If you could only run 4 miles a day, what would be the best running event for you?

800m, maybe the 1500m or Mile.

You could do great 800m or Mile workouts on four miles a day. Obviously a four-mile "long run" is a little short for a miler to build up their aerobic base, but it's fine for an 800m runner.

Were you running 30 mpw structured another way, or four miles seven days a week as the theoretical suggests? That's what I thought. The orig question was not mpw

xlev2 wrote:

Its 30 mpw. The person would have to be prepared to die in anything longer than 5K

lol. I did a 1:23 half on 21 miles a week and I'm still here 30 years later.

Gunder Hagg set the mile and 5000m records on about 25 mpw.

2 miles downhill, 2 miles up.

questioner of reasoning wrote:

Right, but 1:22 is a terrible time for a 4:10 guy. I'm not trying to insult you - it's pretty good for after ten years off and for only running 30 miles a week, and you have every reason to be happy with it - but it's really not good evidence that 28 mpw is sufficient volume for racing well at distances over 5k. If you'd run 1:08, you'd have a point.

If no cross training is allowed, I think the mile is the best bet for an endurance oriented person (maybe 3k or 5k in extreme cases, but I'm skeptical) and anything down to 60m depending on how speed oriented you are.

I was 17 and had three years of running behind me. Never more than 30 a week. I was about a 5 minute miler at the time that I did 1:23 and it was no more difficult than faster times achieved on more mileage.

The half seems to feel about the same no matter how much or little you run.

I ran 1:51 on about 12 miles a week.

NIce!!!!! Yep never said anything about the night....

10ks? U could a couple times a week run 4 miles at 1130pm and then 4 at 1201a

Bump

Just run baby 1.0 wrote:

xlev2 wrote:

Its 30 mpw. The person would have to be prepared to die in anything longer than 5K

I've done half marathon training on 30 miles per week. After 10 years off from running - former 4:10 miler - I ran 1:22 for the Half marathon on that mileage. It can be done.

Did you break it down to 4mpd?

400

questioner of reasoning wrote:

Right, but 1:22 is a terrible time for a 4:10 guy. I'm not trying to insult you - it's pretty good for after ten years off and for only running 30 miles a week, and you have every reason to be happy with it - but it's really not good evidence that 28 mpw is sufficient volume for racing well at distances over 5k. If you'd run 1:08, you'd have a point.

If no cross training is allowed, I think the mile is the best bet for an endurance oriented person (maybe 3k or 5k in extreme cases, but I'm skeptical) and anything down to 60m depending on how speed oriented you are.

The problem when this question comes up is that, ultimately, everyone assumes that a runner wants to run elite times off of 28 miles per week. Sure, you won't pop a 13:45 5k or go to the Olympic trials, but you might be able to enter your local 5k and win at least your age group in 17:30 or go run a 4:35 mile.

The standard for what is "good enough" performance-wise is highly subjective. If you can realize 90% of your potential off of this training, is it really worth the several extra miles each week to realize that last 10% of potential? For some people it is, but for others it is not.

Bump

whatitis wrote:

If you couldn't exceed running 4 miles a day, what would the best event for a person running this mileage?

Wow you must be my high school coaches. Also the 800 ended being everyones best event, so that one.

Bump

800

For me personally, probably 800. Although if alternate-aerobic work were allowed, then 1500.

But different things work for different people and I could see other people having sprints or 3000, even 5000, as their best.