Why don't elite runners do more aerobic work?

IMO, you are better off by just IGNORING anything wellnow has to say...either a troll that likes to argue with contrary opinions on base training, and/or resents the idea of actually having to run miles to improve. Who knows his contrary agenda. pete seemed to enjoy putting up with him.

I am with you. I was hitting 60-70 miles per week and then got a case of achilles issues. I have been biking four days per week and working the hills hard, finally hitting some pool running, and today did my first "run" on the treadmill to see how it went. I covered 60:00. Felt strong aerobically but a bit uncoordinated at first. I am optimistic I can run well with more cross training. Good Luck.

I think the main reason is because it brings nothing -- there is no slack to pick up. What aerobic potential remains when top runners are already running 100-150 miles/week (or even 250+)?

I'm reminded of Canova's words: elite runners have presumably built their aerobic house, so more aerobic training will bring little or no benefit. Then it's time to furnish the house.

I would agree that there are multiple components, and we can speak of short term, and long term improvements in performance. I would rephrase "a few weeks at most" to "12 weeks at least". In my experience, coming back from a prolonged rest, it seems to take about 3 months to come back to something close to top form. I'm not sure this corresponds to my "maximum aerobic capacity".

wellnow wrote:

True. Aerobic capacity is just one component of running, and probably the easiest one to train. It only takes a few weeks at most for most runners to reach their maximum aerobic capacity. Beyond that though, the contractile component of muscles, the elastic component of tendons and muscle fascia, and the component of running economy all have a huge influence on how fast we can run, and how long we can hold a certain pace. These three components take much longer to train than the cardiovascular system.

If the aerobic system gets maxed out so quickly, what is it that separates high school caliber runners from elite runners?

Does it all come down to running economy after that?

I guess that's more a question for "wellnow". He did mention "contractile component of muscles, the elastic component of tendons and muscle fascia, and the component of running economy all have a huge influence" and "these three components take much longer to train than the cardiovascular system."I think aerobic improvements (VO2max, LT, AeT) occur on the scale of years, but I use an old model.I would answer what separates high school athletes from elites is aerobic development, strength and running economy, as well as training and racing experience.

no more wrote:

If the aerobic system gets maxed out so quickly, what is it that separates high school caliber runners from elite runners?

Does it all come down to running economy after that?

no more wrote:

If the aerobic system gets maxed out so quickly, what is it that separates high school caliber runners from elite runners?

Does it all come down to running economy after that?

Maximum heart size takes 4-6 years of regular interval training to develop. (Coe, BTFDR)

the high-mileage is all the aerobic training that the elite runners need.

Adding wrote:

why can't a runner run for an hour and swim/bike for three more to maximize aerobic development?

Who the hell would want to do that???