I disagree with your first point. I train with guys running 2:2x in the marathon and a 10 mi tempo at even 10s slower than MP is not easy for them when dealing with fatigued legs deep into high volume weeks.
My experience is training with guys 10 minutes faster than you. Ten mile tempo runs at marathon pace is easy ... really easy.
I guess what's considered easy is different for everyone. My coach considers anything easy to be a 2-3/10 on an effort scale (with 7 being threshold repeats, 10 being a race). 10 miles @ MP would be a like a 5-6/10 for me.
That framework is coherent within its own system, and if someone believes deeply in it, it may indeed feel useful to them. For me, however, I operate from a self-authored lens that prioritizes efficiency, evidence, and the nuanced understanding of my own body’s responses.
I think it was maybe in the 90s that I started seeing or hearing people say things like "I don't run a lot of miles but I do a 20 mile run every week so I don't need a lot of miles." The idea seemed to be that in one day you can compensate for not doing enough on the other six days. I do get the appeal of that approach for the "I don't have time to run" crowd who like the idea of cramming most of a week's work into a day or two but it's not something I'd advise doing.
That's just categorically stupid.
Totally agree. For the record it's not something I'm advocating but I've known people who have done it.
This post was edited 4 minutes after it was posted.
My experience is training with guys 10 minutes faster than you. Ten mile tempo runs at marathon pace is easy ... really easy.
I guess what's considered easy is different for everyone. My coach considers anything easy to be a 2-3/10 on an effort scale (with 7 being threshold repeats, 10 being a race). 10 miles @ MP would be a like a 5-6/10 for me.
Judging from your coach's expectations and your own expectations you are a perfect match. You should stay with your coach.
None of my coaches had ever had such low expectations of me.
Saying the long run is overrated is like saying the tempo run is overrated, or vo2 intervals are overrated...or running everyday is overrated, or easy runs are overrated or recovery runs are overrated.
Just because you drop one and get results doesn't mean you wouldn't be better with it . They all have a place.
Saying the long run is overrated is like saying the tempo run is overrated, or vo2 intervals are overrated...or running everyday is overrated, or easy runs are overrated or recovery runs are overrated.
Just because you drop one and get results doesn't mean you wouldn't be better with it . They all have a place.
Not true at all. For 99% of runners long runs are overrated. You arent the 1%.
There's a lot of variations on the long run among top runners. Kenny Moore would go over 30 miles once every 10 days. Moore said that Frank Shorter rarely went over 20 miles, but would often do that two days in a row. I remember reading that Seko would do a 60 mile weekend with four 15 mile runs. I tried doing that when I was in college, early 80's. It wasn't easy. I think a lot of it relates to where you live and the environment there. The Lydiard 22 mile run in Auckland happened to be the length of the loop.
Yeah, I did a 30 miler 2 weeks before my first marathon and it was a big mistake. I also did a ball-busting hilly 10 mile race as a favor for my protege Don "Spiney" Norman the next week. Again, not a good idea. But I survived.
Generally my long runs were anywhere between 18-23 miles, with a handful 25-29 miles. The 29.5 milers was the Megamagneto Loop, over two monster hills. Like Shorter, I would sometimes/frequently do two 20 milers in the same week.
There's a lot of variations on the long run among top runners. Kenny Moore would go over 30 miles once every 10 days. Moore said that Frank Shorter rarely went over 20 miles, but would often do that two days in a row. I remember reading that Seko would do a 60 mile weekend with four 15 mile runs. I tried doing that when I was in college, early 80's. It wasn't easy. I think a lot of it relates to where you live and the environment there. The Lydiard 22 mile run in Auckland happened to be the length of the loop.
Yeah, I did a 30 miler 2 weeks before my first marathon and it was a big mistake. I also did a ball-busting hilly 10 mile race as a favor for my protege Don "Spiney" Norman the next week. Again, not a good idea. But I survived.
Generally my long runs were anywhere between 18-23 miles, with a handful 25-29 miles. The 29.5 milers was the Megamagneto Loop, over two monster hills. Like Shorter, I would sometimes/frequently do two 20 milers in the same week.
Malmo, what sort of cap should the hobbyjoggers put on their longest runs in your opinion?
In my experience, nearly every runner is different with respect to how much long runs may or may not benefit a given race distance performance. I was never a fast 10K runner, but when I ran sub 6 minute pace for a 10K, I was far behind a guy in his late 40's who ran only about 20 miles a week. He also ran marathons in the 2:50 range on 25 miles per week.
I was doing regular runs of 12 miles and farther at the time of my best 10K, but I doubt there was any kind of training that would have dropped my times lower - because I tried many types of shorter-distance training. I felt I was vindicated in this belief when I found that by far my best races were at 50 miles.
Marathoners, in my experience, tend to fall into one of two camps: those who perform at their best when they do only one or two 20 mile runs in the last weeks before a marathon, and those of us who need to run at least 26 miles in training, and who improve when they run a couple of 30-mile training runs. I think a similar thing translates to how we perform at 5K and 10K. I think it depends on your physiology - fast twitch vs. slow twitch, stride length, BMI, even chest and lung size. And other factors that may be more difficult to quantify.
I doubt my 20-miles-per-week friend would have run faster 10Ks had he been doing regular long runs. I don't think I would have ever dipped below 37 minutes had I not been building my strength with long runs. I have seen similar phenomena in runners with whom I regularly trained with or trained nearby at the track. Trying to assert that long runs help or hurt one's chances of improving at 5k or 10K is a gross generalization that has little meaning in practical terms, IMHO.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
I actually agree with the GPT slop though. Long runs are overrated if you're not training for a marathon.
I'm not reading all of it either. But even good marathons have been run without long runs. That doesn't mean long runs aren't valuable but overall mileage and number of runs matter more.
I’m proud of you for stepping out of the Lydiard shoebox way of thinking where long runs are practically worshipped
This is a bit of an aside, but has there been any research done on the second wind? I’m sure we’ve all experienced going through a bad patch and then something kicks in and you’re good. What exactly is going on there physiologically?
I'm not reading all of it either. But even good marathons have been run without long runs. That doesn't mean long runs aren't valuable but overall mileage and number of runs matter more.
I’m proud of you for stepping out of the Lydiard shoebox way of thinking where long runs are practically worshipped
I'm still in the shoebox. Long runs are valued but done relative to the specific runner. I've seen schedules Arthur wrote with long runs of just an hour. The point is that something you do six days a week is more important than what you do on one day.
This is a great example of how you can be a good coach and not understand the science of training.
I think his science checks out.
Fast enough to create tissue hypoxia, not so fast that the athletes have to slow down / stop, long duration. His kids are probably doing what we'd call M pace, or "long tempo" in some of the calculators. Repeat every 7-10 days. These principles have been around forever
Making sure they go slow enough on the way out so that they don't fall apart on the way back is a nice way to teach them to listen to their bodies as well.