So... High Mileage doesn't hurt High Schoolers?

The idea that you won't get injured just because the milage is slow is also eroneus.

I've found runners get injured more training for the marathon than anything else.

A long run places a lot if stress on the body sane as a track session.

Doing slow long runs is also old hat. Again the Kenyans really don't do that look up Canova training.

Ovett did his long runs. 10 miles twice a week in around 52/3 mins. Elites see not plodding round doing Lydiard LSD.

Write down your 100mpw for a HS runner the you'll realise how much it is

Doubles during week 5 miles each week day 5 miles Sat and 15 Sun only comes to 70 mpw. Fitting in Interval work makes it even harder.

How well is Radcliffe runnng now. Her foot is fecked it's worth it for her. Is it for most people?

30 miles per week is about 3-3.5 hours of running per week. Try only practicing 3-3.5 hours per week for other sports. You're not going get far. Also, running is not hard on the body compared to other sports. 10 hours per week of wrestling practice is way harder on the body compared to running. Yet, do you hear people complain about overtraining and burning out high school wrestlers?

And Sullivan still runs but now does about 40mpw max

ukathleticscoach wrote:

Doing slow long runs is also old hat. Again the Kenyans really don't do that look up Canova training.

Write down your 100mpw for a HS runner the you'll realise how much it is

1. Most of the Kenyan runners grow up jogging to school and walking everywhere. Canova has said this is why you don't need to emphasize building up their aerobic system as much because they've already did it.

2. Hundred miles a week is not that much running. It is only about a 115 minutes or less per day of activity.

Try reading what I actually wrote about 30mpw.

A lot of training in other sports is technique. Despite the bs you read that's not the case with runnng.

Footballers don't play football all the time in training. They do a lot of skill work

Also other sports like swimming or cycling you have to spend twice as long to get the same effect.

To me if you are doing 100mpw at 17 you've got nowewhere to go at college.

I'd say even fir serious athlete better to build to around 70 on leaving his the build from there.

I definitely don't believe in low mileage though. Just that training should be progressive.

FrenchDawg wrote:

I can say from experience, and from witnessing the collapse of an entire high school team over the course of 3 years, that if done inncorrectly, high mileage is the worst possible thing for a high school runner to do.

Im interesting in hearing what happened.

BS, look at how the top high school wrestlers train and compare it to a hundred mile week.

Try reading what I actually wrote about 30mpw.

A lot of training in other sports is technique. Despite the bs you read that's not the case with runnng.

Footballers don't play football all the time in training. They do a lot of skill work

Also other sports like swimming or cycling you have to spend twice as long to get the same effect.

To me if you are doing 100mpw at 17 you've got nowewhere to go at college.

I'd say even fir serious athlete better to build to around 70 on leaving his the build from there.

I definitely don't believe in low mileage though. Just that training should be progressive.

some athletes respond best to lower miles whereas others need higher miles. i have seen both.

you need to adapt so that you do not run the low miles guy into the ground.

similarly, if you don't give enough miles to the guy who needs it and then you taper as the season goes on, you are going to lose him.

you cannot exclude the possibility there are high school aged athletes who respond best at 100mpw. I haven't seen one yet but ...

some people screw around in their 20's and start a family in their 30's, whereas others keep messing around thru their 30's. similarly, some high schoolers may not want to leave anything for college because they may not want to run in college.

at least in US high schools, you will not see 30 yo east africans competing against you. in college, there is another story.

i am not trying to dismiss what you are saying because, generally, you make good points.

I don't think the Ingebrigtsens, despite running 1500m, cut down on AT runs in favor of race pace. Most of their training sessions are AT.

why? wouldnt that be past pro runner retirement or very near? why should a professional athlete base their work volume on still being active after their earning years as a pro are over?

Really, Luv2Run?

I'd rather see more rec league basketball players in 20 years that have high school and college kids make it to the NBA.

It's better to have more fat office workers playing beer league slow pitch softball than a few kids hitting 40+ jacks a year in the big leagues.

Who needs a green jacket from Augusta when you can win a country club best ball tournament when you are 45?

It's better to have 100% of high school grads being good little cubicle drones in middle age than to have a few innovators re-shape industries.

Mediocrity is nothing to aspire to in any endeavor.

treyway xD

Haven't read every word of this thread...but saw two things that really stood out...

1. A 90 minute run will really beat you up...SINCE WHEN? A nice and relaxed run of 90 minutes can be restorative and rejuvenating...and this leads me to point #2.

2. "If done the right way..." NO DUH. High mileage if done the right way is not detrimental to runners, young or not. Sure, there will be humans who cannot run 5 minutes, let alone 100+ miles per week, but for most healthy humans, if run and done the right way, they can handle higher mileage.

Just my two pennies.