I am building back my base mileage, and was just curious about the Lydiard style. I have, and have read most of, Run To The Top, but still have a question. Does Lydiard propose an ever building mileage asscention, or does he use a so many weeks up, down week, so many weeks up plan?
I'd like to help, but I really don't understand what you're asking.
I guess that I'm refering to his aerobic phase. If I understand him correctly, the goal is to build the mileage gradually, and then hold it before advancing to the next phase. My question is that durring this build up, do you increase a bit every week, or do you mix in a down/easy week or two to allow your body to recover/adapt to the workload? As an example, would I do something like this:
50mpw
55mpw
60mpw
65mpw
70mpw
etc....
Or would you maybe do something a bit more like this:
50mpw
55mpw
60mpw
50mpw
65mpw
70mpw
etc...
Bear in mind that these are just eamples, not real numbers. In a nut shell....I'm 3 weeks into a 12 week base period, and thus far have done 2 weeks at 35 & 37, and will do 50 this week. I want to develop my aerobic potential as much as possible before I start legitimate trainig for other events.
Does that help?
This time around, I did the following:
0
35
45
55
65
76
85
95
100
100
100....
But, the first time I did such an increase, I stopped and did 2 or 3 weeks at 75, 2 or 3 weeks at 85, etc.
It works well for me. The 1st 100 mile week feels exactly like the 35 mile week (effort-wise). Adaption is a glorious thing.
From what I've read around here from Nobby and HRE and others -- and let me say I'm only an observer, not an expert -- is to throw predetermined schedules out the window and simply pay attention to how your body reacts. The first challenge is to get the total volume up and the pace really doesn't matter that much. Once it's no longer a struggle to simply complete the volume, then you can gradually up the pace.
If I'm reading this wrong, please correct me.
Ok, thanks. From a Lydiard perspective, either one is fine. You'd do what you need to. The goal is to get the volume up. If you can add distance constantly each week that's fine. If you find yourself feeling like it's just too much, have a shorter week or stay put for a bit until you feel like you can start adding on miles again. Some people handle distance better than others do.
"Nobby-One has taught you well...;o)" That's pretty much how I would have said. Humna body is not a machine. It "reacts" to things. Do you force yourself to stick to the schedule even if your body's "stuffed"; do you take it easy even if your body's full of running? When feeling tired, it could either mean that your body is trying to break through a certain barrier; or your body is sending a message that you should take it easy. You have to read the body's reaction day-to-day, week-to-week to determine what you should do. Neatly written down schedule, Lydiard would have said, is not worth the paper it's written on.
Of course, there's a certain guid-line you could give. After the competition season and his body needed a break, Snell would try to "jog" a half an hour in the morning and an hour in the evening to prepare himself for 100MPW. He was one of those people who struggle to do the distance work. His mileage fructuated from 100 to 70 to 50 to 30 and back up to 90 or 100... Something like that. It wasn't planned. But one thing he tried to do even when he's having a hard time, and Kim Stevenson can tell you, is to try to run Waiatarua 22-mile every Sunday. In a way, that 20% rule (for the longest run of the week) is a bunch of crap. Same with 10% rule (weekly increase). It all depends on the background of your training. You just can NOT predetermine those things as a general rule and have everybody follow.
Nobby thanks for stating that the 20% rule for long runs is bogus. It might be optimal, or even better, but it damn sure isn't set in stone or even absolutely necessary.
I remember stumbling across that "20%" rule at a time when I was doing 140-150 mile weeks and thinking, "So I've got to do a 28-30 mile run now, but if I cut back to 80mpw I only have to do a 16?" Made no sense.
Nobby and HRE are right.
BTW : The first time I came across this 20% deal was here on letsrun. I wondered what and where on earth that came from !!. I had never heard Arthur talk in percentages.
As for my take on building mileage. What I did is gradually build my Sunday runs up so I spent more and more time on my feet. That did not mean I neglected the rest of the week.
I had this theory that if I had a "solid" Sunday behind me then the rest of the week 'fell' into place.
I also learned from Arthur (And many of his "Boys") that once you have run 20 miles you can always do it again. No matter when. I now sincerely believe that.
Just this Sunday I headed off on my own for a run though our forest and found that the further I went the better I felt and one of the thoughts I had during that run was about this exact aspect. I only went for an Hour and a half but if someone had come along and said "Lets cruise for another hour" I could have easily done so.
The body has never forgotten. It just needed to be taken to that "spot" where it could do it again.
As for the rest : the key is consistency of running days per week/weeks per month/months per year, then years upon years.
As I said before on another thread when asked what the 'fastest' long run I ever did was. It was 2:40 marathon pace for 22 miles. It felt easy. BUT it took 4 years of cocnsistent running to get to be able to run that fast that easily.
Hope this helps
Got my hands on a book the other day called "Base Training for Cyclists" or something like that. I'm not a cyclist, nor do I have any desire to be one, but it's still a very useful book for a runner. The author's perspective and approach sounded like he took it straight from Lydiard, Daws, Osler, Nobby, HRE, Kim, and so on. But he never mentioned Lydiard once in the whole book.
Just goes to show how the basic system is sound.
Bump: lets see if this goes anywhere
Thanks for the responses thus far. I'm just coming back from some minor surgery, and would really like to focus on increasing the volume, and building an aerobic base rather than trying to do it all durring a more involved training cycle. I may also be a product of the 10% & 20% rules bombarding me, and may be a bit scared to push too soon too quickly and have it come back to bite me in the ass later on.
Raw Rookie: 10 minutes out and back your first day.
Make sure you keep the same effort up and don't wind up running out for 5:00 then taking 7:00 to come back the same return route. That means you went out too fast.
Or do the opposite, run out 5:00, then return in 4:00...you don't race the base phase.
You do that until you feel good enough to do 15:00, do that for a while until you feel comfortable (You said you had surgery). When you do take one day and extend it to 30:00, but do your 15:00 for the next two days following.
After that add it up until you're handling 2 hours regularly.
That's IT. NO %, no set miles, no mile splits. Take it as it comes... BE PATIENT. OK, I'll turn it back over to Nobby and HRE and Kim.
I've always thought that if you're out of school and aren't needing an Olympic qualifier in time for the trials, you never have to rush things.
Doug E. wrote:Thanks for the responses thus far. I'm just coming back from some minor surgery, and would really like to focus on increasing the volume, and building an aerobic base rather than trying to do it all durring a more involved training cycle. I may also be a product of the 10% & 20% rules bombarding me, and may be a bit scared to push too soon too quickly and have it come back to bite me in the ass later on.
Play it by ear; you know yourself. "Trust your feelings, Luke." Also, you might get back in shape faster than you think. Six months ago I couldn't run due to achilles tendon issues, and now I'm definitely on track to get a Boston qualifier in May (which would be only 6 min off my PR). Yesterday I did a 10k aerobic tempo run in a time I couldn't have done in a race three months ago.
Remember that progress isn't always consistent. I couldn't up my volume every single week, and I certainly didn't get faster every week. But from one month to the next, there was significant progress. If you've been at this for any length of time, you'll recognize the signals that you need to step back for a day or a week or whatever. Which is why I don't plan "step-back" weeks; in my 30s, they just happen.
the 20% rule seems fairly weak
I sometimes do 1/3 to 1/2 of my mileage in on long 15 mile death march at a fast pace
i feel like shit for a few days after, have trouble walking and stairs are a bitch but amazingly 3 days after when I go out for my fast "tempo run" of the week I run 5-8 seconds per mile faster then the week before. I have dropped the pace of these runs over 1:30/mile in the past few months...talk about effective training
Doug,
You'll probably surprise yourself early on with how quickly you regain fitness. It's almost like starting over, but you'll have enough of an accumulated base that it's a little better.
Personally I went from doing a 20 minute 5km to a 1:20 20km in about 2 months just by adding volume and eventually some tempo runs, then a little recovery period, and then the 20k. At that rate of progress I thought I'd bust out a marathon PR later in the year, but of course the rate of improvement slows down as you approach your former state!
YMMV, but my yardstick of how fresh I am while building volume is how often do I have a run where I just end up running an impromptu tempo run because it's fun and I'm feeling good.
Enjoy the buildup -- you made up some great progress last year (i remember your contributions to fall marathon thread), and that fitness won't be totally lost.
Here comes March.... wrote:
This time around, I did the following:
0
35
45
55
65
76
85
95
100
100
100....
But, the first time I did such an increase, I stopped and did 2 or 3 weeks at 75, 2 or 3 weeks at 85, etc.
It works well for me. The 1st 100 mile week feels exactly like the 35 mile week (effort-wise). Adaption is a glorious thing.
Just to follow up on this...
I don't actually run the above weeks based on "miles." Everything is based on time spent running. I basically pretend that all of my easy/steady runs are at 7:00 mile pace (even though some days early on in the base phase are slower and some days later in the training cycle are significantly faster). I think some folks call these "Badger Miles" or something of the sort (Wisconsin used to do this). I record mileage based on time simply because "100 miles" has more substantive meaning to me rather than 700 minutes or 11 hrs 40 mins per week.
The beauty of going by time is that you never feel the pressure to try and hammer out a specific time for planned steady/easy mileage days. And if by chance I feel great and pick up the pace on a particular run, I just knock a little bit of time off of the day's run. I figure it all evens out in the end.
Obviously it becomes important to run on mapped out courses for tempo/intervals to make sure one isn't going too fast or too slow.
Thought that while the "Lydiard Book" thread is up and someone has 'recranked' "Lydiard v Daniels" We may as well have the the 3 threads running.