General Discussion Triathlon Talk » minutes vs miles Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
 
 
of 2
 
 
2004-01-18 7:34 AM


11

Subject: minutes vs miles
how is your training program set up? using miles or minutes. running i always just ran so many miles each week.
i see a lot of tri programs are set up to train by so many minutes per workout. this site the programs are in minutes, other sites some are miles and yards for swim.
what do you guys do and why?
i think i am going to use the 16 week oly program on this site. i am just not sure about training in minutes.
thanks, John


2004-01-18 8:26 AM
in reply to: #4135

User image

Champion
13323
5000500020001000100100100
Gold member
Subject: RE: minutes vs miles

the reason for minutes versus distance is something that made a lot of sense to me when training from 'triathlons for ordinary mortals'...if u train in distance and u feel tired or worn out on a certain day, your pace will be slower and u will end up training your longest minutes...

i feel if your not feeeling 'great' on any day, training in minutes at a slower pace will 'save' u so to speak so u don't end up killing yourself to meet the mileage at a reduced pace.  face it, if your not feeling well on any day, u should be taking it easy SO a slower pace and sticking to minutes will allow u to do that.

2004-01-18 12:01 PM
in reply to: #4135

Expert
680
500100252525
NC Illinois
Subject: RE: minutes vs miles
Training for minutes (and using a HRM) keeps me from turning everyday into a time trial.

Edited by TripleThreat 2004-01-18 12:18 PM
2004-01-19 11:27 AM
in reply to: #4135

Member
13

Subject: RE: minutes vs miles
minutes are also a good way to manage your workout schedeule. for those of use who need to cram workouts in, it is easier to schedule a 30 minute run, than a three mile run. i know i'll be done with that 30 minute run in a given time, and can schedule work, kids, and everything else easier. the heart rate moniter suggestion is great too. i generaly train using time and heart rate about 90%of the time. I do workouts at a given distance to mentally reassure myself that I can still cover those distances (usually race specific) once or twice a month when my schedule allows it. it's kind of a best of both worlds approach. hope this helps
2004-01-19 3:52 PM
in reply to: #4135

New user
23

Subject: RE: minutes vs miles
I use neither. I use routes for specific purposes. The minutes gauge how well I am running a specific route. Miles tells me how to compare the route with the target course for any given race. Each route should have a specific training goal. For example. Long hill climbs wll stengthen the legs. The rolling hills can be a good interval workout if you attack the hills and "let it ride" on the down hills. THe flats can be used for long slow distance or for tempo runs at race pace. You should mix up your routes but keep them consistent to gauge your progress.

Edited by jtoplus3 2004-01-19 3:52 PM
2004-01-20 5:46 AM
in reply to: #4135

User image

Expert
713
500100100
Rockledge, Fl
Subject: RE: minutes vs miles
I see the value in the minutes training, but I prefer by miles. This helps me know the distance I am going with relation to race training for. I understand the time trial problem and have learned to stop that pretty quickly :-) I check my lap times to slow myself down on easy runs and to keep in HR range. For me, it helps me to see progress as far as HR and time for a given distance. Maybe you should try both and see what you prefer. For miles, I pick a distance close to time to train for that workout.


2004-01-20 6:19 AM
in reply to: #4346

User image

Regular
62
2525
Lakewood, CO
Subject: They are both useful
As a personal trainer and long time runner I think both have value.
Like others above have already said, minutes will help you not go too fast. Practically runnimg by minutes you will learn to run in your aerobic zone and burn fats instead of carbos. If you look at training plans you will notice that when people train for Marathons they go mainly on minutes, but if you talk to coaches for track (1500m, 5000m), most of them prefer to work mainly with distances.
Here is an example as to why distance is important too: last fall I decided to run a 1/2 Marathon 6 weeks before race day. I was short of time, I had trained mainly for sprint tri for the first part of the year and had not run more than 45' at one time. So I decided to put in some long runs. I focused on time, but not on distance. I run up to 11miles 5 or 6 times during the following 5 weeks, focusing on form, and being able to last 1h30minutes.
I had a great race, but the last mile was terrible. I think I lost about 20 seconds to my average during the last mile, because my legs were saying: "this is too much. We are not used to run for so long and so fast. What are you doing to us?"
Makes sense?
Hope this helps. ;-)
2004-01-20 6:37 AM
in reply to: #4135

User image

Expert
713
500100100
Rockledge, Fl
Subject: RE: minutes vs miles

smeeko, I started last year training for a half marathon and I was more convcerned with being able to run that far rather than time since my first race. I think that is what got me started on distance. At some point I will try the minutes training and see the difference after my races this year. For me, I think it's mostly a mental thing wanting to be able to log distance Thanks for sharing your experience.
2004-01-20 10:10 AM
in reply to: #4135

Expert
680
500100252525
NC Illinois
Subject: RE: minutes vs miles
Realistically, they are going to be similar (or at least attempt to make them similar). If I choose to do a 150HR run for 40min or for 3 miles, it's basically going to be the same. Okay maybe in 40min I run 3.1 miles, or maybe I run 3 miles in 39:30. They will be similar.

The only problem is if you're running for "half an hour" or for "10 miles" at a specific HR. The values are not equal. 10 miles is a much greater demand than half an hour of running at a set HR.

More times than not they will be similar. It doesn't really matter if you put the jelly and peanut butter ont he same slice of bread, or if you put each on its own slice. You still get a PBJ sandwich in the end.
2004-01-21 2:57 PM
in reply to: #4135


11

Subject: RE: minutes vs miles
thanks for your input. i see good in both ways. thanks again
i am leaning towards the miles for the run and minutes for the bike and yrds for swim
thanks, John
2004-01-21 3:53 PM
in reply to: #4135

User image

Veteran
247
10010025
Subject: RE: minutes vs miles
I use minutes, because it is easier. When I am done, I just look at my watch and know what I did. I also don't have to stick to a planned route. I just go where my legs take me and don't have to figure out the exact miles. I do miles every now and then just to see how I am doing.

It doesn't matter as long as you are out there.


2004-01-22 5:11 PM
in reply to: #4135

User image

Master
1902
1000500100100100100
Berkeley, CA
Subject: RE: minutes vs miles
Thanks for this thread. This is very helpful as I plan out my training schedule for the next 3 1/2 months (Olympic distance on the first weekend of May).

I had never really considered the options and had always trained by miles. The experience and suggestions on this site are definitely going to help me (as well as entertain me!)

Dana
2004-01-23 5:17 AM
in reply to: #4135

, Alabama
Subject: RE: minutes vs miles
I used to go strictly by HR and minutes when I started doing distance tris (oly or longer). Now I basically go by minutes, but I kind of blend it with miles, occasionally still using the HRM. I start out knowing how many minutes I want to run (I have many routes near my home that I know mileage to) but also figure out an estimate of how many miles that will be. If I'm doing intervals during the run, of course the distance will be higher than if I'm just doing the same time at an easy pace.

Sharon
2012-07-04 7:25 PM
in reply to: #4135


45
25
Subject: RE: minutes vs miles

I train my run in minutes (swim in yds, bike in mi), because I am adding 10% distance per week, which is a heck of a lot easier for me to think of... 4 extra minutes per run, rather than .32 miles or w/e.  For me it could have gone either way, I'm just lazy.  

 

-Trev

2012-07-04 7:59 PM
in reply to: #4135


134
10025
Subject: RE: minutes vs miles

I'm all over the place. I use miles for bike since I have to choose one of my routes. I use miles for swimming actually too, i.e. 1 mile, 1.25, etc. most of the time and sometimes meters.

Runs I try to stick to minutes because I had been battling some injuries and minutes keeps me in check. When I increase, I increase by minutes and I don't need to increase a whole mile so I increase more gradually.

Then again, I have been doing a 3 mile route recently and I've been trying to (and getting better at) keeping the whole time trial tendency in check.

2012-07-05 4:37 AM
in reply to: #4135

User image

Extreme Veteran
929
50010010010010025
, Kobenhavns Kommune
Subject: RE: minutes vs miles

Minutes are great for making your weekly plan, you schedule time for the workout. Minutes works great for workouts at the gym, on the trainer, the treadmill or in the pool where after all you haven't really moved.

But when doing outdoor activities, distance is easier to plan because, after all you have to get home too. You make a route and know the approximate time needed. If time is limited you plan your route to be realistic within that time, but you might get home early on a good day.

Distance and in particular routes are great for comparing and monitoring progress. If I do the same bike route I can compare and see how well I do on the hills and each 5km split. The same thing on the run or swimming, whether in the pool or OWS. Then workouts becomes more like TTs.



2012-07-05 5:02 AM
in reply to: #4135

User image

Resident Curmudgeon
25290
50005000500050005000100100252525
The Road Back
Gold member
Subject: RE: minutes vs miles
Ummm, eight year old thread folks.
2012-07-05 8:15 AM
in reply to: #4135

User image

Master
1929
100050010010010010025
Midlothian, VA
Subject: RE: minutes vs miles

By distance, unless it's coming up on closing time at the pool. Even then I usually just end up going a little harder/faster to squeeze in my 'usual' distance.

Most of my runs these days are on a 5k loop.  Sometimes I do 4 miles or so instead, and sometimes I have another route that will take me around 7. What I tend to change more is the frequency of how often I run.

For biking it's usually about 12 to 25 miles. On the short end I kinda wander around close to home, on longer rides I plan out a route.

My swims are pretty much always 1.5 miles. Deviations skew towards 1600m or 2000m when I show up with less time, and sometimes as much as three miles.  Unless I get kicked out for lightening or something random, I always end a swim in a quarter mile increment. (Easier to mark on the 100 mile swim chart on the wall...)

Most triathlons are about doing X distance in the best time you can, so it makes sense to train the same way for the most part. (Speedwork/intervals are different.)

2012-07-05 9:21 AM
in reply to: #4294871

User image

Elite
4564
200020005002525
Boise
Subject: RE: minutes vs miles

the bear - 2012-07-05 4:02 AM Ummm, eight year old thread folks.

 

They're trying to bring back that old BT feeling

2012-07-05 9:37 AM
in reply to: #4135

User image

Master
1858
10005001001001002525
Salt Lake City
Subject: RE: minutes vs miles
I was in my senior year of college when this thread started...
2012-07-05 10:32 AM
in reply to: #4294871

User image

Veteran
393
100100100252525
Subject: RE: minutes vs miles

the bear - 2012-07-05 5:02 AM Ummm, eight year old thread folks.

 

Yes, someone who actually used the search function.



2012-07-05 10:46 AM
in reply to: #4295348

User image

Sensei
Sin City
Subject: RE: minutes vs miles
Rickz - 2012-07-05 8:32 AM

the bear - 2012-07-05 5:02 AM Ummm, eight year old thread folks.

 

Yes, someone who actually used the search function.

I know...  And in other threads we complain they don't use the search function...  Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

BUT, I guess if you are getting a answer, search.  If you are answering, it is probably better to provide an answer to a question that was asked in this decade. 

The question is relevent though.  It get's asked at least a dozen times a year.

2012-07-05 10:57 AM
in reply to: #4295374

Master
10208
50005000100100
Northern IL
Subject: RE: minutes vs miles
Kido - 2012-07-05 10:46 AM
Rickz - 2012-07-05 8:32 AM

the bear - 2012-07-05 5:02 AM Ummm, eight year old thread folks.

 

Yes, someone who actually used the search function.

I know...  And in other threads we complain they don't use the search function...  Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

BUT, I guess if you are getting a answer, search.  If you are answering, it is probably better to provide an answer to a question that was asked in this decade. 

The question is relevent though.  It get's asked at least a dozen times a year.

I don't see a question in the post that bumped this.

2012-07-05 10:59 AM
in reply to: #4135

User image

Extreme Veteran
633
50010025
Hollister, CA
Subject: RE: minutes vs miles

I started the HIM training program which goes by minutes.  But because im a painfully slow rider the bike training wasnt working for me- it just wasnt enough bike training... So i uped the milage on the bike and use (more or less) minutes for the swim & run.   

I think when you begin training you will figure out where you need to tweek the workouts to fit YOU.

2012-07-05 12:03 PM
in reply to: #4135

User image

Subject: RE: minutes vs miles
Thread necromancy ftw
New Thread
General Discussion Triathlon Talk » minutes vs miles Rss Feed  
 
 
of 2