The fact that pro triathletes can run a sub-30:00 10k shows just how deluded this forum is about training.

might as well jump wrote:

obviouslee. wrote:

Link to three of them if there are so many.

I swear I've seen it before, but here are a few examples of guys pushing 60 mpw and not figuring out how to run sub-18:00

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=3881915http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=5017662http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=5077161

And here's someone running 40-45 mpw with a current PR of 19:39, confused about what to do

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=5154573

So you link to threads of people that don't run much and aren't very good. That makes sense. Maybe if they continued to run 60 miles a week and cycled a few hours a day and threw in an hour of swimming they would be better.

I really don't understand your position here. I would suspect the average letsrun person that can't break 18:20 that you are referring to actually runs much much less than 100 miles a week (which you have provided links for) and that's why tri-runners who run the same volume but also cycle and swim are faster.

I'm overweight, injured half the time and run less than 30 miles per week and can run 19 min in the 5k. I never ran in hs or college but, guess what? I rode a bicycle regularly for 10 years!

Aerobic conditioning is key and can be done in several ways.

Runner 1 = Around 30 mpw for the last few years, dabbling with 45 mpw for 3 months

Runner 2 = 1 week over 50 in his life

Runner 3 = A female hoping to break 18, currently running 60 mpw.

Runner 4 = Currently running 40-45 mpw as you say

40-60 miles a week is a world away from 90-100. Many runners at 40 mpw just like to run, and don't really want to train for peak performance. Also, none of these OPs claim to be the "training experts" you referred to. In fact, most are asking for advice on a trashy anonymous board.

Rain Dance wrote:

I'm overweight, injured half the time and run less than 30 miles per week and can run 19 min in the 5k. I never ran in hs or college but, guess what? I rode a bicycle regularly for 10 years!

Aerobic conditioning is key and can be done in several ways.

Cool, but that isn't really relevant to the original posters position. He or she seemed to be suggesting that there's this letsrun army of runners out there running 100 mile weeks and running 18:20 for 5k. This just isn't true.

Of course if you do minimal running, any other aerobic work you do is going to help you be a better runner!

A better question is why are there even pro triathletes at all? Marathon mania was bad enough, it didn't need to go multi-event.

Distance mania grew out of fitness/jogging myths of the 70's. Those myths are long discredited, but the industry they created still thrives, and chokes the life out of other, more worthy pursuits, like middle-distance. People will travel hundreds of miles to place 500th in some obscure marathon or triathlon, and pay $50 for the privilege. But they won't go to a nearby track meet to run the 800 or throw the javelin.

Bad Wigins wrote:

A better question is why are there even pro triathletes at all? Marathon mania was bad enough, it didn't need to go multi-event.

Distance mania grew out of fitness/jogging myths of the 70's. Those myths are long discredited, but the industry they created still thrives, and chokes the life out of other, more worthy pursuits, like middle-distance. People will travel hundreds of miles to place 500th in some obscure marathon or triathlon, and pay $50 for the privilege. But they won't go to a nearby track meet to run the 800 or throw the javelin.

Good point

might as well jump wrote:

Right, but the fact that Galen could still run 28:00 on 60 mpw with all that cross-training from swimming and cycling should demonstrate that most recreational runners with a decent goal like 33:00 don't need to be doing any more than 60 mpw. I would argue that, by holding back a little on the mileage, focusing only on constructive running workouts, and going all-out with the cross training (since you can't get injured with swimming or cycling), they'll probably hit their goal with less chance of injury along the way.

Hey, you just discovered that people need to do some fast workouts if they want to race well, and that cross training can reduce injuries. Revolutionary thinking, I call it.

triathletes are the best athletes in the world....Also, very few guys run their 10k in under 30 minutes in a triathlon.

pdpdp wrote:

I'm new to triathlons (2nd full season) and it's incredible what cycling has done for my legs and my runing. It just made every aspect, all the muscles on my legs, stronger. I think that serious runners should consider, if they have the TIME (CYCLING TAKES TONS OF TIME) to supplement with REAL cycling, not 'spinning' but real rides where you are accumulating some good elevation or maintaining a difficult speed for yourself.

cycling takes a lot of room too. I can't exactly ride my road bike on sidewalks of busy roads and I don't want to use the road and do a ride through heavy traffic. Unless you live out in the country or near some trails, or a greenway, or bike path, there is nowhere to cycle. But you can get a run in.

The best runners in the US do much, much more than just run. I'm not sure why you're making this sound like a ground breaking concept.

Salazar in particular puts a big emphasis in strength training in the gym, and alternatives to actual mileage, be they underwater treadmill running or anti-gravity running.

I can only speak for myself. I'm 43, run consistently about 50 mpw, 2 speed workouts per week.

I started running consistently/seriously in 2010 at about 30 mpw. So I haven't been running forever.

I KNOW I can't break 18:20 in a 5K. My PR for a half-marath is 1:33:05. I haven't raced a 5K in 14 months but I'm guessing I could maybe run under 21 minutes.

I do continue to set PR's though, so one day a sub 20 5K should be possible.

4350mpw wrote:

My PR for a half-marath is 1:33:05. I haven't raced a 5K in 14 months but I'm guessing I could maybe run under 21 minutes

Hmm. I can't imagine how somebody could run a 1h 33 half marathon and not be able to break 20 for the 5k.

It's not sub 30:00 unless it's on a track.

Which pro triathlete runs sub-30 in a tri? I don't know any. Maybe there's one in a year if at all. Some elite road races are won in 29:xx, and you say there's a bunch of triathletes running sub-30 on the road? Not possible.

Well, that Brownlee guy ran like 28:32 or something on the track so I don't find it hard to believe he can run sub-30 even in a triathlon.

Also, no elite road race is ever won in 29:xx. Come on.

4350mpw wrote:

My PR for a half-marath is 1:33:05. I haven't raced a 5K in 14 months but I'm guessing I could maybe run under 21 minutes.

21 minutes is almost your half pace. I think you need to re-evaluate your training.

The 30 min 10k tri runners are exceptional pro athletes, and are getting a lot of aerobic benefit from the cycle and swim training, as well as whatever run training they are doing.

In terms of running 90 mile per week and not breaking 18:00 (assuming one is in the open age group, and is recovered from the training), I'm sorry to say that it is probably just coming up against genetic limitations.

I was never superfast, with a 15:22 pr, and I probably only run about 40 miles a week, but I ran 17:33 at 53, and 17:53 last year in 80f+ temps. at 55. I'm now 56, but I would be disappointed if I can't get under 18:00 again this year.

Idontevenknow wrote:

Also, no elite road race is ever won in 29:xx. Come on.

Mo Farah won the Bupa London 10k last month in 29:13. The second place guy was in 30:05.

ConfusedHSer wrote:

If you're an 18:xx 5k guy on 90 mpw you aren't gonna be very good no matter what you do.

If you're an 18:xx guy running 90+ mpw, you must be at least 70-years-old.