The coach who UNDERTRAINED the sub 4 miler and 13:50 kind deserves credit for being smart and not destroying those guys with ridiculous training in HS.
The coach who UNDERTRAINED the sub 4 miler and 13:50 kind deserves credit for being smart and not destroying those guys with ridiculous training in HS.
SebCoesGhost wrote:
The coach who UNDERTRAINED the sub 4 miler and 13:50 kind deserves credit for being smart and not destroying those guys with ridiculous training in HS.
I'm with this guy. I give my HS mid-distance runners 20-30mpw. They are almost entirely injury free. They improve every year. They have fun. They are competitive provincially, and some are competitive nationally (I've had one internationally competitive).
Another coach in my region is an Olympic medalist in middle distance and gives 'their' runners similar mileage. This coach produces national medalists.
Looks like some runners are being coached on the side...nothing wrong with that. Colleges are throwing money (scholarships) at these high performers so having a secondary coach is a must (in some cases) in this day and age. See it all the time. 15 MPW is nothing!!!
No!
Know what go out and run on your own, high school is only 4 years long, I was not that fast in high school but I ran out outside of practice, added extra miles onto the workouts, then go run a marathon the year after you graduate just to prove to yourself it was all worth it. It def is worth it and you would gain much more from running higher mile weeks then 15 mpw!!! Also Im starting to rep from it now and am up to 80 miles plus a week and looking forward to what the future has to offer.
Any high schooler running less than 50 miles a week as a junior or senior is pathetic. Get out and train! Anyone can handle 50 miles a week. Entire teams run that much in high school without injury.
If a coach has national-level runners with less mileage than that then coach is very fortunate to be in a talent-rich area. Try pulling that stuff somewhere else and your kids won't achieve anything.
No. How 'bout 30-35, with appropriate helpings of quality workouts/rest days? Worked for me back in the day, 2:01 880 and 4:30.7 miler. Not a star, but always a contender.
"Running outside of practice" leads to overtraining and injury. Focus on workouts and racing for now, and up the mileage as you age and in your college career. Plenty of other ways to improve running without actually running. Do you go to the weight room after practice? How about stretching? Form drills? Nutrition? Enough sleep?
OT22 wrote:
oldXChasbeen wrote:What's the longest run you've ever done and longest recently?
I've actually been doing long runs of 12-14 miles. Is that too long?
No it's not. Gerry Lindgren did 350 miles a week with an 88 mile long run and he still holds the indoor record for 2 miles on a horrible track. So, I suggest you do 100 mile long runs and 300 miles a week.
Yeah going race,long run, hardest workout of the week is a great idea. This isn't the greatest looking program but it is better than some (i.e. the ones that replace the workouts with TT on monday, dual on Wed, invite on Sat). If it progress so that in march so that those 2 mile runs are now 6 and the 4 mile run in an 8 and the rest during workouts has gone from 3 mins to 60s, you will be fine.If you want to try higher mileage, do it over the summer.
The Super wrote:
The answer for the OP is clearly to not take Sunday off. You aren't running enough during the week to need that day off anyway. I would start with a 4 miler on Sunday and bump it up to 6 the next week and then 8 and then 10, and assuming no injury problems, continue to do those 10 milers on Sunday until you get toward the end of the season when you want to preform well and then pare back.
OT22 wrote:
I'm a male junior in high school and I have a coach who has coached some very successful runners. However, he only has our team running about 15mpw. How is that enough mileage? Our distance team this year is pretty weak. I've asked him before if I could run extra outside of practice and he said DEFINITELY NOT. What should I do?
I think you're fine. I was in a similar program in HS and as a Sr I ran 4:33, split 1:55 in a relay, and split 49.x as well. The only thinh I did different that your coach doesn't want you to do is ran an easy AM 3 miler twice a week. However, my group of teammates and I were highly competitive and ran our workouts and runs extrememly fast. All the time.
Now that being said every runner is different. I responded well to this type of training. Shorter and intense workouts. Most of my teammates did as well. The fall previous I ran 16:10 for the 5k so I probably had a pretty good base going into track which I'm sure impacted my overall fitness.
If you have no asperations to run college at any level don't worry about it. If you do then you'll prbably walk on somewhere and have the freshest legs on the team. Then you can train in a different program and see what suits you.
Absolutely not. Running 15-20 will never even come close to reaching your potential. Also since you won't even run in the same galaxy as your potential you won't run in college so the development doesn't matter like some of the jackasses here seem to think (i.e. the morons saying running 35 mpw will ruin your development).
I really hope this is a joke and REALLY hope the idiots saying running 35 mpw will ruin your development are joking.
LOL seriously? wrote:
Absolutely not. Running 15-20 will never even come close to reaching your potential. Also since you won't even run in the same galaxy as your potential you won't run in college so the development doesn't matter like some of the jackasses here seem to think (i.e. the morons saying running 35 mpw will ruin your development).
I really hope this is a joke and REALLY hope the idiots saying running 35 mpw will ruin your development are joking.
The people who say that stuff omn here are usually the guys who were too lazy to ever run high mileage.
People...you need to build an aerobic base starting in high school or you will never reach your potential. Higher mileage is only detrimental if you do too much anearobic work too.
Does really nobody else consider this to be an all too obvious troll attempt except for me? 10/10 sir. This is one of the better ones I've seen in a long time! The idea that people actually believe that two sub 4:20 milers ran those times under said coach's program is the best part of this entire thread.
Maybe a troll, maybe not. For the sake of argument let's pretend he is legit.
My high school coach retired with over 20 state championships in cross and multiple guys who went on to be stellar college careers. Here was his breakdown.
Freshmen-5 days per week running, 1 day of intervals, ~20mpw
Sophs-6 days per week, 2 days of intervals, ~30mpw
Jrs- 6 days per week, 3 days of doubles, 2 days of intervals, ~45mpw
Srs-6 days per week, 3 days of doubles, 3 days of intervals, ~55mpw
He would adjust this schedule to the individual kids, but he stayed pretty close to this for +30 years.
Once had a kid with chronic injuries run 4:26 with nothing more than pool work, 1 interval session per week, and 1 race day per week.
He also coached a 2:26 marathon kid in high school who took his mileage up to ~80mpw progressively following the original schedule "cause he could handle it."
The point is the original poster may not be in a terrible situation. He is a soph from what I can gather, and he doesn't sound like a world beater. Maybe his coach is trying to bring him along slowly and actually knows what he is doing.
my 2 cents
Runner from the North Country wrote:
Does really nobody else consider this to be an all too obvious troll attempt except for me? 10/10 sir. This is one of the better ones I've seen in a long time! The idea that people actually believe that two sub 4:20 milers ran those times under said coach's program is the best part of this entire thread.
A friend of mine coached a guy who went under 4:00 in the 1500m his last two years of highschool (something like 3:57 then 3:55), and under 9:00 for 3000m his last two years of highschool (something like 8:54 then 8:47). He did about 30mpw.
I strongly agree with those that favor under training high school runners. Lets run is filled with people who post who were over trained and later have long term challenges and limitations in their ability to run with regularity of intensity because of this.
I am curious if your coach changes the training based on the age and years in the program? A 14 year old frosh who has never trained on a daily basis would need to be brought into regular daily training slowly. But a 17 year old senior who has three years of running track and cross country should be doing more. Starting at 15 mpw as a frosh and ending at 30 mph as a senior seems generally reasonable and ethical, depending of course on intensity. High school coaches should not be training and running teenage kids into the ground to run as fast as they can when they are 17. In the long term, who cares if you run 4:12 instead of 4:07 in high school if that means that you will not fully develop later when you are older and more mature? High school coaches should be creating programs that seek to develop long term increases in effort and speed which would mean that their talented athletes would be in an excellent position to develop and increase work load and decrease times in college. Or, if not inclined or talented, to live healthy and active physically active lives after high school. it is almost always better to under train high school athletes. Their bodies are still growing excessive physical will likely have negative long term consequences.
I personally do not think anyone should be trained like Jim Ryun was in high school. I would be curious if there are any studies that found runners that ran over 50 mph in high with any regularity and investigated how they were doing physciall--5,10, 20, 30 years later. I know there will be examples of those that have been healthy and fine. But as a group how likely was that? Has that quantity of running as a teenager had negative long term consequences as a group?
g_d
genetic_dysfunction wrote:
I strongly agree with those that favor under training high school runners. Lets run is filled with people who post who were over trained and later have long term challenges and limitations in their ability to run with regularity of intensity because of this.
I am curious if your coach changes the training based on the age and years in the program? A 14 year old frosh who has never trained on a daily basis would need to be brought into regular daily training slowly. But a 17 year old senior who has three years of running track and cross country should be doing more. Starting at 15 mpw as a frosh and ending at 30 mph as a senior seems generally reasonable and ethical, depending of course on intensity. High school coaches should not be training and running teenage kids into the ground to run as fast as they can when they are 17. In the long term, who cares if you run 4:12 instead of 4:07 in high school if that means that you will not fully develop later when you are older and more mature? High school coaches should be creating programs that seek to develop long term increases in effort and speed which would mean that their talented athletes would be in an excellent position to develop and increase work load and decrease times in college. Or, if not inclined or talented, to live healthy and active physically active lives after high school. it is almost always better to under train high school athletes. Their bodies are still growing excessive physical will likely have negative long term consequences.
I personally do not think anyone should be trained like Jim Ryun was in high school. I would be curious if there are any studies that found runners that ran over 50 mph in high with any regularity and investigated how they were doing physciall--5,10, 20, 30 years later. I know there will be examples of those that have been healthy and fine. But as a group how likely was that? Has that quantity of running as a teenager had negative long term consequences as a group?
g_d
Gebrsalassie? Daniel Komen? Most of the Kenyans? The real problem isn't mileage,it's intervals.
I call BS. Trollllllll