Average runners and 100-mile weeks.

With the right workouts you could turn that average pace from 8:40 to 7:40 on 50 miles a week. If you do Vo2 max and LT workouts.

thank you

Not trying to be mean in any way, shape or form, but if you are only able to run 8:40 pace you probably aren't cut out for 100 mile weeks. I say this as someone who is likely faster than you are (can't say for sure because you didn't list any times) and doesn't run 100 miles per week myself. I'd say work up to about 70 over time and add a threshold run and some strides every week and your training pace, in the very least, will drop for sure. Hope this helps.

Well he did say that was an "average training pace".

And in training "more" is always more, especially in base training.

iamstewpid wrote:

Not trying to be mean in any way, shape or form, but if you are only able to run 8:40 pace you probably aren't cut out for 100 mile weeks.

Not necessarily. I got up to 88 miles last winter, and will hopefully hit 100+ this winter, and I do most of my training between 8-9 min/mile. Current race fitness is 18:30 for 5K.

On the one hand, that's a lot of miles for a fairly mediocre runner to be putting in. On the other, I'm old (48) and it's fun to beat the younger guys. The more miles I run, the "faster" I get and the more young guys I can beat.

I do this mileage in Katana2 racers, Streak XC's, and Adizero PR's (for track work). No mechanical issues the last two years. I was blessed with good mechanics, if not blazing speed.

I suspect that you are running too slowly if you are running that pace. When I started running regularly (in grad school), I was fortunate to run with guys from a DIII XC/track team. One of the assistants/grad student was the same height/weight/build etc and I picked up his stride and we could run stride by stride for a mile without ever trying to match strides. It meant that I had to work for a while to get my pace up but soon 7:00/mile was my background pace and only recovery was slower and anything with effort was faster.

My guess is that if you ratcheted up: added some base, then decreased base as you did more mileage at a faster pace (every other day, say). Then, once adjusted to a faster pace increase the base mileage again, then increment your pace.

I went from sporadic running for six years after HS XC to running 100/week within 3 months of when I started running regularly, and my pace got down to 7:00 pretty quickly once my legs got over the shock. I ran a 2:52 marathon at the end of week 17.

Maybe I am better/more natural runner, but there is a lot of ground between 8:40 and 6:40. I was not that good because I was not good enough to make the varsity XC team even though I went out four years, and in fact, did not usually score on the JV team until the last couple of meets of my senior year (when something must have clicked for 5th in League JV race) but was still not good enough for the varsity. (I did go to a big California HS in the 1960s).

I've got you beat, methuselah, I'm over FIFTY. I've been racing around 7:30-7:35 pace lately. This is after several years of leg issues, surgery and family concerns that reduced my training to pretty much nil.

That race pace is off more or less 15-20MPW, sometimes up to 25. I need drastic changes in my work schedule and parental caretaking roles, but that won't happen for a few more years.

I'm really envious of guys like Ed Whitlock and Rich Stiller (a miler who was able to run 5:19 off of 20-25MPW) who handle both ends of the spectrum.

Someday maybe, someday.

The focus here at letsrun seems to be on high mileage. Some of us have personal circumstances which preclude that possibility. I'll never marathon again, but want to peform credibly at the shorter stuff: 5-8K.

it would take forever to run 100m weeks at 8:40 pace!

Hmmmm. Maybe I should switch to racing flats for my training?

The Century Mark wrote:

I'm really envious of guys like Ed Whitlock and Rich Stiller (a miler who was able to run 5:19 off of 20-25MPW) who handle both ends of the spectrum.

Rich Stiller? You from the Bay Area? I used to run in the same club as him (WVJS). I still go to the Saturday AM track workouts when I'm down there.

it would take forever to run 100m weeks at 8:40 pace!

I like that scenario of high miles in the winter. At 56, I may try your routine. You didn't specify any speed work - do you work that in? ...and how do those Katanas work for you? (I need a wide forefoot, semi-high volume shoe.)

Thanx.

sodbuster wrote:

how do those Katanas work for you? (I need a wide forefoot, semi-high volume shoe.)

Thanx.

The Katanas should be fine for you then. I've got a quite wide forefoot, and really appreciate the cut of that model. The only drawback, for me, is the outsole material. It's got hard rubber on raised nubs that tend to pop off pretty quickly for me. Other than that it's a really great shoe with a fantastic ride.

probably...if you see him ask him about that program he posted on MASTERS track & field, please.

i'd be curious about that friend of his who was doing

4:45-4:50 miles off of less training that Stiller

additionally somewhere out there is a miler who's probably now in his 60's who was featured in some article wherein he had some unofficial record for most years as a Master with sub-5:00 miles, he was working on sub-6:00 miles in his 60's; know about him?

the mile is the classic distance, too bad they don't have more of them

okay, maybe I should rephrase that. I, personally, wouldn't be willing to put in 88 miles per week for the end result of an 18:30 5k. If that is your prerogative then fine, I'm just saying to me it wouldn't be worth it.

iamstewpid wrote:

Not trying to be mean in any way, shape or form, but if you are only able to run 8:40 pace you probably aren't cut out for 100 mile weeks.

I agree, at least for now. I think it will benifit you more at this point to ramp up the intensity a bit before you start adding on the milage.

sodbuster wrote:

You didn't specify any speed work - do you work that in? ...and how do those Katanas work for you?

I do a track workout twice a week.

Some of my Katana outsole has removed itself from the shoe. Out of the box, they have sticky little rubber nubs on the outsole. I think at some point those stuck to the ground (likely during a track workout) and I lost a part of the outsole under the ball of my right foot.

So they aren't the most durable shoe out there, but I probably have at least 500 miles on mine. That's maybe more than a racing flat was designed to handle, anyway.

I will buy another pair later this winter, anyway. I like them a lot.

iamstewpid wrote:

I, personally, wouldn't be willing to put in 88 miles per week for the end result of an 18:30 5k.

Well, I'm 48, and I was only a 16:20 guy when I was 24, so maybe it's relative. I also have no kids or other big responsibilities that I am neglecting by doing this.

88 miles was my high week this year. The whole year is going to total about 3000 miles, so about 60 mpw average. Next year, maybe 3500. I tend to get a lot of my miles in from Oct/Nov through April. This summer I only ran 80 miles in August, taking a break.

The Century Mark wrote:

What sort of times could an average, or slightly below average runner (training pace of 8:40 per mile...)

expect to run if he got up to 100MPW in training for race distances from 5-8K?

To get more bang for your buck I would suggest some speed oriented work, instead of going out and running 2 hours a day. What about tempos runs, 20-40 minutes at 8:00 pace? Or some 400 or 800m intervals at 7:20 pace?

Instead of just running more, and taking up more time, you can definitely run much faster in a 5000 if you stress the systems that are most important to you in a 5000m race. You are taking about training more like a marathoner or ultra runner.

You could run 50 miles a week, 5 of the 7 days at 8:40 pace with Mondays being intervals at 7:20 pace and Fridays a tempo run at 8:00 pace, and with dedication you could get far. 20, 19, 18:00?

Good luck