2:19 on 70-80 miles per week.

I just looked up Ken’s last name it was Young quite a guy who passed recently

I always liked Van Aaken guideline on how much to run per day:

Race—Training done per day

400 meters— 6 kilometers

800 meters— 10 kilometers

1500 meters— 15 kilometers

3000 meters— 20 kilometers

5000 meters— 25 kilometers

10,000 meters— 30 kilometers

Marathon— 40 kilometers

https://www.scienceofrunning.com/2016/07/ernst-van-aaken-the-pure-endurance-method.html?v=7516fd43adaa

Ken Young. But he did emphasize that the 1/3 was the minimum you needed to get through a distance and that running more would have you racing faster. He'd get up to 150 mile weeks at times. Of course as a guy who raced at 50 miles that was 1/3 of his race distance.

When Van Aaken wrote that he was speaking in general terms. He always seemed more interested in health than competition. He had me reduce my training load many times when I appeared (to him) that I was straining more than training. He was concerned more about a healthy human race than developing a handful of fast runners. He was one of the first to see females as having a substantial amount of available fat for training/racing long distances. Individuals like Jackie Hanson and Ann Treason bore this out.

Just out of curiosity, what was his advice to you getting ready for the marathon/training in general and how did you prepare for it?

I put in Ken’s theory because this thread started out with basically “ how little can I do and still succeed” you see this all the time with articles like “train less and race faster “ or “ eat more and weight less” etc. I don’t subscribe to any of that thinking

vladimir wrote:

I put in Ken’s theory because this thread started out with basically “ how little can I do and still succeed” you see this all the time with articles like “train less and race faster “ or “ eat more and weight less” etc. I don’t subscribe to any of that thinking

Exactly, laziness thinks it can outsmart hard work. When there is no substitute for hard work.

Depends on your make up. For you, I don't know nor should anyone say they know you can.

Also, with a family and the stress and lack of sleep that comes with that is your body able to recover from the stress of training enough to run at that level? This is probably the most important factor for you that unless I missed something has not been discussed here?

So, I'm confused about what you are looking for from us? I guess you just asked a simple question which deserves a simple response. Like HRE said it has been done and will be done again. Will that be you? Who knows?

Yes, High 2:19's maybe a low 2:20

As for the rest, have you discussed your insecurities with your psychiatrist or psychologist? Nobody really gives a rats tail about the type of wife you got, if you make 6 figures or flip burgers etc. Grow up bud.

Off of the times you are running now and the training doing now I'd say you are going to run either 2:19 or 2:39.

You will either get there or you are going to completely blow up.

I've quoted Young's theory to many people over the years. And many today would consider 9 miles a day high mileage.

By the way, do you speak German? I've always understood that EVA didn't speak English and I know his son doesn't.

HRE wrote:

I've quoted Young's theory to many people over the years. And many today would consider 9 miles a day high mileage.

By the way, do you speak German? I've always understood that EVA didn't speak English and I know his son doesn't.

Lol, I consider 9 miles per day/ 63 MPW low mileage. I guess that what 100+ mile weeks will do to you. Puts it perspective. I'm a big Lydiard guy. But EVA always intrigued me and I see a lot of similarities between the two. Mainly a good emphasis on building up our aerobic system via lots of low intensity mileage.

I am coaching many Belgian Elites and 2 of them are marathonrunners.

Thomas de Bock ran 2.14 in his 3th marathon and Dennis ran 2.16. Both of them averaged around 55-60 miles a week for the last 12 weeks before their marathons.

Most athletes and coaches don't understand training. All they see is figures and workouts, but they don't look beyond those numbers and workouts. It's about changing your bodycomposition, about making more and stronger mitochondria and these things you can't push it takes: Time and time means consistency. So if you ask me if this is possible I don't see why it wouldn't be possible. Marathon is the "easiest" distance to make progression as it is easy to train for so most coaches are able to coach marathon runners. While for a 1500m-5000m for instance this is much harder as you have to find the right balance between your 3 energy systems.

I am posting some of my trainingprograms in the coming weeks via moriautim (instagram) if you would be interested.

Already posted 1 yesterday of 1 of my 5K runners that ran 13.19 in Stanford this year not doing to much of anything ;).

Why do you believe so much in "junk miles"? Why would you take the risk of injuries and killing your anaerobic system with to much mileage when it is not needed to do so? The only athletes that really need high mileage are Topmarathonrunners or topathletes with really high VlaMax (strong anaerobic system) to come to a relative balance with their aerobic system.

I am coaching some of these types that are really strong by nature anaerobicaly and they need higher mileage (read average around 75miles ) to come to a balance where their aerobic system is strong enough to support their anaerobic capabilities. But what people tend to forget is that is not all about mileage it is also about what kind of mileage you do. Their are several ways to come to a balance and the "short" way is to go via aerobic powertraining, however in the long term with this kind of training your aerobic capacity will only get worser the more you do it on a long period of time.

OlympicRunningTeamCoach wrote:

Why do you believe so much in "junk miles"?

Japan

Pro high mileage wrote:

OlympicRunningTeamCoach wrote:

Why do you believe so much in "junk miles"?

Japan

Also, the first book I read about running when I first got into running was Bill Rodgers autobiography Marathon Man. Americans were pretty good in the 70s and 80s on a steady diet of high mileage. We switched to your bs of low mileage quality sh!t here in the US in the 90s, we sucked.

I think you misunderstand me, I don't say low mileage and quality is the right approach:

1) Every athlete is different it depends on his VO2Max/VLaMax, body type, distance he/she wants to run.

2) I believe in a balance between Aerobic and anaerobic work where the aerobic work is the most important focus as this needs much more time to develop.

The main thing I am saying about your approach (lydiard) is that the basics are good but it is stupid to only focus on mileage mileage mileage... And I agree with you that most coaches/athletes are forgetting the basics and focus to much on quality.

Most of my guys only do around 10-15 quality sessions a year (races not included). Main focus is on developping endurance and mileage (but not insane mileage, normal mileage...).

See the program of 1 of my 13.19 guys and you will see that most of my training is what you say it should be:

instagram: moriautim

OlympicRunningTeamCoach wrote:

The main thing I am saying about your approach (lydiard) is that the basics are good but it is stupid to only focus on mileage mileage mileage...

You are either a idiot or ignorant if you think Lydiard is only about mileage.

Japan => LOL

2 athletes of mine ran faster than all the athletes in that country: Isaac = 3.37, Stijn 3.38 flat, Japan best: 3.38.12

2 athletes of mine ran faster than all the athletes in that country: Isaac= 13.18, Robin 13.19, Japan best: 13.26.70

You couldn't have picked a better example of why that approach is OK but not the most efficient approach, it focus merely on 1 domaine of the human body => aerobic endurance. While there are many more parameters that play a vital role in running fast. 10K+ training is easy because your aerobic system is the dominant and almost only factor in terms of fysiology. 800-10000m is a different story my friend ;)!