Do people who run 100 MPW have girlfriends/wives, regular jobs, etc?

Tip 1: Marry a serious runner

RunnerSam wrote:

Tip 1: Marry a serious runner

Thomas from Believe in the Run and Megan from Believe in the Run are goals.

If I work 50 hours per week and spend 5 hours per week running, it isn't that hard for me to believe that some other guy can work 40 hours per week and spend 15 hours per week running.

If you run that much and are not a professional runner, trust me you don’t have a life, social or otherwise, outside of running. It’s really sad actually.

If you run 100 miles a week at 7 minute pace you run about 1:40:00 a day.

Get up, pop an hour run, go to work, run after work and then see family, maybe even do your second run during lunch, or maybe your wife or girlfriend can ride a bike next to you for 40 min in the evening so you can work out together.

People spend 40 min jerking off, or hours on TV/phones, so don't give me BS about not wanting to waste time after work for family and friends etc.

Fax wrote:

Literally how you gonna run that much and have a healthy balance between all facets of your life? And these are the type of people who probably also do strength work, too.

Only if you are ultra type A personality. Those are the only people that can run that much and still do the other things for a full "normal" life.

simple math wrote:

If I work 50 hours per week and spend 5 hours per week running, it isn't that hard for me to believe that some other guy can work 40 hours per week and spend 15 hours per week running.

This is not nearly equivalent because the non-running needs between a 5 hr week and a 15+ he week are so different. Strength, rest, etc. That could eat up as much time as running itself, if not more.

100 mile weeks are overkill for most runners.

Kipchoge probably runs less on average through the year.

What are you training for?

I'm married, work full time, running 120 miles this week with one strength session already done that lasted a solid hour, might do another one tomorrow. I'm pretty fast so a 10 mile normal run barely takes over an hour. A 20-24 mile long run takes between 2-2.5 hours on Sunday. So it's about 2 hours per day of working out, nothing crazy. If I was only doing 100 per week it'd be less than 2 hours of work per day. When I think about what it'd be like running only 70 miles in a week, it seems so easy to average only 10 miles per day or barely an hour. I work from home most days so that saves nearly an hour on the day from the pre-covid days, so that helps. I imagine having kids would make it more difficult, but then again is it really so bad to have your wife watch the kid for an hour while you run, then you can watch the kid for an hour while your wife does something she wants to do? Or better yet, push the kid in a running stroller a couple times per week. I know someone who was still training heavy after having their kid and was literally pushing a stroller for near 100 miles in a week, only doing the workouts and long run without them.

the100mileoverkillweek wrote:

100 mile weeks are overkill for most runners.

Kipchoge probably runs less on average through the year.

What are you training for?

I'm not personally considering it, more of a general inquiry.

Fax wrote:

simple math wrote:

If I work 50 hours per week and spend 5 hours per week running, it isn't that hard for me to believe that some other guy can work 40 hours per week and spend 15 hours per week running.

This is not nearly equivalent because the non-running needs between a 5 hr week and a 15+ he week are so different. Strength, rest, etc. That could eat up as much time as running itself, if not more.

I didn't say they were equivalent. I said it isn't hard for me to believe that a person could do it.

Do you really need to set aside dedicated time to rest? Most people are physically at rest most of the day. If someone really wants to run 100 mpw and sufficient rest is important to them, they could presumably pick a job that won't require them to be on their feet, giving them 16 hours of rest per day between time in bed and time at a desk.

i know a few guys that come close (more like 80-90 a week). full time job, wife, kids. the secret is that they do their runs at about 5:30 AM year-round. there are a lot of hours in the day that many people spend watching tv or playing video games. oh also the guy i'm thinking of does basically zero strength work. i don't even think he does core. he's a 2:30 marathon guy so you could argue this lifestyle isn't worth it, but i think he genuinely loves it.

How many hours per week training is the question? Running at 9:15 per mile or running at 6:15 per mile?

Lets do the math:

There's 168 hours in a week.

Subtract sleep (8hrs per day x 7 days = 56)

That leaves you with 112 hours. Now subtract your 50 hr for work (40hr + commute).

You're at 62 hours remaining.

Subtract 1 hour per day (7) for showering, hygiene, etc and you're at 55 hours.

Subtract 5 hours for chores and miscellaneous and you're at 50.

Now subtract 15 hours for running (7+ min/mile) and you're at 40 hours per week, remaining.

Don't waste time on social media, TV, mindless web surfing, and you've got 35 hours per week, or about 5 hours per day to divide between family, friends and significant others. Or, 2 hours per day during the week, and 25 hours on the weekend.

It seems doable, contingent upon not wasting any time on stupid stuff most people waste most of their time on. I guess it depends on how bad you want it, but it seems possible.

What am I missing?

the100mileoverkillweek wrote:

100 mile weeks are overkill for most runners.

Kipchoge probably runs less on average through the year.

What are you training for?

LOL if you think Kipchoge isn't running 100+ mile weeks on the regular. Here's his training log before Berlin a few years ago. This is the 6 weeks leading up, so admittedly he's during his high mileage part of his training, but he's running back to back 120 mile weeks, then a 112 week and a 115 week before doing a taper into the marathon. I'd bet that he has another couple weeks of above 100 before his 120 mile weeks, and then a couple weeks of 100 before that. Meaning there's a chunk 8 weeks where he's averaging around 110 miles per week. Doing that twice per year means 4 months of the year is an average of 110 miles per week. I'd bet that a lot of the other weeks at the beginning of a buildup are still in the 70-95 mile range. Interesting thing, his 'easy' 10k runs he does for doubles he typically runs them in about 40 minutes, which is about 6:20 mile pace. And easy-moderate half marathon runs the days after workouts where he ends up running an average of around 6:00-6:10 pace, meaning he is running sub 6:00 mile pace on a good portion of those runs. An elite US runner shouldn't expect to go that fast, but shouldn't be more than 10-15 seconds per mile slower, running some 10 mile runs at 6:20 pace and the easiest of days is still like 6:45 pace.

At one point I ran up to 150 mpw and worked 50 hours per week with a wife and kids

I am well aware that Kipchoge does 120 mile weeks. But he also has some time after races where he does not run at all.

I would not be surprised if he is below 100 miles per week on average over the year.

The problem with mileage numbers is, that people hear peak mileage numbers and think that athlete does that all the time.

On the other hand there are plenty of slower runners who run 100 mile weeks on average. Does that make sense? Probably not.

I spend roughly 14 hours a week running, every week and have done for over a year (100mpw at over 8 min per mile).

Some of its in commute, replace driving with running.

I've also had a full time job and distance learning course but no children.

People waste 2 hours day on TV I'm sure of it. I still probably watch an hour a day but recon others are 3 hours per day TV/videogaming/instagramming.

I'll never be an elite but at least I know that I won't.