Cam Levins just ran a 190 mile week

facepalm13 wrote:Why are you trying to make a correlation that isn't there between distance times and basic speed?

no

i'm not

i'm stating the exceptionally obvious that every distance runner has a certain 400 ability at any time or do you think cam's is a completely unfathomnable quantity & as far as we know coud be 43.17 ???

Also, 400m isn't a measure of basic speed

err...

for a 5k/10k guy it certainly is

I know you feel passionately about hating Cam Levins, but when it comes to the interwebs you need to stop doing stuff.

eh ??

i only started posting about him a few posts ago

What do you mean by average training? What kind of doofus would think that Galen Rupp's training is "average"?

You keep arguing against something that nobody said. For Cam Levins, AND CAM LEVINS ONLY, higher mileage has consistently led to faster times. That does not mean that Bernard Lagat can't run fast off low mileage. Lagat is another person who isn't doing "average" training.

___________________________________________________________________________

#1 Don't assume average mileage means average training

#2 Sometimes exceptional talent can do fairly well on average training.

You never said the following?

muscle imbalance: "training needs quality, not just slogging through mileage for the sake of running more

why in god's name would you bump up your volume even more when he was already doing 160 per week

if he wants to improve he should focus on running faster in training, not doing more volume

he is not even training for a marathon"

Sounds an awful like you are advocating that Cam should not be running his high mileage and should be doing what other runners are doing in their training (similar mileage/more quality). He did not have good results with that method of training so he tried something else. AND IT IS WORKING.

And before you call someone else an idiot you should go back and read the thread again to see what you are actually arguing about. (or trolling, whichever you are doing)

brain imbalance wrote:

You never said the following?

muscle imbalance: "training needs quality, not just slogging through mileage for the sake of running more

why in god's name would you bump up your volume even more when he was already doing 160 per week

if he wants to improve he should focus on running faster in training, not doing more volume

he is not even training for a marathon"

Sounds an awful like you are advocating that Cam should not be running his high mileage and should be doing what other runners are doing in their training (similar mileage/more quality). He did not have good results with that method of training so he tried something else. AND IT IS WORKING.

And before you call someone else an idiot you should go back and read the thread again to see what you are actually arguing about. (or trolling, whichever you are doing)

No

I never said he should train like everyone else

I said he should not bump his already extremely high mileage to even higher levels when it would be more beneficial to him if he instead focused more on improving his speed

I'll repeat it for you since you seem to lack reading comprehension: I never said he should train like everyone else

Ho Hum wrote:

What do you mean by average training? What kind of doofus would think that Galen Rupp's training is "average"?

You keep arguing against something that nobody said. For Cam Levins, AND CAM LEVINS ONLY, higher mileage has consistently led to faster times. That does not mean that Bernard Lagat can't run fast off low mileage. Lagat is another person who isn't doing "average" training.

Compared to 160 miles per week that Cam Levins was doing in college the 80ish per week that galen did was average

And for god's sake, read the thread, I am so tired of repeating myself

I am arguing against something that someone DID SAY, that average training = average race times. and he meant average to mean someone doing much less than cam, and by doing so, playing it "safe"

read the thread, you clearly have not, like many people who seem to be posting

canada Coach wrote:

#1 Don't assume average mileage means average training

#2 Sometimes exceptional talent can do fairly well on average training.

1) I will assume that because that was the whole topic of this thread: MILEAGE

The poster who kept saying average training = average race times was meaning someone doing a lot less than cam, which he identified as 99% of north american runners.

someone doing nearly half of what cam was doing seems pretty average wrt training

Well I was there and I know how to take splits, but believe whatever you want. Cam has plenty of speed is my point. Just wanted to restate that this was also the same day that he ran his first sub 4. He is a stud, and has plenty of improvement left.

I guess i was wrong about the 1:49. I'm not sure where I got that from. 1:51.3 seems to be his 800 pr.

He has ran 1:49 converted.

http://www.tfrrs.org/results/23405_1484575.html

On a flat 200m track...an hour after a mile.

How is 1:50.81 converted to 1:49

Canada Coach wrote:

In this group, only Lagat, is arguably faster than Levins at 10,000m.

Since when????

honestly muscle (mental?) imbalance.

what do you think you're accomplishing by writing all of your drivel in such an antagonistic way?

you've been repeatedly shown to be clueless about the subject at hand and your continued aggression is neither warranted nor needed.

why don't you just go relax somewhere? maybe take a xanax or something.

blah blah blah wrote:

honestly muscle (mental?) imbalance.

what do you think you're accomplishing by writing all of your drivel in such an antagonistic way?

you've been repeatedly shown to be clueless about the subject at hand and your continued aggression is neither warranted nor needed.

why don't you just go relax somewhere? maybe take a xanax or something.

where have I been shown to be clueless?

by pointing out that focusing on improving speed will yield more improvement rather than bumping from the already incredibly high volume of 160 miles per week to 190 miles per week?

Boy, what a nut I am

muscle imbalance wrote:

blah blah blah wrote:

honestly muscle (mental?) imbalance.

what do you think you're accomplishing by writing all of your drivel in such an antagonistic way?

you've been repeatedly shown to be clueless about the subject at hand and your continued aggression is neither warranted nor needed.

why don't you just go relax somewhere? maybe take a xanax or something.

where have I been shown to be clueless?

by pointing out that focusing on improving speed will yield more improvement rather than bumping from the already incredibly high volume of 160 miles per week to 190 miles per week?

Boy, what a nut I am

this entire thread.

to take a line from you: why don't you read a little more closely.

I'm not sure 190 mpw is going to help him either, but I'm going to wait and see. A lot of people thought 160 mpw was ridiculous until he became the 2nd best non-African born runner in the Olympic 10,000 final.

After that, you'd think some of those people would quiet down and see what happens. I love the idea that he'll try anything to be good. and it seems as if high mileage works for him.

You guys are being stupid. He isn't running 190 mpw any more than he was running 160 mpw before. He ran A 190 mile week. He's hitting high mileage right now, but you can't simplify someone's training down to the single highest week they ever do.

Don't you worry. Levins will NEVER crack 27:00 or 13:00. He is done.

The high mileage will break him, he will retreat to a trailer in Nebraska, drinking Natty lights for the rest of his life, and reminiscing to his 400 pound wife (they roleplay Jabba and Leia- but Levins is the Princess!)about the glory days of having Galen Rupp DROP THE HAMMER on him at the Olympic Finals.

A make her dance wrote:

You guys are being stupid. He isn't running 190 mpw any more than he was running 160 mpw before. He ran A 190 mile week. He's hitting high mileage right now, but you can't simplify someone's training down to the single highest week they ever do.

This. The best way to measure a runner's mileage is to look at their yearly totals. Someone way upthread linked to Bill Rodgers training. His logs are very instructive. Although he was up and down from week to week his yearly totals for 76 and 77 were very very close. He averaged around 135 miles/week. As one who has tried to run high mileage, I can tell you that that is very very hard - much harder than a single 190 mile week. I'd like to see Levin's yearly totals. If he's running over 7000 miles/year, then I'd say look out. High mileage works. I'll write more about this if someone evinces some interest, but I have plenty of examples. As do most people.