How does Wejo run 7:00 miles all day, then run 28:06???

I remember reading about Grete Waitz waking up early on NYC marathon day, looking out the window and seeing some guy creeping along, barely moving, ugly form, about nine-minute miles. Turns out it was Decastella out for a warm-up run on the day he ran 2:07:--.

[quote]hey wrote:

Roy Benson taught me using the HR monitor -- usually the easy aerobic days were at 1:30-2:00 slower than date 10k race pace. So for me, a 30:45 10k runner when in shape, that would be 6:30-7 pace (a little slower on easy mornign runs before hard workouts). Early season, when I was only in 32:00 shape, it would be 7:15-45 or so.

quote]

This makes no sense. You say that you go 1:30-2:00 slower than 10k pace. A 32 min. 10k is 5:09 pace. That would make your easy runs at 6:39 to 7:09, not 7:15-45.

And exactly when did Deek run a 2.07 in NYC???

BEEF TURN MAIL wrote:

Lydiard has advocated the LSD runs. Long SLow distance. He talked about doing them for 5 hours or so. I don't really know people that have done the 5 hour runs, but the LSD runs are shown to work. I'm pretty sure that the LSD runs will deplete your slow-twitch fibers.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't a guy by the name of Van Akken(sp?) the "father" of long slow aerobic running? Lydiard was more about a lot of miles at a steady state....aerobic, but not crawling all the time.

Alan

But for the 28.06, would people not be saying his training is all wrong, too slow, etc etc?

Instead, now Wejo had a great race, everyone is now saying slow jogging is the way to go.

Or is Wejo just a legendary talent who would race a good 10k whatever his predominant steady run speeds?

Which perspective is more likely true?

While I certainly can't refute the benefits of his running at 7000 feet, Wejo himself would argue pretty hard against being called "a legendary talent" (and would back it up with plenty of poor race results). As jtupper says, everyone is an experiment of one, and obviously what JK is doing with Wejo is the right thing for him -- and should not be disdained by anyone who feels they have more in them than they've shown under other training philosophies.

Congrats to both Weldon Johnson and John Kellogg on the result.

I think (as I'm guessing you already know) that he meant Boston, in '86 when Deek did 2:07:51. Though I don't remember if Waitz was there that year.

Rob DeCastella ran 2:07:51 at [John Hancock] Boston -- "neddy boy" was close enough for most lestsrun.com viewers.

you're right, it was boston...

BEEF TURN MAIL wrote:

Lydiard has advocated the LSD runs. Long SLow distance. He talked about doing them for 5 hours or so. I don't really know people that have done the 5 hour runs, but the LSD runs are shown to work. I'm pretty sure that the LSD runs will deplete your slow-twitch fibers.

Bzzzzzzzzzzz.

Wrong.

Would you like to buy a clue?

So lemme get this straight... Grete Waitz looked out of her hotel window in NYC in November, and she saw Deek in the street in Boston doing his warm-up the following April??!?

Did I get that right?

Wejo also weighs about 130 pounds, has long legs, great lung capacity, etc., etc. These things also benefit him during training and racing.

Sure, Wejo may run a whole lot of miles at what you consider to be a remarkably slow pace, and then run a very fast race. Does his running a very fast race mean that his training was optimal? Absolutely not. Would he have raced faster if the block of training in question had been run faster? I don't know, and there's no way that you can know either. Would he have raced faster if the block of training in question was run even slower? Who knows?

Somebody else above posted about the Arkansas guys doing 16 mile runs at a fast pace. Yes, they do race fast. Does that mean their training is optimal? No. It might be, but fast race does not imply best possible training. Would Cragg race faster if he trained like Wejo? Would Wejo race faster if he trained like Cragg? Who knows? The fact of the matter is that they apparently do not train alike, but both run fast times. What they are doing is obviously producing very good results, but are these the best results possible for Cragg or for Wejo? I sure as heck don't know, what I'm saying is that nobody else can possibly know either.

I remember reading an interview with Paula Radcliffe a couple of years back in "Athletics Weekly" -British equivalent of track and field news. I remember her saying that her judge of pace wasn't that great, but the vast majority of runs were done at 6 min pace or faster... And she hasn't done too badly!!!

Yes, but let's don't forget that Paula has run the marathon WAAAYYY faster than wejo...

Wejo (or anyone else),

do you also advocate such long, slow running during base training? If so, would you structure the week around, say, a planned tempo run, and maybe a sub-threshold effort with the rest being scads of long, slow distance?

I've also seen evidence for a bit different approach, most vehemently suscribed to by Hodgie, Lydiard, Malmo, Kemibe, etc. of busting it out whenever you want to on a run, the more often the better.

Currently, I'm only concerned with building the most effective base, not speedwork or racing. Thanks!

I agree with the Malmo/Hodge et al approach of hammering it when you feel like it. I like closing out a 90 minute run with 30 minutes at an uptempo pace. If putting a label to it I'd call it marathon pace, or just slightly faster than easy. If feeling even better I'll pick it up to around threshold pace or so, maybe halfmarathon effort. Then maybe the last 5-10 minutes I'll pick it up to around 10k effort. Done this way you could do many days a week like the above. Maybe not pushed to 10k pace or even halfmarathon pace at the end, but still closing fast at the end of a run. I think doing the above is great for the off-season because you can do it anywhere anytime without any formal structure.

Alan

runningart are you the same runningart from marius' board. the only thing i question about what you say is the part where you run around 10k pace. i think the object for these sub threshold efforts is to not accumulate any lactic acid which for alot of people would be marathon pace not 10k pace. this is the way many runners push there threshold up by running for about 35-60minutes right under the point of the accumulation of lactic acid. even just for 10 minutes at 10k pace that might be a little hard and dangerous, but it would be alright if you hit actual marathon pace for the last 10 minutes but not go faster than it. if you run 35-60 minutes at a tad slower then marathon pace you'll be fine.

6:00 is slower than her marathon pace. And so is 5:30, for that matter.

That would be the late Dr. Ernst van Aaken, of Germany. Anyone on this board who has not read "van Aaken Method" should do so ASAP (while resting between his multiple runs per day and emaciating himself to the point of resembling Harald Norpoth). Dr. van Aaken's method works.