Can someone explain how doing more mileage makes one faster?

Your running-efficiency improves. Makes your body use more of the intaken oxygen. It also makes your form better. Psychologically you will be more "tireless".

hrtf wrote:

Gary Oldman wrote:

How can you say he knows his physiology if you don't know yours?

Given I'm studying it right now, your passive aggression is so very LR I do believe you just made my day.

I've left a very open retort there so I do hope you use it. Go for the LR clean sweep tiger. I know you can do it.

Grrrrr. Of course you're studying it right now. This is letsrun, you are supposed to say you already have the degree and 20 years in the field.

The fact that you thought you couldn't jog 12km after 3 months off and that you were completely detrained and in danger of tendonitis speaks volumes about your ability to fall asleep in class.

newdistancerunner wrote:

Thanks for the clear answers. One more question, when you start the season should you lower your mileage or do you have to keep up the high mileage to see the results?

Back to not making personal attacks and answering the questions...

If you hold your mileage through the season, and not taper until the end, you will likely have a great peak. The thing about dropping your mileage early on is that you can peak randomly.

Also, if you hold your mileage through the season, it will vastly improve your NEXT cross country season. The longer you can hold your miles through a season, the more "lifetime" miles you accumulate. These add up and make it so you can handle more and more training. The aerobic gains you get from more cardio (mileage) are the most transferable part of training, from season to season.

So, if you keep your miles through the season, you're building a base for the future.

That said, don't neglect your speed. If you run strides a few days a week during base phase, you will be constantly developing speed. 4x100 after your runs will be sufficient at least through the winter. If you get caught thinking mileage alone will get you to where you want to be, you can lose your raw speed, which is of course important. BUT you can manage to train aerobically and maintain your speed, the two are not mutually exclusive.

Also don't listen to cross-fit guy, he's a troll.

Gary Oldman wrote:

hrtf wrote:

Given I'm studying it right now, your passive aggression is so very LR I do believe you just made my day.

I've left a very open retort there so I do hope you use it. Go for the LR clean sweep tiger. I know you can do it.

Grrrrr. Of course you're studying it right now. This is letsrun, you are supposed to say you already have the degree and 20 years in the field.

The fact that you thought you couldn't jog 12km after 3 months off and that you were completely detrained and in danger of tendonitis speaks volumes about your ability to fall asleep in class.

You did it! Oh my goodness you came through. The wide open retort was, of course, that if I study it I mustn't study very hard and I hardly dared to hope you would reach for the brass ring.

Imagine my excitement to see the reply and sure you made me wait for it - waffling on about how a detrained 34yo subject can of course run 12km with no issues (the end implication being someone who has never run can do the same), adding something unclear about how three months off does not result in detraining (latest research shows sharp declines between 4-8 weeks with variable falls to baseline up to 12 weeks and occasionally beyond ) - but by golly it was worth the wait.

It actually IS my birthday (or, at least, it was yesterday) and to think I didn't even order a clown.

C'mere you. Gimme a hug you snarky autism patient you.

And....

Back to the personal attacks and not answering the questions.

LOL. I love it. Great retort hrtf. This whole thread was answered by "The Stache," with no need for anyone to post anything. He nailed it, and I suspect that he might have credentials that none of the rest of us have. And yet, here we go again on LRC, with the numbskulls and know-it-alls yacking on and on. Just once, I'd like to see a thread where someone gives a clear, concise, comprehensive, correct answer like "The Stache did, and not have a bunch of nobody know-nothings attack it.

agreed!

I have a possible solution for our running board. It would be kind of like earning frequent flier miles, but for douchebags.

Here is how it would work: every time some douchebag makes a douchebag post - they earn 1 douchebag point...once a poster has accumulated (let's say 5 douchebag point = you are an official let's run douchebag) all future post from you (your user name or ULR - if that is the right term) then your posts will automatically be routed to the special douchebag page - where you and other douchebags can read and respond to each other's douchebagery...and the rest of us who are here to learn etc. won't have to wade through it anymore.

having never written the word douchebag before, I just wrote it 10 times) Once you become douchebagtized, there is no coming back. Problem solved.

jerrry wrote:

agreed!

I have a possible solution for our running board. It would be kind of like earning frequent flier miles, but for douchebags.

Here is how it would work: every time some douchebag makes a douchebag post - they earn 1 douchebag point...once a poster has accumulated (let's say 5 douchebag point = you are an official let's run douchebag) all future post from you (your user name or ULR - if that is the right term) then your posts will automatically be routed to the special douchebag page - where you and other douchebags can read and respond to each other's douchebagery...and the rest of us who are here to learn etc. won't have to wade through it anymore.

having never written the word douchebag before, I just wrote it 10 times) Once you become douchebagtized, there is no coming back. Problem solved.

LOL. Good one. But I think some might say that I've douchebagged before, so I think we need a three-strikes-you're douchebagged rule. :-)

I would add that there is an additional practical effect of increasing your work capacity. I have seen experienced runners recover quicker from hard races and Hard workouts and tempo runs when their mileage is higher.

It also helps when you taper, your taper mileage isn't that low. So you can still maintain the aerobic fitness that you had developed. Low mileage runners suffer at the end of the season when they go from 35 mpw down to 20-25 mpw. They will pop off a couple of nice races, but then they flag a bit. If you are a runner from Christian Brothers Academy going from 80 mpw down to 60 mpw, the taper feels like a vacation, but there won't be much loss of the aerobic fitness.

Tell us again why you took exactly three months off with injury and your physiology studies told you that a 12km comeback run was sound reasoning.

You are supposed to be creating the illusion of being smart.

Plenty of people can run 12km with no training.

Back to class.

Bad Wigins wrote:

It doesn't make you faster. Just look at ultramarathoners, who run more volume than anybody. Are they fast?

You adapt specifically to how you train. If you run 100 kilometers at 8 min/k then you will adapt to running exactly that fast for a long time.

Now, you might end up losing weight, and gradually improving your running economy and fitness so that you can increase your training speed at a given effort. Then you adapt to running at that faster speed. But only because you deliberately sped up. To run fast, train fast.

Ok, the "i know more than you" thing on Let's Run gets old. Here's something for you pal, if all of your training just remains equal and you increase mileage, more often than not, you will get faster. Even if your other training slides a little bit and you increase your mileage, you will get faster. I can say that I got much much faster just running miles and never racing. I was deep into my 30s and PRd on mileage and tempos. Yes,to run fast train fast but I would just run long slow miles and then twice a week do a workout. It's a combination of all of those things that made me get faster. So if you're already doing workouts and you're not running a lot of miles, then adding more mileage will make you considerably faster.

The tempo's made you faster. The mileage gave you endurance for your tempos.

Because it does. So does walking, depending on your initial level of fitness.

Now get out there and run.

[/quote]

Co-writer is the d*ckhead Tom "tinman" Schwarz who posted on LR a few years ago, but he couldn´t handle that people didn´t agree with him, so he started his own website where he is the indisputed guru.

The guy is so full of himself it makes you want to puke. He has said that basically all great coaches has stolen their training concepts from him and that if the best marathoners in the world had been coached by him they would run sub-2,02 by now.[/quote]

The above remarks are lies. In fact, it's almost remarkable you could include so many lies in a few sentences.

I was coached by Tom. He doesn't mind people disagreeing with him. He didn't start a web site. He's not full of himself...actually extremely humble...almost to a fault. He regularly gives enormous credit to all the great coaches from whom he learned. He never said anything about coaching anyone to 2:02...although he is extremely successful with the athletes he does coach and the coaches he advises.

The worst thing you could say about Tom is that he sucks at marketing.

What kind of person are you to slander someone like that? Geez...what's the matter with you anyway?

I'd agree with everything the Stache wrote except for the blood volume thing. RBC count can actually be lowered through distance training as cells are smashed into little bits as they pass through your feet which are pounding on the ground

http://books.google.com/books?id=WkArAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA169&lpg=PA169&dq=RBC+loss,+distance+running&source=bl&ots=6nsE7zHkUC&sig=TBL3Ba2j9HTY08Q79A_iZHqmQ1s&hl=en&sa=X&ei=gkJZVNv0DoX-iAKopoGAAw&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=RBC%20loss%2C%20distance%20running&f=false

well,. wrote:

Shawn H wrote:

Add to that Pete Magill's Build Your Running Body. Great explanations of the physiology of running in there, plus so much more. Great book:

http://www.amazon.com/Build-Your-Running-Body-Ultramarathoners-Run-ebook/dp/B00IIXLKQY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1415076751&sr=8-1&keywords=building+your+running+body

Co-writer is the d*ckhead Tom "tinman" Schwarz who posted on LR a few years ago, but he couldn´t handle that people didn´t agree with him, so he started his own website where he is the indisputed guru.

The guy is so full of himself it makes you want to puke. He has said that basically all great coaches has stolen their training concepts from him and that if the best marathoners in the world had been coached by him they would run sub-2,02 by now.

Nice work pal. Tinman is actually interesting and totally not full of himself. He's a nice guy. Thanks for your addition to the English language.

To tell you again I would have to have told you in the first place. DO try and keep up.

I had a subluxed cuboid, and I never said it was a comeback run, nor smart. It was more a social engagement I was previously committed to. I was surprised at the result. I posted the result, in the hopes of shining light on the factors which predispose a person to better running technique.

Then you showed up. The rest is history.

My first-ever run was 4km and I barely finished. Building took a long time, my first 10k was quite a personal achievement. Running 12km off the bat was very surprising to me, and it wasn't down to fitness, said fitness being mostly of not entirely withered. This is backed by sound research. The sole remaining factor was having practised the movement. Running economy, in other words. This also is backed by sound research. I related this to the OP.

Then, as we've covered, you showed up.

I study physiotherapy. This sort of thing is kind of what we do.

People have different levels of fitness retention after a lay-off. You are just guessing that yours withered in order to support your running economy hypothesis.

Did you race the distance and compare it to your fit level?

I thought physiotherapy would be a bit more scientific than wild speculation based on a recent hobby jogger experience.

is that true? wrote:

Bad Wigins wrote:

It doesn't make you faster. Just look at ultramarathoners, who run more volume than anybody. Are they fast?

Do you have any evidence to back up your claim that ultra-marathoners "run more volume than anybody"?

Is "more than anybody" all that relevant to the point of my post, or are you just being anal?

Obviously they run high volume. Maybe someone else runs even farther, but so what - the point of my post, which you obviously comprehended, was that they run high volume YET the high volume does NOT make them faster. Thus contradicting the premise that high volume makes one faster in the OP's title. Capiche?

That goes for the even ruder weasels who have trolled me so far. They run high volume, do they not? They are relatively slow, are they not? Therefore "doing more mileage makes one faster" is false. Suck on my logic and perish.