Most middle distance runners would be better off swapping morning runs/junk mileage for yoga, plyometrics, weights, and prehab. This would lead to better kicks, but also eliminate most injuries. Injuries are what end most careers or interrupt training and stop people from reaching their full potential.
Morning runs are not that important for the average hs/college/sub-elite 800/1500/3K guy if you're already running 30-70 miles in singles with workouts.
Just run multiple loops, and pick up drinks when you pass the starting point each time.
Those hydration vests cause you to sweat all the more (as they cover large areas of your skin), and who the hell wants to run while carrying an extra 2-3kgs of weight?
Above a certain threshold of quality, training does not matter. Kerr, Hocker, Nuguse, Ingy all are on completely different plans but are separated by less than a second in the OLY final. This applies to collegiate athletes and amateurs as well. The most important thing is consistency and buying into a program.
Who is the best athlete across the board though?
Jakob has won Olympic gold and multiple world championships gold at another distance. He's also won a European title in 10k cross country, and set world records at 3 other distances.
The training that Kerr, Hocker and Nuguse do may work very specifically (and very well) for a 3.5 minute race, but it's not gonna turn you into an aerobic powerhouse like the training that Jakob does.
All of you are doing way too many hard workouts every week, far more mileage than you need, and your easy workouts should be closer to Z1. None of you listened to Hadd in all the years he gave advice here before he passed.
The first time an elite coach finally bites the bullet and has their runners train more easily and cuts their mileage down to 60-80 mpw, and wins doing that, it's going to break most of you because (as they all do) you attach your egos to how fast you run, how many mpw you do, and sticking to outdated research and traditions.
I think the idea of being able to isolate your core with planks, crunches, etc. is pretty dumb and ineffective. Core strength is really a product of doing complex movements that engage your core muscles. But the goal is not to have strong core muscles. The goal is to activate the kinetic chain and engage all the relevant muscles. A one legged Romanian deadlift is a great example. You engage everything from your foot to your shoulder and your core is at the center of the movement.
Going back to the post about core that started this thread, one of my hills is that core strength is important, but traditional core exercises are not the optimal way to increase it. Lifting and plyometrics are superior.
Yeah but how far down does that go? Does someone with 11s 100m speed find a 2:40 marathon easier than someone at 13s? If 100m speed is irrelevant then where's the cutoff between 100m and mile. Ie what's the correlation between sprint, mid d and distance?
the 100m benefits from fast-twitch fibres and raw power (muscle mass). Neither of which are that helpful in the marathon
Another thing I'll take to my grave is that, in practice, slow twitch and fast twitch is just meaningless bro science for the average runner.
It probably matters when you're the best in the world. Anyone that's not reaching the very limit of their capabilities has plenty of room to grow in both the speed and endurance department. No, doing some speed drills and weights once or twice a week won't hurt your 16:20 5K because you became "too fast twitch."
Running a “premeet” the day before a marathon has no beneficial effect whatsoever on performance in the marathon the following day; it could even negatively affect your performance if running too far or fast. True for anyone, including professionals.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.