how to run faster? (Page 2)

Bear, Scout, Daremo - I think we are all actually on the same page. We all agree long slow runs are the proper way to build aerobic foundation and ultimately get faster.   I think the times Bear references come out to about 45 minutes for 5mile runs (assuming a 9 minute pace) and 1:30 for the 10 miler.  Add in strech time and your looking at 5:30-6 hrs for running  x3 (assuming you want the same time devoted to bike and run) = 15-18:00 minimum.  Add 2 hours for commute time, weights, shower, picking up chocolate milk, etc. and you are at 20 hours.  My gripe with the inital answer was that it suggested no possibility of improvement without this volume. If that is the case, so be it, but my tri newbiness is not ready to accept it.  Either way, I'll let you know 2 years from now. 

douginoz- speak for yourself I was and remain a super jock!

Add another voice to those of Scout, Daremo, and Bear. 

Consistency and frequency is the key.  And a very high % of the time (85%+) should be done at paces about 2 min/mile slower than you can race it.  This slow pace helps ensure the repeatability aspect that is so important.

I STRONGLY recommend reading a book titled, "Daniels Running Formula" written by Jack Daniels.  He has coached high school to Olympic runnings for more than 4 decades, not to mention done a number of research studies on training related items.  This book is simply the best guide to learning how to run faster than anything I've come across.  It costs maybe $15 and is simply a FANTASTIC guide to getting faster.

Edit: I'll add that total volume and pace will vary for everyone.  We all have other priorities and we're all at different fitness levels.  If all you can do is 30 minutes 3x per week, then so be it.  But if there's a way to make that 5x30 per week and maybe build up a longer run for 1x per week, that will definitely help.  The paces, again, should be roughly 2 min/mile slower than you can race that distance.

Good luck

So skip the weights, skip the stretching, skip the commute. None of that makes you faster

I really like this thread.  Lots of sage advice and some personal histories thrown in.  These are the threads where I learn a lot.  However, it brings up some questions that have been nagging me.

Not to go off topic, but the best way to get faster at swimming is through technique, not volume.  While that is still controversial to some, I think it is pretty much been proven lately.

That brings up my question about running.  The Chirunning book also believes that endurance can be gained through modifying your technique at running.  I have just started trying some things in his book and have found them very helpfull at allowing me to run faster with less effort.  That is the thrust of his book.  You can run faster, with less effort, if you optimise your technique.  Anyone else tried to optimize running technique in order to run faster, with less effort?

nice!! however, my bath tub is a bit small for lap swimming.

Running is much less technique-oriented.

Here's the problem I have with the whole Chi Running thing:  It makes specific recommendations about form that may or may not work for many people out there.

There's nothing wrong with heel striking, and leaning may or may not improve.

The real take-away from that book is really the whole crux of this thread:  Improvement comes through time, and building volume gradually.  Build your strength and endurance before attempting to do anything at a higher intensity level.  This is the same advice in every running thread/plan.

I disagree with much of the form-related stuff in the book.  I do agree that there are drills that can make you more efficient and economical at running, but those drills tend to work more with your natural biomechanics than trying to force something that may not work on you.  I also disagree with his discussions on cadence. 

If your longest run is only 4 miles, I would just keep running and work on slowly increasing your total miles each week (about 10% increase per week)

Over the last year, I have not followed a particular plan but started at a point where I could only very slowly jog a half of mile.  Eventually, I could do 3 miles at about a 11:30 pace.  After about 7 months of running 2-4 times a week, I completed a 10k and averaged 9:59 per mile.  I recently did a 5k and did 9:09 avg miles.  My last tri, I did under 10 min miles on a cross country course. 

The speed will come. 

Just now, a year into training am I have just started a run training plan that has a bit of tempo and speed work. 

Thanks for your response Scout.  While I am sceptical about some of his suggestions on running technique in the book, I am just as skeptical of the theory that all running technique is natural and/or individual and should not be adjusted.

 He does point to studies that have shown that the reason the Kenyon's win the most races is because their running technique is more efficient than everyone else's, not that they have better fitness level/VO2 max or anything.

I just think that it makes sense that running technique is overlooked a bit too much.

I think I'd rather say that people generally have less bad technique naturally. Of course it is possible to have absolutely horrible technique running (suppose, for example, that you 'run' by taking two steps forward then one back...) The issue is that almost nobody has technique that bad.

On the other hand, I've seen some people who do appear to run pretty darned inefficiently.

On the other hand, I've seen some people who do appear to run pretty darned inefficiently as they pass me like i'm standing still..

I don't disagree with speeding up every once in a while for variety, but the above is, in my view, somewhat misleading.  A study of how Kenyan or American elite runners improve probably has absolutely no relevance for somebody who does 5 3-mile runs per week.

My first race of any kind was a 1/2 marathon, May, 2007. I started running about 7 months before and finished in 2:14. I wasn't really happy with that time, bought a HR monitor right after the race and ran 3-4x per week (usually 4), 3 60-min runs and 1 90-min run, every week for a year. Every run was a comfy zone 2 run. I did ZERO speed work. Same 1/2 marathon, May 2008, same course, same weather, I ran a 1:41, 33 minutes faster.

I don't expect to shave another 33 minutes this year, with or without speedwork. As you get faster the gains get harder and smaller, but I do expect to run it again next year faster than this year. Hopefully I can pull out a sub 1:30. I've been running for almost 2 years, and I'm just now adding in tempo runs.

Faster is relative. To the OP, faster might mean going from a 12/mi 5K to a 10/mi 5K. That probably can be done with only 2-3 runs per week and no speedwork. But that same 2-3 runs, no speedwork, probably won't get someone from a 5:45/mi to a 5:30/mi.

Wanna know the best way to improve your running form and economy?

Run more.

It's like weight lifting.  Part of the ability to lift more weight becomes the muscle's ability to become more efficient at lifting weight.  This is achieved by lifting weights.

Like I said, there are form drills that can be performed.  Here's a list.

The suggestions by Bear, Scout, Daremo are right-on and I think that your time estimates are coming out much too high. I only have 3 to 7 hours/week  to train, but I split it to work on consistency, frequency, volume, and form. Obviously, the volume is sort of fixed.

The ratio of short week (3hr) to long week (7hr) is about 1:3.  I tend to split time into thirds between swim, bike and run. I only stretch, but no weights except during off-season.

Swim 2x per week working 50% on form and 50% on endurance only.

Bike 3 to 4x per week at endurance pace except for one workout at tempo or interval. During the endurance, I'll through in some spin ups (130+ cadence) and one-leg drills for speed work.

Run 3 to 4x per week at endurance pace (z1&2) except for one tempo or interval pace to get legs used to seeing a faster pace. In the endurance runs, I trow in some short acclerations (20" to 30" max 4 to 5 times) and work to turning cadence at a high rate.

I started training from the couch level in Nov 2006, unable to swim (50 yd max), no cycling background, and poor running (10:00 min/min fastest). I was always back of the pack in running, duathlons, and triathlons.

Last week, I finished middle of my AG and better than that overall.

The key that everyone is pushing is that you need consistency, frequency, and work at less than all-out. You will be faster in the end.

What you describe in your 100M/100M routine sounds like a combination of plyometrics and strides, both of which are beneficial, but hardly in the realm of speedwork.

Let's see if I can come up with a personal anecdote.

When I joined the health club, my marathon PR was 4:19. After three years of mostly upper body workouts, I lowered that PR to 3:54. Gawsh, I think you're right, weight lifting does make you faster!

Ignoring, of course, the 2500 miles of running I did over that period.

Plenty of reasons for weightlifting. Getting faster isn't one of them.

He did include it in the routine he said made him faster.

And running a few 100s among his plyometrics wouldn't fit the predominant definition of intervals.

It's not about one workout that you do.

It's about ALL the workouts that you do.  Was it the striders that you did?  Or was it the mileage you did?

Or perhaps the combination of the two made you more efficient, thus allowing you to run faster?

Or, maybe it was experience overall at pushing pace that allowed you to run faster?

I'm going to say that it's most likely all those things.

This in no way implies that you stop doing something.  Or add something.  It merely points out that it's not about doing a certain type of workout that will make one faster, but that the whole is more than the sum of the parts. 

You're also running as many, or more in some cases, miles in those two runs than other people do in three.

Why three? Because not everyone can run up 21 miles in only two runs. Some people aren't able to run that many in three. Three gives most people the right balance between doing enough at a time, and not overdoing it.

Do I think you'd see greater improvements running more often? Yes, I honestly do.  But you've got more volume than others do, and you're consistent.