Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Im no expert on running but generally you need to train at the same level if not a higher intensity then you will be when in competition

Train hard, fight easy....

At the risk of upsetting people that, to my best understanding, is completely wrong.

In competition you put in a 100% effort. In training if you attempt that regularly in training you will end up either injuring yourself or what they call "over training" such that you slow down your rate of improvement.

It is in fact a common mistake people make. They try to go too hard and end up disenchanted or injured or both.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/363972-running/page/8/#findComment-6696673
Share on other sites

Just started running again. Was 105KG now down to 85KG. Goal for April Canberra marathon is 75KG.

Cant do any more than 10ks without injury at the moment as I'm too heavy still (176cm).

5Ks takes just under 30 mins. Long way to go but I've got 3 months.

Great Work Kepp it going and keep us posted

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/363972-running/page/8/#findComment-6696760
Share on other sites

At the risk of upsetting people that, to my best understanding, is completely wrong.

In competition you put in a 100% effort. In training if you attempt that regularly in training you will end up either injuring yourself or what they call "over training" such that you slow down your rate of improvement.

It is in fact a common mistake people make. They try to go too hard and end up disenchanted or injured or both.

People that are starting out then yes there is a higher risk of getting injured,

when im in full swing training (not now that it holidays) Every, and i mean every run session is as hard as i can go based on the distance i have to run. If i get close to the goal and im not buggered, i go harder.

Now this isnt a daily occurance, i may do this 2-3 times a week in accordance with the rest of my training program as its essentially strength based.

Basically all i need to is run 2.4km to pass my fitness tests for my job, that doesnt mean i just do 2.4km runs.

For instance we might do a 5km run, or 3x 2.4km or not long ago we did a 6km 7kg weighted run. These are all very intense workouts unless your a dedicated runner. These sessions arent just run by any tom dick or dumb prick, they are run by well trained PTs, (and they arent like 95% of the morons you find at your local gym)

Based on this training i have conditioned myself to run 5km in under 20min and a 2.4km run in under 8min 50 @ 87kg, thats more then 2 min under the required time i need to run for my age.

train hard fight easy

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/363972-running/page/8/#findComment-6696799
Share on other sites

What do you do, Joey?

That's damn quick for your weight. I'm of the same opinion. It might apply to other things, or newbies, but with running I just wanna go harder each time and give it my 100%. If I didn't, I'd never break PB times and that's most of the reason I run.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/363972-running/page/8/#findComment-6697079
Share on other sites

exactly birds.. like you im driven by beating my PBs and that isnt acheived by doing a half assed training session. Well it might work initially but when it starts getting to the nitty gritty you really arent going to improve.

Personally i see it as a waste of training if your not giving it your all

Im in the Army mate, beleive it or not i know bigger guys then me that are quicker over 2.4km

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/363972-running/page/8/#findComment-6697176
Share on other sites

I thought as much. Got a mate in reserves who used to talk about his 2.4km runs...I assume that's standard training/testing distance. He was telling me about the SAS and their benchmarks...numbers are no doubt off, but from memory they pull similar times...with 20kg of armor/equipment lol.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/363972-running/page/8/#findComment-6697190
Share on other sites

yeah thats for the basic fitness assesment,

those SAS guys are half human half machine, you really cant compete with them haha

Have you seen "search for the worrior"... awesome 2 part doco on the selection process for SAS

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/363972-running/page/8/#findComment-6697196
Share on other sites

At the risk of upsetting people that, to my best understanding, is completely wrong.

In competition you put in a 100% effort. In training if you attempt that regularly in training you will end up either injuring yourself or what they call "over training" such that you slow down your rate of improvement.

It is in fact a common mistake people make. They try to go too hard and end up disenchanted or injured or both.

Initially, You need to build a base level of fitness so going for a jog at a pace you are comfortable with and slowly increasing the speed on each subsequent run is fine. This will be working your aerobic energy system predominantly.

But long term that's not going to help as much. If you want to be fast, you train fast and you increase your training intensity or volume.

Having good anaerobic capacity/lactate threshold is just as important for running as high vo2's.

Steady paced training won't do anything to stimulate changes in you anaerobic energy system/increase your lactate threshold.

Obviously you don't train flat out all the time and you need to make sure you get your recovery time in. But the basic principals are the same for most fitness type things, progressive overload (through volume, intensity weight etc) and you tailor them to suit your goals.

Edited by Mitcho_7
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/363972-running/page/8/#findComment-6697449
Share on other sites

People that are starting out then yes there is a higher risk of getting injured,

when im in full swing training (not now that it holidays) Every, and i mean every run session is as hard as i can go based on the distance i have to run. If i get close to the goal and im not buggered, i go harder.

Now this isnt a daily occurance, i may do this 2-3 times a week in accordance with the rest of my training program as its essentially strength based.

Basically all i need to is run 2.4km to pass my fitness tests for my job, that doesnt mean i just do 2.4km runs.

For instance we might do a 5km run, or 3x 2.4km or not long ago we did a 6km 7kg weighted run. These are all very intense workouts unless your a dedicated runner. These sessions arent just run by any tom dick or dumb prick, they are run by well trained PTs, (and they arent like 95% of the morons you find at your local gym)

Based on this training i have conditioned myself to run 5km in under 20min and a 2.4km run in under 8min 50 @ 87kg, thats more then 2 min under the required time i need to run for my age.

train hard fight easy

Initially, You need to build a base level of fitness so going for a jog at a pace you are comfortable with and slowly increasing the speed on each subsequent run is fine. This will be working your aerobic energy system predominantly.

But long term that's not going to help as much. If you want to be fast, you train fast and you increase your training intensity or volume.

Having good anaerobic capacity/lactate threshold is just as important for running as high vo2's.

Steady paced training won't do anything to stimulate changes in you anaerobic energy system/increase your lactate threshold.

Obviously you don't train flat out all the time and you need to make sure you get your recovery time in. But the basic principals are the same for most fitness type things, progressive overload (through volume, intensity weight etc) and you tailor them to suit your goals.

Doing a 100% effort session periodically is fine. As is doing a mix of interval (anaerobic) and steady state (aerobic) work. It is doubltess a good idea to do all those things. But pushing too hard too early in a fitness campaign or just too hard too regularly can and does hold people back from reaching their goals.

Doing some work to pass a fitness test (alot of work even) is a different circumstance than doing it for say a fun run or a sport and different again for a health benefit. In the former you want to go in knowing you can pass the test (so train hard, fight easy) in the middle circumstance you will be giving 100% (or should be) and so a repeated 100% effort in training is not the way to prepare for it. You should be targetting ongoing improvement and over doing things can slow your rate of improvement down, even if you dont injure yourself.

If you are doing stuff for enjoyment or the health benefits then it shouldnt matter how long it takes to get up to a level - the gain is in just doing the activity.

Edited by djr81
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/363972-running/page/8/#findComment-6697824
Share on other sites

as long as you dont get bored :)

Well it is one of those thing eh.

On the one hand if you make it too hard alot of people get fed up and quit becuase they CBF'd.

If you make it too easy then a different group quit because it is not challenging enough.

But if you were to pick which was the more common it would be the first. After the initial enthusiasm wears off they get left with a regime that requires a big effort several times a week. Then they give up and go back to couch potato land.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/363972-running/page/8/#findComment-6698380
Share on other sites

as long as you dont get bored :)

Yer thats the killer, get off the treadmill and get outside. Love the scenery :) Its helps me run further and push more. Say id go 80% till this and stride out till there. And generally if i kno distance from home ill sprint a last sector

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/363972-running/page/8/#findComment-6698619
Share on other sites

My last half marathon ran it in 1hr38min. Pace of 4.41, my aim is to complete a full marathon at a pace of 4.30-4.35.

Over Christmas and New years haven't been doing any running so will have to pick it up.

My running schedule is shit but trying to get something better and see some improvement.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/363972-running/page/8/#findComment-6705387
Share on other sites

All these amazing results you guys get are motivating me to ge back into it!

I did the city2surf over the past 2 years and my results were:

2011 - 89 mins

2012 - 76 mins

2013 - hoping for sub 70mins

I the reason why I improved so much in one year is because I was warming up wrong and also diet. I used to jog for warm up and then stretch for 5 mins. Then when I run, I used to get terrible ankle pains while running. I did some research and found that doing the cross trainer for 8 mins warm up, then stretching 10 mins will reduce those pains. This is because there is no impact on ankles while warming up. I was actually able to run 5km on treadmill in 23 mins. Now I also make sure to digest the food before I run.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/363972-running/page/8/#findComment-6713909
Share on other sites

Running is something I've been trying to get into but I hit the magical 2.4km mark and I just cannot get motivated enough to run more than that....

Been trying to push myself a bit more but after about 4km I just get bored... Even outside running

Any suggestions/recommendations on how to just keep going? Or is it more of a mental thing I have to suck up and get over??

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/363972-running/page/8/#findComment-6715934
Share on other sites

Time yourself? try and beat it everytime you run :D

This...

I never run more than 3km, but that 3km is the run of my life. Started timing myself one day and have worked my way down from 20 minutes to 11:46. Don't have to run further, just faster. The good news is, the faster you run, the sooner it's over :P

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/363972-running/page/8/#findComment-6716047
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • That's odd, it works fine here. Try loading it on a different device or browser? It's Jack Phillips JDM, a Skyline wrecker in Victoria. Not the cheapest, but I have found them helpful to find obscure parts in AU. https://jpjdm.com/shop/index.php
    • Yeah. I second all of the above. The only way to see that sort of voltage is if something is generating it as a side effect of being f**ked up. The other thing you could do would be to put a load onto that 30V terminal, something like a brakelamp globe. See if it pulls the voltage away comepletely or if some or all of it stays there while loaded. Will give you something of an idea about how much danger it could cause.
    • I would say, you've got one hell of an underlying issue there. You're saying, coils were fully unplugged, and the fuse to that circuit was unplugged, and you measured 30v? Either something is giving you some WILD EMI, and that's an induced voltage, OR something is managing to backfeed, AND that something has problems. It could be something like the ECU if it takes power from there, and also gets power from another source IF there's an internal issue in the ECU. The way to check would be pull that fuse, unplug the coils, and then probe the ECU pins. However it could be something else doing it. Additionally, if it is something wired in, and that something is pulsing, IE a PWM circuit and it's an inductive load and doesnt have proper flyback protection, that would also do it. A possibility would be if you have something like a PWM fuel pump, it might be giving flyback voltages (dangerous to stuff!). I'd put the circuit back into its "broken" state, confirm the weird voltage is back, and then one by one unplug devices until that voltage disappears. That's a quick way to find an associated device. Otherwise I'd need to look at the wiring diagrams, and then understand any electrical mods done.   But you really should not be seeing the above issue, and really, it's indicating something is failing, and possibly why the fuse blew to begin with.
    • A lot of what you said there are fair observations and part of why I made that list, to make some of these things (like no advantage between the GSeries and GSeries II at PR2.4 in a lot of cases) however I'm not fully convinced by other comments.  One thing to bare in mind is that compressor flow maps are talking about MASS flow, in terms of the compressor side you shouldn't end up running more or less airflow vs another compressor map for the same advertised flow if all external environmental conditions are equivalent if the compressor efficiency is lower as that advertised mass flow takes that into consideration.   Once the intercooler becomes involved the in-plenum air temperature shouldn't be that different, either... the main thing that is likely to affect the end power is the final exhaust manifold pressure - which *WILL* go up when you run out of compressor efficiency when you run off the map earlier on the original G-Series versus G-Series II as you need to keep the gate shut to achieve similar airflow.    Also, how do you figure response based off surge line?  I've seen people claim that as an absolute fact before but am pretty sure I've seen compressors with worse surge lines actually "stand up" faster (and ironically be more likely to surge), I'm not super convinced - it's really a thing we won't easily be able to determine until people start using them.     There are some things on the maps that actually make me wonder if there is a chance that they may respond no worse... if not BETTER?!  which brings me to your next point... Why G2 have lower max rpm?  Really good question and I've been wondering about this too.  The maximum speed *AND* the compressor maps both look like what I'd normally expect if Garrett had extended the exducers out, but they claim the same inducer and exducer size for the whole range.   If you compare the speed lines between any G and G2 version the G2 speed lines support higher flow for the same compressor speed, kinda giving a pretty clear "better at pumping more air for the same speed" impression. Presumably the exducer includes any extended tip design instead of just the backplate, but nonetheless I'd love to see good pics/measurements of the G2 compressors as everything kinda points to something different about the exducer - specifically that it must be further out from the centerline, which means a lower rpm for the same max tip speed and often also results in higher pressure ratio efficiency, narrower maps, and often actually can result in better spool vs a smaller exducer for the same inducer size... no doubt partly due to the above phenomenon of needing less turbine speed to achieve the same airflow when using a smaller trim. Not sure if this is just camera angle or what, but this kinda looks interesting on the G35 990 compressor tips: Very interested to see what happens when people start testing these, and if we start getting more details about what's different.
×
×
  • Create New...