In the year 2024, there are all sorts of advice columns all over the Internet, but we’ve never seen one for distance running. That is now changing. Back when LetsRun.com started in 2000, John Kellogg’s near-daily message board postings on training were a hallmark of LetsRun.com but he’s gone dark from the web for 20+ years. That’s changing now.
Each week, John and LetsRun.com co-founder Robert Johnson will be answering your questions in their “Dear Distance Gurus” column. Column #1 which revolves around Hobbs Kessler's training is now posted.
Dear Distance Gurus (DDG): Recently, Hobbs Kessler told letsrun.com that he bonks on all runs longer than 7-8 miles. If he was doing 10-12, he’d bonk and just have to grind it out. He felt like his stimulus to fatigue ratio was off as he was getting tired out on the easy days and not getting much stimulus, so now he pretty much doubles every day (6 days a week with one day off) to get the volume up but never runs more than 50 minutes (7 miles) at a time. His longest normal run is 7 miles and he’s gotten rid of most long runs but has done a few 12 milers. What do you think of this? It sounds like he feels much fresher and can do more quality when he does run/lift.
In the year 2024, there are all sorts of advice columns all over the Internet, but we’ve never seen one for distance running. There is one now as Robert Johnson and John Kellogg are here to answer your questions in our Dear D...
I don’t think JK deserves the hype you give him, but I am glad to see training talk back prominently featured on the website. So for that, I’ll give you an upvote and I’ll eventually get around to reading it.
I'm curious when JK says So the point is that you should make an honest effort to get those easy runs up to at least an hour, but if you have to sacrifice too much to do it (whether in terms of injury risk or a pace which will have a training effect, etc.), you might be better off running a few minutes less
and implies that the extra distance might not be worth it if you are sacrificing the pace whether he is distinguishing "easy days" from "recovery days"? That is, does this advice apply to (say) the day after a really hard workout or is it more for your general "get in the miles" days?
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
As an exercise physiologist with more knowledge in basic than applied science, I can't speak with a ton of confidence about endurance training specifically, but I'll try and describe what I think is probably happening here.
In general, as far as resistance training goes, if you can train more intermittently while keeping the total volume the same (i.e. 6 shorter workouts a week versus 3 longer workouts, spread out as evenly as possible), it seems like you'll probably benefit more from the greater frequency. This is probably due to less peripheral fatigue accumulation per individual session (which will reduce force production efficacy, among other things), but likely helps preserve the mental fortitude of the athlete in the individual session. If your session is 3 hours long, people probably check out, atleast, a little bit by the end of the workout. This should be less likely with shorter sessions, helping the individual rep quality. I can't imagine this wouldn't also be somewhat reflected in endurance training as well, particularly considering Kessler is a higher intensity athlete than 5k-10k/marathon people.
Truthfully, I Kessler's approach is mostly reflective of the fact that we aren't as close to perfect as we sometimes think when it comes to programming for training, even with endurance athletes. There are simply a lot of ways that can work well, and there are always multiple factors that are involved. What Kessler is doing makes some physiological sense to me, particularly considering he is a shorter event athlete at the moment. I think it also helps a TON that he seems very, very bought into the approach he is taking, likely to do with the fact that he seemed to be heavily involved with the decision to try it over what he was doing before. Since he likes what he's doing currently, it probably means his individual rep/mile quality is higher than it might have been before.
My gut feeling about this also is that Kessler's event(s) is too short to really be stressing the beta-oxidation metabolic pathway a whole lot. It's involved, but I would expect that predominantly he's using the aerobic/anaerobic glycolytic systems for 800/1500. In essence the events aren't long enough to really reap the potential "benefits" from the later miles of particularly long runs, if they exist.
In the year 2024, there are all sorts of advice columns all over the Internet, but we’ve never seen one for distance running. That is now changing. Back when LetsRun.com started in 2000, John Kellogg’s near-daily message board postings on training were a hallmark of LetsRun.com but he’s gone dark from the web for 20+ years. That’s changing now.
Each week, John and LetsRun.com co-founder Robert Johnson will be answering your questions in their “Dear Distance Gurus” column. Column #1 which revolves around Hobbs Kessler's training is now posted.
Dear Distance Gurus (DDG): Recently, Hobbs Kessler told letsrun.com that he bonks on all runs longer than 7-8 miles. If he was doing 10-12, he’d bonk and just have to grind it out. He felt like his stimulus to fatigue ratio was off as he was getting tired out on the easy days and not getting much stimulus, so now he pretty much doubles every day (6 days a week with one day off) to get the volume up but never runs more than 50 minutes (7 miles) at a time. His longest normal run is 7 miles and he’s gotten rid of most long runs but has done a few 12 milers. What do you think of this? It sounds like he feels much fresher and can do more quality when he does run/lift.
El Guerrouj trained this way. Except he ran super fast on normal days, near 5:00/mile quite regularly but only 6-7 miles mostly, and doubled most days.
I'd say that doubling greatly reduces your rate of stress injuries. I don't have any way of proving it but I'd think you'd be much more likely to get a stress fracture running 10 miles 6 days a week versus 12 runs of 5 miles each.
I'm sure we'll talk about pace at length in future posts and I'll type up the following in more polished fashion and without typos, but it's stunning that John mentioned how ideally you wouldn't be plodding on your easy days when the reality is both Weldon Johnson and Nick Willis were famous for running super slow on their easy days. When Nick came to Ithaca to run a mile one year, he ran the next day with me and the guys on the team. We head out at like 7:30 pace and he's like, "Do you guys normally run this pace?" I was kind of like trying to not act embarrassed and said, "Yeah. We believe in recovering on your easy days. The point is to spend time on your feet and recover."
He said, "Finally, I've found a college team I can run with. I can't even run with the guys at Michigan."
When I moved to Flagsatff in 2000 to help Weldon get ready for the Trials, I'll admit I was STUNNED by how slow he was running on his easy days. Now the beauty of it all was we didn't have GPS or now how far really we were going but I called up John and asked him, "Do you want me to secretly try to run like 15-20 seconds a mile faster as this seems slow to me." John said, "No. His' running 20mpw more than ever and training at altitude for the first time ever. Easy day pace is the last thing we'd ever worry about." That was the year Weldon went from 29:50 to 28:20 in the 10,000.
Fast forward a few years and Weldon goes out for a run after being out with some sort of injury for like a few months. He's running at leats 45 seconds a mile faster than he normally would run. We said, "What are you doing and thought he was f***king with us." He said, "this is my normal easy day pace." I said, "No it's not." We got to a fence that normally took us 22 minutes to get to and we go there in 20 minutes.
The point was, "he wasn't running slow. He was just running easy. When he was in the midst of 140 mpw in marathon training, his body naturally slowed his ass down. When he was running 0 mpw, he was fresh and thus he sped up."
Do any of you ever wonder if great runners could have gone faster or had longer careers if they would have had a different series of experiences as a runner?
I always wonder if some of the great runners we’re watching might be better with a different coach who trains them differently. Or went to a different high school. Or lived in a different climate.
Are they just too talented and durable to not find success no matter who is coaching them, or does it really make a huge difference?
Probably works both ways and is some of both, but it makes you wonder if guys like Webb and Solinsky and Fernandez would have had Lagat’s coach and lower mileage and how their careers might have been different. I know Lagat is a freak of nature
Do any of you ever wonder if great runners could have gone faster or had longer careers if they would have had a different series of experiences as a runner?
I always wonder if some of the great runners we’re watching might be better with a different coach who trains them differently. Or went to a different high school. Or lived in a different climate.
Are they just too talented and durable to not find success no matter who is coaching them, or does it really make a huge difference?
Probably works both ways and is some of both, but it makes you wonder if guys like Webb and Solinsky and Fernandez would have had Lagat’s coach and lower mileage and how their careers might have been different. I know Lagat is a freak of nature
I think we’ve lost many legendary runners to bad highschool or college or even pro programs.
A younger highschool teammate of mine (not a good program, I was injured 50% of the time, ran 2:06 under these coaches and ran 1:49 a year after walking on in college) split an official 49.8 his senior year during track, and ran in the 15:30s during cross… guess his graduating 800/1600m PBs?
Prepare to be disappointed.
1:58.5 and 4:29.
Hes not going to run in college because he’s set on attending BYU and won’t be walking on with those times. This kid could be on scholarship at BYU if he was handled better, and if he could have been at competent enough of a program to get him there, I would bet money BYU could’ve made him a 48, 1:47, 3:59, 14:00 type of guy. He has amazing mechanics, he’s built just like Cooper Teare, and he races with a ferocity that is extremely rare.
I mentioned it in greater detail in the trending Cade Flatt post, but I have another friend who ran 21.high 46.mid as a sprinter at a TERRIBLE highschool, entered his first ever 800m for fun and ran a 1:56 solo. He was school record holder 100m-800m by the end of his HS career, even though he literally raced the 800m once at a JV last chance type meet. He got picked up by a good D1 distance program as i’m sure the coach saw the potential there, but completely mishandled it and the guy couldn’t even break 2:00 nor 50 seconds for the majority of his time at the program.
If I have firsthand witnessed wasted potential like this, I guarantee you there are far larger examples out there. I genuinely believe there are many kids out there with sub 1:45, sub 3:50, sub 13:00 world class type potential that just get destroyed in HS/College and never even get to have a glimpse at what they could’ve become.
Could be true, but it's more than training that could derail potential. Poor relationships, being broke, it's hard in a new city, your parent just died and it's generally tough out there. As they say, we're not robots and you can't just train at XX.XX pace and expect race times of YY.YY.
In training you often have to pick your battles. It’s all about efficiency and maximizing your gains off the lowest having fruit. Threshold volume is more important than a steady long run if you are training for events below HM. Doubling is a no brainer. Rojo, hope this column becomes a regular feature of the site.
i'm no guru, but joe douglas of the santa monica track club had milers doubling 6 days a week, every day except sunday. recovery runs were never more than 7 miles--any time we went over 7 miles (typically saturdays, and it could be anywhere from 8-16 miles when i was training in the 90s) it was at "fresh" pace, probably something similar to threshold, but maybe faster at times...
Doubling and injuries: Running twice per day requires two warmups as opposed to one, which could increase injury risk. However, injury risk is generally less doubling, which is why most elite runners do it. Or at a minumum, the rick/reward favors doubling. One's legs get tired 7-8 miles into a 10 mile run, especially if they are more fast twitch dominant like Kessler, as opposed to a 10k'er. When doubling, the aerobic effect of a 5 miler vs. a 10 miler is different. Also, the morning session could be a jog aiding in recovery, and the evening run a more serious effort. Many ways to go about this.
Easy day pace: While there are plenty of examples of elite runners jogging on easy days, the norm is probably much faster. I would challenge the Letsrun team to come up with a spreasheet and analyze paces run on non-workout days by elite runners. Also, many vary the pace. While 7:30/mile may be fine the days after a tough session, the next day may be a 10 miler going from 7:00/mile down to 5:30/mile averaging 6:00/mile. It's not fair to bring up a couple examples, and leave out former top US runner's like Solinski, famous for saying something like "we're pro runner's we should be able to run 6:00/mile or faster on normal runs" or something to that efffect, or Lagat who ran low mileage but routinely ran 10 milers in 55-50 minutes on non-workout days. Would Solinski have become an American record holder if he ran 7:30 pace on easy days? I doubt it.
My biggest question is about the fiber type claim by Kellogg.
Is there evidence (research) that the fast twich fiber types actually become more oxidative? I could understand stand type IIa (oxidative) being adapted to the training he describes. However my understanding is that fiber types in say untrained individuals are hybrids and will specialize depending on the type of training. Since we are talking about a trained individual like Kessler, his fibers are probably differentiated already. I don't see why type IIx (glycolytic) fibers would adapt more mitochondria since that isn't what they are ment for.
I would imagine his increases in performance comes from growing stronger with age and psychologically being able to push farther/faster. But thats just my theory.
If any one can point me to literature on long runs (1-2hr) leading to fast twich fibers actually being recruited in a meaningful way I'd love to read up on it.
Probably works both ways and is some of both, but it makes you wonder if guys like Webb and Solinsky and Fernandez would have had Lagat’s coach and lower mileage and how their careers might have been different. I know Lagat is a freak of nature
I'd never thought of that but it's an interesting thought experiment.
If Solinsky had Lagat's coach, I think Solinsky would have been WAY worse. Fernandez's issues weren't training or injury related - I don't think he liked the pressure of racing. Webb's coach wasn't known for super high miles - but that's more interesting.
One thing about training that John Kellogg talks about is - he thinks it's awful to base your stuff based on one pro you heard about. How do you know that pro wasn't on PEDs - and if they were #1 in the world they likely were a freak? Whenever he hears about a training that doesn't make sense to him, he says to me, "Don't make me make that motion - and it's a motion of himself injection himself with a drug."
Back when I started running, I felt there was 1 WAY to get in shape.
Now I view it more like cooking. There are a number of different ways to cook a steak and ultimately if you are cautious and don't burn it, they all taste great and are hard to distinguish but they all involve similar things - spices, heat, etc. The order you put it on isn't necessarily the same for every chef but the quality of the meet is massively important.
Probably works both ways and is some of both, but it makes you wonder if guys like Webb and Solinsky and Fernandez would have had Lagat’s coach and lower mileage and how their careers might have been different. I know Lagat is a freak of nature
I'd never thought of that but it's an interesting thought experiment.
If Solinsky had Lagat's coach, I think Solinsky would have been WAY worse. Fernandez's issues weren't training or injury related - I don't think he liked the pressure of racing. Webb's coach wasn't known for super high miles - but that's more interesting.
One thing about training that John Kellogg talks about is - he thinks it's awful to base your stuff based on one pro you heard about. How do you know that pro wasn't on PEDs - and if they were #1 in the world they likely were a freak? Whenever he hears about a training that doesn't make sense to him, he says to me, "Don't make me make that motion - and it's a motion of himself injection himself with a drug."
Back when I started running, I felt there was 1 WAY to get in shape.
Now I view it more like cooking. There are a number of different ways to cook a steak and ultimately if you are cautious and don't burn it, they all taste great and are hard to distinguish but they all involve similar things - spices, heat, etc. The order you put it on isn't necessarily the same for every chef but the quality of the meet is massively important.
I think this is also a great point.
NOP had tons of success with their fast “easy mileage”, and the Ingebrigstens do great with their high volume double threshold sessions, but NOPs reputation is hindered and although there’s not hard evidence, there have been Ingebrigstens on the “likely doping” list, and I will never ever be surprised when a world class athlete gets caught, it’s just sadly part of the sport.
That being said, i’ve personally found lots of success incorporating aspects of Ingebrigsten training into my own training. I’m getting into 1500/3000m PB territory even though I’m currently self coached and usually do my hard sessions by myself, and I don’t feel like i’m working as hard as I did back when I set those PBs. Maybe someone with better physiology knowledge than me can explain this, but running at near top speed is significantly more relaxed than it has been, and feels less taxing. I often find myself accidentally running a 24.5 or so 200m rep when I was expecting to see about 27 on my stopwatch.
This training will also let me transition to half marathon/marathon work a lot more smoothly once track season is over too. I’ve decided I’m essentially going to be doing a mashup of Peter Snell type training and Norwegian method training going forward and I’m very excited to see what it does for my 800-3k fitness, and even longer events.
