Anyone do the Runner's World Beginner Program (instead of the c25k)?

Uhfgood

Just curious if anyone has done the RW beginner prog. Every thing I've read mentions c25k but not the other. And you know what I hear most about c25k, is that they end up quitting or that it gets too hard (and yes I realize you should go slow, but still that many people having trouble with it -- In fact I tried to start myself and never progressed passed the first week).

But the RW 8 week proggie is slightly different and it looks better to me right now, so I'm wondering if anyone has tried it or had success.

loratliff

I'm not familiar with the Runner's World program, but I successfully completed C25K and am now on my way to a 10K using a Hal Higdon plan (I chose Hal Higdon because I felt I was ready for full runs, not run-walk like C210K).

Anyway, I loved C25K and I was about as far from a runner as you can get. It was hard, but anyone who quits or thinks it's "too hard" is either entirely too out of shape to start running OR simply needs to suck it up and get some mental toughness. It is not an incredibly demanding program. The interval jumps can seem scary, but most people quit without even trying which earns no sympathy from me.

IamMCM

I haven't heard of Runners World either, but I plan to do C25K and just repeat weeks as needed. There's no reason you have to finish in 8 or 9 weeks unless you're planning to do a run. I'm doing it for fitness, so why rush? That way, I do t give myself a reason to give up; if it's too hard, that just means a temporary step back.

RunnerElizabeth

loratliff wrote: »

Anyway, I loved c25k and I was abouit as far from a runner as you can get. It was hard, but anyone who quits or thinks it's "too hard" is either entirely too out of shape to start running OR simply needs to suck it up and get some mental toughness. It is not an incredibly demanding program. The interval jumps can seem scary, but most people quit without even trying which earns no sympathy from me.

I think this is a bit harsh. I have asthma and when i was first trying running in 2011 with a one yearold in daycare, I kept getting sick because of a weaker immune system, introduction to child hood illnesses my body hadn't been in contact with for years and the stress on my lungs from trying running. Other forms of exercise I could handle, but running fit into my life better.

C25k was too hard. I found a program from runners world that was only building up to 20 minutes of running. This worked better for me. Still, it took me 14 months to build up to running 5k. Maybe I'm outside the realm of normal, but i stuck with it. I have run 7 or 8 half marathons. Tons of 5ks (goal for 2014 is to get my 5k down from 26:04 to under 25, I started at 40 mins all running in 2012) and for 6 months i averaged 47.6 miles per week so I could run my first marathon. And my marathon was awesome and now I'm planning the next one.

So yes, you do have to have the gumption and drive to stick with it, but c25k doesn't work for everyone.

RunnerElizabeth

http://m.runnersworld.com/beginners/running-101?page=single

This is the program I used. Not sure if it's the same one you mentioned.

Uhfgood

IamMCM wrote: »

I haven't heard of Runners World either, but I plan to do C25K and just repeat weeks as needed. There's no reason you have to finish in 8 or 9 weeks unless you're planning to do a run. I'm doing it for fitness, so why rush? That way, I do t give myself a reason to give up; if it's too hard, that just means a temporary step back.

I'm not rushing but I do need a structured program, I think RW will work.

RunnerElizabeth wrote: »

loratliff wrote: »

C25k was too hard. I found a program from runners world that was only building up to 20 minutes of running. This worked better for me.

This is what I'm thinking

RunnerElizabeth wrote: »

http://m.runnersworld.com/beginners/running-101?page=single

This is the program I used. Not sure if it's the same one you mentioned.

Not the exact same, but also looks like a good one, maybe a bit easier -- here's what I'm looking at - http://www.runnersworld.com/getting-started/the-8-week-beginners-program?page=single - at least I think it's different.

Thanks for the replies.

loratliff

RunnerElizabeth wrote: »

loratliff wrote: »

Anyway, I loved c25k and I was abouit as far from a runner as you can get. It was hard, but anyone who quits or thinks it's "too hard" is either entirely too out of shape to start running OR simply needs to suck it up and get some mental toughness. It is not an incredibly demanding program. The interval jumps can seem scary, but most people quit without even trying which earns no sympathy from me.

So yes, you do have to have the gumption and drive to stick with it, but c25k doesn't work for everyone.

Obviously physical issues are an exception—and no program is a one size fits all solution, but I *do* read about a lot of people quitting C25K because it was too hard. "Too hard" meaning not willing to push through any pain or discomfort.

My point is more if you're expecting ANY beginner's running program to be easy, you're taking up the wrong exercise.

SuggaD

C25K is the best! And yes, it is hard, but you do just have to be disciplined. I could barely run 90 seconds straight when I started. But I pushed through and finished the program, never repeating a week, ran my first 5K, moved on to the 10K program, which I didn't like as much, did my own thing for awhile, and then found a suitable 1/2 marathon program. You just have to stick with it.

msf74

I did C25k (well it was actually the C210k which incorporates it) and liked it a lot. The RW plan looks good though.

All beginner's plans are just ways of managing intensity, duration and progression effectively so that you make the appropriate physical adaptations but don't get injured / wiped out / demotivated in the process. There's no magic in any of them.

Find one you like and have at it.

SueInAz

msf74 wrote: »

All beginner's plans are just ways of managing intensity, duration and progression effectively so that you make the appropriate physical adaptations but don't get injured / wiped out / demotivated in the process. There's no magic in any of them.

Find one you like and have at it.

This.

Everyone is different. What matters most, whichever program you choose to follow, is that you stick with it and follow the program. That doesn't mean that you can't go more slowly if you need to but you should never skip ahead if you are truly a beginning runner. The reason these programs are so popular, and successful, is that they incorporate the formula you need to follow to increase endurance while keeping the likelihood of injury to a minimum. Most people who are unsuccessful either have a physical limitation, let the increased running intervals get to them mentally or try to do too much too soon and end up getting hurt.

I started C25K but had to "create" myself a "Week 0" because I couldn't complete the running intervals in week one. About 4 weeks later, I realized that I actually prefer running intervals to simply running so I switched over to Jeff Galloway's method. Fast forward 3.5 years later and I've completed over a dozen half marathons and I've lost count of how many shorter races I've completed but they've all been done in intervals of around 5 minutes running and 1 minute walking. It works for me. Find what works for you.

Uhfgood

loratliff wrote:

My point is more if you're expecting ANY beginner's running program to be easy, you're taking up the wrong exercise.

Well if it says 'beginner' I expect to be oriented towards beginners, meaning not so hard at first. I do expect it to be easier than others if it says beginner. Of course I can make it easier or hard on myself, and I choose to go easy, meaning, I'll probably be jogging slower than I normally walk, until I can get up to speed.

I suspect c25k isn't as beginner oriented as some others are, like SueInAz said she had to create a 'week 0' for herself, and in fact I've seen blog posts about people wanting to know how to get up to speed before even doing week 1. There's obviously an issue here. I'm not even saying it's bad or wrong or whatever, I'm saying I'm choosing something different because it doesn't look like it's for me. Regardless of whether or not it claims it's supposed to take you from the couch to doing a 5k race, it isn't quite like that since many people seem to struggle with it.

lyttlewon

The C25k program from coolrunning.com gives you the option of doing either timed or distance intervals. A lot of people who struggle with the distance intervals succeed with the timed intervals.

loratliff

Uhfgood wrote: »

loratliff wrote:

My point is more if you're expecting ANY beginner's running program to be easy, you're taking up the wrong exercise.

Well if it says 'beginner' I expect to be oriented towards beginners, meaning not so hard at first. I do expect it to be easier than others if it says beginner. Of course I can make it easier or hard on myself, and I choose to go easy, meaning, I'll probably be jogging slower than I normally walk, until I can get up to speed.

I suspect c25k isn't as beginner oriented as some others are, like SueInAz said she had to create a 'week 0' for herself, and in fact I've seen blog posts about people wanting to know how to get up to speed before even doing week 1. There's obviously an issue here. I'm not even saying it's bad or wrong or whatever, I'm saying I'm choosing something different because it doesn't look like it's for me. Regardless of whether or not it claims it's supposed to take you from the couch to doing a 5k race, it isn't quite like that since many people seem to struggle with it.

And that's fine, but I just also see a lot of people jumping around to various programs because they're all "too hard" and then ultimately never completing one, etc. Assuming you're in relatively good health, you'd be better served by just picking a program and jumping in rather than trying to find the perfect program. Look at wulfax's thread for a great example of someone who's stuck with it when it's been hard.