140 Miles per week

Famous American clock cleaner wrote:

Mathematically, no. The risk of running 110 mi a week will always be greater than 90. I don't know why you're making the argument: seems like a moot point. If you progress correctly you will always have a better chance of running a higher mileage safely.

The training principle of individuality suggests that 90 miles a week will be better than 110 for some people and vice versa. Someone might have more slow twitch fibers and require more easy and threshold running to develop them, thus higher mileage

Twinn wrote:

What makes you say that? There is one good answer, and that is they risk more injury/fatigue at higher mileages, but as I said, if you train right, progress correctly, then the risk of injury at 110 and 90 is the same.

That is what I was TRYING to say.

Read the autobiographies of British runners from the 1960s and 70s such as Ron Hill. They all ran in excess of 100 miles a week, sometimes well in excess! They may have been elite runners but they were all amateurs with full time jobs.

I doubt this guy can even break 14:30 in the 5k...

Abdoujaparov wrote:

THere's always a few nutters who do this - my main Strava club includes a guy who run commutes 17.5 miles a day at 8.30-9 minute pace, 6 days a week for 210 miles a week. I don't know if he ever races and don't know him personally. I don't know anyone who routinely breaks 110 and isn't (a) a very dedicated dropped out hippie ultra runner or (b) a pro.

You must mean, each way? :)

Funny I bike commute, 5 days a week, 18 miles each way, and everyone who finds out, thinks I'm crazy....now I have a good example of a lot more crazy than me.

Famous American clock cleaner wrote:

Mathematically, no. The risk of running 110 mi a week will always be greater than 90. I don't know why you're making the argument: seems like a moot point. If you progress correctly you will always have a better chance of running a higher mileage safely.

The training principle of individuality suggests that 90 miles a week will be better than 110 for some people and vice versa. Someone might have more slow twitch fibers and require more easy and threshold running to develop them, thus higher mileage

Twinn wrote:

What makes you say that? There is one good answer, and that is they risk more injury/fatigue at higher mileages, but as I said, if you train right, progress correctly, then the risk of injury at 110 and 90 is the same.

Look, I understand your perspective. But I am trying to get you to change your perspective.

Training is not math. Injuries are not probability. You're pretending they are and using that to justify less work being better.

And principle of individuality? I don't think you know what you mean when you say that. All things being equal, any individual will be a better runner with higher milage, as I said before. Ignoring injuries, fatigue, boredom, dude getting made fun of by his neighbor, all things being equal, more mileage will make a better runner, for every individual.

Your concern over those other factors, injury, fatigue, etc. is justified. But those aren't absolutes. You train to avoid injuries. You eat and sleep well to avoid injuries. Your body doesn't have an odometer, and doesn't know the difference between 10, 90, and 160 miles. All it does feel is the stress, all it does in response is to try to adapt. Years of progression, upping milage and its stress in that sweet spot, and any individual can be running safely at a higher mileage (what is individual is that sweet spot: some can bump into new territory 10 miles at a time, while others might push 3 new miles and take a down week. That progression is the individual part.)

You talk about training as individual, which is good, but you're thinking about it as a paint by numbers game: 90 good, 110 bad. All I'll say is you're making the choice to work less hard than others.

I ran this much for a while in grad school and 130s consistently after. Ran the best times of my life then and high mileage helped. As others have said, its not that much time. Just get up an hour earlier in the morning and get at least 8 and then do a run of at least 12 after work/classes. Chances are you waste a ton of time on netflix, games, hanging out with people, etc. outside of work. Depending on where you live, it can get very boring though...

I ran up to 150 in college, as a 442 HS miles I went on to run 2934 in the 10k.https://runnomad.com/why-not-going-to-the-university-of-oregon-was-the-best-thing-that-happened-to-me/

Cheesy wrote:

I just saw a thread where someone mentioned that they ran 144mpw and my first reaction was to call them out. However, it got me thinking. How many non professionals really run over 140 miles/week? I'm a D1 runner, and I've only met one guy that claimed he had, and even then I didn't really believe him.

kvothe wrote:

Just get up an hour earlier in the morning and get at least 8 and then do a run of at least 12 after work/classes.

Yes, "just" do that. It's all very very very simple.

And don't get injured, of course.

Chances are you waste a ton of time on netflix, games, hanging out with people, etc. outside of work.

You mean, waste time with that thing called "having a life". I mean really, who wants to play games, be entertained, and, heaven forbid who would ever want to "hang out with people"?

Better to just slog along by yourself for hours on end so that you can run a faster, but still non-world class 10k or marathon. Yes, yes indeed, a much better use of one's time.

SMH

I follow a 52 year old guy on Strava and he regularly runs 150+ mpw. He topped the LetsRun leaderboard on Strava for months. He does most of his mileage around 7.20-8.00. He only runs a max of 6 days per week too. One day he did 30 miles at about 7.40 pace and then went out a few hours later and ran 14 miles as an 'easy to moderate' progression run, doing a half in around 1.30, having started out at about 7.30 pace. He's injured now but not a running/overuse injury.

I'm currently in the middle of the college recruiting process with D1 and some high ranked D2 schools. One coach I talked to, when I asked how many MPW they do, he said that it's all individual, bla, bla, bla, but the highest the girls go is 85 MPW. Then he added, I don't know why, probably more just like a brag or something, he said that he has some guys who run 140 MPW. Then he said he's a low mileage coach. 🤔

Well that settles it... wrote:

You mean, waste time with that thing called "having a life". I mean really, who wants to play games, be entertained, and, heaven forbid who would ever want to "hang out with people"?

Better to just slog along by yourself for hours on end so that you can run a faster, but still non-world class 10k or marathon. Yes, yes indeed, a much better use of one's time.

SMH

Well, I always thought so.

HRE wrote:

Well that settles it... wrote:

You mean, waste time with that thing called "having a life". I mean really, who wants to play games, be entertained, and, heaven forbid who would ever want to "hang out with people"?

Better to just slog along by yourself for hours on end so that you can run a faster, but still non-world class 10k or marathon. Yes, yes indeed, a much better use of one's time.

SMH

Well, I always thought so.

A very wise man once told me, "unless you're hitting the OT standard, literally NO ONE cares if you run 2:50 or 2:20." Ok so maybe 50 or so Letsrunners care.

Something to consider when slogging out 100+ mile weeks....

So YOU don't care if you run 2:50 or 2:20? Then you're probably better off with a lot of Netflix time. I did care and didn't really give a crap if no one else did and trying to do so was a lot more meaningful to me than hanging out with people or watching Netflix, well, had there been a Netflix to watch.

HRE wrote:

So YOU don't care if you run 2:50 or 2:20? Then you're probably better off with a lot of Netflix time. I did care and didn't really give a crap if no one else did and trying to do so was a lot more meaningful to me than hanging out with people or watching Netflix, well, had there been a Netflix to watch.

I actually don't watch Netflix or have cable. Just wanted to share some wisdom here. But if you personally care and sub 2:40, 2:30 or whatever is a goal of yours, then yes, I agree, 100+ mile weeks may be worth it. Just be sure to actually hang out with real people (outside of work and running) occasionally....

I'm not sure why you think I'm yelling. Anyways...We're talking past each other. It sounds like we agree.I guess I didn't make myself clear earlier. As the context of the thread, I was talking about mileage in holistic and general terms. I assumed, because we were talking about runners doing 90,110, 140 mpw, that we were talking about runners who had the fundamentals down. The original poster had been talking about being a former D1 athlete. That our hypothetical athletes were doing workouts with intensity, periodized their training well, were pragmatic enough to rest when they needed, etc. was a given, I thought. I also figured we were talking about long distance runners, and was careful to add

Twinn wrote:

For every runner racing more than 3000m, safely adapting to a higher mileage will make them a better runner.

just to be sure.

I don't need to reiterate myself. I'll point out your sections that say the same thing.

proper progression will always be key no matter what mileage you are at.

...

increasing the volume of training that you train CAN HELP DRIVE IMPROVEMENT

And I'll make it clear now that no, not for every runner is more mileage the 1st step. Most hobby joggers would improve (if they wanted to) simply by switching out one of their morning jogs with the dog for a fartlek. Most high school kids would improve if their coach got them off the track and out on a tempo run. Many college kids would improve if they took the pressure off and rested. Milers don't want more volume because they need to preserve every fast twitch muscle they can, and also don't want to lose the elasticity that gets lost at bigger volumes.

But in the context of this thread, long distance athletes who have the fundamentals down, those who race and get on the track and hit the hills and generally train with intention, more mileage is better.

I'm writing this because especially in the US, we have runners who see 100mpw as some sort of cliff. HS kids warn their teammates not to get to close, college kids celebrate clicking off a few over the summer, and amature post collegiate athletes keep this mentality, that it all tops out at 100. I'm exaggerating obviously, but the point is, too many American runners are afraid of increasing their mileage. Maybe they got hurt running 105 in college, but don't realize that now their 26 and have a more mature body that could take it. And I'm talking about runners: guys who ran in college, say. Sub 2:30 guys, sub 31:00. The kind of runners that are already doing smart, regular workouts to get where they are, but stuck because they're not pushing their mileage.

This is the point that I'm speaking to, and I don't think I was wrong in reading this thread in this context.

Avoiding hanging out with real people has been a lifelong goal.

Not completely related to the topic, but may I ask those who have had run 140+ mpw here what your PRs are?

CuriousReader wrote:

How's your racing going these days? I remember following your training on the weekly thread. Were you shooting for marathon OT at some point?

Hey! It's actually going very well. I ran 14:31 for 5k last summer and will be running the same race tomorrow and shooting for a bit quicker.

So far this season I've run 30:10 for 10k (vs 30:47 for same race year before) and 68:00 at the US Half Marathon Championships where I was 18th vs 68:43 the year before. I went 24:10 for 5mi vs 24:46 the year before. I also ran 67:43 through HM at USA 25k Champs where I was 16th.

I'm running US 20k champs in a few weeks then CIM in December and shooting for under 2:19 which I think is very possible. I think the mileage has helped, but just being consistent has been the biggest factor. Like I said, it's very possible once you reset your mental expectations and push yourself out of your comfort zone.

ScriptedConnection wrote:

Not completely related to the topic, but may I ask those who have had run 140+ mpw here what your PRs are?

Sorry for double post... but here is a progression from 2012 on

PRs (yearly mpw average in parentheses)

2012 (45) - 15:30 road 5k, 26:02 8k, 32:12 10k

2013 (67) - 4:26 road mile, 15:04 road 5k, 15:09 track 5k, 25:48 8k, 31:51 10k

2014 (92) - 4:23 indoor mile, 8:45 3k, 14:57 road 5k, 14:58 track 5k, 25:30 8k, 31:24 10k, 69:06 HM

2015 (102) - 8:33 3k, 14:45 track 5k, 25:02 8k. 2:31:58 marathon.

2016 (112) - 5k 14:31, 24:46 5mi, 30:47 10k, 67:32 HM

2017 (120 so far) - 5k 14:36, 24:10 5mi, 30:10 10k, 67:43HM through 25k race. Running fall HM and fall marathon.