Forums >Running 101>Splitting long run on two
Hawt and sexy
I'm touching your pants.
Suspect Zero
Runners run
(does anybody know who Bill Squires is?)
Just for the record, though...it's not that I'm AGAINST going very long. My longest run ever (and I respect you, Willamona) was 3:36 or something like that... It was a 30-miler. I did my first marathon within a year of that run and it was 2:59:48...
Of course, Arthur Lydiard was the one who promoted "one long run" over two shorter ones. This is because, based on East German exercise physiologists' study, a long continuous run of 2-hours or more would quickly develop capillary beds around the working muscles. He promoted one 2-hour run would be better than two 1-hour runs. Now would that mean 4-hour run is better than 2-hour run? Well, depending on what event you're training for (ultra?), I actually disagree with it. The thing is; would two splitted runs done "faster" outweigh one super long SLOW run? If you train two 1-hour runs at, say, 10-minute-mile pace; would that give you a better chance to run 4:30 marathon instead of staying around 12-minute-pace and go for a 4-hour training run? You know, that's probably your choice. I sort of assume people would like to run the darn thing faster. ... Anyways, I'm not sure if I'm actually answering the original question; but the thing is; I think the marathon has become more or less a ultra event for most people. I think someone should look into the effective training principles for ultra races--I think it's a bit different from running a marathon under 4-hours or 3-hours. Continuously running more than 5 hours; I think you'll be getting into something other than running a marathon (or what marathon--26.2 miles--used to be) physiologically.
It was when I talked to Coach Squires (does anybody know who Bill Squires is?) that he suggested a long run of about 3-hours + another 6-miler after a relatively short break (just a couple of hours break).
Nobby, For curiosity, what's the reasoning behind a couple hours break between a 3-hr run and another 6 miles. Is that in a particular context - like new, slow runners; any level of experience slow runners; well trained elites (if they're doing marathons, they're probably not using 3-hr runs); ...? Does a person just go about rest of life in that time period or refuel or ...? I was wondering if that break serves the same function as walk breaks in ultra training - or something completely different. (It's not something I'd realistically consider because of logistics and goals, but I was thinking about this while out snowshoe running today.) Thanks.