Weekly Mileage and Marathon Performance

Lot of info on your site.

As I went through, I noticed an article that disagreed with the "easy run" method to recover from a hard workout. It really had no meat behind it. I don't have the references, but I recall reading that it didn't aid in performance, but it did aid in recuperating better than not running period.

Read your bio, too.

Lots of info, but I can see why some may dismiss a bit of your research as oversimplified.

Another topic...there was an article on your site about injuries and correlating them to mileage. I think intensity plays just as important of a role in this, but it isn't mentioned. The only injuries I have ever had occured when I was doing intense workouts.

If you honestly think that 14% of performance is a minor thing, then you really are the crackpot you are made out to be.

VERY interesting website of research ... thought provoking series of training articles that seem to give creedence to the Steve Jones model of high intensity training over the more traditional high mileage training. Workouts over weekly mileage totals. I have believed, however, that building a good base of mileage makes for a more consistently good marathoner over a longer career ... but this research does not back that notion up. Thoughts?

Ellis, J. wrote:

VERY interesting website of research

I looked at it. I didn't see any research. None. Just "reviews" (inept, biased ones) of already noncontributory studies.

Ellis, J. wrote:

...the Steve Jones model of high intensity training over the more traditional high mileage training.

What do you know abotu Steve Jones? Jonesy was known to venture into the 100 mpw range in periods preceding his marathon build-ups, the last 8 or so weeks of which would include 80-90 mpw. He will say as much himself. It doesn't matter, though, because all of these totals are high by the standards of the wingnut/idiot calling himself Richard. And as someone else pointed out, anyone who thinks a 14% difference between two study groups is trivial needs to quit playing scientist/analyst and enroll in GED class. Richard, take your site down. You surely have a family to think about and just because you've shamed yourself doesn't mean they deserve shame too.

"As a general rule, faster marathon runners tend to run more miles each week than do slower marathon runners. For example a survey of 35 female marathon runners determined a fairly strong relationship (r = -0.74) between average weekly mileage and marathon performance (1). Other surveys have found similar correlations. These anecdotal observations and correlations are typically interpreted to mean that higher mileage is necessary for faster marathon performance.

(1) Hagan R., Upton S., Duncan J., Gettman L., Marathon performance in relation to maximal aerobic power and training indices in female distance runners. Br J Sports Med. 1987 Mar;21(1):3-7 "

Point of correction: you should not refer to the survey above as an 'anecdotal observation' when it clearly isn't (ie, has been published in a peer-reviewed journal; unlike you article).

Richard_

I appreciate your passion for the sport and the physiological aspects of training. Your enthusiasm is inspiring!

However, I've always wondered why you only choose to summarize a single article at a time. In any scientific field (whether it be natural or social), true knowledge generation comes from the amalgamation of a body of studies over time. It comes from initial experiments, replications, and additional research examining new angles or variables. There is no single, definitive study in any field (though there may be some informative or insightful ones).

Accordingly, I think that it would be more useful if you could review a body of research before drawing any definitive conclusions. This would help overcome the biases or limitations of any single study and identify systematic results across a line of research. Also, I think this would help you better support your (as even you have put it) somewhat unorthodox approach to training.

Best Regards,

RR

AC,

It was not my intent to suggest the research was anecdotal. I wrote:

"Several reasons exist for this belief, chief amongst them is the anecdotal observation that elite marathoners all seem to run relatively high weekly mileages. In support of this belief, scientists have conducted numerous surveys of the training characteristics of marathon participants and detailed studies of the training characteristics of elite marathoners."

My point was that there is anecdotal observation that elites run high mileage and these observations are reinforced by research surveys, which are not anecdotal. Sorry for any confusion.

RR,

Thanks for the compliment.

I agree with you - knowledge comes from a amalgamation of data, not a single source. And it has been suggested to me on more than one occasion that a single study doesn't prove or disprove a belief.

In the cases where I've reviewed single studies (and it isn't in all cases, many of my articles reference multiple studies) I've done so for a variety of reasons. Sometimes I review a study because I believe it to be representative of the total avaiable research on a topic. I may review a single study because it is more recent work that challenges older studies but hasn't yet been confirmed by additional studies. And sometimes I may only have access to one full study with only access to the abstracts of other studies on the same topic.

With all that being said it is still a valid point that more than one study should be reviewed on any particular topic. I am currently working on an article that incorporates the majority of the research available and hope to have it done in the next month or so.

Regards,

"For example, who ever records that exceptional runners like Walter George and Alf Shrubb achieved quite remarkable performances on very low mileages? George ran a mile in 4:10.6 and a 16-km run in 49:29 on little more than 3 km of training per day. Even Paavo Nurmi, the most medaled Olympic runner of all times, trained pathetically little but performed exceptionally, even by today’s standards. The outstanding performances of the black African runners, from Kip Keino to Matthews Temane, have also been achieved on relatively little training in which high quality but relatively low volume has been emphasized.” - Dr. Tim Noakes, 2003, The Lore of Running, 4th ed, page 510"

Maybe you should tell the people that Dr Noakes considered these athletes to be very talented and very rare cases. Nurmi was one of the first to do speedtraining and peaking, which is one of the reasons he did so well. A lot of statements on your site, but not very much facts.

I only know what I read, and I agree with you that Steve Jones ran 100 mile weeks, but on an elite level, I don't see that as high mileage compared to 140 miles per week as done regularly by the likes of DeCastella, Shorter, Rodgers, and Seko in their prime. I recognize that Jones ran faster than all of them, too, though the number of elite performances at the marathon on his part were less than that of his higher mileage competitors. So, not knowing the definitive answer myself, I can only speculate as to the optimal training regimen: more intense miles like Jones, as DeCastella admitted in training in Boulder with Jones, or more longer miles. The debate continues ...

I have run 15 marathons over the past 11 years between 2:36 and 3:12. I find there to be a very direct relationship between my mileage and my performance.

When I've run 70+ mpw I've run in the 2:36-2:42 range

With 50 - 60 mpw I've run 2:48 to 2:55

When I've been running less than 50 mpw I've been over 3 hours.

Yesterday I passed 1000 miles for the year so far (the earliest I ever hit 1000 miles), and hope to PR at Boston next week.

Phipps wrote:

I find there to be a very direct relationship between my mileage and my performance.

[/quote]

Phipps, do you notice a similar relationship between mileage and shorter distances such as 10k/5k?

Typical wrote:

Phipps wrote:

I find there to be a very direct relationship between my mileage and my performance.

Phipps, do you notice a similar relationship between mileage and shorter distances such as 10k/5k?[/quote]

Yes, I tend to run better at all distances when my mileage is higher.

Phipps,

Some people, you included, have a high correlation between weekly mileage and performance. Some don't, as illustrated in the referenced marathon studies. In a study on cross country skiers, half of them responded well to annual increases in training volume. However, half did not respond well and 4 years of increasing volume did not produce performance improvements for these athletes. It just emphasizes that individuals respond differently to the same stimulus.

http://www.powerrunning.com/Training/Base%20building%20vs%20High%20intensity.htm

Regards,