Sara Hall: Don’t buy into the myth that kids can’t run a lot of mileage in high school or they’ll get hurt/bur

BergLaufer wrote:

https://twitter.com/SaraHall3/status/1150476929209786368?s=20

Terrible statement. This is an elite with PR's of 4:31/15:20/2:26. Those times as female are only possible with an incredible VO2MAX/aerobic system. Her genetics and talent allowed her to absorb these insane training loads (especially for a freshman and sophomore, 70 mpw for girls in HS is insanity unless they are an absolute outlier).

Don't get me wrong, I consider her a great athlete with an amazing career, put putting an average HS girl with an average VO2MAX and lifetime potential of 18-20 min 5k on a 70 mpw/high mileage program early in HS is gonna massacre her body, lead to injuries and burn her out and away from the sport of running faster than anything.

High mileage (70+ mpw for girls, 90+ mpw for boys) should only be used on the most talented runners (top in state meets) that are able to absorb and recover from that training load, and even then I wouldn't use this mileage before junior XC season. But even talented runners don't need that mileage, Sydney Masciarelli ran 10:11/16:16 off less than 35 mpw, Ping also trained very low mileage.

Why risk injuring the average HS girl, but even talents like Sydney or Grace by throwing high mileage on them? Let them gradually build, leave room for improvement, focus on all the other things like strength and core and allow them to prosper and reach their potential without being constantly injured/fatigued/overtrained from high mileage.

Btw, who ran high mileage? Alana Hadley. 110 mpw weeks, marathons at 16, one of the greatest talents we had, complete burn-out at 17.

Aren't you like a 22 minute 5Ker? Your opinion holds no credibility.

This is why her husband is no longer a runner.

It’s not mileage that burns runners out, it’s the duration intensity being too much.

East Africans spend their childhood running EASY miles to and from school.

In terms of training volume its not about distance but duration. A fast runner covers more distance in a certain duration. For instance, a 22 minute 5k girl running 70 mpw covers much more training volume than a 18 minute 5K girl. Obviously they race and train at much different paces. Therefore, the 22 minute girl should top out at 50 miles a week but still be training as much as the 70 girl.

The question shouldnt be how much mileage, rather it should be what is the optimal mileage for an individual. Factors in determining the right amount include physical maturity, running form, intensity, emotional maturity, longer term benefits, etc. Burnout is a function of all of these things and all training should aim to reduce the chances of burnout during the years 18-30. Burnout is the result of too much training structure and intensity, including always chasing yesterday’s success. The problem is when that early success is based on early year training advantages rather than talent people get fooled as to how good they really are or are not. In later years the training advantages are not as much of an issue as the training/commitment evens out. Those early prodigies dont know that they arent really more talented and they dont adjust to when people catch up in training. Sure african youth spend more time running in their youth. This is part of their culture and lifestyle. It fits in with everything they do. I am ok with more time on your feet in earlier years but it shouldnt be training. It should be playing. High running mileage at young ages is a bad idea. A good college coach can transition kids into proper mileage/training.

Hghggg wrote:

It’s not mileage that burns runners out, it’s the duration intensity being too much.

East Africans spend their childhood running EASY miles to and from school.

In terms of training volume its not about distance but duration. A fast runner covers more distance in a certain duration. For instance, a 22 minute 5k girl running 70 mpw covers much more training volume than a 18 minute 5K girl. Obviously they race and train at much different paces. Therefore, the 22 minute girl should top out at 50 miles a week but still be training as much as the 70 girl.

I love how we assume that every "East African" (which is a loose term) runs to school as a kid. There is no way that all the Kenyan and Ethiopian athletes built their aerobic capacity this way.

Of course the question should be about optimal mileage. But why would that rule out higher mileage for kids who want to do it? When I talked with Lydiard about my sons' early running careers he said, "Try to get them interested in how far they can run rather than how fast."

VO2Max has literally nothing at all to do with whether an athlete can handle and/or benefit from high mileage. Many of the most aerobically talented runners are made of glass. Many slow runners respond very well to high mileage. These aren't exceptions; there's actually no correlation at all between speed and the appropriate amount of mileage.

While it's true that faster runners tend to run more mileage, but that's partly because the mileage is what makes them faster and partly because being fast, they enjoy running and want to get better at it, so they train more. It doesn't mean that speed determines one's capacity to train.

Lol. She was not even remotely close to "one of the greatest talents we had." And her burnout seems to have been almost entirely mental and due to the pressure she and her father put on her, not due to any physiological issues with mileage.

Exactly right.

Coffee Monster wrote:

Hghggg wrote:

It’s not mileage that burns runners out, it’s the duration intensity being too much.

East Africans spend their childhood running EASY miles to and from school.

In terms of training volume its not about distance but duration. A fast runner covers more distance in a certain duration. For instance, a 22 minute 5k girl running 70 mpw covers much more training volume than a 18 minute 5K girl. Obviously they race and train at much different paces. Therefore, the 22 minute girl should top out at 50 miles a week but still be training as much as the 70 girl.

I love how we assume that every "East African" (which is a loose term) runs to school as a kid. There is no way that all the Kenyan and Ethiopian athletes built their aerobic capacity this way.

Aerobic capacity is genetic. It ain't built. And having a high VO2 max doesn't make you a better runner.

I don't know if the higher mileage stuff is a "should or can" issue as much as it is Do They Want To issue. Prescribing and making a younger kid do the higher mileage seems like a great way to turn a fun after school activity into pure drudgery and work. Just slogging away counting miles, also it's darned time consuming, time that could be spent in a thousand other productive ways.

IF the kid really LIKES that, then yeah, they won't see it as drudgery and work, they will see it as they are GETTING to go running more, not HAVING to go get in that second 5 miler of the day.

If I were a parent I'd be pretty hesitant to have my kid spending that much time and effort on a sport. I LOVE running, love road races, track meets, and XC, but most kids are going to run in HS and that's it. I would hate for them to look back on HS and their only memories are of running a billion miles.

Sorry, Sara is wrong, just because it worked for her doesn't mean it works for everyone. She is not speaking from proven science, just from her heart. Pure stupidity.

And, all Kenyans don't run to school and back everyday as kids. Do you really think all kids live 6 miles from their school? What about the kids who live next door to the school or a block or two away? I knew a Kenyan back in the day who laughed at that premise, he said he was driven to school in a mercedes. He was a multiple time all-american, raced at a high level on the roads making a good living.

And, Sydney Masciarelli is 18 as a soph, will not be eligible for HS comp as a senior, not so impressive any more.

Sample size of one. Just because high mileage in high school worked for S. Hall doesn’t mean it will for everybody else.

I think that's exactly the point he's trying to make and actually does have credibility.

The ability to handle high mileage and the ability to run fast are two different skill sets. Some slow folks can handle years of high mileage and improve greatly. Some fast folk break down quickly with high mileage. Just because a runner seems to have low talent doesn't mean they should necessarily shy away from mileage. To quote George Sheehan, we are each an "experiment of one."

LoneStarXC wrote:

Sample size of one. Just because high mileage in high school worked for S. Hall doesn’t mean it will for everybody else.

BergLaufer wrote:

https://twitter.com/SaraHall3/status/1150476929209786368?s=20

In hs I ran 75-85 mpw during the summer and handled it great. I agree with her but you can not force someone to do this. the majority of those miles were from 7:30-6:45

ran between 12-15 a day with fridays off every week.

Lots of doubles. 8 & 6 . 6&6 . 8 &4 things like that. and the pace usually was always easy in the afternoons if I did double. Plus we also did track workouts once a week.

the one thing I will say is that my senior season was not what it should have been but that was because I stayed up late every night talking to girls and did not eat healthy and became iron deficient. No stress fractures!!

Ran more in hs than I did in college for sure.

This strategy works when you have Jesus in your heart.

LoneStarXC wrote:

Sample size of one. Just because high mileage in high school worked for S. Hall doesn’t mean it will for everybody else.

Very true, however unless you close your eyes to reality and couple her statement with many others, you incorrectly assert that there is no other evidence. Consider eras and HS performance. Look back in the 60s or 70s where people did train hard. How fast and deep were teams, state meet and national results? What types of people were going into running at that time? If you look at when people were really averse to hard training in general in the US (80s and 90s) and compare the 60s/70s 80s/90s and then 00/10s you do see the outlier is 80s/90s where there were much slower times comparatively. There are already threads on here about this. Go back at look at these threads where they compiled nationally the top 1600/3200 times.

You can also consider currently HS that do run a lot vs those that don't. Some good examples would be York/Neuqua Valley/Mead/Rockford/Woodlands HS. I am sure some people can add some more HS where they know kids run a lot. But these schools produce very good runners and their talent levels are deep.

Kids and teens should not run high milage. Instead they should work on speed, various different sports and distances to get a muscularly well rounded body. Also running form can be a focus. Then they will be prepared for higher mileage and are able to unlock their potential. Sarah is a prime example of this problem. The only thing she got good at from her mileage is marathon running. She is too slow and not versatile enough to be competitive in any other event