Optimal way to double: shorter run in am or pm?

I'm pretty stiff when I get up now, so to pull off doubles with a longer AM I'd need quite a while to loosen up if I did that with a 9-5 job.

When I did run doubles I'd do 5 AM consistently. PM would be anywhere from 5-10. Interval workouts were always PM (partly because that's when my training group met). Sunday long runs where usually early afternoon.

Nowawadys I do singles in the morning because that's the only time my family can't bug me ... but workouts are brutal.

Learn time management wrote:

txRUNNERgirl wrote:

Pro runners get to sleep in, run long in the late morning, sleep some more, run again in the afternoon, then go home to their families.

The rest of us have to get up early for work, earlier to squeeze in a short run if doing doubles (or squeeze it in at lunch), work all day, then do the most we can in the evenings/weekends and typically sacrifice family time and/or sleep to do so.

Elite runners only spend 2-3 hours a day training. You can easily fit this in with a full-time job, and many do.

Even the ones who run full time don't sleep in because they aren't lazy like you.

Shorter used to get up around 9:30.

I almost always do my main run/workout in the morning and a relaxed run in the afternoon, but I have noticed that I run a bit faster in the afternoon on the rare occasion that I miss my morning workout, and often my relaxed run feels easier at the same pace as a longer morning run.

Jeff on a Starship wrote:

Learn time management wrote:

Elite runners only spend 2-3 hours a day training. You can easily fit this in with a full-time job, and many do.

Even the ones who run full time don't sleep in because they aren't lazy like you.

Shorter used to get up around 9:30.

Right. I live in Beaverton, so I see when people run. It's typically 9 am. I don't mean they sleep in until noon, but to me this is sleeping in compared the the average person who works at 8 and has to run at 5:30 or 6 if they do a morning run.

As for the "elite runners only spend 2-3 hours a day training," I'm talking about *professional* runners like Hasay, who don't have an outside job.

txRUNNERgirl wrote:

Jeff on a Starship wrote:

Shorter used to get up around 9:30.

Right. I live in Beaverton, so I see when people run. It's typically 9 am. I don't mean they sleep in until noon, but to me this is sleeping in compared the the average person who works at 8 and has to run at 5:30 or 6 if they do a morning run.

As for the "elite runners only spend 2-3 hours a day training," I'm talking about *professional* runners like Hasay, who don't have an outside job.

If you don't wake up early you don't see all those who run early.

Hasay still only spends 3 hours, maximum training.

txRUNNERgirl wrote:

Jeff on a Starship wrote:

Shorter used to get up around 9:30.

Right. I live in Beaverton, so I see when people run. It's typically 9 am. I don't mean they sleep in until noon, but to me this is sleeping in compared the the average person who works at 8 and has to run at 5:30 or 6 if they do a morning run.

As for the "elite runners only spend 2-3 hours a day training," I'm talking about *professional* runners like Hasay, who don't have an outside job.

It was also about 11 before he did his morning run. Nenow was the same way.

Learn time management wrote:

to me this is sleeping in compared the the average person who works at 8 and has to run at 5:30 or 6 if they do a morning run.

If you don't wake up early you don't see all those who run early.

[/quote]

I do when I double, at 5:30 or 6 am, as mentioned above. The only runners I see that early are not pros. No one runs that early unless they have to.

This past summer I did my longer run at 7 AM just to avoid the heat (though 70 degrees and 90%+ humidity isn't exactly pleasant), and then a shorter run around 4 PM.

Like others have said, I think it depends on the individual and their schedule. I'm sure there is some science to suggest that one time is more beneficial over the other (I would guess shorter mornings/longer evenings) but I prefer not to overthink things and just put the work in.

top of hte mornin to ya wrote:

morning people

longer AM

shorter PM

night folk

shorter AM

longer PM

Sounds about right.

Plus weightlifters advise late afternoon work-outs, when (they say) testosterone and therefore performance is at a peak. But I guess for runners harder work-outs in the AM allows our hormones to settle out for longer before we sleep.

Once I had kids I began doing many workouts at 6am. Rarely did I have a day where I was eager to run the workout, however, once I was through an interval or two then things generally went fine.

It's harder mentally to run a workout in the early AM (before 8), but that doesn't mean the training benefit is any less. In fact, I'd argue you get a slight mental benefit from pushing yourself to run hard when you don't feel like it. Part of training is callusing your mind and body to pain. Running hard when you don't want to run hard helps achieve that goal.

Ideally I'd sleep until 7 or 8 and run at 8:30 or 9:30 with a second run around 4 or 5. Good luck fitting that into a typical work schedule.

i usually go by weather and time which usually means the easier run is in the morning and the harder in the afternoon. This also works cause your legs sort of "wake up" as the day goes on so my aftertoon workouts are better thn if they were in the morning.

another thing to consider is when will yu be racing. If you are doing morning races it may be beneficial to learn to run hard in the morning and recover in afternoon

I think the question is too simple. It can also depend on the objective.

Examples:

Recovery day - AM 60' easy / PM 60' easy

Moderate running - AM 80' moderate / PM 40' easy

Workout day - AM 40' easy / Workout

Seriously mate? wrote:

If I had unlimited free time like a professional athlete I would run the longer workout morning or mid-morning and the shorter workout in the afternoon/evening. I like getting the majority of the work done earlier in the day.

Real world: I do my shorter run before work and my longer run after work. I don't enjoy getting up super early to run.

I agree with this. For athletes in general, individual or team sports, during morning workouts they are prone to be less receptive to technical components. They are still waking up and, even if they were excellent early birds, their bodies and nervous system are not fully synced. That is why many pro athletes use the mornings to put on volume work or just "uncomplicated" exercise.

Afternoons you are at the peak of your mental/physical activity mix, so any work towards perfecting technique usually takes place at this time. Now, in the case of running a shorter/longer run, it depends on what you want to achieve with each run. If longer runs are only for purposes of logging the miles, mornings are ideal. If pacing and in-race simulation is needed, maybe afternoons will work better. On the other hand, if short runs are intended to practice top-end or other speed-specific components, it may be best to do it in the afternoons.

wejo wrote:

The Jordan Hasay quite of day made me think about whether it matters if you double with the shorter run in the AM or PM. I think most people who do doubles do one shorter run and one longer run. At the very least if they are working out one run is usually easier than the other.

Anyone have any evidence if the one way is more optimal than the other. I am not a morning person so my am run was always easier.

I do not know of any peer reviewed research that has looked at it. Personally, not being a morning runner, I did my first run at noon, typically an easy 4 to 5 miles. I did this M - F. My second workout was at 5pm.

txRUNNERgirl wrote:

I do when I double, at 5:30 or 6 am, as mentioned above. The only runners I see that early are not pros. No one runs that early unless they have to.

It's not just work schedules that incline people to run at 5:30 or 6. Heat & humidity force many top level talents to run extra early...

wejo wrote:

The Jordan Hasay quite of day made me think about whether it matters if you double with the shorter run in the AM or PM. I think most people who do doubles do one shorter run and one longer run. At the very least if they are working out one run is usually easier than the other.

Anyone have any evidence if the one way is more optimal than the other. I am not a morning person so my am run was always easier.

Science has shown that people run faster times in the evening.

Take this for what it's worth. Some PR's are in the morning, but scientists insist that the human body is optimal after the evening hours

If you are running 140 to 150 miles a week, it's easier to get 13 to 17 right off the bat in the morning.

I'd like to see how Levins split his 160-180 mile weeks.

OLD SMTC SOB wrote:

I do not know of any peer reviewed research that has looked at it. Personally, not being a morning runner, I did my first run at noon, typically an easy 4 to 5 miles. I did this M - F. My second workout was at 5pm.

I didn't want to hijack the thread - but - what is the "best" amount of time between the two runs? Because of my schedule I end up mixing it up and will do one of three things: (1) run morning then at lunch; (2) lunch then after work; or (3) morning then after work.

It's somewhat weather dependent and time of year, but I think overall a shorter time between the runs is better for me (noon then after work). I also always do easy and then hard, so the first run feels somewhat like a warm up for my second harder run when there is a shorter break between. (It's also a time issue as after work I don't feel rushed to get to work so I can do a longer run without feeling stress.)

Where I lived at the time, weather wasn't much of a factor (SOCAL)...and it was much easier for me to slog the hour to 90 min freeway commute in the AM, work till noon, run then eat lunch. Then the big run at 5pm (either track work or an easy 6 miles, depending on the day. The noon run really warmed me up for the later run at 5pm, worked better for me all the way around.