Hansons SOS Marathon Program w/ higher mileage?

Jim, it's ok to say that this an alternative and such. that's fair. but the way the article is written (such as the way it starts off as saying doing long runs is a FARCE - even despite the overwhelming evidence it works for a lot of people) really sounds like you/they are claiming the "old" way is wrong and the hansons method is best. i can totally buy it's an alternative that's fine, but that's definitely not how the article is written, so maybe you can see where my confusion comes from?

one thing i will never buy is how an extra 4M will make you more tired during than the week as opposed to a tempo run followed by a 16Mer. It's fine to say that this will test other physiological systems that a long run in isolation may not produce but I don't think it's reasonable to say that you will be LESS tired over the course of a week given tempo run + long run on back to back days. I have done that before, and usually you are more tired than not. At any rate, it's a bit of a contradiction to say you want to be fatigued (via cumulative fatigue) but then argue you would be less fatigued than doing a long run. To me it sounds like either poor writing or the Hansons were trying to make their system sound scientific or something. Just my two cents.

Anyway, it's a little confusing when people on this thread say it IS BETTER than long runs. I don't think anyone can conclude which one is better for the average runner by anecodotal evidence alone.

I don't think they claim you'll be less tired, but there may be a reduced chance of injury, and the fatigue will be of a lower level. I know from personal experience that after a 20 miler I'm basically a couch potato the rest of the day, whereas after 15 or 16 I'm just "pleasantly tired."

And no, it's not necessarily the best or only way to train for a marathon - just a viable alternative, and one that's fairly different than most traditional plans.

I know there are many people who find something that works and stick with it religiously, and that's fine. I'm one of those other types who's always looking for a new and possibly better way to skin a cat. And if it doesn't work, that's fine too - for me, the process is as much, maybe more, fun than the end result.

As George Sheehan said, we're all an "experiment of one." What's wrong with breaking away from traditional methods to try something different? Given that the body tends to get better and more efficient at doing the same thing over and over, a fairly radical change might be the impetus that is needed to jump start some improvement.

Sorry if the tone of the article was misleading, but in order to get people's attention, you have to grab them with a headline like "the myth of the 20 miler" or Kevin's statement that "20 milers are a farce."

Given the length of this thread, it's obvious they've succeeded in at least getting that attention.

what the? wrote:

BY 20, I mean 20+milers. the hansons all think that anything over 20 is a waste of time.

.

And by 20, Hansons mean 20. The quote by Kevin Hanson is repeated by Jim G (the man who wrote the article)"20 miles is a farce". You stated long all of the benefits of a long run. The Hansons would probably agree with you. Their definition of the long run is different than yours. Hansons program is smart. I am just another anecdotal success. I will tell you that there are hundreds of us if that makes a difference.

what the? wrote:

my point is that saying something is the best because it worked out for a few people is not a good way of proving ANYTHING...... especially with nothing more than anecodotal evidence.

Is this Jeff Galloway? If so you are correct a lot more people will swear by your walk breaks and long runs than the Hanson System. A lot more testemonials must make it better???????

I hate the Hansons progam because it has zero walk breaks. What are they thinking? It is common knowledge that walk breaks are mandatory for a quality marathon. I know this for 2 reasons.

1. Several people swear by the walk breaks and therefore it is not just a select few testemonials.

2. I have read it in Runners World on several occasions. That is also where I read the importance of the 20 mile run/walk.

THAT MY FRIENDS IS SCIENCE.

I agree with you. I sat through an entire clinic at Hansons and they never touched on the importance of a fannypack. These guys know nothing.

Francine Fannypack wrote:

I agree with you. I sat through an entire clinic at Hansons and they never touched on the importance of a fannypack. These guys know nothing.

Nice job. I laughed out loud. It is strange how someone like Galloway gets beat up on this board for destroying the competitive aspect of the sport. He and the penquins only goals are to increase the number of finishers. Keep in mind that both of these guys take marathon training as a "part time hobby". The Hansons on the other hand say that it is a "full time endeavor" and that every day is important and they get beat up as well. Obviously this board sees their way as the only way. Yet they come on here looking for advice?

hahaha thread length doesn't mean anything. if the thread was composed of a lot of testimonials, maybe. but this one is basically a battle about whether this is right or not. not quite the same thing as good attention.

Who had the most success of all Hanson-Runners so far?

Trent Briney!

There was a one week training-log excerpt of him prior to the trials on the hansons homepage, he did 2 hard track workouts(~5k pace), one tempo run and a long run.Blue print.For some reason(?) that excerpt is not online anymore.

and where is he now?

exactly.

What is your point? That because he hasn't done it again, again and again that the 2:12 doesn't exist. I guess his 4th place at the trials doesn't exist either....

If that's Trent only "major" accomplishment, what's it to you?

You're obviously on crack, good sir.

Brian Sell is clearly the most successful Hanson member.

Period.

briney has the best marathon time of any hanson. and since theyare a marathon group. that is the yardstick we should rate their runners by. he has a 2:12, no one else does. end of story

Bob Kempanin has a faster marathon best than either Bill Rodgers or Frank Shorter. Does that make him a better marathoner than them?

taylor bow wrote:

if you're getting up to 80M/week why not ditch the hansons program and actually run some real long runs. it will do more for you anyway.

Like take 4th at Boston???

taylor bow wrote:

if you're getting up to 80M/week why not ditch the hansons program and actually run some real long runs. it will do more for you anyway.

Like take 4th at Boston???

taylor bow wrote:

if you're getting up to 80M/week why not ditch the hansons program and actually run some real long runs. it will do more for you anyway.

Like take 4th at Boston???

except they were using a different program.

Yep.