Anyone run a marathon using only high intensity intervals for training?

Bruce Kidd ran 2:20.18 in Atlanta in 1974. Sorry for my mistake.

I think he won the Aus champs for maybe the 4th time in 75. 76 I reckon he might have been around the 2.17 ish and missed selection.

I remember him racing in the late 70s early 80s but mostly shorter races. He did win an Adelaide marathon in the 80s but well over 2.20, he was in his mid or late 30s at the time.

O. Atkins wrote:

Bruce Kidd ran 2:20.18 in Atlanta in 1974. Sorry for my mistake.

Do you know if he changed his training for that race or kept on doing the sort of stuff you guys were doing with Foot?

Thanks. I'd have just added that to my post to Orville but want to avoid further confusion.

The majority of training we did while I was there with Bruce consisted of 4 or 5 days a week of intervals. We built our base with that program in 1961, 62. I left Toronto in October of 1964. I do not know that Bruce did after that time but we had been running more and more long runs as I left. What I think is that Bruce had operations on both feet. He also obtained an MA from the University of Chicago in 1968. I do not know how much he depended on intervals. I went on to do all intervals with Coach Igloi for about 20 months and a mix of workouts devised by John Bork for a year after that. When I started just running and fartlek as I felt and usually from home I found that all that background left me extremely strong. I continued to Run Marathons under 2:36 until age 38. Remember that I had a full time job and was really an hobby runner. It was fun!

I'm just wondering if the 13x1 mile plan in early 80s books works for sub 3:00. This is in lieu of tempo runs.

O. Atkins wrote:

I went on to do all intervals with Coach Igloi for about 20 months and a mix of workouts devised by John Bork for a year after that. When I started just running and fartlek as I felt and usually from home I found that all that background left me extremely strong. I continued to Run Marathons under 2:36 until age 38.

Yeah, so this seems like is should work for many, not 'just' an elite athlete. But it's obviously different than just high intensity.

Sure you can run a decent time doing the wrong training. But you can run a lot faster doing the right training.

pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:

O. Atkins wrote:

I went on to do all intervals with Coach Igloi for about 20 months and a mix of workouts devised by John Bork for a year after that. When I started just running and fartlek as I felt and usually from home I found that all that background left me extremely strong. I continued to Run Marathons under 2:36 until age 38.

Yeah, so this seems like is should work for many, not 'just' an elite athlete. But it's obviously different than just high intensity.

Not from what's been said so far, if you're considering intervals only, low mileage and a couple of days a week as per the OP. The ones that had marathon success either have lots of intervals on several days a week, or ran other workouts like long runs, tempos, etc.

HIIT increases mitochondria, glycogen storage, utilization of fat, muscle mass in the heart, and VO2Max on par with long distance running. All these improvement are necessary for a good marathon. What are athletes running 70, 80, and even 100 plus miles per week getting that someone maxing out on just intervals every week for maybe 20-30 miles total with some warmup and cool down miles not?

Is it just the mental strength being improved?

Mumbling In Mumbai wrote:

HIIT increases mitochondria, glycogen storage, utilization of fat, muscle mass in the heart, and VO2Max on par with long distance running. All these improvement are necessary for a good marathon. What are athletes running 70, 80, and even 100 plus miles per week getting that someone maxing out on just intervals every week for maybe 20-30 miles total with some warmup and cool down miles not?

Is it just the mental strength being improved?

But the challenge is getting enough of all those good things to carry your ass over 26.2 miles at a respectable clip, which is likely why those with reasonable success either throw in longer easier efforts or run a lot of intervals. It's not that it theoretically cannot be done, it's that a human body has to run those workouts.

Worked for this guy: http://www.outsideonline.com/1920971/brian-mackenzies-controversial-new-approach-marathon-training

Inside in D.C. Snow!!! wrote:

Worked for this guy:

http://www.outsideonline.com/1920971/brian-mackenzies-controversial-new-approach-marathon-training

My sarcasm detector isn't working perfectly but I think and hope you're being sarcastic.

HRE wrote:

Inside in D.C. Snow!!! wrote:

Worked for this guy:

http://www.outsideonline.com/1920971/brian-mackenzies-controversial-new-approach-marathon-training

My sarcasm detector isn't working perfectly but I think and hope you're being sarcastic.

No, I read the article and the guy made a personal best by 5 minutes on very little volume and mostly intervals. For sure, it didn't kill his time or endurance and he didn't reach complete depletion of glycogen.

Inside in D.C. Snow!!! wrote:

HRE wrote:

My sarcasm detector isn't working perfectly but I think and hope you're being sarcastic.

No, I read the article and the guy made a personal best by 5 minutes on very little volume and mostly intervals. For sure, it didn't kill his time or endurance and he didn't reach complete depletion of glycogen.

Neither do these people:

Inside in D.C. Snow!!! wrote:

HRE wrote:

My sarcasm detector isn't working perfectly but I think and hope you're being sarcastic.

No, I read the article and the guy made a personal best by 5 minutes on very little volume and mostly intervals. For sure, it didn't kill his time or endurance and he didn't reach complete depletion of glycogen.

He actually did long runs and tempos if you actually read the article, and had calf cramps for the last 5 miles of his marathon.

This guy wrote:

Inside in D.C. Snow!!! wrote:

No, I read the article and the guy made a personal best by 5 minutes on very little volume and mostly intervals. For sure, it didn't kill his time or endurance and he didn't reach complete depletion of glycogen.

He actually did long runs and tempos if you actually read the article, and had calf cramps for the last 5 miles of his marathon.

Yeah did a few 18's, but still kept a very low volume and the main focus was intervals. Calf cramps isn't glycogen depletion. And he did improve his time and felt much more rested going into the race.

I guess not as pure as the OP was looking for, but close.

Inside in D.C. Snow!!! wrote:

This guy wrote:

He actually did long runs and tempos if you actually read the article, and had calf cramps for the last 5 miles of his marathon.

Yeah did a few 18's, but still kept a very low volume and the main focus was intervals. Calf cramps isn't glycogen depletion. And he did improve his time and felt much more rested going into the race.

I guess not as pure as the OP was looking for, but close.

Cramps or not, the point is he is not particularly fast. You can do all sorts of things wrong and still run 3:39. I think the OP was looking for examples of people actually somewhat fulfilling their potential.