Been running for six years, past nine months have done workouts perhaps once every 10 days or less. Strides/sprints once a week. Didn't used to always train like this. I am much faster now than I was before. 400 speed is quicker, and hour long tempos are at my previous 10k pace. Mileage is moderate, 60-70 most weeks. What's the deal here? Do you not need workouts often to be fast?
400 then vs now: 52-49
10k pace was 4:58, now that is extended tempo pace.
You must be like a sub 4 minute miler nice job
No, easy runs allow you to handle workouts without getting injured, which in turn makes you fast.
I think this us impossible unless it was that you just hit puberity.
Yes. Next question. But seriously, the best endurance athletes 80-90 percent of their training is easy. Other studies have been done on finishing times in road races, the number one predictor of how fast one will run, is the amount of easy running they do(these studies also show hobby joggers spend much more time in a medium-high intensity zone and very little time spent in zone 1/2). As far as doing better off of doing less workouts, look up the thread on here called no interval success(or something along those lines). Some people do better with doing hills, fartlek and tempo running as workouts as opposed to doing hard reps/intervals on the track.
big disconnect wrote:
Yes. Next question. But seriously, the best endurance athletes 80-90 percent of their training is easy. Other studies have been done on finishing times in road races, the number one predictor of how fast one will run, is the amount of easy running they do(these studies also show hobby joggers spend much more time in a medium-high intensity zone and very little time spent in zone 1/2). As far as doing better off of doing less workouts, look up the thread on here called no interval success(or something along those lines). Some people do better with doing hills, fartlek and tempo running as workouts as opposed to doing hard reps/intervals on the track.
Do you have a link to those studies out of interest ?
Gotcha, that makes sense. Thanks for the explanation. I may update the thread with race results.
How fast are these easy runs for you? I agree that you can get faster without hard interval workouts but not if your easy runs are super slow.
It depends. I run with company often times and will go a slow as 8 minutes. Others by myself can be 5:30 or faster, though I usually stay around 5:50 by myself. I would say half of the "easy" mileage is at the 5:50 pace and half of it is around 8, and of course there lies the little bit in between.
As Bowerman would say... you take a body... any body... make it do work, rest and then a little miracle happens... it gets better.
Continually stressing the body will not allow proper improvements as rest is required for the body to adapt to the stress. Running often IS required for mitochondrial density has been shown to decrease with even just 24 hrs rest. The stress however does not need to be intense everyday to maintain it.
Easy Peasy Lemon Squeezy wrote:
It depends. I run with company often times and will go a slow as 8 minutes. Others by myself can be 5:30 or faster, though I usually stay around 5:50 by myself. I would say half of the "easy" mileage is at the 5:50 pace and half of it is around 8, and of course there lies the little bit in between.
What’s your 5 or 10k time? You must be blazing fast.
big disconnect wrote:
Yes. Next question. But seriously, the best endurance athletes 80-90 percent of their training is easy. Other studies have been done on finishing times in road races, the number one predictor of how fast one will run, is the amount of easy running they do(these studies also show hobby joggers spend much more time in a medium-high intensity zone and very little time spent in zone 1/2). As far as doing better off of doing less workouts, look up the thread on here called no interval success(or something along those lines). Some people do better with doing hills, fartlek and tempo running as workouts as opposed to doing hard reps/intervals on the track.
You need to rethink that. Professional runners do a lot of training in the zone you are calling medium- high intensity. It's called fitness. Look it up.
ifzif wrote:
big disconnect wrote:
Yes. Next question. But seriously, the best endurance athletes 80-90 percent of their training is easy. Other studies have been done on finishing times in road races, the number one predictor of how fast one will run, is the amount of easy running they do(these studies also show hobby joggers spend much more time in a medium-high intensity zone and very little time spent in zone 1/2). As far as doing better off of doing less workouts, look up the thread on here called no interval success(or something along those lines). Some people do better with doing hills, fartlek and tempo running as workouts as opposed to doing hard reps/intervals on the track.
You need to rethink that. Professional runners do a lot of training in the zone you are calling medium- high intensity. It's called fitness. Look it up.
I may be wrong but I think a lot of pros may run at a medium-high pace, but that pace for them isn't necessarily at a medium-high intensity.
Sounds like you are reaping the benefits of training 60-70, for 6 years. Oh, and having around 50, 400 meter speed. ?
Ha! If you are real, yeah, should be focusing in on the mile or less with that speed.
I stinky boy p.u. wrote:
ifzif wrote:
You need to rethink that. Professional runners do a lot of training in the zone you are calling medium- high intensity. It's called fitness. Look it up.
I may be wrong but I think a lot of pros may run at a medium-high pace, but that pace for them isn't necessarily at a medium-high intensity.
You may also be right?
Discus.
I stinky boy p.u. wrote:
ifzif wrote:
You need to rethink that. Professional runners do a lot of training in the zone you are calling medium- high intensity. It's called fitness. Look it up.
I may be wrong but I think a lot of pros may run at a medium-high pace, but that pace for them isn't necessarily at a medium-high intensity.
You’re not wrong
I don’t have any recent 5K or 10K times, though I should have some soon and may update the thread.
Nice work!
What you are discovering is the minimal effective dose, which is something everyone should play with.
Running is primarily aerobic, and your training is now focused on that. The infrequent workouts allow the stimulus you need for that small portion of your physiology to improve, and the time in between is enough to fully absorb it.
I would keep at the same regime until you stop improving, before upping any other stimulus unnecessarily. Your body will still need a break eventually, so consider that sooner rather than later.
If you do it right, you should steadily improve without injury. You seem to be on the right track!
There are tons of stories of elite runners and others who run their fastest times off their base training Ie easy running
There are also tons of stories in running world of the what we used to call sclumpfs the recreational runner who just schlumpfs along consistently day after day with no speed work and occasionally beats the name runners who has an impressive speedwork but didn’t have a quality base
Check lydiard he has this down pat
coachcommentsnicely wrote:
As Bowerman would say... you take a body... any body... make it do work, rest and then a little miracle happens... it gets better.
Continually stressing the body will not allow proper improvements as rest is required for the body to adapt to the stress. Running often IS required for mitochondrial density has been shown to decrease with even just 24 hrs rest. The stress however does not need to be intense everyday to maintain it.
I must have missed those studies. Sounds speculative to me.