One reason is that cross training is incredibly boring and tedious. Most runners prefer to run
great to have a training thread not about double threshold days for once.
lol at not running 200 mpw
This post was removed.
I run faster in 5k races running twice a week, not even 10 miles, than I did at 35 miles. But you do you.
The closest exemplar to Parker in consistent success with a high proportion of cross training that I know of is Eilish McColgan. Also not afraid to front run to great performances.
I see no reason why you cannot have success cross training. I run and cycle, averaged 50km running and 70-100km bike each week for last 5 months. I am a bit of a hack, but fitness has improved greatly.
She is just the best, very impressed with this girl, a true goddess of distance running
Thanks for the link; sounds similar to Frank Horwill’s philosophy, that running economy is best learned running at speed. And of course, “Quality over Quantity” Mr. Peter Coe was aligned with Horwill.
Now that type of training is great for mid-distance, and maybe can be stretched out to the 6k?
However, an important point, is that Valby has self-discovered (out of necessity from past injury) the added benefit of stacking cross-training workouts (intervals, etc) on top of the quality running.
Another thing Valby self-discovered is that not all cross-training reaps similar benefits; she honed in on the Arc Trainer for its unique ability to improve “dynamic functional capacity of the legs”, as discussed in this thread:
Your "arguments" are obtuse. Your entire premise is based on the false assumption that her training program is somehow "less than ideal" simply because she replaces junk mileage with other training methods that are scientifically proven to provide various physiological benefits. You are obsessed with the number 30. Would you revise your silly argument if she instead ran some slightly higher and more common, but still completely arbitrary, number of miles? Say 45-50 per week with those extra 15-20 being easy miles? Ridiculous. The answer to your question is that there are undoubtedly plenty of other collegiate runners who must reduce their mileage due to a propensity to get injured. The difference is that Valby is obviously insanely talented. So yes, plenty of others are doing similar cross training, but no, few if any of them are as talented as Valby. Now stop posting. She's telling the truth even if you are too stubborn/ignorant/inexperienced to understand or accept it. Cheers.
So all her competitors and the top distance runners are all running "junk mileage"? How about those who aren't?
Either cross-training with low mileage is as good as a high mileage distance programme or she is beating the very best of her competitors on a less than optimal training programme. Neither is credible.
The question is not whether you can have success but whether it is as good as a more full running training programme for an elite athlete. If it is then it should be typical for most top distance runners. It isn't.
So cross-training is generally avoided because it is boring but running long distances or doing reps on a track isn't? Yet triathletes don't seem to mind cross-training.
You can keep repeating your idiocy for all the world to see. Hopefully people will get the message that you’re just another shrill parrot trolling the site.
true. But such examples demonstrate that you may still reach a good standard by cross training. The best of the best may be a different story.
So you can't answer my question either. Is her training programme ideal for a top distance runner or is it a less than optimal substitute? If it is less than optimal how is it that she can destroy her best competition?
The best of the best is what the issue is about.
not really, for myself lets run is about running for all levels, so any story of reasonable success is interesting and an experience to learn from.