What is the best year-round, non-periodization training schedule?

This is an interesting thread. I'm also looking for some structure for the in-between marathon buildup period.

My concern with MPR's schedule is

(1) Isn't 2 workouts + a LR too much? Isn't it better to just focus on building up easy mileage?

(2) My intuition tells me to have the Speed work on Tuesday after a Monday recovery) and the Threshold work on Friday. Am i wrong?

1) You sure have to build your mileage first, and it shoudn't be all easy. 2 workouts + LR should be ok after that. The LR is only 12-14 miles, which isn't really a "Long run" for a marathon runner. My personal concern is how to best tackle recovery.

2)Speedwork takes more time to recover from then tempos, so one would only have 2 easy days between workouts if done on Tuesday. If you do speedwork on Friday you have 2 real recovery days + a moderate day (the not so long run) which will give your muscles more recovery time from the speedwork.

I think it all depends on: the number of years you have been running, consistent mileage, a decent base before more intense workouts, and in my case...age.

Jeriod and CTA, tweak it to what works for you. There's nothing magical about intervals monday and tempo on thursday or temop on tuesday and intervals on friday. Do what works for you and your schedule. Personally, I would never come homeo on a friday and go hit hard intervals because mentally, I'm just ready for Friday after work to be a nice relaxing time. That's just me. But do whatever will allow you to recover. This might mean functioning on a non-weekly calendar:

A few years back I started doing this at a suggestion of an acquaintance. It was a bit odd to many folks but it worked very well. I started using a non-weekly cycle. Meaning I wasnt trying to fit everything into a 7 day box. I, too, was trying to build my mileage but keep some workouts going. I started using 8,9, and 10 day cycles. The 10 day cycle was cool because two of them fit into three weeks with an off day, so the calendar didn't get too screwed up. Also the beauty of the 10 day cycle was that I could get in some more longer runs than one per cycle, essentially keeping up the 1 long run per week idea so prevalent. As it turned out I was getting 4 long/longer runs per 3 weeks.

I've known people who did 14 day cycles also. Often times 14 day cycles that I have seen basically are just two 1-week blocks of training, so there's little difference, but it can be done right to allow enough recovery time between your workouts. There's nothing magical that says you MUST get in one of each of these kinds of workouts per week. You know your body. You know what you feel like after certain types of workouts. Tailor the training to fit your needs.

Examples of what I've done:

9-day

1 long run, morning

2 double day

3 easy, afternoon

4 temop run, morning

5 double day

6 easy, afternoon

7 intervals

8 double day

9 easy

I was really trying to get more mileage in this program. that was the main idea. Doubles helped accomplish that. I know malmo would say there are many more days in there I could have doubled, butI was not used to running them. The tempo run was generally longer than the standard 20min T like Daniels advocates. Obviously pace was modified slightly, mainly by feel though. Intervals were mostly more relaxed intervals like 'cruise intervals' and I guess what would qualify as 'groove' per MPR above, not the really hard vo2 max pace intervals. Again, mostly by feel. I would often start what felt really under control, kinda easy, and get a little faster each one, but not always. The doubles were moderately long (for me), something like 6 and 9 most days. The tough part of this was the calendar and my mind kept wanting to come back to 'how much per week am i running?' since that's how everyone else thinks. So I started doing a 10 day cycle after I read a couple articles about Jerry Schumacher's group using progression runs and other marathon based groups using long progression runs as conerstones of their training over the whole year.

10 day plan:

1 progression run

2 double

3 easy

4 intervals

5 easy

6 long run

7 double

8 easy

9 tempo run

10 easy

In this plan I decided to run the tempo run shorter but faster much like the Daniels idea. The progression run I built up to 10 miles. Totally off of feel. Start with an not quite easy run and after a few miles start letting myself slowly build faster until the last 2-3 miles were aobut as fast as I was running my previous 6 mile tempo runs. I would usually put in an easy mile cool down on the end also. So...while it's not a true long run, the progression run was longer than all the other runs, plus the long run of 12-13.

Hope this gives you some ideas about how to schedule your training in a way that can allow you to recover more and still get what you need.

By the way, it was during about a year and half time that I was doing this for myself that I set PRs from 5K to HM, after college.

Thanks for this. Some interesting points you raise here.

As a mid-40's dude, i am starting to realize that i need recovery after hard workouts. Perhaps moving to a 10 day cycle will allow that. On the other hand, as an obsessive type i will expect to worry that my fitness is not improving as much as it could be. Pros and cons.

The most difficult issue to master as you age as a runner is not necessarily being ready to go on your scheduled stress days. In younger years we can pretty much book that on whatever days of the week we plan, assuming we give ourselves proper recovery, that we'll be relatively fresh and ready to go when we wish to.

Age has a way of removing this choice. At 53 I've had weeks when I can go LR and two other stress workouts without a problem. Other weeks I find the LR is no problem but I might have to back off nearly completely on the other stress workouts....and there seemingly is no pattern to this at all.

Good stuff MPR, thanks.

This might be a dumb question.

Would you throw some strides in there on the easy runs or are we getting enough speed from the 300 repeats?

MPR wrote:

For a schedule in the 55-60 mile a week range here are some suggested workouts by type:

AT - Tempo: 7 miles

LT - Tempo: 4 miles

LT - Repeats: 3 x 3k w 2 min jog

Groove Intervals: 5 x 1600 w 2:00 jog

VO2 Max: 7 x 1000 w 2:30 jog

Fast Intervals: 16 x 300 w 1:30 jog

Easy Paced Long Run: 14 miles

Steady State Long Run: 12 miles

Progression Long Run: 12 miles

Drop that VO2 Max BS.

6x wrote:

6 miles per day, six days per week.

... says Dr. George Sheehan, thats pretty close the schedule he claimed to run year in and year out, except he did it 7 days a week.

seven x 7 sounds sweeter

I'm copying the below from an old LRC post I've got bookmarked. I'm now running essentially the same thing, modifying it as I feel .

I think this thread applies to a huge percentage of the running populous: moms and dads who want to run well all year round at their local road race, but have bigger priorities in life, such as kids, work, bills, etc.

_____________________________________________

last day RE: training for 1600-5k on minimal miles 6/7/2005 7:52AM - in reply to milt Reply | Return to Index | Report Post

Training through the early months of parenthood is tough but doable. Tinman's schedule is similar and excellent. You could sustain that schedule and improved for a long time training like that. Throw in one or two races per month and you've got a nice recipe.

If you're like me, you may find out that you prefer this type of training to your previous methods. I have been following the same basic schedule for three years now:

M-50 minutes with 7 miles @ aerobic threshold (5:45 pace)

T-50 easy plus striders

W-50 minutes with 3 x 1 mile at 12k pace (90 second rest)

R-50 minutes easy plus striders

F-50 minutes easy plus striders

St-2 hours medium with striders

Sn-50 minutes easy plus striders

On this training, I have run 15:12 5k, 31:30 10k, and a 2:28 marathon---not PRs, but within 2.5%. That is, I'm training at 50% of my former training mileage, but racing at 97.5% of my personal bests. I actually like running again too.

Just run baby.

MPR wrote:

On doubles: I love doubles but only once the primary easy run gets above 1 hour in length (except long runs). For most people this means starting to add in doubles once 60 miles per week has been reached.

For example, once your Day 3 and Day 4 runs are up to 60 minutes in duration I would keep them at 60 minutes and add in a easy 20 minute secondary run rather than lengthen the duration of those runs.

I am curious about this suggestion of doing 1 hour + 20 minutes in 2 runs. Is this really better than just doing 80 minutes in one go?

For a slow guy like me, 20 minutes easy is around 2.5 miles.

How much benefit is there in doing a secondary run so short?

I always understood that there was benefit in doing around 4 miles as a secondary run which for a mortal like me is around 30-35 minutes.

CTA wrote:

I am curious about this suggestion of doing 1 hour + 20 minutes in 2 runs. Is this really better than just doing 80 minutes in one go?

For a slow guy like me, 20 minutes easy is around 2.5 miles.

How much benefit is there in doing a secondary run so short?

I always understood that there was benefit in doing around 4 miles as a secondary run which for a mortal like me is around 30-35 minutes.

Why not just split it into two 40-minutes runs and call it a day?

Just follow former Australian elite runner Rob DeCastella's schedule from back in his prime, only drop the morning runs.

Or, conversely, just run an hour-plus hard over remarkably hilly terrain ala Kiwi jack Foster, which got him a 2:11 marathon by age 41. Remarkable.

Why drop the V02 BS? Just curious. What makes it so bad??

bump

interesting stuff for master runners...