Group photo
Author:
HARPANGEL36's Photo HARPANGEL36 SparkPoints: (13,643)
Fitness Minutes: (57,619)
Posts: 30
2/11/15 6:10 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Wow. This has been most helpful for me. I ran today a 45:30 after doing 30:30 for the last month. My time was actually slower and I was actually a bit more tired (although I ran 1.5 miles longer than usual). It seems as though I need to keep experimenting and find what is best for me. It's easy to get caught up in PR's ( even for a competitive newbie) and lose track of why I am doing this in the first place. Thanks so much!

TRILLIUM22's Photo TRILLIUM22 Posts: 7,713
2/11/15 10:38 A

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I think what is really important is finding a ratio that you enjoy and that allows you to run regularly without injury. There is no advantage to going on a campaign to run continuously and running becoming some dreaded burden. You then train for a race and stop running sometimes for months. You see it all the time. Run for you health and your enjoyment.

I love using 15 sec runs/30 sec walks. I feel energized after them and I can put in miles. I've also had times when I wanted harder runs. I frequently use 1 min run/20 sec walk. But it was great to have those easy run/walks. I really enjoy them more than running continuously at a slow pace. Then I just feel like I'm slogging along.

As you become more fit your recovery rate improves. So walking for a whole minute seems too long. At least thats what happened with me.

Edited by: TRILLIUM22 at: 2/11/2015 (10:42)
Cindy or Trill
Co-Leader Jeff Galloway Training for Any Length Race Spark Team
www.sparkpeople.com/myspark/groups_i
ndividual.asp?gid=33873


PRs
March 4 Little Rock Marathon 4:44:07 PR
April 7, 2013 Go St. Louis Half Marathon 2:05:55
Chesterfield Turkey Trot 5k 26:05 PR docs.google.com/spreadsheets/
d/1DrXvwR5YbjQo1_tYthun_CtBETjg2CG44am
4NaWSMCc/edit?usp=sharing


 Pounds lost: 4.0 
0
6.25
12.5
18.75
25
LIVE2RUN4LIFE's Photo LIVE2RUN4LIFE SparkPoints: (489,461)
Fitness Minutes: (162,196)
Posts: 12,246
2/10/15 8:39 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Jeff's method and run/walk recommendations are really oriented to endurance distances. In longer runs, Jeff will tell you that if you wait to walk until you "have to," then you have waited too long and the walk breaks won't help you much. Once your legs are tired, walking doesn't restore them to an untired state. The point of the walk break as a method is to slow down the rate at which your legs tire and preserve their freshness for as long as possible. So walk before you need to, if you are a Galloway runner. The longer the race, the greater this benefit.

However, an understanding of the logic behind his method is useful, even with shorter race distances. Short walk breaks in a 5K can help your legs clear the lactic acid that slows you down. It can also be a psychological benefit. My favorite interval for a 5K is :50/:10. I take the short walk breaks because my 5K times are faster when I do. And isn't that what a race strategy aims for? My best 5K time is 27 minutes.

I agree that each runner needs to find what works best for him or her. But truly experiment. You might be surprised by what does or doesn't work. Many people focus too much on the few seconds they lose by walking and not enough on how much time they lose by slowing down during the run segments. A walk strategy that lets you run faster during the run segments often is a winning race strategy.

Edited by: LIVE2RUN4LIFE at: 2/10/2015 (20:45)
Catherine

If you're not having fun, then why run?

You don't get to choose how you're going to die, or when. You can only decide how you're going to live. Now.
-- Joan Baez

We are what we think. All that we are arises with our thoughts. With our thoughts we make the world.
-- the Buddha


489 Maintenance Weeks
0
125
250
375
500
RUN4FOOD's Photo RUN4FOOD Posts: 1,434
2/10/15 8:19 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Catherine, as always your answer is correct and your thoughts are much appreciated.
I usually run 1:30/:30. Thought I would give 3/1's a try. I tried this for a few weeks. Same ratio, but I was slower and much more tired. Think I'll stick with my 1:30/:30 ratio for my longer runs.

Gary


 current weight: 167.0 
180
175.75
171.5
167.25
163
RAMBLER61's Photo RAMBLER61 Posts: 143
2/10/15 7:49 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I guess I should have qualified my opinion as "what seems to work best for me". For example, I've only done 5km races, but after running for 7 years, I wouldn't dream of taking walk breaks in a 5k race. At 6 months, yes, I would have. Even now in a 10km, I might, because I probably would go out too fast and wear out and HAVE TO take a walk break. And I'd never even consider a half marathon without walk breaks. Some people can do it. I can't. I've done the distance before, just to see if I could do it, after running 8 miles on my saturday long runs for a couple years. But only with walk breaks at 6/1 ratio. Maybe I should go back and study up a bit and try it at 4/1.

Pacific time zone
Central Valley, CA


 current weight: 229.1 
248
233.5
219
204.5
190
LIVE2RUN4LIFE's Photo LIVE2RUN4LIFE SparkPoints: (489,461)
Fitness Minutes: (162,196)
Posts: 12,246
2/10/15 7:32 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
There is of course no one, "correct" answer to this question. And not that it particularly matters, but Jeff Galloway himself (and hence his "method"), never recommends 8/1 or 10/1 ratios. And he recommends 4/1 as the best ratio for runners whose pace is 9 minutes per mile. He recommends 1/1 for those whose pace is 13 minutes per mile and :30/:30 if your pace is 14 minutes per mile.

One common misconception among runners starting with Galloway (or with those who just use pieces of the approach rather than the whole program) is that your ratio determines your pace. That's not really true. Your basic running fitness is the largest component of your sustainable running pace. At your current point in the journey, if you switched to 4/1, for example, you would not run a 9 minute pace. You'd run something close to what you run with :30/:30, especially after a few miles, and might in fact run even slower than you do with :30/:30 because you would get very tired very quickly with that much running. It all evens out.

To further illustrate this point, Jeff qualified for Boston last year using :30/:15 intervals (that's a 2/1 ratio). His qualifying requirement was a 4:10 marathon, which means an average pace of around 9:30. He was able to this because he had that level of running fitness and capability, not because of the ratio he chose. And in fact, the way he describes how he chooses a ratio, he goes for the most comfortable intervals that allow him to sustain his pace. But he sustains his pace because of his training.

So don't get too worried about what intervals you chose as if they prove anything about you as a runner. Listen to your body, do a lot of running (which you can be much more successfully if you aren't constantly pushing yourself to exhaustion ) and don't compare yourself to other runners. The best way to get faster is to run a lot. And it doesn't have to be fast running either.

One last comment. I have to take some issue with the suggestion that a faster runner is healthier than a slower runner. Not at all. In fact, getting too wrapped up in pace can have the unfortunate side effect of less than healthy choices when it comes to running.

Or that a runner using 4/1 is a better runner than a runner using 2/1 (I think the story about Jeff illustrates this, by the way.) Jeff's favorite ratio for most of his marathons is :30/:30 (with this ratio he usually finishes in about 5 hours with a smile on his face.) So you are in good company.

Edited by: LIVE2RUN4LIFE at: 2/10/2015 (19:37)
Catherine

If you're not having fun, then why run?

You don't get to choose how you're going to die, or when. You can only decide how you're going to live. Now.
-- Joan Baez

We are what we think. All that we are arises with our thoughts. With our thoughts we make the world.
-- the Buddha


489 Maintenance Weeks
0
125
250
375
500
HARPANGEL36's Photo HARPANGEL36 SparkPoints: (13,643)
Fitness Minutes: (57,619)
Posts: 30
2/10/15 5:53 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Thanks so much! I hope one day, before I'm 100, I can get to your ratios. :) having done too much too soon and been injured, I am certainly trying for short goals.

Edited by: HARPANGEL36 at: 2/10/2015 (17:56)
RAMBLER61's Photo RAMBLER61 Posts: 143
2/10/15 4:54 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
In my opinion, if you want to improve your health and your time, you wouldn't be talking 30/30 or 1/1 so much as "how do I get to 2/1 or 3/1 and then 4/1". Obviously if you've only been doing this a couple months, then yes, stick to 1/1 for a while longer. Then go 1.5/1. For a week or two, then 2/1 for a week or two, then 3/1 etc. Only you can decide your goal, but I'd say to stay injury free, stick with Galloway...but to really improve your health and your times, build up to a Galloway plan that has your running more than walking/resting. Quite a bit more...like 7/1 or 10/1. Don't try to do that in one fell swoop...do it over a 6-12 month period, with a very long period at 1/1. Your heart will get there faster than your legs/bones/muscles/tendons, so give them a lot of time at the lower run to walk ratio.

FWIW, when I did Galloway as a formal way to train (I had been doing my own version previously) I started at 3/1 and moved up to 6/1 or 7/1. Now I usually run my 3-6milers straight thru, 7 milers at 7/1 and anything longer at about 6/1. When I started running I was 46 and couldn't run 100 meters without having to stop and walk. Also, if I've been off for more than a week or so due to injury or illness or just plain bad luck with being busy, I go back to 7/1 or 6/1 for a couple of shorter 2-3 mile runs until I'm sure I can run all the way thru without hurting myself.

Pacific time zone
Central Valley, CA


 current weight: 229.1 
248
233.5
219
204.5
190
HARPANGEL36's Photo HARPANGEL36 SparkPoints: (13,643)
Fitness Minutes: (57,619)
Posts: 30
2/10/15 4:19 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I am so new to this, but friends who have run the half said that if I start the race at 1/1 and get tired in the middle I can go down to a 30/30. My pace at 30/30 is about 13:30 to 13:55. The longest distance I have done has been 5 miles

Edited by: HARPANGEL36 at: 2/10/2015 (16:51)
LIVE2RUN4LIFE's Photo LIVE2RUN4LIFE SparkPoints: (489,461)
Fitness Minutes: (162,196)
Posts: 12,246
2/10/15 3:46 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
Why do you want to get to this interval? It is the same ratio as 30/30, i.e. equal amounts of running and walking. It us not a "better" interval. What is your pace at 30/30?

Catherine

If you're not having fun, then why run?

You don't get to choose how you're going to die, or when. You can only decide how you're going to live. Now.
-- Joan Baez

We are what we think. All that we are arises with our thoughts. With our thoughts we make the world.
-- the Buddha


489 Maintenance Weeks
0
125
250
375
500
IFDEEVARUNS2's Photo IFDEEVARUNS2 Posts: 11,378
2/10/15 3:43 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
If 30/30 works, why do you want to switch to 1/1? The ratio is the same.
I'm faster and run more effortlessly with 30/30 than 1/1. Perhaps I'm missing something?

Dee
Houston, TX

"May there always be sushi at the finish line!"





HARPANGEL36's Photo HARPANGEL36 SparkPoints: (13,643)
Fitness Minutes: (57,619)
Posts: 30
2/10/15 3:29 P

My SparkPage
Send Private Message
Reply
I am a 60 year old new runner who has been doing 30/30 for a couple of months. I want to train for a half in 8 months and do a 1/1. What is the best way to get to a 1/1 without injury? Decrease distance? Decrease pace time? Any other suggestions?

Page: 1 of (1)  

Report Innappropriate Post

Other Jeff Galloway Training for any Length Race Training Questions and Logs Posts

Topics:
Last Post:
2/13/2018 9:06:18 AM



Thread URL: https://www.sparkpeople.com/myspark/team_messageboard_thread.asp?board=11804x33873x60621073

Review our Community Guidelines