Do easy runs even do anything?

Sciatica Road wrote:

Why in the world would you think Canova has some secret knowledge when he has gone over there and cherry-picked from a huge litter of crops?!?

Brother Colm O'Connell was there long before Canova, actually developing the litter of talent from a young age.

Please post a coherent, relevant question if you want a proper response.

The above question is so fundamentally stupid and off-the-wall that it does not even merit this short reply.

turkey leg wrote:

Need_speed wrote:

As a result of our discussion I would propound that it might be of interest to clarify if elites can reduce the poundings of high mileage running without any performance loss (even the empirical data says no way). Peace?

Kind regards.

Hasn't that been your question all along? And haven't you read all of the responses? You've got your answer. You can choose to accept it or go ask another place. But I still think your best answer will come from trying your idea yourself, like many of us have, so you will prove it to yourself one way or another. There's no substitue for experience.

Once again I have to realize, that I have failed to express what I would like to say (need more practice).

You are right, that´s my question, but I also have tried in my post to arise as someone who has accepted the answers and that there are strong arguments for easy runs. I think, a few days ago my manner/argumentation was different and I try to avoid bossiness.

Sciatica Road wrote:

Why in the world would you think Canova has some secret knowledge when he has gone over there and cherry-picked from a huge litter of crops?!?

Brother Colm O'Connell was there long before Canova, actually developing the litter of talent from a young age.

Seems totally clear to me. Why do you think there is secret knowledge at all.

SlowFatMaster wrote:

Some people say that running slower than 55% of vVO2 max has no physiological benefits. The sub-2:07 Japanese marathon dude who ran tons of 5 minutes per kilometer runs might be going even a little slower than 55%.

Okay. So running super slow may not be a good idea.

How about splitting easy runs into smaller segments?

If I split an 8 mile easy run into 4 in the morning and 4 in the evening, would it be easier on my body? Is 60 miles in eight runs better for my body than 60 miles in six runs?

If I split an 8 mile easy run into 4 in the morning and 4 in the evening, would it be easier on my body?

Yes, very much so. You could probably even get away with 3 and 6 with less stress and come out with an extra mile to boot. That's the beauty with doubles.

Thank you so much.I will experiment with some doubles and see how it goes.

Bang wrote:

Yes, very much so. You could probably even get away with 3 and 6 with less stress and come out with an extra mile to boot. That's the beauty with doubles.

Or else the runner for whom the race speed is the most below their maximum will slow down less, because they're putting in less effort.

That is, the runner with the biggest speed reserve at that pace is the most comfortable and will slow down the least.

In truth it's a combination of both. I think 800 runners neglect real speed training.

newname wrote:

Karma Police wrote:

I've always wondered why distance runners don't do more swimming. It's a good recovery thing because the water supports your weight. It lets your muscles recover.

But it's great aerobically. Fantastic general aerobic fitness without extra strain on your legs.

You're still getting the running fitness as well.

I don't get the easy run either. If it's easy, I don't see that you get a huge amount of aerobic fitness out of it. And shy does a base mileage have to maintained? What's the point of long, easy, plodding runs that aren't really testing your breathing? Toughening up your body or putting extra wear and tear on it?

Because it does nothing to develop mitochondria in your muscles in your legs, which is what moves you forward.

It looks like you have no grasp of physiology.

Sure, swimming doesn't. But all the other running training does.

How much is enough running? Fartlek, vVo2max, longer runs, interval training, speed endurance - if you're incorporating all of this into your weekly schedule, do you need the extra easy runs?

You're dead right I'm no physiology expert. But you surely have to weigh up wear and tear on the body and the benefits of some cross training, with overloading on running, including slower runs.

Obviously you'd have to learn how to do it. But if you're a serious runner and swimming helps, then you learn to swim.

Jonathan Savage

comic expertise wrote:

comic answer wrote:

if there´s an example of one elite - of course it´s no clear proof, but worth to look at.

sure, it would be worth it.

but my point is there ISN'T one.

It's absolutely mind boggling that this is even being debated. People will go to great lengths to avoid doing work.

Giant Johnson wrote:

It's absolutely mind boggling that this is even being debated. People will go to great lengths to avoid doing work.

Narrow minded post. Prime example of self-importance.

If you can run sub 6 minute miles as an easy pace, 60% of max heart rate, then you can break every world record from 5000m to the marathon.

fjdfghdfgh wrote:

If you can run sub 6 minute miles as an easy pace, 60% of max heart rate, then you can break every world record from 5000m to the marathon.

You rock, buddy. If you can break every world record from 5k to the marathon, all 6 minute miles are beauteous, cocksure.

a guy in the 60s/70s that I knew of and was a frequent 'racer' in local events (in Los Angeles) used to train via LSD (Long Slow Distance). He had been a slower than average guy in HS (4:.5/10:10) per training the standard interval system. He tried the long slow way as a frosh or soph in college and eventually improved to 4:16y/14:00y/29:xx? sub 50 10m/ ~2:20 marathon - all exclusively on long runs @ 7:30-8:min miles. and ~ 120 miles week. Very good times for then. Also 'ran' a 50 mile race in 5:15, pretty impressive I think. thats (50 m races) another breed imho. missed qulifying for Olympic team by 1 place. This was an oddity to the 'rest of us'. And received some press @ Runners World (and T&FN I think). But it was hard to disparage his results. I didn't 'know him' just knew of him and his appearance at local road races and some track meets. I did admire him for his willingness to think and do outside the box. He was well respected. I'm sure there were other guys following the same system - I just didn't know them I never replicated that kind of regimen.

Reportedly the Fla TC people in their heyday ran a more than a few number of workouts ... in 7:00 to 8:00 min pace.

Personally doubt one could get to national or international levels with an exclusive or prominent diet of that now.

Well, I just started training using the Hansons' approach and it clearly recommends easy runs as a way to promote recovery and base-building.

I am not against it and I will wait the see if it makes a difference, but these initial runs surely feel plenty slow and even sluggish.

This is what this morning's run did to me:

http://axiom7.net/BotCoach/ReportCache/outputReport/Laurent-A000000000032

As you can tell, I spent most of the time in Zone 1, where Zone 1 is defined based on my Lactate Threshold.

Does it change anyone's opinion if your intention is to race at no longer than 800?

Does that lessen the importance of the long run?

Karma Police wrote:

Does it change anyone's opinion if your intention is to race at no longer than 800?

Does that lessen the importance of the long run?

I meant the midweek easy runs, sorry.

shipsy wrote:

what's your point? wrote:I see years of brilliant running performances from those athletes, what do you see?

Oh that is there but the point is that Canova doesn't have athletes who continued to improve in their main event beyond their third season. Long term development just does not happen.

Anyway if you take the time to read the comments on each athlete and the statistics behind them you will also see more specific comments as well.

I see that "gypsy" has escaped from the nuthouse again.