Long Run Pace

Question for you all: How much slower than marathon pace do you really run your long runs?

I've always been one to run their long runs too fast i.e. too close to my marathon pace than the possibly "magic" 1-1:30 min slower. However, this winter mostly due to the weather (lots of snow covered roads, trails, and sidewalks) and coming back from injury and minor surgery, I'm running my long runs at closer to 2 min slower than my goal MP. Case in point - the group ran 21 miles yesterday on the local paved trail with some hills that was covered by 2" of snow, in the snow, and in 24F temps. The run was very easy, felt great and easy (my HR was at about 60% the whole run), and it turned out to be an average of 10:32 per mile. We did negative split the run by 7 min which is positive since even though it is out and back, the hills are a tougher climb/easier down on the way back. Obviously, I'd love to be able to run a sub-4 marathon in April, but I'll honestly admit that I've never run long runs at this slow a pace.

I know that many elite runners (including my 2:18 chiro friend here in Cleveland) run their long and easy runs significantly slower than their 5 or sub-5 min pace and a wonderful recent article in Running Times about running with the elites indicated that the author learned to slow down significantly after spending a few days training with elites over a race weekend trip that he won. Leo runs most of his longer runs at 7-7:30 pace since he does a lot of them with his wife (who will run only 10-12 miles of his 21-23). But does it work for a journeyman runner like me?

So what do you guys think??? Does it or has it worked for you? Remember I am also adding in some speedwork, pace and tempo runs in the mix, so I'm not running everything at 10-11 min pace only the long and recovery runs.

I have found that I'm more likely to stick to the minute plus slower than MP on my long runs when I'm running higher mileage. The two cycles that I did when Dave was coaching me, this was definitely true. I was shooting for 7:24 and 7:08 paces in those two marathons and my long run pace didn't drop below 8:20 and 8:00 until the very end of both cycles. If I'm not running quite that high of a mileage per week, the long run pace does tend to get a bit quicker. I think the biggest risk, for me anyway, is the potential for over training/injury and I think you're probably in about the same boat.

Since your workouts are pretty well rounded, I wouldn't be concerned about slowing them down a bit. Honestly, you're going to end up spending a bit more time on your feet if you slow down and may have a little more juice in the legs for quality workouts. Knowing how much long runs beat you (and me) up, slowing down may be a key to not feeling wrecked after them. I know I was stiff but not sore after the one full marathon I pace in 4:10 and then ran 3:31 4 weeks later in a sweltering Chicago race.

I have always consistently ran my long runs about 1 minute to 1 minute and 15 seconds slower than my marathon pace ended up being. Right now though, I seem to be running my long runs more like 30-45 seconds slower than my planned pace. That simply feels like the correct slow pace for me right now. I'm hoping that means I can actually go faster than I think for my next marathon, but i kind of doubt it. I think it is just a function of my miles being lower right now and it being cold outside.

Michelle -- I was hesitant to respond when you have so much more experience . . . I feel I've run two marathons well. The first decades ago. My long runs were run by feel and I didn't have a defined marathon pace goal. I would run out and back -- running as far as I thought I could go and make it back. Not helpful except to make the point that perhaps we over think this stuff.

The second was 3(?) years ago. Lots of pace change including running the long runs @ 1 minute slower than goal -- but with a number of near tempo pace miles mixed in. So the slow was slow but there was a lot of change of pace mixed in.

Good luck.

Michele:
I generally run most (75%) long runs 7:50~8:10 (with friends); the other (25%) long runs 7:00 (by myself).
So, 75% at +1:30 and 25% at +0:30 per mile.

Michele, first, we have to take weather out of the equation as when it heats up, the long runs slow down dramatically.

What I've found over the past 2-3 years as I've tried to follow more advanced plans from Greg McMillan, Brad Hudson and Jack Daniels, is that the long runs are getting faster and faster, especially with the McMillan plans. But I recall the Daniels plan actually mixing tempo intervals in the long run that I just couldn't handle. I would say they go on the faster long run side. Still it's hard to refute it when I look at my marathon times over those years as they have definitely come down.

Now though, while recovering from an injury, I am finding myself going slower than those plans. part of it is loss of conditioning, part is trying to use a Hansens' type plan where they have you do about 1 minute slower than MP for long runs and every other week their long run is 1-2 minutes slower than MP. I kind of like this but Boston won't be a good view of whether this makes a difference since our training cycles are somewhat abbreviated.

So bottom line, I think if you are doing the slower long runs like this, you should ensure your speed work and tempo runs are top notch. Fast finish long runs or fast long runs in general will tire you out more and not allow as much quality on the other runs. So doing slower long runs should provide more strength/stamina to hammer the speed/tempo runs.

Ran 16 at 9:30 recovery pace today due to my old man issues and felt great after, but still got some benefit. A lot of it was dodging ice patches and mud while running on crunchy snow to avoid concrete and asphalt where possible. I normally go 8:00-8:30 which is about 1:00-1:30 over MP. I ran all my long runs @7:30 for my 1st marathon which turned out to be 4 seconds over my eventual marathon pace 4 years ago. hah!

Doesn't matter, you can always claim you are a sub 3 marathoner and even Jerry couldn't beat you.

I read Joe Henderson's LSD The Human Way to Train and Ryan Hall's Running with Joy(it has Hall's 12 weeks training to Boston 2009). We all heard how slow elites run their easy runs. But reading the books, I am still shocked with Hall running 7-8 minutes pace for his easy runs.

Personally it works for me, not because my past success, but also I can simply feel it. Having said that, I am still trying to train a little faster. We will see how I do. My point is a runner at your caliber should know your body well and makes the right adjustment for yourself. Just trust your instinct. You will do great.

Another shocking factor I read Hall's training is it is so simple. Jerry feels very encouraged.

Stan's comments in his race report made me wonder about the paces and mileage during training. Kind of pointing to this post and just other training in general. It is funny that he mentioned that he easily ran 12 at pace a few weeks back, but never really got in that groove in the race. I think this happens a lot, but I've never really been able to nail what to attribute it to. Back when I was young, I ran everything at the same pace basically since I really didn't know what I was doing and there were no real plans (just ask the elites like Bill Rodgers or read Salazar's book). I know that I cannot handle the higher mileage, so I'm guessing I and maybe we all just need to account for age, ability, weather and fitness when we race. I'm just puzzled as I see many of us make similar missteps as Stan did (I know I do all the time missing times that my training points to, so now I simply back off when it comes to the marathon distance in my expectations no matter my fitness level or training miles). I dunno, probably putting way too much thought into this, and I'll blame my slower long run paces of late simply on running in and on the snow for 98% of them.

Michele "1L" Keane wrote:Stan's comments in his race report made me wonder about the paces and mileage during training. Kind of pointing to this post and just other training in general. It is funny that he mentioned that he easily ran 12 at pace a few weeks back, but never really got in that groove in the race. I think this happens a lot, but I've never really been able to nail what to attribute it to.

I always believed in this and was very glad to read it in Joe's LSD book.

Running slow gives me an extra excitement in race cause I was so fast. I think racing less works for the same reason.

Think about it, training is like marriage,.........boring.
Race is like dating or having an affair......

I think the comment made about high mileage is what's key. If you're running a lot of miles, running slower is almost necessary in order to not overtrain and miss your peak.

Personally, I'll stay within a +30 to +90 second range for most of mine. Usually all of them are somewhat of a progressive run, with the first 4-5mi being +90sec and the last 4-5mi being +30 to +45sec. Except the last 20, which is broken into 10@+75(ish) and 10@MP.

It's worked for me with my very limited experience.

I found this on line to confirm the slower paced running

http://bobbymcgee.com/running-tips-going-fast-through-going-slow/

I've finished 8 marathons, and my training has been all over the board with the pace of my long runs. Some cycles I ran the long runs way too fast (especially the second one) and some I ran them quite slowly. Based on that data, unfortunately I cannot synethesize an answer to your question that makes sense.

But if you figure it out definitively, I'm dying to know!

Obviously you are capable of a much faster marathon than four hours, and that probably influenced your previous training. Based on your target, you seem to be doing about the right long-run pace. I usually base my long runs on 1:00 to 1:30 slower than what I should have liked to think I could have done five years ago. Mine is a bad policy.

But 10:30 for you? Good training, but the view or the conversation must be great. I'm just too impatient, but your combination of slow long runs and speedwork seems the right approach. I'm surprised you asked

I have always adhered to the 10-20% slower than MP rule. I generally start at 20% slower and gradually work my way down. I think that puts you at the right heart rate and effort level to get the intended benefit of the long run.

As others have said, though, it also depends on the rest of your week. If you do a tempo or pace run the day before a long run, your pace on the long run will likely be 20-25% slower than MP. And that's fine, since you're running on fatigued legs.

Chris Coleman wrote:Obviously you are capable of a much faster marathon than four hours, and that probably influenced your previous training. Based on your target, you seem to be doing about the right long-run pace. I usually base my long runs on 1:00 to 1:30 slower than what I should have liked to think I could have done five years ago. Mine is a bad policy.

But 10:30 for you? Good training, but the view or the conversation must be great. I'm just too impatient, but your combination of slow long runs and speedwork seems the right approach. I'm surprised you asked

Chris - I asked because I've always thought that I might be running my long runs too fast, but I have nothing to really compare that too other than what I read or to see what experience others have. You are right in stating that I can run a faster marathon than 4 hrs and I hope to again in the Fall, but coming off injury and surgery, I may have actually finally learned not to kill myself in the rebound process.

Personally not a fan of basing anything off of 'marathon pace'. You know what marathon pace is? It's what I run during the race. Outside of that, it has little meaning. So what does have meaning? Effort.

Long runs, to me, are just building a bigger aerobic engine. I don't worry much about pace. If I can do them 'easy' with maybe a little 'moderate' in there I'm fine with it. It's also very fluid depending on all of the other variables. What did I run earlier in the week, or yesterday, or this morning? What am I thinking I'll be running the rest of the week, or tomorrow, or later today?

A 20 mile run feels very different when it's at the end of a 100 mile week, versus a 50 mile week. I may run as slow as 10s or as fast as 8s, depending, but no faster.

I haven't weighed in on this because my low HR training approach would pretty obviously suggest what I'd say.

Still... I never can shut up about this, so here's my take.

I do my standard long runs (not 3/1s) at my target heart rate. Since I see the goal of long runs as supercharging aerobic capacity, I don't want to push those runs too hard and end up defeating the purpose of adapting myself to build mitochondria and burn fat more efficiently. That means I end up slowing a bit as the run progresses and fatigue begins to accumulate - because I try to keep the effort level constant. The more long runs I do, the longer it takes before those paces start to fall off at the low heart rate. I see that as progress.

When I did 3/1 long runs, I'd do the first 15 miles of a 20 miler at my low heart rate level, then pick it up to close to my anticipated marathon heart rate level for the final 5. I don't know how much of a conditioning effect it had, but it was a great confidence builder that showed me that I can pick up the pace and run faster, at a higher level of intensity, even off a nearly pure endurance base.

The takeaway for you is that you needn't worry too much about pegging long run pace to marathon pace. It's not that they should be slow jogs, but they need to be easy enough to let your body adapt aerobically.

I know this isn't supposed to matter, but the slower my training runs, the slower I get in races. It's probably just mental (i.e. I get "used" to the slower pace), but for me it's a reality. On the flip side, I didn't crash in the 2nd marathon where I trained slower and I did in the first where my longer runs were probably too fast (30-45 seconds slower than intended MP at about 9 min pace).

Of course, it may have been that I actually did get slower. That's sad to accept though.

I employ a range of paces for my long runs.

The 'easy' long runs tend to stay in the 60-90 sec slower than goal pace range.

But after reading more about elite's training from Canova he likes to do at least a few long runs (up to 18 miles) at only 5-10% slower than goal pace. I tried it last training cycle and thought it was a good way to challenge myself in a very specific way to what it will feel like in a marathon.

Then there is also the few long runs where I'll try to do a significant portion at race pace (up to 15-16 if possible - though rarely can I hit this) plus 2-3 min warm up (at +90-60 sec) and cooldown.

Then there is also the 20 mile long run at ~+60 sec with 10 x 90 sec 'surges' every mile at race pace from mile 10-19.

So I really believe there is no such thing as one type of long run pace. You need to figure out what you are trying to get out of the run then decide on what the best pace should be. Then adapt during the run depending on how things are going.

Once a long run becomes relatively easy, I will start including progressive tempos within the long run, e.g. 3:1 fast finishes, 2x3 or 2x4 miles at anything from HMP to MP, and so on.

There's really no point in running the long run much slower than marathon pace once you can run 18-22 miles easy pace and be able to feel decent the next day.

Of course, much of this depends on what you do the rest of the week. Most of my week during marathon training consists of progressive runs down to MP plus 30 seconds and only one day of intervals.

Michele, you are doing speedwork during the week and just ramping up your long runs; so you should be fine. You also have the experience to prove it.

My long run pace depends if I'm running my myself or if I'm running with a group. Running my myself the pace is usually in the + 60 - 90 second range. If I'm running with a group then it depends on the speed of the group. Typically I run with a slower group that makes my long run pace in the +120 range and then other times I'm with a fast group that may push the pace under the +60 second range a bit. I would say that I usually fall in Hal guidelines of +60 - 90 seconds or more slower than MP.

Of cause, there are times when I run a fast finish long run but that is a different animal.

Thanks so much for all the input and as I expected it varies all over the place. I think I'm on the right track since I am still in comeback mode, and the easy 20 pace made my "speed" session on Tuesday night seem almost pedestrian because my legs were fully recovered.

It is supposed to be over 30F this Saturday morning and we've only received snow showers this week - so nothing stuck (to be missed again in this part of Ohio was/is awesome!). I'm expecting this to be a quicker pace; however, the schedule calls for 16 long run and then 10 pace the next day.

This is a good topic. I personally have always done them, excluding fast finishes, in the 60-90sec above range. However this cycle I've been running them a bit faster. I have such a big disconnect between my Half and Full time that I questioned myself if part of the reason was I wasn't running my longs fast enough.

I also wonder if the distance itself should be a factor for the pace. Does it make sense to slow it down a bit once you start hitting 20 because too many of those will end up beating you up too much if you run them too fast. Also, when does the point of diminishing returns start to come into play as well.

Great thread.

Interesting Alex - I'm curious how this turns out. As we all know, we are an experiment of one, and I have a 20 min disconnect usually between my half and full times when I'm in optimum shape (I'm betting right now they will correlate much better). I often wondered if my running the long runs too fast and leaving it in training was my issue. When I have been able to run more miles (without going off into the abyss), I've had better success (like last year when I was very fit and actually cruised through very hot Boston in a time that I would pray for today). Keep us posted!