then why are ultra distance runners not the best 5k runners?
People who run 100 mile races should easily run a fast 10k
but their not.So,does that prove high mileages doesn't make one fast.
then why are ultra distance runners not the best 5k runners?
People who run 100 mile races should easily run a fast 10k
but their not.So,does that prove high mileages doesn't make one fast.
No.
End of thread.
Yes, it does, but you have to compare apples to apples. Someone running 60 mpw with three fast workouts may well run much faster in a race than someone with 100 mpw all very slow, but someone running 100 mpw with three fast workouts will crush the 60 mpw three fast workout runner, other things being equal.
There is a little thing called talent that has a say in this argument.
jjjjjj wrote:
Yes, it does, but you have to compare apples to apples. Someone running 60 mpw with three fast workouts may well run much faster in a race than someone with 100 mpw all very slow, but someone running 100 mpw with three fast workouts will crush the 60 mpw three fast workout runner, other things being equal.
so,it's a combo of slow easy runs and fast short runs.So,if a person
only does 100 mpw slow easy runs they would be slower than a
person who does 100 mpw of slow and fast runs.
I ounce did about 6 weeks of 100 mpw just to see if I could do it. I followed a Lydiard schedule as best I could and mixed in some faster stuff as I acclimated to the distance. The next racing season was PR central, even with backing down to 60-80mpw. The boost in fitness was substantial.
so,if you took a 32 minute 5k runner and had him run 100 mpw
doing both easy long runs and fast short runs for 3 months
would his time improve?
of course getting a 32 minute 5k runner to agree to running a
100 mpw would be the hard part.They most likely would drop
out after the first week.
do you literally know nothing about training philosophy?
jjjjjj wrote:
Yes, it does, but you have to compare apples to apples. Someone running 60 mpw with three fast workouts may well run much faster in a race than someone with 100 mpw all very slow, but someone running 100 mpw with three fast workouts will crush the 60 mpw three fast workout runner, other things being equal.
No. And I can use myself as an example:
Ran 3 (looking to PR) track 10,000m races on the same track and same time of year over a 3-year period (one for each year). During the build up phase to each of those races I averaged weeks of 80, 90, and 100+. The total PR time between race 1 and race 3 (3 years later) was a total of...7 seconds.
And the only reason I was able to PR in subsequent years, was due to running more conservatively in the very first 10k (because, you know, I was only doing 80 mile weeks). If I'd gone out at the same pace in that first 10k I'd of ran faster than in either of 2 future races.
Your assertion that, everything else being equal, higher mileage will automatically make you run faster is a generalization.
Find the mileage that works for you.
I think running 100 miles or more per week has made at least one faster.
More than one, actually.
Just not all.
but isn't there a selective bias of people who are running 100 mpw.
Excluding ultra distance and hobby jogger marathon runner.
People who are running 100 mpw are the fast runners.
I never heard of a 35 minute 5k runner running 100 mpw.
the 100 mpw runner are the 15 minute or faster 5k runner.
People who are fast to began with are more likely to run 100 mpw.
People who are slower are more likely not going to run 100 mpw.
One spring, in HS, I was an 11:00 3200m runner.
I ran 95 mpw for 10 weeks that summer.
In the fall, I was a 10:00 3200m runner.
I did almost no running faster or slower than 6:00 to 6:30 pace.
Was this the best way for me to train, NO. Did it work, YES!
A person who joins a cross country team,does good their first
race and enjoy it is more likely going to run 100 mpw
than a hobby jogger who runs in a local 5k race.
selective bias
hobby wrote:
but isn't there a selective bias of people who are running 100 mpw.
Excluding ultra distance and hobby jogger marathon runner.
People who are running 100 mpw are the fast runners.
I never heard of a 35 minute 5k runner running 100 mpw.
the 100 mpw runner are the 15 minute or faster 5k runner.
People who are fast to began with are more likely to run 100 mpw.
People who are slower are more likely not going to run 100 mpw.
I started running over 100 miles a week when my three and six mile times were over 18:00 and 38:00. Eventually I got down to 5 and 10km times of 15:33 and 32:20. In the years when people commonly ran 100 or more miles a week lots of us did that. Believe it or not, a lot of us who were slow thought that we needed to train AS MUCH OR MORE than the people who were beating us if we were to have any chance of challenging them. I can't think of any activity where people who are short on talent get better at the activity by doing less of it than people who seem to have some talent.
28:00? 30:00? 35:00?I ran just under 100 miles a week for 8 weeks and my 10k PR went from 31:56 to 29:14.Am I fast?
hobby wrote:
then why are ultra distance runners not the best 5k runners?
People who run 100 mile races should easily run a fast 10k
but their not.So,does that prove high mileages doesn't make one fast.
lknsadf07w54 wrote:
One spring, in HS, I was an 11:00 3200m runner.
I ran 95 mpw for 10 weeks that summer.
In the fall, I was a 10:00 3200m runner.
I did almost no running faster or slower than 6:00 to 6:30 pace.
Was this the best way for me to train, NO. Did it work, YES!
Proves my point.People who are fast and enjoy running
are more likely going to run 100 mpw than people who are slower
so,100 mpw makes one faster suffer from selective bias.
HRE wrote:
I started running over 100 miles a week when my three and six mile times were over 18:00 and 38:00. Eventually I got down to 5 and 10km times of 15:33 and 32:20. In the years when people commonly ran 100 or more miles a week lots of us did that. Believe it or not, a lot of us who were slow thought that we needed to train AS MUCH OR MORE than the people who were beating us if we were to have any chance of challenging them. I can't think of any activity where people who are short on talent get better at the activity by doing less of it than people who seem to have some talent.
but your not a typical 32 minute 5k runner.You and other 100 mpw runner are way faster,enjoy running more
than the average local 5k runner.I've never seen any 35 minute 5k runner even attempt a 100 mpw. The only people that do run 100 mpw are people who are fast and enjoy running.
Most fast people enjoy racing fast, not the 100 mile weeks that lead to that.
If one runs 100mpw @6min/mile pace, it takes 10 hours a week. If another runs @12min/mile pace, it takes 20 hours. The two runners are covering the same distance, but the second runner is spending twice as much time. And there are higher chances of injury or exhaustion because of that.
That's why you normally don't hear about really slow people running a high mileage.
hobby wrote:
so,if you took a 32 minute 5k runner and had him run 100 mpw
doing both easy long runs and fast short runs for 3 months
would his time improve?
of course getting a 32 minute 5k runner to agree to running a
100 mpw would be the hard part.They most likely would drop
out after the first week.
It is going to take at least a couple of years for a 32min 5k jogger to safely build up to a consistent 100mpw.