Assuming I'm looking to maximize my potential as a Masters runner, how much difference does 80 vs 100 vs 120 mpw make?

Try this wrote:

I believe in varible mileage from medium to high. For me that was 60 - 120

Deena Castor did something similar when training with Joe Vigil:

http://www.isaiahjanzen.com/2014/10/joe-vigils-marathon-training-program.html?m=1

This is why she could not beat Mizuki Noguchi, who was constantly running 170-180 mpw.

Hazel wrote:

How can you tell whether you're responding well though? I've been in a perpetual base build since Jan of last year and looks to last at least until this fall. So with no time trials or races, how would one measure whether they've actually gotten fitter?

Run a 10 mile trial. 10 miles is long enough that the pace is manageable to hold by yourself but short enough that you shouldn't need fueling/hydration .

Pick a flat course, wait for a good day on the weather forecast, go out conservatively and see what you've got. Good luck-

Like others said, it is hard to figure out what your ideal mileage is and whether you would benefit from increasing your volume.

I have run 2:30 twice as masters runner. Historically, I was always a low volume runner (didn't run in high school and went from 35 to 55 mpw as a collegiate runner). When I decided to try the marathon as a masters runner, I decided to increase my volume.

I've run 4 marathons, all with roughly the same overall outcome, although the times were all different because of different courses and weather conditions.

My peak mileage ranged from 75 for my first marathon to 100 for my second. The other two marathons had peaks at 85-90. I typically only hit my peak mileage 3 times per cycle. I was at 90% peak mileage a couple of times as well. Otherwise, being at between 70-80% of peak was about right for the main part of the cycle for me.

Of course, I ended up with two plantar fascia surgeries out of 5 marathon training cycles, one of which was aborted due to a stress reaction, so I arguably didn't exactly strike the right balance (although I am content with the way that stretch of running unfolded). But I think my body (slightly bowed legs, flat feet) is such that I am just not meant for that kind of volume. Depending on your body structure and mechanics, your experience may be totally different.

One supplemental thought: for those later marathons, I did cross train quite a bit using the elliptical and sometimes aqua jogging.

When I was running 80 miles per week I was able to run 80 miles per week.

When I was able to bump it up to 100 miles per week I was able to run 100 miles per week.

pin oak wrote:

Hazel wrote:

How can you tell whether you're responding well though? I've been in a perpetual base build since Jan of last year and looks to last at least until this fall. So with no time trials or races, how would one measure whether they've actually gotten fitter?

Run a 10 mile trial. 10 miles is long enough that the pace is manageable to hold by yourself but short enough that you shouldn't need fueling/hydration .

Pick a flat course, wait for a good day on the weather forecast, go out conservatively and see what you've got. Good luck-

Yeah there is no reason why you can't just step on the track and run even just a 8k or 10k to get a good gauge on your aerobic fitness. But even without that, your workouts tell you a lot. Have your tempo runs gotten faster, longer, or easier (i.e. heart rate drop) over the past year?

sled puller wrote:

When I was running 80 miles per week I was able to run 80 miles per week.

When I was able to bump it up to 100 miles per week I was able to run 100 miles per week.

And you are able to run 120 mpw when you decide to run 120 mpw. It's all about motivation and commitment.

There is absolutely no need for such high mileage. I`M SURE! :)

Body structure and mechanics also play a role.

#stayhard wrote:

You’ll probably break 2:20 building your mileage and doing full ‘thon workouts. Your mind is the biggest muscle you need to train starting by ignoring the haters, doubters, has beens, and never was’s on this board and in real life.

Only one way to find out how good you can be. N=1.

Stay Hard!

Was's? Bravo, sir!!

Smoove wrote:

Body structure and mechanics also play a role.

Very little rule! Have been great runners of all body structures and mechanics!

HRE > Rupp wrote:

Try this wrote:

I believe in varible mileage from medium to high. For me that was 60 - 120

Deena Castor did something similar when training with Joe Vigil:

http://www.isaiahjanzen.com/2014/10/joe-vigils-marathon-training-program.html?m=1

This is why she could not beat Mizuki Noguchi, who was constantly running 170-180 mpw.

Uh huh. How many Olympic medals have you won?

I was expecting to find some 20 year asking for a way to prepare for his first masters race.

Best way to prepare for your first masters race is to turn 40.

Try this wrote:

HRE > Rupp wrote:

This is why she could not beat Mizuki Noguchi, who was constantly running 170-180 mpw.

Uh huh. How many Olympic medals have you won?

And how many have you won? Does that matter?

Noguchi ran more than Kastor and she beat Deena in Athens.

High mileage beats low mileage.

The Wizard JS wrote:

Smoove wrote:

Body structure and mechanics also play a role.

Very little rule! Have been great runners of all body structures and mechanics!

What, even the morbidly obese? It's a miracle!!!!!!!

50+ guy here. I started running when I was about 40, and have since run 17 sub-2:50 and 10 sub-2:40 marathons (plus another dozen or so slower). In general I've found that my best ones have been the ones where I was able to put in the most miles without tweaking something during the buildup. I've minimally been in the 70-80 mile range for these, but I've gone as high as 100-105. Most recently I ran 2:37 at 2019 CIM with 6 weeks in the 100-105 range during my buildup. My weeks generally include 1 mid-week workout with long intervals or tempo, plus a weekend long run including some marathon pace work maybe every other weekend. The rest is just easy volume, very rarely faster than 7:00 pace and sometimes as slow as 8:30 pace. 2 maybe 3 doubles per week that are squarely in the 'jogging' category. My buildups are usually no more than 12 weeks long, but I try to maintain a base of at least 60-70 miles/week otherwise.

Like others have said, you have to experiment to see what you can stand without getting hurt. It's a fine line to ride. Push it just a little too hard/far one week - or even on one run - and you can find yourself rehabbing a sore hamstring for the next 2-3 weeks, which sets you back way more than whatever fitness gains you were trying to achieve and defeats the whole purpose.

TimM - would love to see sample week or two?

Mid 40’s master here, 2:40PR 5 years ago.

General goal is sub 2+age for marathon time this Fall.

Run 8 hours per week, 60-65 mpw, Tinman-ish program (2 big workouts, strides), 2-3 short doubles. During a cycle will get closer to 70-80 peak. Experimented this Fall with three workouts (tempo, intervals, long run) and couldn’t sustain. The midweek workouts were only done as part of a 60 min run (4-6 mile easy tempo, or 8x1K, etc, maybe strides or short hill repeats added on) and did short 20-30 min doubles those days for recovery plus mileage. Too much fatigue and muscle soreness. Tried two shorter runs vs longer singles on easy days and didn’t help. Back to two big workouts now. Not sure if I am on track for my 2+age goal though.

HRE > Rupp wrote:

High mileage beats low mileage.

I’ve always been a quality over quantity guy as I’ve found volume causes me to get hurt because of my body structure.

That being said, other things being equal, the more miles you can run, the better off you will be, particularly at the marathon distance.

Of course, in real life, other things are rarely equal, so the “more miles beats fewer miles” mantra isn’t always the answer. I’d rather prepare for a marathon by running 75 mpw with a tempo session every 4 or 5 days than I would by running 85 mpw with no tempo efforts. Some of us need to make the decision about that kind of trade off, and for many of us who do, I’d say choosing more volume isn’t always the right answer.

But yes, I’d say running as many miles as you can while still getting in workouts and without causing a material increase in your odds of getting injured should be the goal when marathon training.