How fast can someone run who does 100 miles/week in singles at 6 minute pace?

Calculader wrote:

guestimator wrote:

4:20 mile

8:30 deuce

15:59 5k

33:10 10k

1:08 half

2:19 marathon

His 2 mile pace would be faster than his 1 mile pace?

Of course. When he runs that many miles at that pace, he needs one mile to warmup before cutting down to 410.

4:20 mile

8:30 deuce

15:59 5k

33:10 10k

1:08 half

2:19 marathon

So he can only run a 16min 5K but a 1:08 half and 2:19 marathon. Might want to rethink those. I assume the deuce is actually a 3K

HRE wrote:

I was pretty much doing that in my late 20s and managed at best 15:33/32:20/54:48(10 miles) 2:35"21 marathon. I also had a 66 400 meter in there somewhere.

You were massively over-training relative to times!

Try again Sir wrote:

4:20 mile

8:30 deuce

15:59 5k

33:10 10k

1:08 half

2:19 marathon

So he can only run a 16min 5K but a 1:08 half and 2:19 marathon. Might want to rethink those. I assume the deuce is actually a 3K

And his half time would be at a faster pace than his 10km as well.

Nah. Years later Peter Snell told me that you weren't running too hard as long as you could do your next day's run as planned and that was almost always the case. I never felt stressed. I modelled it on what Ron Clarke did. I never did any sort of interval work or anything and pretty much always felt good once I got going.

Why?

I would assume this person has an exceptionally low amount of fast twitch fibers. I would also assume this person is just averaging 6 minute pace throughout the week, not hitting 6 minute flat every mile of every day. My third assumption is that this person is very lean, probably about 5'5" 102 pounds. They started training seriously around the age of 14 after being good at soccer, but not incredible. They are now 22, have recently graduated from college, but don't want to get a "real" job. So, they moved to Flagstaff and are trying to see what they can do as a runner.

It works like this...

4:07

8:38

13:41

28:24

1:02:27

2:09:39

I really love how people use Lydiard´s guys to prove that it´s a good idea to run 100 mpw in singles, but you never see anyone using them to prove that it´s a good idea to have a hill phase with 5 hill sessions/week or daily track sessions during peaking.

Try again Sir wrote:

[quote]

4:20 mile

8:30 deuce

15:59 5k

33:10 10k

1:08 half

2:19 marathon

Revised 15:32 5k. No faster.

I guess we were very different physiological types. Very similar through 5000m/10000m/10 miles, but you would have been at least 10 minutes up the road on me in a marathon, but I could run 52 and change 400m.

I was always focused on the marathon and had the idea that if I was going to be able to run at a particular pace or effort level for a marathon I pretty much should be able to run at that pace for 10-15 miles every day.So when I was running 3:00 or so for marathons I was training around 7:00 pace, etc.

Eventually I did get into the idea of making the easy days really easy and just pushing 2-3 times a week. It made no difference in my performances as far as I could tell and I didn't like it.

We maybe were meant to meet in the middle. I managed a 57.8 quarter mile in high school when I couldn't break 6:00 for the mile, 59.8 in college when I couldn't break 5:00. As my distance times improved my 440 times slowed.

HRE wrote:

I was pretty much doing that in my late 20s and managed at best 15:33/32:20/54:48(10 miles) 2:35"21 marathon. I also had a 66 400 meter in there somewhere.

So you claim to have run more than a half marathon at just slightly slower than marathon pace every day?

Hogwash!

Such bs is just why you should never trust old runners who yap about their alleged training.

I believe HRE. My volume ceratinly was not his volume, but I did a lot of MP (and even faster) running regularly, in runs mostly ranging from eight to fifteen miles. I simply do not like slow running...and I do not like the super-fast stuff, either.

I think in that time range (i.e. 2:30+ marathoners) it would be possible to roll out at marathon pace every day. I couldn't imagine heading out the door at 5:15-5:20 pace though! Think of slower 3+ -3:30+ hr marathoners who can easily run their marathon pace most days...But it's not ideal. You probably could've run under 2:30 (considering you had a 32min 10km PR) if you just slowed down and ran 7min+ on most days and then actually did some workouts like Tempo Runs at 5:35-5:30 pace, 2-3 mile repeats at 5:25-5:20 pace and some steady negative split long runs going from 7min to sub 6min pace. Add in a couple mile repeat workouts or 1km's at 5:10-5:15 pace and you would've been golden!

HRE wrote:

I was always focused on the marathon and had the idea that if I was going to be able to run at a particular pace or effort level for a marathon I pretty much should be able to run at that pace for 10-15 miles every day.So when I was running 3:00 or so for marathons I was training around 7:00 pace, etc.

Eventually I did get into the idea of making the easy days really easy and just pushing 2-3 times a week. It made no difference in my performances as far as I could tell and I didn't like it.

We maybe were meant to meet in the middle. I managed a 57.8 quarter mile in high school when I couldn't break 6:00 for the mile, 59.8 in college when I couldn't break 5:00. As my distance times improved my 440 times slowed.

1) are there any top runners actually doing what this author recommends? If so, who is it?

2) any HR formula that does not take into account each individuals resting and Max HR is just a wild guess and is not scientific (although it might sound like it's scientific).

I really can't help what you believe but yes, I pretty much did that for years on end at progressively faster paces. It wasn't every day. Some days I was really dead and was much slower. It really wasn't that hard. I think Sage is partly right, I suspect that when you get to 5:30, 5:20, etc. pace you might not be able to do that every day. I have always just thought I was a crappy racer and probably didn't generally race as well as I trained.

Sage,

I did try stuff along the lines you mentioned for a while and as I said in the earlier post, it made no difference in my performances so I gave up on it as I really didn't like doing it.

To me, 2:35 is very good.

I do not have the breadth of experience you have, but I know what you mean in regard to training. I like bringing at least some pace to every run. The super hard then super easy routine is hard for me to do. I brought at least some pace to every run I can recall last year, and I do not ever remember being so tired that I could not run decently the next day. The experts would argue that it is tough on the muscles, tendons, and joints, and I gather I would accept that argument--although, day-to-day I felt fine.

In a certain way, injuries remain a mystery. They come about in an instant, and when one is feeling as well as on any other day.

I sometimes think that if I had a good swath of grass to run on, I might never get injured--some decent grass, and not some dirt/rock rutty trail that feels like some weird and uneven form of broken up pavement under my feet. I can find no grass to run on in my town. What a shame.

I know a guy who ran like this. Granted, he was in his early 40s but that's how he trained. I'm not sure if he ran 100 miles a week but he ran 80 for sure. He ran all his miles at around 6:00 pace. What was his marathon time? 2:43-2:46. And he ran several of them always with the same result. Never ran sub 17 in the 5000 or anything like that.