university running only 20 to 30 miles a week.

I'm not Green if that's what you are asking. Different Charlie. Your Charlie runs a great XC meet though.

Low mileage=patience? What the heck are you talking about? I don't want to come across too strong but listen to what you are saying. Its competitive NCAA DI athletics not club sports. If athletes are serious they can gradually build their base over the summer and with communication with a knowledgeable coach they will prosper and stay healthy with mileage ample to handle an 8K-10K XC races. The key is to go to a school with a knowledgeable coach. This post has referred to one school specifically and if what's posted is true the coaches should have their balls cut off. Of course it sounds like they have none to begin with. 20-30 miles per week is not enough to race XC unless you are a statistical anomaly. Mary Jane Harrelson has been mentioned and it appears she eventually gained enough knowledge to realize she was never going to become her best under the system she was in. She likely learned through her visits to David Martin’s lab that physiologically she was lacking in many areas. To her credit she “believed” in what her coach told her until her results finally became stagnant and poor to the point of getting out. High school athletes should take notice of situations like these and stay clear of this type of program no matter what the glitter surrounding it.

You people suck. The VT team is great and certainly one of the best up and coming distance programs in the nation. The 13th place at track nationals proves everything. Look at the Penn State results next weekend and the ACC results in 3 weeks and you will see. You punks will see the truth and it will hurt you.

Mims you have got to open your eyes girl. The results from the past 4 NCAA regional XC champs prove eveything, not a meet that had 0 distance runners represented. If those throwers are running 20-30 miles per week we'd be impressed, but it's not about the throwers.

is it longwood??

Mims you know not what you say. Please read the following since you missed it

Stat wrote:

Actually, AngryTaxpayer is accurate. The Virginia Tech men's team never finished out of the top 9 at NCAA Regionals from 1980 through 1991. Typically, they finished 3rd-7th place with 1987 being their highest placing (4th at NCAA Championships). Since 1991 under Thomas they have finished

2001- 9th

2002- 13th

2003- 15th

2004- 14th

at NCAA Regionals. Based on the tradition of the program they are clearly not getting it done.

Get off it already. I believe the school has been covered so quit trying to start s**t about another school.

why????? wrote:

Why if va tech is doing such low mileage, dont the runners transfer??

Some have and some will and some won't need to.

Low mileage is the key to success and a long career. If you run low mileage you will extend the life of your joints and have a longer running career. I've never run over 30 miles a week and I still love to run everyday and I'm over 45 years old.

Blacksburg wrote:

VT is a awesome school and does a great job with LESS than one scholarship on the men's distance side. The women have a few scholarships and have done more.

Blacksburg a fully funded women's program of 18 scholarships is a bit more than a "few". There can't be many teams with that kind of money. 11.3 men's scholarships for the men is more than any school I know in the ACC. That's more than Virginia, Duke, Wake, UNC, Maryland, Miami, Georgia Tech, NC State and BC . Who is left in the conference?

they do 2 workouts a week...First they walk a mile...which doesn't count as running but he factors that into warmup...then jog a mile for warm up. They would proceed by doing 4 or 5 x mile at very comfortable pace (bout 5:15-20 pace). With like 3 minutes rest between each...It's a joke. We used to run 5 or 6x miles at sub 5. He is easing off becuase he doesn't want any injuries... he just wants them to feel some turnover. On other days they run 4 to 5 miles each day...with a two mile run the day before a meet. Plus they get sunday OFF!!! so it would look something like this.

Sunday- off

monday-one mile warm up 5x mile 5:15-5:20 for the top runners and slower for the other ones. one mile cool down.

Tuesday-5 miles

wednesday- 5 mile fartlick

thursday- 4 miles of easy running

friday- 2 miles premeet

saturday one mile warm up 8k sometimes mile cooldown...sometimes no cooldown.

29-30 miles for the week

keep in mind it does vary sometimes a few more miles one week but then back down to this. I talked to their senior today at work and he said that they actually ran more then 5 miles today... they ran 8 miles. So right there they got an extra 3 miles of running. But really they just had their first day of practice in my mind. But anyways...he asked how i was doing since i had just come off of a little injury where i was out of running for about a week and a half...I told him that i was only running about 5 to 6 miles a day since i started up again...keep in mind i started 4 days ago. I told him that i would eventually run more milage ...probably next week...but i wouldn't go much more then 50 miles a week becuase i'm cutting back my milage..because i'm going to start doing workouts. He then surprised me with his next response. He said yeah we are starting to cut back on our "milage" as well. How much less miles can they possibly run in a week and still consider it running?

this thread is no fun unless someone names the school

I can understand your point about building the mileage slowly and smartly. However, what I see happen way to often is that proponents of low mileage think too simply. "I ran 75 miles a week once and got hurt so I backed down to 40 and didn't get hurt and ran well." Mileage increase alone is not what got these people hurt. There are so many other factors that people don't take into account. Of course your body needs less attention when you are doing easy mileage b/c you aren't stressing it much. When you up the mileage, you need to up the attention. Sleep, eating right, hydration, stretching, ice bath, proper footwear, etc, etc, etc.

I have spoken with many people who claim less is more and that they "can't" run higher mileage b/c their body "can't" handle it. What I have found every single time is that the person was making a number of mistakes in their everyday maintainence and probably caused their injuries not from increasing mileage, but from neglecting to do the proper things when they weren't running. The actual mileage itself is only one small piece to the puzzle. Once people realize this, they will also be able to realize their potential.

I agree with your comments. But you have to realize. I have 10 plus years track racing experience and now coach. When I stopped running competitively (at a young 24) it was because my body was having a lot of troubles. I had surgery as well as constant back and hip/knee problems from the years of pounding.

My point is although you can add ice baths, nutrition, etc. You will STILL run into people who just can't jump their mileage up. And like I said if you do it patiently maybe they will stay healthy and active. I myself in hindsight, with years of my training logs, realize now I was a 50-60 mile a week guy. Do some research there are a lot of people who have trained at those miles.

You cannot expect kids (yes i said it kids) to come to university and: wELL atleast not all the kids can handle:

a) handle school

b) Run back to back xc, indoor, outdoor.. for 4-5 years

c) Increase mileage to quickly

I know a lot of people do it. But I also think it is why so many young phenoms dissapear the day they graduate. Unless they are rich it is very hard to keep chasing a dream if you can't afford the physio you will need after the system chews you up. So like I said if one kid can go 100+ a week and stay healthy, it doesnt mean his redshirt roomate can do the same. And sometimes coaches will only pay attention to an athlete running very fast their first 2 years and sometimes ignore the slower developers who with PATIENCE could run like 3:45, 8:10, 14:10 or so.

And if you think people can't run fast with terrible biomechanics you are wrong. There are a lot of reasons why people cant handle high mileage. Leg length discrepancies, hip problems, back and neck issues, etc.

I think you misunderstood me, I never said I support large jumps in training. I merely said people who push low mileage often don't see the whole picture. I'm a college coach also and I've had kids come to me having done 75 miles a week in high school and some having done 20 miles a week. I've increased all of them, but we've done it intelligently. Of course its a methodical and sometimes slow process, but all of them were able to handle it. There have been occasional injuries, but I can assure you that not a single one was from simply increasing mileage.

Yes, each person is different, but I also believe each person should push their limits to maximize their potential. Some of my athletes have graduated with mileage PR's of 65mpw and some with 100mpw or more. All progressed from where they came in and all were pushing the envelope. Of course I can't speak to your personal experience, but I can speak to the majority who see things only in one dimension when it comes to distance training.

I never commented about biomechanics, but I do know all about leg length difference, etc, etc. I have an extensive background in sports medicine as well as physiology. Please don't assume that just because I don't list every factor involved that I don't have a firm grasp on what contributes to training, progression and injury.

Something doesn't add up here:

http://www.hokiesports.com/cc/recaps/20051001aaa.html

It's true that most of VT's All Americans have been in the field events (not even sprinting), but their results are NOT what I would expect from 20-30 mpw. 18 minutes for a female xc 5K may or may not be good depending on how many hills there are (kind of what you might expect in a "mountaineer invitational"?), but something in this thread seems off to me.

If VT is soooo bad, what do you say about the programs that they beat? Or....is this a case of a low mileage program actually BEATING higher mileage programs and that's what somebody is really pissed at?

Or perhaps it isn't VT?

actually i really liked that last post. I get you and your points are very valid. It just so happens that most coaches worry about the 5th man on a team to make NCAA's. So sometimes they will push kids to soon to achieve a salary bonus or go to the big dance. That is fine and dandy, but then again most 19 to 23 year olds may not understand if they are gambling with their health if they do get pushed to soon.

And my above post (first one) states how I think people can build miles. I only wish I had a patient coach like you while I ran at University. Mine didn't care about anything but us going all-american so he could hang with his buddy coaches and accept his regional coach awards.

VT gets much better athletes than a lot of schools. Alistair Cragg can beat me off of 10 miles a week (or no training at all) even if I am running 100 mpw. Talent plays a big role.

ben thomas isnt the best coach in college athletics. however his athletes arent running 30 mpw on average, it was a funny joke, but the previous poster is correct, they have a good squad of guys running in the 80's.