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

Read more, learn more, train better, race faster wrote:

As others have said, periodization.

OP, how fast are you and how old are you? With better training than 20-30mpw, I bet you could be faster. A good example is to look at how most elite athletes, top college programs, and top training groups are doing things. I guarantee you none of them are doing just 20-30mpw with intensity and getting by because there are no shortcuts to optimal training and performance. You need the aerobic strength, from those higher mileage weeks, long runs, and tempos (**While still touching on speed, form, and strength) to help you be able to do the intense workouts later.

That said, yeah you correct, you wont race as fast unless you are doing the nitty gritty of getting in faster reps, but there is a time and place for everything.

Again, as others have said on here, periodization.

Im not advocating that you run 100+ MPW, I know that different people racing different events respond to different types of training, but if you are training for anything that requires you to be strong aerobically, then yes, you will need more running than what you are currently doing.

Even guys who were 800 specialists like Nick Symmonds run up to 70mpw. Do you do it all year long? No, but if I recall correctly, even in his competition phases he was still running 50-60mpw compared to other elites who put time in between 80-120mpw for the track.

So in conclusion, though it may feel good to run 20-30mpw and do hard workouts, you need to 1) Run more 2) periodize your training 3) understand how training works and that all facets of it add up to you being faster.

jcaweiioj fd; wrote:

This thread reminds me of how some people react to some of those limited academic studies that take one group of runners, have them do intervals a few times per week for 6-8 weeks, and compare their improvements to the control group that only did easy running for 6-8 weeks to show that the interval-trained group showed distinctly more improvement. To which anybody that knows training replies, "Well, duh."

To many posters on this thread, why are you assuming that your training needs to be all one way or the other? Why either all mileage (with the occasional tempo) or lots of intensity with very low mileage? What about an integrated training program that has moderately high mileage with moderate workouts (that vary in type and evolve and progress through a season) that you can do consistently with the occasional race-specific work to help you race your best at the right time?

OP, it sounds like you are basically doing the pre-peaking phase for a month, seeing improvements, then crashing and having to start again. Try finding a middle ground that might show less obvious improvement for a few months but will sustain your improvements far better in the long term.

jogging doesn't help wrote:

Slartibartfast wrote:

This guy gets it! OP, try 50 miles/wk with two quality workouts and a long run for 16-20 weeks. You’re not built differently than everyone else, you’re just making a rookie training error.

OP here. I understand what you're saying, but it just doesn't work well for me. What you're describing is really similar to a few Daniels 5k cycles that I tried. What was interesting is that my times didn't improve much going from 30mpw to >50mpw. That said, I did enjoy the training. It just didn't make me much faster. Nor did Tinman type long tempos combined with CV workouts. Nor did some time spent on higher mileage... Malmo says that the effects can be seen quickly. Not true for me, which leads me to think that it's just not a great training stimulus for me.

I think that, as other posters have suggested, I am just a fast twitch guy. Probably the right genetic profile to be a long sprinter or middle distance runner, but that's about it.

Maybe the better question for me to ask is how to properly train a 400m runner to run 5K. I don't think that most good coaches would put this runner on the same regimen as a natural 10k - marathon type slow twitch runner.

jogging doesn't help wrote:

I'm talking specifically about 5k running. I will always run a faster 5k on 20-30mpw of quality than 80mpw of mileage and tempos. I know that this may be unusual, but it's true for me and I'm curious if anyone else has noticed this.

A hard week needs to include something along these lines:

1. 8-10x400 at mile pace or a bit faster. Adjusting the rest anywhere between 60 sec - 3 minutes depending on feel. Ideally, feeling very nauseous at the end of the session. Maybe 6-8 miles total with warm/cool.

2. Some sort of traditional 5k workout, such as 5x1000 or 4x1200 at 3k pace with a 400m jog. I gradually adjust this so that 10 days out from the race, it's 4x1200 at goal pace with a 60 sec jog recovery. Also might tack on a few hard 200's off of very short rest if not feeling exhausted. 8 miles total.

3. 20 minute tempo/cruise intervals/longer tempo. 8 miles total.

4. One, maybe two other easy days of 3 - 4 miles and core work.

In essence, I get way more benefit from running my workouts 'incorrectly'. I improve when I race my workouts. If I get done 4x1200 and feel like I could do one more rep, then I go do another rep and stop when I am totally wiped out. If I don't, my improvement rate is way worse. I avoid injury by backing off the easy mileage instead. I run the 400's until I am dry heaving, or else they don't work that well. Not advice I would give to anyone else, but it is the only way that I ever shave chunks of time.

Anyone else?

you could be faster wrote:

Read more, learn more, train better, race faster wrote:

As others have said, periodization.

OP, how fast are you and how old are you? With better training than 20-30mpw, I bet you could be faster. A good example is to look at how most elite athletes, top college programs, and top training groups are doing things. I guarantee you none of them are doing just 20-30mpw with intensity and getting by because there are no shortcuts to optimal training and performance. You need the aerobic strength, from those higher mileage weeks, long runs, and tempos (**While still touching on speed, form, and strength) to help you be able to do the intense workouts later.

That said, yeah you correct, you wont race as fast unless you are doing the nitty gritty of getting in faster reps, but there is a time and place for everything.

Again, as others have said on here, periodization.

Im not advocating that you run 100+ MPW, I know that different people racing different events respond to different types of training, but if you are training for anything that requires you to be strong aerobically, then yes, you will need more running than what you are currently doing.

Even guys who were 800 specialists like Nick Symmonds run up to 70mpw. Do you do it all year long? No, but if I recall correctly, even in his competition phases he was still running 50-60mpw compared to other elites who put time in between 80-120mpw for the track.

So in conclusion, though it may feel good to run 20-30mpw and do hard workouts, you need to 1) Run more 2) periodize your training 3) understand how training works and that all facets of it add up to you being faster.

jcaweiioj fd; wrote:

This thread reminds me of how some people react to some of those limited academic studies that take one group of runners, have them do intervals a few times per week for 6-8 weeks, and compare their improvements to the control group that only did easy running for 6-8 weeks to show that the interval-trained group showed distinctly more improvement. To which anybody that knows training replies, "Well, duh."

To many posters on this thread, why are you assuming that your training needs to be all one way or the other? Why either all mileage (with the occasional tempo) or lots of intensity with very low mileage? What about an integrated training program that has moderately high mileage with moderate workouts (that vary in type and evolve and progress through a season) that you can do consistently with the occasional race-specific work to help you race your best at the right time?

OP, it sounds like you are basically doing the pre-peaking phase for a month, seeing improvements, then crashing and having to start again. Try finding a middle ground that might show less obvious improvement for a few months but will sustain your improvements far better in the long term.

OP, you're getting really good advice here.