I know there are lots of threads on quantity vs quality and all this back and forth with science and evidence and blah blah blah! But I really don't think there's a substitute for the confidence you get when you're really cranking high mileage weeks. Like you can just silence any little doubt in your head by knowing you're doing as much as you can because you're running twice a day, no days off, and just racking up numbers on the Garmin. Same thing I guess goes if you're just crushing a workout or running really fast but idk if it gives the same satisfaction as seeing 3 digits on your mileage total come Sunday. Some say it'll burn you out but how else do you know how high you can fly?
Hard work gets results. That often involves spending more time training. So many runners nowadays want to find a shortcut. They don't want to run more than 30 MPW. Then they wonder why they're mediocre. If you want to be great, if you want to be the winner, you've got to train harder and train more.
Hard work gets results. That often involves spending more time training. So many runners nowadays want to find a shortcut. They don't want to run more than 30 MPW. Then they wonder why they're mediocre. If you want to be great, if you want to be the winner, you've got to train harder and train more.
Honestly, I find I'm pretty mediocre no matter how much I run! But relative to myself and how I feel about my running, high mileage and hard workouts are the simplest route to run well. I actually have a ton of respect for people who can dial their training back and still show up to race day confident they've done enough. Like for me to feel my best on race day, I have to have a pretty stacked training resume but some people I know can show up off like 20 mpw and a few light threshold workouts and they crush!
Hard work gets results. That often involves spending more time training. So many runners nowadays want to find a shortcut. They don't want to run more than 30 MPW. Then they wonder why they're mediocre. If you want to be great, if you want to be the winner, you've got to train harder and train more.
Honestly, I find I'm pretty mediocre no matter how much I run! But relative to myself and how I feel about my running, high mileage and hard workouts are the simplest route to run well. I actually have a ton of respect for people who can dial their training back and still show up to race day confident they've done enough. Like for me to feel my best on race day, I have to have a pretty stacked training resume but some people I know can show up off like 20 mpw and a few light threshold workouts and they crush!
I think you’re just referring to natural talent and experience with the low mileage anecdotes.
My friend picked up running in his late 20’s and is now a 2:32 marathoner at age 40. He runs 70-80 mpw. he routinely does a 24 mile training run close to marathon pace 5 weeks out from his marathon to “check” his fitness. That, to me, is a serious lack of confidence despite his impressive volume and big workouts.
i am about the same age, same pb, and run 55 mpw in my biggest week.
I know there are lots of threads on quantity vs quality and all this back and forth with science and evidence and blah blah blah! But I really don't think there's a substitute for the confidence you get when you're really cranking high mileage weeks. Like you can just silence any little doubt in your head by knowing you're doing as much as you can because you're running twice a day, no days off, and just racking up numbers on the Garmin. Same thing I guess goes if you're just crushing a workout or running really fast but idk if it gives the same satisfaction as seeing 3 digits on your mileage total come Sunday. Some say it'll burn you out but how else do you know how high you can fly?
I love the last ten words here. Exactly right. Off of 30 mpw, I managed a 17:27 5k. Off of 100+, I ran a faster pace for the marathon distance. No substitute for mileage, baby!
I think you’re just referring to natural talent and experience with the low mileage anecdotes.
My friend picked up running in his late 20’s and is now a 2:32 marathoner at age 40. He runs 70-80 mpw. he routinely does a 24 mile training run close to marathon pace 5 weeks out from his marathon to “check” his fitness. That, to me, is a serious lack of confidence despite his impressive volume and big workouts.
i am about the same age, same pb, and run 55 mpw in my biggest week.
What's funny is I actually agree with the lack of confidence thing. That's really what I find mileage helps me with. It's great to take confidence in 55 mpw and the workouts you're doing without having some huge session to point to and say "see! If I can do that, then I can run 2:30!" It just couldn't be me.
I think I had this realization when I was in high school. I was a scrub senior and trying to break 5 in the mile. I didn't run every day and I'd take one practice day to do long jump stuff so my mileage was usually around 15-20 a week. But I couldn't break 5 to save my life and that was all I wanted to do. So we had two weeks off at spring break and instead of taking a college visit or vacation, I just ran. Not even anything crazy, I just did two weeks that were more like my xc summer training, doubling and hitting 40s. No workouts, just mileage. I remember coming back and feeling supercharged, then we hit back with the speed and I broke 5 for the rest of the season.
Again, I'm mediocre and I've tried every shortcut training method to get around it. But there just isn't one I've found. First time sub 17 in the 5k? Came after the biggest mileage month of my life hitting a 60 peak and consistent 50 mpw. Even my 800 pr came the spring after running my first xc 8k in the fall and putting in a big summer assistant coaching. I'd love to be like a Cade Flatt or Donovan Brazier type where I don't have to put the hours in. I'm probably the last person who wants to run anything more than 25 mpw but I don't think I could ever replace the confidence and feeling that having that training base gives. Most of you guys are way higher mileage than me but I'm just talking about a feeling and the relativity of the miles.
my personal experience (a) when my XC mileage was upped by half i got ill and blew up my season and (b) my college soccer coach who adored 2 or 2-1/2 hour practices, well, you couldn't outwork us, but we had a lot of 0-0 double OT ties.
what you're expressing is not confidence unless you see the actual goods -- times -- it's faith.
to me the numbers that matter are meet times and finishing places. to give us (or even yourself) digitally recorded distance trivia from your training as proof the training works is circular and begs the conclusion.
related point but it helps to be have other events or sports to see the limits or downsides to what you are selling. as a sprinter/hurdler and soccer player, i could quickly tell i had lost a little top end speed as my distance work accumulated, and then biofeedback and my times told me i was getting ill when they increased my workload year 2.
kind of like i knew from my 75-90 min select soccer practices we didn't need 120-150 min daily in college. you need rigor and context to tell the difference.
I agree completely. I don't think a runner of my caliber needs it fitness wise but the mental side and confidence does wonders. Even when my lactate threshold, vo2 max and form do not change by much I still can race faster just because of confidence.
my personal experience (a) when my XC mileage was upped by half i got ill and blew up my season and (b) my college soccer coach who adored 2 or 2-1/2 hour practices, well, you couldn't outwork us, but we had a lot of 0-0 double OT ties.
what you're expressing is not confidence unless you see the actual goods -- times -- it's faith.
Well if it is upped by half yes you will burn out. If you spend years doing it and play it smart with nutrition and switching out shoes and all the injury prevention you can get to 100 mpw in like 3 years if you push the envelope.
Recreational runners read about mileage debates and miss the point entirely. “Low mileage” pros still run a ton of miles. Coe was doing 80-90 if you count his warmups, cooldowns, and recovery runs, which he never did when he self-reported what he was doing.
Low mileage for a middle distance guy is 70-80. Low for a marathoner is 90-100. If you’re running 55, don’t kid yourself that you’re “training smart.” Maybe it’s what you have time for, and that’s fine, but it’s severely compromised training for any distance over 800 meters.
Recreational runners read about mileage debates and miss the point entirely. “Low mileage” pros still run a ton of miles. Coe was doing 80-90 if you count his warmups, cooldowns, and recovery runs, which he never did when he self-reported what he was doing.
Low mileage for a middle distance guy is 70-80. Low for a marathoner is 90-100. If you’re running 55, don’t kid yourself that you’re “training smart.” Maybe it’s what you have time for, and that’s fine, but it’s severely compromised training for any distance over 800 meters.
I don’t know, I think you’re missing part of it. you assume every body can handle more and will respond positively.
Lagat ran 3:26 and 12:50’s.
he was running under 70 mpw.
everyone has a ceiling relative to their talent AND potential. It’s not like you give Lagat 110 mpw and he starts running faster.
Ritzenhein and Lagat could run sub 14 on 30 mpw.
I started on my college team and we slowly built up to 75-80 mpw. I got injured after two years. After a year and a half of struggles my coach had me run 45-50 miles and I ran quite well, better than we thought I could do. durability and the ability to handle a workload is part of natural talent. I can’t handle a lot. German Fernandez and Derrick Rose are two athletes that were supremely talented but not durable.
Recreational runners read about mileage debates and miss the point entirely. “Low mileage” pros still run a ton of miles. Coe was doing 80-90 if you count his warmups, cooldowns, and recovery runs, which he never did when he self-reported what he was doing.
Low mileage for a middle distance guy is 70-80. Low for a marathoner is 90-100. If you’re running 55, don’t kid yourself that you’re “training smart.” Maybe it’s what you have time for, and that’s fine, but it’s severely compromised training for any distance over 800 meters.
I don’t know, I think you’re missing part of it. you assume every body can handle more and will respond positively.
Lagat ran 3:26 and 12:50’s.
he was running under 70 mpw.
everyone has a ceiling relative to their talent AND potential. It’s not like you give Lagat 110 mpw and he starts running faster.
Ritzenhein and Lagat could run sub 14 on 30 mpw.
I started on my college team and we slowly built up to 75-80 mpw. I got injured after two years. After a year and a half of struggles my coach had me run 45-50 miles and I ran quite well, better than we thought I could do. durability and the ability to handle a workload is part of natural talent. I can’t handle a lot. German Fernandez and Derrick Rose are two athletes that were supremely talented but not durable.
I was always kind of puzzled when people cite someone really fast who ran low mileage. I always thought that if I wanted to be competitive with someone like that I just had to do a lot more running than they did. When I was a college freshman I couldn't even dream of beating the guy who was roommate and best runner. He ran less than half the miles I did but over time I closed gap and finally managed to beat him in a marathon the year after we graduated. That may have pushed him into retirement but though we were best friends passing him around 18 miles is one of the most satisfying running memories I have. Maybe it would have happened anyway if I hadn't run as much as I did but you'd have a hard time convincing me of that.
On the other hand, Liz McColgan ran about as much or more than anyone in her day. Elish has times pretty comparable to her mum's on maybe half the miles. So there's that.
We've updated our BetterRunningShoes.com web site to make it easier to find good deals on the best shoes. To keep it great we need new shoe reviews from you.