How great can you be as a runner if you ran moderately and harder daily? Say you ran 6 days a week and always warmed up and cooled down but the meat of every run was strong, marathon Pace or faster. If you were tired or sore the meat might just be strides. The work would be relative to your days ability. Is this the secret to training? Is slogging over rated?
White Lines wrote:
Is this the secret to training? Is slogging over rated?
White Lines wrote:
How great can you be as a runner if you ran moderately and harder daily?
This is basically what inexperienced and poor performing runners do, so we know it is not a recipe for success.
I believe Strava has crunched participant data leading up to marathons and found that the characteristics of more successful participants is (1) higher mileage and (2) polarised training. The characteristic of poor performers was the approach you just described.
This is one such Strava study regarding Boston Qualification.
"Male [Boston] qualifiers ran 15 percent of their training runs at marathon pace or faster. For the other 85 percent of their miles, they ran slower than the qualifying standard pace, signaling that they only cranked up the effort for important workouts. In comparison, male non-qualifiers may be going too hard, too often. Fifty-seven percent of their runs were done at their BQ marathon pace or faster."
Unsurprisingly, taking of running selfies is also negatively correlated with Boston Qualification.
I think he is trying to get there with lower mileage. 40mpw is about the minimum if you want to get to 95% of your marathon Max. Run 5 days per week with 1 long run and 2 quality days of 10 miles total which is 25% of total weekly mileage. That's already pushing it.
Quality over Quantity, no junk miles, sounds genius.
Runners World preached it. Every high school coach ate it up. America sucked at running in the 90's.