That’s what he did in highschool, him and Teare are doing 60s and 70s on 6 day weeks right now
That’s what he did in highschool, him and Teare are doing 60s and 70s on 6 day weeks right now
50mpw is not low mileage!
snowdays wrote:
everyone who runs an elite performance is obviously not counting 10-15 miles per day of warmup and cooldown.
also, you can only lie about doing less mileage than you're doing - it's not possible to lie that you're doing more mileage than you're doing.
every time you see an 800 runner post a workout where they're doing like, sub-40 300s, pay no attention. they're trying to distract you from the fact that they're doing 2 hour long runs every day.
10-15 miles "per day" of warmup and cooldown???
2 hour long runs "every day" for an 800 runner???
No. Just no.
And yes, is is "possible" to lie that you're doing more mileage than you're doing.
Running low millage in HS or too low can be unattractive for lots of college programs. You take a kid running 30 miles a week and runs 4:10. It will take him over 4 years to a normal workload to run competitive in college cross country.
lots of college coaches will pass on kids who only run 30 miles a week in HS.
The TRUTH is GOOOOOOOD wrote:
Running low millage in HS or too low can be unattractive for lots of college programs. You take a kid running 30 miles a week and runs 4:10. It will take him over 4 years to a normal workload to run competitive in college cross country.
lots of college coaches will pass on kids who only run 30 miles a week in HS.
Then they are incompetent and don't know how to coach low mileage!
The TRUTH is GOOOOOOOD wrote:
Running low millage in HS or too low can be unattractive for lots of college programs. You take a kid running 30 miles a week and runs 4:10. It will take him over 4 years to a normal workload to run competitive in college cross country.
lots of college coaches will pass on kids who only run 30 miles a week in HS.
lots of college coaches made the right decision to pass on cole hocker
The TRUTH is GOOOOOOOD wrote:
Running low millage in HS or too low can be unattractive for lots of college programs. You take a kid running 30 miles a week and runs 4:10. It will take him over 4 years to a normal workload to run competitive in college cross country.
lots of college coaches will pass on kids who only run 30 miles a week in HS.
You can’t be serious rn.
If you do it right you can build from 30ish mpw to 50-60 in one year and then 70+ the next. If you run 4:10 on 30 you’re going to run faster than 4:10 on 50 so it wouldn’t be an issue.
like, literally the only way 30mpw 4:10 kid gets passed over is if a coach is one piece away from an NCAA XC title with a team of all seniors, and taking the 30mpw kid prevents the coach from getting a grinder that can make an immediate impact at 8k/10k
Klaas Lok, who has promoted his book and unique training approach on this board, ran 3:38/13:38/28:24 back in the late 70's/early 80's while training using the Verheul Method (later tweaked by Lok and now called the 'Easy Interval Method' or 'souplessemethode' in Dutch).
It's not totally clear from his book what his weekly volume was during those years, but a rough estimate would put him in the 50 - 60 mpw range, with about 20 - 25 of those miles consisting of quality running. So, he was doing the same amount of quality as someone using an 80/20 approach and running 100+ mpw.
People too often lose the plot in chasing arbitrary mileage quotas. Mileage totals should be the result of a week's worth of general and specific training for your chosen event distance, and not an end in itself. If your low mileage training is specific, allows for proper recovery, and you are improving, there is no reason to switch to high mileage unless the specific demands of the event require it (e.g., the marathon). Of course, this flies in the face of conventional LRC training dogma.
For me personally, there is a very real detriment to what I assume is my running economy at race paces when I start to run mileage over 50-60 mpw. The dead-legged feeling seems to more than offset any apparent aerobic benefit from additional time spent running. Different things work for different people, I guess.
80 mpw is low mileage
Coaches hate him - this one weird trick makes low mileage runners faster that high mileage runners. Sounds too good to be true but they cant stop him.
lvrhs1992 wrote:
50mpw is not low mileage!
For girls it's medium
For guys, it really is low mileage in the grand scheme of things, if of course you aren't a hobbyjogger
101701 wrote:
The Natalie Cook thread made me think of this. Any elite distance runners, past or present, running fast on crazy low mileage?
The OP said "elite distance runners", so I don't think 1500m and below runners should be mentioned as examples. That's middle distance. Everyone has probably heard of guys from Roger Bannister to Donavan Brazier being low-mileage, but they weren't distance runners.
The closest I can think of, just based on what I've heard, is guys like Henry Marsh. Definitely elite, as he was one of the very top steeplechasers for a number of years.
I think the real question is, have any distance runners reached their potential while running "crazy low mileage". Because one has to assume that runners like Geb and Bekele, for example, would have been elite even if they'd run low mileage - but not as good as they were with normal, relatively high mileage.
lvrhs1992 wrote:
50mpw is not low mileage!
For an elite long distance runner, that is very low mileage.
Scottish marathon runner Stephanie Twell avg. 68 miles per week inc. marathon prep.
GettingFasterDude wrote:
lvrhs1992 wrote:
50mpw is not low mileage!
For an elite long distance runner, that is very low mileage.
And probably unheard of. Yeah you'll get some 2.15 marathoner saying he did it of a block of 30mpw due to x reason, whilst ignoring the fact he ran 100+ for the majority of the previous year.
Finance Bro wrote:
Klaas Lok, who has promoted his book and unique training approach on this board, ran 3:38/13:38/28:24 back in the late 70's/early 80's while training using the Verheul Method (later tweaked by Lok and now called the 'Easy Interval Method' or 'souplessemethode' in Dutch).
It's not totally clear from his book what his weekly volume was during those years, but a rough estimate would put him in the 50 - 60 mpw range, with about 20 - 25 of those miles consisting of quality running. So, he was doing the same amount of quality as someone using an 80/20 approach and running 100+ mpw.
People too often lose the plot in chasing arbitrary mileage quotas. Mileage totals should be the result of a week's worth of general and specific training for your chosen event distance, and not an end in itself. If your low mileage training is specific, allows for proper recovery, and you are improving, there is no reason to switch to high mileage unless the specific demands of the event require it (e.g., the marathon). Of course, this flies in the face of conventional LRC training dogma.
For me personally, there is a very real detriment to what I assume is my running economy at race paces when I start to run mileage over 50-60 mpw. The dead-legged feeling seems to more than offset any apparent aerobic benefit from additional time spent running. Different things work for different people, I guess.
I have that book and it's very interesting. Also I agree with the logic that your weekly mileage is what it is, you don't aim for it. You do you workouts and runs specific to your event you are training for, the weekly mileage, what ever it is, is a result of that, plus your fitness.
Doing runs for time is a way to get out of this mileage obsession. As you get fitter you'll naturally get faster, and your weekly mileage will creep up as a result.
So far it looks like the answer to the OP's question is "no".
Steeplechase Henry Marsh...around 30 MPW.
Henry had no choice. Think he had a weak immune system and came down with viral infections if he ran any sort of volume. Also struggled to maintain form deep into seasons. However, I believe Bowerman actually had him in the 40-50 mpw range.
Here's what Marsh had to say about his training (he wrote this to a lets run poster in 2003).
Always took a month after summer track season. Commented that he "always did better late summer in meets than the June nationals in U.S. Said that the type of training he did may have atrributed to a longer peak or late peak in summer.Henry then spent 1 month "just getting back into a training regime, running 20 -30 miles a week easy".MOndays were the biggest mileage day, with 3-4 miles in the morning, followed by a 10 Miler ( his long run). Henry mentioned that " the 10 miler got fatser as the year progressed. His fastest was 57:00 towards the end of the year.Tuesdays: 2-3 Miles am on the treadmill. PM: 3,000 Metersof longer intervals and he usually ran in a ladder format.The longest was 1200 Meters. Warm - Up was always a 1 mile jog, followed by stretching and then 1 mile of fast strides on straight, jog the curves and then some more stretching.Wed: 2 - 3 Miles am treadmill3- 4 miles pm treadmill or trails. Henry said that if was very tired he cut this down even to 1-2 mile jog an some stretching, because he wanted to be well recovered.Thursdays: 3 - 4 miles am on treadmill. PM: 1500 meters of reps at faster than race pace; such as 200m, 300, or 400 m reps with a longer recovery. Henry said he got down to 26-28 for the 200's.Friday: The second lightest recovery day of the week, behind the sunday rest day. 1 - 2 mile jog on treadmill am1-3 mile jog on treadmill pmSaturday: Early season, steady mileage of say 5- 7 miles.progressing to 1-2 mile warm up - tempo run and warmdown. Race simulations in season or races. RAN SEVERAL INDOOR MEETS and SAID THIS BROUGHT HIM AROUND BETTER FOR OUTDOORS.Sunday: REST DAYFunny guy, actually. Said that guys in europe would laugh at his workouts and he would comment, "why should I train when i am resting for the races". That his unusaul short jogs of 2 miles or so the day before races or in between short workouts of 3-4 x200M or 800 Meter time trials.Mentioned that his physical makeup was different than most and alot guys could not handle such little volume, where he could not handle higher volumes. Also got viruses alot from early overtraining before Bowerman.