Malmo, how long before I get the effects of base?

malmo wrote:

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

Jim Spivey didn't follow it up with another 2 miler that evening.

If the OP is doing 50 a week in doubles, where are the productive runs?

It takes a year at consistent higher mileage to see significant results.

I ran 4:50 on 40 mpw.

I ran 4:30 on 60-70 mpw over a year later.

I did this at age 30-31.

Cool, thanks for the info. I've worked very hard on my base. I want to be the ace of base.

an Objectivist wrote:

In order to be productive, exercise must be demanding. A workout that is well within one's capability to handle will not stimulate the body to improve. Slipping in easy junk miles just for the sake of reaching some arbitrary mpw target is of no value.

You have no idea what constitutes good training. Don't you realize that elite runners gain efficiency by often repeating a familiar route with less effort?

Repetition improves skill. Do you not understand that basic concept?

Have you ever noticed how the fittest and healthiest kids play? It's kind of an all day long thing till after dark and Mommy calls them in for supper.

At least it was back in the day......

There is always this:

http://www.scienceofrunning.com/2009/10/is-9mi-once-better-than-45mi-twice.html

and this:

http://jap.physiology.org/content/98/1/93

malmo wrote:

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?

Who won the race?

I can't imagine how annoyed Malmo is by these people who worship the "No doubles unless running > 50 miles a week mantra." I've run doubles at all sorts of different mileage. It makes you fit, quick. Paraphrasing Jack Daniels, there are huge spikes in hormonal benefits that take place within the first 30 minutes of all exercise. The benefit barely increases beyond half hour. The two mile run is delicious in a big week of training. I recommend it to anyone, especially a high school runner who has been slogging out hour plus runs in the summer heat. Whenever I do them, I tend to hit a range of paces that includes absolutely hammering it home. Two miles just feels so easy mentally that the body almost always feels good.

Three and four mile doubles are great as well. Nothing like getting a half hour run in every 12 hours. It teaches us that we were made to run. I don't know how someone can read SOM and think it can fail if followed. Maybe some people are too anal to feel the kung-fu of the run!

I've had my differences with malmo, but not in this thread. Doubles make a difference if you're running 30 miles a week, much less 50.

---------------------------------------------------------

OP, I frankly find it hard to believe that you *actually* did Summer of Malmo. Were you on the track with buddies, once or twice a week, throughout the summer?

"'Summer of malmo' revolves around a relaxed commitment from a group to meet just twice a week for an organized workout. ... Once a week meet for a tempo run on the track of four to six miles. The other workout is four to six by 1200m to 2000m with one lap jog, OR 16 to 24 by 150m to 300m with FULL RECOVERY - that's a really slow jog. Walk if you have to. (You determine what you want to do; these are just recommendations.)"

http://www.bunnhill.com/bobhodge/rtp3.htm

lease wrote:

Doubles make a difference if you're running 30 miles a week, much less 50.

The difference with doubling at 30 mpw (?????!!!!!) would be to make ALL of your runs pathetically short.

Would you really do 10 3-mile runs rather than 5 six-milers?

Hilarious.

Doubles, high mileage, training schedules etc...these are things to be experienced...not debated...at least until they have been lived.

Why do you assume he means 10 3 mile runs?

I started running doubles at 25 miles per week by adding a 2 mile run in the morning. It made a dramatic difference. 2 miles became 3. 3 miles became 4. 25 miles became 35...then 45..then 55.

I went from 6th-7th man on my hs team, suddenly to 12th at a major invite involving the top MD, DC., and VA teams.

Start small and work your way up. Not a difficult concept to understand unless you simply don't want to.

now you're just being silly wrote:

lease wrote:

Doubles make a difference if you're running 30 miles a week, much less 50.

The difference with doubling at 30 mpw (?????!!!!!) would be to make ALL of your runs pathetically short.

Would you really do 10 3-mile runs rather than 5 six-milers?

Hilarious.

Except...that you'd be so fresh, all the time, that you might feel inspired to up your total mileage a bit, say to 35 or 40mpw.

Or you might find that you were running at a somewhat faster pace, with absolutely no increase in effort.

And, because you weren't practicing "being tired" (while running) so much, slogging through singles, you might find that your mechanics improved.

And if you were coming off a layoff, you might find that you got into shape quickly, while avoiding strains and other injury.

But, as usual, different things work for different people.

Update. Ran 30 second 3200 PR this week. Feel like I am a long way off from peaking. The base is taking effect.

I heard the University of Colorado XC doesn't do doubles. are these guys any good?

Actually most of Colorado runners do a second run. Wetmore himself has said that he would prefer them to double but doesn't require it due to time restraints of college life.

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.

Here's a book that addresses this issue. I suggest you read it (there are others, but this is a good one):

For those who follow Lydiardesque training programs, two ways to minimize loss of basic speed during base training are 1) to do intense weight training hitting all major muscle groups year round (Baye.com is a great place to start learning about this), and 2) to do strides 2-3 times per week during base training.

This is the actually Sloppy Joe OP the last two post haven't been by me... Some guy loves acting like me which is really annoying. I'm not so worried anymore because I ran 18:10 yesterday at first meet. I should have went sub 18 but I went out way to quick. You guys think I could go sub 17 by the end of the year? Last years P.R was 17:34.

Comments about "accumulative aerobic" , "all running matters", "training must be difficult", .....

Young runners cant see the forest thru the trees. They are so focused on today tomorrow this season or next season they don't see the big picture. What happens in a race today was determined not only by recent training but also training you did months and years ago.

Training adaptations occur all the time not just in response to a single bout. Run 5200 miles in year and your body responds accordingly, likewise run a single bout be it intervals or long run and your body responds accordingly.

Doubles allow two things: improved recovery while still maintaining or increasing overall volume (run 5/5 vs 10 when necessary for overall recovery), increased overall volume when a long single would be too hard to recover from (5/10 vs 15).

All running provides some benefit, even if it's just weight management.

I was never near malmo's pedigree but I did the best with the hand I was dealt by looking ahead and having faith in my training.

The OP asked when he should see benefits of base...they are already there and will show themselves even when you aren't looking such as in the ability to now do more volume in season more intervals more volume next off season and the off season after that and so on.

Alan