Camille Herron is overrated. I don't hate on her for finding soft "world records" to "crush," but her 2-hour run cap wouldn't get her into the top 10 at the OT or Boston. Her advice is especially irrelevant to most ultra athletes who aren't sponsored (or supported by a spouse) to have time outside of weekends to support cumulative volume like her. In short, she is apparently unaware that she's an experiment of one.
ummm so Lebron James and Djokovic shouldn't talk about their training approach because Joe Sixpack at the gym doesn't have the time to train like they do???
She is a PROFESSIONAL runner sharing insight into her training regimen. what planet are you on?
Camille Herron is overrated. I don't hate on her for finding soft "world records" to "crush," but her 2-hour run cap wouldn't get her into the top 10 at the OT or Boston. Her advice is especially irrelevant to most ultra athletes who aren't sponsored (or supported by a spouse) to have time outside of weekends to support cumulative volume like her. In short, she is apparently unaware that she's an experiment of one.
Err she won the JFK 50, USATF 50, black canyon, javelina and a bunch of other races. What are you even talking about?
Also, she's won 3 individual IAU World Championships and COMRADES, arguably the most prestigious ultra in the World. Tom Higgenson calling her "overrated" is absolutely ridiculous and a display of sheer ignorance.
Camille Herron is overrated. I don't hate on her for finding soft "world records" to "crush," but her 2-hour run cap wouldn't get her into the top 10 at the OT or Boston. Her advice is especially irrelevant to most ultra athletes who aren't sponsored (or supported by a spouse) to have time outside of weekends to support cumulative volume like her. In short, she is apparently unaware that she's an experiment of one.
ummm so Lebron James and Djokovic shouldn't talk about their training approach because Joe Sixpack at the gym doesn't have the time to train like they do???
She is a PROFESSIONAL runner sharing insight into her training regimen. what planet are you on?
Planet Lovetron, muthafukka. LeBron and Djokovic have nothing to do with this.
Ultra runners love their long runs and back to backs. I honestly think some of them would still do them even if they found out they could actually hurt rather than help.
Personally, I agree with her. Even for me the average ultra runner only doing 50-60 average mpw I dont do over 20 miles and never do back to backs anymore and I am more fit, faster and dont end up at the starting line feeling drained.
[Granted i've never done very well at the 100-mile + distance] but I'd say take this all with context:
Weekly mileage is the big factor here. When I ran my marathon PR at Hansons I was averaging about 120 miles per week for months. We ran twice a day like 5-6 days a week and then we'd have maybe a Long Run every 10-14 days or so. I only ran up to 20-miles on a single long run....but then keep in mind we'd crush that long run (like sub 6-min pace average with some MP miles in there) and I'd be hitting a lot of 15-17 mile days on doubles (or from doing a long tempo workout like 3 x 3 miles with a 3-mile warm up and a 3-mile cool down kinda morning).
So quality and volume matter.
Now the average ultra runner in the US probably trains like 35-65 miles per week. They probably aren't going to have time to double (and they shouldn't double really if under that kind of weekly mileage...or even under 70 miles per week). A big "weekend Long Run" that's over 20-miles is nearly 50% of their entire weekly volume. Doing a "Back to Back" Long Run is a little over the top in that case... but in some cases just that "time on feet" hiking/walking/jogging around the woods (esp if on mountain trails) is usually a good fat burning stimulus, gear prep with hydration and nutrition, and honestly mostly mental prep for a 50k-50-miler-100k or even 100-miler).
I've basically never done any Back to Back Long Runs in my whole ultrarunning career and very rarely would go over 25-28 miles in a single session (usually long runs would still be 20-24 miles but with more vertical gain)....but then again this would be on 80-120 miles per week.
So yes the "Long run" could be overrated for a lot of ultra runners...but they better back it up with consistently high weekly mileage and some moderate intensity/speed (like i assume Camille does). I also don't think Camille has done a ton of actual steep mountain running (think like UTMB or Hardrock style)...she has seemed to really excel at the "runnable and flatter" ultras/marathons only.
As others have pointed out, training loads will be heavily dependent on time available for training and will determine which strategy to employ. There have been two strategies to endurance running identified here: 1. The Intensity through Density Strategy This is more for pros who are all-in on the sport, usually reserved for pros. Heavy focus on cumulative volume, similar to how triathletes will train for ironman events. In the same way that Gustav Iden has been averaging > 20-30 hrs a week of training with hardly any long runs near race distance, Camille has knocked out >100k lifetime miles.
and
2. The Simulated Effort Strategy This is probably more for people who have real world obligations and it focuses on maxing out the time that is available for training windows. This leads to heavy training blocks on the weekends and often at higher intensity since the rest of the week is going to be more of a recovery during the week.
It seems obvious, but each strategy is going to have different strengths and weaknesses, opportunities and limitations. A major strength of the Intensity through Density approach is that it promotes more long-term gains. As someone from Oklahoma, I actually had a number of conversations early in my career with Camille that actually got me into serious running and eventually went on to run d1. So I'm a big fan of that approach, especially in theory. But now, I've got a full time job and family obligations. So I'm doing more of the simulated effort strategy when I am able.
Err she won the JFK 50, USATF 50, black canyon, javelina and a bunch of other races. What are you even talking about?
Also, she's won 3 individual IAU World Championships and COMRADES, arguably the most prestigious ultra in the World. Tom Higgenson calling her "overrated" is absolutely ridiculous and a display of sheer ignorance.
Thats weird since my anecdotal evidence was in support of hers.
Take some deep breaths, buddy.
Ahh yes, because you cannot admit you made a mistake, right. Clearly I need to take deep breaths for pointing out that what I said was in support of her take.
As others have pointed out, training loads will be heavily dependent on time available for training and will determine which strategy to employ. There have been two strategies to endurance running identified here: 1. The Intensity through Density Strategy This is more for pros who are all-in on the sport, usually reserved for pros. Heavy focus on cumulative volume, similar to how triathletes will train for ironman events. In the same way that Gustav Iden has been averaging > 20-30 hrs a week of training with hardly any long runs near race distance, Camille has knocked out >100k lifetime miles.
and
2. The Simulated Effort Strategy This is probably more for people who have real world obligations and it focuses on maxing out the time that is available for training windows. This leads to heavy training blocks on the weekends and often at higher intensity since the rest of the week is going to be more of a recovery during the week.
It seems obvious, but each strategy is going to have different strengths and weaknesses, opportunities and limitations. A major strength of the Intensity through Density approach is that it promotes more long-term gains. As someone from Oklahoma, I actually had a number of conversations early in my career with Camille that actually got me into serious running and eventually went on to run d1. So I'm a big fan of that approach, especially in theory. But now, I've got a full time job and family obligations. So I'm doing more of the simulated effort strategy when I am able.
I agree with this but I still think there is a point that she makes that has nothing to do with what time you have available and what I was trying to get at.
How hard is it to get 90 minute runs in during the weekend and not go crazy on the weekend? IDK, I have a wife and 2 kids, a house, a job, all that good stuff. I find it much easier actually to get some decent runs in during the week and not kill my weekend with huge weekend runs.
Its that people think they NEED to run at least a 20 miler every weekend. Its the advice I got when I started running ultras. Huge run on the weekend and back to backs often. This is IMO a lot harder to sustain with a family and full time job and is actually part of the reason I switched up my training.
Says she never does longer than 2 hr runs during training.
Ultrarunner Camille Herron shared one reason why she thought she was “crushing world records” in her forties: She only does one or two long runs a month (nothing over 22 miles) and she never does back-to-back long runs. Case in point: she ran one easy 20-miler in the lead-up to the Jackpot Ultra Running Festival’s 100-mile race last year, which she won outright. Instead, she focuses on cumulative volume and running frequency. In her words, “Long runs are overrated
She's a very influential figure in ultras and even in the road communities. A lot of corporate Fleet Feet types mention her on my social media all the time. I think long runs are NOT overrated; they give you mental strength too.
Camille Herron is overrated. I don't hate on her for finding soft "world records" to "crush," but her 2-hour run cap wouldn't get her into the top 10 at the OT or Boston. Her advice is especially irrelevant to most ultra athletes who aren't sponsored (or supported by a spouse) to have time outside of weekends to support cumulative volume like her. In short, she is apparently unaware that she's an experiment of one.
You have a good point about ultrarunners being supported by spouses and family. She also probably has a good social presence and has sponsors.
While Herron and Little’s training mirrors research findings, it can’t be considered in isolation. There are other factors that influence bone health and adaptation aside from mechanical loading—genetics, nutrition, running gait, and how much bone you laid down during your peak bone-building years. Hormonal health matters, too, because bone cells have sex hormone receptors. If your hormone levels are low, Troy says it tips the balance toward bone removal, leaving the tissue more vulnerable to injury.
Same here, I find it pretty easy to get 75-90 minutes on weekdays (sometimes through doubling) when my toddler is at daycare, and then I can just do a 2ish hour long run on the weekend and have more family time. Although I work 50-60 hours a week, it helps that I have flexible hours (professor); I could see how the weekend warrior approach might work better for someone who needs to be at their workplace from 8-5 M-F.
Is it really that unconventional though? At least in terms of non-ultra runners? I mean sure there are some marathoners who do really long runs sometimes but isn't the science backed conventional thinking is that there is no point to longer than 2-3 hour runs? It seems the ultra runners doing 6 hour runs on a regular basis are the unconventional ones.
As for average ultra runners, I've never met anyone that went from slow to fast just by doing long a$ runs and back to backs. They may have went from DNF to finishing a hundo though.
If you look at some of the top ultra runners out there, they follow similar training and have full time jobs.
Im thinking specifically of Harvey Lewis and Marianne Hogan. Both get most of their mileage from running commutes which create a structured double day almost every day and then will do a longer effort over the weekend but usually not a crazy long run compared to their races. It seems that the frequency and volume are the most important factors and if your creative you can “easily” do this around a busy work schedule.
Ahh yes, because you cannot admit you made a mistake, right. Clearly I need to take deep breaths for pointing out that what I said was in support of her take.
I made no mistake, your claims are entirely specious with no real evidence.
Ultra runners love their long runs and back to backs. I honestly think some of them would still do them even if they found out they could actually hurt rather than help.
Personally, I agree with her. Even for me the average ultra runner only doing 50-60 average mpw I dont do over 20 miles and never do back to backs anymore and I am more fit, faster and dont end up at the starting line feeling drained.
Most people take up Ultra Running/MUT because they enjoy long adventure runs.
The sport seemingly gives them license to go and spend 4 hours+ running/hiking around trails, and to have it count toward something.
I don't think these people are totally driven by performance, and so, doing speedwork, intervals and tempo runs - though it may be more effective training - can be tedious for someone whose more into the adventure side of the sport.
Ultimately, people are going to do the things in training that they find most enjoyable.
I ran my first ultra marathon last year in 4hrs 30m, no doubles, longest run being 19miles on rolling hills, and topped at 70mi for 1 week before dropping. My 4 peak weeks were 60-64-67-70 then back down to 55 the following 2 weeks with the last week 30mi. I did 1 real workout per week that involved longer duration tempo running usually 4x10min or 3x3mi or cut downs. I only ran 7 days a week for 2 of the 15 weeks leading up to the race. So all my training was on 6 days a week training, again life commitments. I had no issues fueling for the race (4k elevation 31mi) using GU and gatorade and my training was adequate enough to get me aerobically fit. Quite frankly I think I could have done just as well with 4 weeks less training (total training was 15 weeks after taking 2 months off doing nothing). I could have definitely gone faster had my calves not begun to twitch (onset of cramping) which slowed my pace down significantly. I definitely think I could have gone 10min faster if I added more regular strength training. I cannot commit to doubles since I work the normal 8-5 so I run after work 90% of the time besides weekends where I hit trails on back to back days in the morning. Most of my trail runs, decently technical grade 3 were ~8:00-9min pace with an occasional 7:20s from fast sections with no roots or rocks. For my race, I was averaging 8:10/mi for a good chunk of it with some sections averaging 7:20s for a few miles before hitting more technical trails which I was still rolling 8:10s through. If you are experienced aka ran in HS/College/ or have a coach, you can probably do a decently fast ultra or you can do one for fun and not get too much discomfort towards the later stages. Definitely looking forward to doing more 50ks. I do not want to do road marathons simply because I enjoy trails more and enjoy the ever changing scenery that trail running brings. Marathon races seem more mundane and the training I feel is much more grindy compared to an ultra where there is no pressure to run fast times. Anyways, thats my experience running an ultra marathon for the first time last year. I will probably eventually run a road marathon and do Boston just to say I did it but after that, I'll stick to trail running.
