Malmo,
This summer I built to 50 miles a week from 34 using SOM. I recently did a time trial and ran 5:25! I have had 2 speed endurance workouts this far and I ran 4:57 last spring. This is about the same time I posted last year at our time trial. Why is this? How long before I regain my speed and start running somewhat decen times?
Oh btw I had no one to pace me on this time trial.
I was wondering the same thing. Ran 50-60 all summer, started off well, and now other people with less summer mileage are closing in and surpassing me, and I am running slower than last season despite a way bigger base. Will I get much faster as I incorporate more speed work, or am I already tapped out and everyone else is just beginning?
You still have lots of time until the big meets start, summer training is to get you ready for the faster fall training, not necessarily to get you fast. listen to your coach and don't freak out you guys will be fine.
How do u bounce back from injuries when you haven't even hit your base yet?
Someone posted a good question: Why train two-a-days when you are only at 50 mpw. That is 7 miles per day (or less assuming that you have any days over 7 miles).
What do you do, break your day into 3.5 miles and 3.5 miles? OR do you go 5 and 2?
50 mpw is, what, FIVE measly hours of running? That is not exactly heavy training by the standards of any sport. You definitely shouldn't break your daily hour into two parts when you're training so lightly.
I don't know what that post got deleted.
6min miles? nope.
If he runs 7:00 pace, 50, miles takes 5h50m.
If he runs even 8:00 pace, it takes just 6h20m.
Try 6h 40m.......
The point is doubles are better at any mileage.
The fact that you can't do simple math just supports the idea that you don't know what you are talking about.
Malmo 2008
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=2486857
It's as simple as: everyone I know who's competitive runs doubles. This has been that way ever since high school, way back in 1970.
The real question is, if you are serious about running, why are you doing singles?
Malmo 2006
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=907089&page=3
asv0_UYVUP wrote:
The point is doubles are better at any mileage.
The fact that you can't do simple math just supports the idea that you don't know what you are talking about.
Malmo 2008
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=2486857It's as simple as: everyone I know who's competitive runs doubles. This has been that way ever since high school, way back in 1970.
The real question is, if you are serious about running, why are you doing singles?
Malmo 2006
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=907089&page=3
Michael Musyoki ran singles and beat malmo's ass in Philadelphia in 82.
asv0_UYVUP wrote:
The point is doubles are better at any mileage.
The fact that you can't do simple math just supports the idea that you don't know what you are talking about.
Malmo 2008
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=2486857It's as simple as: everyone I know who's competitive runs doubles. This has been that way ever since high school, way back in 1970.
The real question is, if you are serious about running, why are you doing singles?
Malmo 2006
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=907089&page=3
Hey coach, how about putting things into perspective. This is a kid with a 4;57 mile for a best time and runs 5:30 alone after a summer of running. Let's not get silly here. Doubles are not going to help this kid one bit.
Since I don't know anything about this poster, I wouldn't try and tell him what to do specifically, but one thing I would strongly suggest is that he start getting on a track and learning how to do pace runs. Repeats 400's at 75 second pace with a 200 jog would be a good start and then gradually work his way down where he is doing them eventually at 70 seconds, so he knows what a 4:40 mile pace is all about. He probably should start off with maybe 7-8 reps and then up it to 10 before then dropping the pace down from 75 to maybe 73-74 and eventually to 70 as he gets more fit. This will take weeks and maybe even a month or two.
Young athletes don't know pace and going out on the roads with no clue as to how fast they are running, other than medium slow to slow on most days is not going to make him a good distance runner.
I strongly believe there is just too much emphasis on staying off the track and doing all these tempo and threshold runs without any clue. Tempo and threshold runs are for more advanced runners, in my opinion. He needs to be supervised and taught how to become efficient and rhythmic with his running. As he matures, then he can go out and get some good miles in and eventually even do the doubles you are suggesting.
yeah...a kid who ran sub 5 shouldnt be running 5:20s in a time trial. heck, i wouldnt be 25-30 seconds off my mile PR if i stopped running for a month or two.
how did you pace that 5:25 OP? and did you do any workouts before that time trial?
also, nobody should be doubling at 50 mpw. unless by doubling you mean adding a bike ride or a swim.
just toughen up, go run an hour every day, and start doing harder workouts.
Sloppy Joe wrote:
Malmo,
This summer I built to 50 miles a week from 34 using SOM. I recently did a time trial and ran 5:25! I have had 2 speed endurance workouts this far and I ran 4:57 last spring. This is about the same time I posted last year at our time trial. Why is this? How long before I regain my speed and start running somewhat decen times?
Oh btw I had no one to pace me on this time trial.
I don't know the specifics of what you're doing but simply saying "I did SOM" doesn't really tell me much. Most people who say they did SOM didn't really do it, they merely did what they thought it to be.
SOM is in-between season training to get you ready for the real cross country training in the fall, without physical or mental burnout.
With that said, going from 34 mpw to 50 mpw alone you should show improvement over the Summer, by virtue of cumulative aerobic development and (especially) physical maturity.
Give me your email address so that I can see exactly what you did this Summer and perhaps I'll be able to comment on it. I don't know what "(2) speed endurance workouts" means? it doesn't really sound like you've actually done SOM?
To answer your question in the title, building base is a continuous process. You get the benefits of base both immediately and at some point in the future. The problem here is that a lot of young runners understand base as something that happens in phases. Their thinking is "I do base now, for some point down the line." Frequently some point down the line never comes because of it. They don't think of it as a continuous process.
I've seen threads here where guys say that they've been injured in March or April, so they're going to skip the rest of their track season and concentrate on "building base" for the fall. That's a complete waste of the immediate. Running is a competitive sport. In sports everything isn't ideal. You play the hand you are dealt, not the ones that you want. Get in the game and play...NOW. Worry about the future in the future.
reed wrote:
also, nobody should be doubling at 50 mpw.
Flat out wrong.
your mileage may vary wrote:]
Michael Musyoki ran singles and beat malmo's ass in Philadelphia in 82.
You FAILED miserably. Why bother trying?
Do not hold the extreme anomaly up as the model for how to train for maximum performance.
Having barely jogged for 10 months, and backing out of a scheduled surgery date in June to repair a torn plantar fascia, I began training --carefully. Four and a half months later I was right on the tail of one of the top distance runners in the world at Philly.
Mr Musyoki, future Olympic silver medalist in the 10k, supposedly "gifted" just by being a Kenyan and a lifetime at altitude. He had years of uninterrupted training/racing behind him, yet he could barely beat a white guy with a lame foot and only four months of training?
Which one of the two had more a more productive training strategy - the guy who trained like every other world class runner, or the 5 sigma anomaly?
All running has value. You're looking for excuses, no matter how lame they are, you're going to latch on to them. That is the polar opposite of the Culture of Excellence.
I started running doubles when I was just running 25 miles a week at age 15. Just two miles. When from 6th-7th man on the team to 2nd-4th. It made a huge difference.
Jim Spivey was known for his 2 mile am runs.
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=907089&page=3
These very short doubles have very little value. It's quite something to do 10/3 on a double day, but 3/3 isn't. It's not the length of a single run that is too short, it's the combination of both that makes little sense.
As for the 'when' part of the question: at the end of the training cycle you might be able to feel it working, not right away. Also, time trials with no previous speedwork can be off by a large margin.
Keep telling yourself that. Reality is a different horse than opinion.
Saying "all running has value" shows that you have zero awareness of the basic requirements for productive exercise.
If you want to be Objective, tell me who has more data for their position? Your scientists trying to define "productive exercise" or thousands of coaches and athletes over more than 60 years?
an Objectivist wrote:
Saying "all running has value" shows that you have zero awareness of the basic requirements for productive exercise.
Humor me. What are "The basic requirements for productive exercise"?