According to the minimalists...You can run in them until they literally fall apart.
According to the minimalists...You can run in them until they literally fall apart.
The way I eased into it was this...
Hayward/Skylon
Asics Gel Speedstar II
Nike Streak XC
Nike Katana 2 Racer
Bumping this thread for the benefit of another thread poster, hope this helps.
Hey Malmo,
After track, I am taking a week or 2 break before starting up my summer training. I was wondering how long you think I should take to build up to 90-100 mpw. Last summer and fall I was consistently in the low-mid 90's, then this past track season mid 70's, with my last 2 weeks before this break around only 50mpw. So since it will be at least 3 weeks since my last 70mile week, how should I build to 100+miles? Thanks
Mottram's coach says no pace is too slow for an easy run. I completely believe this. I just go out a run whatever my body feels like running and figure out my pace when I get back.
My only criteria for an easy run is to feel better at the end of my run than I did in the beginning. I usually double my easy days 4+8 and get a little faster throughout the day. As for my shorter morning run before a longer, harder effort in the afternoon, same principle, but my pace tends to be a bit faster than an "easy" day.
"Personally i think that genetics and talent are wildly overrated."
Wow- how wrong can you be... Do you think the only thing keeping your typical college shmuck from being a WC runner is the work load or work outs? Maybe that's why so many people come on here looking for the "magic workout". Listen, talent and genetics play a HUGE role!
Just look at the typical XC team, most everyone does a very similar workout, yet one guy is usually ahead of the others- is it just because he's working harder?" I think not, there are plenty of #5 men on vasity that work their tails off, it's just that they are maxed out.
Think about this. Do you really think Geb could be an NFL linebacker? I mean if genetics and talent play no role his 5'3 110 self should be able train up to NFL standard right?
Do you think that Charles Barkley could be an Oly marathoner with the right mileage? Hell no! He's freaking huge- he'd never be a decent long distance runner.
In all these potential weeks all that is given is distances. Are these all just steady runs? Are some tempos and some progressions and some recovery days? Can someone who's had success with hundred mile weeks be a little more specific?
Malmo,
Admittedly I've read in and out of the thread which I only discovered today. Much earlier (around pages 3-5 say) a lot of attention is placed on Henderson's training and the more I read of your running style and those advocated by Renato the more I've become intrigued by the low volume, high intensity take to running which is new to me.
My question is how could this be incorporated by a coach for a group of athletes instead of just an individual. It seems all well and good when coaching oneself by feel or an athlete you know very well and whose body you understand, but I can't help but think that this system would be really easy to f**k up either as the coach or that it would be easy to f**k up by the athletes. Let's face it, a group of 15 competitive guys are not going to go out together and then just section off into runs by feel.
I've been mulling different ideas around in my head but I'd really enjoy your take on the matter.
Check out the thread on the Adams St. guys and how they structured a 100-110 mile week. A lot of guys had success with it. It's not 100 miles in singles and it's not doubling every day. It's a mix of both in about 10 or 11 runs with good intensity, altitude, and a two-hour run weekly. That's how I'd do it; essentially did do it.
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=1657603&page=0
Bumping this thread for a few friends who said they wanted to read and comment on it, we'll see if they follow through...
My 2 cents:
If you can build up to it slowly then this schedule is pretty good and classic in that many many good runners have used it:
Mon am: 5 miles easy pm: 10 miles easy
Tue am: 5 miles easy pm: LT or AT Workout
Wed am: 5 miles easy pm: 10 miles easy + strides
Thu am: 5 miles easy pm: 10 miles easy
Fri am: 5 miles easy pm: VO2 Max or Repetition Workout
Sat am: 5 miles easy pm: 10 miles easy + strides
Sun am: 20 miles progressive long run pm: rest
Total: 110 miles per week
Malmo's subjective descriptions of his paces seems really weird to me as the range is so small between easy and hard. I do alot of my easy runs over 7:00 pace, and when tired from mileage and hard workouts, that might not feel good at all, but I would call 6:00 pace moderate and do tempos in the 5:20 range. To me, hard, easy and moderate is dictated by how my legs feel, not how hard I am breathing. I know lots of guys who, while not as fast as Malmo, are pretty fast and observe a much wider range of training paces. I know 14:20 guys for whom 7:00 pace would be a nice easy day if they are running 100+ a week and getting in solid workouts.
1:00 per mile is the difference between easy and moderate or between moderate and hard for me, not the bridge between easy and hard.
has anyone actually finished a summer of malmo and have any follow up results to support such a summer?
Keep in mind that Malmo is talking about 8.5 mile runs so his tempo pace is probably AT not LT.
I don't think its uncommon to have a minute swing between easy and hard. Generally there is about a minute (give or take 15 seconds) difference between AT and Easy for elite distance runners.
i.e. a 6:00 may feel easy, while a 5:30 feels moderate and a 5:00 feels hard (but under control - i.e. AT pace).
My first thought would be that if he felt truly awful that he didn't slog through 8.5 miles but only did 3 or 4. The way I read it is that those 8.5 mile runs are all just mileage and do not get as fast as his marathon, that is, tempo pace either.
Other places I have read him describe several tempo runs a week. I wonder if these hard and/or fast runs are what he meant?
I also have to wonder how your size and the fact that, correct me if I'm wrong, you never could quite run the marathon your half marathon predicted come into play. What if his efficiency, marathon ability, let him run faster more often?
If you want a bench mark use Dr. Daniels' tables.
For a 75 VDOT level (i.e 2:14 marathoner) he suggests and easy pace of 6:09 per mile and a marathon pace (read AT) of 5:09. Exactly one minute apart. With LT being 4:56 but that would be very difficult for a 8.5 mile run, so knowing Malmo's philosophy on tempo runs it would be closer to AT rather than LT.
My easy runs will swing from 7:15-6:15, my long tempo runs will start around 6:00 and go as fast as 5:30, shorter ones will start around 5:45ish and get down to 5:15, 5:15-4:50 is interval pace, anything much faster than that is reps for me.
tl;dr, one minute difference sounds about right.
I think someone asked this earlier but I couldn't find an answer. Malmo - how quick of a buildup do you advise, and how much of a break after track before starting the SoM? Our coach has us taking about a month off, then starting with 15 miles a week and building up to about 75 by early August. I'm coming into my senior year of college and I've handled 90-100 mile weeks before, so I want to get up at least that high by August.
An increase of 80 miles (from 15 to 105) in 10 weeks seems pretty steep, so my question is, do I start earlier or start with higher mileage right off the bat? I was thinking 2 weeks off, start at about 20-25 miles/week and then take 12 weeks to build up to 100+. How's this compare with what other people have done?
twig mzungu wrote:
I think someone asked this earlier but I couldn't find an answer. Malmo - how quick of a buildup do you advise, and how much of a break after track before starting the SoM? Our coach has us taking about a month off, then starting with 15 miles a week and building up to about 75 by early August. I'm coming into my senior year of college and I've handled 90-100 mile weeks before, so I want to get up at least that high by August.
An increase of 80 miles (from 15 to 105) in 10 weeks seems pretty steep, so my question is, do I start earlier or start with higher mileage right off the bat? I was thinking 2 weeks off, start at about 20-25 miles/week and then take 12 weeks to build up to 100+. How's this compare with what other people have done?
1) 15 to 105 in 10 weeks is steep? I don't think that 15 to 105 in 3 weeks is steep.
2) take a 2 weeks off then run 35 miles. 5 miles once a day. The next do 70 of doubles 3 or 4 days and singles in between. Then 90 or even 100.
My question to you is why on Earth would you take 12 weeks to build up? that's wasting time.
1) 15 to 105 in 10 weeks is steep? I don't think that 15 to 105 in 3 weeks is steep.
2) take a 2 weeks off then run 35 miles. 5 miles once a day. The next do 70 of doubles 3 or 4 days and singles in between. Then 90 or even 100.
My question to you is why on Earth would you take 12 weeks to build up? that's wasting time.[/quote]
Interesting - I definitely don't disagree (I'd love to be up to 90 a month from now), but this is very different from my current coach's philosophy, which is that you should always either be building or tapering. Under his schedule I'd be coming into Augusut around 80, building steadily to about 100 in early October, then backing off for conference/regionals.
My question with your model is, what do I do once I get up to 100 a week in June? Stay there? Keep adding mileage? Up the intensity? I know you're going to tell me to feel it rather than think it, but if the goal of the SoM is to come into the season feeling fresh, wouldn't running 8+ weeks at a constant 100ish risk some stagnation? Obviously I've never tried it so I don't know how my body would react, but this quick of a jump goes against a lot of what I've been taught.