3 Hour Long Run - How Often (Read 2921 times)

    I'm gradually building my mileage back up and am very close to getting some frequent long runs up to 3 hrs.    I want to continue to do some fairly long long runs but probably not to exceed 3 hours this year.....and ill take what ever mileage 3 hours will get me.....

     

    So, my question is - How frequently should I consider running long runs up in the 3 hour level.  

     

    I'm thinking something like:

     

    -Week 1 - 10 Miles Long Run

    -Week 2 - 2 Hr Long Run (or 12 to 13 miles)

    -Week 3 - 3 Hr Long Run

    -Repeat the process

     

    Just curious as to what some of you think....

    Champions are made when no one is watching


    A Saucy Wench

      I usually do something more along the lines of 2, 2.5, 3.   Or 2,2.5,2,3 depending on where I am in a buildup.  I really get a lot out of the 16 mile run.  That is right on the edge of where I can run without fuel and is a major threshold for me.  (For me the jump from 16-18 is the toughest jump repeatedly)

       

      I have become Death, the destroyer of electronic gadgets

       

      "When I got too tired to run anymore I just pretended I wasnt tired and kept running anyway" - dd, age 7


      an amazing likeness

        Now that we're into the winter weather, John, I would do them all by time-on-feet and ignore the miles.  I like the build for three weeks, then fall back as Ennay describes -- it is an idea I took from her some time ago, but I'd wait for March for that.  For this time of year, I'd do an every-other-week 2 hour and stay steady with that until spring and then move to the progression of 3 weeks build then fall back in the 4th week.

         

        Rather than just adding one long per week, you might consider using a model of a hard day on Saturday -- speed or medium distance, followed by long (2 hr) on Sunday so that you're going into Sunday starting tired.  This will give some of the benefit of the 3hr without having to put yourself out there for 3 hours in snow, sleet and crappy roads.  In  other words, do 10 on Saturday and then turn around and do 12 - 14 on Sunday.

        Acceptable at a dance, invaluable in a shipwreck.


        A Saucy Wench


          Rather than just adding one long per week, you might consider using a model of a hard day on Saturday -- speed or medium distance, followed by long (2 hr) on Sunday so that you're going into Sunday starting tired.  This will give some of the benefit of the 3hr without having to put yourself out there for 3 hours in snow, sleet and crappy roads.  In  other words, do 10 on Saturday and then turn around and do 12 - 14 on Sunday.

           I like this a lot too.  3 hours is a lot even at my LR pace unless there is a marathon on the horizon.   I usually do at least 1/2 my LR on Saturday, and if I am not injured some of that at Marathon pace.  Even if it makes Sunday sloooooow.   And also I am a big fan (not that you could tell by my log THIS year) of the "off season" lots of medium long runs.

           

          OK I am just procrastinating because it is really cold and windy out there.

          I have become Death, the destroyer of electronic gadgets

           

          "When I got too tired to run anymore I just pretended I wasnt tired and kept running anyway" - dd, age 7

            I'm gradually building my mileage back up and am very close to getting some frequent long runs up to 3 hrs.    I want to continue to do some fairly long long runs but probably not to exceed 3 hours this year.....and ill take what ever mileage 3 hours will get me.....

             

            So, my question is - How frequently should I consider running long runs up in the 3 hour level.  

             

            I'm thinking something like:

             

            -Week 1 - 10 Miles Long Run

            -Week 2 - 2 Hr Long Run (or 12 to 13 miles)

            -Week 3 - 3 Hr Long Run

            -Repeat the process

             

            Just curious as to what some of you think....

             

            I am lately totally intrigued by the fact people train so very hard; yet there seems to be a barrier as to how much faster they'll get.  I am not at all saying that being slow, if you may call it that, is not good or anything.  Yet, when I look around and people talk about "being slow", I somewhat feel this embarrassment or antagonistic tone.  If they really feel being slow is totally fine and be proud of it, so be it.  But just as being slow is not sin at all, being fast is not sin either.  So I sort of sense this reverse psychology thing; they say they're proud to be slow; yet, they are resentful about it and trying to justify it by putting down people who are fast or those who try to be faster

             

            At any rate, it is quite intriguing to me because, it's like what my wife always says; she had run a 3:47 marathon (with her first being 3:54) on very light training program compared with many of popular training program available.  He would look at "standard" program and says; "If I train that hard, I'd expect 3:00 marathon!"  And it's true!  She would go out and train with a local training group and she'd do probably half of what the program calls for.  And she'd beat 80% of the participants comes actual race time. 

             

            When you look at physiological reaction of simple adaptation process; you put your body through some extra stress so your body would adapt.  Ideally, it gets stronger and stronger.  In the case of what we do, when we go out for a run for the first time, our body aches and we breathe heavily because we lack the ability to retain oxygen to do the task (aside from our legs being able to take pounding and what-not).  We we run more, our body's ability to take in, transport and utilize oxygen increases.  What this means is; once we could bearly run a mile without stopping, now we can do 2; then 3; and then 5 miles...  Also, what happens is that, as our oxygen uptake ability increases, you can run at a certain distance aerobically faster.  When our oxygen uptake level is low, say 30ml/kg/min, then even at slower speed, we get into oxygen debt situation.  Now when our oxygen uptake level improves to, say, 37ml.kg/min, then we can run now, say, 10 minute-mile pace and don't get puffing; whereas once we get into oxygen debt while running at 12-minute-mile pace. 

             

            When you look at most elite training program, they usually include a long run of about 2:00~2:30 on their weekend long run as a part of program.  Most distance runners, a mile and up, would include a regular 2-hour run.  I myself found that, while runnng 1:30~1:45 pretty easy, going beyond 2-hours is a work.  There's physiological changes that occur somewhere around 1:30~1:45 range of continuous exercise that actually develop fine capilary beds and increase the size and the number of mitochondria and what-not around that time of cntinous exercise (now, this word, "continuous" is actually important).  As this physiological adaptation takes place, our body's ability to handle oxygen improves and now we can run further and faster aerobically--meaning, you can run at faster pace without getting breathlessness and, theoretically, we can go on for much longer period of time.  Now that's in theory. 

             

            Now, we have people up in Mexico or, of course, highland in Kenya who could run 100km without thinking much of it.  They have developed such fine cardiorespiratory system and fine muscular endurance that they can run and run and run and not get tired.  In the past, there had been some coaches and promotors who tried to bring them down and put them in a marathon race, thinking they'll blast everybody away.  They've run somewhere around 2:20~2:30 marathon and not quite made any sensational headlines.  They did well; but not that fast.  This is because it involves a little more than just running a lot in order to perform well.  Of course, they could turn around and run the same course (26-miles) all over again!  I knew of a guy in New Zealand who ran to the start of the marathon, ran the marathon and then and home.  His home was 20-miles away!  He finished 6th or something.  But 6 or 7-minute-mile pace is a nice easy strall for him.

             

            So here's my intriguing question; when you're running over 2-hours, up to 3-hours, so regularly; then why in the world people don't get quite a bit faster?  I posted this somewhere else but, when people don't move on and get faster, it's usually because (1) they're never trained to run faster, (2) their training is not as effective, (3) they are in fact over-training and always too tired or (3) they just made up their mind that they'd never get faster.  If you run 3-hours so often and yet you're still a more or less novice runner, I'd say that's way too much.  I'd stay somewhere around 1:30 or 1:45 and work to get faster first.  It is not because running faster is better; but it actually helps you to develop more efficiently and also running faster actually helps to get injury-free because of, most likely, less pounding. 

             

            It's just my observation and opinion.  If you have a goal of running a marathon next month, well, then you may have to include some long runs in your program.  But, once again, I feel way too many people attempt to "complete" a marathon so quickly.  I'm not quite sure if it's doing them good...  As much as I always would like to encourage people to run, I feel that there are some elements of "overkill" in most of the programs today.  I sometimes see people who jump in a running band-wagon and "finish" a marathon within a few months, completing it in 5 hours or whatever--which is great--but get so excited and become a leader for some local running training group; or write a book on "how to run a marathon in 3 months"...  I'm not quite sure if it's the right approach.

             

            Last week, I talked to a guy by the name of Gary Lydiard.  He's Arthur Lydiard's son.  He was there when THE first jogging club started in 1961; he was there and saw how 20 obese people with heart attack histories started to run from ZERO (I mean, they couldn't run 200 yards without stopping); and saw how they transformed into running 20-miles WITHOUT STOPPING in 8 months.  Some of them ran a marathon.  Most of these guys who ran a marathon did so around 4 hours.  He said something interesting--"If you have to take walking breaks, you're doing it too much..."  Or would someone like Richard_ consider all these guys genetically superior???

               I like this a lot too.  3 hours is a lot even at my LR pace unless there is a marathon on the horizon.   I usually do at least 1/2 my LR on Saturday, and if I am not injured some of that at Marathon pace.  Even if it makes Sunday sloooooow.   And also I am a big fan (not that you could tell by my log THIS year) of the "off season" lots of medium long runs.

               

              OK I am just procrastinating because it is really cold and windy out there.

               

              All due respect...  I know some peolpe do that--in fact, I know Hansen's group did something like that.  But there is a reason why some people train up to 3-hours and there's a reason why it's effective.  There are things you just can't cut a corner.  I'm not saying it's always better to do it in one stint and do 3-hour runs; but, if you take that philosophy, can you do an hour run 3 days in a row and call it equivalent of 3-hour run?  If you have to do that and divide it in 2 runs, I think it's too much for your current level.  Of course, it all depends on what you're training for like you said...

                NOBBY -- Im not even talking about marathon running -- I just talking about making myself a better runner.....

                Champions are made when no one is watching

                jordirio


                    

                  So, my question is - How frequently should I consider running long runs up in the 3 hour level.  

                   

                  I'm thinking something like:

                  Just curious as to what some of you think....

                   Never.....

                  10km 38'19''

                  HM 1h22'07''

                  M 2h58'44'' 


                  A Saucy Wench

                    Nobby - You misunderstand me - I am not talking about "dividing a long run" And I'm not talking never doing 3, but I think it is a big jump from 2-3  if you are just in maintenance mode.    I was supporting the notion of going hard on Saturday to get the most out of Sunday, I always like doing the hard Saturday even before a long run of 20 or more.  I have a better long run if I go hard on Saturday.

                     

                    John - I think Milktruck has another good point about weather.  Weather isnt much of an issue where I live but if you live in an area that tends to have bad weather, why schedule it at all?  Take advantage of  (relatively) decent days when you have them.  If it is relatively nice this week do 3 hours, if it is a brutal icestorm next week do 90 minutes or whatever.  Don't find yourself thinking "this is a cutback week" on a rare sunny Sunday (or saturday, who cares what day the long run is "supposed to be") and then get trapped into running 20 miles on ice.  (I say after cutting my long run short because the wind was killing me)

                    I have become Death, the destroyer of electronic gadgets

                     

                    "When I got too tired to run anymore I just pretended I wasnt tired and kept running anyway" - dd, age 7


                    i sacrificed the gift

                      Times that you should run over 2 and a half hours:

                       

                       

                      -If you are training for a 50 mile or longer race.

                       

                      -During a marathon race (unless you're fast enough to go sub 2:30), or ultramarathon race.

                       

                       

                       

                      That's about it.

                      Robot House Recovery Drink Protocol:
                      Under 70 Degrees: Samuel Smith's Oatmeal Stout
                      Over 70 Degrees: Dougfish Head 60 Minute IPA


                      A Saucy Wench

                        And of course, I wouldnt worry so much about what you do on Sunday and worry a little more about what you do M-S.  I've stupidly run a marathon on little support miles but had my long runs, and idiotically on no long runs but ok support miles.  B is better - MUCH better.  (not as good as actually running BOTH mind you)  

                         

                         

                        I have become Death, the destroyer of electronic gadgets

                         

                        "When I got too tired to run anymore I just pretended I wasnt tired and kept running anyway" - dd, age 7

                          NOBBY -- Im not even talking about marathon running -- I just talking about making myself a better runner.....

                           

                          John:

                           

                          Yes, presicely.  I feel 3-hour run is pretty close to max even for marathon preparation and even for elite.  I feel it's way too much to do a regular 3-hour run for, well, beginners/novices.  One thing with running; muscular trauma comes with those long runs.  Naturally, coming from Lydiard school, I'm all for long runs.  But, once again, I think people kinda went over-board.  Elite people did weekend 20-miler and that happened to be about 2+ hours.  Now slower people do 20-miler and it takes, for some, 4 hours!  That's a long time to pound on the pavement.  Once again (ghost of Cool Running argument...), I feel 3-hour (just ONE of them) is max for marathon preparation for ANY body.  I got crucified by some slower people, one in particular who would go for a 4+ hour training run for a marathon.  She runs a 5-hour marathon.  I'm not saying it's bad.  But I felt she was over-doing it. 

                           

                          My advice to be a better runner is 2-hour max for now.  I would even do that sparingly.  I'm assuming "being a better runner" means "improving your PR"???  Work on your speed (not necessarily doing repeats).  Run hills...  In the old literature, when Arthur Lydiard was starting his "jogging" movement, they all considered training run of 8-minute-mile pace as "jogging", or a sort of cut-off point of a jogger to a runner.  I just couldn't figure out why so many people hang around at 10, 11, 12-minute pace and seemingly don't improve....

                           

                          John, if you're interested (and we'll be posting this at our Lydiard Foundation website soon), I can send you a copy of "Jogging--the Lydiard Way".  Quite fascinating stuff...  Send me ane-mail at nobby415@msn.com

                            Nobby - You misunderstand me - I am not talking about "dividing a long run" And I'm not talking never doing 3, but I think it is a big jump from 2-3  if you are just in maintenance mode.    I was supporting the notion of going hard on Saturday to get the most out of Sunday, I always like doing the hard Saturday even before a long run of 20 or more.  I have a better long run if I go hard on Saturday.

                             

                            Sorry, I thought you said you "like" that approach (of dividing 3 hour run).  I actually feel that, if you can handle 2-hour run REGULARLY and COMFORTABLY, you can attempt to go for a 3-hour run without too much physical distress (mental distress is another matter...).  I feel the trouble arises when you're struggling to get 2-hour run in, then jump to do 3-hours--or, with the same token, when you're actually strugging to do 1-hour run regularly (meaning, you need to have walking breaks), jump to do 2-hour run or 12-mile run or 16-mile run or whatever (regardless of how un-Godly long it may take); then I really think the body goes through too much stress situation.  So what do they do?  They try to find some, well, what I'd consider as "shortcut" of dividing a long run in half or third or whatever; or frequent walking breaks or things like that.  I think Gary's right about his comment--"If you need to do things like that, you're not ready to move up."  I'm not saying you are.  I'm just making a general statement.  Back in the days (and, whenever I say this, I feel OLD!), we NEVER even consider taking regular walking breaks.  It's a straight shot of 2-hours or 18 miles or 22 miles or whatever.  Today, walk break had become such a big hit and everybody is doing it--and not too many people are even considering moving up to do a continuous run.  I actually came to believe that walking break actually greatly hinder the further improvement.  Now I could be wrong; but I haven't come up with any other reason why so many people DON'T advance while frequently tackling 2 or 3 hour "run" (with walking breaks). 

                              I think I've done a grand total of 2 training runs in my life that were 3 hours or longer--both were by accident.  So to answer the question, approximately never.

                              Runners run


                              The King of Beasts

                                I like to do one every week. 

                                 

                                I did a few weeks in my last "training cycle" where I cut my long run back from 3+ to a little under 2:30, i think that helped me during the week.

                                "As a dreamer of dreams and a travelin' man I have chalked up many a mile. Read dozens of books about heroes and crooks, And I've learned much from both of their styles." ~ Jimmy Buffett

                                 

                                "I don't see much sense in that," said Rabbit. "No," said Pooh humbly, "there isn't. But there was going to be when I began it. It's just that something happened to it along the way."”