I only improve when going HARD. Mileage doesn't have any effect

Do you understand how periodisation works?

Periodisation wrote:

Do you understand how periodisation works?

I only understand how it effects me. The easy mileage periods are best kept as short as possible for some recovery. I'm better off trying to hit 6-8 peaks a year than build to 2 or 3.

I'm a little bit similar. Not any kind of standout, but have managed to place in US Masters at 5000m and 3000m indoor, and had a state age record for 10k on roads.

Having had DNA testing, I'm basically a slow sprinter with a big V02 Max (72 at age 46), I also have a gene variant that means I clear lactate quite quickly.

Before I learned that, I never understood why I seemed to under-perform in races, relative to my ability to run reps.

My racing off an aerobic base phase is absolutely horrible. I takes me a long time to work up to doing a decent longer run, and when I start back off a break, it's much easier for me to run hard for four miles than slowly for an hour.

I get a quick response to the kind of intervals you are talking about, but I also peak and then "go off" very quickly.

I'd guess that you have some form of 'more fast twitch than typical for distance/big V02 max' type make up. My experience was that I did benefit long-term from a base phase which included runs of up to 100 mins, but I had to both treat the long runs with respect as they took more out of me than speed work, and to accept that I sucked for racing in the base phase.

jogging doesn't help wrote:

Periodisation wrote:

Do you understand how periodisation works?

I only understand how it effects me. The easy mileage periods are best kept as short as possible for some recovery. I'm better off trying to hit 6-8 peaks a year than build to 2 or 3.

Ha! I hadn't seem this when I wrote my reply, but same as I noted - the tendency to quick short peaks, and then to train off. It's typical of a faster-twitch type middle distance runner.

Cavorty, what kind of test did you have(and how much did it cost?)? I'm interested in getting one done. As I'm the opposite of you as far as training goes. I'm interested to see if my suspicion is true, that I'm mostly slow twitch.

I am an old man, close to 60, but did 2:04 for the 800m at age 14 so some talent,

I have built to 45 miles/w from mostly slow distance running, but lately

I have startet to run to the barn, having very, very fast (in comparison to my normal pace)

last miles, and I just love it and even if I tell myself to not do it , I do it,

and I just feel the speed and endurance and ability to run fast is coming back.

Is this something of the same as the OP?

Yes, I do think I have more fast twitch and especially medium fast twitch fibers than normal.

I had a lost summer in college, just running now and again, maybe pick up toward the end of an hour. NEVER more than an hour. Nothing other than hour runs, in fact. Then jumped in an open 3K after 10-11 weeks, and ran a 9:17.

Jan 1 of the next year, I turned it up. 100 mile weeks religiously, doubles, long intervals, short intervals, tempos, long runs, on a ten-day schedule so I could fit it all in. Kept it up for 14 weeks, then got in another 3K. Ran a 9:14.

The 9:17 was outdoor, road flats.

The 9:14 indoor, spikes.

What are your age, weight, height and PRs for your best distances?

Yep, me wrote:

I had a lost summer in college, just running now and again, maybe pick up toward the end of an hour. NEVER more than an hour. Nothing other than hour runs, in fact. Then jumped in an open 3K after 10-11 weeks, and ran a 9:17.

Jan 1 of the next year, I turned it up. 100 mile weeks religiously, doubles, long intervals, short intervals, tempos, long runs, on a ten-day schedule so I could fit it all in. Kept it up for 14 weeks, then got in another 3K. Ran a 9:14.

The 9:17 was outdoor, road flats.

The 9:14 indoor, spikes.

And as long as we're mentioning testing, I had a VO2 test the November between these two 3K races.

77

Different strokes for different folks. I’m a pure distance runner with no speed and I found mileage and races to be the only things that helped me to improve. Workouts had no effect and actually hurt me sometimes. Everyone’s different.

Okay.

Write down your results within last year , thank you.

Prefontaine91 wrote:

Okay.

Write down your results within last year , thank you.

questions like this end here with three scenarios:

1. the op posts his results, some realize the obvious, i.e. the op does not hold the current world records from 800m up to the marathon or does not come close to qualify for the olympic finals. slanderous comments and the usual repartee (low mileage vs high mileage) takes places.

2. the op does not post his results. slanderous comments and so on.

3. the mild variant: the op gets the hint to structure his training "better", i.e. to train at least two years in the traditional way.

what the op writes is perhaps not the best way to train but it works for some, especially for aging runners and for those with the typical low mileage nature. the most important factor is: it's fun to push hard and personally speaking i am better off running hard and low mileage. in my prime big volumes did not pay off and now as a masters runner more than 40 mpw end with an injury.

the only criticism is that i would write "efficient mileage". this can be quite low if it covers what has to be done.

I don’t mind posting this. I’m not sure it will be much help because I don’t have many data points due to lack of racing. I’m not fast, but I think that I can get competitive in my age group in the next couple of years. Age 38, just got back into running a few years ago after not running from age 16-35. Have a busy life with family and career stuff, but I really love running so I’m trying to fit it in the best I can.

The last time that I raced more than one distance in a year was age 15: 25.x, 54 flat, 4:46, 18:05. What’s funny is the 4:46 and 18:05 were run within a week of each other. Terrible. My better 5k’s were around 17:15 the following year.

Age 38: have only been working on the 5k, going from about 25 minutes just starting back to about 18:40 now. Would like to dip into the 17’s by age 40, as that is a decent time in my area.

5’8, 135.

That's funny you say that. My past summer of training was mostly base mileage at 8:30-9:00 minute pace and the occasional tempo (ex: 4 miles at 5:35 pace), some hill sprints and slow long runs and I went 9:14 for the 3K as well. My mileage was around 70-75 a week and I did one week of 90. I personally believe I improve a bunch from mileage and if I do anything much more intense than 5K pace very often I fall apart.

if it works for you, no one should be judging what you do. I used to do the same thing but trained for 10k and the half which wasn’t ideal considering how long the race is.

for a 5k, you might be able to get the same benefits from hard training as long as you have some jogging even if it’s just a warmup or cool down.

Yep, me wrote:

Yep, me wrote:

I had a lost summer in college, just running now and again, maybe pick up toward the end of an hour. NEVER more than an hour. Nothing other than hour runs, in fact. Then jumped in an open 3K after 10-11 weeks, and ran a 9:17.

Jan 1 of the next year, I turned it up. 100 mile weeks religiously, doubles, long intervals, short intervals, tempos, long runs, on a ten-day schedule so I could fit it all in. Kept it up for 14 weeks, then got in another 3K. Ran a 9:14.

The 9:17 was outdoor, road flats.

The 9:14 indoor, spikes.

And as long as we're mentioning testing, I had a VO2 test the November between these two 3K races.

77

Pretty sure you’re way underperforming if your Vo2 max is actually 77.

Same here. Lots of easy running with 1 tempo run a week does nothing for me. I guess big mileage isnt for everyone

Big surprise here but.... people are different. Imagine that? Not all training works for every person.

FWIW, here's what I think.

Fewer people are born with much, if any real leg speed than those with the capacity for aerobic endurance, so since most people fall into that category they do see results when they really work on the aerobic system. They just build this really big powerful engine, so while they can't run 1 really fast 400, they CAN run A LOT of kinda OK 400s.

For those people doing a lot of speed work only goes so far. It's like trying to sharpen the edge of a blade made of iron vs one made of steel. It will only get so sharp and that's it. It just can't do any better.

For those that do have some genetic gift of actual leg speed, they ARE that steel blade. They can be honed and sharpened to be razor sharp. They just have to do the sharpening. That means getting after it, running HARD, running FAST. So while they can see results with the ol LSD stuff, they see MORE and better results with intervals.

SprintTriathlon wrote:

I am an old man, close to 60, but did 2:04 for the 800m at age 14 so some talent,

I have built to 45 miles/w from mostly slow distance running, but lately

I have startet to run to the barn, having very, very fast (in comparison to my normal pace)

last miles, and I just love it and even if I tell myself to not do it , I do it,

and I just feel the speed and endurance and ability to run fast is coming back.

Is this something of the same as the OP?

Yes, I do think I have more fast twitch and especially medium fast twitch fibers than normal.

wholesome.