Training for top speed during base

Well there smarty pants have you considered that I might want to move to longer distances? Guess not.

Slartibartfast wrote:

Aerobic development takes time (years) not just miles, and it also takes your body time to adapt to additional mileage.

Are you sure about this? If my body can handle the mileage ( and I'm not saying it definitely will) then I dont see why I wouldn't run the maximum number of miles it can handle. Assuming I can also manage once I add quality.

just listen to your body. if you can't do more mileage, don't. if you are handling it, keep at it. be honest with yourself. Ask questions to people who have done it for a long time. And if you have a setback (everybody does), make sure you learn from it.

va coach wrote:

However, if the goal is truly pure speed development, which is what it seems we all agree on for that stage of the training cycle, doesn't that require being able to hit pretty much full speed on each rep, without undue straining to get there and stay there? And if so, can that realistically be accomplished for multiple reps at 100 meters? Wouldn't there be a risk of the last 30 meters or so, especially during the later reps, becoming too difficult and too close to the wrong type of effort?

For speed development, yes. That's why I mentioned there were better ways to do it. Ray and Benson did specify 400m pace so they weren't really thinking of pure speed development. Hitting sub-13 for reps on the fly is pretty easy for must guys that can run 53-54s in the 400m as a distance runner even though the pace is for a 51/52. That workout is a much better special endurance 1 (SE1) workout translated for distance runners than it is a Speed Dev workout.

It's also worth mentioning that eventually, you have to make that speed functional. Yes a better top speed can improve efficiency, yes it will give a better speed reserve, but our races aren't alactic so these 40-80m rep workouts need an outlet to create adaptations for our events.

nomadiclife wrote:

Slartibartfast wrote:

Aerobic development takes time (years) not just miles, and it also takes your body time to adapt to additional mileage.

Are you sure about this? If my body can handle the mileage ( and I'm not saying it definitely will) then I dont see why I wouldn't run the maximum number of miles it can handle. Assuming I can also manage once I add quality.

To play devil's advocate, the reason that you wouldn't want to increase to your maximum (even if you can handle it) is that you miss some of the low hanging fruit from the lower levels. Most new runners could get to 40 miles a week and stay there for years while their boy absorbs training and continues to adapt to it. They can apply new, novel workouts to their plans that add depth in their running ability, and fine tune things to they progress evenly.

Their next jump, lets say to 50 miles, again goes through a similar cycle. They see that running more helps make tempos easier so they get faster. Their tempos get better and find that doing mile pace isn't so fatiguing, but is hasn't gotten faster. So they may have gone from doing 14x200m at 35 to 20x200m at 35 but 34's still feel unfamiliar. So they work on some shorter efforts, maybe hit the hills and gradually the gear catches back up to them and finally 34's feel like a breeze.

The cycle happens at 60.

The cycle happens at 65.

At 70, you guessed it.

Lets say you can run 100 miles a week starting tomorrow. How are you going to apply a new stimulus past that? I guess Gerry Lindgren has done 200 mile weeks, but man, who wants to work that hard for 1% better (probably actually harmful) than 120 miles a week (which was probably only 1-2% better than 90 miles a week).

I'll provide some defense for you though. Some athletes can rely on talent, some have to rely on hard work. It's not an excuse to be dumb with it, but if I had a HS kid that said, "I want a scholarship to a DI school," and his times were just not there, we'd have a long talk about it. How realistic it is, what times these schools are looking for, what it might mean to be a scholarship runner, and what it will take to get there. If they still say that's what they want then it's my job to help them get there. That may mean saying screw the other coaches that think 70 miles a week it too much. It may mean we discover that the dream just isn't going to happen. But it should never mean that I say, "well our top guy does 40mpw and can run DI, let's just do what he does."

Some kids just aren't gifted enough to take the same road that the talented ones can coast on.

Do you have actual anecdotal evidence for the former or are you just playing devils advocate? As someone who is inexperienced it just makes intuitive sense that higher lifetime mileage is just better than a lower mileage (again assuming no injuries yadda yadda). It seems perfectly reasonable that all the benefits of each cycle would be gained by doing multiple cycles of a higher mileage. I obviously understand that it doesn't happen overnight and it takes time to reap the rewards of a mileage level so it would take a really long time to plateau at 100 miles a week so that problem wouldnt exist. If i did 100 miles next week it would do almost nothing for me. But again im speaking from inexperience so maybe this concept of "training depth" does exist in reality?

It's hard to get top speed out of 200 meter reps. Unless you're running them at 200 meter race pace it's more of a speed endurance workout. Try 50 meter reps, and do drills first ( skips, high knees, butt kicks, strides)

I hate pulling out the " as a Division I coach," line, but it has been my experience with athletes that reaching for everything all at once can work, but often doesn't. Lifetime mileage of course matters, and no person over the internet knows you well enough to say what's right for you so I won't pretend that I have all the answers for you.

For a 17-something guy, 50 miles a week is usually plenty. Even being in the 30-40mpw range is roughly standard for males running those times. I don't doubt more mileage can help, but is it the best bang for your buck? I think there's something holding you back more than the mileage. Time spent in that area will give you results a lot faster.

In the grand scheme of things, mileage and speed development are both a long game. They can eventually be a bottleneck (speed & endurance), but on their own aren't usually the things that translate the most to PRs in the short term.

I much prefer thinking of things in terms of, "what does this athlete need to work on?" then coming up with solutions that address that. I had a girl that was very fast, think top 5 in her country kind of fast. But she was horrible with tempo runs and it really hurt her in cross. We tried slowing them down, and changing the set-up , but really didn't see any changes.

Tempos weren't what she needed to work on. It was a symptom, not the source. Physiologically what I wanted her to improve was her Lactate Threshold (LT). So we leaned into things that looked like what she was good at (track work), but worked on what she needed. Repeat miles worked great; used shorter recoveries and a slightly faster pace. 1-2 mile tempos followed by 3k pace reps she was fine; the tempo wasn't so long that it psyched her out. Alternating paces between tempo and 1500m, again, right in her wheelhouse; gave her a chance to build up lactate on the fast reps and clear them on the longer, slower reps.

What I'm trying to say is that if 50 miles a week didn't/doesn't get you sub-17, then 75 miles a week may not be a mountain that needs climbing.

As someone who has been running less than half a year i'm not thinking in terms of what's holding me back (which if i did have to answer that question would surely just be total time training and lifetime mileage) but in terms of what will get me ahead as much and as fast as possible. I'm not looking at the sub 17 goal in the context of this discussion. That's just an arbritary goal i set for myself a couple months back (and one i'm pretty confident of hitting as i managed 3 x 5:15 miles w 1 min rest pretty comfortably last week). I'm thinking about the long term and my eventual goal of the marathon. I see the 5k as a introductory step into running. I do have 5+ years of serious soccer training so i'm not sure how much or how little it contributes to running fitness but given that i've jumped the mileage up fairly quickly I assume it's helped some. I'm also ethnically East African so that has to mean something right?

And its fine to pull out that line. I was literally just asking whether you have evidence for this plateau philosophy given you did start that paragraph with "i'll play devils advocate". By the way that is a very confusing way to start a discussion as it makes it sound that you are talking completely from a theoretical standpoint.

I won't lie even if it's definitely "less is more" in terms of mileage i probably will still run as much as I can without pain. I have a fairly obsessive personality so I will probably have to learn it the hard way (if indeed it applies to me).

I'm with V. In no world do you need 75 miles a week to create a stimulus to continue to improve. Heck, even jogging a few days a week is a lot more stress than you were doing five months ago.

He said exactly how I felt, so I don't need to repeat his arguments but like him, if you're doing 75 miles a week five months in, what in the world do you think you'll need to do in five years? 150 miles a week?

I had a question about first year runner volume and emailed a coach a well-known coach. It's no argument that he has one of the most successful HS programs in the US. Many people even accuse him of having his kids run too much. Granted every kid is different, but he suggested a first year runner in a similar scenario would typically max out around 40 miles a week in his program....you want to nearly double that in half the time.

I recently was also talking on the phone with one of the top coaches in my state about something else. He was talking about talented first year runners who would occasionally question his training based off things they read in a book or the internet. It blows his mind whenever a kid who just started running thinks they know more than a guy who has been coaching for over 30 years with multiple State Championship teams, Foot Locker All-Americans and teams sent to Nike Nationals.

It's like you reading a cooking recipe on Pinterest and deciding that you want to open up a five star restaurant. There's nothing wrong with asking questions but use them as an opportunity to learn.

You remind me of a more extreme version of Ben Barrows when he asked a lot of people about marathon training for an OTQ. He received excellent answers from experienced marathoners and coaches but gave a "thanks, but no thanks response." Unsurprisingly, the guy never got close to running close to an OTQ because he thought he knew everything but had no idea.

I'm not going to get into the weeds, and/or try to argue with you. You seem to have your mind made up, so I'm not sure why you are asking questions. I'll just say this much, and then wish you the best of success:

Please listen to V. He knows his stuff.

First things first. You need to calm down. I don't know why you're so emotional but it doesn't make you come across all that competent. If you have a point to make actually make it with logic, anecdotes or hell even something theoretical.

Again to say if i started doing 100 miles next week i would have nowhere to go in 6 months time assumes that i would actually adapt to that level to the same extent as someone who had been running at that level for years. Obviously that's not the case.

nomadiclife wrote:

I won't lie even if it's definitely "less is more" in terms of mileage i probably will still run as much as I can without pain. I have a fairly obsessive personality so I will probably have to learn it the hard way (if indeed it applies to me).

I can understand that. Hell, most of us are in a similar boat on the neurotic scale. Since your original question only asked about speed development in a base phase I won't harp on the mileage any more. I appreciate the discussion.

I disagreed with you, gave real-world examples from two very well accomplished coaches and gave an analogy that shows how naive you are. To be honest, I thought you were a high school kid because of your logic and what I'll call "extreme optimism." But I saw where you stated your age somewhere. Looking at prior threads, you like to ask questions and then argue with people who answer your questions.

But to answer your question, your speed sucks because you're running way more volume than your body needs at the present time. Of course your CNS system can't fire at 100% when it's fried. And all speeds are beneficial, year round, just in different doses.

Even though it's on the far end of the spectrum, I have one of my guys who qualified for the Marathon Trials do short, uphill sprinting yearly near round. It's also great for muscle fiber recruitment and running specific strength.

You sound a lot like someone who has never been injured before. I get it, you wanna reach your peak genetic potential as fast as possible, but being injured sucks, and you’ll be kicking yourself in a few months if you don’t listen to some of these people. 30-40 mpw is plenty for a new, albeit talented, runner. I’d even go so far as to say you’d be slower at 75 mpw. I see this going one of two ways, you get to 75 mpw and you get an overuse injury of a muscle or tendon, or you get to 75 mpw and your body is like wtf and will start rejecting the training and you’ll start sliding backwards and feel like crap all the time, it’s happened to me. If you want to enjoy running both now and in the future, start with the lower mileage.

Just want to say Thank You to V for the information you've provided in this thread and your previous thread you linked to earlier on Sprint training.

I did my first "Speed Devolopment" workout yesterday, then followed it up with a 20 min Tempo run today. That was probably the most relaxed I've felt running a tempo. This was the change I needed to add. Thank You!

So much good stuff on this thread! Is this really Let's run or an alternative universe? ;) Wanted to make a little comment on this. To me, this ability to self-reflect, evaluate, and correct is what indicates true maturity as a runner. However ...... this is really tough to do, especially as a young runner. Anyone who is competitive goes through a period of self-denial about injuries and/or overtraining. And because of that, I think it's important to limit young runners unless you can be very much in the loop, monitoring, and getting feedback. For those supporting ramping up the mileage to 75 or whatever, I wouldn't say don't do it because your body can't handle the training load this soon. I would say don't do it because you don't have enough experience yet to know when too much is too much. We put the reigns on kids because not getting injured is a faster and more reliable path to success than piling on the mileage.

high school xc coach wrote:

just listen to your body. if you can't do more mileage, don't. if you are handling it, keep at it. be honest with yourself. Ask questions to people who have done it for a long time. And if you have a setback (everybody does), make sure you learn from it.

jrank97 wrote:

Just want to say Thank You to V for the information you've provided in this thread and your previous thread you linked to earlier on Sprint training.

I did my first "Speed Devolopment" workout yesterday, then followed it up with a 20 min Tempo run today. That was probably the most relaxed I've felt running a tempo. This was the change I needed to add. Thank You!

I'm glad it helped out and thank you for the kind words. Speed days followed by a tempo are usually an easy combination to have together. My team and I use it often.

OP, if running 75mpw doesn’t compromise your ability to do all the other work at the level it needs to be done (including this CNS/speed development work that, yes, should be done during base phase), then it can be done. If you find that you’re not able to do the other work you need to do To develop as a runner at the effort level and with the form it should be done with and not get injured, well, then you can do it. Here’s how I would try to get there if I were you, and also build in an off-ramp for yourself before 75 mpw in case it’s too much:

-Race your TT

-Recover for a week, do one light workout, then race a shorter TT (either 3k or 1-mile)

-Take one week entirely off, then take another week where you run no more than 4 days, no more than 20 total miles and no runs longer than 6 miles

-Consider the next week to be week 1 of training, and build as follows:

Week 1: 6 days, 30 miles, no runs longer than 6 miles, 2 days of 4 x 100m @ 400m efforts w/ walk/jog back for recovery at the end of an easy run

Week 2-3: 7 days, build to 40 miles, no runs longer than 8 miles, build to 3 days of 8 x 100m @ 400m effort at the end of easy days in each week

Week 4: repeat week 1

Weeks 5-7: 7 days, build to 50 miles, and 4 days of 8 x 100m @ 400m effort at the end of easy days, add 1 day of 4-6 x 10s hills all out w/ 5 mins easy jogging recovery, build your long run to 10-11 miles and run it and up to one other easy run per week as a fast finish if you’re feeling good

Week 8: 6 runs, 35 miles, 8 mile “long” run, 3 days of 8 x 100m @ 400m effort

Week 9-11: Now your real training begins! Stay at 50-55 mpw with an 11-mile long run (can still be fast-finish For the final 3-4 mile if you’re feeling good), and add 1 day of 3 x mile (becoming 4 x mile, then 5 x mile) w/ 90s recovery at 15k-10k effort and 4 x 800m @ or just slightly faster than 5k effort w/ 400m jog recovery (becoming 5 x 800m then 6 x 800m). Do 2 days of 8 x 100m @ 400m effort and 1 day of 4 x 200 @ 800m-400m effort at the end of easy runs, with one day of either 6 x 10s hills all out w/ 5 mins easy jog recovery or 6 x 60m all out w/ 5 mins easy jog recovery (alternate).

Week 12: 6 runs, 40 miles, 9 mile “long” run, 3 days of 8 x 100m @ 400m effort, 1 day of 3 x mile @ 10k effort w/ 2 mins recovery followed by 2 x 200 @ 400m effort w/ walk/jog back recovery.

Week 13: Now that you’ve built to an appropriate, maintainable level of different types of aerobic stimulus, you can add up to 1 mile to your long run and 5 mpw total to your previous peak totals every week (still taking a down week every week), as long as you can still do 1 day of 15k effort intervals, 1 day of 3k-5k effort intervals, an 11+ mile long run w/ a fast finish for the final 3-4 miles, and the speed maintenance/efficiency days at the end of most easy runs. If you struggle to hit paces on your workouts, or feel excessively fatigued on your easy runs, or can’t maintain crisp form on your speed development work, take a down week, back off to what you did the last week you could successfully do all of these elements, and know that that’s your peak for this cycle.

Starting in week 9 you can replace any of the workouts with a race of 1 mile-12k, and once you’ve done 2-3 weeks at your peak you can drop your mileage and do whatever types of sharpening workouts work for you, and race 2-4 times over the next month before calling your season a wrap.