If "there is no substitute for milage", then what are junk miles?

There is no such thing as "junk miles." That's the term someone uses when they are afraid of doing high mileage.

As an example: "I don't want to run more than 70mpw because those junk miles do me no good." Interpret this as: "I'm too lazy to run more miles."

asd234 wrote:

There is no such thing as "junk miles." That's the term someone uses when they are afraid of doing high mileage.

Is that fact or is that opinion?

I'd argue that volume is a key, but running volume without an overall structure or an intent behind that mileage, that's what junk miles are. I'm sure we've seen two people run similar mileages and get very different results. Why? The overall plan was different (if it existed at all).

another one wrote:

asd234 wrote:

There is no such thing as "junk miles." That's the term someone uses when they are afraid of doing high mileage.

Is that fact or is that opinion?

It is a fact

Seconded.

I'd argue that volume is a key, but running volume without an overall structure or an intent behind that mileage, that's what junk miles are. I'm sure we've seen two people run similar mileages and get very different results. Why? The overall plan was different (if it existed at all).

__________________________________________________

Right on. For example, take two runners at a measly 35 miles a week. One of them does workouts within that 35 miles a week & the other is straight miles. The "workout" runner should be better prepared.

I'd even say the difference between the two (above mentioned runners) is the difference between running & jogging.

But, I'd say mileage is relative to each individual athlete too.

Junk miles are recovery miles run too fast that invariably lead to staleness, sickness, or injury. They could also be miles run too fast at the beginning of the base building period.

On Slowtwitch, I've often read that there is no such thing as a recovery run because it places too much stress on the body. Who is right?

asd234 wrote:

There is no such thing as "junk miles." That's the term someone uses when they are afraid of doing high mileage.

As an example: "I don't want to run more than 70mpw because those junk miles do me no good." Interpret this as: "I'm too lazy to run more miles."

Actually, junk miles are for the more insecure runners that have it in their head that the more miles they train, the better they will be, as opposed to training smarter. It would be very interesting to see how many 1000's of runners never developed because of this. Yes, more miles will be good to a point, but each runner has an optimal training zone. Some runners never figure it out, pounding their heads against the wall constantly trying to run more miles and more miles, despite the fact that it isn't working for them.

I could not disagree more. But, it's no big deal...we can still get along!

asd234 wrote:

I could not disagree more. But, it's no big deal...we can still get along!

I don't necessarily disagree with your earlier statement. Probably more runners fail because they are afraid to take a chance and train harder or they are too lazy as you said. However, I think there are also a lot of runners who fail because they can't figure out what is optimal training for them. Especially with the internet today it is so easy to see what other people are doing and assume that this is the right way to train for everyone.

I will take Solinsky as an example. He is one of the few world class U.S. runners that hammers most of his runs. He can handle it and it works for him. For many others, it would be a disaster. Same with mileage. What works for one person doesn't always work for someone else. Work hard, keep a detailed log, listen to your body and figure out what works best for you in terms of mileage, intensity, core work, cross training, etc. I am always amazed at how many different ways there are to train to success.

When I say Solinsky hammers every run, that is not what I meant. He does most of his running at 5:40 pace or under, but for him that is pretty comfortable. My point was that he does his easy runs faster than most of the other top runners do and it works for him.

train smart wrote:However, I think there are also a lot of runners who fail because they can't figure out what is optimal training for them. Especially with the internet today it is so easy to see what other people are doing and assume that this is the right way to train for everyone.

OP here, Funny you should mention the internet and forums like these as being, well, not the best place for people to get advice from. I agree. I used to be a LetsRun hound, spend all my time here, and tailor my entire training plan on what someone 1000's or miles away was doing. It took me a long time to realise that this was disastrous and debilitating more than anything else. You're right, listen to your body and use your own common sense, not someone else's. I'm running better than ever now

another one wrote:OP here, Funny you should mention the internet and forums like these as being, well, not the best place for people to get advice from. I agree. I used to be a LetsRun hound, spend all my time here, and tailor my entire training plan on what someone 1000's or miles away was doing. It took me a long time to realise that this was disastrous and debilitating more than anything else. You're right, listen to your body and use your own common sense, not someone else's. I'm running better than ever now

Excellent post.

More important than running high mileage is running the right mileage--mileage that gives a stimulus that you can respond to. Of course, the goal eventually would be to build a body strong enough to benefit from higher mileage, but this goal has to be implemented intelligently.