ok
ok
lexel wrote:
AnnaCallis wrote:
How healthy it is running twice a day? I would like to know more about it.
Why do you think that should be unhealthy?
Because you go for another 45 min when your body still is in recovery phase after 75 min .
AnnaBeauty wrote:
lexel wrote:
Why do you think that should be unhealthy?
Because you go for another 45 min when your body still is in recovery phase after 75 min .
Thx that you take care about my health.
The term 'unhealthy' means for me that my health is in danger. I do not see that. I can tire yes, but i would adjust and i would listen to my body and would do a rest day, or go slower. I would never keep up the plan blindly, i am too old and experienced enough (40 years of sport) to avoid that trap.
Here i found something to read for you:
https://www.runnersworld.com/training/a20790487/pros-and-cons-of-running-twice-a-day/lexel wrote:
AnnaBeauty wrote:
Because you go for another 45 min when your body still is in recovery phase after 75 min .
Thx that you take care about my health.
The term 'unhealthy' means for me that my health is in danger. I do not see that. I can tire yes, but i would adjust and i would listen to my body and would do a rest day, or go slower. I would never keep up the plan blindly, i am too old and experienced enough (40 years of sport) to avoid that trap.
Here i found something to read for you:
https://www.runnersworld.com/training/a20790487/pros-and-cons-of-running-twice-a-day/
There's no evidence of what these guys telling here. And Brad Hudson is among the many coaches who were question marks about Yuki Kawauchi's rise and rampage with only once a day training.
AnnaBeauty wrote:
There's no evidence of what these guys telling here. And Brad Hudson is among the many coaches who were question marks about Yuki Kawauchi's rise and rampage with only once a day training.
There does not need to be evidence for everything. Practice experience was in the past often before science. And as more i read about sport science as more i see that not too much is clear.
What is clear is that a new training stimulus has a good probability to increase performance.
I have 2 shots at it:
a) increasing the weekly volume from 7-8h to 10h
b) training twice a day (instead of once/day)
lexel wrote:
AnnaBeauty wrote:
There's no evidence of what these guys telling here. And Brad Hudson is among the many coaches who were question marks about Yuki Kawauchi's rise and rampage with only once a day training.
There does not need to be evidence for everything. Practice experience was in the past often before science. And as more i read about sport science as more i see that not too much is clear.
What is clear is that a new training stimulus has a good probability to increase performance.
I have 2 shots at it:
a) increasing the weekly volume from 7-8h to 10h
b) training twice a day (instead of once/day)
There's a third shot for you to increase your performance.Staying with normal volume and increase stimulus by running singles smarter and more efficiently and get more recovery than usual. Good luck!
AnnaB wrote:
lexel wrote:
There does not need to be evidence for everything. Practice experience was in the past often before science. And as more i read about sport science as more i see that not too much is clear.
What is clear is that a new training stimulus has a good probability to increase performance.
I have 2 shots at it:
a) increasing the weekly volume from 7-8h to 10h
b) training twice a day (instead of once/day)
There's a third shot for you to increase your performance.Staying with normal volume and increase stimulus by running singles smarter and more efficiently and get more recovery than usual. Good luck!
Either way, homeboy is increasing his volume at the same moment he switches to doubles. I have a big popcorn tub at the ready.
AnnaB wrote:
There's a third shot for you to increase your performance.Staying with normal volume and increase stimulus by running singles smarter and more efficiently and get more recovery than usual. Good luck!
How do you know how i run my singles now and that is not smart enough? Or unefficient?
Have a little bit the feeling this is some chit-chat. Dont mind a flirt.
But why not: What would be your concrete plan for the first week for me?
Have a good day.
lexel wrote:
AnnaB wrote:
There's a third shot for you to increase your performance.Staying with normal volume and increase stimulus by running singles smarter and more efficiently and get more recovery than usual. Good luck!
How do you know how i run my singles now and that is not smart enough? Or unefficient?
Have a little bit the feeling this is some chit-chat. Dont mind a flirt.
But why not: What would be your concrete plan for the first week for me?
Have a good day.
I have seen your example training and it's far from the best you can do on singles.By the way happily married and not interested of a flirt. Good luck!
AnnaBanana wrote:
lexel wrote:
How do you know how i run my singles now and that is not smart enough? Or unefficient?
Have a little bit the feeling this is some chit-chat. Dont mind a flirt.
But why not: What would be your concrete plan for the first week for me?
Have a good day.
I have seen your example training and it's far from the best you can do on singles.By the way happily married and not interested of a flirt. Good luck!
Yes…he’s a terminal mix of clueless, and hard-headed in the dumbest possible way.
AnnaBanana wrote:
I have seen your example training and it's far from the best you can do on singles.By the way happily married and not interested of a flirt. Good luck!
I posted here a plan with doubles, maybe you mixed something up?
Hope you don't coach anybody :)
lexel wrote:
AnnaBanana wrote:
I have seen your example training and it's far from the best you can do on singles.By the way happily married and not interested of a flirt. Good luck!
I posted here a plan with doubles, maybe you mixed something up?
Hope you don't coach anybody :)
I referred to the training examples you have shown before that.
I'm just getting back into shape right now and doing doubles pretty much every day. I've generally run doubles when getting off the couch and ramping my mileage up, and also do them most days (sometimes even triples - e.g., run to work, run at lunch, run home) if I'm running high volume.
It gives my legs time to recover and do some refueling rather than just pounding out the miles all at once. I know everyone is different, but in my experience, volume and tempos are critical to seeing a lot of improvement in fitness.
No idea as to your level of experience or your current volume or injury threshold so have no clue as to what to suggest but there is no way I'd be able to find the time to run high volume or avoid injury on an aggressive ramp up from the couch without doubling up. The only "junk" miles in my view are the ones that get you injured or interfere with being able to complete key workouts (e.g., long run, tempo, intervals, etc.).
Best of luck!
AnnaGoesBananas wrote:
I referred to the training examples you have shown before that.
I have still no plan posted before my mentioned one.
Why you do not use your registred name Annacallis? :)
Happy bananas
Kootenay Runner wrote:
I'm just getting back into shape right now and doing doubles pretty much every day. I've generally run doubles when getting off the couch and ramping my mileage up, and also do them most days (sometimes even triples - e.g., run to work, run at lunch, run home) if I'm running high volume.
It gives my legs time to recover and do some refueling rather than just pounding out the miles all at once. I know everyone is different, but in my experience, volume and tempos are critical to seeing a lot of improvement in fitness.
No idea as to your level of experience or your current volume or injury threshold so have no clue as to what to suggest but there is no way I'd be able to find the time to run high volume or avoid injury on an aggressive ramp up from the couch without doubling up. The only "junk" miles in my view are the ones that get you injured or interfere with being able to complete key workouts (e.g., long run, tempo, intervals, etc.).
Best of luck!
Thanks a lot for your very nice feedback.
My first post gives away something about volume and performance. Dont belive in injury threshold, but i believe in a healthy running form.
I wish you all the best for your comeback!
Last week i had a spiroergometry.
Running economy was on a very good level, performance also (for my age). Fett burning very good, and the so called Anaerobic threshold (VT2) was a little bit lower as expected. The doctor concluded that everything is at his maximum and i can only get better by increasing my weekly volume. That was the good news.
The bad news is that i have to repeat testing on a bike-ergometer (without mask) to my limit to see if my EKG (cardiogram) is ok this time. Next week i have the appointment with a pediatrician ...
A confirmation could mean that i need a heart operation to prevent a possible heart attack ...
lexel wrote:
The doctor concluded that everything is at his maximum and i can only get better by increasing my weekly volume. That was the good news.
The doctor who administered your lab tests used the results to definitively assess what you needed to change in your training?
I suspect you suggested you would increase your mileage next, and he was like "yeah that'll work". Or was he like "your VT2 indicates you are doing enough long intervals!"
Either way, this entire thread has a confusing vibe
sounds good wrote:
lexel wrote:
The doctor concluded that everything is at his maximum and i can only get better by increasing my weekly volume. That was the good news.
The doctor who administered your lab tests used the results to definitively assess what you needed to change in your training?
I suspect you suggested you would increase your mileage next, and he was like "yeah that'll work". Or was he like "your VT2 indicates you are doing enough long intervals!"
Either way, this entire thread has a confusing vibe
And that’s because lexel is as confused as they come.
sounds good wrote:
The doctor who administered your lab tests used the results to definitively assess what you needed to change in your training?
I suspect you suggested you would increase your mileage next, and he was like "yeah that'll work". Or was he like "your VT2 indicates you are doing enough long intervals!"
Either way, this entire thread has a confusing vibe
I started this thread before i had my spiroergometry. This appointment came from my side, and it was my free will to do so. A birthday present from my wife (as wishes from my side).
At this visit i got the suprised information there is possible an issue with my heart. I was shocked and suprised.
Of course the sport doctor and myself had a discussion, but i did not made any suggestion. It was his comment, based on the measured spiro data, that only volume could do the trick.
Hope this is more clear now.
Just bumping for results on this 2-week experiment. What did you end up doing lexel oh wise one? Did your training take off like a rocket ship? Or did you come to terms with the fact that randomly switching up your training for two weeks will not change things in the long term (especially if you end up going back to doing what you did before)?