Has anyone in the history of the world ever broken 4:00 in the mile with a shorter longest run than Donavan Brazier?

Graham Williamson never seemed to go over 10 miles and he ran a heck of a lot faster than just under 4. He also did it at 18.

Grete Waitz had never run more than 12 miles before her first marathon, which she won in a world record. That pretty much takes the cake on this "longest run" issue for me.

http://www.marathonguide.com/features/firstmarathons/index.cfm?Story=Waitz

rojo wrote:

Before I tell you the longest run of his life, please guess.

Don't cheat.

Come on.

Guess.

i ran 4:19 in high school and never did more than 4 miles in a single run. all of my mileage was on the track. didn't know what a tempo run was until college

i wasn't even that talented, just raced my teammate in every workout and race who was about the same. we tried to crush each other and would do 4-milers at 6 minute pace. so....i guess we were doing tempos 3 days a week for a whhihre, haha hehe huh ha ha giggle

Tyrone ReXXXing wrote:

Alan Webb when he ran 3:53, how many times did he run over 8 miles? I know his training was pretty low mileage/high quality.

Lastly, Lucas Verzbicas said almost all of his running during track seasons was quality work, and his base work was all swimming/biking. But maybe in cross he went over 8 sometimes.

In short, a really fast 800 guy, young, breaking 4 in the mile without going over 7.5 mile runs? Doesn't shock me/doesn't seem unprecedented.

What are you talking about? The examples you are providing are the complete opposite.

We're talking about never, not once running more than 7 miles. Do you not think Alan Webb went on hour long runs ALL THE TIME? If he did that, hell if he ran 45 minutes, he'd be over 7 miles. I just looked it up. Webb said he was doing 60 a week in HS. That's 8.5 per day. And I don't want to hear he's doubling every day. If he runs lon

Lukas Verbicas said he "usually ran 50-60" miles per week. That means he was doing 7-8 miles EVERY SINGLE DAY.

Proof here:

One of Mike Boit's contemporaries, Rick Wohlhuter, was another low-mileage guy with a stellar mile PR: 3:53.3.

He averaged 50 miles per week year-round, and the bulk of his training took place on the track.

From an article in Runner's World:

"My training schedule consisted of one hard day followed by an easy day. My easy day was often speedwork."

PortlandXCgirl wrote:

Imagine how many mile-specialist college guys are out there who do 22 mile long runs every weekend and only manage a 4:05.

It's 100% sour grapes, but I'm going to have a difficult time rooting for this kid from now on. 7.6 miles? That just ain't right, man.

OMG, OMG, he's so special. he's going to start running 10 miles for a long run and break the WR!!

I'm no 800m specialist, but could some longer runs help develop his endurance to actually make it through the rounds at the championships level?

rojo, tell us what length of long run creates the ability to break 4.

vivalarepublica wrote:

I'm no 800m specialist, but could some longer runs help develop his endurance to actually make it through the rounds at the championships level?

People say this all the time, and I've never been able to see the connection between running higher mileage and recovering from multiple short hard efforts over the course of a few days. That isn't what endurance is.

I was going to say 7, but I read an article last week where he said that (I can't remember which site it was on), and he said he and his coach believed in quality over quantity, mentioning that he'd go out and run 5 miles in 30 min. I was waiting for someone to bring it up here, because I recall the thread about him only running 20-30 miles per week, and some people assumed he would be running more than that now as a pro. Apparently not!

Really proves that you don't [necessarily] need high mileage to be an elite 800m runner.

Did James Robinson ever break 4:00? Probably not since he was a 400/800 type and I could not easily find his mile best. He did rabbit some mile races later in his career but that is a different thing altogether.

Noooooooooo wrote:

vivalarepublica wrote:

I'm no 800m specialist, but could some longer runs help develop his endurance to actually make it through the rounds at the championships level?

People say this all the time, and I've never been able to see the connection between running higher mileage and recovering from multiple short hard efforts over the course of a few days. That isn't what endurance is.

The connection is that people tend to be able to practice more of the scenario due to their higher mileage. Not that just long runs guarantee ability to repeat hard efforts.

In a similar way a low mileage person doesn't tend to be able to handle as much volume of repeats as a higher mileage runner.

Another round wrote:

Noooooooooo wrote:

People say this all the time, and I've never been able to see the connection between running higher mileage and recovering from multiple short hard efforts over the course of a few days. That isn't what endurance is.

The connection is that people tend to be able to practice more of the scenario due to their higher mileage. Not that just long runs guarantee ability to repeat hard efforts.

In a similar way a low mileage person doesn't tend to be able to handle as much volume of repeats as a higher mileage runner.

Why? I still don't see it. Why would higher mileage help with that, versus practicing running shorter, harder efforts on back to back days? They seem like entirely different things. As do recovering between many repeats in one session versus recovering between 2 or 3 short efforts over 2 or 3 days.

Racket wrote:

Bannister never did more than like 35 mpw right? I think Chataway never did more than 30. Forgot where I read that though. What's the answer? 4? 5?

If you go back to the pre Lydiard years this sort of thing was more common than you'd think now. There was a time when EVERYTHING was intervals. In Fred wilt's 1959 "How They Train" there's a profile of Roger Moens whose mile best was 3:58. The longest continuous run I see in that profile is 600 meters.

Nooooooooo wrote:

Another round wrote:

The connection is that people tend to be able to practice more of the scenario due to their higher mileage. Not that just long runs guarantee ability to repeat hard efforts.

In a similar way a low mileage person doesn't tend to be able to handle as much volume of repeats as a higher mileage runner.

Why? I still don't see it. Why would higher mileage help with that, versus practicing running shorter, harder efforts on back to back days? They seem like entirely different things. As do recovering between many repeats in one session versus recovering between 2 or 3 short efforts over 2 or 3 days.

Hey, why not just time trial your race distance as training? Or just race?

Nooooooooo wrote:

Another round wrote:

The connection is that people tend to be able to practice more of the scenario due to their higher mileage. Not that just long runs guarantee ability to repeat hard efforts.

In a similar way a low mileage person doesn't tend to be able to handle as much volume of repeats as a higher mileage runner.

Why? I still don't see it. Why would higher mileage help with that, versus practicing running shorter, harder efforts on back to back days? They seem like entirely different things. As do recovering between many repeats in one session versus recovering between 2 or 3 short efforts over 2 or 3 days.

At the Worlds or Olympics, you might be running 1:45 or faster in the rounds, then even faster for the final. 1:45 or lower multiple times within a few days is not easy, no matter how you swing it. Doing an all out 800m or 1600m can cash your lungs more than longer distances because they are working overtime for the whole race, rather than trying to keep it steady and even and then going had the last 1/3 of the race or so. Personally, I know that my lungs feel the effects of a hard mile more than a hard 5k.

Mileage can strengthen your body to give you the ability to do workouts that have lots of repeats with short rest, or like you suggested, doing hard workouts on back-to-back days. It giving you the ability to do more and recover quicker from a hard race in less time. It's about developing the strength to run hard and recover, rather than run one fast race.

At least that's what it all seems like to me.

This is almost exactly how I feel.

Inthe grand scheme of things mileage is just a sort of insurance runners invest in. It allows you to be more durable and recover better from workouts and races.

You can gain fitness through almost anything as long as you do it consistently; whethe biking, swimming, or doing interval training, the end result is the same, you end up physically stronger.

On the otherhand, however, running off of little to no mileage really does beat the hell out of you when you really go to the well. Anything below a two-miles can be run off of speed endurance training, but the upper end of that does leave you feeling like your lungs are bleeding and your muscles have been ripped

afterward.

My point is, higher mileage equals better durablilty and faster recovery. It would definitely help someone navigate though championship rounds.

Eyewitness: I did a five mile hill workout with Boit in May of 81 in Eugene. The previous day I ran into him at the top of a hill in Hendricks Park where he was doing hill reps. Tired, he asked me to help him out with one last rep, which I barely accomplished (I was tired myself, as I was on a warm down run after a track workout). He then invited me to run with him the next day.