You are reporting the following post to the moderators for review and possible removal from the forum

Glenn McCarthy

I recall reading a study that was published in the late 70's that said that there were several places of increased returns as compared to just several minutes less, 45-48 minutes returned more than a 40 minute run, over 60 minutes significantly more than less. But that once you got over 90 minutes the rate of return for the time climbed significantly and even more so after 105 minutes. The study went on to say that once you got to 120 minutes the return dropped to a very low return rate. Yes there was some improvement, but the loss of form, and general fatigue residue made the returns risky compared to stopping at 2 hours.

With the runners I work with, unless training for a marathon, I use a 90-105-120 3 week cycle. That way they can easily see the returns of the improvement gains of each cycle.


Hit the submit button below if you want us to review the post.

If you feel this is urgent or want a reply, email us at [email protected] about the post and please include a link to the thread the post is on and what page number/post on that page it is.