120-140 mile per week winter base.

Link wrote:

I'll second this. I went from (according to the 800 distinct NCAA div I All-Americans on this board) from crappy to er... less crappy by changing my training from 80-100/wk at near MP to a 100-200/wk (probably averaging 140..) at MP+++ and much faster speedwork. Specifically, I went from a 2:47 marathon to 2:27 in two years by running a lot more, most of it a lot slower and a little bit of it a lot faster. Don't let these cynics discourage you. Great things were never achieved by those who were afraid to fail.

Nice, what progressions did you make in your other PR's if you ran any?

35 minute 10k to 32, 1:17 HM to 1:09HM. PR of 15:20 track 5,000. That was an improvement from 17 minute road 5k. I ought to say that the 1:09 was en'route to the 2:27 (I had delusions of grandeur... I wanted to run sub 2:20) So, my half marathon PR's are a bit better than my marathon, I think. As a junior in HS (I didn't run my senior year..) I ran a 4:48 mile and 10:40 two. I am NOT gifted.

Hard, and, perhaps more importantly, *consistent* work will get you a long way though.

Damn, can you detail your progression a little more. How many years you took to get the mileage up, how the PR's progressed as you went. As long as Ian doesn't mind a bit of a sidetrack.

I am embarrassed to admit, that I am now no longer certain about dates and precise times. I'll root around for my logs, but this was all about 20 years ago.

Anyway, the two year period was from 89-91. I'm sorry that I cannot recall specifics, if that's what you're looking for. In some sense, though, it doesn't matter, you know? If you're looking for inspiration, then rest assured that I am an example - as is Wejo, by the way - and, hell, hundreds of others, of the power of moderately paced high volume training. If you want a guarantee, then, well... I'm not sure I can supply it.

Does this sort of training result in big improvements for everyone? I don't honestly know. Will it turn any ugly duckling into a beautiful swan? Well, from my own experience it will turn an ugly duckling into a less ugly duckling. I was never a threat to win big races, or even to win small ones. Can it turn an ugly swan into a beautiful swan? Yes. Check out Bill Rodgers' logs on Hodgie-San's site. If this training will give you improvement how long will it take to do so? For me, it took a matter of months. But, I had some mileage in my legs already, and I wasn't in college when I undertook this training. What's the takeaway? What will happen if you start to run high mileage? Well, there's only one way to find out if this approach, this running a lot more, will catapult you to greatness. What's the path? Ian is on his way. If you are inspired by this thread, joiwef, then you should put on your shoes, get out the door, and start on your way too.

maybe smarter means higher mileage. seems the americans with higher mileage, wearing the swoosh perchance, are doing quite well against the africans these days.

Week 2: 140.2 miles. 7:46 average pace for the week(for all runs put together) No tempo/fast runs. Long run of 21 miles at 7:31 pace. Doubled 6 days this week.

I was feeling real tired by the end of the week. Did most of these runs solo.

Dang, that's a lot of mileage. Are you planning on adding some tempo runs in at some point?

I don't know this OP from a hole in the wall, but anyone crapping on his plan is a piece of garbage. For those of you who've said he shouldn't do this with the insinuation he's not good enough to handle it or make it worth risking it - I find that logic backwards. He should be trying this BECAUSE he's not currently an all-american. Those of us with moderate abilities and times, should at a certain point, consider what might be possible if the boundaries are pushed beyond the norm. (and for the record, there are a lot of guys, many of them from another generation, who would argue that 120-140 is not "beyond the norm")

The other point I would argue is from the guy who stated this is a bad idea because the OP will lose speed, and then when he drops his mileage to regain the speed, he will lose the endurance. While I agree this increase in mileage should include some up-tempo stuff, to suggest that the benefits of 8-10 weeks of high mileage will be lost after dropping the mileage back down a bit, is lunacy. That's money in the bank, and it would take several months of pretty low mileage to lose those effects.

I've never been able to average mileage that high, but the few times I've come close, I've run better than at most other times in my life. So, to you, ian edwards - realize there is a risk involved. But if you're willing to take on that potential for injury, good luck to you and keep me/us updated on your progress.

i ran 926 (well, 926.89 to be exact) miles last week, anyone think that's too much? i don't wanna get hurt...i didn't push it too hard (averaged 7:15s) and got plenty of sleep (8 hours a night). anyone have any experience with this type of mileage or any injuries that might come with it?

Too bad wrybread, 0.01 miles more and you would have had the world record and the billion dollar prize I'm offering for anyone who reaches 926.90.

sprint7 wrote:

Dang, that's a lot of mileage. Are you planning on adding some tempo runs in at some point?

Yes, at some point I will. But I'm not sure when. Maybe mid January. To tell the truth I'm having some hammy trouble right now, and I don't think it can take any fast running. Also, my foot hurts alot, so that might lead to me not doing any tempo runs until it doesn't hurt.

I completely agree with "Distance Guy."

I'm never going to be as good as the fastest guys by just doing what everyone else is doing.

I agree with distance guy's post as well, and you're right that logic is completely backwards - just because Bannister did 30 miles a week doesn't mean I should be able to break 4 with the same training.

But at the end of the day you ARE doing this more for the attention than for the performance results. I think you're going to injure yourself sooner rather than later, not because of high mileage training per se, but because you're more concerned with silly stunts than methodically working your way up to being able to handle that volume.

Ian, Are you doing all these mileage on asphalt or some on trails? I'm not saying one is better, I am just curious what percent you do on soft surfaces vs hard. I usually like running on trails, but with the snow this winter I am stuck pretty exclusively on roads. I'm trying to build my mileage as well, but I'm worried how well my legs will hold up when I can't do at least a percentage of my runs on trails.

edumacator wrote:

But at the end of the day you ARE doing this more for the attention than for the performance results.

This is also true to an extent. I've never been able to run a 20 miler without updating my facebook status to tell people about it. And I love LetsRun so of course I had to come on here and make a thread about it. But if LetsRun and Facebook didn't exist I'd still be doing this, but I'd still find a way to tell people. There's obviously something wrong with me.

sineCosine wrote:

Ian, Are you doing all these mileage on asphalt or some on trails? I'm not saying one is better, I am just curious what percent you do on soft surfaces vs hard. I usually like running on trails, but with the snow this winter I am stuck pretty exclusively on roads. I'm trying to build my mileage as well, but I'm worried how well my legs will hold up when I can't do at least a percentage of my runs on trails.

I try to avoid the road. I usually run on dirt/cinder or whatever it's called at a park near my house. It's not a trail, but a path. And also if I have to run on the road I'll try to hop on some grass on the side of it. I avoid the road/pavement as much as possible. I've had shin splint problems in the past due to it.

hows the foot injury ian edwards?

bifg wrote:

hows the foot injury ian edwards?

Feels alot better than yesterday. I just have to stay off the roads.

how havent u died from 140 miles yet?