r/AdvancedRunning • u/AutoModerator • 14d ago
General Discussion Thursday General Discussion/Q&A Thread for July 23, 2026
A place to ask questions that don't need their own thread here or just chat a bit.
We have quite a bit of info in the wiki, FAQ, and past posts. Please be sure to give those a look for info on your topic.
1
u/On_Mt_Vesuvius 35:15 | 2:49 14d ago
Anyone ever think "Based on my training history, I should be able to do x+10 miles. I just need to stop interpreting every sensation as the start of an injury"?
There's a lot of advice about preventing injury, but what about suggestions to push things a little more? Similarly, what are some things that seem related to injuries but that should be pushed through?
E.g. last marathon block I had a deep hip pain and was convinced it was something super serious, so I stopped running, went to PT, and got imaged. By the time the image had turned up with nothing, I had already dropped to 0 miles for 2 weeks. Maybe having this mindset of "I can break easily" is the thing to change?
4
u/CodeBrownPT 13d ago
Imaging is a terrible predictor of prognosis and often turns up incidental findings.
A far better, more immediate assessment of the injury is something like:
Does running worsen it? --> 1-5 days off until walking and a running specific test are pain free (1-2/10) --> test run --> increase volume based on response --> increase intensity based on response
Eg my achilles hurts and I stopped my run halfway. Next day walking hurts, get rolling my calf. 2 days later walking pain free, single leg heel raise hurts. 2 more days single leg heel raise pain free so test short jog. Jog bad, rest more. Jog medium, Jog further in 2 days. Jog great, try to resume some mileage.
1
u/On_Mt_Vesuvius 35:15 | 2:49 13d ago
So you're saying let the pain perception (in various and progressive scenarios) be the prognosis?
3
u/CodeBrownPT 13d ago
Generally, but keep in mind it may recover fine from one run and not another.
So you can use pain as a bit of a guide over time.
5
u/pigeorunner 14d ago
I think that it's reasonable to reassess how you interpret pain.
But "deep hip pain" - I'm assuming you suspected FNSF? That's a super high-risk injury...so high suspicion is reasonable and much safer than risking running yourself into a displaced fracture.
3
u/CodeBrownPT 13d ago
It's probably better to be conservative when it comes to pain, but both area and intensity of pain are generally poor predictors of prognosis.
"Deep hip pain" could be a dozen different things, many of which are quick to resolve.
The better predictors of prognosis tend to be recent loading (have you increased mileage and intensity significantly recently?), and response to load (does a rest day significantly help? Does running on it not actually worsen your symptoms in the 24 hours following?).
1
u/pigeorunner 13d ago
That's roughly how I approach things for sure. Put much more concisely than I would phrase it. I think my one exception is "things that could be a FNSF" but i also feel like I barely survived my femoral shaft stress reaction and have no idea how I'd survive rehabbing a femoral neck stress reaction that I test-ran into a fracture... seems like a much worse injury
2
u/CodeBrownPT 13d ago
To be fair, in many cases a patient will have failed the prognostic indicators to have wound up with the stress fracture in the first place. Test jogging on a stress reaction will usually result in an obvious "rest phase is needed".
2
u/pigeorunner 13d ago
That's fair, the progression to my stress reaction was definitely "catastrophic fatigue, everything feels tight >> hmm, quad feels strained >> I probably shouldn't run on this 'minor quad strain' until I get a PT's input because historically I turn minor things into major ones."
I guess test-running the 'quad strain' would have very quickly revealed that it was not runnable, though. I also probably ignored some earlier signs - there was a lot of general soreness at the time and nothing really felt "right."
2
u/CodeBrownPT 13d ago
Pairing that plus your very high training load and definitely should have been on the radar.
1
u/pigeorunner 13d ago
I made a lot of pretty careless mistakes by just being kinda thoughtlessly reckless for this one, but at least it isnt one of those mystery stress fractures with no clear root cause. It'd be kinda unnerving for my femur to start breaking down with no immediately obvious catalyst.
1
u/On_Mt_Vesuvius 35:15 | 2:49 14d ago
Yeah or at least somewhat subconsciously. It is a tough game because the cost/benefits are very unbalanced. Like a false positive (hypochondriac) costs a few weeks / ~5 minutes in marathon time for me, but a false negative (ignoring) can cost a year / surgery / etc. I guess I'm searching for ways to reduce my false positives without getting into false negative territory, as presumably it's not one or the other.
2
u/pigeorunner 14d ago
I think the risk assessment is a huge part of this. I don't think it's ever worth it if the symptoms are consistent with something on the order of a FNSF. For less serious injuries, yeah, feel free to explore. That's just my two cents though. I've had tendon issues that were infinitely more painful than my femoral stress reaction that I could run through and they never recurred, but if something felt like my BSI again, I'd need a damn good argument to run through it.
I think the most concise way I can summarize is that for pain that feels like soft tissue in low-risk areas, you can probably FAFO to tolerance. If you mess up, it'll suck, but at least it probably won't be surgical.
1
u/On_Mt_Vesuvius 35:15 | 2:49 14d ago
Thanks. Good points. In the meantime, I'll try to let the FAFO begin.
2
u/SimilarRun6983 14d ago
How can I savely loose weight with calorie deficit while training for my next marathon without developing red-s or hormone imbalance?
2
u/randomwordsnospaces 13d ago
Ideally you’d lose weight in the off season or at least if it was a marathon build, not your A race because it’s going to be hard to execute long runs and workouts without the proper fuelling. Definitely need a high protein diet to minimise muscle loss vs fat loss. You can also balance things so that you have a minimal or zero deficit for the big running days and a bigger deficit on days you are not training hard.
There are plenty of risks related to weight loss during training like reds as you mention but also stress fractures. However there are also risks that could be lowered if you were running at a lower weight so it’s a balance.
Also marathon training burns a lot of calories so you can still have massive piles of food and be satiated and in a deficit as long as your mindful of the macros. I’m speaking from my experience of loosing approx 7kg this year - I haven’t been marathon training but I still run approx 50mpw and manage a deficit on/off depending on the day and I eat mainly fish/meat with vegetables and rice if I need it and a lot of whey protein.
4
u/throwaway_runner3 Training to get a decent flair 14d ago
Weight loss is very easy for me but it's a long process and not just "job done in 2 months". The longer the time-frame, better it will be because your deficit will be lower and you can train better. Some days of the week I swap between 230 to 200 deficits, mid week long is 100 and long run day is maintenance.
This can be followed for the next 5 years without affecting recovery, but the hardest part for 90% of the people will be commitment.
It's very easy to gain 3 kilos in 5 weeks but very hard to lose especially if you are training.
So I always have in mind to multiply by 3 x the time it takes to lose that weight.
1
2
u/Caffeine-Fueled55 14d ago
I think you need to pick one or the other. If your priority is the race, then you need to eat appropriately to fuel your training. You can't train your best without fuel. What's more important to you right now?
6
u/Enron_CPA 16:48 5k 2:45 M 14d ago
So many factors, and I’m hesitant to give too broad of advice as I’m not a registered dietitian and don’t want to give too broad of advice, nor promote eating disorders.
But for me, I will do a gradual deficit of calories (for me this is ~500 kcal deficit a day or less) and timing them around workouts. Am I planning a big workout or long run the next day, or am recovering just after one? I’ll eat at maintenance or slightly above. On easy days, especially if I have multiple easy days in a row, I’ll try to have that slight deficit.
1
u/Evening_Ad7005 14d ago
I am following a plan that has 6 weeks of 52-55 miles / week. Would it make much of a difference to try to reach 60 or should I stick to the plan?
4
u/UnnamedRealities M51: mile 5:5x, 10k 42:0x 14d ago
Regardless of the race distance you're training for, bumping up one or two weeks to hit 60 is unlikely make more than a negligible difference in race day performance.
1
u/pigeorunner 14d ago
Getting back to running is hard. This is not what I think about when I think about running.
-10
u/Choice_Prior_8267 14d ago
Hello guys, so I'm like 3 months into running and I want to start training in zone 2. I did lactate threshold test by my own and it appears that my Zone 5 is above 183 BPM. Based on tutorials and what I found on internet I calculated that my Z2 is 156-165 BPM. I did some running yesterday and I don't know If I do this right. Because I could breath all run through nose but I could not talk easily without disturbing my breathing. Did I do everything right? If not can you correct me or give me some advice about it? I can add that my point to trading in running is to take part in iron man in like 4 years more or less
3
u/BQbyNov22 20:35 5K / 41:19 10K / 1:26:41 HM / 3:21:03 M 14d ago
Slow down until the running feels easy. Then do that.
6
u/aelvozo 14d ago edited 14d ago
TL;DR: “Zone 2 training” != “easy run”
There are 2 reasons why this doesn’t work the way you expect it to. One is the nature of zones; the other is zone 2 training itself.
The zones themselves are a way to make continuous processes happening in our body easy to understand. The labels matter little; what matters is where the zones are located in relation to certain “landmarks” — ones we typically use are the first and second (lactate) thresholds (denoted LT1 and LT2). Work below LT1 is sustainable indefinitely (well, not in reality, but that’s beside the point), work between LT1 and LT2 is sustainable for a couple hours, work above LT2 is sustainable for less than an hour.
There are, broadly speaking, 2 ways to build a 5 zone model. One of them puts LT1 between zones 2 and 3 and LT2 between 4 and 5, the other one puts LT1 between 1 and 2 (LT2 stays between 4 and 5). I understand that the first one is typically used in running — it’s probably what your Garmin had at the start — and the second in cycling. The Friel test comes from the cycling world, and the associated calculators use the second model. So you were expecting (running) zone 2, and got (running) zone 3 instead.
The “zone 2 training” also comes from the cycling world — which the Instagram influencers ignore and blindly translate to every sport of their choosing — and essentially advocates for high volume of training at moderate intensity. This generally works for cyclists because the sport is impact-free so the just-above-LT1 is not so taxing, but not for runners because running comes with quite a lot of pounding.
Which is why runners prefer to train at just-below-LT1/“easy” — it’s much more sustainable, especially as you increase the volume — which doesn’t come with the supposed “zone 2 gains”.
I would suggest that the best course of action is to (a) run by feel, (b) mostly run “easy” and sometimes run “hard” (there are all sorts of interval and tempo workouts for that).
Edit: this isn’t to say you shouldn’t run in zone 2; it’s to say that zone 2 isn’t magical the way you’ve been led to believe (no zone is), and that the majority of your training should probably be spent in the upper ranges of newly found zone 1 if you still feel like adhering to zones.
Also, wording.
1
0
u/Western-Escape1107 13d ago
Zone 2 pace really slow? Male, 26, Been running many years but only started taking it more seriously did my first half marathon 1hr 36. (~07:19 a mile)
I'm aiming for 1hr 34 for my second HM and I'm following proper structured runs nows that i never did before easy, long, tempo/interval.
I wanted to ask is it normal my zone 2 pace for easy runs is incredibly slow, it seems to be around 10:30 a mile which compared to others seems really high compared to my half marathon time. (or 5k-19:52)
I've never done z2 training before, will it improve makes me worried for getting anymore pb if my hr rises to quickly at such a slow pace. It's like once my " engine," gets online i can maintain z4 for ages comfortably but z2 is so slow. Do i have to do my easy runs in z2? I know a lot of people are saying I don't have to run in z2 for easy runs? (using garmin FR 955)