Why do runners train so much and race so little

Ron Clarke essentially never did intervals or much anything that most would consider speed or pace work. But he raced pretty much every week. Bob Deines was 4th in the '68 Olympic Trials Marathon and twice 6th at Boston and did all of his training at about 8:00 pace. But he raced up to 50 times a year. So, yes, it could.

NHS wrote:

Marcus O'Sullivan has a Heart Rate/Threshold video lecture out there talking about the "engine" of a runner and how the tank has three leaks:

1) Speed work

2) Racing

3) Time off from running.

Clyde Hart said something similar but used a piggy bank as the engine.

When you have big names like these teaching conservatism it's no wonder many other lower level coaches follow their lead and teach anti-racing.

Except O'Sullivan managed to run sub 4 about 100 times.

How many mile races did Webb do?

H.E. Pennypacker wrote:

I don't know where you live, but where I am there are often a dozen races every weekend within a hour or so drive, many of them in the $20-$30 range. For a working person with a grown up job, that shouldn't present a hardship. Many spend more than that on coffee or eating out. For a sport that's supposed to be your passion, that should be doable.

If you're just too good for road races, I guess I can't help you?

The races that are $20 have the competitive value of a $5 race. The rest of it is charity fundraising. What other sport has sunk so low?

I am not too good for road races, but I am too stingy. I'm not going to pay two dimes just to run the equivalent of a paced time trial. Why can't there be a real local track club (not some elite travel squad) that meets once a week at a local track and races each other for no money at all? No cops, no course certification, no entry fees, just show up and have a race.

First of all, the vast majority of runners are recreational runners. Their goals for running vary, but are often not fully based upon things like competing, improving their time, etc.

Rec. runner goals include things like losing weight, attaining general health and fitness, socialization, etc.

These runners can achieve their goals without racing, so they do not always race. (or race much)

They might race a few times a year, perhaps a marathon or the big local 10k. But because they are not very good at racing, and do not get much out of it, there is little incentive to alter their daily routine and pay money to race.

For ~40 years I used to race a bunch, 20 times a year. But now that I am old and slower there is little incentive for me to race. The races are expensive, I have to travel, I have little chance of winning anything of value, I have too many t-shirts, I have nothing to prove, I will not set a PR, I do not need other runners around to push myself to hard efforts, etc.

Yeah this kind of stuff used to bother me so much with teams like Oklahoma State and Wisconsin. I'm not sure if it's still this way, but Oklahoma State's top guys used to literally only race two all out races in xc season: Big 12s and Nationals. That's it. You can't even use travel or budgetary constraints as excuses since the athletes would usually travel to the races even if they didn't actually race them. Sometimes they would run in them but just run as a pack and not go all out. I never understood it.

A lot of the pro groups are pretty bad too. Schumacher's guys get a lot of flack, but they're not the worst offenders. The NY/NJ guys go long periods without any racing and Rowland's guys seem to disappear for months, if not years at a time.

My daughter is an elite college runner. 4:22 1500m, 2:09 800m. She loves to race and would hate to be part of a college program that only trains. What kind of college experience is complete if you don't get excited about the next race. Who's running? Can I beat them? No sitting out and waiting for Nationals is worth it. She would rather compete every week and win. If she doesn't win the last race of the season, so be it.

I get suspicious of programs with champion runners that sit out the first 9 weeks of the season, then run one qualifying race before Nationals, then arrive eager to win and they do. How can the runners tolerate this strategy. It makes you wonder what their 'training' was. In a college division that has no testing procedure, it makes me very suspicious when the African runners suddenly perform for their school and win a championship.

People are afraid to routinely prove they have crappy training. But it's easy to have other excuses if you just emerge a few times a year.

The standard argument is that running is different now so things have to be done differently. But that's only true for the people actually winning.

For the rest it's like saying the 800 is now a sprint and applying that logic to a 2:20 guy.

For people with skill, mental fortitude and the will to break themselves racing frequently is not an option.

Thanks for responding. Are the 'people' you refer to only the coaches?

Others have commented that track is not like football or b'ball. You can hold back your talented runners and no funding is lost. The only one that benefits by always training is the coach. He has no failure because there was no talent on display.

I just think it is terrible for the athletes who love the thrill of competition. It must be demoralizing. If you don't race, how can training be satisfying?

My other point was whether coaches hold back runners for 9 weeks of the season because they are hiding something. I researched drugs like Anavar that will be clear from testing in 3 weeks. Are these being used early on to boost performance and call it training.

A Brit wrote:

Lots of races in the UK, and plenty of 'club' runners who compete ~30 times a year or more. This guy takes the biscuit I think!

http://www.thepowerof10.info/athletes/profile.aspx?athleteid=3369

Traditionally club runners would race lot in the UK. However, they would train through less important races. So you run every day do workouts Tues and Thur and race at weekend

This has to some extent been replaced by a new breed of runners who taper for parkrun and will only do workouts once a week. Seriously!

Then some more serious runners get obsessed with running a marathon and religiously follow some book such as P&D or which do not have much many races in the plan. I finished 40th in local races with a 33 10km time now you see people winning races in 36. There maybe more races but the standard of average club type runner has dropped despite more people running

There are loads of local races in most areas of uk plus parkrun to check fitness. There are also cheap races if you look around. Everything is a lot nearer in the UK so you don't have the problem of travel - apart from traffic and parking!

jamin wrote: In part because although there are so many races these days, there are so few legit ones. For example, there are about 20 in my city this weekend but almost all of them are color runs or untimed or short courses or have none of the local fast guys show up. You're paying $40 for a tempo run.

+1

Most of the local 5k races are "won" in 18:30 or slower. So other than hometown race, why would I fork over cash and travel, etc to run a "race" that I will win by 2 minutes? Not a race if no one is there to push you. I have much more fun battling it out for 20th place in a competitive race than by winning a race by 2 minutes.

As an example of declining standards in uk at least

I did 16:41 for a 5km road race about 25 years ago. No great shakes but just checked finished 55 and out of around 300 so it was not a big race.

Hovering around 16 mark would get you 10th-20th in lower standard local races. Same with 10km for around 33 mins you'd finish between 10-50th and that's before you enter non championship but classic races

If you couldn't go under 5 min miling for 5 miles + you would get nowhere near the front

Races are plentiful and competition has been difused widely among those races. With all of these charity events (not true races) it is hard to find ones that are truly competitive.

On the scholastic level, I think that coaches hold runners out of races and elect only to race once or twice in a season because coaches don't know how to integrate the lower key races with what is considered to be "traditional workouts" necessary for success at the end of the season. It is the coaches way of navigating around lack of know how.

Because racing hurts more than intervals.

Cost.

If I got comped entry I would run all the local 5 and 10ks. At $35 a pop, I do maybe 4 a year (one each season). The world major marathon cost plus travel costs was a lot, again, a once a year type thing.

bandit the race, just don't cross the finish line.

profits.