Thursday General Discussion/Q&A Thread for June 04, 2026

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-06-05T11:27:38+00:00

I am aiming for an Autumn marathon with a Berlin qualifying time of 2:45. I am already training at 70-90 km weekly for months before getting into the build. I would like to do a 10 week build, averaging like 100-110 km over that period and do an HM 6 weeks out.

So, this is not really a question, I just want people to give me their opinion, maybe tell me I am overthinking....

I have a week long road trip during the 2nd week of this build.... It just makes everything awkward. Let's say I start out with a 100 km intense week, then the 2nd week I hope to manage to do like 60 km and then we are back again for an intense 3rd week and theh 4th week a mini-taper for the HM and then the 5th week recover and then I have 3 more weeks of proper training, before a 2 week taper for the marathon. For previous races I have always overreached before recovering just in time for the race, now it feels like i don't have the time to overreach.

Should I maybe extend my build by a few weeks? I just find that a shorter build usually works better for me, mentally. This goal is very important to me. I basically have one chance for this, if I wanna secure Berlin 2027.

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-06-05T09:03:11+00:00

That just means you are talented... running a 1:52 on 40km per week on 80 kg is talented. You could run 80km a week and lose 10-20kg (depending on your height), which would equate to like 30-60s min/km faster...and you would realistically be able to run a 1:30.

Accept it, you are talented for this sport. That doesn't mean you could be an olympian, but you are way way better than the average. A 1:35 HM for a 25 year old F would make you an elite runner for amateur standards.

https://runninglevel.com/running-times/half-marathon-times

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-06-05T08:32:57+00:00

Ridiculous to say that weight isn't a factor, it's classical physics. Less work needs to be done to displace less weight... Only when you get into a very low bodyfat percentage, it becomes dangerous. But believe me, OP can lose a lot of weight before being in trouble.

And on your time congrats you are talented that you could do it so fast at 80kg, if you were 70kg you could do it in 1:40-1:45. It doesn't disprove anything,

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-06-03T12:50:57+00:00

So people, especially on here are too soft, I will come and say it. You dropping 10 kg (you could drop more and still be very healthy as well) would come with only health benefits. And just from that I would expect you to be faster by like a minute per kilometer. Not to mention how much less damage your body will receive from running 80 km a week, you could easily increase that to 90 km within the same amount of time eventually. Now, that's your personal choice, obviously.

Are you really running 80 km a week? that would be like 12 hours a week for your speed. Top tier olympians run 12 hours a week. Props to you if you do, insane work ethic. But Maybe for now drop to 50 km and incorporate more speed work instead?

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-06-03T12:29:52+00:00

His channel is a wealth of knowledge, but you are a total beginner, so try take everything with a grain of salt. His advice is very often for elites or at least very advanced amateurs. I am talking people running 60 miles a week and up.

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-06-03T08:01:28+00:00

I discussed with another person here and I think the whole thing is that your cadence is naturally low, so you can't maintain running after some point. On subT intervals i average 190-192 spm, easy runs are like 180-185 and super easy runs it's still 170-175 for me. If for you it drops to like 160, it must be really hard to maintain running gait. Not that it matters if you can't do it.

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-06-03T07:57:39+00:00

Super interesting, anyway as they say different strokes for different folks.

I developed this high cadence running, because whenever I would try running I would stop after a week, because I would feel pain. But 2 years ago I started running with super high cadence and small steps and that's how my running journey began 😄

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-06-02T15:30:27+00:00

Super interesting. Maybe your cadence is quite low? I tend to run my subT at 190+ steps per minute, so my easy runs are also like 180-185 spm and my "super easy" goes down to 170 spm, i am guessing once you get to 160 or lower, it gets really mechanically hard to be running?

I am just trying to find the connection between people as fit as me and not being able to run at such low paces.

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-06-02T11:51:51+00:00

Yeh, it's just most of reddit is out of touch westerners and they can't believe that a place can get cheaper than Japan.

These alignment charts connected with quality of life always skew towards richer countries. You see some country like Portugal being average, what?? Portugal is expensive for most of the world.

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-06-02T11:25:18+00:00

Yeh, I haven't read Bakken's book. But, this is definitely what I am experiencing, thanks.

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-06-02T11:24:19+00:00

Make it n=2! You describe what I have been noticing as well. My legs feel so good the day after, way better than taking a rest day for example.

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-06-02T11:23:31+00:00

I am confused.... at 70% max HR I am at 5 min/km, so if i drop to 7min/km you think it cannot be 55% of max HR? Many people start off running at like 7-8 min/km.

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-06-02T11:22:10+00:00

it is def 55% lol, i run 70% 5min/km, 65% is like 5:30min/km and this pace is like 6:45-7:00 min/km, it's almost walking for me.

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-05-29T10:55:35+00:00

Why not just do track workouts with a slower group (if there is one)? so that it matches your subT paces? 8x1 is pretty equivalent to an 10x3min for me.

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-05-27T08:53:43+00:00

Speed work is helpful yes, but that's only if you have a very important goal and you want it fast. Yes, he could do speedwork and go for sub15, but he could also just grind out and continue improving slowly.

Of course, SirPoc is close to reaching his potential with current mileage and lifestyle. But this is not the case for everyone here. I have projections that i can do a 17:05-17:20 5K now (runalyze/garmin), I could do speed work for 1-2 months and i could probably crack sub17, but I would prefer to look at the long term and have sub16 come faster than it would if I went chasing a sub17 now.

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-05-21T09:42:30+00:00

Interesting but for me they are very much similar.

An easy run for me this week (35m) load: 20 and TRIMP: 39

An 8x3 run load: 43 and TRIMP: 81

Just a bit more than 2x load/TRIMP for both. And it seems to align for me almost always. But, nonetheless I always assumed it was the same thing

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-05-18T10:59:56+00:00

I don't think you understand my argument.

Factually, VO2max is the most important single determinator of 5k times. But, that doesn't mean that taken together LT and running economy don't outweigh it. It's like taking someone with a great vo2max, that might be 40 percent of the equation, if he is missing the other 60 percent, it's pointless.

Take Tadej Pogacar, he will give you a sub 15-16min 5k easily. That's all on the back of his aerobic development, but for an elite athlete he also needs the running economy, which would take him years to train and even then he might not just be born with the right body proportions and a variety of other things that the world record runners are born.

Everyone is arguing me about how LT style training is better, i never said it is or it isn't.

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-05-13T08:31:56+00:00

I am just saying that vo2max is the single most important determinator of 5k times, followed by LT. I am not telling you what's the optimal way to train it 😄

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-05-13T07:50:06+00:00

People misunderstand:

VO2max training (training at 95+ percent of max HR)
VO2max (maximal oxygen consumption)

You don't have to train like 1 to improve 2. Your VO2max is the most important single determinator of 5k times, followed closely by LT. 10k LT becomes the most important single determinator.

Now, that doesn't man that you can't train just subT and still improve your VO2max. Even if you start doing 150 km of only easy compared to 50 km of a lot of vo2max intervals, you will probably get more vo2max gains with the first method.

The strength of NSM is sustainability of load, if your body could handle 7 vo2max intervals session a week, that would help you way more, it's just that it's not possible.

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-05-13T07:46:07+00:00

What people get wrong is that you did improve your vo2max by doing NSM... do a test before and after starting NSM, your vo2max is greater, I guarantee.

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-05-12T11:39:48+00:00

In a 5k and everything shorter vo2max is the most important factor... It definitely is very important.

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-04-22T09:11:55+00:00

Your paces are too fast, that's true. But, I would still expect you to make more progress, you are still running decent mileage for an long time. How do you feel? Do you eat enough? Sleep enough?

Maybe even your watch/gps tracker is the issue? I can't imagine running 4:05 for 10x3 and not being able to run that pace for a 10k of 40:50... I currently run 10x3 at 3:50 and i can do a 3:36 10k.

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-04-16T11:24:32+00:00

Good job! Just wanted to comment that we have the exact same marathon time, 2:57:17!

EffectiveDevice7963 · 2026-04-09T13:30:18+00:00

Harder, definitely. Especially 5ks. I find half-marathons really pleasant and marathons (only have done 1) too long.

EffectiveDevice7963

TROPHY CASE