Why do people say running doubles helps you recover better?

Because they do. You don't really have to know how.

The benefits are twice the frequency of training stimulus.

If you want proof that they don't work then they are not for you.

I've heard two explanations:

1. By putting your body through a little more stress without doing much extra damage, you get it to release all of the hormones you need to recover, but you don't dig yourself into a hole.

2. It's easier to handle two shorter runs than one longer run.

I personally don't buy into #2. A fourteen mile day in doubles feels moderately tough but a sixteen mile day in singles feels totally normal. I'm not sure about #1. It sounds feasible to me.

Doubles will of course make you more fit, which in turn helps you recover more efficiently long-term.

IMO anything about "flushing out" is BS and is maybe just referring to how #1 feels.

Because your body adapts to the training stimulus it is going through. If you are running every 12 hours(i.e. twice a day) your body is going to recover in 12 hours because it is put under the stress of running every 12 hours and adapts. If you are only running every 24 hours(i. e. once a day) your body will take longer to recover because it only has to adapt to running 24 hours a day.

Is this true

AJJ wrote:

Because your body adapts to the training stimulus it is going through. If you are running every 12 hours(i.e. twice a day) your body is going to recover in 12 hours because it is put under the stress of running every 12 hours and adapts. If you are only running every 24 hours(i. e. once a day) your body will take longer to recover because it only has to adapt to running 24 hours a day.

xenonscreams wrote:

IMO anything about "flushing out" is BS and is maybe just referring to how #1 feels.

Canova ran some tests on lactate clearance on his athletes. The results showed that each subsequent run after a hard workout lowered the lactate level more. A group took a day off, then ran an easy day and found the day off hardly cleared any lactate compared to a separate group which ran an easy run on the same day.

I forget if there was a group that did a double or not, but the frequency of easy runs after a hard effort impacted lactate clearance significantly. From that finding, you could make an argument that doing two runs in a day could flush more lactate than a single run.

I ran doubles for years. I, especially, liked the after effects of running a second 35 minute run after a very long mile run in the AM.

One benefit of running a shorter run after a longer run was to move the lactic acid along. More like a later in the day warm down. And believe it or not, I did feel a whole lot better the next day running.

Another benefit of running doubles , it helped to increase your mileage. It was pretty easy to run 120 or so mile doing doubles.

patti wrote:

I ran doubles for years. I, especially, liked the after effects of running a second 35 minute run after a very long mile run in the AM.

What was the main difference you found between a very long mile run in the AM versus a medium mile run, or short mile run in the AM?

Also, did you wear your heavy 10 oz shoes or your light 10 oz shoes for those runs?

You run doubles because that's what champions do.

I ran in the Mariah.

And I along with Tony Sandoval, was a tail wind tester way before they came out on the market.

The main difference I found from running a short run in the PM was that the awkwardness of having to regain my composure for running after a twenty miler with pick ups. THe first twenty minutes I was all out of sorts then the next ten minutes were really good and the last five just bringing it home.

As a matter of fact a lot of Squires athletes did this way of running/ Rodgers, Meyers. Greater Boston Track Club. MY coach was coached by Squires.

Love it when a decorated former pro drops in to shed light on their training methods. How many LRers do you suppose have ever doubled with a morning 20mi pickup? That's bossin it.

Hi-five Patti.

defy,

Please don't make fun of the former holder of world and American bests.

patti wrote:

I ran doubles for years. I, especially, liked the after effects of running a second 35 minute run after a very long mile run in the AM.

One benefit of running a shorter run after a longer run was to move the lactic acid along. More like a later in the day warm down. And believe it or not, I did feel a whole lot better the next day running.

Another benefit of running doubles , it helped to increase your mileage. It was pretty easy to run 120 or so mile doing doubles.

Do you have a clearer description of "move the lactic acid around?" I've heard "flush out the system" and other sayings, but I really don't truly understand it. Doesn't Lactate clear out anyway, an easy run just speeds the process slightly, right? I personally like easy run as the first run because I feel better for my higher quality second run, but everything I see seems to have the earlier run as the harder effort.

Lactate clears in about an hour. Don't need no cool down or an extra jog for that. The scientific reasoning behind doubles is bogus (as with most other "science" on running).

You run doubles because it's a proven way to get faster.

What has been said above. When you run you increase blood flow to the muscles. Assuming you're intaking the right nutrition, that means you increase the delivery of recovery, and also stimulate hormone release for muscle recovery. Also, you get more mileage.

I've noticed on days that I do a workout in the morning then take 30 min to jog in the afternoon the next day feels a whole lot better.

I think it's Malmo that has said it, but if you're doing big mileage doubles you essentially don't need to put an emphasis on the long run because you're already getting enough mileage in?

DaCloner wrote:

I think it's Malmo that has said it, but if you're doing big mileage doubles you essentially don't need to put an emphasis on the long run because you're already getting enough mileage in?

No, I said, take care of the other 6 days of the week before you add the long run. I've never said anything about "getting enough mileage in" as a reason to run, or not run, the long run.

The long run would be on a Sunday...about twenty miles or so...gearing up leading towards a Spring or Fall Marathon. The short run afterwards was due to the suggestion of Squires. About four to five hours after you finished your long intensive run, the athlete should run at least thirty five to forty minutes...and no more.

Yes, lactic acid would move around...stiffness would either not be there the next day or it would be greatly lessened. It's a recovery run...more like a run later in the day after a race. A lot of the runs are either recovery or gearing up towards an intense workout..depending on where the athlete was in the training cycle.

As a non scientific person, (though I love to cook), I do know it worked for me. Without doubles I would never have attained the strength to race longer distances or the staying power to run fifteen k and under.

It's all about blood flow and getting growth factors to the working muscles. At least from bone studies (Robling and others at IUPUI), they've found that doing 2 mechanical bouts separated by 4-6 hours between, rather than 1 bout of the same total duration, was more 'anabolic' to bone.

Also, I've got a study on my computer at home that did a strength training study- doing 2 bouts was better than 1 because it greater upregulated factors for aerobic metabolism (~citrate synthase). This could mean greater glyocogen sparing. Basically, it's better for developing the ability to work through aerobic metabolism if the "glass is always half full".

Like Patti, I've done the long run double for years and always felt like it helped recover from the long run and bounce back quicker for the next workout. It all come down to blood flow.

patti wrote:

The short run afterwards was due to the suggestion of Squires. About four to five hours after you finished your long intensive run, the athlete should run at least thirty five to forty minutes...and no more.

I can barely walk 4-5 hours after a 20 miler, much less even think about going back out for another 35-40 min....guess that's why I never tried this professionally!

Second the high five from above!

patti wrote:

Yes, lactic acid would move around...stiffness would either not be there the next day or it would be greatly lessened.

What you call lactic acid doesn't cause stiffness. No doubt your assessment of the benefits of running doubles was totally correct. But it simply has got nothing to do with lactate.