ChrsitopherKringle wrote:
I think you are correct. And I think people who are more inclined to be natural middle distance runners understand the ideology of very slow easy days more than your general hubby jogger or even your general serious marathoner. Sprinters are on the extreme and might not even do easy days but rather take it completely off or cross train.
He's parroting what's been known for decades...aka repeating. Are you guys brothers or something more than that?
I like to work on my form on easy days. As I zero in and get a great rhythm, that’s where I tend to go too fast and suddenly my easy has turned too hard but fun.
Yeah, I need to slow and run bored.
1ub2run wrote:
I like to work on my form on easy days. As I zero in and get a great rhythm, that’s where I tend to go too fast and suddenly my easy has turned too hard but fun.
Yeah, I need to slow and run bored.
I'm usually so beat up at an easy day that I'm just trying to get the mileage in somehow without slogging (trying to keep at least somewhat steady cadence). I work on form on my hard days, when I'm fresh and run at paces where it's very important.
Sure, if not doing any workouts or feeling super fresh on an easy day, it's also great to work on form but I usually don't have too many of these days.
I totally agree with what you're saying.
I'm just saying when people begin to switch to higher mileages, it's a lot easier than most people make it out to be. I'm sure once I get more accustomed to it, that the pace of my easy days will gradually become faster as well.
I think there are just so many posts on letsrun about people taking painstaking efforts to raise their weekly average mileage by like 5-10 miles at time, when that doesn't seem to really be necessary during a building phase if you just take things slow.
ShilohDoesntCare wrote:
100% true. Anyone that disagrees with this is wrong.
You're wrong. Easy pace should not be any different whether or not you're running 60mpw or 100mpw.
that is correct.
Third Leg wrote:
My issue with Letsrun.com's obsession with slow mileage is that most posters here think there are only two types of running- work outs (tempos, intervals, etc) and easy days. And that's simply not true for most people. There is such a thing as a normal day, a maintenance day, a just go out and run how I feel day.
I see what you're saying, but if you aren't doing a workout or a tempo, then the run is by definition an easy run isn't it?
I think where people get into trouble is where they set arbitrary times that they want to hit for their easy days, either too fast or too slow. Too fast is the greater error and can lead to burnout, but if you try to keep them too slow you might also be limiting yourself unnecessarily.
For instance, if you have a workout the day AFTER your easy day, perhaps you throw in some strides to get the legs cooking. So this version of your easy day would be a little bit quicker.
In contrast, say you had a really tough workout the day BEFORE your easy day. Then you go out by feel and you're pretty wiped, so you run a lot slower.
Both are easy days, but the paces are different. Easy days should always be run by feel and never try to keep them too fast or too slow, just run comfortably.
Short answer: yes.
Evidence: my first couple years of college xc.
More evidence: atleats half the 1st and 2nd year guys on my team every single year.
always a loser wrote:
No. My sister got a stress fracture in her foot last month. She walks 3 miles per day, 5 days per week. Really slow runners take twice as many steps as fast runners and are on their feet twice as long. Higher risk of injury in a 12 minute per mile 4 hour run than a 6 minute per mile 2 hour run.
More steps = less force per step.
Less force = less stress on bones.
What you are ignoring is the total time she spent on her feet. If you want to compare training volumes of runners who have different paces you need to use time instead of distance. Of course a great exposure time will increase injury risk.
Given 2 people both run 6 hours per week at different paces I would put my money on the one who takes fewer steps to be more injury prone.
I believe this to be wrong (being awkward here)
I struggle with high mileage due to busy work life and a young family. If I hit 60mpw then I am doing well.
If I actually ran slower then I could not do as many miles, would this then be better for me?
Sure I could spend more time running but that’s time I’m not with my wife/kids, or it’s less sleep so worse recovery and means I’m more tired when spending time with family.
Salazar advocated running your easy runs only 1:30 per mile slower than your 5K race pace otherwise you're just burning calories.
Salazar never ran 2:08 on a legit course and nobody in their right mind believes he was clean as an athlete or coach.
The secret to getting fast over distance is to run your easy runs easy, but as fast as you can as long as it's still easy! Then it's a matter of adaptation to better form, technique and so forth, not the mistaken belief that more effort will get you anywhere. You can't build your max effort from 100% to 200%.
Salazar speaks on Easy Pace. End of discussion.
I hear Salazar explaining that he thinks easy runs should be about 1:30 slower per mile than current 5k pace.
I do not hear him explain why he thinks this is preferable to running slower. He just says "oh you'll be tired but then you adapt, you're tired all the time".
Why won't coaches just admit when they found a training principle that works for their (elite) athletes, and they don't know why it works, and they aren't sure if it applies more generally? Instead we get salazar exclaiming he knows the secret of easy run pace.
I agree with this 100%. So many people feel the need to prove themselves on easy days & that sacrifices good training on what are supposed to be harder days. Too many of us do too much running in the grey zone where you're just a little slower than marathon pace (:15-:45) on easy days. I haven't seen a convincing argument that that's a good way to train.
I also will be intrigued at what happens if OP keeps going through higher mileage builds. The training does take a toll on you eventually. Some people train well but might be in their 12th marathon build dealing with injury/fatigue/whatever.
malmo wrote:
ShilohDoesntCare wrote:
100% true. Anyone that disagrees with this is wrong.
You're wrong. Easy pace should not be any different whether or not you're running 60mpw or 100mpw.
I was going to post this as well. The idea of running slower the more you run is arsstit backwards. You'd be running forever to reach 100 at 10 pace for example, then what, slow down even more to get to 120? ha.
As fitness improves, from yeah running more, surely you'l run faster at your easy EFFORT.
The actual problem which seems baffling to me is quite a lot of runners have zero idea how to judge effort, RPE whatever, really no clue.
When I ran Marathons I always did my long and easy runs at at sub 7 minute pace.
Maybe that's why I never boke out of my plateau. Over 70 miles/week was just not in the cards, maybe because I always pushed a bit too hard.
From the horse's mouth:
"I don’t really care about the pace. I’m not trying to run “slow” by any means, but I have no concerns that I am going too slow. But when I am running twice a day, 120 miles a week, the pace is the last thing I need to even think about. I need to go too “slow” (in your opinion not mine) if I want to workout consistently and effectively." -- Weldon Johnson (2006)
https://www.letsrun.com/news/2006/09/wejo-speaks-why-i-sucked-in-college/
Also adding, in the same vein, that as a sprinter, this is how the vast majority of programs that screw up extensive tempo on easy days screw up extensive tempo. It is a gentle run, not crazy death conditioning.
Question: What have you run in the mile/800 since coming back?