1234

Is there any science behind the long run rule (Read 304 times)

Joann Y


    Training is 100% science.

     

    False.

      It is by people who know what they're doing and understand the principles of science.

      A particular event produces, and REproduces, a particular result. the variables are many, so the results will vary. The origin of training for running comes from horse racing, and their training methods developed by trial and error over centuries.

       

      With as-yet-to-be-achieved measurement and observation of every minute detail of training on the human body, the "perfect" training schedule could be developed for each individual for the particular event they want to perform well in. Right now we have some coaches who are pretty good at dialing it in for their athletes.

       

      even psychology is science, btw.

      60-64 age group  -  University of Oregon alumni  -  Irreverent and Annoying

      flyrunnr


        One of the best things you can do if you have an hour and you want to learn about a legendary coach's running philosophy, I suggest you watch the lectures of Jack Daniel's on YT. Just search on "Jack Daniels Lectures" and someone queued up a playlist of a bunch of video clips.

         

        His philosophy is that the long run should be the LESSER of 25% of your weekly mileage or 2.5 hours. He prefers that they be done by time.

         

        People who run 100 mile ultras typically cap their long runs at 30 miles (30% of the distance) and have no problems finishing the 100M distance,  but people who run marathons feel they need to do 20 miles (80% of the distance) or more to be prepared?! Crazy.

        https://www.strava.com/athletes/2507437

        PR's - 5K - 17:57 (2017) | 10K - 38:06 (2016)  | 13.1 1:23:55 (2019)  | 26.2  2:58:46 (2017)

        2020 Goals - Sub-2:55 Marathon                       Up Next: TBD, Boston on 9/14?

         

          One of the best things you can do if you have an hour and you want to learn about a legendary coach's running philosophy, I suggest you watch the lectures of Jack Daniel's on YT. Just search on "Jack Daniels Lectures" and someone queued up a playlist of a bunch of video clips.

           

          His philosophy is that the long run should be the LESSER of 25% of your weekly mileage or 2.5 hours. He prefers that they be done by time.

           

          People who run 100 mile ultras typically cap their long runs at 30 miles (30% of the distance) and have no problems finishing the 100M distance,  but people who run marathons feel they need to do 20 miles (80% of the distance) or more to be prepared?! Crazy.

           

          So, any marathon plan containing long runs greater than 7.8 miles is crazy?

          Dave

             

            People who run 100 mile ultras typically cap their long runs at 30 miles

             

            Some do, but others may work in at least one 50m race in a training cycle in preparation for a 100m

             

            or so I've heard

            "Famous last words"  ~Bhearn

              There's a big difference in training to "just finish" and training to achieve a time (training for performance).

               

              Sure, people could run their longest run at 8-10 miles during training and finish a marathon, but it ain't gonna be very fast!

              60-64 age group  -  University of Oregon alumni  -  Irreverent and Annoying

              TeaOlive


              old woman w/hobby

                 

                Sure, people could run their longest run at 8-10 miles during training and finish a marathon, but it ain't gonna be very fast!

                 

                So true.

                 

                And painful.

                 

                You didn't mention painful.

                steph  

                 

                 

                  It is by people who know what they're doing and understand the principles of science.

                  A particular event produces, and REproduces, a particular result. the variables are many, so the results will vary. The origin of training for running comes from horse racing, and their training methods developed by trial and error over centuries.

                   

                  With as-yet-to-be-achieved measurement and observation of every minute detail of training on the human body, the "perfect" training schedule could be developed for each individual for the particular event they want to perform well in. Right now we have some coaches who are pretty good at dialing it in for their athletes.

                   

                  even psychology is science, btw.

                   

                  You smokin' 'dro, bro?  I think that's what I said.  Training is supported by science with a coach's (or your own) philosophy making up where we can only try to dial it in.

                   

                  Physiology is the science behind running and training, but that doesn't make training a science.  Simply using the scientific method doesn't make something 100% science.  (Btw, psychology as a science is debatable--even within the field.)

                   

                  "With as-yet-to-be-achieved measurement and observation..." doesn't sound scientific to me.  And how do you measure will, determination, and heart?  Running and training will always be a philosophy or an art.

                  There was a point in my life when I ran. Now, I just run.

                   

                  We are always running for the thrill of it

                  Always pushing up the hill, searching for the thrill of it

                  Mikkey


                  Mmmm Bop

                    There's a big difference in training to "just finish" and training to achieve a time (training for performance).

                     

                    Sure, people could run their longest run at 8-10 miles during training and finish a marathon, but it ain't gonna be very fast!

                     

                    Exactly. It will be slow and painful whatever way you decide to break up 25mpw...but at least there’s a medal at the end of it!

                     

                    Imo it's best to experiment and figure out what works for you. My best marathon was in Spring last year and averaged 75mpw over 16 weeks, peaking at 103. That cycle included 4x22, 3x26 and 2x50k runs. It worked for me because I was able to recover from them without it affecting the rest of my training. And it was a big confidence booster come race day!

                    5k - 17:53 (4/19)   10k - 37:53 (11/18)   Half - 1:23:18 (4/19)   Full - 2:50:43 (4/19)

                      People who don't like long runs (I am not one of those, btw ) could always try this plan:

                      9-Mile Marathon plan

                      PRs: 5K: 21:25, 10K: 44:05, HM: 1:38:23* (downhill), M: 3:32:09

                          It will be slow and painful whatever way you decide to break up 25mpw...but at least there’s a medal at the end of it!

                         

                         

                        I have documented proof of this.

                        Dave


                        Why is it sideways?

                          To go back to the original question, much depends on the meaning of the word "should."

                           

                          Should you run 100+ miles per week for the marathon -- Yes, if you want to run your best marathon.

                          Should your long run be capped at 20% of weekly mileage -- Yes, if you are running 100+ mpw and you want to run your best marathon.

                           

                          Most people are trying to balance running a marathon with many other "shoulds" in their lives. If you can only run 5 days a week, then yeah probably your best marathon training is going to have a long run at greater than 20% of your weekly mileage. If your life only allows 50 mpw, then a long run of 10 miles is not going to cut it for marathon training.

                           

                          As always, most debates revolve around unclear definition of terms. When Lydiard was talking about training in this context, he was talking about his vision of the ideal form of training, not the form of training that the vast majority of people actually do -- not because they are not scientific or not running by feel, but simply because they have to balance the "shoulds" of running with all the other "shoulds" that life throws at them.

                           

                          What we can take from the Lydiard quote for all of us is the idea that understanding the best marathon training is much less about looking at the impact of single runs (long or short, hard of easy) and more about the accumulated effect of a volume of miles over a period of time.

                            I guess I just can't express it in a way that explains what I'm thinking.

                             

                            Training is predictable results produced via physical activity, aka science. The more we learn about how the body (and mind) functions the better and more predictable the training. We obviously don't know everything in minute detail...yet. I'm talking a strict Skinnerian concept of training; a stimulus elicits a response. Training is not metaphysical or "art", there is not much mystery about it.

                             

                            Art is finding meaning in the indecipherable and creating an interpretation, which is usually subjective.

                             

                            RUNNING can be metaphysical, and how it affects an individual mentally could be conceived as art. The intersection of training the body and mind, or placating the mind, is subjective from person to person and thus a lot left up to interpretation. If an individual's interpretation is that training via running is mystical and controlled by intangible ephemera like "feelings" and they channel that into a productive system, good for them. But it's still stimulus leading to response; physical and mental.

                             

                            Running and training are not the same things, but they overlap. I have to go back to that quote describing types of runners:

                             

                            Racers run to increase their performance

                            Joggers run for fitness/weight loss

                            Runners run because they enjoy the activity

                             

                            And all 3 types overlap at different amounts depending on the person.

                             

                            Sorry for the tedious reply, but in my my bio I warned people not to read my replies. Also, MS Sports Psy.

                            60-64 age group  -  University of Oregon alumni  -  Irreverent and Annoying


                            Why is it sideways?

                              Definitely a science of running -- just have to make sure you get the experimental situation right. I think the road's the best lab. It isolates the right variables.

                                ANNNND...back to topic.

                                 

                                The Long Run is very beneficial for performance and for making longer runs (and races) easier aka less painful. The breaking point of HOW LONG the long run should be resides in the capability of the individual. There is a point of diminishing returns as mileage increases, where running more doesn't allow sufficient recovery and causes overuse injuries. Consistent long term training will extend the mileage an individual can sustain without reaching diminishing returns, but some people will fall apart at lower mileage than others. There are anecdotes supporting or deriding ALL KINDS of weekly and monthly mileage strategies.

                                 

                                There is no one size fits all strategy to the long run, but the 20-30% of weekly mileage seems to be safe for most. I think as we age we need to change our approach to training. A lot of Masters have arrived at a system of just two real workouts a week, a long run and a speed workout, with very easy runs in between. The speed of recovery from a hard workout lengthens as we age, and what used to be easy day/hard day turns into hard day/two easy days.

                                 

                                How does this relate to the Long Run? For Masters, the long run may turn out to be 50% or more of the weekly mileage.

                                60-64 age group  -  University of Oregon alumni  -  Irreverent and Annoying

                                1234