Miles and miles - she runs 70-80 normally. She backed off the three days before so she wouldn't spike to over 100.
Miles and miles - she runs 70-80 normally. She backed off the three days before so she wouldn't spike to over 100.
So back to the original theory....if she managed that speed workout, she wasn't really running 30 miles with her "training partner." I'd make sure his float when he's done with those long runs....
"If you can't run 30 miles at an easy pace you won't be able to run 26 at a hard pace." --Ron Daws
Wait, aren't you that loon from run-insight's message board who used to bloviate about how lower milage is better, and there was no scientific proof that high milage was good?
deena kastor in her preparation for london and the games ran 30 mile long runs occasionally on that sandy road by the airport in mammoth. thats 7500ft altitude by the way.
That is amazing. Maybe she is another Pam Reed and doesn't know it.
If you plan on running hard for 26.2 miles shouldn't you be able to run 30 easy?
I ran a 30 miler at 7:15 pace, it was like going out for a walk. I was training for 6:00 pace for the Mar.
run long,
Your original post ("I think any run that consists of more then 30% of your weekly mileage is just a dumb idea. But she'll have to find that out on her own.") was kind of condescending and you came off as an establishment know it all.
I may have pointed out "the obvious," but it apparently wasn't obvious to you, as it contradicted what you had just stated. All of the "rules" that people throw out there should be taken with a grain of salt. Yes, there are commonalities in running. Yes, there are universally stupid things to do in running.
Are you an absolutist when it comes to limiting weekly mileage increases by 10%? What happens when you're injured and only can manage 10M on your first week back?
The odds may be with you IF this woman is exactly the average runner. But that's my point - there is no average runner. We're all individuals. That's why coaching a large team of runners can be so difficult.
And to further point out the obvious, there's a LITTLE difference between 30-40M runs and 100M runs.
Bucko (aka BDG)
BDG wrote:
I may have pointed out "the obvious," but it apparently wasn't obvious to you, as it contradicted what you had just stated.
Sigh... I felt no need to qualify my statement with the ridiculously obvious notion that someone out there could get away with it because it WAS obvious.
> All of the "rules" that people throw out there
> should be taken with a grain of salt.
Also obvious.
>Are you an absolutist when it comes to limiting weekly
>mileage increases by 10%? What happens when you're
>injured and only can manage 10M on your first week back?
No. I am not an absolutist about much of anything. Anyone who has spent more than few years running knows that the 10% "rule" is crap anyway. It does not apply to all, most, or even a large percentage
>The odds may be with you IF this woman is exactly the
>average runner.
The odds are with me period. That's why they are called "odds". This woman need not be "exactly the average runner". She just needs to be in the majority who aren't going to thrive on this regimen.
> We're all individuals.
No, really? Wow! That's not obvious at all! Thanks! This is groundbreaking stuff!
The odds are with me period. That's why they are called "odds".
I'd say the odds of you having passed a statistics course are not "with" you, though.
von Neumann wrote:
I'd say the odds of you having passed a statistics course are not "with" you, though.
guess again.
You folks have given some examples, but the closest to a 3:00 marathoner are a few guys in the 2:30s. Most are elite and much faster.
For the record, I have tried long runs over the marathon distance, and I know others who have done the same. None of us are fast. My PR is 2:55, and the others are in that range.
We all ran faster when we kept the long runs in the 16-22 range.
I'm surprised she hasn't done a faster marathon yet.
I'm 44, average only about 40/week and peak at about 60
with long runs of 20-22 and have broken 3 hours.
Hope she gets it...
Well whoopie for you! I'll let my wife know there is a 44 year old that runs less and can beat her. I'm sure she'll be completely surprised (sarcasm) and I'm sure she'll give a shit.
Mayeroff- dont sweat the idiot, Hey Buddy. He obviously is intimidated by decent runners and insecure when he reads posts by better runners than himself. He would like it if he could read the letsrun message board and pretend he is the best runner on it and make himself feel better. You ruined his day when he learned he's not the best. Calling you a "cock" was proof of all I just said.
Tergat said he was running 60 kilometers a day when training for hte olympics...37.2 miles for the metrically challenged. Although we all know how well the marathon at the olympics went for him.
The basic rule of Lydiard is the long run should be 20% of your weekly total mileage. Mid week long run should be 15%.
The CU guys seem to stick pretty close to that judging fron Running with the Buffs
Are you saying a 40 mile per week beginner shouldn’t do a 20 mile training run?