Why Increasing Mileage Improves Performance

That was Hilarious!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Thanks for making my day.

There are many excellent coaches in all sports who were never world class athletes. Was Lydiard faster than the runners he coached to Olympic medals?

I do not think a person's times are indicative of how well his/her ideas will work for training. In fact, I would argue that very good runners would be likely to train everyone just as he trained. Some would improve, some would not.

Look at the greats in any sport and few will be good coaches for whatever reason. How many great NBA players made great NBA coaches? Lenny Wilkens is probably one of the few. Larry Bird--although not all that much of a "coach" when he was with the Pacers? Magic? Yeah, that worked well.

How good of a runner is Wetmore or Vigil. Daniels certainly was a good athlete (Olympic medalist on the modern pentathlon).

So do not let one's times blind you to the person's knowledege.

I think Richard is off the reservation on this, but a debate of his ideas does not need to get personal or silly.

Dude, if you slowed down when you ran then you probably wouldn't have gotten hurt so much. I'm sure you're the type that runs go-pace everyday.

I don't think anyone truly knows why high milage, makes for faster times. But with a few exceptions high miles equals faster times!

It is as someone said befor not just the miles, but also doing some LT training once or twice a week, along with hill spirts to build up your speed.

There are two runners who I am sure did not dope, one is Paul Tergit, the other is Geb. And Geb, at times ran up to 175 miles a week, look in his book. And Terget in his book say's at peak he runs 300k a week.

Speedwork is over-rated, and is the lazy man's way to the top. One thing that people should allways rember is that Lassie Verien, was not the fastest guy in his Olimpic Finals. In fact there where much faster guys, but he kicked them all down!

To take a few words for the late great Lyidard ''miles make champions''.

You have to ask yourshelf, why is it that all these High School kids, can run 9 min 3200's off of 35-40 miles a week. And then with in one or two years end up having injory upon injory. Maby if you can get a kid running fast off of low miles and speed work it is better, but from what I have seen more often then not these guy's don't come on, and end up hurt all the time in a few years. Less might get you to the top faster, but the flame that brurns hot, burns short!

Richard_ wrote:

You appear to not fully understand my training recommendations. I don't recommend just 3 days per week of training for those with elite level genetics. I recommend 3 days per week for those with average genetic talents, not elite genetic talent.

Your recommendations are a good and sound training philosophy for 99% of those who run.

But the point is that those coaches were NBA players. They made it a place where very, very, very few make it.

In running comparison, they would be world class but not at the top of the class. Richard's pr's are hardly world class.

If you were are high school senior with a 4:10 mile, who would you rather have coaching you next year, Steve Scott or Ron Warhurst?

Again the argument about high or low mileage ?

We must decide about what we are talking.

Is the final target to improve their performance for runners of 3 hours or slower ? Or this is an ABSOLUTE problem ?

In the first case, may be that, during the first period of 3 months for beginners, THE MOST IMPORTANT TRAINING is not to increase mileage (soon is possible to run VERY SLOWLY 25 miles a week), but TO QUALIFY the speed. Of course, if I run at a speed of 10:00 per Mile, the first aim is to run at 9:00, in other case I'm a walker.

But, after reaching a good level of speed, I have to move to longer distance and longer mileage.

In the second case, I can explain that, WITHOUT RUNNING OVER 120 MILES a week, it's not possible to be e TOP COMPETITIVE ATHLETE.

I had in my career more than 30 athletes under 2:10, and, like women, athletes (not only Kenyans) running 2:23:47 (Viceconte, 2000), winning bronze medal in World Championships (Ferrara, 1995), silver medal in European Ch. (Curatolo, 1994) and a lot of Kenyans under 2:30.

In all these cases, they improved increasing mileage, and inside the mileage increasing SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE.

For example, I tell you a workouts that Ornella Ferrara did in 1995 in Predazzo, one month before the bronze medal in WCh (that is in my book from IAAF : Marathon, a scientific approach) :

Morning : 4 km warm-up + 24 km at 3:36 pace

Afternoon : 4 km warm-up + 24 km at 3:33 pace

This means 48 km at SPECIFIC MARATHON SPEED in the same day, and 56 km in the day.

So, it's completely wrong to tell to people that you can improve in Marathon using a low mileage.

The reasearch about we are speaking is completely useless, regarding a champion not significant.

For having a correct idea, scientists must invetsigate in groups of top runners, putting everyone in relation with himself and not with the others. In this case, you can see without any doubt that the key is THE INCREASE OF MILEAGE AT SPECIFIC MARATHON PACE.

The problem is : HOW IS POSSIBLE TO INCREASE IT ?

So, we must work in both directions : increasing mileage gradually, and at the same time increasing speed connected with the Marathon Pace. In a period of 3-4 months, we can QUALIFY our long run (running faster), and our speed (running longer). At the end of this process, we are able to build the SPECIFIC ENDURANCE, depending on speed and endurance in same percentage.

What is the endurance ? Of course, nothing to do with a generical mileage at very low pace. This is GENERAL RESISTANCE, and for qualified athletes has nothing to do with the specifity of the Marathon.

But, in any case, don't think that is possible to improve, when you are already at good level, without reaching a mileage of 120/150 miles a week. Only after this, according to the type of athlete that you are (fast of resistant) you can find the best personal key :

RUNNING FASTER maintaining the same mileage, or

INCREASING MILEAGE maintaining the same speed.

Every result, every research out of this rule, is a FALSE research, from scientists that don't know anything about the methodology of training and what training can provoke in your body.

Normally, the research is very good, but the animal is wrong.

Yeah, like you know what you're talking about.

Neither.... Matt Centrowitz.

I am new to this website and this is my first post. I have been running since 1977. It seems that everyone who posts on this ite is infatuated with credentials. Mine are modest:9:04 for 3,000 meters15:44 for 5,000 meters33:47 for 10,000 meters.I have been reading and striving to find a concensus (if threre is one) on how to train for a marathon. I have read Arthur Lydiard, Jeff Galoway, jack Danieles, etc. etc. etc.I would say that the keys to a marathon are 3 types of training:*Speedwork*Tempo Runs*Long runsI would say a general concensus is to develop a strong base, followed by a strength building period, emphasizing hill running, followed by speed training. Long runs should build gradually from 10-12 up to (roughly) 22 miles - a bit slower than marathon race pace. I disagree with running long runs 1:30 to 2:00 slower than race pace -I believe your system will go into shock on marathon day when you attempt the faster pace.I DO think the long runs should "ladder" i.e. 16-20-18-22-16-20 etc.Speedwork should ideally be 1200 or 1600 repeats - maybe 800s - but anything shorter will better serve you in preparation for shorter distances.I think most people do not rest enough - or taper enough.I think an ideal week is as follows:Monday - RestTuesday - 9 mile tempoWednesday - Track workout - 4 x 1 milesThursday - 8 mile hill workoutFriday - RestSaturday - race or 6 tempoSunday - Long RunI think anything more complicated is hogwash. Just cover the the types of training: Long runs, strength (hills and tempo) and speed.Getting plenty of sleep, drinking a lot of water, and eating right are all elementary.Multiplying your best 1/2 marathon by 2.1 is the best predicitor of performanace. 15k x 3 also works well. Multiplying your best 10k by 4.7 is another. Using any distance shorter than 10k is unreliable. And if you haven't done 3 or 4 20 milers - with at least 1 close to goal pace, you may be disappointed as well.Lastly, choosing a flat fast course in weather between 40-60 degrees is optimal.2 week or 3 week taper ? AT LEAST 2 - 3 is probably better.

Richard_ wrote:

One of the more hotly debated topics is that of weekly mileage. Does increasing weekly mileage result in improved performance? If so, why? This article reviews the research on this important topic in an effort to provide some additional insight. There is a link to the article in the "new and updated" section on the front page of my web site at

http://www.powerrunning.com

(I should warn you in advance though that it is a long article.)

We are basically reinventing the wheel over and over again. The answer has been and always will be = you get what you put into it.

-Soup

maxybear wrote:

I have been reading and striving to find a concensus (if threre is one) on how to train for a marathon. I have read Arthur Lydiard, Jeff Galoway, jack Danieles, etc. etc. etc.

I would say that the keys to a marathon are 3 types of training:

*Speedwork

*Tempo Runs

*Long runs

I don\'t believe there is any consensus on how to best train for a marathon. I do believe you\'ve hit the nail on the head as to the 3 types of workouts that are included in basically every marathon training program (beginner marathon programs being the exception). It is the arrangement of these types of runs and overall mileage that seems to distinguish one program from another.

If you haven\'t seen it yet, there is a group of researchers from Furman University that have drawn a lot of attention recently by having subjects train for and run marathons while only conducting the 3 types of runs listed above - no easy runs, no recovery runs. There is an article about this in last months RW plus additional info on their web site that sparked some interesting & lengthy discussions on running forums all over the net.

Here\'s the link: