Jacked / Built distance runners of the past

Counterintuitive wrote:

Lifting heavy increases muscular strength but the muscles don't get as large as when you do many high rep sets at lower weights.

ANY type of strength training will only yield increased muscle size (and an increase in body weight) if there is also a corresponding increase in caloric intake. Weight lifting alone will not create mass out of nothing. The commonly heard excuse of "I don't wanna lift weights, I don't wanna get big" is a fallacy.

C.O. Jones wrote:

Joe Falcon.

/thread

Falcon was a tiny jockey sized runner.

Solinsky didn’t run 100 mpw in HS. More like 65

jonnyjinlondon wrote:

Rob de Castella (Australian marathon champion runner from the 80s - he won Boston in 2.07 in 1986).

This guy is /was very big boned and muscular, naturally. I saw him run at the tail end of his career - he's naturally much larger than most distance runners:

https://www.runnerstribe.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/dee3-1024x628.jpghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_de_Castella

Wrong, look again at his pics. Deek from the waist up was as skinny as can be. However, his legs were like massive tree trunks. If his legs matched his upper body, then he would look like a muscular beast.

Meant to add that he won the 96 trials at 1500 I believe.

Oh c’mon, you know you found the worst pic of him with that one you cucck. Dixon was thicker than molasses

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-N0tQQqCB8fE/TrXhibCrCFI/AAAAAAAACPo/I3hDkHY-ESg/s1600/dixon.jpg

I think what the “lots of low weight reps” folks are referring to is hypertrophy.

Some people are ignorant enough to think that hypertrophy only occurs in an 8-12 rep range, but obviously that is incorrect. Hypertrophy can easily be achieved with lower weight while doing sets of 20+ (think pushups), 8-12 reps of heavier is just the most EFFICIENT way to achieve hypertrophy.

The question is: Is it humanly possible to put on some muscle at such high mileage? I know a caloric surplus or at LEAST caloric maintenance would be required. But if enough protein was consumed and enough calories, I don’t see why one couldn’t add a few pounds if running 100mpw and guzzling whole milk with each meal. Healthy? No

Solinsky fell down the stairs in a freak accident resulting in that hamstring tear. It wasn't the mileage.

Ray Wicksell was pretty good sized, he was a 1500 / 5000 guy who moved to the road and ran 1:03 for half

http://www.newhampshiretrackandfield.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/019_5-e1554670334206.jpg

Protein_etc wrote:

Oh c’mon, you know you found the worst pic of him with that one you cucck. Dixon was thicker than molasses

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-N0tQQqCB8fE/TrXhibCrCFI/AAAAAAAACPo/I3hDkHY-ESg/s1600/dixon.jpg

And you found the best pic. He was maybe 150 at around 6 feet. That's some runny molasses.

Paul McMullen was around 6’5, 240 in the offseason and would cut down to 195 or so when tapering for big races. Back when he played football, he was similar in size to Brock Lesnar.

Solinkso wrote:

LateRunnerPhil wrote:

He ran 100 mpw all the time, but got injured when he tried 120 mpw (his hamstring got completely torn off, career-ending injury).

Why is this lie still being spread? He ripped his hamstring when he fell down the stairs in his own home after tripping over his dog

Solinksy had been dealing with the hamstring for a while. It was already injured/weakened. Tripping over his dog was the final straw which ripped the hamstring off the bone. End of career.

You are blind wrote:

jonnyjinlondon wrote:

Rob de Castella (Australian marathon champion runner from the 80s - he won Boston in 2.07 in 1986).

This guy is /was very big boned and muscular, naturally. I saw him run at the tail end of his career - he's naturally much larger than most distance runners:

https://www.runnerstribe.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/dee3-1024x628.jpghttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_de_Castella

Wrong, look again at his pics. Deek from the waist up was as skinny as can be. However, his legs were like massive tree trunks. If his legs matched his upper body, then he would look like a muscular beast.

I don't see skinny upper body (??).... Yes, he had a thinner upper body [compared to his enormous lower body] probably due to extremely high mileage and necessary low fat % required for good marathoning; but - actually - he was quite well built up there too IMO.

Out of all the elite marathoners, Deek's (De Castella's nickname) the largest and broadest body type I've ever seen . These days, he'd be written off very young for being far too large to do anything decent. Shows you can do it, even if your body type seems all wrong.

Protein_etc wrote:

I think what the “lots of low weight reps” folks are referring to is hypertrophy.

Some people are ignorant enough to think that hypertrophy only occurs in an 8-12 rep range, but obviously that is incorrect. Hypertrophy can easily be achieved with lower weight while doing sets of 20+ (think pushups), 8-12 reps of heavier is just the most EFFICIENT way to achieve hypertrophy.

The question is: Is it humanly possible to put on some muscle at such high mileage? I know a caloric surplus or at LEAST caloric maintenance would be required. But if enough protein was consumed and enough calories, I don’t see why one couldn’t add a few pounds if running 100mpw and guzzling whole milk with each meal. Healthy? No

You would be incorrect. Not only would you need a lot of calories but also more protein than could actually be processed over the course of 24hrs. Recovery from 100mpw requires protein to repair muscle tissue and calories. Recovery from and adaptation to weight lifting also requires protein and calories.

These types of questions are easily researchable.

You are not building muscle mass while running 100mpw. At what amount of running could you still build muscle mass? That depends on the person. Someone with a history of running 100mpw who cuts down to 30-50mpw AND lifts hard 4-6 days a week could easily put on mass given enough calories and protein and if it's in the magical window of his first 6-12 mo of serious lifting (newbie gains don't follow conventional wisdom because the stress is new).

Alan

Not a single mention of Herb Lindsay on this thread.

https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/track-field-arra-cascade-run-off-herb-lindsay-greg-meyer-and-bill-in-picture-id682029528

?

tarckstar wrote:

Not a single mention of Herb Lindsay on this thread.

https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/track-field-arra-cascade-run-off-herb-lindsay-greg-meyer-and-bill-in-picture-id682029528

?

There was. Lindsay was not big at all. He's scarcely any bulkier than Rodgers in that pic and Bill was 128.

LateRunnerPhil wrote:

Quoting:

The hamstring started giving him problems. He saw it as just another obstacle to run through and ignored the pain. Two weeks before the 2011 World Championships, the hamstring had enough. Three of the four major muscles tore off his pelvic bone.

"It's kind of a sad story," Solinsky said. "We were at a training camp. My wife and my dog were there. I tripped over my dog coming down the stairs and caught myself, but I felt something pop in my leg.

"I think it was going to happen sooner or later."

Source:

http://archive.jsonline.com/sports/etc/chris-solinskys-hamstring-brings-him-a-major-pain-pg58mfe-150114415.html/

Welp that literally was the tipping point.

tarckstar wrote:

Not a single mention of Herb Lindsay on this thread.

https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/track-field-arra-cascade-run-off-herb-lindsay-greg-meyer-and-bill-in-picture-id682029528

?

"Not a single mention of Herb Lindsay on this thread", eh?

Try looking on the first page.