Forums >Running 101>3 Hour Long Run - How Often
It was not aimed at your post but general comment. Many new people look at elite marathon schedules tact then on the frig door and try imitate them.
Well, we've all done that now, haven't we? I mean, the first thing I did as a newbie was print out Tergat's training and went from there.
Options,Account, Forums
I heard it's better to fetch Tergat into your house, not just a copy of his training schedule.
It's a 5k. It hurt like hell...then I tried to pick it up. The end.
I'm noboby, who are you?
So, wait, 3 hour long runs are disproportional--not ideal for training?
Nice try but no cigar. They were disproportional as compared to my total weekly mileage. back then and to some extent today, some people would draw a line in the sand and say, your long run should not be greater than X% of your total. On some weeks a long run a 3 hours and 20-22 with my total of 45.
I was not trying to play the minimalist but two kids, a wife and a 50-60 hour a week job meant my time was limited. With a short porch I made sure that I got the bread and butter runs - Long, speed and mid-week 10-12 each week. if I had time I'd slide in some 4-5's.
Were they ideal? I trust you can define IDEAL so we can all get our arms around it. For me, the 3 hour and more run was ideal. My disproportional training took me through a few dozen marathons to include ten Bostons in the 3:06 - 3:15 range in my mid to late 40's. In my little world all was well.
I'm not one to extrapolate what worked for me should work for everyone. That's silly. I'm simply proposing that one needs to keep an open mind as to their personal strengths and mold a marathon schedule around such strengths and that often takes years. I would never aim a rookie down this path, unless they made an appoint with the their orthopedist before they started to avoid the long wait to get in. My eventual marathon schedule was a collage of published schedule, one of which was Galloway's 26-28 mile long run.
One of my strengths was running long with very little repercussions. For some of my fellow running mates they would be in the hospital or on the injured reserve list.
Are we a little clearer on this issue or are you going to sing a rendition of Subterranean Homesick Blues? I grew up with Dylan\'s music and even spent time in his Woodstock house.:-)
The internet allows us to share our thoughts - even at times to agree to disagree.
Again, we agree! But we don't agree, apparently. Why not? Because it's the internet!
Again, we agree!
But we don't agree, apparently. Why not? Because it's the internet!
Why is it sideways?
I was not trying to play the minimalist but two kids, a wife and a 50-60 hour a week job meant my time was limited. With a short porch I made sure that I got the bread and butter runs - Long, speed and mid-week 10-12 each week. if I had time I'd slide in some 4-5's. Were they ideal? I trust you can define IDEAL so we can all get our arms around it. For me, the 3 hour and more run was ideal. My disproportional training took me through a few dozen marathons to include ten Bostons in the 3:06 - 3:15 range in my mid to late 40's. In my little world all was well.
Exactly. There is a place for 3 hour plus runs. In some situations--like the one you mention in which that's the best way to get your miles up, they may be the best way to get the miles in. We agree.
I'm not sure why people took me to be saying that no one should ever do a 3 hour plus training run. My only point was they are not necessary.
...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. ...Just curious as to what some of you think....
...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.
...
Just curious as to what some of you think....
John -
It looks like you're doing ok. There has been a lot of good advice and comment in this thread. I think you're doing the right thing by treating the longer runs as the "mileage builder" part of your schedule.
.
As many here have indicated, there's nothing "magic" about a 3-hour threshold for long runs. It all depends on what your goals are and how your schedule reflects that. I'll bet Sebastian Coe never did 3-hour runs. OTOH, some people do them because they have to put in 3-4 hours to get some 20+ mile runs in their marathon training. I know a couple 2:30 marathoners who have/have-had different experiences here. One runs marathons, has won a number of them, and never does 3-hour runs because he doesn't think he needs 25-mile runs in his training. The other guy concentrated more on ultras, won a number of them (as well as marathons), and had no problem with back-to-back (successive days) 25 to 30 mile training runs... so what if he did them slower than 7 min/mile pace.
When exclusively doing Low Heart Rate (LHR) training in the summer of 2008, it looks like I had a stretch of 32 days where I did 13 runs of 3 hours or more. I had a strange way of keeping records, but that's TMI. It worked fine for me... legs didn't cramp at all in the October marathon.
Just take it easy most of the time and run for enjoyment and you will do fine.
Exactly. There is a place for 3 hour plus runs. In some situations--like the one you mention in which that's the best way to get your miles up, they may be the best way to get the miles in. We agree. I'm not sure why people took me to be saying that no one should ever do a 3 hour plus training run. My only point was they are not necessary.
But they can be necessary for some people and why we keep beating this dog. If I find that a three hour run gets me 3:0n marathon and 2:30 results in a 3:20, then the longer run IS necessary for my optimal goal. Hopefully you are are not trivializing the word necessary to mean to cross the finish line regardless of time.
Hopefully you are are not trivializing the word necessary to mean to cross the finish line regardless of time.
Yeah that sounds like something Jeff would do.
Runners run
Like every forum, one has to learn, and that can take some time, who is reasonable vs. who is less than reasonable. Now\, wasn't that tactful.
One of you has proven that 3 hour runs are not necessary to run a 2:38 marathon. The other hasn't really proven anything but thinks he has.
The King of Beasts
+42
"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."”
Cause Jeff is all about jogging it in, and not caring about accomplishing any time goal. </sarcasm>
Yeah, 3 years ago. Haven't been proving much lately, but so it goes...
Peace and love, pithydoug. The horse is long dead and has now been properly beaten, far as I'm concerned.
Well -- a few days ago, I started this thread......now that i have reviewed everything I'm convinced the people whom say you don't need to run 3 Hr Training runs are the one that are making the most sense (at least to me)....
At least to me, the point has been proven and I agree ........it will be a while before i do a 3 hr training run....
Thanks Everyone...
Champions are made when no one is watching
Well -- a few days ago, I started this thread......now that i have reviewed everything I'm convinced the people whom say you don't need to run 3 Hr Training runs are the one that are making the most sense (at least to me).... At least to me, the point has been proven and I agree ........it will be a while before i do a 3 hr training run.... Thanks Everyone...
I totally agree with you. My suggestions about 3 hours runs were a potential for those some years and marathons down the road.