What is the point of 'Badger' Miles?

Average Joe -

actually I like your responses. I am talking to the people who bitch about how Wisconsin count there training miles.

My mistake then. Your post was a reply to mine so I figured you were talking to me.

I don't really care what Wisconsin does (I would never have started a thread like this) but I do see the silliness of making stuff up to put in a log. Maybe they should just record minutes in the log instead of miles.

Originally, I believe that Martin wanted to emphasize that all the aerobic running should be done at that pace. Even though it isn't always accurate, I have read many people who say that the amount of time spent at a certain effort is more important than the distance covered, but talking about '80 miles' is easier to grasp (and makes more sense to non-Badgers) than 560 minutes.

I never knew runners fell into the "dumb jock" stereotype. If a runner the caliber of Spiker or Solinsky runs harder one day than another, he can probably remember it, whether he writes it down or not. When used by an intelligent runner, all the "Badger Miles" do is remove a little bit of unnecessary anxiety. They don't hide anything.

"This strange day is almost over ... 'just started to, get sick of it."

The new system is hard Badger miles, soft Badger miles, and

Gallow-Badger miles.

BCT wrote:

I never knew runners fell into the "dumb jock" stereotype. If a runner the caliber of Spiker or Solinsky runs harder one day than another, he can probably remember it, whether he writes it down or not.

Can he remember it 6 months later? How about a year? Not likely. That's why we write information down in the first place. To recall it.

When used by an intelligent runner, all the "Badger Miles" do is remove a little bit of unnecessary anxiety. They don't hide anything.

An intelligent runner does not need to engage in an exercise in self-delusion in the first place. Making up the mileage hides relevant facts -- specifically the pace at which you ran. If knowing this simple information causes an athlete "anxiety", that athlete has much bigger problems than fudging the numbers will solve.

I agree with you as far as keeping a log for sure. I look back on mine usually to figure out what I did wrong but also to see what I did right and where performances could have been improved.

My question here as long as the accessory information is included, things like how you felt, whether it was a hard run, the course it was over, weather, shoes and what not as long as you are consistant with your measurement it seems to me the log is still very valuable and should suffice for most.

As far as the Badgers go I would guess that they also do track and fixed distance intervals quite a bit and this is for things like Fartlek and long runs, but I do not know

The "miles" are just for people outside the system who aren't accustomed to hearing how many minutes a day someone runs. So to avoid confusing a reporter, or anyone else who asks "how many miles do you run", most elite athletes just tell them an approximation because that's all they want to know anyways. Wisconsin, and many other top college programs, are no different.

I think I'm gonna start a new system of counting miles for my training log. Instead of counting everything and using 7:00 miles as my average pace, I'm gonna drop that down a bit to 4:00 miles! That way, even if I run one hour at 6:00 pace, it doesn't matter, I still put 15 miles in my training log!! Sure, I might never actually run at 4:00 pace, but this way I don't have to worry about the pace and I can keep chugging out 200 mile weeks!

runner9441 wrote:

I think I'm gonna start a new system of counting miles for my training log. Instead of counting everything and using 7:00 miles as my average pace, I'm gonna drop that down a bit to 4:00 miles! That way, even if I run one hour at 6:00 pace, it doesn't matter, I still put 15 miles in my training log!! Sure, I might never actually run at 4:00 pace, but this way I don't have to worry about the pace and I can keep chugging out 200 mile weeks!

Hey, as long as you improve in those certified races, more power to you!

Let's face it, any college program in the country has set courses they do repeatedly over 4 or 5 years (per athlete). The meaningful entries in the running logs aren't

"12 Badger Miles"

but

"Greenway course: 67 minutes"

If they do the Greenway in 64 minutes at the end of the season, they know the miles were worth it, Badger or no.

Martin used to repeatedly give this workout:

50 minutes-7 miles-easy.

If you tacked on a couple more minutes then you could call it 8.

I think you guys are being a little ridiculous. Easy days are for aerobic running, what everyone else does. 45 minutes to an hour 20 or so. Does it really matter if you're mileage calculations are off by a mile or so?

Accurate measurements are for the hard days.

And for the guys who have to hammer sub-6:00 pace every day, Martin had them on a lower volume level.

Most you posting on here with all these problems with Badger Miles are anal, obnoxious assholes. Who gives a shit what they are doing? They are one of the best programs in the country and look to be so for years to come. You guys need something better to do with your damn time than bitch about these guys using a conservative method of measuring miles. How much can you tell about injuries from mileage numbers? Probably will be able to tell more by the subjective material in the log. You guys are f***ing ridiculous.

i agree completelybadger miles are for easy days, i don't need to know the miles i ran on an easy day,log entry - 75 minutes easy pace that's all I put if I want to know about how many miles I divide by 7 minutes and 30 seconds... that simplebut yes for workouts and hard runs i know and write down to the meter how far it was

football player wrote:

Most you posting on here with all these problems with Badger Miles are anal, obnoxious assholes. Who gives a shit what they are doing? They are one of the best programs in the country and look to be so for years to come. You guys need something better to do with your damn time than bitch about these guys using a conservative method of measuring miles. How much can you tell about injuries from mileage numbers? Probably will be able to tell more by the subjective material in the log. You guys are f***ing ridiculous.

alright wrote:

So what if it says in my training log 100 miles, when in actuality I ran 106 or 107. The point - you ran those miles anyway, they are in your body, so what difference does it make what you have down on a piece of paper?

The difference between 106/107 and 100 mpw is 6-7%. That is a noticable difference.

Also try and remember that you do not know the exact distance of every run you do. Madison is filled with different trails and routes that people can mix and match, making the distance that you run impossible to guess. So you take your time and divide by seven, because if you don't know where each mile mark is, you probably don't know how fast you're going.

Martin always did things like 50 min, 7 m, LSD, or 60 min, 8m, LSD on SSF. It was just to simplify. The time was important, but almost everyone writes down mileage in their logs. How many of you come on here and say, "I ran 10 hours this week, next week i'm shooting for 11..." not alot.

Go run around the arb (in madison, a huge trail system) and tell me how far you ran... you couldn't so you'd estimate by time... its that easy...

And no one ever said badger miles made you better, its just a simplified way of estimating your mileage.

Hey Football Player (runner?), thanks for your contribution. Until I got to your post, I was duped into thinking this thread was kind of interesting, just some informative speculation. Now I realize that we're really all retarded for discussing a successfull team's training method.

As far as the topic goes, I think the Badger Miles terminology makes sense on a coached team, where the coach has worked all of the training out and can keep his athletes' from worrying about their pace on every workout or mile of the week. For me, an individual runner, I could never really trick myself with my mileage like that. In that sense I can see it both ways. I keep a pretty close eye on my mileage because I need that information to figure out what I'm doing, and to keep close track of the wear & tear on my shoes, stuff like that. If it was in a coach's hands and I was simply following orders, it would be totally different. To the same end, in my situation, I don't time some of my runs when I already know the distance. It accomplishes the same thing, letting me focus just on perceived effort, without letting anxiety dictate what I should be doing to fit some number scheme.

Uh oh, was I speculating or bitching? I'm sure somebody will clue me in

I have nothing against Wisco, and the training is obviously working for them, but the idea of Badger Miles is a psycholical game that really means nothing to their success.

It is like setting your alarm clock 15 minutes early so that you can get up on time....you are always (even if subconsciously) adjusting for those 15 minutes.

If I do an hour run at 6 minute pace, that's ten miles---

alright wrote:

The point - you ran those miles anyway, they are in your body, so what difference does it make what you have down on a piece of paper?

im glad someone else feels this way- ive never been able to be so obsessive about mileage ive run because i dont see how writing it down on a piece of paper is going to affect what i did. i honestly dont see whats so wrong about badger miles, and i think some people feel better about themselves when they can say that they just did a run at 6:00 pace or 5:30 pace or whatever. its never really botheres me how fast im runnnig- if i feel bad i slow down if i feel good i pick it up.