Serious Doubles Question. Too Much Contradiction (Summer of Malmo)

Positive Contribution wrote:

GokuIsBack wrote:

I'm not about to go from 60 to 80 miles a week all at once...

Why don't you just add doubles slowly enough so your mpw goes from 60-80 in a sensible way? You are really over thinking it.

Because many people, including Malmo, say to start doubles asap.

Pretty sure Malmo is crystal clear. Double, as much as you can, as soon as you can. Malmo is all about a flexible commitment to running more in preparation for the fall. The keyword is FLEXIBLE. Rigid rules means people feel bad if they miss a target. Make the rules flexible and it's more enjoyable.

"easier" meaning you have more time between runs to recover with singles = better run-to-run recovery at least that's how i interpret it (and i agree with it).

pjb wrote:

malmo wrote:

A twenty mile run puts more strain on the body than two ten milers. But the twenty mile single is easier to recover from than the two ten milers.

¿Qué?

doubles work for plenty of athletes if they don't get burnt out or injured. For me I get burnt out physically, mentally, and emotionally after a few weeks of doubles.

For this reason I subscribe to doing singles 6 days a week and have my best results doing so.

The point is, it looks like you are making the wrong comparison.I thought the point of adding doubles is adding sessions and mileage, not redistributing your current weekly mileage over more sessions.That means you don't replace an 8 mile run with a 3 mile + 5 mile run, but you add the 3 mile run to the 8 mile run.If the additional mileage is easy, and you've reduced the volume intensity for the summer, why not go from 60-80 all at once?If that still makes you nervous, start with doubles only 2-3x/week, and build up gradually the way you want.

GokuIsBack wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

What about doing 3 miles in the AM and 8 in the PM?

I'm not about to go from 60 to 80 miles a week all at once...

NotAustin18,

I doubt what you feel after a few weeks of doubles is burning out physically, mentally and emotionally.

What happens is that your initial unreasonable enthusiasm that we have all seen on here runs down. You try to do too much too soon and when the first tough patch comes along you reasonably bail out most likely avoiding injury and real burn out but also learning the wrong lesson.

That is why many suggest the first time you try it to run easy doubles of 3 or 4 in the morning and 3 or 4 in the afternoon for a couple months with just a couple easy and short workouts to not lose touch with running fast.

(_*Yibp%RS* wrote:

NotAustin18,

I doubt what you feel after a few weeks of doubles is burning out physically, mentally and emotionally.

What happens is that your initial unreasonable enthusiasm that we have all seen on here runs down. You try to do too much too soon and when the first tough patch comes along you reasonably bail out most likely avoiding injury and real burn out but also learning the wrong lesson.

That is why many suggest the first time you try it to run easy doubles of 3 or 4 in the morning and 3 or 4 in the afternoon for a couple months with just a couple easy and short workouts to not lose touch with running fast.

Yeah you're probably right. But I like singles. Doubles can be a grind. I dunno if that makes me lazy, but the grind is just too much for me.

(_*Yibp%RS* wrote:

NotAustin18,

I doubt what you feel after a few weeks of doubles is burning out physically, mentally and emotionally.

t.

I think he's like me, it may not technically be "burn out". I think it's more I Don't Like It.

When it comes to running, or any work out routine if you dont like something you wont do it, or if you do you will hate it and resent it, and not get much out of it.

For me, I dont get paid to run. Im not on scholarship. It's just not worth the hassle.

GokuIsBack wrote:

Positive Contribution wrote:

Why don't you just add doubles slowly enough so your mpw goes from 60-80 in a sensible way? You are really over thinking it.

Because many people, including Malmo, say to start doubles asap.

Ok add 2-3 double days at 2-3 miles. That will only increase your mpw to 65-70. Once again, overthinking.

GottaSayIt wrote:

(_*Yibp%RS* wrote:

NotAustin18,

I doubt what you feel after a few weeks of doubles is burning out physically, mentally and emotionally.

t.

I think he's like me, it may not technically be "burn out". I think it's more I Don't Like It.

When it comes to running, or any work out routine if you dont like something you wont do it, or if you do you will hate it and resent it, and not get much out of it.

For me, I dont get paid to run. Im not on scholarship. It's just not worth the hassle.

Pretty much. I look at it as "how much do those doubles really help me? is it worth it?" Like if I can run 99% of my potential in singles, then there ya go. And I enjoy the doubles at first but then they begin to wear on me and its all like "I really don't feel like running twice" and that negative talk is bad. You can beat someone much more fit than you if you run smarter and have a better mental state, but on the flip side you can lose to people less fit if your head isn't in it.

You have to enjoy what you do to reach the maximum benefits. And when I'm running once a day 6 days a week, it feels like each run is important and serves a big purpose, even the rest day seems important, and I only have to run the one time so the routes don't get too repetitive and I can get excited once a day for a run first thing in the morning to kick start the day.

That's just me though.

i'm like this. can spend all afternoon dreading a second run & trying to talk myself out of it (especially if i went pretty hard in the am).

in the end i always tell myself "have you ever felt WORSE at the end of a second run?". and the answer is no of course, the first mile or so can be rough, but 15min in i am feeling warmed-up/good and usually finish the 30-40min run feeling really refreshed & glad i got out the door.

pjb wrote:

malmo wrote:

A twenty mile run puts more strain on the body than two ten milers. But the twenty mile single is easier to recover from than the two ten milers.

¿Qué?

This isn't counterintuitive and malmo is right and 800 dude wrong. Covering twenty miles in one run gives you more time to recover than two runs that break up your recovery time. Or think of it this way: It's better to recover in single rest sessions than double rest sessions.

People, bear in mind that Not Austin 18 has a PR of 16:53. As a senior in high school, he's already figured out training, and in addition to regularly commenting on pros' training such as Rupp based on brief soundbites, he's here to help you, too.

Another aspect overlooked is time available for running in a single session can make doubles a better choice. For me, it's not a question of 8 vs 3+5, it's 8-10 (max) vs 6+6 (morning/lunch break) - in that case, in a week with 2 workouts and a long run, the doubles win. I've experimented a bit this year with my base and focussed on singles up to 60 MPW - but there is no way I can practically increase much beyond that with singles. Doubles make it simple to get more easy aerobic running in.

Crap Post wrote:

People, bear in mind that Not Austin 18 has a PR of 16:53. As a senior in high school, he's already figured out training, and in addition to regularly commenting on pros' training such as Rupp based on brief soundbites, he's here to help you, too.

haha I've found out what works for me. We're all individuals and need to find out what works best for us on an individual basis.

NotAustin18 wrote:

Crap Post wrote:

People, bear in mind that Not Austin 18 has a PR of 16:53. As a senior in high school, he's already figured out training, and in addition to regularly commenting on pros' training such as Rupp based on brief soundbites, he's here to help you, too.

haha I've found out what works for me. We're all individuals and need to find out what works best for us on an individual basis.

When was your last race?