A random question for anyone who might know....On this site everyone is always talking about the benefits of high mileage (95+ etc.), I agree with this, and my question is this. I am a triathlete who averages 60 miles per week running, 175-225 mpw cycling, and 5-12000 yds per wk swimming. Does anyone know how this would convert equivalency-wise into pure running miles? Just curious.
I would estimate that you are putting in about 60-miles a week.
That might be the dumbest reply ever
It was not a dumb answer. You are putting in a lot of other aerobic work, and probably some anaerobic work, but it is not running specific. If it makes you feel better, estimate that every ten minutes of swimming or biking is equal to a mile of running and figure it out based on the duration of your running and swimming.
For biking, I believe every 4 miles you bike, is the equivalent of running 1 mile. With swimming, each mile would be like 4 running miles. Of course the above posts are correct in saying it is not running specific, but this should give you a general idea.
No way. For a good biker, 100 mile rides are routine. For a good swimmer, 10,000 yard workouts are not a rarity (high school level does them, even).
That's kind of like saying most serious bikers and swimmers do equivalent of 25 mile runs (one run, not two!) near daily.
Maybe that's why American running sucks relative to swimming and some cyclists. (Flame away)
I'm going to have to agree with ra ra, somewhat. The 4 to 1 biking to running ratio might be a little excessive, and yes, if you are a top level cyclist or training for ironman distance triathlons, 100 mile rides are quite regular. However, if you look at the training of olympic distance triathlon professionals, Craig Walton, for example, he rarely goes above 250 miles per week biking, but the intensity is WAY up 2-3 times per week. (In addition to 60mpw running and 15-25000ydspw swimming). So 100 mile rides and 10000 yd swims aren't quite as prevalent at for the professionals focusing on this distance.
I think the confusion here is perhaps due to comparisons
based on metabolic equivalents (i.e. calories burned)
versus training effect.
Based purely on a calorie expenditure basis, the ratio
for swimming to running is about 1 to 4 (varies a bit depending on swimming speed) as indicated above,
however the ratio for biking is actually even less than
4 to 1. It depends a lot on speed but is typically
around 2.5 to 3 to 1 for a biker averaging 17-20 MPH.
A biker doing a 100 mile bike ride does burn a lot more
calories than a runner does during a 25 mile run (of
course it takes the biker twice as long to do this, and
his calorie expenditure per unit time is less than the
All of this says nothing about how to compare the
training effect of the two workouts which is what I
think the poster is really asking about and I don't know
the answer to this question. It is worth noting that
professional triathletes typically spend a hell of a lot
more time on the bike than they do running (most don't
run more than 60 miles a week).
High mileage for a runner is 140 to 200.