still in that range?
still in that range?
100's
EuropeCalling wrote:
still in that range?
no.
missourian wrote:
100's
haha ok, who is your source exactly?
He does Badger Miles Still. Why do you think he is so damn good.
Question:
So do you think that part of the reason you’re doing so well this year is that you’ve had a couple of years of uninterrupted training so that your fitness can accumulate?
Matt T:
Yeah, definitely. Also, my coach, Jerry Schumacher, is good at pulling back on the reins when necessary. Also, last year it was important for me to get a professional contract, so we purposefully brought the training down a step so that I could stay healthy the whole year—I did maybe 70-75 miles a week instead of 90, which may have hurt my performances some, but I stayed healthy. Now I’m coming up on two years of consistent training, and I’m starting to reap the rewards.
Badger miles?
thats what they lowered his mileage to then. its bumped up now.
Actually, he said recently that his mileage during the last two years had been cut from 90 to the 70-75 range. He had been having a major growth spurt and 80-90 had been breaking him down too much:
http://www.kimbia.net/newsarticle000106.htmlSo do you think that part of the reason you’re doing so well this year is that you’ve had a couple of years of uninterrupted training so that your fitness can accumulate?
Yeah, definitely. Also, my coach, Jerry Schumacher, is good at pulling back on the reins when necessary. Also, last year it was important for me to get a professional contract, so we purposefully brought the training down a step so that I could stay healthy the whole year—I did maybe 70-75 miles a week instead of 90, which may have hurt my performances some, but I stayed healthy. Now I’m coming up on two years of consistent training, and I’m starting to reap the rewards.
A lesson from Jerry Schumacher that the letsrun mileage freaks don't want to get.
Yesiree Coach D- and staying healthy is just as important as wracking up the miles.
The lesson is: wrack up the mileage (and training and workouts) which you can HANDLE!
Coach D wrote:
Actually, he said recently that his mileage during the last two years had been cut from 90 to the 70-75 range. He had been having a major growth spurt and 80-90 had been breaking him down too much:
This is not what he said in the interview.
The interview said, "Also, last year it was important for me to get a professional contract, so we purposefully brought the training down a step so that I could stay healthy the whole year—I did maybe 70-75 miles a week instead of 90, which may have hurt my performances some...."
What this means is that last year he did 70-75. It does not say he did 70-75 this year. It goes on to say that he thought the 70-75 rather than 90 miles hurt his performance last year. But even at 90 Badger miles this year he still is not to the LETSRUN magical 100, yet.
FTIR wrote:
What this means is that last year he did 70-75. It does not say he did 70-75 this year. It goes on to say that he thought the 70-75 rather than 90 miles hurt his performance last year. But even at 90 Badger miles this year he still is not to the LETSRUN magical 100, yet.
90 badger miles = 90 x 7 minutes spent running = 630 minutes spent running.
If Teg held an average of 6.3 minutes/mile pace (6:18 pace), then he runs a hundred miles a week. For a 13:04 runner it would be kind of ridiculous if he didn't hold 6:18 pace as an average (including workouts, mind you). So he is doing 100 mile weeks, but not calling them that.
He is doing the LETSRUN magical 100, if not more.
Welcome to the 100 miles a week club...we pray to Lydiard everyday...
He could easily be covering 100 a week. The point of my post was that he said what he did last year, not this year. However, given his injuries and desire to have uninterupted training, I would bet he is (or has become) a hard day HARD, easy day EASY runner and does not average under 7 minutes per mile. I say this because I thought the point of Badger miles was to encourage everyone to run 7 minute pace because that was all you were going to get credit for and it was a useful EASY pace for even 13:04 runners.
As a total scrub in college I ran all my miles at 6 minute pace. Since anyone who runs for the Badgers could as well, why aren't Badger miles 6 minutes per mile? There has to be another reason than to undercount their miles because they and everyone else knows they are undercounting.
Let's hear his own opinion (sp?) on this one...
http://www.kimbia.net/newsarticle000108.html
"The improvement will come as I keep increasing my base mileage. Last year was like 75 per week, this year 85-90, next year planning 90-100, then 100-105 (real miles, not Badger miles--I still do them, but no one understands them). [Coach Jerry] Schumacher and I have a plan, and we will be sticking to it!!"
Not sure what he means with the phrase "I still do them", I understand that he still runs his miles at 7 min pace.
Any other thoughts?
FTIR wrote:
What this means is that last year he did 70-75. It does not say he did 70-75 this year. It goes on to say that he thought the 70-75 rather than 90 miles hurt his performance last year.
What?!? nowhere in there does it say 70-75mpw HURT his performance..it was done to help him stay HEALTHY therefore it helped him reach the status he is at now...
Matts a cool dude wrote:
What?!? nowhere in there does it say 70-75mpw HURT his performance..it was done to help him stay HEALTHY therefore it helped him reach the status he is at now...
"I did maybe 70-75 miles a week instead of 90, which may have hurt my performances some..."
There's the part about it hurting his performances. Teg acknowledges that 70-75 miles per week is not the optimal way to train. He did it for a while to get healthy and re-establish his base. He understood that while he was training at that level his performances would suffer some, but he did what he had to do to get healthy. Once he was able to increase, he did, because he knew he couldn't stay at 70-75 miles per week and run his best.
are yall asking how much he is doing right now, during racing season? because i actually know the answer to that
The way I read this is "... 90, which hurt my performances some." This implies that he had better performances (at least short term) by staying healthy at 70-75 and worse performances off 90 becuase he could not stay healthy.
Just throwing that out there to fan the flames of this silly argument.