Forums >Running 101>Running 6 days a week vs. 5 days a week
Besides getting in extra mileage are there any real advantages to running 6 days a week as compared to 5?
Specifically, I have trained for my marathons running 5 days a week. I am looking to bump up mileage during training for my next one but don't know which way is best to go about doing it.
Do I add miles to my current runs and continue at 5 days a week or do I add a sixth day for the extra miles and keep the other five fairly consistent?
"If you have the fire, run..." -John Climacus
Good Bad & The Monkey
are there any real advantages to running 6 days a week as compared to 5?
The main advantage is that you get to run 6 days a week, whereas when running just 5 days a week, you only get to run 5 days a week.
I'm running somewhere tomorrow. It's going to be beautiful. I can't wait.
Poor baby
This is also why a six pack is better than a 5 pack.
Besides getting in extra mileage are there any real advantages to running 6 days a week as compared to 5? Specifically, I have trained for my marathons running 5 days a week. I am looking to bump up mileage during training for my next one but don't know which way is best to go about doing it. Do I add miles to my current runs and continue at 5 days a week or do I add a sixth day for the extra miles and keep the other five fairly consistent?
If you're strictly talking about running a marathon, often times (not always) you get better result from doing long runs deligently and run a couple of times a week even, than running a mediocore duration like 5~6 miles day in and day out for 5~6 times a week. Of course, this is at the level of >4-hour marathon.
Actually, if you are really serious about improving your perfomrnace or flirting a 3-hour marathon, you wouldn't be asking this kind of question and heading out for 7 days a week of running.
I love them 7 packs
Nobby, Would you recommend the same for shorter races like 10 milers and Half marathons. i.e run 4 longer runs than 7-8 short runs with 1 longer 12 -15 mile run, both equalling 40-45MPW.
I guess I probably didn't explain things clearly and you didn't get what I was trying to get at. You just described possibly the best approach--7~8 short runs with 1 longer run.
I think the original poster was asking, I'm assuming, if it's better to do 3 X 10 miles to get 30MPW or 6 X 5 miles. What I was trying to convey is; particularly if the marathon is the objective, it's FAR better to do something like 15-5-5-5 to get 30 than 6 X 5 simply because you don't get your body prepared for pounding of long running on the road. Is 3 X 10 miles better? Well, it still is 1/3 way shorter than 15-mile continuous run.
To answer your question (for events shorter than the marathon); there still is a benefitial reason to go a long way--particularly 2-hours or more--even for middle distance runners like a guy by thte name of Peter Snell whose event was only 2-laps around the track. There's always a balance that we need to consider.
One of the worst things these "internet message boards" had brought, it seems to me, is this casualness of asking question in a form of "A or B" and 99% of times it's either one or another. Is quality better than qnantity? Is doing long runs better than short runs? Should we take energy gel or not? Of course, probably 99% of the time, it all depends and most likely COMBINATION would work best. For some reason, people like to ask A or B question perhapsn only to get the answer; not necessarily actually implimenting it??? Sometimes some questions are outwardly silly. So this particular OP is asking if it's better to do, I'm simplifying it, 3X10 is better than 6X5 EVEN IF he can do 10-miler here and there or if he is not in a position (not fit enough?) to actually do a 10-miler? People seem to love such question so they can completely eliminate "the bad approach"? Or try to do "the correct approach" regardless? Or just simply trying to get "the right answer" for a party talk??? In my days, at least, we usually try to figure out ourselves to see if that worked for ME or not to get the answer. You gain "wisdome" by doing it that way. You gain yet another file in your computer file only to be lost in the vast information cabinet in the cyber world. Maybe I'm just getting old...
I can say from experience that sometimes the questioner doesn't realize just how vague the question is or that significant information was missing. It's you guys who know so much who see it.
"I want you to pray as if everything depends on it, but I want you to prepare yourself as if everything depends on you."
-- Dick LeBeau
It's just a understanding I got to, with my schedule that I'd have about 6 hours to run in a week in the near future with a 2 hour+ weekend long run, and the rest as I find the time, with maybe a double on a weekday totaling 90-100 minutes (30 + 60 min or 40+ 60 min), and trying to optimize this running time for the best gains for a HM.
I want to break 1:40 in the Half marathon before attempting a marathon, just a silly little round 100 minutes target I picked up a while ago, doesn't hurt that it would also be my BQ pace, just a arbitrary target time to keep me focussed.
Right you are. And by the same token, this is why 7 is better than 6. Because it's one more, isn't it?
Runners run
Ours go to eleven.
When it’s all said and done, will you have said more than you’ve done?