everthing as 10 min/miles even when i do some around 8-9 mm. 140 mpw takes Miles probably 15-16 hours, it would take me the equiviannt of a full time job to do 140mpw, so I figure if I log 10-12 hours, that’s a good week for me, and my body feels it. If I chase mileage totals I’m not really listening to the body, and I end up with problems.

    I’m also lazy and adding up 10 min miles is alot easier. Hours run X 6 = weekly mileage.

    It also helps when I get the “how many miles do you run a day?” from non runners, I just tell them “about 10-12 hours per week.” When they get that confused look on their face I know it is time to go get another beer.

    I figure whenever I get to the point where I’m doing everything under 9 min then I’ll start recalcualting my mileage and devise a whole new complex formula for calculating my miles. 😉

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.