[liath]

You can tell I've been reading with all these questions! <img alt="biggrin.gif" src="http://files.kickrunners.com/smilies/biggrin.gif"><br><br>
Ok, so I have run 2 sub 90 (hilly) halves and intend to again (I was laid up with injury) and lost a lot of pace.<br><br>
Previously when I did this I ran 30 mpw with long runs of about 16 miles.<br><br>
Why then when I read the training schedules for this time:<br><a href="http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/2/2_4/132.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/2/2_4/132.shtml</a><br><br>
Do they expect someone of that pace to be running a 40-60mpw?<br><br>
As I am rebuilding my fitness is this the sort of milage I should be aiming at?

 

[PacerChris]

sub 90 on 30 mpw? You've got some talent for sure -that's fairly low mileage for such a good half marathon time.<br><br>
I'm more of a marathoner so I might be biased towards slightly higher mileage but I think if you got up to 45-50 mpw, you could really take some time off your half. Your long run of 16 miles is pretty good for a half - but it's way too high a percentage of your total weekly mileage. I think, although your time is quite good already, you could really run fast by increasing your mileage.<br><br>
HOWEVER - since you're coming of an injry, I would build SLOWLY. Get back to where you were before and then build gradually from there. No sense pushing it and risking more time off - I know for me, once I lose fitness it will really suck trying to get bac into shape.<br><br>
Best of luck to you!

 

[liath]

Thanks Chris <img alt="biggrin.gif" src="http://files.kickrunners.com/smilies/biggrin.gif"><br><br>
Oh I should mention I' a baby at 21, I did this when I was 19.

 

[PacerChris]

All the more reason to hate you... <img alt="biggrin.gif" src="http://files.kickrunners.com/smilies/biggrin.gif">

 

[phillytom]

Liath:<br><br>
I ran 1:25 last Sept. And the weeks leading up to it were like this mileage-wise:<br><br>
2006-06-05,30.8<br>
2006-06-12,32.0<br>
2006-06-19,21.1<br>
2006-06-26,39.9<br>
2006-07-03,21.3<br>
2006-07-10,41.7<br>
2006-07-17,44.2<br>
2006-07-24,30.1<br>
2006-07-31,32.7<br>
2006-08-07,36.5<br>
2006-08-14,33.1<br>
2006-08-21,38.7<br>
2006-08-28,38<br>
2006-09-04,31.7<br>
2006-09-11,27.35<br><br>
Long run was usually 10-13. One of my key HM workouts is the tempo run (1x5m) at sub HM pace. Since (unlike Chris) I'm not a marathonner, I came at HMs from the other side, get the speed down and then enough endurance to hang in there therough 13.<br><br>
So, depending on where you are speed-wise, and how fast you want to go, I think getting up to 40ish for your peak weeks would be a good next step for you if you have previously run mostly 30s. Breaking through the 40s as an average was hard for me, I ended up doing it over the winter.<br><br>
But I also agree with Chris - take it slow coming back from an injury, no sense getting hurt again from impatience.

 

[tigger]

My daughter ran 1:36 last May on similar mileage, so I'm not surprised at your times. You could run much faster if you ran more miles. If you were training seriously you would probably be running even higher than 60 miles per week, as I think a good target would be 8 to 10 or more hours per week of solid runs up to 2 hrs or maybe a bit longer. That would get you pretty close to your potential unless you are still growing.<br><br>
For what it's worth, I expect my daughter to run around 1:25 next year at the age of 18. She is already running 10:50 for 3k and is ramping up the miles in prep for college XC.