Grasshopper. Not worry about what kind of frosting to put on top of cake. Worry about how to make your cake.
not an expert on the subject wrote:
I heard this some where, does that number sound about right?
The OP didn't specify at what period in the training cycle the question applies, or how the long run is managed.
25% is way to high.
If you've NEVER seen a marathon training plan without 2-3+ 20 milers, you're overlooking metric plans which top out at an equally round figure of 30 km, and also the Hanson's "marathoning for the masses" plan of a few years back: http://runningtimes.com/Articl...cleID=4447
Lonn: What am I missing here? I feel sort of foolish because I've NEVER seen a marathon training plan that didn't include at least 2-3 long runs of 20ish miles -- most of them called for 4-5. NONE of these plans were for much more than 75 miles per week.
Pfitziger never trained like he proposes in his books. I've addressed this issue with him directly. He pointed out the obvious to me that what he writes is for those people who are not going to properly train for a marathon, so his schedules are more or less a patch. Since they aren't going to put in the event specific mileage, he has them put in thses disproportionate long runs becasue "they have to do something."
I've read anywhere from 20-30% of weekly milage, in general, depending upon the cycle and focus of the training. Look at the schedules in Pfitz's marathon books. If I remember correctly, he and Scott have folks doing 24 miles in a 80+ mile week. Same with Beck's plan. He calls for 26 milers in what amounts to a 70 mile week.
hmmm...I've talked with Scott and he said no such thing. If anything, he spoke to changing up the "speed work" components of what's in those books.
I don't make money selling books to people who are not going to train properly for a race, especially a marathon. All of my advice is geared to serious competitive runners. If you are not a serious runner you should skip over my posts.