How many people could cut their mileage way down and get the same result if they stopped running trash miles

A lot of the East African elites run their easy days pretty darn slow, Kipchoge, Bekele, and Desisa among them.

Have you ever considered that Salazar's coaching philosophy is one approach, and there are scores of other successful approaches out there?

You might also consider that Seth James Demoor isn't very good at running.

cheaterfly wrote:

... Seth James DeMoor from youtube running 8 to even 9 min miles... isn't he just burning calories at that point... !?

Burning calories is pretty important though. Definitely not something I would put “just” in front of.

Just walk for 3 hours every day! Would walking be "trash miles"? Yes.

For an elite, running 1:30 slower than 5k pace works, because that's the level of fitness he or she is at. But that's not sustainable for people who are still trying to teach their bodies to get to that fitness. That would be like saying "don't ever do intervals, just steady runs", since the rest breaks are just "trash miles".

I'm thinking of that legendary 10,000 race in Eugene where Henry Rono, who was not in good shape at all a couple months before the race, edged Salazar out at the finish. Henry ran VERY slowly on most of his distance runs, much slower than 1:30 above his 5,000 pace. Obviously that's not all that he did but it was a big part of it. Maybe that sort of thing wouldn't have worked for Alberto or some others but you cannot make a general statement like that.

HRE wrote:

I'm thinking of that legendary 10,000 race in Eugene where Henry Rono, who was not in good shape at all a couple months before the race, edged Salazar out at the finish. Henry ran VERY slowly on most of his distance runs, much slower than 1:30 above his 5,000 pace. Obviously that's not all that he did but it was a big part of it. Maybe that sort of thing wouldn't have worked for Alberto or some others but you cannot make a general statement like that.

Exactly. And he is far from the only elite runner to train in such a way. Someone posted Lelisa Desisa's training log a few weeks ago and I believe his easy days were around 8 minute pace.

The Salazar approach is but one way to achieve distance running greatness, there are many other ways to do it.

Proportionally, an elite marathoner running 6:30 pace is like a 3:30 marathoner running 10:45 pace. Math.

In his autobiography Henry says that he got the idea for doing his distance runs as slowly as he did from watching how slowly Viren ran when Viren was on a training trip to Kenya. Yeah, you can dig out loads of examples of fast people who trained really slowly. Jim Pearson had the US 50 mile record for a while and a 2:22 marathon. In a training profile in Runner's World he said he really didn't know how slowly he ran but had a stretch where he trained almost daily with a ninth grade girl (he was a teacher, not a pedophile) whose best mile was 6:47. But there are plenty of examples of people who ran much faster in training and did well.

Consistency is king. And running slowly most of the time leads to consistency for the vast majority of runners.

HRE wrote:

In his autobiography Henry says that he got the idea for doing his distance runs as slowly as he did from watching how slowly Viren ran when Viren was on a training trip to Kenya. Yeah, you can dig out loads of examples of fast people who trained really slowly. Jim Pearson had the US 50 mile record for a while and a 2:22 marathon. In a training profile in Runner's World he said he really didn't know how slowly he ran but had a stretch where he trained almost daily with a ninth grade girl (he was a teacher, not a pedophile) whose best mile was 6:47. But there are plenty of examples of people who ran much faster in training and did well.

Yep! Quality workouts are the most important thing anyways.

As long as you can hammer your quality days (intervals, tempos, long runs), then it really doesn't matter how slow your easy days are.

And here is the correct answer^^^

HRE wrote:

In his autobiography Henry says that he got the idea for doing his distance runs as slowly as he did from watching how slowly Viren ran when Viren was on a training trip to Kenya. Yeah, you can dig out loads of examples of fast people who trained really slowly. Jim Pearson had the US 50 mile record for a while and a 2:22 marathon. In a training profile in Runner's World he said he really didn't know how slowly he ran but had a stretch where he trained almost daily with a ninth grade girl (he was a teacher, not a pedophile) whose best mile was 6:47. But there are plenty of examples of people who ran much faster in training and did well.

Didnt he and up marrying that girl (Tina)?

cheaterfly wrote:

According to Salazar easy runs should be no more than 1:30m per mile slower than 5k race pace.

Yet I see many like Seth James DeMoor from youtube running 8 to even 9 min miles on his long easy runs (even the road ones), for someone of his level isn't he just burning calories at that point since based on his 5k race pace he shouldn't ever be running slower than 6:30 even on an easy day!?

So what does this have to do with your thread title?

Can anyone shed light on what Jack Daniels would say? I know in his vdot tables he prescribes a range for easy pace. What would he say if you ran slower than that range? Would he say you’re not getting the same physiological benefits? I also remember him saying that running too slow could lead to bad form which impacts running economy.

There seem to be largely 2 camps on easy runs

- short, only moderately slow easy runs, may do more workouts per weeks than the other camp. Running too slow is useless

- longer, slower easy runs. Try to get the most mileage they can, with roughly 80% of it easy, possibly more at certain points of the year. They may do progressive runs and finish as fast or faster than the other camp every now and then.

Taken to the extreme the short camp is only doing like 5-6 mile runs on easy days, 6 runs a week, and a lot of intervals/fast intervals on other days. The extreme for the higher mileage slower easy runs group is 160+ mpw or triples.

Some runners could succeed in either group, others would not run well after training under one of the approaches.

We need to stop pretending there is one right way for everyone, one formula and realize training should be individualized. The most successful coaches find the sweet spot for any given athlete.

Kvothe wrote:

There seem to be largely 2 camps on easy runs

- short, only moderately slow easy runs, may do more workouts per weeks than the other camp. Running too slow is useless

- longer, slower easy runs. Try to get the most mileage they can, with roughly 80% of it easy, possibly more at certain points of the year. They may do progressive runs and finish as fast or faster than the other camp every now and then.

This is false. Those who do longer easy runs are doing them as fast, or even faster than those doing short easy runs.

Givetallugot wrote:

Can anyone shed light on what Jack Daniels would say? I know in his vdot tables he prescribes a range for easy pace. What would he say if you ran slower than that range? Would he say you’re not getting the same physiological benefits? I also remember him saying that running too slow could lead to bad form which impacts running economy.

I recall John Kellogg repeatedly stating that on slow easy days one should pay attention to form and cadence especially in order to negate the undesirable effects of prolonged foot plant and thus, worse economy. But digressions aside, I think Daniels would've likely said that it is okay to deviate from that range as long as you're not pushing the envelope. Recovery days are for recovery after all--not for any significant physiological benefit. However, what someone should NOT do, even if they are feeling in form that day, is go faster than that prescribed range by too much.

malmo wrote:

Kvothe wrote:

There seem to be largely 2 camps on easy runs

- short, only moderately slow easy runs, may do more workouts per weeks than the other camp. Running too slow is useless

- longer, slower easy runs. Try to get the most mileage they can, with roughly 80% of it easy, possibly more at certain points of the year. They may do progressive runs and finish as fast or faster than the other camp every now and then.

This is false. Those who do longer easy runs are doing them as fast, or even faster than those doing short easy runs.

Correct. They aren't longer "easy" runs, but longer "aerobic" runs. According to Lydiard and many others, this means running them at your maximum steady-state without dipping into the anaerobic side too frequently. They are by no means "easy", yet they aren't exactly runs where you should go to the well (relative to other workouts).

malmo wrote:

Kvothe wrote:

There seem to be largely 2 camps on easy runs

- short, only moderately slow easy runs, may do more workouts per weeks than the other camp. Running too slow is useless

- longer, slower easy runs. Try to get the most mileage they can, with roughly 80% of it easy, possibly more at certain points of the year. They may do progressive runs and finish as fast or faster than the other camp every now and then.

This is false. Those who do longer easy runs are doing them as fast, or even faster than those doing short easy runs.

Are they? I know guys who do easy runs at 6 minute pace. I'd never consider 10 miles in an hour easy. Yet, it would be a bit too slow to be a tempo for me.