can someone plz explain the point of double days to me?

It's kind of like an amplifier that goes up to 11...

sc42 wrote:

To respond to the original post -- doubles are mainly intended to bump up your total work load by adding an easy or moderate run each morning. By splitting the day's total effort into 2 sessions, the quality of the day's main workout is not compromised, but you get more total training.

Sort of.

The purpose of doubles is straightforward. It's simply to get in two straining stimuli per day. For the human body, the right number of training stimuli required for peak performances could have been three times, or could have been one time, or could have been every 48 hours or even 72hrs. It just happens that athletes, through billions of hours of collective experimentation, have discovered that it's twice a day. They aren't doing this to pad mileage, or recover better. They are doing this to perform better.

Ockham's Razor at work here.

Is there any added benefit for doing doubles when you're in your 30s or even 40s?? In Brad Hudson's book, he mentions that junk miles should be avoided.

malmo wrote:

sc42 wrote:

To respond to the original post -- doubles are mainly intended to bump up your total work load by adding an easy or moderate run each morning. By splitting the day's total effort into 2 sessions, the quality of the day's main workout is not compromised, but you get more total training.

Sort of.

The purpose of doubles is straightforward. It's simply to get in two straining stimuli per day. For the human body, the right number of training stimuli required for peak performances could have been three times, or could have been one time, or could have been every 48 hours or even 72hrs. It just happens that athletes, through billions of hours of collective experimentation, have discovered that it's twice a day. They aren't doing this to pad mileage, or recover better. They are doing this to perform better.

Ockham's Razor at work here.

I so hate it when people invoke that Razor thing. So your explanation is simple, that must mean it's right!

If this is intended to help an 800 meter runner who is a girl then I don't recommend doubling up on runs. Most of the advice given has been for long distance training. Girls tend to need more recovery as well. That being said, I would recommend one run a day. Light weights and plyos 3 to 4 times a week with a 1 mile warm up and 1 mile cool down before and after the plyos and weights. Would be best to run in the morning and do weights and plyos in afternoon on the days you have both. As an 800 meter runner you don't need high mileage unless she plans on running longer events. This is the case for most people who run the 800. I know someone will come up with an example of someone who did high mileage and ran the 800 but there are always exceptions. We had an guy who ran 800 for us, he did high mileage with us except he cut down a few morning runs and the long run a bit. Long story short he did not improve to much in the 800 but he had range he could run the 10k in a pretty decent time. I think all the high mileage took his speed from him. He would have done better running lower quality miles with one more short workout day added to the schedule.

...I was an 800/1500 runner in college (female), and I got up to 85-100 mpw during base a few times. This was quite common among the other women on my team as well. I ran my fastest times after adding in doubles and bumping the mileage up, as did many others on my team.

shababa wrote:

Is there any added benefit for doing doubles when you're in your 30s or even 40s?? In Brad Hudson's book, he mentions that junk miles should be avoided.

OK what's your point? Doubles aren't junk mileage, nor is any other running.

While I don't disagee that 800m runners probably don't need to run as much as 10k runners. I don't think you are correct in saying someone is going to come back with one story that is an "exception." -- There are PLENTY of 800m runners (girls & guys) that do the same base mileage as 10k runners, not just the 'few exceptions.' -- I guess, their 'racing' season mileage is lower bc clearly most of their intensity is higher; that's just common sense. Additionally, I'm NOT a feminist by any means, and I'm not on some crusade to say "don't tell girls they can't do as much as the boys." And I don't mean to turn this into a male-female runner debtate. But people really need to stop telling girls that "they need MORE recovery" or can't run "as many miles," simply "bc they are girls." Girls are not more suspetable to injury because of their "hips" or "bones," any more than any one individual guy is. The point is if you're the kind of runner male or female that needs more recovery, then you need more recovery, regardless of your sex. Because you are a girl is no reason 'not to double.' I guess, my point is (which I've said before on these forums) when females really start realizing just how much they can run, women's distance running is going to be better off in every event from the 800m up. Lastly, I think there is not a good letsrun answer to this problem if the problem is a coach not 'believing in doubles.' Talk to the coach or give his program a chance. If she really feels like the program doesn't work for her transfer, but talk to that coach before you go selecting schools again. Also, in my experience, it usually takes a good year to adjust to a new program, unless you are a stellar athlete bc for some people...everything works for them.

Disagree. The fact that she is female could be a factor but I don't personally buy into the argument that males and females should train differently.

But the fact that she is an 800m runner does not mean she should run less... Run as many miles as possible and double as much as possible without compromising workouts. Anybody here ever heard of Peter Snell? 100 mpw for 6-9 months a year with one AT workout per week. He STILL holds the New Zealand NR for the 800m. HIGH MILEAGE HELPS 800M RUNNERS TOO!

UCLA has Johnny Gray as its 800 meter coach for men and women. He believes in the Igloi style of training that does not incorporate plyometrics or double days. Im told he wont budge on this and wont coach his athletes as individuals. So I applaud this woman for getting info on Letsrun to help her 800 meter daughter at UCLA. Good luck!

What do you (malmo, although by all means others) think about triples

Vancy Pants wrote:

Overall, I am not denouncing doubles. I am saying that 10 is better than 8/5. However, what is better than both would be 10/5.

[qoute] You are categorically wrong. [/quote]

Malmo, could you elaborate on that?

shiver me squimbers wrote:

30-35min is plenty long enough to have a significant effect.

i know plenty of people who don't run longer than that and they have improved much and are running at a great level

you could sort of look at doubles the same way you look at an interval workout...sort of. what i mean is, why do 8x400 with a rest instead of just doing 1.5-2 miles hard? Or here's one: why do less-intense runs that are longer than your goal race distance? If you're a 5k runner, why not just do hard 5ks everyday?

Each workout you do has a specific purpose.

A normal training run's purpose is to

A) Break from harder workouts

B) Improve cardiovascular systems

A is going to be achieved whether you do one run of 10 miles or two runs totaling 10-13 miles.

B is going to be improved after a sufficient amount of time at a decent enough pace, i.e. the benefit doesn't really start until say ~20 minutes into the run. So let's say that, hypothetically, whether you are running 10 miles at a time or doubling in 5 and 8 miles, you run 7 minutes/mile pace. That means ~35 and ~55 minutes if you are doubling, and ~70 minutes if you run one longer run. The doubling would net you ~15 and ~35 minutes of benefit (or ~50 total), while the long run would net you ~50 minutes of benefit...

More total mileage isn't necessarily better by itself, because it matters how you get to that point. I would say doubling @ 5 miles and 8 miles vs. a single @ 10 miles is about the same... but 5/6 double vs. a 10 mile run, for example, is not better unless they weren't all done at the same pace with the same purpose.

volume>quality

lol this place is like a giant game of telephone. i'm 23 and i don't have a daughter running the 800 @ ucla. i just graduated from UCLA and i'm trying to get into real, legitimate, serious running for the first time in my life.

but, regardless, thanks everyone for your answers. they were all highly informative! you guys are great!

If you are at a perfect weight or under your ideal weight, doubles are a good way to get higher mileage in while minimizing muscle loss.

For example, a single 18 mile run will produce considerable protein breakdown after the first hour of running. Breaking up the run into two 9 mile runs, with proper carb/protein recovery will greatly minimize any muscle loss.

I recently did 3 x 10 miles in a 7 hour period, with two hours between the first and second legs, and one hour recovery before the last. Consumed some dates, protein, and water after each leg. The next day, muscle recovery was excellent and any joint inflammation was very minor.

Doing a single 30 mile run would have been insanely difficult, since my average mileage has only been around 70 miles per week lately. Even two 15 mile runs would have been difficult, due to the increased muscle breakdown during the last 5 miles of those segments.

Hey, at what age/fitness level/mpw should one add doubles? Should one maximize training at one run per day before two runs are needed. I'm senior in HS doing some off-season/pre-season base now so I don't want to reach my 'peak' in life early.

Honk for Bruins wrote:

UCLA has Johnny Gray as its 800 meter coach for men and women. He believes in the Igloi style of training that does not incorporate plyometrics or double days. Im told he wont budge on this and wont coach his athletes as individuals. So I applaud this woman for getting info on Letsrun to help her 800 meter daughter at UCLA. Good luck!

I can't tell what you meant by that (sarcasm?) but Johnny Gray KNOWS. Come on this is a forum with enough knowledge that I don't have to give his resume here, right?

To the guy that used Snell as an example, I hope YOU are aware of how JOHNNY GRAY trained and the times that HE ran. Most of the great 800 runners have been low volume/high quality guys. Coe, Cruz, and many others.

To the guy that said volume>quality; while that is the general consensus on this board, I disagree. For distances over 10k, yeah, that's probably a good rule of thumb. But high volume is not necesarry for success even in the 10k. Look at Salah Hissou. Wheating does 55-60 mpw. Lagat has done similar, and El Guerrouj didn't do much more. The list goes on.

Different strokes for different folks.

I am a former elite female runner who has been doing doubles since college. I no longer compete and am in my late 40's, but I still run doubles because it's what makes me feel the best throughout my day. My first run is for my body, and my second is for my mind - to unwind after a busy day. In terms of training effect, there is no doubt in my mind that doubles are necessary, simply for the extra mileage and to stress your body systems twice a day. I also agree with an earlier post that states it helps your recovery rate. Good luck.