A runner absolutely must obtain the ability to train at 120-150 (or more) miles per week by the peak of the career in or

Good question bro. I was kinda wondering myself.

JK is a fool if he honestly believes his own assertion. And he wants people to pay him for his coaching expertise? Training for JK, after figuring in the medical expenses, could break one financially.

You are blaspheming against the BroJo's God. HOW DARE YOU!!

The truth shames many into modesty whereas for others, it sets them free.I am sure that even the BroJo's don't believe that garbage assertion.

Skinny wrote:

You are blaspheming against the BroJo's God. HOW DARE YOU!!

Geez! Is this going to be yet another Coe vs. Lydiard thread?

Good one PR, and maybe that will be some of the bent of this thread. OK, fine, it?s been gone over before. But what would you prefer, another Coe vs Lydiard(Snell) thread, or another one of these threads:

 Ritz vs Webb

 Paula is on Drugs/Paula is clean

 Galloway sucks

 Hottest girl/guy in running

 Running is for losers (Mr Chest)

 Jason is God, Jason sucks, Jason is insane, Jason is not really Jason, etc, etc, etc

 Hodgie says running lots of miles is the only way/ Hodgie is old and boring/ Don?t knock the great runners on this board, show some respect!

 Stanford Sucks

 Colorado and Wetmore suck

 US runners suck

 All Africans are on drugs

 Africans are genetically superior?or are they just harder workers?????

 Some political thread

 Some College Sports thread

 Some drinking thread

You pick one, and I will start THAT thread just for you since you are bored with the Coe/Lydiard discussion!! (doesn?t sound so boring anymore, huh? :-) )

I learned a long time ago not to use the word "absolutely" or the phrase "there are no exceptions..." when discussing training. I've seen too many different runners who respond differently to the same training stimuli.

You know how Wejo was thinking about starting separate forums? I think that you've provided the template for the "Been There, Done That" forum. That would leave the "Fresh Ideas and News" forum uncluttered.

Let me throw this theory out there and get some input: I believe, through being a student of physiology and a long-time runner and coach, that high milage usually brings about an improvement in performance. However, for many, what is gained aeobically, is off-set by biomechanical problems. Because of this, what I have seen is that while there is a rise in performance level, it is usually somewhat short-term, and many times leaves the athlete with long-term problems. Example: Bob Kennedy was low/moderate milage in college. He upped things post-collegiately, had a big breakthrough, and shortly after, seemed to fall off the face of the earth. There are many, many similar examples. While his or any others problems might not be directly linked to the milage, possibly they are more than we know. Please give me some input, but please save the 'I do it this way so it must be the right way' rhetoric we get so often. Thanks for your thoughts on this.

Isn't WEJO an example of this, save for this website?

Shoot,

I thought all you had to do to run fast and know it all was to go to Columbia

DougC,

Do you absolutely never use the word absolutely?

Bob Kennedy "seemed to fall off the face of the earth"? Isn't he the most consistent US 5K runner of all-time? I think his performance most recently suffered from an injury that occured during a car accident... not from training.

Doug, Kennedy is just one example, but didn't his marks began falling (for him, still tough by American standards-- 13:teens)about a year after his sub 13 and increase in milage. I thought the auto accident set back just his latest comeback. Either way, that was just the most prominent example I could think of off the top of my head.

JK is absolutely right. I like a man who pulls no punches and tells it like it is.

DougC wrote:

I think his performance most recently suffered from an injury that occured during a car accident... not from training.

Ya, and if he hadn't been running so much he wouldn't be so tired and he wouldn't have needed to drive. He could have run and he never would have been hurt. Duh.

I would pay for JK's coaching. Seriously. I need someonee to coach me.

go high go low. run run run very far very slow....run no less than 150 miles a week...with high low concept...run slow. whent it is time to run fast, we will run fast but in meantime run high and run low and run really really far otherwise you will always suck

I still don't see what is wrong with getting in "only" 12 or so weeks of 90 miles a week, and then doing insane interval sessions like 3 x 2 mile in 8:50 with 5:00rec or 5 x 1000m in 2:34 with 2:00rec. Yes, that is the type of training I formerly did as a Sub 28:40/8:00/13:50 guy. It seemed to get it done for me. Just my opinion, but I also was still able to keep my miles at 85-90 during this training.