I ran 1:54 in high school and the longest run I did was our "long route" we called it. I measured it once, 2.15 miles. LONG ROUTE !!!
I ran 1:54 in high school and the longest run I did was our "long route" we called it. I measured it once, 2.15 miles. LONG ROUTE !!!
I remember reading an article on flotrack where Portland runner Alfred Kipchumba talks about running 13:45 for 5k off of 20-30 mpw.
http://www.flotrack.org/article/1328-Alfred-Kipchumba-KWIK-E
It's definitely possible to run fast off of low mileage in any event. i'd say it depends heavily on genetics.
Maybe it's like badger miles, except he assumes everything is 15 minute mile pace.
Stock LRC Response wrote:
long dong silver wrote:Didn't jack daniels say he had some beast chick run for him who ran some crazy times off of less than 30 mpw (I'm sure that he coached multiple athletes who had done similar things almost as impressive)? Does anyone know which thread this was, or more details on this? I'm pretty sure it was more along the lines of 5k/10k which I think is certainly applicable to this thread; if you can run a good 5k off low mileage then certainly it could be done @ 800!
Well, obviously the answer here is that she was running 10 miles every morning and not counting it as mileage; you know, like any other athlete, ESPECIALLY an African, that has had success at any distance over 400 meters while running less than 100 miles per week! Probably doesn't count warmups and cooldowns either. You're probably looking at more like 130 a week here when she says 30.
Ha ha ....EXCELLENT satire of many of the Lydiard nuts here at letsun.
The fact is: Padilla, Spivey, Webb, and Lagat, ALL ran world class 5k's while running 60 miles a week or less. There are plenty more like them
[Padilla and Spivey (13:15's) definitely have spoke of running between 40-60 for the large % of their weeks. Yes, even base weeks. Yes, counting warm-ups.
Lagat (sub 13:00 at the time) has been quote at numerous times in the past talking about his 60 miles weeks as being his most (he's done more lately after moving away from the mile). Remember he was a miler.
And Webb was doing 40-65 most of time in HS, early in college, and first few years out. He did 13:10 and was on pace to run near 13:00.
Talent is more important than alllllll the miles run int he world put together]
800 is a weird animal wrote:
Hey, it wasn't actually a race, it was during practice - prescribed as a tempo, but once I went through the first mile in 5:08, I just decided to crank it down a bit and see if I could set a record for our 5k tempo loop (it's on a certified usatf course right by school, basically a rectangle, so you don't have to stop anywhere).
And actually for a 4:12 miler, mcmillian prescribes a tempo pace of 4:55-5:08 - so I was actually within reason.
An equivalent 5k performance to my mile would have been 14:33 - so I was sadly pretty far off. Had I crushed some more miles maybe I would have gotten under 15 :) Which was the point of my original post! Unfortunately, in typical letsrun fashion, we've obsessed ourselves with a random comment instead of the intended point.
Yeah my mile PR was run backwards. My 5k was actually with a 6:00 first mile (including cartwheels and soul'ja boying). I just wanted to break my school record in the 2 mile so I picked it up.
I'm assuming you didn't look at the McMillian calculator as I politely suggested? 15:32 is the PRESCRIBED TEMPO PACE for a 4:12 miler.
What incentive would I have to lie? I was simply trying to point out that miles may not have big effects, if any, on an 800 but can yield substantial gains in distances above that. Increased mileage may also benefit the mid-d athlete with better consistency in races and the ability to run multiple heats/events. I realize I may not be a perfect example of a low mileage athlete, given that swimming 15-20 hrs a week every summer and winter through hs and college gave me a substantial aerobic base, but I nevertheless thought it was a relevant example.
I apologize for offending you with my use of "Tempo" - despite using it CORRECTLY. Nevertheless, to calm your clearly offended sensibilities, I'll change my statement to -
"The most surprising benefit of added mileage was that I was fit enough to run a hard 15:32 by myself during practice one chilly Tuesday afternoon. Although this was a FULL MINUTE slower than performance calculators indicate I should be capable of, it was definitely not a tempo run because it was overall a relatively quick time."
If you read carefully, I didn't say my compartively slow 5k (compared to your alleged "4:08 and 14:48" )was a school record, I simply noted that setting an informal "course record" on a frequently-run route was part of my motivation for running 'hard'.
From your clearly offended response though, I'll assume you'd stand to reason that Solinksy's, Ritz's, Teg's etc's tempo runs are run at 6 minute pace? As anything faster couldn't possibly be a "tempo" ????
I changed to a low mileage training plan last year and was amazed when I saw that Flotrack video to see that my training is nearly identical to Vessey's.
My 'long run' is 25 minutes and I do a lot in the gym.
The only difference is that I stay off the track and do all my speedwork on grass.
Last summer I ran 1:52 and 3:51.
I've been injury free for 8 months now (a new pr!) and hoping to go faster this year.
Then what is your training former cripple those are some imressive times just saying you don't run much means nothing give us something to chew on!
Kelly Holmes double olypic champ for 800/1500 reportedly did less than 40 per week, ran 3:57/1:56 at those olympics, so its not so insane that someone focusing purely on the 800 should only run 40 mpw.
They can probably make up for this with solid gym work and high quality sessions.
It alwasys amazes me that all runners seem to either advocate miles or quality.They cant look at an event that lasts 2 minutes and decide that it requires different training from one that takes 30.
800 is a weird animal wrote:
I'm assuming you didn't look at the McMillian calculator as I politely suggested? 15:32 is the PRESCRIBED TEMPO PACE for a 4:12 miler.
What incentive would I have to lie? I was simply trying to point out that miles may not have big effects, if any, on an 800 but can yield substantial gains in distances above that. Increased mileage may also benefit the mid-d athlete with better consistency in races and the ability to run multiple heats/events. I realize I may not be a perfect example of a low mileage athlete, given that swimming 15-20 hrs a week every summer and winter through hs and college gave me a substantial aerobic base, but I nevertheless thought it was a relevant example.
I apologize for offending you with my use of "Tempo" - despite using it CORRECTLY. Nevertheless, to calm your clearly offended sensibilities, I'll change my statement to -
"The most surprising benefit of added mileage was that I was fit enough to run a hard 15:32 by myself during practice one chilly Tuesday afternoon. Although this was a FULL MINUTE slower than performance calculators indicate I should be capable of, it was definitely not a tempo run because it was overall a relatively quick time."
If you read carefully, I didn't say my compartively slow 5k (compared to your alleged "4:08 and 14:48" )was a school record, I simply noted that setting an informal "course record" on a frequently-run route was part of my motivation for running 'hard'.
From your clearly offended response though, I'll assume you'd stand to reason that Solinksy's, Ritz's, Teg's etc's tempo runs are run at 6 minute pace? As anything faster couldn't possibly be a "tempo" ????
I didn't read any of that, but I do have to ask you a question. Why are you trying so hard to prove to me that you're running these times?
It sounds like you don't believe my times either, which are nothing to lie about because they're not very fast anyway.
Not trying to prove anything. Initially I was trying to share a relevant anecdote, then later trying to clarify for you, since you attacked it so condescendingly. I'm sorry having more than one line is too overwhelming for you. Next time I'll include pictures.
Quality Poster wrote:
They cant look at an event that lasts 2 minutes and decide that it requires different training from one that takes 30.
It's not that they don't require different training. It's that they're both primarily aerobic driven, obviously one moreso than the other.
Tike wrote:
Then what is your training former cripple those are some imressive times just saying you don't run much means nothing give us something to chew on!
I don't run much but I probably train harder than most of the guys I know that run 70+ mpw.
Usually I do four runs in a week. 'Long run' is 25 minutes done at 5:25 pace.
The other 3 runs are speed sessions done on grass with a long warm up (hurdle drills, speed drills, strides)
12x30s
6x[45s/60s]
10x60s
5x3min
That kind of thing. These sessions are done HARD. I don't worry about distance covered just make sure i'm pushing myself.
Gym Work: On the days that I run I either swim or cross train (elliptical/row). On the days with no runs I swim AND cross train.
I do core/circuit training every day. This is something I never really did when running high mileage. It makes a MASSIVE difference, I feel like a running machine when i'm training now.
Also do a decent amount of easy cycling. A cycle to the gym is a 20k round trip for example. Every extra little bit of training helps!
I was out for nearly 3 years with different injuries (calves, achilles, shins) and I wasn't even doing crazy mileage only 60-70 mpw. Knew I had to try something new.
Different things work for different people.
Sucks training on my own the whole time though :(
In Charlotte, Canova did say he followed Coe (by car)in a 30K run on the roads. Canova said the next day Coe did a 2 hour gym workout that was unbelievable without much rest.
The guy that Canova was talking about doing the fast 200s was Bucher. Canova said he ran 10K on the track in 30 minutes and change, then the next day ran 3 x 200 averaging about 21.5 or so.
m goo blue wrote:
I ran 1:54 in high school and the longest run I did was our "long route" we called it. I measured it once, 2.15 miles. LONG ROUTE !!!
Just think what you could have done with some training
I prefer to follow the training of champions myself
fgdfsadfaf wrote:
800 is a weird animal wrote:The 800 is a weird event. A lot of it comes down to whether you're a 400/800 runner, or an 800/1500 guy. I dunno if it's even that simple though, it's such a bastard distance, I know I was better than a number of guys in my conference in the 400 and 1500 my sr year, but couldn't touch their times in the 800.
I swam in high school, so during spring track in hs I was doing less than 20 mpw. Sr year I ran 50.3/1:59
My freshman/soph year of college I was still swimming, so same deal, and just ran 400 hurdles, but did run a 49 and 1:55 off of ~3 interval sessions - no tempos or long runs.
Jr year had mono, so it was a wash
Sr year quit swimming and ran indoors, I also started running 50 mpw every single week in Sept, and continued through that through may. My 400 and 800 didn't get faster, but my 800 was much more consistent week in and week out. The mileage allowed me to move up and run my best pr's - 3:04 for the 1200 and 4:12 for the mile, and ran a 15:32 5k tempo run in practice.
No doubt mileage makes you a better runner, but it won't necessary make you a better 800 runner. The biggest gains are to be seen in the longer events.
If a 15:32 5k is a tempo run, you were capable a 1:05-1:06 half marathon. I call BS. You either ran close to all out or your track was short.
Maybe he just has bigger balls than you.
middle distance is simply different for many people. For example, in the Coe/Ovett era the two guys did a totally different style of training, Coe running up to 50, Ovett up to 120. Interestingly however, although, and Steve will be the first guy to say it, that Coe was a faster 800m runner, he did not produce results in 800m competitions which included rounds, whereas Ovett did. This could reflect Coe's aerobic conditioning in terms of Ovett's.
a specific example of an out and out 800m runner is Peter Snell (whom this week rather amusingly stated us distance running as "pathetic"- what a LAD!!!). Snell used Lydiard's method of marathon training in his base phase in prep for the summer. the following is an extract from Lydiard's Book concerning the training of Snell:
"Peter Snell was basically the slowest runner in the 800 metres final at both Rome and Tokyo Olympics but he had the stamina to carry him through the heats and then sprint the last 100 metres of the final faster than any of his rivals. Snell was trained to be capable of running a fine marathon but his rivals were not. This was the advantage that enabled him to succeed; it's also the advantage you can give yourself"
The training of Snell in his base phase was the following:
Monday- 1 hour fartlek
Tuesday- 1 hour 30 mins aerobic running @ maximum steady state
Wednesday- 5000m Time Trial
Thursday- 1 hour 30 mins aerobic running @ maximum steady state
Friday- 45 mins aerobic running @ maximum steady state followed by hill bounding and repetitions
Saturday- 10,000m Time Trial
Sunday- 2 hours 10 mins aerobic running @ maximum steady state
Snell also did morning runs and regular Weight sessions.
So, if I was to say how Vessey will do this season I can predict a fast time on the circuit, however being knocked out of the heats of major competitions such as nationals and worlds (if she makes it to Korea), due to not having the aerobic base of which to get through the rounds.
PH
Didn't Tyson Gay say that he'd run a mile. Once. And didn't like it?
needs more endurance to win!!! wrote:
middle distance is simply different for many people. For example, in the Coe/Ovett era the two guys did a totally different style of training, Coe running up to 50, Ovett up to 120. Interestingly however, although, and Steve will be the first guy to say it, that Coe was a faster 800m runner, he did not produce results in 800m competitions which included rounds, whereas Ovett did. This could reflect Coe's aerobic conditioning in terms of Ovett's.
Coe didn´t lose to Ovett in the Moscow 800 because he lacked conditioning, but because he ran like an idiot.
needs more endurance to win!!! wrote:
middle distance is simply different for many people. For example, in the Coe/Ovett era the two guys did a totally different style of training, Coe running up to 50, Ovett up to 120.
That's wrong. Coe often did up to 100mpw.