Infrequent long runs vs. frequent short runs? (Read 1928 times)

How about defining "long run" as a percentage of weekly mileage? So, a long run would be a run that is equal to about 1/3 (or more) of your total weekly mileage.

Any of you remember coaches like Dick Brown, Bill Dellinger, Mike Manly, Luis de Olivaira??? Some of who's who in distance running who all lived in Eugene, OR. They used to get together once a week for an hour to discuss training. Each week they pick a topic and, even though no "agreement" is reached, the time limit was one hour. Of course, one week, the topic was "Long Run". Guess what? With all those top coaches in the country, they could NOT define what "Long Run" was... We were telling this story to the late John Davies (another great coach you may or may not recognize) and John started to explain HIS version of "Long Run"! Long run can vary from individual to individual. I don't think it's a good idea at all to "formulize" long run. If you say 1/3 of total weekly mileage, what about someone who runs 120 miles a week? Going back to the original poster's question; whether to run short for, say, 5 days vs. a couple of "long" runs. I'm not trying to be a wise-man (perhaps wise something...) but I'd say neither. I think Tchuck or Narsi got it right. I think you should get some variation of duration and effort throughout the week. I don't think long run is over-rated at all--in fact, I think it's probably under-rated. According to Dr. Ulenbrouch (spelling) of Cologne, West Germany (at the time), during the long runs, particularly longer than 2-hour CONTINUOUSLY, capillary beds surrounding the working muscles grow most significatly. And, according to him, even a short break of 30 seconds can hinder the development (not that you should NOT take some easy break or you'll wipe out the benefit completely...). Now I don't know how "walking breaks" fit in to this theory but... Anywho, this capillary beds development is what develops muscular endurance. Without it, as some people would say at the end of the marathon, "I wasn't tired; I could talk but I couldn't move my legs..." This happens to a lot of cross-trainers as well; they're fine cardiovascularly; but their development of muscular endurance in the specific muscle groups is not as good. I have guided my wife to her first marathon (3:54) on something like 25 miles a week schedule with her long run consisiting of about 80% of her weekly mileage. I would not necessarily recommend this to just anybody but it can be done. In fact, the more I know about the sport; the more I'm finding out that she did so much better than a lot of folks who runs almost of double of what she did (or does) and particularly those who does a lot of the runs consistantly short and fast but never do long runs. Now this is the case of "surviving" the marathon. If you want to become a good 5k runner, that might be a bit different. I'm "coaching" this Beginning Women's Running Class for MDRA (I guess I've promoted this several times on this message board... ;o)) and I checked out Cool Runing (former) C25K program. I thought the basic concept of this program is very very good. But I modified it a bit to suit MY own beliefs. I was actually surprised with the fact (1) how much walking breaks they put into and continue to have it throughout; and (2) how most of the weekly workouts are all the same. I believe you need to have some CONTINOUS running and the duration of that should be lengthened as you get fitter; and you need to introduce some form of Hard-Easy principles. In other words, I believe in putting your body through some extra stress that you never did before one day; and then go back to an easy stress to give your body a chance to recover from it. I really didn't see that in the original C25K program. It just sort of getting harder as you go along... I think you need some sort of a FLOW or wave of hard-easy-medium hard-easy-extra hard...., etc. something like that. After all, without pushing out the envelope, you will sort of vegitate. But without a chance of recovery, you'll get into a stress situation.

Yeh Nobby! And while we're here, how do you feel about easy running or jogging vs taking days off to facilitate recovery?

I was wondering that as well. I'm a 20-25 mile/week runner (when I have the time and I'm healthy) like the example people have been talking about. My "longer runs" are usually 6-8 miles. I would run everyday if I could, but don't always have time to run my usual 3-4 miles. Is going for a short, slow run (1-2 miles) better than not running at all? I've read it keeps you loose, and gets the blood flowing to your legs and feet.

Any of you remember coaches like Dick Brown, Bill Dellinger, Mike Manly, Luis de Olivaira??? Some of who's who in distance running who all lived in Eugene, OR. They used to get together once a week for an hour to discuss training. Each week they pick a topic and, even though no "agreement" is reached, the time limit was one hour. Of course, one week, the topic was "Long Run". Guess what? With all those top coaches in the country, they could NOT define what "Long Run" was... We were telling this story to the late John Davies (another great coach you may or may not recognize) and John started to explain HIS version of "Long Run"! Long run can vary from individual to individual. I don't think it's a good idea at all to "formulize" long run. If you say 1/3 of total weekly mileage, what about someone who runs 120 miles a week? Going back to the original poster's question; whether to run short for, say, 5 days vs. a couple of "long" runs. I'm not trying to be a wise-man (perhaps wise something...) but I'd say neither. I think Tchuck or Narsi got it right. I think you should get some variation of duration and effort throughout the week. I don't think long run is over-rated at all--in fact, I think it's probably under-rated. According to Dr. Ulenbrouch (spelling) of Cologne, West Germany (at the time), during the long runs, particularly longer than 2-hour CONTINUOUSLY, capillary beds surrounding the working muscles grow most significatly. And, according to him, even a short break of 30 seconds can hinder the development (not that you should NOT take some easy break or you'll wipe out the benefit completely...). Now I don't know how "walking breaks" fit in to this theory but... Anywho, this capillary beds development is what develops muscular endurance. Without it, as some people would say at the end of the marathon, "I wasn't tired; I could talk but I couldn't move my legs..." This happens to a lot of cross-trainers as well; they're fine cardiovascularly; but their development of muscular endurance in the specific muscle groups is not as good. I have guided my wife to her first marathon (3:54) on something like 25 miles a week schedule with her long run consisiting of about 80% of her weekly mileage. I would not necessarily recommend this to just anybody but it can be done. In fact, the more I know about the sport; the more I'm finding out that she did so much better than a lot of folks who runs almost of double of what she did (or does) and particularly those who does a lot of the runs consistantly short and fast but never do long runs. Now this is the case of "surviving" the marathon. If you want to become a good 5k runner, that might be a bit different. I'm "coaching" this Beginning Women's Running Class for MDRA (I guess I've promoted this several times on this message board... ;o)) and I checked out Cool Runing (former) C25K program. I thought the basic concept of this program is very very good. But I modified it a bit to suit MY own beliefs. I was actually surprised with the fact (1) how much walking breaks they put into and continue to have it throughout; and (2) how most of the weekly workouts are all the same. I believe you need to have some CONTINOUS running and the duration of that should be lengthened as you get fitter; and you need to introduce some form of Hard-Easy principles. In other words, I believe in putting your body through some extra stress that you never did before one day; and then go back to an easy stress to give your body a chance to recover from it. I really didn't see that in the original C25K program. It just sort of getting harder as you go along... I think you need some sort of a FLOW or wave of hard-easy-medium hard-easy-extra hard...., etc. something like that. After all, without pushing out the envelope, you will sort of vegitate. But without a chance of recovery, you'll get into a stress situation.

No cheating. You can't say "neither." She wanted to know which was "better." For my money, the hardest part of a run is lacing up the shoes and walking out the door, so I think it's better to run 6-7x week than it is 2x week. Sooner or later, a couple of those short runs will get longer because -- let's face it -- after you've put in the 20 minutes of warm-up, it's kind of a nice feeling to keep trotting along. I know, may answer's a cheat too. It's a loaded question.