The longest I have run is 18 miles. Would running 20 or 23 miles make any difference to my 5k or 10k times? Is there any fitness benefit to be gained?
The longest I have run is 18 miles. Would running 20 or 23 miles make any difference to my 5k or 10k times? Is there any fitness benefit to be gained?
a lil bit
I don't know. I feel like you're better off increasing the volume/intensity of your other workouts for 5 and 10K. Once I get to 14-16 miles for a long run, it's capped there. Training for half-full is a different story
For 5/10K, you've probably reached the point of diminishing returns for a long run. Pushing your long run out another 2-5 miles means longer recovery and 15-40 minutes spent on a long run that you could spend on something else. Is that really the best use of your time at this point? It might even be counter-productive (and even 18 might already be counter-productive) if it means you can't do race-specific workouts more frequently. Everyone responds differently and maybe you thrive on marathon-style long runs, but chances are you should focus on some other part of your training if 5/10K is your thing.
The science shows that there is virtually no benefit to running more than 2 hours, but for every additional minute after 2 hours, injury risk sky rockets. There is true for total time between doubles and time on a long run, but the increased injury risk is more pronounced on long runs.
In other words, cap your long runs and daily volume to 2 hours of running. Then the mileage just is what it is.
robert678 wrote:
The science shows that there is virtually no benefit to running more than 2 hours, but for every additional minute after 2 hours, injury risk sky rockets. true for total time between doubles and time on a long run, but the increased injury risk is more pronounced on long runs.
In other words, cap your long runs and daily volume to 2 hours of running. Then the mileage just is what it is.
*This is true
Sorry for the typo.
Evan Jager does a 2 hour long run every week. He’s better than everyone on this board. I’ll gladly run that distance if it means coming 4 to 5 minutes within his 5k PR.
robert678 wrote:
The science shows that there is virtually no benefit to running more than 2 hours, but for every additional minute after 2 hours, injury risk sky rockets. This is true for total time between doubles and time on a long run, but the increased injury risk is more pronounced on long runs.
In other words, cap your long runs and daily volume to 2 hours of running. Then the mileage just is what it is.
This is nonsense.
robert678 wrote:
The science shows that there is virtually no benefit to running more than 2 hours, but for every additional minute after 2 hours, injury risk sky rockets. There is true for total time between doubles and time on a long run, but the increased injury risk is more pronounced on long runs.
In other words, cap your long runs and daily volume to 2 hours of running. Then the mileage just is what it is.
From my experience I think that makes sense.
But I have not seen the science for it.
Where is the science?
This just isn’t true. The difference of running 2 versus 3 hours is somewhere around like 3-6% mitochondrial increase. While significantly smaller increase from 1 to 2 hours, it’s still significant. You also don’t lose any speed increasing long runs once you adjust to recovery if from that larger load. It’s a preferential thing. Some people find the time to recovery is slower for them so it’s not worth it but those who do do it and recover well from it find bigger gains. Although the further you run a long run the greater likelihood of injury so I guess you’re partially right.
I would think that pace would be a factor in injury risk. Running 2 1/2 hours easy may be less risky than 2 hours at moderate pace or with a fast finish.
Renato Canova says that long runs are only necessary for the marathon.
Friend of the 2 hour run wrote:
robert678 wrote:
The science shows
From my experience I think that makes sense.
But I have not seen the science for it.
Where is the science?
Just trust the science.
Sham 69 wrote:
Renato Canova says that long runs are only necessary for the marathon.
No, he does not!!!! Just look at Said Shaheen training.
Saif sorry
800mto5K wrote:
Evan Jager does a 2 hour long run every week. He’s better than everyone on this board. I’ll gladly run that distance if it means coming 4 to 5 minutes within his 5k PR.
A 17-18 min 5k? You can do that with a long run of 4-5 miles.