Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Options
Quality...or Quantity?
I'm not sure how much this topic has been discussed on here, but i am definately interested in what methods we all adopt when it comes to mileage, etc.
I regularly do 3 or maybe 4 quality sessions in a week, and therefore, not as much mileage as it seems many of you do.
Of course, it must make a difference depending on your normal racing distance, but as a 5k/10k specialist in the winter, (1500m - 5k in summer) what mileage is needed to lay down the base for that kind of distance?
regards,
JP
I regularly do 3 or maybe 4 quality sessions in a week, and therefore, not as much mileage as it seems many of you do.
Of course, it must make a difference depending on your normal racing distance, but as a 5k/10k specialist in the winter, (1500m - 5k in summer) what mileage is needed to lay down the base for that kind of distance?
regards,
JP
The materials in this website are in no way intended to replace the professional medical care, advice, diagnosis or treatment of a doctor, qualified personal trainer, therapist, dietitian or nutritionist Runners's World, Part of the Hearst UK well-being network © Copyright 2017
Comments
More mature runners would find 3/4 quality sessions a bit too hard on the body!
I like to think I do a mixture of quality and quantity.
As I very rarely race less than 10k I tend to concentrate on 2 quality sessions (when fit) and the rest (4 sessions) to maintain my endurance.
BTW, Peter Snell (arguably the greatest 800m/1500m doubler EVER) did 100mpw of fast aerobic work t/out the winter PLUS almost as much again jogging. He said he was close to his best after base work and now, 40yrs on with a PhD in exercise physiology, says he wouldn't change a thing about how he trained...
for now
Thats if i have any skin left on my chest at the end of it:)
Particularly in light of original post which seems to suggest that a 1500m-5K target in the summer should mean 3-4 quality session and low mileage in the winter...
Limited results can be achieved with either, but few runners will reach their potential without the right mix of both. But looking at weekly mileage gives too small a focus. An aspiring distance runner needs to look at the wider picture.
For example:
Step 1: Oct/Nov/Dec - build up the quantity first - as much as you can handle.
Step 2: Jan/Feb/Mar - add quality, while maintaining quantity.
Step 3: Apr/May/Jun - reduce quantity, increase quality
Step 4: Jul/Aug - race/peak time. Sessions during this period are about maintaining fitness, not increasing it.
Step 5: Sep - rest
then back to step 1...
The quantity (miles) give you the strength and stamina to cope with the quality (speed work). It is also worth considering increasing the work load over a number of years and not just weeks or even months. How you race this weekend is not just a product of what's been done in the past year, but of every run you've ever done.
I think the way you structure your training varies with race targets - my work at the moment is geared towards a 1/2 marathon, so I'm doing long runs of up to 17m and emphasising longer speed reps (up to 1m) and tempo runs. I maintain a fairly consistent 70m per week, but tailor the individual sessions to my training needs at the time.
In September?????
but thatswhen the best races are
hm
goes off to look at plan
cos im already behind on this one!
Bazza - maybe step 3 would be more to do with specificity than quality? Quality if you're doing 10K, but slower if doing MP work...?
Overall, is it more benfitial to run mileage all at a slow pace, if there is lots of quality sessions going on, or should this also be kept at a high intensity? or maybe changed, i.e. one LSD, one shorter recovery, and one steady distance?
Many believe that to train for running fast, we must...run fast, for surely lots of LSD will ultimately only prepare us only to run LSD, will it not?
N.B. i understand that mileage is essential, and am in no way trying to advocate low mileage, but merely speculating...
I do feel that a good training program should consist of the following elements:-
1. Base training
2. Preparation
3. Conditioning (or specificity)
4. Competition phase
5. Rest
The actual amount of time spent in each phase can vary depending on an individual's goal, but I think that sometimes the type of schedules seen in RW try to incorporate all the elements in too short a cycle. This is demonstrated in the typical the '14-week' marathon training plan - though I appreciate that many people find these helpful.
However, what is quality? and what is quantity? ...surely you can do a high quantity of quality sessions as well as quality runs that are large in quantity?
what am i on about? not sure about this whole thing really.
.............>confused<..........sorry everyone.
have you read the base training thread?
thanks
it does deal with a lot of these arguments
thanks
I'm off to draft up a training plan for next year with a period of base training included...
you arent supposed to capitulate like that
ARGUE MAN, ARGUE
I'd say 3 or 4 quality sessions a week is about right for a young 1500 / 3000m type athlete.
You don't want to be piling in the miles now, since if you got up to say, 100 miles a week now (perfectly possible for a teenager) then what next?
The British way, which apart from a recent dip is very well tried and tested, is to work up through the distances, so that virtually all successful senior distance runners were successful over shorter distances as juniors. Adults coming to the sport on the roads (such as Steve Brace or Keith Anderson) and making it all the way to the top are the exception rather than the rule.
Personally I like to do 3 speed sessions a week. It works for me. Here are a couple factor I bear in mind:
- I like the cumulative distance of my longest rep session each week to be about the distance I race over the county - e.g. I have done 10 x 1k - cross country league races are 5-6 miles. As an under 17 I would say the volume of at least some of your sessions should be at least 6k/
- I like a long run at least every fortnight. Previously when I haven't had the marathon on the horizon 90 minutes has been fine.
- I see cross country league races as a means to an end, and not the aim in itself. If you want to be successful at the championships you can't afford to taper every week. Rather pick a few races through the season, and use the remaining league races as hard training runs. You may get beaten by your rivals in some of these, but you're getting the hard training in.
- Don't run miles for the sake of it. I try and run as few miles a week as possible whilst still getting in all the sessions and steady runs I want to do. In practice this means up to about 80 miles a week in marathon build up, since I need two runs on non session days (morning run as a very easy recovery ru ).
you're doing pretty well as a bottom year under 17, and I presume you've got a coach who seems to know what they're doing.
By all means use any of our suggestions as ideas to take to your coach, but I would be very wary of thinking "if i'm doing this well of what I'm doing at the moment imagine what I could do if........" and then going and, say, doubling your milage / starting base training and cutting out all speedwork.
I know that I'm coached by the best coach in the world FOR ME and although the grass often looks greener on the other side, I'm pretty happy with how things are going at the moment.
This is a nice board but if we were on letsrun.com I might mention a steeplechase who was a very promising junior at the end of the 90s, initials K N.
As long as you can manage 1 or 2 long easy runs each week to go alongside your quality sessions and maintain your aerobic base - and the quality sessions don't become something you feel obliged, rather than willing to do, there can't be much wrong with your regime at the moment JP. Different routines suit different people, ages and abilities though - I'd struggle to handle 4 quality sessions a week myself!
Personally I don't think a 16 year old should be doing huge mileages. I don't come from a science background so am not going to even attempt to put into words the scientific reason for this, but all the reading I've done on young runners advocates less mileage.
JP-with your talent, getting a coach might be well worth the effort.