HM / FM Hard training sessions

[ShortAndStout]

Howdy,

Confused about a discrepancy between my own training and the Fletcher plan. I did my first HM in June at 1:38 (2:20/500 roughly). For context my 2K time (which I don't train for) is 7:40ish. I'd guess that the vast majority of my training is at Default M Pace or faster, roughly 130-135W is where I naturally do a SS row.

The fletcher plan lays out the following ranges (with my watts):

Default M Pace: 125W
M Pace: 138-149
HMP: 150-161
10K: 161-172
5K: 172-184

Here's my issue: Take for example 3x20' (MP / 10K / MP) workout found in the fletcher plan. Presumably, this workout is meant to 1.) Stay within a tough-but-fair heartrate band (70-80% maybe?) and 2.) Sandwich a harder tempo pace between two easier paces.

The "easy pace" FM pace is significantly faster than my normal SS (from 2:18 to 2:13) and I don't think I'd be able to do a FM at that pace, let alone 60 minutes. Am I supposed to be able to do a marathon at 2:13 currently? Because I definitely can't. I may be able to do 45m - 1h at that pace.

Anyway, how do I structure the hard workouts then? At this rate a (DMP / HMP / DMP) seems more realistic a workout than a (MP / 10K / MP) which is a huge step below what is suggested in the course.

[Dangerscouse]

This also baffles me too, and that's probably why I've never followed a plan for longer distances and just followed my intuition and incremental gains.

If I was you I'd go with whatever feels more realistic as trying to follow something that you know is unobtainable is surely a fool's errand?

[hikeplusrow]

I'd suggest basing the target for your next HM on the wattage you achieved in your last one - eg whatever the 1.38 wattage is plus a couple of watts. My best HM is 1.39 and bits (124 watts), so I'm going for 126 in my next serious attempt. You've got to be realistic and aim for incremental improvements. Even a one watt improvement is an improvement.

[jcross485]

Howdy,

Confused about a discrepancy between my own training and the Fletcher plan. I did my first HM in June at 1:38 (2:20/500 roughly). For context my 2K time (which I don't train for) is 7:40ish. I'd guess that the vast majority of my training is at Default M Pace or faster, roughly 130-135W is where I naturally do a SS row.

The fletcher plan lays out the following ranges (with my watts):

Default M Pace: 125W
M Pace: 138-149
HMP: 150-161
10K: 161-172
5K: 172-184

Here's my issue: Take for example 3x20' (MP / 10K / MP) workout found in the fletcher plan. Presumably, this workout is meant to 1.) Stay within a tough-but-fair heartrate band (70-80% maybe?) and 2.) Sandwich a harder tempo pace between two easier paces.

The "easy pace" FM pace is significantly faster than my normal SS (from 2:18 to 2:13) and I don't think I'd be able to do a FM at that pace, let alone 60 minutes. Am I supposed to be able to do a marathon at 2:13 currently? Because I definitely can't. I may be able to do 45m - 1h at that pace.

Anyway, how do I structure the hard workouts then? At this rate a (DMP / HMP / DMP) seems more realistic a workout than a (MP / 10K / MP) which is a huge step below what is suggested in the course.

A :25/500 gap between 2k and HM seems quite big.

When did you hit your 2k time?

Since your HM in June, what has been your average weekly volume?

These two things might help everyone provide a bit more insight.

[ShortAndStout]

A :25/500 gap between 2k and HM seems quite big.

When did you hit your 2k time?

Since your HM in June, what has been your average weekly volume?

These two things might help everyone provide a bit more insight.

Fair, I've put in probably 6 - 700K since the season started in may. That 2K time is outdated but it remains a decent benchmark I think, I couldn't really say. That 2K time is also from June.

[jcross485]

Fair, I've put in probably 6 - 700K since the season started in may. That 2K time is outdated but it remains a decent benchmark I think, I couldn't really say. That 2K time is also from June.

I must say, I am at a bit of a loss. It seems like you've been putting in decent volume and both benchmarks are from around the same time.

That would lead me to believe that you are just naturally a bit better with the shorter distances. I am a bit opposite - I am strong at really short efforts (think 100m) and long efforts (10k+) but those in between are just not a great fit right now.

If that is the case, I would look at the prescribed paces/power as goals but regulate each interval by the prescribed HR's, if you are aware of HR max, so that relative effort is still in line with the intention. As you progress through the plan, you may find that you start more on the HR side of things and end up making gains such that the paces/power are within reach towards the end.

[ShortAndStout]

Fair, I've put in probably 6 - 700K since the season started in may. That 2K time is outdated but it remains a decent benchmark I think, I couldn't really say. That 2K time is also from June.

I must say, I am at a bit of a loss. It seems like you've been putting in decent volume and both benchmarks are from around the same time.

That would lead me to believe that you are just naturally a bit better with the shorter distances. I am a bit opposite - I am strong at really short efforts (think 100m) and long efforts (10k+) but those in between are just not a great fit right now.

If that is the case, I would look at the prescribed paces/power as goals but regulate each interval by the prescribed HR's, if you are aware of HR max, so that relative effort is still in line with the intention. As you progress through the plan, you may find that you start more on the HR side of things and end up making gains such that the paces/power are within reach towards the end.

I mean I don't do a lot of power training and mostly just do SS - I know I need to do harder stuff but I'm just confused on the pace.

[jcross485]

I mean I don't do a lot of power training and mostly just do SS - I know I need to do harder stuff but I'm just confused on the pace.

Do you have a HR monitor by chance?

[btlifter]

Yeah, that 2k->hm discrepancy is quite large.

For context, I was a sprinter in my day, and my delta was just 15 splits.

[Sakly]

Yeah, that 2k->hm discrepancy is quite large.

For context, I was a sprinter in my day, and my delta was just 15 splits.

Agree. I'm no sprinter, delta is ~11 currently, but 2k is outdated, so probably delta is more of 12-13.

[contradictus]

The given heart rate for that session would be 80-90% of HRmax.

One of the basic ideas of the EF-Plan is slowing down if HR exceeds the limit. If you take the training from that perspective, the pacing ranges are even more of an orientation.

And if you are naturally stronger on the shorter distances, it makes perfectly sense that you struggle in the first weeks of the plan with the given pacings and have to slow down quite a bit, esp. in the last intervall (after the 10KP-intervall).

Maybe it´s a good idea to do some (nearly) max-effort pieces for 5k, 10k and 2k to be more orientated - having in mind that the training paces are somewhat slower and heart-rate-limited.

Anyway: following the plan is quite rewarding!

[ShortAndStout]

Yeah, that 2k->hm discrepancy is quite large.

For context, I was a sprinter in my day, and my delta was just 15 splits.

Agree. I'm no sprinter, delta is ~11 currently, but 2k is outdated, so probably delta is more of 12-13.

The given heart rate for that session would be 80-90% of HRmax.

One of the basic ideas of the EF-Plan is slowing down if HR exceeds the limit. If you take the training from that perspective, the pacing ranges are even more of an orientation.

And if you are naturally stronger on the shorter distances, it makes perfectly sense that you struggle in the first weeks of the plan with the given pacings and have to slow down quite a bit, esp. in the last intervall (after the 10KP-intervall).

Maybe it´s a good idea to do some (nearly) max-effort pieces for 5k, 10k and 2k to be more orientated - having in mind that the training paces are somewhat slower and heart-rate-limited.

Anyway: following the plan is quite rewarding!

Yeah, that 2k->hm discrepancy is quite large.

For context, I was a sprinter in my day, and my delta was just 15 splits.

So some more information:

The EF plan lays out the following:



So with a 2K W of 230 roughly, my Marathon pace would be 138-149, for example. HM would be 149-161.

So a 230W (1:55) equals about 2:12-2:16 FM, or a 2:09 to 2:12 HM. So that sounds right? A 1:55 to 2:12 is a 14-17 second delta, is that a lot? Maybe it's just more because my 2K time is slower than average.

[Elizabeth]

I just ran my numbers through the calculations above. First, with the exception of the 5k and the Default Pace, my times do fall within the bands above. My 5k is faster than projected, and my usual steady state sessions are quite a bit slower than the default pace.

Because this is based on watts, the slower the 2k, the larger the split differential. It's math.

Here's my issue: Take for example 3x20' (MP / 10K / MP) workout found in the fletcher plan. Presumably, this workout is meant to 1.) Stay within a tough-but-fair heartrate band (70-80% maybe?) and 2.) Sandwich a harder tempo pace between two easier paces.

The "easy pace" FM pace is significantly faster than my normal SS (from 2:18 to 2:13) and I don't think I'd be able to do a FM at that pace, let alone 60 minutes. Am I supposed to be able to do a marathon at 2:13 currently? Because I definitely can't. I may be able to do 45m - 1h at that pace.

3x20' (MP / 10k / MP) would be a hard session for me. That first 20' would build to around 85% of max HR. The 10k pace would redline it. And then my HR usually doesn't drop well once it's redlined, unless there's a good amount of rest between those sets. I assume the goal for the last interval is to accumulate some work around marathon pace under a lot of fatigue, and not to hit easy paces.

Does the plan build into this? If you can't do it at the prescribed paces, then my guess is that it would make the most sense to do it at paces that lead to the above effect, but perhaps you could ask Eddie? If you're paying for the plan, I would imagine he could answer questions?

[Sakly]

Don't know anything about the background of this plan, but when I assume I could crank out a 1:39-1:40 2k atm and I do my typical steady 60mins or HMs at around 2:02-2:03, this would put me around 54% of my 2k watts.
I can do my steady sessions faster for sure - and do so from time to time - but not regularly, so I can recover well from them beside my other training stuff.
If I calculate 67.5% of 2k watts for HM training pace, I get 1:54 splits, seems way to fast for me as a training pace for a HM (considering my HM PB was done at 1:51.9).

[ShortAndStout]

Don't know anything about the background of this plan, but when I assume I could crank out a 1:39-1:40 2k atm and I do my typical steady 60mins or HMs at around 2:02-2:03, this would put me around 54% of my 2k watts.
I can do my steady sessions faster for sure - and do so from time to time - but not regularly, so I can recover well from them beside my other training stuff.
If I calculate 67.5% of 2k watts for HM training pace, I get 1:54 splits, seems way to fast for me as a training pace for a HM (considering my HM PB was done at 1:51.9).

My 55% is also my SS pace. I think what it really will boil down to for me is taking it just a little slower than expected, maybe jumping down a level as suggested, because I also agree that it's a bit too fast. At least for me.