Long Distance Runners

Join

Daniel's Training Tables...How accurate for you?

lporter229
lporter229 Posts: 4,907 Member
edited November 23 in Social Groups
I am just wondering how accurate the Daniel's tables are for your marathon pace based on your half marathon PR and heart rate data? When I plug in my HM PR and my resting and (guesstimated) max HR, the numbers that the table populates with are spot on accurate in terms of my HR vs. pace for training runs and my 5 mile PR (both of these races were about 9 months ago). I have not raced since my last marathon in January, but I have been doing a lot of training. I have upped my mileage a lot too. The tables predict a marathon time of 3:36:44. My last marathon was 3:52:48. I definitely did not go all out for it since I was focused mainly on finishing under 4 hours without crashing. But I also will not say that it was easy either. Anyway, my goal for my October marathon is 3:45 (3:43 would make me ecstatic). Based on your experience with the tables, is this realistic?

Here is a link to the tables if you don't have them:

http://www.electricblues.com/html/runpro.html

Replies

  • Carrieendar
    Carrieendar Posts: 493 Member
    my half marathon PR from last training cycle and HR predict a marathon time of 3:01. I ran 3:05, though the weather was less than ideal. It gives me a 5k time from the HM that is 10 seconds faster than my PR.

    I guess its pretty accurate for me; McMillan has always been very close for me as well-- my first it predicted 3:30 and I got 3:33. Then my second it predicted 3:09 and I got 3:12!
  • litsy3
    litsy3 Posts: 783 Member
    They're pretty close for me (my 5k and marathon line up okay; my half marathon is a bit better) though McMillan works even better. I wouldn't worry about not having raced recently. I think the fact that you've already run a 3:52 and now you've done loads more training makes your goal seem realistic!
  • snowflakesav
    snowflakesav Posts: 649 Member
    It is realistic based on your statement that you have increased your mileage.
  • lporter229
    lporter229 Posts: 4,907 Member
    Thanks for the input. My hunch is that the tables are more accurate the faster you are, so I don't really expect to be too close to the predicted pace, but maybe an 8 minute cushion isn't too far off. I am mostly surprised at how accurate the LT predictions and HR vs. pace data lines up. I guess all I can do is train my best and wait and see what happens on race day.
  • litsy3
    litsy3 Posts: 783 Member
    I don't think it's 'the faster you are', I think it's 'if you've done appropriate amounts of training for the distance'. It's more likely that faster runners will have done, even if only because it doesn't take them as long to do a high volume of training.
  • DavidMartinez2
    DavidMartinez2 Posts: 840 Member
    I have found the times correlated to my VDOT are pretty darn close to reality.
  • vcphil
    vcphil Posts: 79 Member
    My half predicts a 3:05. My PR is 3:14. However, Im working on getting there :-)
  • ActiveApril
    ActiveApril Posts: 73 Member
    The majority of those numbers are accurate for me, which makes me really motivated to lose the 5 lbs I've been wanting to get off because of the predicted drop in race pace :)
  • beeblebrox82
    beeblebrox82 Posts: 578 Member
    edited September 2015
    I have found that my half/10k times all correlate really nice, but I can't hit the marathon prediction. That led me to believe I was undertrained, and have been ramping up my mileage for this fall. I've zipped off faster 5K times too, but it's in the ballpark.
  • e5412
    e5412 Posts: 17 Member
    I put in my most recent 1/2 marathon time (PR) and it was pretty darn close. I beat the marathon time by 10 seconds and I'm faster in the 5k by 20 seconds.

    With that said, I ran that 1/2 just a touch on the conservative side because I was nursing a slight injury.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories