Read this article recently and it made some good points that ring true in my experience.
I think I understand. It's less is more. It's the walking, the easy way. Forget the hard, hard training.
Ditch the speed. Run slow, walk slower and get fast, fast and faster. It's the early 90's all over again.
new true believer wrote:
I think I understand. It's less is more. It's the walking, the easy way. Forget the hard, hard training.
Ditch the speed. Run slow, walk slower and get fast, fast and faster. It's the early 90's all over again.
No. More is more. This thread is about volume first and foremost. Intensity is to the point that the volume is not compromised. Sometimes for some people less intensity means more volume. More volume means less injury if the intensity is correct. Incorrect intensity means injury. Come on keep up.
It is all making sense!!
I am glad I "ran" into this thread. I think you all have something here regarding frequency of running.
I am "older" at 51 and have found contrary to much advice for older types, that if I exercise more frequently I am LESS likely to get injured. I think older types shouldn't just assume they can't do 2 a days. While I do a lot of runs slowly, I also keep in touch with more speed/intensity work per week than many of my friends my age. I try to do something "faster" about 4-5 times a week. But, my track workouts are usually modest. (Like today I did 4x300's at a bit faster than mile pace). My tempo runs are rarely more than 30 minutes. I do think a somewhat longish run once a week is good but for most of the week I think frequent bouts of modest work are really important.
I mostly race 5ks but will occasionally race anything from 800m to half marathon.