Why is LetsRun still Hyping Megamiles?

cram ran his best on lower mileage after having done higher and feeling sluggish:

I came across an interview with Steve Cram in an October 1985 issue of Athletics Weekly and thought the following extract might be of interest, especially with all the recent speculation about Bernard Lagats low mileage/ high intensityprogramme.

AW - 'What have been the factors behind your transition into one of the all time greats of middle distance running?'

SC -'I felt that last year I had run far too many miles in training and got very sluggish.I decided I would change that this year. I used to run 100 miles a week at times but I decided I would get back to running a lot more cross country and road races, keep the mileage down but run it at a good pace. The highest week's mileage I had all winter was 74, but most of the time I was running between 50 and 60 miles a week. However, I was running very, very hard. Much of it was done at 5 minute mile pace. I probably averaged five and a half minute miles for all the training I did last winter.'

Read more:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=2580897#ixzz0yWcU5krL

Of that list only Cram was a true middle-distance runner (800/1500m). He was also diagnosed with compartment syndrome, which reduced the amount of running he was able to handle. He ran best off less mileage, but faster, at least for 1985. But he also never raced any faster either.

wilfredo wrote:

oiishjdhdhh wrote:

[quote]evenastupidmancansee wrote:

Webb ran 3:53 in high school. Obviously this WASN'T because of his low mileage. His body was, from birth, born just a bit different. Maybe a higher VO2, maybe his heart is a tiny bit bigger, maybe he has more xx cells or w/e. Either way his mileage had little to do with how well he performed (at least in HIGH SCHOOL). All these guys that you named ran in the 8:40's - they aren't your normal run of the mill athletes, these guys could do CrossFitting and still run sub-9.

Webb wasn't "from birth, born just a bit different." From an early age, he was in an swimming program that produced a couple Olympians. He had a huge aerobic base that few Westerners have before he switched to running in highschool.

ummm...are you really trying to tell me that Alan Webb ran 3:53 mostly because he swam a lot? . . .

Man! Too bad he didn't bike too! AND skateboard. The biking would have got him down to 3:47'ish, then the skateboarding at such an early age would have given him the boast he needed to break the WR with a time of 3:43.17

Right. Now it makes sense. Too bad he also horseback ride, then he might have gone under 3:40.

Optimal training for 800-1500 runners: hard easy cycle for 80% of the year (the other 20% would be the "base" period, which need not be too intense of base). Interval/repitition based during the cycle, which would also include a long run/high aerobic effort run. A lot of easy running in between the harder efforts.

Optimal training for 5k 10k- Basically just lydiard, minus a few things. You're left with aerobic base (lots of steady states, lots of hilly runs. Short 100% effort sprints once in a while), then an interval/repition phase, then the taper/race phase.

What a great cookie cutter formula! Yay. Know the marathon I don't have quite so figured out....

nobody thinks you need "megamiles" for MD. for 5k+ mileage is king

The problem here is multi-faceted:

1. Are a runner's reported mileage his/her actual mileage? Why give away all of your cards? Only that individual runner knows how much they are currently running.

2. You bring into a race ALL of the training you have EVER done not just the training you've done in the previous 1 month or 6 months. So, averages can be misleading. Just because runner A makes a breakthrough while running 50 miles a week doesn't mean the 100 miles a week they ran 3 months ago or 6 months ago or 1-2 years ago doesn't have an effect.

3. As a runner gets older they will need to reduce time on their feet. The catch here is that the large majority of runners will peak between say 25-30 years old. Right about the time father time decides to throw wrenches in the system after training at a competitive level since age 14 or earlier for some. This reduction in time on their feet ties into point #2.

4. Many world class distance runners over the ages have been thoroughbreds not draft horses. Meaning, many runners will have periods of quality training both in volume and intensity between periods of forced layoff due to sickness and/or injury CAUSED by this quality training (Ritz and Goucher come to mind). Very few world class runners will be able to train at a high level year after year for 10-15 years without getting hurt and/or sick. Interesting how many a world record or Olympic medal in the past has come after a runner was forced to take some down time (Joannie in '84 sick I believe and Clayton during the 80s would train, train, train get hurt, take some forced down time then set a record).

"US team on the track without <50 sec 400m speed."

And I argue there are far more distance runners with <50 400m speed than those with the ENDURANCE to sustain 60s speed. How many runners can run <60 for 400m? How many <2:00 for 800m? How many <3:00 for 1200m? How many <4:00 for the mile? Endurance is in part built through miles, but more importantly the ability to handle more training stress is first built through simple time on your feet.

You'll be hard pressed to find American or World Record Holders or Olympic medalists in anything 800m and up who have never spent some time over 100mpw. In the cases you do find the majority will be in the 800m-1500m range and even those will be more 800m guys than 1500m guys.

Alan

Are those averages for the entire year? What age were you at each PR?

Hyping megamiles is an easy "cop out" to justify someone's success or criticize someone's lack there of.

Of course Ritz had his big break through season last year which Letsrun attributes to his "marathon training", yet hasn't able to reproduce the same thing this year. So obviously it is not a simple thing as just doing a lot miles or building a "big base".

Then there is the great Peter Snell, the double 800 meter gold medalist who ran 20+ mile long runs during his base phase. But as time goes by (almost 50 years), it looks like Snell was more an exception than rule, as no other 800 world record holder has done the same type of base mileage.

Each individual responds differently. Former marathon record holder (2:07)Steve Jones hardly ever went over 100 miles per week. Whereas Frank Shorter would go 120 to 140. The Japanese runners are notorious for running megamiles, yet are mostly midpackers in major races.

Obviously, it boils down to common sense. The runner should do as much training as he/she can tolerate but below their "injury threshold". Some people can handle long runs better, while others can handle intervals in abundance. The trick is finding the right balance for the individual.

Steve Ovett didn't break the 800 world record, but probably could have, and I believe he ran fairly high mileage.

the numbers on todd williams are wrong i think.

Weekly mileage for the 10 weeks leading up to 1995 Gate River Run:

110-102-91-86-93-105-105-95-103-106* race week

if you would look through his logs most is sub 6 min pace with an occasional exception and the most common pace for a non-workout is 5:30-5:40.

doubtingthomas wrote:

The Japanese runners are notorious for running megamiles, yet are mostly midpackers in major races.

Two out of the last three Women's Olympic Marathons were won by Japanese women. In the Athens Olympics, Japan had three of the top seven. On the all-time list:

3. Mizuki Noguchi 2:19:12

7. Yoko Shibui 2:19:41

8. Naoko Takahashi 2:19:46 (former WR)

21. Masako Chiba 2:21:45

24. Naoko Sakamoto 2:21:51

27. Eri Yamaguchi 2:22:12

34. Reiko Tosa 2:22:46

36. Harumi Kiroyama 2:22:56

Webb's 2007 success was due to his previous years of higher mileage and holding onto his chips until he cashed in all his chips for 2007 season.

He couldn't continue to copycat 2007 training and get the same results in 2008.

I believe it is the same for Ritz.

Why would anyone think that high level aerobic training from an early age didn't help Webb? I'm sure all the biking and swimming Verzbicas has done didn't help him at all...

I won't go as far as to say that Webb DEFINITELY wouldn't have run as fast in high school without the swimming, but I don't think it's coincidence that the one 3:53 high school miler "just happened" to have elite swim training his whole life, and it didn't affect his running whatsoever.

chillll wrote:

Why would anyone think that high level aerobic training from an early age didn't help Webb? I'm sure all the biking and swimming Verzbicas has done didn't help him at all...

I won't go as far as to say that Webb DEFINITELY wouldn't have run as fast in high school without the swimming, but I don't think it's coincidence that the one 3:53 high school miler "just happened" to have elite swim training his whole life, and it didn't affect his running whatsoever.

After a decade of biking, coupled with one of the worlds highest vo2's (Armstrong has recorded an aerobic capacity of 83.8 mL/kg/min (VO2 max) lance armstrong took on the marathon and only managed a 2:59 (though in his defense he later ran 2:46 or 2:47 which still isn't that good). you could cite that he is older, but hey, he still has placed well recently. I really doubt the swimming turned him from a regular 4:30 miler to a 3:53, i refuse to believe that. He would have run sub-4 regardless, IMO

Why is it so hard to connect that an intense swimming background as a youth can translate into faster running? The development in swimming is not limited to increased aerobic capacity. The shoulders and biceps are developed as well, in addition to body balance and overall muscularity.

Jordan Hasay was a serious swimmer before she became a great distance runner and continued to swim 3x a week even after she focused on running. Craig Miller (of Wisconsin), a 4:06 1600 runner as a HS sophomore and sub 4 miler and All American at Wisconsin swam as a youth, as did his twin brother Brad (who replaced Craig as a Penna state champ in the 1600 his senior year when Craig was injured and could not compete).

It is simply amazing how often I will read the detailed bios of successful runners like these, Verzbicas, and others and discover they were serious swimmers when younger. That additional aerobic capacity and strength in the shoulders and arms that swimming develops provides power for running and sprinting (remember, these runners are champions, they are capable of fast finishes).

I am sold on the benefits that swimming can provide in the early development of an athlete. Pay attention to the bios of successful runners and you will start to notice this interesting connection as well.

Maybe you are looking at it backwards. They were good swimmers because of the way they were born (higher vo2 max/effecient body...etc), so naturally they are good runners because of this, not the swimming. All I'm saying is that if you took a typical 4:30 guy (someone who would be capable of running 4:30 his Senior year in high school), went back in time and had him swim for 5 years or so, I am willing to bet a thousand dollars that he wouldn't be able to break 4 in the mile. If this were the case people would have caught on and there would be HUNDREDS of sub four milers in the USA. Every middle aged John Doe who failed at reaching his max potential with running would be pushing their kids to swim with great coaches for some odd years. Again, I just can't imagine that it's that easy - get 30 kids in a pool trained by 1 or 2 olympic swim coaches, and da ta, 5 years later they all run 3:53. I'm not buying it, but I do agree that it gives you an, obvious, edge when you start running.

All the good runners I know who are on a good swimming program have better recovery than their rivals. They do a lot of swimming but very low running mileage at fast paces.

I totally agree that the cult of lydiard is rampant on letsrun. It seems to me that Americans and lets run are focused on a fallacy of 70's that if you run 110 miles every week you will be fast. These guys never look at the top guys that are running now and what they are doing i.e. Lagat. There are tons of great distance runners who are doing things here and now that don't use a lydiard method and never get mentioned on letsrun. But then one guy goes out and runs 120 mile weeks and puts up an okay time and suddenly there are 400 posts declaring lydiard a god.

Well, I'm glad this is getting some discussion.

In terms of training volume: current versus late 70's/early 80's US record holders:

Hall runs less than Rodgers

Solinksky runs less than Nenow

Lagat runs less than Centrowitz

Webb runs less than Scott

Across the board we have seen faster guys running higher quality and relatively less volume to produce superior results than back in the day.

The idea is to get more out of the miles you run, not to simply run more miles.