2-hour runs.

Did you and RDD train as slowly as the stories about him claim he did?

Folks, trust me, if it were possible to run for 2 hrs every day in one stretch then a lot of runners would do it, but unfortunaly (or fortunately, as the case may be) runners can only tolerate limited pounding. That is the nature of this sport. It is not like swimming, cycling, cross country skiing, and other endurance sports where there is no impact.

The limitation of running is the impact, and that is why cross training is good for most athletes, because they can augment their daily dose of aerobic training with other aereobic activities.

The maximum that top runners can run in a single stretch, day after day, for months on end is usually around 1.30 minutes or 15 miles or under. Anything over that, and you start to break down. Many athletes break down with less time or distance than that.

When University of Colorado athletes did most of their mileage in singles, only the strongest on the team survived, and there were always a lot of injuries.

For most athletes, an optimum time frame for running a progressive run would be between 40 to 60 minutes. Those who have high aspirations can run twice a day, with the same time frames, but one of the runs should be easier, much less taxing.

It also does not pay to run fast every day. It may work for a while, but those athletes who train like that, tend to have shorter careers (Ron Tabb, Derek Clayton).

The best athletes are able to go slow when necessary, and we can learn from the Kenyans with this, as they start all their runs (jogs) at a very slow pace, so slow in fact that any jogger could keep with them for the first mile or two or even further on some runs. They seem to be able to gauge how to treat their bodies.

The Japanese are also good at slow running and walking when required. Running/jogging machines, they are. When going easy, they run for time rather than distance and that is the way it should be. Jeff Schiebler (13:13/27:36/2:14) did not like that aspect of training in Japan, and he was given a waiver to not run the early morning slow jogs with his Japanese teammates.

Western runners tend to be more competitive on training runs, and often get down to 6 minute pace within a few minutes of running (too fast!).

Ghost in Korea

A single 2hr run/day is very doable and excellent base training...it's a matter of allowing one's body to adapt to the mileage in a reasonable manner by doing the mileage slow enough at first, and then increasing the intensity as one becomes more fit.

I used to do daily 2hr runs at 6:30 to 7:00 pace (at altitude), but when my racing priorities changed I slowed down to 8:00 pace and can now do two 2hr runs per day relatively comfortably for extended blocks of training.

I know a college team-mate of mine who ran more than 200 mpw for ~8 consecutive weeks with an average in the high 100s the rest of the time. I do recall one run that was over 40miles. I'm not sure what the ave mile was but it wasn't LSD per Deines (who I don't think attended UCLA - but I do know he attended Occidental - just not sure if there was a transfer in there), I also know my team-mate and 2 or 3 other (teammates) ran a 30+ run and going past the marathon in 2:27 or so. Many of the runs in the 15-20 mile range were below 6 min pace and often much closer to 5 min pace for the last ~3 miles.

2 hr runs were not unusual but just not consecutive days and normally once per week - maybe twice during off season - rarely during season.

A ? for NOBBY wrote:

NOBBY:

do you yourself advocate DAILY runs of 2-hours duration?

just run 2hrs as often as can. no matter what if 800m coming from 400m. 2hrs thats the secret of it all. try it. if is too much, ok maybe 1.5 hrs or 1.75hrs, but really , 2hrs is the magic formula.

1 a week is fine. increase pace of other runs

we usually ran just over or just under the 2 hr magic, never exactly 2. now that's the ticket. But we did 1.5 and 1.75 +/-... usually less often than the 2hr.

Tom D: do you really wear Loco shoes?

here we go again wrote:

A ? for NOBBY wrote:

NOBBY:

do you yourself advocate DAILY runs of 2-hours duration?

just run 2hrs as often as can. no matter what if 800m coming from 400m. 2hrs thats the secret of it all. try it. if is too much, ok maybe 1.5 hrs or 1.75hrs, but really , 2hrs is the magic formula.

You really have some serious problems with reading comprehension. Nobby didn't say that. But yes, running a lot is good way to start.

Feel free to ignore "here we go again." That guy of girl has a way of ruining threads like this involving high mileage training.

terps wrote:

Feel free to ignore "here we go again." That guy of girl has a way of ruining threads like this involving high mileage training.

You're right. Thanks.

Currently, I'm only running about 20:20 for 5Ks, give or take. I'm 63. Last year, when I was running daily single 2 hour runs, my best 5K was 19:44. My model is Ed Whitlock. I'm not yet able to do his workouts but I'm progressing in that general direction, maybe next year I'll be there. i know Ed only runs once a day but I'm experimenting with this, running doubles. I think I might start running two 3 hour runs/week, one mid week and the other on Sunday (or else run a marathon on Sunday, as my second long run of the week). I'll ease into that schedule, starting with just one 3 hour run and then going to two eventually.

I've run 12 marathons so far in 2007 with a best of 3:26. My 5K times are predicting faster marathon times so I have enough speed but need more longer endurance runs and maybe a little less emphasis on the daily double 90 min. runs.

I remember reading, some years ago, that the ideal runnning time was about 2 hours. After that, the benefits continue to increase but at a sharply decreasing rate. I dont have the study. Does anyone know of this study?

Nobby wrote:

If you CAN do 2-hours day in and day out and feel good about it, by all means, why not?

i was thinking that from hre i did miss something. ok i guess not so carry on some more.

hehehe.

I'm not going to be that clear here but maybe someone can go off what i'm saying and actually know where to find this info.

It said that the benefits from 90-120mins are greater than those from 60-90mins.

Not sure where this study was from. I will check my stuff!

If two hour runs were so great, then why do the world's best distance runners from Kenya/Ethiopia/Morocco seldom run for two hours? Think about that! Trust me, if 2 hour runs really conferred great benefit to runners, most world class runners would be doing them. Instead over 90% of world class runners never go past 60 minutes on most runs, except for their weekly 'long run.' Many world class distance runners, even do less than 60 minutes duration, prefering 40-45 minutes time duration for runs. I think 45 minute runs are the best for most runners, because long enough to give a good training effect, and running for not longer than 45" still allows the runner to run at a good overall pace, especially in the last 20 minutes when the running body is warmed up and the athlete can run at speeds which simulate race conditions. This cannot be done for regular 2 hour runs, which, by their very nature, are plodding jogs, for most runners - if done regularly.

Physiological tests show that running for 45-60 minutes at progressively faster speeds confers much greater benefit than plodding along for 2 hours every day.

And another thing - I don't believe the posters who claim that some runners are able to run 2 hours per day at speeds of 6mins per mile or <. That would be physiologically impossible.

Last time I checked it is the runners who run for about 40-60 minutes twice a day who show the greatest performance levels.

Occasional 2 hour runs may be of benefit to some athletes, but giving novice athletes the idea that running 2 hours per day will increase their performance levels is wrong and misleading. It simply won't happen, and in fact the only thing daily or regular 2 hour runs will do is to increase injury susceptibility to high levels.

Ghost in Korea

silkysullivan wrote:

I've run 12 marathons so far in 2007 with a best of 3:26. My 5K times are predicting faster marathon times so I have enough speed but need more longer endurance runs and maybe a little less emphasis on the daily double 90 min. runs.

So which of these 12 did you aim to peak for? Ever heard of periodisation? Perhaps your 14th marathon this year will give you a PR. I suggest you read a very basic running book.

I've been running for 50 years and I've read a few books. Thanks. Ever heard of doing long runs every week?

If someone is getting better results doing two hour runs each day than they did on another plan why in the name of heaven would they want to read a "basic" running book that will tell them not to do something that's worked for them?

That's the problem with all the books and formulas we have now. They're a great source of information. But when people begin to think that what's in a book is more valid than what's worked for them it's time to quit reading.

Of course doing a run of two hours or so is a good thing. I'd agree with ghost that doing it every day is not going to work well for most people, for a variety of reasons. But that doesn't mean it isn't going to work for everyone, as has been shown by Ed Whitlock, Bob Deines, a few Japanese marathoners, and silkysullivan.

On the other hand, on Ingrid Kristiansen's website, her husband/coach makes a very strong case for making 45 minute runs your "norm," arguing that longer runs wear out your muscles too much and force you to go too slowly. He argues for multiple 45 minute runs with an occasional longer run. you simply can't answer these sorts of questions by reading. You need to try things yourself and see what works and what doesn't.

There are man to ways to skin a cat, but...the best runners

in the world do run high mileage (>70mpw). Many run 45-60min twice a day, others have regular (i.e. at weekly or more often) long runs (2h). Many marathon runners thrive on insane

mileage (albeit somewhat slow). For shorter distances, it is

probably wise to up the pace (as ghost suggests).