Alberto's Marathon Training... FLAWED

Sagarin wrote:

Funny... back when Ritz ran his 8:11 two-mile, it was "roughly" in line with his 5k PR at the time, depending on which conversion calculator one uses. To date his 12:56 is his best performance. His 1:00:00 in the half is almost equally impressive and converts somewhere to around 2:05:30 +/-, again depending on which calculator one uses. He's nowhere close.

I do respect what Salazar has been able to do with Rupp and both Gouchers on the track, all but briefly resurrecting Adam's career, but I think tinkering with form is a huge mistake.

His 8:11 was worth 13:02. His 5000 (13:16) PR was set at nationals in Indianapolis, which was a good indication that he was ready for 13:05 or better in ideal conditions.

I don't know why you insist on comparing HM and marathon times through those calculators of yours. They are much different events than 3000/5000. The IAAF has 60:00 marathon equivalent to a 2:06:00 marathon. Most people agree that their scoring tables in the HM need to be adjusted upwards.

I averaged several calculators, and 13:02 would be a best case scenario, though I agree that there is certain "skewing" depending on distances measured. I also agree that the 13:16 was probably not in optimal conditions, but I don't see how you automatically extrapolate that to a 13:05. Also, his 12:56 would equate to about a 59:44, which, according to IAAF tables would be in the 2:05 range. Again, he's not anywhere close.

Let's not forget that this is a business to Ritzenhein and Salazar, and Ritz needs to get PAID. Ritz is following in the footsteps of the Africans, heading straight to the Marathon for a payday, either through appearance fees or performance bonuses.

Just learn from Barmasai who skipped track altogether to run 2:07 at Dubai and pick up $250,000. Simply amazing.

Does anyone think it's prudent for Kara Goucher to actually race Boston this April, especially after debuting for the season in 1:14, when she is a 68:00 runner? Probably not prudent, but she is paying the bills.

I have heard people say this before, about his age. His birthday is 12/30. In Michigan if you are age 5 on or before 12/01, you are allowed to enter Kindergarten. DR was age FIVE on that day, turning SIX a month later. Trying to enter kindergarten at age 4, turning 5 half way through the year would not be allowed and they don't bend the rules for you, even if you get an assessment that says you are "ready" or you are gifted or precocious.

The majority of states (37 states in all) require that the kindergarten entrance age of 5 must be reached before October 16, with most of these states requiring that students be 5 before September 1. Therefore he could not have entered Kindergarten at age 4 in other states either, as he would not have turned 5 by the date required by the rule, he would not have made that deadline BY FOUR MONTHS.

I have the same birthday and it means you turn 18 DURING your senior year of classes, which in my experience was the norm.

Interestingly, Maryland HAD a rule that results in OLDER kids than Michigan:

Kindgarten entrance age: 5 by November 30

(MD EDUC § 7-301)

Beginning with the 2003-04 school year Maryland began raising the entrance age as follows:

2003-04: November 30

2004-05: October 31

2005-06: September 30

2006-07: September 1

(MD EDUC § 7-301)

Maybe you were thrown off by the fact that Ritz could not set an AJR as a college freshman? He missed that ability by two days.

Incidentally I would bet that his 13:27 run as 19yo freshman, would be a World age 19 record among runners with a verifiable birthdate. At least it would have until GF broke it with 13:25, although I think he was still 18 then?

It is also interesting to look at the World age records and see that EVERY record for age 5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12 and 13 were ALL set in the early 70s when men were tough. They are also ALL from the US and one from AUS.

Every single age record for age 14,15,16,17,18,and 19 until you get to the age of 20 (where you can't be credited with a WJR anymore) are all set by Kenyans and Ethiopians during the EPO and age-faking era of the last 10 years.

After you reach age 20 and there is no incentive to cheat based on ages, the marks are a mixed-bag of races from the 90s and the 2000s.

Now, commence the flaming about how Africans were too poor to actually race effectively (as teenagers anyway!) until the year 2000. And training methods! Training methods have improved SOOOOO much in the last 10 years that these kinds of times (note the 13:52 by a 14-year-old!!) are possible as long as you are willing to run 10 miles 3 times a day progressing to 5:00 pace in the last miles. Because the Africans are!!

Or you could actually look at the data and see that there is merit to the claims that they cheat.

Dammit, I got off on a tangent again.

newname wrote:

I have heard people say this before, about his age. His birthday is 12/30. In Michigan if you are age 5 on or before 12/01, you are allowed to enter Kindergarten. DR was age FIVE on that day, turning SIX a month later. Trying to enter kindergarten at age 4, turning 5 half way through the year would not be allowed and they don't bend the rules for you, even if you get an assessment that says you are "ready" or you are gifted or precocious.

Duuuuude, I don't get your point. If Dathan missed the December 1 rule by 30 days, then that makes him older than 92% of his classmates.

Physiologically the 13.1/26.2 mile races are essentially identical-- roughly as similar as 3000m/5000m, or 5000m/10000m.

In either of these comparisons, some will have trouble moving up but most will not. Prepare to excel in one you'll be prepared for the other. It's hard to compare the current era to the past mostly because smaller, lighter, faster athletes now dominate the sport of distance running. These days a guy can run 2:06 looking at backs the whole way. The IAAF tables are always lagging what is.

In Ritz's case, it isn't so much he lacks capability in the marathon as his training has been mismanaged. The bad news is that Alberto is not learning from his successes or mistakes with Ritz. So long as the fixation on high mileage continues, Ritz will not reach his potential.

For those of you who ask malmo "How did you come up with such-and-such?" If he ran 13:16 in Indy in a Nat Champs race, how do you think he estimated that DR was ready for 13:05? I bet it was hot and muggy or at least a little in Indy in June!! Also, in a race where DR would have even-paced to a 13:05 he would have went out behind a rabbit and a "hoover column" of eight guys at ~4:10, then continued (hopefully even-paced!!) to a 7:52-7:54 3k split and then ran a few more 62-63 laps and knocked out a 62/58 last two laps. It wouldn't work like that in a Nat Champs race!!

Well, malmo is not big on those calculators. Learn this. He knows what he knows because he ran at the highest level at every stage: HS, college, pro for 20 years. And on things that you CAN be objectively right about, he is usually correct.

Another thing to realize malmo has already said. If you are DR or Chris Solinsky or say Chris Derrick, it would be great to figure out what your best event is (let's assume it is the 5k for all three) and spend the rest of your time reaching your best effort ... but look at what that entails?

In European meets there are always enough 12:45-13:05 capable Africans to fill up every meet. I remember Marius Bakken saying that he was always the ONLY white guy in the fastest races. Bottom line? For runners like Teg, Ritz, Solinsky, Jager, unless you have a recent 13:05-12:55 race you aren't going to get in the big races. If you aren't in the biggest races you can't improve and you don't post the times to get in the next meet, and you don't make money. And it downward-spirals from there. Now, for most Americans recently they have been doing well with this, but that is not guaranteed.

Also, as malmo alluded to, Ritz may not have the speed to make it through rounds of the 5k. Not sure what the modern meets do, maybe the A standard has pared the number of contestants down a little and they just run a semifinal and a final. Back in the day, they ran 2 rounds of the 5k and a final, and a heat in the 10k and a final, AND STILL most runners ran two events!!

In addition to the heats dilemma, there is the fact that in the 5k/10k there will be 3 Kenyans, 3 Ethiopians, and then usually 1 Moroccan, 1 from Uganda, 1 from Burundi, 1 from Eritrea, 1 from Zimbabwe, 1 from Tanzania, 1-2 from Qatar, and then 5 others to deal with from Europe, UK, SA, or the USA. Just considering the BEST four nations I would not like my medal chances. Also, in the WC they allow a pass for the defending Champ which almost always means one more Kenyan or Ethiopian to deal with.

If the Olympic 5k/10k were run like the 84 Olympic 5k where 4 guys take off (all at PR pace) and continue this until they slowly drop everyone else, and then fight out the medals over the last 2 laps, AND DR could get to about the 12:48-50 level (and have that form in the Games) AND everyone else stays at the same level ... then he would have a medal chance.

If you run the marathon, NONE of those nations have been quite as successful in the marathon as they have in the St, 5k, 10k and several runners may not get selected for the team that could beat a runner like Ritz. Also, several may elect to run a Fall marathon for the money they might win. And even though the 2008 OG marathon was dominated by the usual suspects nation-wise there was a gap of 3:28 back to 3rd-place and a group of SIX men within 71 seconds placed third to eighth (2:10:00 to 2:11:11). Clearly Salazar and his athletes believe there is a higher percentage in trying to be one of those in that 2:09-2:11 pocket and getting an Olympic medal.

In cycling, there is a formula of power to weight that supposedly makes you a contender in the grand tours (6.2 W/kg) and in running at the highest levels I would assume that many have figured out just what you need to medal in an Olympic 5k or 10k. Not in terms of Power/weight but in terms of speed.

Take a look at the 2008 OG 10k:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athletics_at_the_2008_Summer_Olympics_%E2%80%93_Men%27s_10,000_metres

A group of SEVEN within just seven seconds from 27:01-27:08 and all the usual nations represented. With the last 5k in 13:12 for the winner! Most people can figure out whether this is even possible for them AND whether they would be able to produce that effort reliably on the day. Then put a 55-57 second last lap on the end of this.

Note that this is a SLOW race, 44 seconds slower than the WR, with the WR holder and former WR holder IN THE RACE. There were also 5 of the fastest 10k runners of all-time in the race.

KB - 26:17

HGeb - 26:22

MKogo - 26:35

ZTadese - 26:37

Sihine - 26:39

This is the 10k, but the 5k had more of the same scenario and obviously puts just as much premium on your speed over the last 2k and 400m.

It had the WR holder, a 12:46 guy, 12:50, 12:52, 12:54, 12:52 guy, 13:11 guy in 7th, 12:54 in 8th. And a 2:25 last kilo by the winner. Solo.

Now I have no idea what kind of money being the bronze medal winner in the OG might be worth in terms of $$$ to Ritz, and I don't know if that is what is guiding him. But my guess is that it would be worth enough to be set for life and that placing 7th in the 5k or 5th in the 10k would be worth crap ... let's face it, he's already done that at the WC. Many other Americans have too (Lynn Jennings, T-Will, Kennedy, Spivey, etc.). 15 years later nobody remembers anyone but Kennedy bc he ran sub-13.

What would you do?

dsrunner has the day off wrote:

Physiologically the 13.1/26.2 mile races are essentially identical-- roughly as similar as 3000m/5000m, or 5000m/10000m. .

Oh, such a novice.

The HM and marathon are nothing alike 'physiologically'. Just about any decent runner can run at WR pace in the marathon through halfway COMFORTABLY, and even to the 25k and 30k marks. The marathon never feels fast. It is a fuel problem.

Only a handful of runners can run at HM WR pace through halfway (or even 12k to 16k), but they will never be any where near in the comfort zone.

malmo wrote:

Duuuuude, I don't get your point. If Dathan missed the December 1 rule by 30 days, then that makes him older than 92% of his classmates.

This is what you actually said:

~

And you're right about his physical maturity in high school. Even though he was a year older than most HS kids in his class, Ritzenhein looked like he was 13 or 14 years old when he was a senior.

~

This would mean that he was 12 months OLDER than 51% of his peers. (like someone who entered school late or was held back somewhere along the way). With a big enough sample this would mean he was 12 months older than someone with a birthday of March 1st (the age mean for the many states with a 9/01 cutoff). 12 months older than those with a June 1st birthdate in MI (the age mean for this state - but MI has nothing to do with what you said or his relative maturity in age). He was not this.

A better way to say it would be, "He turned 18 earlier than most as a senior."

notes from a fan, not a fanboy wrote:

Regarding Salazar's marathon training, I think Josh Rohatinsky's comments regarding Salazar and "training fads" were very revealing. Basically, Rohat claimed that when Salazar had a good idea, it wasn't enough to implement the idea, you had to take the idea and apply it to the nth degree.

Source?

Geezuzf***ingchrist. How about this: "Ritzenhein is older than 92% of his classmates"?

Will that work for you, or do you need to consult your attorney before accepting my revised comment?

Back to the original post.

I agree that AlSal has gotten away from "real" marathon training and is actually training his runners to score higher on laboratory values (VO2 max, anaerobic threshold, blood lactate, tinkering with form, etc) and "under marathon distance" times. It's like training a football player to do well at the Scouting Combines (cone drills, 40 times) but then this player will suck at the actual games.

His runners are still not as fast as the guys (and gals) of the early 80's. If you look at training logs from these early 80's runners, they all followed a basic pattern of 1 long run of 2 hours or more, 1 interval session, 1 tempo type workout and then as much recovery miles you can handle. The interval session almost seem "token" as Rob DeCastella ran a basic 8x400 workout on his interval day (in addition to 10-16 miles for the day). The main point is that most of the work was aerobic and not geared towards getting a high VO2max score in the lab.

These early 80's runners were ALL slower than Ritz at the 5 and 10K, but their focus was the marathon, so they were "ok" with running crappy 10K times.

Another "trait" from the early 80's era is that the runners also raced a lot more. Benji Durden, a 2:09 guy, recommended getting into a 10 to 20K race every 3 to 4 weeks in explaining his 84 week marathon training program.

As for the "right" event. Rod Dixon made the switch from mid-distances (3:33 1500) but he committed to it. He became a fixture on the road racing scene in the early 80's, did the "marathon training" of that era and popped a 2:08:59 at NYC.

Unfortunately, AlSal seems like a classic by product of the Jack Daniels overly scientific school of training. He'll continue to tease us with the great lab and under distance exploits of his marathon runners until he realizes that his training methods needs to get more "sports specific" for the marathon.

Er... wrote:

Instead of blaming his coaching, I think a more likely reason that his "marathoners" are performing better at 5k to the 1/2 marathon is that he's coaching athletes who are ideally suited to those distances but want to run the marathon instead.

Thats most likely the closest. But can take a few marathons to get into it and a lot of Westerners take it up when they are a bit old

I don't see the fascination and prefer a 10km anyway

[makes sense, and I would add that we could research athletes who ran say sub 2:08 to find out their prior marathon times were prior to their "breakthrough". If someone had 4,5 or more races at say 210-212prior it is then not difficult to conceive and if there were more than one the case for D. Is stronger. It would be interesting to see such a distribution, but I tend to think we are unlikely to find such examples. I don't know. that said, I have seen him at 208 pace for 20 on Lorraine (wheeled measured) easy, easy. Something is missing that is not being discovered. If I were D. It would bother me more than just the disappointment of discovering I wasn't cut out for marathoning, cuss I believe he was on that day.quote]malmo wrote:

Good art wrote:

I appreciate your metaphor Malmo. I wonder though if a case could be made for Ritz not having enough good opportunity to demonstrate where his "real"potential is in the marathon vs other events given the infrequency of the samples in the marathon vs shorter events.

I'm all with the probabilistic influences on opportunity. Even if everything goes right in training, conditions on race day might not be optimal, or close enough, to really test your limits. Even if the conditions are right, the human body is a very complicated machine. Bio-rhythms might be at a low and no matter what the athlete can't seem to produce.

The marathon itself is a hit-or-miss proposition. When things go bad, they go really bad in a marathon.

Ritzenheins dilemma is that he's had five opportunities, and all but one of them he's had nearly ideal conditions for marathoning; and the Olympic marathon, was not nearly as bad as people wanted to make it to be.

Ritzenehin is a 27:30 runner who ran NYC twice. Perfect running conditions for each race. In both races (2007, 2010) he was 1:05:35 and 1:05:20, finishing in 2:14:01 and 2:12:33. A 27:30 guy who runs conservatively on perfect days for running should be able to run faster than that if he has talent for the marathon. I tend to believe he is out of his effective range.

Contrast Ritzenhein's two runs in New York with mine. One with a strong headwind, 1:04:56 (2:13:29), and the other on a warm day, 1:03:55 (dnf 19 miles, 3rd place). In both of those races I felt like Fred Flintstone, dragging my feet becasue it felt so slow. I could only imagine how slow it felt for Ritzenhein to be running 1:05:30, yet he still was unable to finish the deal in either race.

TO put things in perspective, Ritzenhein is probably not even the top 30 Americans to run in New York.[/quote]

I can tell you for a fact that the more I focus on balls-to-the-walls intervals and 10km/10mile time trials on the track, the WORSE I do in marathons.

The most frustrated that I have ever been with running was when I ran a 10 mile time trial on the track in 48:33, but then at my marathon 2 weeks later in Rotterdam (2006), I was all done at 15km (about 47:30), and had to drop out. I told my family and friends that I was quitting running at that point, but they pulled me back from quitting.

Mr. Ritzenhein and Mr. Rupp are incredible runners, but I think that Mr. Salazar needs to focus his marathoners on moderate pace long runs and race pace tempos, and just a few interval sessions (not all out) towards the end of the program just to sharpen a little.

As far as I can tell, the best Salazar-coached marathon is still Dan Browne's 2:11:35 from Twin Cities 2002.

I wish them all the best.

notes from a fan, not a fanboy wrote:

Ritz obviously has an incredible "engine." However, the problem in all his marathons hasn't been the engine, it's been cramping in his legs or other "mechanical" stuff.

Maybe Ritz just isn't mechanically efficient enough and runs out of gas in the marathon. I saw the slow motion video of him from New York and was sort of concerned when I saw it. The idea of trying to land directly under your center of gravity is just crazy. Someone show me pictures of a runner who does this. Show me a pictures of a runner with their foot still a millimeter off the ground and directly under their center of gravity. Maybe I'll even start believing in perpetual motion machines too.

Gebreselasie had to change his stride a bit to be successful at the marathon, by keeping his foot on the ground just a fraction longer, thus ever so slightly reducing his vertical motion. It was the right move at the right time. If he did that before 2000, Tergat wins the Olympic 10000m by a yard.

I see what you are saying, but I think you are over-simplifying the training "plans" of some from that era. If you look at the most successful marathoners of 1978-1985 I would say that the training "plans" really varied a LOT. Look at people like Bill Rodgers, Frank Shorter, Bjorklund, Dick Beardsley, Ed Mendoza, Tony Sandoval, Salazar, Jeff Wells, Craig Virgin, Bill Donakowski, Greg Meyer, just wait I'll think of more ...

They had 10k PRs by '85 of 28:04, 27:45 former AR holder, 27:47 Olympian, 29:XX ?, 28:23, 27:49, 27:25 AR, don't know, 27:29 2 time AR holder, 28:10, 27:53, etc...

I would say that ALL of these men were serious about track except Beardsley. Sandoval and Wells were certainly better known for their marathoning, but both got started on the track (and Sandoval ran an excellent 27:49 leading up to the '84 OT Mara.). Rodgers was of course more of a road racer than track racer -- but he did run an excellent 4th in the '76 OT and then 28:05 again in Stockholm.

And even though you can't really train for distance running too differently and still succeed ... these guys were all over the map. Far from the formula that you claim "they all followed." Contrast the "plans" of Bill Rodgers, Frank Shorter, Dick Beardsley, Salazar ... and say Craig Virgin. They are all different, but mostly in the amount of structure they demanded. The key workouts they repeated and the types of racing and the frequency affected it as well. Rodgers, Beardsley and Meyer had similarities because they were all trained at some time by Squires. But otherwise, there are a lot of differences there, low-mileage from Virgin and Sandoval, structured intervals from Shorter and Salazar, high,consistent mileage from Rodgers and Shorter, the Warhurst influence on Meyer and Billy D. ONe thing I will agree with you on is that they raced more, a lot more! Most of those guys ran significant indoor track, outdoor, XC, road races or all of the above!

Outside the US: Lopes (27:17 2nd all-time), DeCastella (28:05), Seko (27:51), Geoff Smith (27:55- Van Damme winner), Spedding (28:08), Treacy (27:49), Rod Dixon (13:17/28:11).

Again, there are a bunch of 10k studs here (for their era). Your comment about this era's runners being slower at 5k and 10k than DR is true ... because his bests were WRs for that era. There are also a wide variety of training approaches here. Spedding and Dixon were low-mileage, DeCastella had a plan all his own that I have never heard of anyone else using (I guess Moneghetti DID use it later though). consistent 135-140 weeks and the same pattern year-round.

Again, most of these guys ran a significant amt. of track, XC and road races. There are 7 WCCC titles won by 3 men from the 2 lists. Several of them were sub-4 milers. Your comment about Dixon is sort of true, but he had long since moved up to the 5k by 1980 and was at the top of the world rankings in that distance for about 6 seasons when he started road-racing in earnest.

So, I have no opinion on how Salazar is training his runners now, but to say that marathon training HAS TO BE different from other distance running training (and the 5k/10k is distance running) is false. Most great runners from the era ran well at both disciplines. Some of them in the same year, some in the same season, some in the same month. And they definitely did not all train the same.

A couple of points. I'm not sure about Spedding, but Dixon was definitely NOT low mileage.

Jeff Wells, the fastest kicker of the group you named, ran 28:12 at the 80 Olympic Trials. Seen him walk down Nyambui in a 5000m race from way back. To the surprise of many, Well's training partner, John Lodwick, ran a 1:52 half mile (not 800m) in high school!

While Rodgers Beardsley and Meyer were all Squires trained, Meyer had a completely different background and skill-set that separated him from the other two.

Others worth citing are Ron Tabb, who really excelled once he started working with track oriented runners under Dellinger, and Ken Martin, who successfully made the transition from track to marathoning by 85. Durden (a low mileage marathoner), Peterson, Heffner, and Coppess, all five tended away from track training. Hodge and Dave Gordon, both a good mix of track and marathon training, both psrt of the Sevene/Squires fraternity.

You just had a whole bunch of guys that never really left their track roots for marathoning mixed in a few who were pure marathoners.

Here is a list of runners who were all seriously running marathons by 1985, and they weren't merely popping one once every three of four years, they were doing this year in and year out. Coaching influences in parentheses.

2:08:52 1 Alberto Salazar (OR) Boston 04/19/82 (Dellinger)

2:08:52 2 Dick Beardsley(MN) Boston 04/19/82 (Squires)

2:09:00 1 Greg Meyer (MA) Boston 04/18/83 (Warhurst/Squires)

2:09:28 1 Bill Rodgers(MA) Boston 04/16/79 (Squires)

2:09:32 2 Ron Tabb (OR) Boston 04/18/83 (Dellinger)

2:09:38 2 Ken Martin (NM) NYC 11/05/89 (Dellinger)

2:09:58 3 Benji Durden (GA) Boston 04/18/83

2:10:04 7 Pat Petersen(NY) London 04/23/89

2:10:05 1 Phil Coppess(IA) St Paul 10/06/85

2:10:07 4 Ed Mendoza(AZ) Boston 04/18/83

2:10:16 2 Jeff Wells (OR) Boston 04/17/78

2:10:19 1 Tony Sandoval(OR) OT 05/24/80

2:10:20 1 Garry Bjorklund(MN) Duluth 06/21/80

2:10:27 2 Craig Virgin (IL) Boston 04/20/81

2:10:29 7 Kirk Pfeffer (CA) Fukuoka12/07/80

2:10:30 1 Frank Shorter (FL) Fukuoka12/03/72

2:10:41 1 Bill Donakowski(CA)St Paul 10/12/86 (Warhurst)

2:10:51 4 John Tuttle (AL) NYC 10/23/83

2:10:54 3 John Lodwick(OR) Eugene 09/09/79

2:10:55 3 Kyle Heffner(TX) OT 05/24/80

2:10:59 2 Bob Hodge (MA) Eugene 09/07/80 (Squires)

2:10:59 1 Marty Froelick(CO) St Paul 10/11/87

2:11:09 3 Dave Smith (CA) Eugene 09/09/79

2:11:09 1 Don Norman(PA) Duluth 06/15/85 (Malmo)

2:11:12 2 Eamon O'Reilly (DC) Boston 04/20/70

2:11:13 7 Rudy Chapa (IN) NYC 10/23/83 (Dellinger)

2:11:16 4 Don Kardong(WA) Montreal07/31/76

2:11:16 7 Don Janicki (AZ) Chicago10/20/85

2:11:18 4 Jack Fultz (PA) Boston 04/17/78

2:11:22 2 Rick Callison (OH) Metairie02/10/80

2:11:25 7 Mike Layman(WA) Boston 04/18/83

2:11:26 5 Randy Thomas(MA) Boston 04/17/78 (Squires)

2:11:32 1 Paul Cummings(UT) Houston01/19/86

2:11:35 1 Fred Torneden(KS) St Paul 09/30/84

2:11:36 2 Kenny Moore (OR) Fukuoka12/06/70 (Bowerman)

2:11:37 8 Dan Schlesinger(MA)Boston04/18/83

2:11:41 11 Dave Gordon(WA) NYC 10/23/83 (Sevene)

2:11:43 1 Pete Pfitzinger(MA) OT 05/26/84

2:11:45 3 Mark Curp (MO) St Paul 10/11/87

2:11:48 13 Dean Matthews(NJ) Hiroshima04/14/85

2:11:52 5 Herm Atkins (WA) Eugene 09/09/79

2:11:53 1 John Dimick (VT) Metairie02/18/79

The point that many don't see is that all the top marathon runners of the period 1978/1990 from US, Australia and Europe, never were able to run under 2:08:00, that today means to be number 100 in the World. Many of them were faster, on track, than top runners of today. An athlete like Salazar (27:22 in 10000m, if I well remember) with a specific marathon training we use today, had to run under 2:06:00 his Marathon.

When you speak about Frank Shorter, he was the best of his time, but never ran under 2:10:00, when, for example, Bordin ran 2:08:19, Baldini 2:07 and Rothlin also, never running 10000m faster than him.

So, all these discussions about high or low mileage, short or long intervals, are useless :

a) Without HIGH mileage, it's not possible to run a fast Marathon. When se speak today about LOW mileage, we speak about 130 miles per week during the most important phases of preparation, because the most part of runners go for 150 / 170 miles per week (about 250 / 270 km), without reaching the mileage of Japaneses (about 320 km per week), that I think really useless and damageous.

b) Without LONG SPECIFIC INTERVALS (from 3000m to 7000m) a little bit faster than the marathon pace, with a consistant volume (between 20 and 30 km per session), we NEVER can teach to our body HOW to create the right mixture between Fatty Acids and Glycogen, in order to last at the high and fast even pace.

Long run easy, and short intervals fast, can produce results good for the marathon of 25 years ago, but not for the marathon of today.

The secret is in the VOLUME OF SPECIFIC MILEAGE, in the EXTENSION of some single specific session, and in the big MODULATION during every week and every mesocycle.

Now a lot of best athletes run 6 minutes faster than Shorter. The best marathon runners of 30 years ago are not in top 300 all-time in the list of today, while, for example, the best specialists of 1500m of 30-25 years ago are still better than the athletes of today.

So, everybody must understand that the training methodology for Marathon is currently very different from the past, and can be synthesized in this way :

RUN LONG AND FAST, and pay attention to recover well before going for the nexgt specific training.