Very hard long runs - Stupid or beneficial?

You are near to the speed of sound so I would say you are quite fast!

British Guy wrote:

I'm a 32:XX 10K and low 70s HM guy and I've always done my long runs around high 6s per mile with the rest of my easy days 7:00-8:00. Thought this was the standard effort level to do runs at.

However, I've recently learned that a friend of mine runs his long runs INSANELY fast. He's a mid 14's 5K/30:XX 10k runner and he's doing his long runs (75-90 minutes) at 5:30 pace. I imagine that's pretty much an all-out race effort. As much as I'd love to criticize this approach he's a better runner than I am so it makes me wonder if I should be pushing the pace more on long run day... any thoughts on this approach?

5:30 pace is ~10s slower than MP pace so we aren't talking all out efforts by any means. If you read marathon training plans, a bunch of them will have 10-15 miles @MP. They are definitely hard days but doable. But with any of this type of work, the line between hard and too hard is pretty fine where running 10s faster makes things go from comfortable hard to race level.

At a really high level people have different views of long run days. For some people the mileage alone is enough stress. For other mileage alone sorts of gets you in the medium effort (i.e. can't do a hard day the next day but you don't really need an easy day) zone. It can make sense to add some intensity to bump you up to the hard zone. And a ton depends on mileage. A 50 mpw guy running a 15 mile might struggle with the mileage alone. For a 100mpw guy, 15 miles is just another training day.

It's completely impossible to analyze this without knowing the rest of the training of the 14/30 guy.

Maybe he is just doing a base phase now and the fast long run is the only hard thing he does. Maybe it's the only hard run he does in addition to 1 weekly workout.

If a long run like this works depends on how much importance/emphasis someone wants to put on them in relation to the other parts of the training program (more important for marathon/longer goal distances, more important for slow-twitch runners, etc.).

Also 75 min is not very long, with warm-up and cooldown he might only do 40-60 min at MP+10s which would be a classic tempo workout during any point of a season/build-up.

Also - just because someone works for someone else given a specific muscle-fiber distribution, a specific VO2MAX and specific lactate threshold does not mean the same training session will have the same effect on you. While he might thrive on these fast long runs, another runner might overtrain doing them and/or get worse.

[/bLateRunnerPhil wrote:

It's completely impossible to analyze this without knowing the rest of the training of the 14/30 guy.

Maybe he is just doing a base phase now and the fast long run is the only hard thing he does. Maybe it's the only hard run he does in addition to 1 weekly workout.

If a long run like this works depends on how much importance/emphasis someone wants to put on them in relation to the other parts of the training program (more important for marathon/longer goal distances, more important for slow-twitch runners, etc.).

Also 75 min is not very long, with warm-up and cooldown he might only do 40-60 min at MP+10s which would be a classic tempo workout during any point of a season/build-up.

Also - just because someone works for someone else given a specific muscle-fiber distribution, a specific VO2MAX and specific lactate threshold does not mean the same training session will have the same effect on you. While he might thrive on these fast long runs, another runner might overtrain doing them and/or get worse.[/quote]

Maybe temporarily, but in the end more quality is more quality and no one’s getting worse unless they’re getting injured.

British Guy wrote:

I'm a 32:XX 10K and low 70s HM guy and I've always done my long runs around high 6s per mile with the rest of my easy days 7:00-8:00. Thought this was the standard effort level to do runs at.

However, I've recently learned that a friend of mine runs his long runs INSANELY fast. He's a mid 14's 5K/30:XX 10k runner and he's doing his long runs (75-90 minutes) at 5:30 pace. I imagine that's pretty much an all-out race effort. As much as I'd love to criticize this approach he's a better runner than I am so it makes me wonder if I should be pushing the pace more on long run day... any thoughts on this approach?

If I was coaching you in a marathon, I would have you build up to 20-24 miles at around 6:10-6:20 pace (~25-35 seconds per mile slower that an anticipated marathon race pace.. assuming 1/2 is around 72 minutes). These long runs would end up being a pretty moderate effort after awhile (assuming you've been running at least 60-70+ mpw for several years). You'd also do some training around MP pace so you'd have some bouts of 5:45 pace mixed in. A 30:30 10k guy would do about the same thing but ~22 seconds per mile faster. .. so 20-24 mile runs at ~ 5:48-5:58 pace would be fairly moderate relative to racing. Doing some faster shorter long runs such as "Warm up 2 Miles. + 13-15 Miles at ~5:30 pace" would be completely reasonable. So for you this would equate to ~ 12.5-14.5 miles at ~5:52 pace. Would you call that a race effort when you're in 1:12 shape? No, lol, but it'd be a hard day.

Also, if you've ALWAYS done you long runs at high 6's, (for multiple years) there's a good chance your long runs are just maintenance now- instead of providing a stimulus to get better. Just something to think about...

And your marathoners have horrible results. We know. OP, ignore this troll.

BOHlCA wrote:

The Wizard JS wrote:

My half/ marathoners runs the specific long run at about 70-75% of max heartrate and then last 10-40 min sustained or in intervals at close to LT pace.Gives a very powerful finish.There is no need

for long fast runs all the distance.

And your marathoners have horrible results. We know. OP, ignore this troll.

This particular advice isn't that bad though... That'd be about the equivalent of a 2:12 marathoner running 14 Miles @ ~ 5:50-6:00 pace (70-75 max HR) and then the last 8 miles at 5:00 pace. (40 minutes @ ~ 10 seconds slower than LT and right about MP). That's a fairly standard long run actually.

However, the OP was referencing a guy that was running 13-15 miles at 20 seconds slower than *estimated* LT pace. This isn't exactly a "long, run fast run for all the distance".

c7runner7 wrote:

BOHlCA wrote:

And your marathoners have horrible results. We know. OP, ignore this troll.

This particular advice isn't that bad though... That'd be about the equivalent of a 2:12 marathoner running 14 Miles @ ~ 5:50-6:00 pace (70-75 max HR) and then the last 8 miles at 5:00 pace. (40 minutes @ ~ 10 seconds slower than LT and right about MP). That's a fairly standard long run actually.

However, the OP was referencing a guy that was running 13-15 miles at 20 seconds slower than *estimated* LT pace. This isn't exactly a "long, run fast run for all the distance".

Totally agree. That part of his advice is good. The problem is that if the OP listens to him he will then push the rest of his "philosophy" and his marathoners haven't had one good race. not one.

And your second paragraph - 100% agreed.

Thanks for the insight on this one! I guess my friend running 5:30s is probably like myself running 5:50s. I think that would be a very tough session for sure - I'd struggle to do it at the end of a higer mileage week, but might be doable if somewhat rested. It's not an easy run for sure, but I failed to consider that his MP is probably similar to my HM pace, so it's not THAT crazy!

Beneficial for half and up but not so beneficial as other training you could be doing for shorter distances. For those you want to run the latter miles of the long run even faster with most of the run being pretty easy.

The Wizard JS wrote:

BOHlCA wrote:

And your marathoners have horrible results. We know. OP, ignore this troll.

They have NOT! I have coached the winners of Valencia and Nice -Cannes marathons 2016 and times from 2:07- 2:10.....three runners sub 2:10......a lady debute marathon 2:26:30........a win in one of SA :s biggest price money marathons O.R Tambo . You seem to be that Troll you are talking about!

You haven't coached any 2:07 runner. I read your thread. They showed that is not true.

And the marathoner you coach has been getting worse for the last 4 years.

Ignore this troll OP.

Kvothe wrote:

Beneficial for half and up but not so beneficial as other training you could be doing for shorter distances. For those you want to run the latter miles of the long run even faster with most of the run being pretty easy.

I've done that in the past a few times. For example a 21-mile run at 6:40ish for 16 miles then the last 5 around 6:00 pace. Always feel exhausted after a session like that though.

Your times are very similar to mine, when I used to run for Hercules Wimbledon AC back in the late 70s and early 80s. My times: 8:57, 15:12, 32:22, 52:03, 1:50.49 (3000/5000/10,000, 10 miles, 20 miles ).

The 20 mile performance was recorded in the Finchley 20 on April 22, 1978. I wore Tiger Onitsuka plimsolls in that race with absolutely no padding.

Basically I was on about 50 to 60 miles a week, no track training, and on Sundays I was usually doing a 15 mile run starting in Wimbledon and going over Wimbledon Common and into Richmond Park. Most of my runs were progressive runs during the week over about 7 to 8 miles. I would start off steady and try to finish “eyeballs out” close to six minutes per mile or even under. That was my method. Consistency was the key and frequent racing which counted as speed work for me.

On long runs (Sundays, 10-15 miles), I would usually start off steady at around 7 to 7 1/2 minutes per mile and usually I would try to finish the longer runs at a faster pace down to around 630 per mile, or faster.

In those days I used to race almost every week so those mid weekly races for example on the track at Crystal Palace or at West London stadium counted as speed work because I never did any speed work on my own.

My best performance in the national cross country over 9 miles was 250th in 1978.

In my club we had people like David Clark, 13:22/27:56 for 5000/10,000 m on the track and English cross country international, and Bob Holt 13:48/28:39/ 48:00/2:16. I was just an average runner for Hercules Wimbledon and was lucky to make the nine man team for the national cross country. My best place in the Surrey County cross country was 26th 1979. In the Surrey league division one, my best placing was 22nd. Standards were high in those days with plenty of internationals running all those races.

There were so many good runners in those days if I ran a race like the Woking 10 mile race in 52 minutes I usually only finished around 40th. The top 10 runners would mostly all be below 50 minutes. Standards have gotten much softer over the years. Good luck.

I'm a sloth compared to you, but during my last marathon cycle, i did most of my long runs at MP or under on fatigued legs. That's probably not a good long term habit, but it did wonders for me.

I can barely run now, fwiw.

The Wizard JS wrote:

BOHlCA wrote:

And your marathoners have horrible results. We know. OP, ignore this troll.

They have NOT! I have coached the winners of Valencia and Nice -Cannes marathons 2016 and times from 2:07- 2:10.....three runners sub 2:10......a lady debute marathon 2:26:30........a win in one of SA :s biggest price money marathons O.R Tambo . You seem to be that Troll you are talking about!

As a South African runner I can tell you this is the first time I heard of the OR Tambo marathon. It is definitely not a well known and highly contested race. For the bigger marathons basically all semi-regular (not even competitive) marathon runners know of the race and runners will travel from all over the country to run. With Bloemfontein being within easy reach of Johannesburg, Pretoria etc one would think there would be lots of groups travelling there to race and it would be well known. But nope, this is the first time I've heard of it. I actually initially thought you meant the Soweto Marathon, but a google search showed there is actually something like a OR Tambo marathon.

I really dug the response from a guy in South Africa. I mean, most of us know JS is a clown, but this dude is in the country where JS supposedly has guys winning stuff. But what I don't get is that there are people responding to the Magic Wizard but no actual JS posts. Has he posted on this thread or not?

British Guy wrote:

Thanks for the insight on this one! I guess my friend running 5:30s is probably like myself running 5:50s. I think that would be a very tough session for sure - I'd struggle to do it at the end of a higer mileage week, but might be doable if somewhat rested. It's not an easy run for sure, but I failed to consider that his MP is probably similar to my HM pace, so it's not THAT crazy!

His theoretical MP pace could be closer to your 10k pace. Now if he can actually run a marathon at that pace is a slightly different question based on if he did the all the specific work.

Now if you can do this work out and it being the best way to train is a much tougher question to answer. Things like if you are better off doing 3 easy, 10 at 5:20, 3 easy is better than 16 at 5:30 is a question we can't really answer.

BOHlCA wrote:

c7runner7 wrote:

This particular advice isn't that bad though... That'd be about the equivalent of a 2:12 marathoner running 14 Miles @ ~ 5:50-6:00 pace (70-75 max HR) and then the last 8 miles at 5:00 pace. (40 minutes @ ~ 10 seconds slower than LT and right about MP). That's a fairly standard long run actually.

However, the OP was referencing a guy that was running 13-15 miles at 20 seconds slower than *estimated* LT pace. This isn't exactly a "long, run fast run for all the distance".

Totally agree. That part of his advice is good. The problem is that if the OP listens to him he will then push the rest of his "philosophy" and his marathoners haven't had one good race. not one.

So? Four guys 2:07- 2:10, a winner in one of the most prestigious marathons in South Africa, O.R Tambo and a lady debute 2:26 isn`t enough for you to make that statement? : ))

BOHlCA wrote:

The Wizard JS wrote:

They have NOT! I have coached the winners of Valencia and Nice -Cannes marathons 2016 and times from 2:07- 2:10.....three runners sub 2:10......a lady debute marathon 2:26:30........a win in one of SA :s biggest price money marathons O.R Tambo . You seem to be that Troll you are talking about!

You haven't coached any 2:07 runner. I read your thread. They showed that is not true.

And the marathoner you coach has been getting worse for the last 4 years.

Ignore this troll OP.

Of course everything I say is the truth. And I can prove it all! And as for the coaching in just 2½ month( ! ) of Victor Kipchirchir , Kenya, to win Valencia marathon 2016 in the time of 2:07:38 ( His still standing PB ) i coached him with the exact same program as his running mate with very similar shape level. I just sent the weekly program to his running mate when I thought it was unnecessarily

to send the exact same weekly program to Victor when they did ALL their training sessions together. Besides I saw that Canova did a similar claim with his three guys group in Kenya, Moen, Wanders and Kiptanui because they had similar programs . I know, I`m far from that famous as Canova and it`s easy to be treated differently.

So, OP, take my advice because it comes from one of the most experienced how to reach top individual results in middle/ long distance , inclusive the marathon.

- COACH J.S -