2-hour runs.

The people you quote were not the best in the world.

Yes, Bob Deines ran two hours a day, but he was a 2:20 type runner, who had a short career which only lasted about 5 years of good running.

Whitlock - phenomenal for his age, yes....but in absolute terms - not very fast....2:50 marathon is not really fast running.....it is just great for his age....but anyone else trying to do 2-3 hours a day like Whitlock would break down quicly.

No Japanese marathoners run 2 hour runs as 'base runs' all year. They may to a week or two, of 2 hour runs during training camps, but then they will go shorter distances. The high mileage Japanese, during selected times during the year might go - am - 60 minutes....slow, lunchtime 90 minutes...faster....afternoon - 60 minutes...slow...but that type of training would only be for a buildup for a few weeks.

Japanese runners, and Ahmed Salah used to also go on runs as far as 50km during buildup phases.

The point I am making is that selling the '2 hour run' as a good training tool is misleading, because you can only do limited number of 2 hour runs, before doing so becomes damaging.

When Whitlock was tested, he shocked the testers at the lab, but the testers noted that Whitlock is very short, light (just over 100 pounds) and has a very efficient stride and economical. Most people cannot do that....he is a freak of nature. But once again, Whitlock is not fast in absolute terms...he is very fast for his age....but 2:50 as a time is not fast for a marathon. So he should not be used in the survey. We should be looking at marathon runners who can run around 2:12 (men) and sub. 2:25 (women) and look at their training. When you look at what those people do, very few, if any, use 2 hour runs as their staple training runs. The 2 hour runs are just used occasionally, with the main purpose of teaching the body to burn fat and run in a semi depleted state.

Ghost in Korea

I didn't say the people I mentioned were the best in the world. I simply said that they did well by running two hours a day. That's essentially the same thing you've done in your threads about Bob Holt, Tony Simmons and so on.

There was also a Canadian called Herb Phillips who was a bit younger than Ed Whitlock who was training similarly and was not that much slower than Whitlock. Liane Winter was alternating slow 20km runs one day with 30km runs done at variable speeds when she won Boston. Zatopek's sessions must have gone to two hours or so.

There's way too much emphsis anymore on finding the proper formula for successful running, be it two 45-60 minute runs, one 120 minute run or some other thing and not enough on simply getting in enough running.

Interesting to note that Henry Rono has been running between 2-3 hours per day for the past year, and has been stuck at a relatively high weight (170 pounds) for the past 6 months, after initially losing weight.

His excessive training, aside from a decent 5km race (17:40+) has not produced desired results. When he 'raced' a mile, he was only able to post a time of 6:24... not criticizing here, but suggesting that the benefits of training for such large chunks of time are not apparent. But Henry is on a mission, and will not listen to advice, however well intentioned.

Ghost in Korea

Do you really think a runner who's done what Rono has is going to take advice from someone he doesn't know but who posts advice on the Internet?

That doesn't make sense. A 17:40 is run at 5:40 pace.

Hey ghost what are your credentials? I like what your saying about the 1hr run with a second afternoon run but what kind of times have you run? Or if your a coach what kind of times do your athletes run?

ghost wrote:

When University of Colorado athletes did most of their mileage in singles, only the strongest on the team survived, and there were always a lot of injuries.

Stick to talking about only the things that you know.

REUJOKING wrote:

Hey ghost what are your credentials? I like what your saying about the 1hr run with a second afternoon run but what kind of times have you run? Or if your a coach what kind of times do your athletes run?

You REUJOKING, what are your credentials? What kind of times you do or you are a coach what times what kind of times do your athletes run?

The question isn´t what kind of credencials you need to have to discuss 2-hour runs ? The question is 2-hour runs. Discuss.

For the record I ran in College at Mansfield State under coach Winrow. My times were not that good - I think I was too tall and uncoordinated to be a good runner. Height 6.2/weight 145 at my peak. Now - 165 pounds, after going up to 185 pounds a few years ago when living in Canada

I had no speed whatsoever (best 400 - 61 during an 800 race!)

My best times;

1500 - 4:19 (Crystal Palace, 1977)

3000m indoors - 8:57 (Rochester indoor track, 1981)

3 miles indoors - 14:42 (Bucknell indoor, 1981)

5000 outdoors - 15:17.4 (Wimbledon, England, 1978)

10.000 - 32:22 (Crystal Palace, England, 1979)

10 miles road - 51:21 (Mansfield, U.S.A., 1980)

25km road - 1:25.09 (Millau, France, 1988)

20 miles road - 1:50.49 (Finchley, England, 1978)

Marathon - 2:30.47

Good runners don't necessarily make good coaches, but it doesn't hurt.

Ghost in Korea

I wasnt trying to put ghost down or anything I was just seeing what kinda times he has run. And if he had any success from this kinda training that he does.

REUJOKING wrote: I wasnt trying to put ghost down or anything I was just seeing what kinda times he has run. And if he had any success from this kinda training that he does.

Why do you ask - is this the first you've heard of anything like "1hr run with a second afternoon run"?

For the Lydiard time schedules... am I correct that the goal is to hit the time... then pick up the speed?

So if 6:00 pace used to be easy but now years later you're running 11 min pace... do you just keep at the distance until you get back to 6's?

A 60:00 run might start off being 6 miles, but eventually becomes 9 miles?

that has always been my assumption. When I heard him speak he talked about how "anyone" could go out and run for two hours, they just need to slow down.

Yes, an hour run might go from 6 to 9 miles in time as your fitness improves. But it's important to let that improvement come naturally in its own time. You don't want to do your hour thinking that you got to get at least 6.1 miles in today because yesterday you ran 6.0.

How did you ever end up in Mansfield, Pa. from the UK? It is just a tad off the beaten path. And did Winrow have you training along the lines he was reported to have done? I recall an old Runner's World article about his experience at Valpariso when he decided to make slow running the base of how his teams trained.

If you read "CONDITIONING OF A DISTANCE RUNNER" by Winrow you will see that he was not into just running 2 hours. He was very much into a hard/easy system. Easy days could be as little as 2 miles (usually twice a week). His longer runs were not all of that long, except once a week. Ed used himself as a test case (to see what worked and what did not). This was not uncommon for runners from the 60's-- not too much to go on as to the "correct" way to train.

That was Tom Osler. I know because I talked to Tom about that earlier this year. Tom does make some reference to Ed in "conditioning" but not to a specific training schedule. I think the quote is something like, "Few will train with him because of his slow pace."

Joe Henderson told me that Winrow was his main inspirations for switching to LSD training. They met in St. Paul in 1966 (I think)at the AAU 15km championships and Winrow told Joe he'd been running for about an hour a day and two or two and a half on Sunday, totalling 60-70 miles at 7:30-8:00 pace. Winrow won that race and Joe decided to train similarly.

didn't it work for tom mcardle too? and speaking of tom, does anyone know how his boulder-based comeback is coming along?

What is Lydiard? Elaborate. Where can I find this system?