run less run faster (Page 2)
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller | Reply |
|
2014-12-08 11:32 PM in reply to: Left Brain |
Expert 2555 Colorado Springs, Colorado | Subject: RE: run less run faster Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by Donskiman Reading back through this thread has me wondering what is being considered fast? I guess my perspective is different as I work with guys who are course record holders and overall race winners. One ran a 1:05 half marathon this year, another is a former 2:12 marathoner. The other thing is watching my son's high school XC meets in which there was one race when over 100 boys ran 16:30 or faster for 5K. What do they all have in common! They all likely run more weekly mileage than many of you do for marathon training. I know the top kids on my son's team were running at least 50 mpw. If faster is moving from a 10 minute pace to 9:30 then almost any consistent program may yield results. I have doubts that many people are going to go from 10:00 to 6:00 by running less, but there will always be a few outliers who do. My kid also runs HS XC and put up a 15:58 this year on 25 mpw......but he does a ton of speed work compared to the other kids. I think that he could get the same results by running more, but he also swims during XC season because the short course season for his club team has started....he has to find a way to make time for both.....and he has coaches who have found a way. So he goes from XC practice to swim club and usually gets 5-7000 yards in the pool per day. Can he be faster than 15:58 if he gave up swimming and ran more? I think that's a legitimate question, but one that he won't have anything to do with because of triathlon. He has one more XC season and 2 more track seasons before he may likely face a decision of giving up triathlon for a few years while he runs in college.....and he'll certainly run more there. I'm looking forward to seeing how it shakes out......but he's proved that he can be competitive in running while only doing ~1/2 the miles.....at least for now. One thing is for certain......he can't be competitive in triathlon without the swimming yardage.....you need sectional and damn near Jr. National cuts to make the first pack in the Jr. series now. He would tell you he is a better swimmer because of running and a better runner because of swimming......I'm sure there are lots of slower people who say that he's wrong. Oh.....and I know what you are saying about these kids and XC races.......my kid ran a 16:04 at Nike regionals and was 94th. HAHAHAHAHA!!!! Your son is fast! No telling if he could have been even faster with more volume. As you're probably aware, he's not likely to be competitive in college XC on 25 mpw where the top runners will be running the equivalent of low 14 minute 5K...even though their races are longer. One of our summer store employees won her Nike regional and finished 6th at nationals. She wasn't happy and will work even harder next year to improve. One thing is certain, very few of us older folks are likely to ever come close to the times of these talented youngsters no matter what we do. My coworker is 53 and can still run mid 16 minute 5Ks, but he was a 2:12 marathoner in his prime. For him these times are slow. He was running 28 minute 10Ks in his prime. He can get away with running low mileage now because of the years of conditioning. |
|
2014-12-09 12:08 AM in reply to: 0 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: run less run faster Originally posted by Donskiman Originally posted by Left Brain Your son is fast! No telling if he could have been even faster with more volume. As you're probably aware, he's not likely to be competitive in college XC on 25 mpw where the top runners will be running the equivalent of low 14 minute 5K...even though their races are longer. One of our summer store employees won her Nike regional and finished 6th at nationals. She wasn't happy and will work even harder next year to improve. One thing is certain, very few of us older folks are likely to ever come close to the times of these talented youngsters no matter what we do. My coworker is 53 and can still run mid 16 minute 5Ks, but he was a 2:12 marathoner in his prime. For him these times are slow. He was running 28 minute 10Ks in his prime. He can get away with running low mileage now because of the years of conditioning. Originally posted by Donskiman Reading back through this thread has me wondering what is being considered fast? I guess my perspective is different as I work with guys who are course record holders and overall race winners. One ran a 1:05 half marathon this year, another is a former 2:12 marathoner. The other thing is watching my son's high school XC meets in which there was one race when over 100 boys ran 16:30 or faster for 5K. What do they all have in common! They all likely run more weekly mileage than many of you do for marathon training. I know the top kids on my son's team were running at least 50 mpw. If faster is moving from a 10 minute pace to 9:30 then almost any consistent program may yield results. I have doubts that many people are going to go from 10:00 to 6:00 by running less, but there will always be a few outliers who do. My kid also runs HS XC and put up a 15:58 this year on 25 mpw......but he does a ton of speed work compared to the other kids. I think that he could get the same results by running more, but he also swims during XC season because the short course season for his club team has started....he has to find a way to make time for both.....and he has coaches who have found a way. So he goes from XC practice to swim club and usually gets 5-7000 yards in the pool per day. Can he be faster than 15:58 if he gave up swimming and ran more? I think that's a legitimate question, but one that he won't have anything to do with because of triathlon. He has one more XC season and 2 more track seasons before he may likely face a decision of giving up triathlon for a few years while he runs in college.....and he'll certainly run more there. I'm looking forward to seeing how it shakes out......but he's proved that he can be competitive in running while only doing ~1/2 the miles.....at least for now. One thing is for certain......he can't be competitive in triathlon without the swimming yardage.....you need sectional and damn near Jr. National cuts to make the first pack in the Jr. series now. He would tell you he is a better swimmer because of running and a better runner because of swimming......I'm sure there are lots of slower people who say that he's wrong. Oh.....and I know what you are saying about these kids and XC races.......my kid ran a 16:04 at Nike regionals and was 94th. HAHAHAHAHA!!!! It's going to be fun to watch it play out. He doesn't really enjoy XC that much.....doesn't really like the uneven footing. He's got his eye set on a 4:10 mile/ 1:55 800 this year in track as a HS Jr.......he's siting on 4:18 from his Soph. year so we will see. He loves the speed work......and doesn't really mind the long runs, but he's been able to gain/keep the endurance with swimming and cycling (tons of hill work...we have a 1/2 mile hill by our house that he will ride up and down until I make him come home) which he enjoys more than a long run. Not too long ago I argued that he didn't need any more miles......because I was ran into the ground as a fairly talented kid.....but he may be coming to a crossroad where he has to decide if he wants to try more miles as an avenue to get where he sees himself running. (like you said.....he will have no choice if he decides to run in college as he's being recruited to do). It's funny in a way.....triathlon has been fabulous for him and his true love.....but there isn't much there, in triathlon, for a kid who has the talent to run in college. His choice....but we've started to have discussions about sleeping on a stranger's couch and eating raman noodles as he travels from triathlon to triathlon vs. running in college. LMAO He got invited to the Olympic Training Center at the end of this last triathlon season so that didn't really help to wean him off the idea of living on noodles and begging for gas money. I get a kick out of these running threads.......It's hard for me to apply "science" to a sport of millions where very few have the same stride or makeup. You just don't know who has IT and may thrive with something other than "just run more"......I don't think we should put people in pigeon holes. What I know for sure is that fast runners are born. You can work to be faster.....but you have to have the genetics to actually be fast. Some do and have no idea.....and they may be able to be fast for their age without all the pounding. My kid was playing baseball 3 years ago (like I wanted him to) and had never ran, swam, or biked a stroke in anger. Go figure. Edited by Left Brain 2014-12-09 12:31 AM |
2014-12-09 5:34 AM in reply to: 0 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: run less run faster Originally posted by Left Brain he's proved that he can be competitive in running while only doing ~1/2 the miles my kid ran a 16:04 at Nike regionals and was 94th isn't there a contradiction in these 2 statements ? bringing this thread back from "all about jr" my take away is while strength, speedwork and other tools have their place, a reasonable mount of volume is the foundation to faster running. "Faster" is a relative term and different for all of us. IME, volume is best built through frequency of running. Running at the right pace, depending on the intent of the workout, is critical. Edited by marcag 2014-12-09 6:04 AM |
2014-12-09 6:11 AM in reply to: marcag |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: run less run faster No....it's not. There are so many fast kids that the difference between 1st and 100th can easily be less than a minute....I think in this race it was 1:01 or 1:02. Besides...it's the fastest 300 kids from 6 states so you have to be competitive just to make the cut for the race. |
2014-12-09 6:17 AM in reply to: #5072177 |
New user 41 Sylvania | Subject: RE: run less run faster I have used it for HM training with great results and as a guide for a HIM. I use it as a run up to the race after I have established a quality base. I do more like 80% long slow runs with 20% speed for base. Then use this books templates to get faster. It has worked well for me. PR both times I used it and still had plenty of gas in the tank for swim and bike training. Planning on using it for marathon in April and as a guide leading into IMLou. |
2014-12-09 7:39 AM in reply to: glayher |
Champion 9407 Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia | Subject: RE: run less run faster IME it can work but only for an athlete with a very solid run base and who recovers well from run training stress. The biggest issue I have is that it is often attempted by runners who have a minimal running base and/or have had injury issues in the past; neither of these groups are good candidates for this type of program. The principles of a solid running program are simple - run lots, mostly easy, sometimes fast. For most triathletes, the fast can be accomplished with strides and/or threshold running. The goal is to provide enough stress to the body to adapt without pushing one over the edge into too much stress. The easy runs are incredibly valuable for a number of reasons including durability, aerobic development, body composition, etc and if you look at the program of any runner who enjoys long term success, there will be way more easy running than anything else. Shane |
|
2014-12-09 9:43 AM in reply to: gsmacleod |
Expert 3145 Scottsdale, AZ | Subject: RE: run less run faster Originally posted by gsmacleod IME it can work but only for an athlete with a very solid run base and who recovers well from run training stress. The biggest issue I have is that it is often attempted by runners who have a minimal running base and/or have had injury issues in the past; neither of these groups are good candidates for this type of program. The principles of a solid running program are simple - run lots, mostly easy, sometimes fast. For most triathletes, the fast can be accomplished with strides and/or threshold running. The goal is to provide enough stress to the body to adapt without pushing one over the edge into too much stress. The easy runs are incredibly valuable for a number of reasons including durability, aerobic development, body composition, etc and if you look at the program of any runner who enjoys long term success, there will be way more easy running than anything else. Shane
Gotta agree with this. Also, if you take a moderate to high volume runner that's never seen anything but LSD (Lydiard?) and dump them into a program like this then yes, I'd expect to see some major progress for a while. Everyone responds different to stimulus and that's part of the fun, figuring out what works for you. With that said, it's been shown time and time again that volume is a key element when it comes to developing elite level potential, however, it definitely is not purely LSD volume either. |
2014-12-09 11:42 AM in reply to: Left Brain |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: run less run faster Originally posted by Left Brain Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Left Brain he's proved that he can be competitive in running while only doing ~1/2 the miles my kid ran a 16:04 at Nike regionals and was 94th isn't there a contradiction in these 2 statements ? No....it's not. There are so many fast kids that the difference between 1st and 100th can easily be less than a minute....I think in this race it was 1:01 or 1:02. Besides...it's the fastest 300 kids from 6 states so you have to be competitive just to make the cut for the race. so what this tells me is that he is 'competitive' at a local level, less at a regional level and probably not at a national level. To be competitive at a national level, he would probably need to "run more". No ? |
2014-12-09 12:09 PM in reply to: 0 |
Subject: ... This user's post has been ignored. Edited by Fred D 2014-12-09 12:10 PM |
2014-12-10 6:29 AM in reply to: Fred D |
5 | Subject: RE: run less run faster do you need to be genetically that way to be a real pro? |
2014-12-10 6:40 AM in reply to: runningdude |
Subject: ... This user's post has been ignored. |
|
2014-12-10 6:52 AM in reply to: thebigb |
Champion 9407 Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia | Subject: RE: run less run faster Originally posted by thebigb Gotta agree with this. Also, if you take a moderate to high volume runner that's never seen anything but LSD (Lydiard?) and dump them into a program like this then yes, I'd expect to see some major progress for a while. Everyone responds different to stimulus and that's part of the fun, figuring out what works for you. With that said, it's been shown time and time again that volume is a key element when it comes to developing elite level potential, however, it definitely is not purely LSD volume either. AFAIK there has never been a great coach who has ever had their athletes only do high volume at an easy pace. Even Lydiard described LSD not as "long, slow runs" but instead as "long, STEADY runs." While Lydiard certainly had lots of volume in the program, there was intensity to go along with it so, IMO, the whole debate about all long and slow versus all high intensity is a false dichotomy. Good programs always have both higher intensity work and easy running to support the harder efforts. Shane |
2014-12-10 6:53 AM in reply to: runningdude |
Champion 9407 Montague Gold Mines, Nova Scotia | Subject: RE: run less run faster Originally posted by runningdude do you need to be genetically that way to be a real pro? If by pro you mean someone who can consistently put food on the table with racing alone, then yes, one is going to need great genetics, combined with a very good program and some luck. Shane |
2014-12-10 11:09 AM in reply to: gsmacleod |
Expert 3145 Scottsdale, AZ | Subject: RE: run less run faster Originally posted by gsmacleod Originally posted by thebigb Gotta agree with this. Also, if you take a moderate to high volume runner that's never seen anything but LSD (Lydiard?) and dump them into a program like this then yes, I'd expect to see some major progress for a while. Everyone responds different to stimulus and that's part of the fun, figuring out what works for you. With that said, it's been shown time and time again that volume is a key element when it comes to developing elite level potential, however, it definitely is not purely LSD volume either. AFAIK there has never been a great coach who has ever had their athletes only do high volume at an easy pace. Even Lydiard described LSD not as "long, slow runs" but instead as "long, STEADY runs." While Lydiard certainly had lots of volume in the program, there was intensity to go along with it so, IMO, the whole debate about all long and slow versus all high intensity is a false dichotomy. Good programs always have both higher intensity work and easy running to support the harder efforts. Shane Yeah, I should have stated "mis-understood Lydiard" because that's what is typically attached to his name. He didn't help himself out with his inability to write or talk very eloquently. Anyway, a lot of people out there took Lydiard as "all slow" and then wondered why they never got faster. Honestly, I think something like Summer of Malmo is a bit better and easier to comprehend when talking about running high volume and building base. |
2014-12-11 1:49 PM in reply to: Agustufus |
Expert 1121 Menomonee Falls, WI | Subject: RE: run less run faster First let me precede my rambling by saying I am a runnner. Although that is by design because I prefer cycling and swimming, I do think more intensity is the key to improvement in all 3 sports. I made huge gains in swimming and that was a result of adding more intensity. Same thing for me on the bike. However, I don't know about the "less" part. If you only want to run 1 or 2 days a week and all you do is speedwork, I don't think that's enough. I feel like 3-4 sessions a day is the minimum for improvement. How much intensity you can do is dependent on how well your body tolerates it. Running is tricky because it's so easy to get injured by doing too much, too quickly. |
|
To Run Fast, You Need To Run Fast Pages: 1 2 | |||
Run less, run faster?? Pages: 1 2 3 |
| ||||
|
| |||
|
| |||
|
|