Grey is Okay

Does anaerobic running erode aerobic fitness?

Back in 2007 I wrote 'Guilty of being grey' — I confessed to being a 'grey runner' who didn't run black and white workouts (either very hard or very easy). Maffetone training is grey running, so how can it be superior to black and white training? I think, for 80% of the population, Maffetone training is the best method to improve (run faster) and stay healthy.

Many elite runners swear by black and white training, so why wouldn't a 'cut-down' version of this work for the average weekend warrior? I think the answer lies in the theory that regular lactic acid production (over time) somehow erodes aerobic fitness. There's a lot of anecdotal evidence of this — one famous 13-page thread on Letsrun.com had many examples of runners who were successful because they didn't do anaerobic interval training. Bob Hodge (2:12 marathoner) said "Most folk's never approach the pinnacle of consistent running that they can handle, therefore the intervals become 'premature withdrawals' from the bank of mileage base they try to build." Other runners reported early season PBs after a winter of steady base-building, then becoming excited and introducing interval training (to further improve their speed), only to have performances paradoxically tail off over the racing season.

I think we hobby joggers need to remember that elite distance runners are typically doing a LOT of aerobic running. Those on mixed running programmes of the type popularised by Pat Clohessy and Chris Wardlaw are running upwards of 160 kilometres per week. Less than 5% of this mileage would be lactic acid producing anaerobic running. I have a theory that the large amount of aerobic running they do is sufficient support to ward off any erosion of aerobic fitness. A 'cut down' version of this mixed training would have me doing less than 3k of interval-type training each week. Even so, would the other 57k of aerobic running be sufficient support for this breathless pain? More to the point, if all my weekly running was aerobic, as it is now (with some very short sprints and drills), would my improved fitness produce faster racing? Distance races of 5k or more, after all, are mostly reliant on aerobic energy. I found another page that takes the view that traditional 'hard/easy' training is not the best method — Re-Thinking The Hard-Easy Myth, which promotes the idea that regular repeatable daily running is the best way to develop an athlete's oxygen uptake. Pretty much Maffetone heart-rate training, but running by feel. Heart-rate monitors would come in handy to stop these kids from turning some workouts into races! In the Letsrun thread I mentioned earlier, 'dwayne pipe' recalled seeing the Lasse Viren documentary 'Running is Your Life' (on Youtube in Finnish!), in which Viren ran much of his 200 miles per week "with a heart rate in the 120's, very very slow, and he would run progressively slower if his rate continued to rise." A predecessor of Maffetone?

 10k trail ends at the grass track for short sprints on grass

Taking a look at Maffetone Training

I'm not long home from cheering on runners in the Canberra Marathon / Half / 50k races. Yesterday I raced in the feature event of the weekend — the Adidas 5k Fun Run. I had a good race! Ran strongly all the way, enjoyed some one-on-one racing with various people (mainly youngsters), caught a fast-starting Janene inside the last kilometre and recorded a respectable time — 22:46. One memorable duel was with an 8-year-old girl in pink. Caught her with about 500m to run, settled for a bit then threw in a strong surge. Thought she'd been despatched but then she came flying past with an impressive kick over the last 100 metres. All good fun!

My sister gave me a Kindle for Christmas and I've downloaded a few books, the latest being 'The Big Book of Endurance Training and Racing' by Dr. Philip Maffetone. I was impressed by Mark Cucuzzella's enthusiastic review on Amazon, summing up the book as 'The best holistic approach to endurance for life.' Mark follows Maffetone's training methods and has an impressive list of running achievements, including winning the Air Force Marathon in 2:38 at the age of 44.

I've only read 7% of the book (according to Kindle) but I'm enjoying it and think it'll serve as a good reference to guide my training. Phil Maffetone is well known for using heart-rate monitors to coach athletes. What I didn't know about is the emphasis he places on the 'holistic approach' to training. Running needs to fit into one's life in a balanced way. Stressful work and home time plus stressful training (hard interval sessions and high mileage for example) doesn't produce successful racing. The Maffetone heart-rate 'zone' is the 'fat-burning' zone and running in it is usually relaxing and not stressful. My MAF (maximum aerobic function) heart rate is calculated to be 130 (180 - my age of 55 + 5 for running history) and by feel I can tell that 130 is a good number for me. Phil Maffetone recommends that as much running as possible be done in a 10 heart-beat range up to MAF heart-rate, so my range is 120 to 130. This quite suits my 'run by feel' philosophy — 130 on flat ground equates to a pace (at the moment) of about 5:30 per kilometre. As my aerobic condition improves, my pace at HR 130 will get faster. I can run well by feel on a day to day basis too — if I've had a stressful day at work I'll do a shorter run, closer to 120 HR; if I feel good and fresh, I can run longer and/or faster and/or over a hillier course. I have a 12k 'rolling hills' trail course which seems to be ideal for building leg strength. Anyway, I'll expand on my thoughts once I've finished the book and with a few months of training in the diary.

My palindromic number for the Adidas 5k

Now that's why I like racing!

I'm still thinking about the race I ran last Tuesday — 5k on the cross-country course at Stromlo. It was the final event in the YCRC 'Summer Series' of races. For once my legs felt okay during the warm-up — they weren't springy and raring to race, but just as importantly, they weren't dead tired and lifeless. After five or six strides I lined up a couple of rows back in the field of 58 runners. Weather was about as good as it gets for summer racing in Canberra, about 14C with a light breeze.

I started my Garmin (didn't look at it during the race) and ran up the first gentle hill at what I guessed was the appropriate effort, ignoring my 'competition'. After 100 metres I noticed that Speedygeoff had bolted (an unusual tactic), keeping pace with Maria and Helen. Brian was running barefoot a few metres ahead with Phil, Charlie was behind (already) and Janene was about 20 metres up the course with Miriam. Brian was despatched after 500 metres, then I ran down the first hill in the company of Phil and Greg. At this stage (1k in) I felt like I was in control, but close to my limit. On the next uphill section Phil dropped back, followed by Greg. I wanted to race Miriam and Janene, but they were 30 metres away. Miriam is an old rival (38 for 10k as a pup and 90 for the half as a Master), while Janene is a new rival. I  gradually clawed back metre after metre during the first 2.5k lap and noticed the digital clock reading 11:18 at half way. Now that's a good split! Can I catch the two ladies?

Janene seemed to tire a little on the next hill and I managed to catch up. Miriam was a few metres ahead. On the next downhill stretch the speed came on again. I was breathing hard, pretty much at my limit, so sat behind Janene down the next hill and along the bottom of the course. I needed a rest! Would have liked to 'help out' with the pace if I could, but that would have put me into anaerobic territory. Anyway, as we raced up the next hill I managed to pass Janene, then Miriam on the flat part after the crest of the hill. After that I ran as hard as I could beside the dam for the last 700 metres to the finish. Caught Daniel with 500 to go, ran with him, but his finishing kick was stronger. Don't know what it looked like, but I felt like I was sprinting! Finished 34th in 22:41, thinking to myself "now that's why I like racing!"

Criterium and cross country course at Stromlo Forest Park

An ordinary 5000 metre race

I raced in the ACT Veterans' 5000m Championships last Thursday evening. Must say that it was exciting to line up for a 5k track race which had 22 starters. Usually 5000s are combined with a 3000 and most runners 'bail out' after seven and a half laps. My race was pretty ordinary — finished 19th in 23:07.27 — quite a bit slower than the 22:17 I ran last November. Back then I was hoping to be in 21:45 form by March, but it hasn't happened. I'm not exactly sure why. I suspect it's down to two things: My training needs to improve and my recovery needs to improve.

I'm not hugely disappointed with the race because on the previous evening's 7k jog my legs had felt 'sore all over' — I seriously considered a DNS listing for the 5000. The race ended up being a bit of a solo time-trial. Kathy sprinted off to a 10 metre lead in the first lap (she would run 22:09) — my legs just weren't feeling good enough to go with her. She'd dropped from a faster group who were running about 21-minute pace. Weather conditions weren't ideal for solo running — it was cool enough, but there was a fresh southerly breeze to push into up the home straight. I tired pretty badly in the fourth kilometre and was caught by Pete with one k to go. He just went straight past! He ran 22:53. My splits were 4:26, 4:39, 4:43, 4:45 and 4:34.

On Saturday morning I jogged in the Ginninderra 5k Parkrun. If I can ever get used to racing hard early in the morning, this event (or the Tuggeranong version) could be worth lining up for a fast 5k attempt. After the race we walked around to the local retirement village's cafe and enjoyed a coffee, cake and chat. The perfect morning!

Great prices at the retirement village cafe!

How bad do you want it?

My recent training has been okay — not exactly where I want it to be, but not too bad. I should say that the idea of taking one, two, or three rest days per week (that I talked about in Bob and Janene Recovery Days), is not one that I've taken up with fervour. I put it out there as an idea that may work well — my main problem with it is that it makes for some very large mileage days if I'm to hit the weekly and monthly kilometre totals I need to maintain (or improve) my aerobic base. I've been averaging 72k per week (45 miles), which is about my 'tipping point' — any less and my aerobic condition starts to fall away.

Recent training:
Monday - 15k of easy running with the Speedygeese.
Tuesday - 10k very easy (6:25/k) during and after the YCRC race.
Wednesday - 8k with 5k at tempo pace (5:11/k) on the grass track.
Thursday - Rest day.
Friday - 17k long run, easy effort (5:43/k).
Saturday - 10k slow Mt Ainslie trail run.
Sunday - 10k Stromlo 4 x 1k intervals: 4:55, 4:50, 4:38, 4:33.

My tempo and interval sessions have been moderate. I've been holding back quite a bit with the Stromlo intervals — my legs are too creaky early on a Sunday morning to run hard. I don't want to pull a hammy or calf. I've been running 4:30 to 5:00 for the kilometre repeats (10k to half marathon race pace), so they're not anaerobic at all.

I read an online Running Times article last week which made me think I should do more — especially in terms of mileage. It was about Sheri Piers, a 41-year-old runner from Massachusetts Maine who is training to run a sub-2:35 marathon (her PB is 2:36:59). What struck me about the story was the relentless way Piers attacks her training. She never misses a session, runs 145 to 209 kilometres per week, and fits it in around motherly duties and a full-time job. She also does some crazy-sounding sessions — like 10 x 1 mile with 1-minute rests, 22 miles on an indoor track (176 laps!) and a 24 mile long run on a treadmill. An amazing lady. However, I thought it a little sad that she intends to retire from competitive running once she can no longer improve. She said "I'm not going to be falling off the cliff. I don't want to go and run a 21-minute 5k."

Balloons at Stromlo distracted from the subject of my photo - the BMW R1200 GS

Bob and Janene Recovery Days

I run most days. Unless I'm exceedingly tired or don't have the time (I'm an afternoon runner). I like running! I've always thought that rest days are overrated — have so since around 1984. Prior to then I'd always taken Friday off (we raced Saturdays) but when I switched to running seven days a week my running suddenly improved. My 5k race times went from 19 minutes down to low 18s, then high 17s. I thought that running every day had made me faster. Well, it sort of had. Really it was the consistently higher weekly volume — my aerobic ability had improved. By running on Fridays I'd added an extra 15k per week — 100k instead of 85. "Miles make champions" Arthur Lydiard had said, and while 60 miles a week was nowhere near Arthur's recommended 100, at the time it was suiting me quite well.

It's now 2013 and I'm a (slightly) older runner and (reluctantly) happy to take a rest day if I feel I need one. However I'm not quite sure that one day off does me any good! My running on the day that follows a rest day often feels creaky and rusty. So how about two consecutive days off? I'd read Janene's blog post where she reported having two days off followed by a day of easy jogging and strides. The next morning she raced 5k in 23:16, 67 seconds faster than what she'd managed 4 weeks earlier. Wow! In my training week of 11 to 17 February I took two days off and followed up with a weekend of 'good' training — 20k on the Saturday and 19k (including 1k intervals) on Sunday. That week I still ran 76 kilometres.

I think this method of training may work quite well. Days off (or very easy jogging/cross-training days) followed by 'hardish' days. These days would contain a decent number of kilometres (15 or more) — in that way, the weekly volume I need in order to be strong aerobically could be managed. I'm taking this idea from Bob's recent training. He's been running 4 days a week (3 days off) while still running around 80k per week. Yes, that's averaging 20k on his running days (which are all 'hard') — he runs interval sessions, hill repeats, tempo runs and long runs. He's also 65 years old and training to run a 3:04 marathon at Boston!

 Think outside the bubble to improve your running. Geoff and myself looking suitably stunned following Cookie's fun-run win this morning.

Still learning

Well, that was an interesting week of training. Learned a couple of things — yes, after more than 30 years of running, I'm still learning. Had a 5k race on Tuesday, which I ended up running at 'tempo' effort. That day followed a big Monday — a tempo effort 10k 'mountain' race in the morning and 8.4k of jogging at Speedygeese training in the afternoon. The day prior to that I'd run an interval session at Stromlo, which followed a 5k 'tempo' Parkrun on the Saturday. Four hard days in a row. Am I crazy, or what?!

I rested Wednesday, 'enjoyed' an ordinary run Thursday on the grass track, a great easy run Friday (it was cool), struggled on Saturday's long (13k) run and was looking forward to the Speedygeese interval session at Stromlo this morning (another cool day). During the warm-up I plodded around at 6:25 per km pace, legs as tight as piano wires (the thick ones). Man, I was not looking forward to this! Even contemplated continuing to jog around rather than attempt something which resembled fast running. We (two girls, three boys) lined up at the top of the hill for our session of 3 x 1000 metres (700m jog back the short way recoveries). I thought "I'll start easy and see how I go."

For the first one I finished a few steps ahead of Miranda in 4:38. The rolling downhill (with some flats and ups) on the lovely spongy grass seemed to coax some life back into the legs. I ran the next kilometres in 4:15 and 4:10, followed by an unscheduled 'bonus' one in 4:29. As I jogged a slow warm-down with Geoff, Andy, Miranda and Kylie I was thinking to myself "that turned out amazingly well!" I'd completed the session more or less as planned in spite of tight legs. It was a 'gift run', as was my easy run on Friday — a day which I'd almost taken as another rest day. This week I've learned two things: interval sessions can turn out well even if the warm-up is shite, and don't do four hard training days in a row.

Kylie leads the way on the Stromlo warm-up

Keen spectators ready to observe the first 'down' of our 1k intervals

Running by feel and heart-rate monitors

I raced a disappointing 5k at the Gindy Parkrun on Saturday morning — 24:02 when I thought I could easily run a minute faster. The whole race was a struggle, so no fun at all! Training has been okay — good Speedygeese sprint relays on Monday, an introduction to 200 metre intervals on Friday and some fast (downhill) kilometre intervals on Sunday. Now those were fun — felt like I was running fast and smoothly for a change and the times backed that up: 4:12, 4:07 and 4:01. Maybe I've just been having an off week or two.

Anyone who reads my training diary will know that I habitually record a lot of data. For aerobic runs I'll record the course, time, pace, average/maximum heart-rate and the weather. Why? Well, it's useful to have a history of data for backwards comparison — I can see what sort of training I was doing when I was 'in good shape'. However, this doesn't mean (as an ageing runner) that repeating training blocks that resulted in PB times is the best way to train now.

I'm a huge advocate for running (and racing) by feel. I know how easy running should feel. The same for tempo running, intervals, sprinting, hill repeats, racing and long runs. One thing I don't do (these days) is 'heart-rate train'. When following Hadd training back in 2007 I used to stay strictly within the suggested zones for various training sessions. If my heart-rate went too high during an easy run I'd stop and walk! These days though, I'll start the Garmin prior to a run or race and not look at it until I've stopped. I run by feel and ignore the numbers. The only exception would be if I'm running a new out/back course and I'm looking for a kilometre point on the way out.

The main thing I like using post-run heart-rate data for is to work out my 'RS result' (for Robert Song who I got the idea from). The RS number is actually 'heart-beats per kilometre' — it's calculated by multiplying average heart-rate for the run by average kilometre rate (you can use heart-beats per mile too). Every week I'll do a steady run over a familiar course of 8 to 10k (often the Speedygeese warm-up) and afterwards calculate my RS number. I think it's a great way to keep an eye on one's aerobic fitness (besides racing a 10k or half marathon — which one doesn't want to be doing every week!). Each runner will have their own scale of what's great, average or below average in terms of aerobic fitness. For myself at age-55, below 690 h/beats per km is great, 715 is average and over 800 means I'm not fit!

The best place to finish a 1k interval — lowest point at Stromlo!

Assessing strengths and weaknesses

When I buy Running Times from the Erindale Newsagency I'll turn straight to the 'Masters Running' section. The website also has a good range of articles for older runners — recently I found a 'Web Exclusive' called 'Five Minutes with Malcolm Campbell'. The interview backgrounds Campbell's running history and finds out about his preparation to win the USATF National Club Cross Country title (10k in 32:47). One interesting thing about the preparation for that performance was that Campbell increased his yearly mileage to 4,000 (average of 124k per week) from the 2,500 to 3000 miles he had been running. He said that the higher level of mileage enabled him to recover faster from training and racing.

Another thing from the interview that really caught my eye was the way Campbell assesses his readiness for racing. He said "I work on improving four different systems to function as close to 100 percent as possible. These systems are endurance, recovery, speed endurance and finally speed — change of pace acceleration." I think that's a great basis for a self-assessment system for all distance runners. I'd probably add 'consistency' — the regularity of our training over weeks, months and years. I've assessed my current preparation as follows: Endurance 85%, recovery 70%, speed-endurance 75%, speed 50% and consistency 90%. How are you going? Probably better than myself in some, worse in others.

In JKK-style, my latest training:

Monday - 10.5k Speedygeese session (recovery run for me).
Tuesday - 8k, some on the grass track (easy day).
Wednesday - 10k, 3k 'easy tempo' on the grass track at 5:20/k.
Thursday - 10k long tempo run in 53:48 (warm and smoky).
Friday - 5k very easy, 3 on the grass track (recovery run).
Saturday - 15k long run progressing from 6:20 to mid 5:30 ks.
Sunday - 10.5k Speedygeeese Stromlo intervals - 4 x 1k.

 Chatting about the weather prior to Stromlo intervals

No rest days in 2012

I did something last year that I'm not sure I'll ever do again — ran every day for a minimum of 5k per day. Yes, a modest streak of running compared to 2:09 marathoner and Commonwealth Games champion Ron Hill's multi-decade running streak. I'll blame Karla and CJ for getting me started on the streak. It seemed like a fun thing to do back in November 2011! Then fellow streakers Geoff and Janene kept me honest in friendly competition.

Did I learn anything from this obsessive-compulsive-disordered craziness? Anything useful that is?! Well, a few things: It's possible to run every day and not get injured; one can run with a bad head-cold during a wet, cold winter (outdoors); a new appreciation for the secret Steve Moneghetti training session — when asked what was the best training session to improve one's running, Mona said "the 2 x 7 x 365" (run twice a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year).

With all that running (3,728 kilometres), my racing performances pretty much stayed the same throughout the year. My first 5k at Stromlo on 31 January was a 23:30 and my last on 4 December a 23:21. Between those races I ran a very pleasing road 10k at the Gold Coast — a 45:11, my fastest 10k since 2008. I didn't run the 5000m track race I think I was capable of — the 22:17.48 in November should have been 30 seconds faster. Similarly for the Melbourne Half — a 'pinched nerve' kept my finish time down to 1:44:30. I think a 1:40-41 went begging that day. Looking forward to this year, I'll continue to try and race "a good" 5k (time yet to be defined) and also chase a sub-1:40 time (and a 'victory' over Canute) for the Canberra Half in April.

Thanks all for reading and commenting on the blog over the past 12 months. I was snowed under with pre-Christmas work, followed by 'family time' during the holidays so I'm a little behind on reading and commenting on your blogs. All the best for 2013 and enjoy your running!

On boxing day the Wagga geese weren't that speedy. It was hot!