Hate to break it to you but if you are not a professional then you are a hobby jogger. So your saying every person not at a 3:56 mile or 2:12 marathon shouldnt have a training plan?
I'm a little late to this thread, but I didn't see this point mentioned so I wanted to add it. That is, what if the minutia and the hyper-analyzation of training is something you enjoy about the sport? And even when doing those things, you keep the understanding you're working well within the margins of any impact it might have on outcomes?
And of course, the opposite could just as well be true. That the "just run baby" approach the OP mentioned is just as valid. I don't really see this being an argument either for or against either training methods. Or anywhere in between. But since 99% of us are doing this because we (supposedly) enjoy it, I just don't feel the need to critique someone that finds enjoyment in whatever approach they take.
I will say the caveat to those that spend far too much time in the weeds, is that if you're not seeing a marked improvement over the "just run baby" types, don't be surprised. You're not digging for gold and just hoping to come across some jackpot of training nirvana. That doesn't exist. But again, if you go into the process knowing that, don't let anybody talk you down from it.
Unless you are close to your full potential there is no point bothering yourself with a specific plan.
Stop worrying about thresholds, intervals, long runs...
Just run more every week, keep most of your runs at conversation pace, and sometimes go faster. Thats it.
The difference of progression between doing this versus doing a detailed plan is insignificant until you are within a minute of your biological potential for 5k-10k, 5 minutes for Half Marathon, 10-15 minutes Marathon.
This is one of the stupidest things I have ever read here, and that is saying a lot.
As a 16:xx / 33:xx/ 1:14:xx runner I highly doubt I am "close to my full potential" and "within a minute of my biological potential" in the 10k.
But I would be even further off if I didn't do "thresholds, intervals, long runs..."
You call yourself "Think Like a Kenyan" ... and yet you have the loser mentality of a country ten times as big with zero sub-2:05 runners. LSD is a joke.
Unless you are close to your full potential there is no point bothering yourself with a specific plan.
Stop worrying about thresholds, intervals, long runs...
Just run more every week, keep most of your runs at conversation pace, and sometimes go faster. Thats it.
The difference of progression between doing this versus doing a detailed plan is insignificant until you are within a minute of your biological potential for 5k-10k, 5 minutes for Half Marathon, 10-15 minutes Marathon.
Sounds about right.
I always laugh when I hear that a 4 hour Marathon person has a coach.
Funny that you mention that, back in 1979 I ran my first marathon in 2:48, then progressed all the way to low 2:20's and never had a coach. Just long runs, and some guy had mention me fartleks which was easy to incorporate in long runs. Now these water cooler guy's think that going 3 hours or 4 hours is something. Bah!
Unless you are close to your full potential there is no point bothering yourself with a specific plan.
Stop worrying about thresholds, intervals, long runs...
Just run more every week, keep most of your runs at conversation pace, and sometimes go faster. Thats it.
The difference of progression between doing this versus doing a detailed plan is insignificant until you are within a minute of your biological potential for 5k-10k, 5 minutes for Half Marathon, 10-15 minutes Marathon.
This is one of the stupidest things I have ever read here, and that is saying a lot.
As a 16:xx / 33:xx/ 1:14:xx runner I highly doubt I am "close to my full potential" and "within a minute of my biological potential" in the 10k.
But I would be even further off if I didn't do "thresholds, intervals, long runs..."
You call yourself "Think Like a Kenyan" ... and yet you have the loser mentality of a country ten times as big with zero sub-2:05 runners. LSD is a joke.
If you’ve been running seriously for more than three years, you probably are.
This is evidenced by the number of high school kids these days running sub 4 min miles.
They’re 17-18 years old and already at the point of marginal gains.
It’s the same with lifting. Most of the gains come in the first three years.
I'm a little late to this thread, but I didn't see this point mentioned so I wanted to add it. That is, what if the minutia and the hyper-analyzation of training is something you enjoy about the sport? And even when doing those things, you keep the understanding you're working well within the margins of any impact it might have on outcomes?
And of course, the opposite could just as well be true. That the "just run baby" approach the OP mentioned is just as valid. I don't really see this being an argument either for or against either training methods. Or anywhere in between. But since 99% of us are doing this because we (supposedly) enjoy it, I just don't feel the need to critique someone that finds enjoyment in whatever approach they take.
I will say the caveat to those that spend far too much time in the weeds, is that if you're not seeing a marked improvement over the "just run baby" types, don't be surprised. You're not digging for gold and just hoping to come across some jackpot of training nirvana. That doesn't exist. But again, if you go into the process knowing that, don't let anybody talk you down from it.
This is it. I enjoy looking forward to my sessions, and I enjoy theorizing about training. Who knows if I would get the same or better results lacing up my shoes and plodding along for a set time or whatever, but I would rather do it like I do now as I find it enjoyable.
This is one of the stupidest things I have ever read here, and that is saying a lot.
As a 16:xx / 33:xx/ 1:14:xx runner I highly doubt I am "close to my full potential" and "within a minute of my biological potential" in the 10k.
But I would be even further off if I didn't do "thresholds, intervals, long runs..."
You call yourself "Think Like a Kenyan" ... and yet you have the loser mentality of a country ten times as big with zero sub-2:05 runners. LSD is a joke.
If you’ve been running seriously for more than three years, you probably are.
This is evidenced by the number of high school kids these days running sub 4 min miles.
They’re 17-18 years old and already at the point of marginal gains.
It’s the same with lifting. Most of the gains come in the first three years.
Disagree.
The fact you use sub-4 high school kids as your "evidence" reflects the flaw in your argument. These are the elite of the elite, and those three years are basically professional training. They have done nearly all they can during that time, and as you say they are then chasing marginal gains.
For most people who aren't high school elites but keen "recreationally competitive" runners, the training during their first three years of running is likely to be organized but far from optimal.
e.g. For 5k I ran 19, then 18 high, then 18 low in my last three years of HS. Even being that slow, my coach had the gall to direct thresholds, intervals and long runs, and I kept improving while also studying and improving my training.
After some more years of steady improvement I am much faster than that, and last year's big PBs don't suggest to me that I am plateauing. Though I suspect I would have by now if all I did was jog at a conversational pace!
Unless you are close to your full potential there is no point bothering yourself with a specific plan.
Stop worrying about thresholds, intervals, long runs...
Just run more every week, keep most of your runs at conversation pace, and sometimes go faster. Thats it.
The difference of progression between doing this versus doing a detailed plan is insignificant until you are within a minute of your biological potential for 5k-10k, 5 minutes for Half Marathon, 10-15 minutes Marathon.
Disagree.
Whilst hobby joggers shouldn’t add too much detail to their weekly schedule, one or two sessions where they push the pace will reap significant benefits.
If you’ve been running seriously for more than three years, you probably are.
This is evidenced by the number of high school kids these days running sub 4 min miles.
They’re 17-18 years old and already at the point of marginal gains.
It’s the same with lifting. Most of the gains come in the first three years.
Disagree.
The fact you use sub-4 high school kids as your "evidence" reflects the flaw in your argument. These are the elite of the elite, and those three years are basically professional training. They have done nearly all they can during that time, and as you say they are then chasing marginal gains.
For most people who aren't high school elites but keen "recreationally competitive" runners, the training during their first three years of running is likely to be organized but far from optimal.
e.g. For 5k I ran 19, then 18 high, then 18 low in my last three years of HS. Even being that slow, my coach had the gall to direct thresholds, intervals and long runs, and I kept improving while also studying and improving my training.
After some more years of steady improvement I am much faster than that, and last year's big PBs don't suggest to me that I am plateauing. Though I suspect I would have by now if all I did was jog at a conversational pace!
It doesn’t matter that they are elite of the elite. It’s about how close they are to their potential. They just happen to have an abnormally high aptitude for the sport.
if you want to reach your potential, you have to do professional level training. For most a professional commitment is not worth amateur rewards. It’s a rational decision as opposed to “settling for mediocrity.” If it is worth it for you, go for it.
Btw, the difference between pro and amateur training is significant but not huge.
Grant Fisher wouldn’t be a 20min 5K guy on 30mpw. Probably could break 15.
Unless you are close to your full potential there is no point bothering yourself with a specific plan.
Stop worrying about thresholds, intervals, long runs...
Just run more every week, keep most of your runs at conversation pace, and sometimes go faster. Thats it.
The difference of progression between doing this versus doing a detailed plan is insignificant until you are within a minute of your biological potential for 5k-10k, 5 minutes for Half Marathon, 10-15 minutes Marathon.
This is one of the stupidest things I have ever read here, and that is saying a lot.
As a 16:xx / 33:xx/ 1:14:xx runner I highly doubt I am "close to my full potential" and "within a minute of my biological potential" in the 10k.
But I would be even further off if I didn't do "thresholds, intervals, long runs..."
You call yourself "Think Like a Kenyan" ... and yet you have the loser mentality of a country ten times as big with zero sub-2:05 runners. LSD is a joke.
No you wouldnt be much further off if instead of wondering if you should 10 minutes at LT + 30 minute at MP + 7 minutes at 5k pace... you would just run 2-3 times a week faster than easy pace, just based on feelings.
Grant Fisher would easily break 14 minutes on just easy run and some faster run. Again just based on feelings.
Most sub 13:00 runners would also be sub 14 minute runners if they would just run easy and do some faster run a few times a week.
The point is just run more, and sometimes a bit faster is enough. Faster can be just run fast every other poles / run fast every hills on your way / run fast the other half of your run etc.
But wondering if you should add 7 minutes of LT pace instead of 15 minutes of MP at the end of a given training session is not going to make a big difference for you.
Note that age will reduce you potential to your ability, no matter what you do. You adjust your goals. I agree with the OP that getting a coach is pointless when you are a young runner, less than 40 years old. When your goal becomes to do well in your age group, such as competing in the local half at age 80, then it makes sense to develop a plan. No coach needed, you just want to not be stupid and wreck your ability to run and compete. Who wants to take up swimming or cycling in their old age?
If you’ve been running seriously for more than three years, you probably are.
This is evidenced by the number of high school kids these days running sub 4 min miles.
They’re 17-18 years old and already at the point of marginal gains.
It’s the same with lifting. Most of the gains come in the first three years.
Used to agree with this, but now hugely disagree. Someone has already mentioned the thread, but now the sirpoc / NSM thread has changed my views.
I was one of the number of runners slaving away in middle aged thinking "I'm near the limit of my potential" . When really, it was an excuse for bad training structure.
If you look at that thread, there's tons of examples of people just slaving away for a decade or more with a training program that left them burned out. If you are burned out that's not a normal feeling in training and you are probably nowhere near your potential . I went through that cycle for over a decade.
Once people over thereworked that out, they were essentially able to run more, but within the context of a structured , progressive and sensible context. I'm basically just running more, but within a framework that helps me do that. I'm an experienced runner, but if I had left that to the "just run baby" mentality, the success wouldn't have been as staggering.
i personally think your HS noob who comes out first time to run should do TF first and try and find a way up the distances. the usual advice is do XC but for a noob XC is brutal mileage even for someone already playing running sports. the normal progression we all did in PE was like race 50 yards. then run a half mile around some distant tree. then run a mile. they don't have junior club TF kids age 10 running 5000m or 10000m. like you say, it builds up. the best prepared distance kids did that long progression. they didn't just come out and, oh, i want to race 3.1 miles. when they haven't done so much as a 100m sprint competitively.
this is what JV was made for.
same thing for adults.
i think this gets at not just the "stick to it" washout issue, but also folks stuck in low gear only able to run an ok pace. if you start with 100, up to half mile, mile, and so on, you have to tap that inner athlete best you can. if you skip right to distance running, you learn plodding along is what running is. you then have a mental hangup in trying to do speed work in the right way where you can push the pace more.
I know this is supposed to be the wise/common sense approach, but do you think Kenyans and Ethiopians care about the 100m when they're kids?
No, they don't.
They just jump straight into distance running; building an enormous aerobic capacity - and Westerners are never able to catch up.
OP, maybe stopping worrying over what other people are doing, and find peace in your day.
Op just gave an advice on an open running forum. You may take it or not. He isnt imposing anything or judging. He gives his opinion. Why are you triggered?
I also think that for beginners training should be quite simplistic. But i think the op is wrong about the amount of knowledge new runners have. Many people have approached me asking what they should do to finish a 5k-10k. "Just run more" is a good answer for us, not for them.
In the end it is all about being more sympathetic with others. You with the op, the op with hobby joggers etc.
OP, maybe stopping worrying over what other people are doing, and find peace in your day.
Op just gave an advice on an open running forum. You may take it or not. He isnt imposing anything or judging. He gives his opinion. Why are you triggered?
I also think that for beginners training should be quite simplistic. But i think the op is wrong about the amount of knowledge new runners have. Many people have approached me asking what they should do to finish a 5k-10k. "Just run more" is a good answer for us, not for them.
In the end it is all about being more sympathetic with others. You with the op, the op with hobby joggers etc.
What most new runners don’t understand is the concept of an aerobic base as it’s somewhat counterintuitive, “How is slow running gonna make me faster?
Here’s a very basic explanation:
“You need to first build up your endurance. You do this by running a lot. You can’t do that if you run too fast. That’s why you want to do most of your running at an easy pace. As your endurance improves you will be able to hold faster paces for longer.”
I would argue that younger beginners are precisely the bunch that should be getting coaching as that’s when they will learn good habits and be able to pick up stuff from more accomplished training partners.
The UK club system runs on its (mostly unpaid) coaches and volunteers and all the time you get to see inexperienced athletes (young – masters) make advances with a bit of guidance. Some gains are modest, some are huge.
A good coach will know when you should be pushing and (vital for masters athletes) when you need to scale things back a bit, something a lot of solo athletes get wrong. A good coach will also tailor planning to the individual athlete, admittedly less easy to do if training groups are large.
I was an okay junior distance athlete but I am a rubbish masters sprinter and field eventer. Do I have a coach? Yes. Why? Because I want to see what I can do, because I don’t know or understand the ins and outs of technical events, because I enjoy the camaraderie of the group and I still like competing, albeit without distinction.
I'm a very slow and very overweight runner, I'm currently struggling with breaking 30 mins in the 5k, but part of the enjoyment in running for me is using data and trying to figure out what the optimal way for me to get better is, even though I know I could stick to nothing but easy runs for years before I stop improving and need to figure out how to improve more optimally.
It's also a hell of a lot more fun to have some variety in your training and have some workouts you do even though you strictly don't have to.
I agree with what a previous poster here said, if you're not an elite then you're a hobby jogger, and it's a dumb thing to have a superiority complex over unless you're actually making serious money from running.