RACE RECOVERY......THEN AND NOW

If today I was writing out the week's training following a Saturday, September 10K for an athlete of 41 who had just run 34.12 it would NOT go like this......THE NEXT DAY...

SUNDAY......... run a HALF MARATHON
                           ......don't hold back ...run 100%......aim for  74/75 minutes. (Done............74.37
MONDAY........A.M........easy  6..............................P.M.  Steady................6
TUESDAY.........A.M.......hill steady......6        P.M.   Pendle track.......8 x 800... (average 2.38)
WEDNESDAY..................slow and easy 10  on road (73.34)
THURSDAY......A.M.........steady   5               P.M.........steady    5
FRIDAY.............A.M.........steady   5              P.M.........REST
SATURDAY.............same run as Wednesday..........inc.  6 x 3 min efforts   9 mins. faster   64.48
SUNDAY..................steady     12
WEEK TOTAL.............72

  The above was the way I  "recovered" (!) from the Kirkham 10K  in 1990.  Running  a half marathon the next day and get back on the track on the Tuesday.   Hardly looks sensible. Quite a gung ho approach  which had even me raising my eyebrows when I looked it up to compare THEN and NOW ,  but it was 20 years ago But even so I would vehemently discourage an athlete if I was advising them from replicating  the stunt.
  Nowadays at 61 I'm far more cautious after races.  After last Saturday's  September 10K the week has seen me nudging up back the miles.  A 5 on Sunday,  a 6 on Monday,  both on road, so a trail 7 on Tuesday.   Today  I wanted to add another mile and up the pace as well, aiming for an average of 8.30 for the 8 on the canal.
  As usual the first 2 miles I just failed to hit the mark and yet again the run became an acceleration effort ...........
      9.12   8.55   8.46   8.29   8.12   8.08   8.08   8.08   7.51 .  Out in 35.33  back in 32.21  Aver. 8.28
So I managed the target average but it proves a hard way to do it.

 Going back to last weekend one of the races I considered was the City Of Salford 10K on the Sunday. Decided against it because of the t-shirt delivery and the £17 entry fee.  But , as you do, I was looking at the results today and was somewhat puzzled by the age categories adopted for the race. Which for men were as follows.......MV20    MV25    MV30    MV35    MV40  and that was all!
  I thought it was odd when I kept scrolling down and could not find any M45, M50, M55 ,M60 etc.  the normal age groups we see every week.   I did notice that Ron Hill ran and finished 111th in his age group.  Not 111th in the M70 of course.   111th in the MV40 !
 I could hardly refer to this age grouping in this blog without  a comment from the organisers. They  informed me by email that they were very aware of the "traditional" age groups but the sponsors, a well known non running specialist sports company wanted the above age groups as they "were in keeping with their target customer audience". 
 Let's just say if you go into JD Sports to buy your running shoes over 40 you might be asked the question......"aren't you too old to be running?!"