Is less more?

[mcshame]

Went to a running seminar yesterday with my soon to be history Chiro and he was a big supporter of a 3xweek running program with 2 x-train days; Interval, tempo and LSD. I am not convinced that a low mileage program will result for me a faster marathon time. I am planning to train of a 5 day/week plan peaking in the 80km/week taken from Hal Higdon's intermediate plan and adding the speedwork day/week from the advanced plan. My 10k race time suggests a 3:24:55 marathon, I've only tapped into a 3:52.

Is less more and more less? Or is quantity with speed work the ticket.

[La]

I don't know if I'm fully qualified to answer your question, other than to share my own experience. I've done the 3x week with x-training approach, and this fall I used the 5x week with no cross training approach. My race day results were similar. Though I have to say that I actually had less pain from chronic injuries using the more running approach than I did with the less running approach. Not sure why (other than the fact that perhaps cycling is what's aggravating some of my injuries). And I did feel less taxed during my long runs than I used to when I ran less and cross-trained more.

Most people will agree that you need three quality run workouts per week: long, tempo, speed or hills. Where people disagree is what else you should be doing during the week (and also how those long, tempo, speed and hills should be run). My belief is that if those three workouts are the most important, then the rest of your week should ensure that you are not too tired/sore to do them properly and get what you need out of them.

I actually think that the more you run (time/distance) the "better" effect this will have on your running - the exception being that if running that frequently creates undue stress on your body that you are not able to recover from, then you need to find a balance between running and other activities.

[La]

Went to a running seminar yesterday with my soon to be history Chiro and he was a big supporter of a 3xweek running program with 2 x-train days;

What is his rationale for this approach? Is it because he thinks that running is "bad" for you?

[scrumhalfgirl]

Different people seem to respond better to different plans - and perhaps some people would respond equally well to both. You also have to think about what you enjoy - if cross-training will be a chore, and you'd rather run 5 days per week, then there's something to be said for that. For a triathlete who would hate to give up their swimming and biking, there's benefit to sticking to what they will enjoy (and thus the plan they will actually follow!).

One thing I would caution against is going to crazy mixing up plans - I'd suggest choosing either the intermediate or advanced plan. The intermediate plan would be structured in a given way, based on the workouts it includes. If you go adding in different workouts, you're no longer following the same plan. An interval workout of 8km is much more taxing than an easy paced 8km run, and the plan would be structured for the following workouts on the assumption that you've done an easy run the day before - not intervals. A "mish-mash" can you work if you look at the plan as a whole, but just subbing in one for the other can be risky.**

**Of course, there are people who can do this with no problem at all, but given the fact that I think you still have lots of room to shave time easily off your marathon PB and you've had a history of injury, my leaning would be to go towards a more cautious approach.

[mcshame]

Went to a running seminar yesterday with my soon to be history Chiro and he was a big supporter of a 3xweek running program with 2 x-train days;

What is his rationale for this approach? Is it because he thinks that running is "bad" for you?

His rational was that it didn't work for him....There were other people there so I challenged him on this approach that people are different and what works for one may not work for another. He believes that people are designed to run, he just can't find the solution to run faster

[jonovision_man]

Sounds like the FIRST program:
http://www.runnersworld.co.uk/general/t ... /2493.html

I've basically been doing it out of neccessity as I can't let biking/swimming lag while I'm focused on running... I've been getting faster year by year on 3 runs a week (sometimes only 2). But I'm nowhere near as fast as many of you folks. So I can't speak to whether it'd work for more elite runners (although the article above gives some case studies as supporting evidence).

jono

[Jwolf]

If three days per week were all it took, then you'd see elite runners running much less than they do. So in general I don't think that less = more--- most people that have seen huge improvements in their running here do it by running more. But there are some coaches that do promote running only three days for runners at our levels, and I have thought about this more lately.

Many people agree that the meat of any marathon training program should be one long run plus two quality runs. If you try to squeeze in more quality runs you risk taking away from the others. The rest of the days should be easy running, at a pace that allows you to do your hard runs hard enough. If you are tiring yourself out by running too hard on easy days, your overall training won't be as effective.

There are several coaches that promote NO running on those other days and say that it works better for many people than trying to do easy runs. I think it does help people that would otherwise try to do those other easy runs too fast. John Hill is a local coach that a few of my friends train with now; he also promotes the 3 runs + cross-training program. Unlike FIRST, there are no set paces for the long run, but the other two quality runs are tough and very specific.

Personally I find that easy runs on otherwise rest or cross-training days help keep me running better on my hard days. I recently learned, however, from my lactate testing, that many of my easy recovery runs were doing very little for my aerobic fitness. They were good for keeping loose and moving on otherwise rest days, but it's possible to do short runs too slow to be effective aerobically.

[mcshame]

Different people seem to respond better to different plans - and perhaps some people would respond equally well to both. You also have to think about what you enjoy - if cross-training will be a chore, and you'd rather run 5 days per week, then there's something to be said for that. For a triathlete who would hate to give up their swimming and biking, there's benefit to sticking to what they will enjoy (and thus the plan they will actually follow!).

One thing I would caution against is going to crazy mixing up plans - I'd suggest choosing either the intermediate or advanced plan. The intermediate plan would be structured in a given way, based on the workouts it includes. If you go adding in different workouts, you're no longer following the same plan. An interval workout of 8km is much more taxing than an easy paced 8km run, and the plan would be structured for the following workouts on the assumption that you've done an easy run the day before - not intervals. A "mish-mash" can you work if you look at the plan as a whole, but just subbing in one for the other can be risky.**

**Of course, there are people who can do this with no problem at all, but given the fact that I think you still have lots of room to shave time easily off your marathon PB and you've had a history of injury, my leaning would be to go towards a more cautious approach.

I was going to use the advanced plan because it had speedwork, I want to do at least 1 day a week of speedwork. But the advanced plan has me running 6 days a week. The intermediate plan has 5 days a week but I needed to insert the speedwork into it. I'll make sure there is an easy run or rest after the more intense day of the week. With 2 days off, I should be able to do that

[mcshame]

Sounds like the FIRST program:
http://www.runnersworld.co.uk/general/t ... /2493.html

I've basically been doing it out of neccessity as I can't let biking/swimming lag while I'm focused on running... I've been getting faster year by year on 3 runs a week (sometimes only 2). But I'm nowhere near as fast as many of you folks. So I can't speak to whether it'd work for more elite runners (although the article above gives some case studies as supporting evidence).

jono

It was actually in a Running World book.

[turd ferguson]

If three days per week were all it took, then you'd see elite runners running much less than they do...

I need to disagree with this assertion - I think the logic that "it doesn't work for a 113 pound kenyan so it doesn't work for you" is fallacious. I'm older, fatter and less talented and I don't see the logical connection between what works for them and what works for me.

[Jwolf]

By the way-- looking back at your original question of whether speed work is the way to get a faster marathon time.

You don't need more speed work to get your marathon time down. Your easy pace is already at 3:30 marathon pace. What you need is more endurance, and you get that by the cumulative effect of several runs over 30K. I would suggest you pick a plan that has you building to at least 4 runs in the 30-32K range starting 8 weeks before your marathon and doing them every 1-2 weeks before taper. The other hard days should build to a longer, marathon paced temp run (up to 16-18K at MP) and speed day where you do long intervals (1-mile to 2K repeats). That will get you there.

[Jwolf]

If three days per week were all it took, then you'd see elite runners running much less than they do...

I need to disagree with this assertion - I think the logic that "it doesn't work for a 113 pound kenyan so it doesn't work for you" is fallacious. I'm older, fatter and less talented and I don't see the logical connection between what works for them and what works for me.

You took my statement out of context-- in the rest of my post I talked about how another approach might be better for the rest of us.

[jonovision_man]

Personally I find that easy runs on otherwise rest or cross-training days help keep me running better on my hard days. I recently learned, however, from my lactate testing, that many of my easy recovery runs were doing very little for my aerobic fitness. They were good for keeping loose and moving on otherwise rest days, but it's possible to do short runs too slow to be effective aerobically.

See that's the thing... I could mail-in an easy recovery run on those other days, or I can go hammer out a wicked Spinervals workout on the bike. Which is more effective?

Granted my goals are different, I have bike stuff on my horizon, but even so I wonder if people who have purely running goals could benefit from cross-training as well.

jono

[La]

Personally I find that easy runs on otherwise rest or cross-training days help keep me running better on my hard days. I recently learned, however, from my lactate testing, that many of my easy recovery runs were doing very little for my aerobic fitness. They were good for keeping loose and moving on otherwise rest days, but it's possible to do short runs too slow to be effective aerobically.

See that's the thing... I could mail-in an easy recovery run on those other days, or I can go hammer out a wicked Spinervals workout on the bike. Which is more effective?

Granted my goals are different, I have bike stuff on my horizon, but even so I wonder if people who have purely running goals could benefit from cross-training as well.

Yes, your goals are different, but there's a big difference between a "mailed in" recovery run and a Spinervals hammer-fest! There's nothing "recovery" about that kind of workout so you wouldn't actually be following the "plan" of alternating easy/hard workouts.

[Robbie-T]

After the recent Canadian Masters XC Championships Flotrack interviewed the male and female winners, each of them said the biggest change they have made to their training as Masters is to rest more, cross train more and only run 3-4 runs a week. These are fast folks.

I believe is you cross train on a bike and run 3-4 times a week, a 3:30 marathon is very possible.

I'd also like to say that speed work isn't that important for a 3:30 marathon, you don't need to learn to run fast, you just want to train yourself to run 5:00 pace for a long time. With your injures I'd likely stay far far away from the speed work anyway, tempos are were it is at for the marathon.

[La]

I also think we need to differentiate between "cross training" for runners and "multi-sport" training for triathletes. They are NOT the same thing. XT is meant to help your body recover while staying active and working different muscle groups. MS Training is to train your body to perform in more than one sport. Those are vastly different training plans.

[turd ferguson]

If three days per week were all it took, then you'd see elite runners running much less than they do...

I need to disagree with this assertion - I think the logic that "it doesn't work for a 113 pound kenyan so it doesn't work for you" is fallacious. I'm older, fatter and less talented and I don't see the logical connection between what works for them and what works for me.

You took my statement out of context-- in the rest of my post I talked about how another approach might be better for the rest of us.

It seemed that you were starting with that assertion as a starting point but that 3x/week might also work. I disagree with even discussing what the elites do when building up a training program for someone like me. I don't think its particularly relevant or helpful.

[jonovision_man]

Personally I find that easy runs on otherwise rest or cross-training days help keep me running better on my hard days. I recently learned, however, from my lactate testing, that many of my easy recovery runs were doing very little for my aerobic fitness. They were good for keeping loose and moving on otherwise rest days, but it's possible to do short runs too slow to be effective aerobically.

See that's the thing... I could mail-in an easy recovery run on those other days, or I can go hammer out a wicked Spinervals workout on the bike. Which is more effective?

Granted my goals are different, I have bike stuff on my horizon, but even so I wonder if people who have purely running goals could benefit from cross-training as well.

Yes, your goals are different, but there's a big difference between a "mailed in" recovery run and a Spinervals hammer-fest! There's nothing "recovery" about that kind of workout so you wouldn't actually be following the "plan" of alternating easy/hard workouts.

Right, the FIRST plan calls for hard cross-training, not easy. I think their idea is that since you're using muscles in different ways, you can handle more intensity than if you'd only been running.

Edit: found the quote that confirms this:
http://www.runnersworld.co.uk/racing/be ... /2494.html

"We believe that if you cross-train correctly, you can use it to increase your overall training intensity, without increasing your injury risk," says Pierce. "At the same time, you can still go out and run hard the next day."

jono

[mcshame]

I'd also like to say that speed work isn't that important for a 3:30 marathon, you don't need to learn to run fast, you just want to train yourself to run 5:00 pace for a long time. With your injures I'd likely stay far far away from the speed work anyway, tempos are were it is at for the marathon.

Intervals are tough in the winter anyhow and for me seem to cause more impact. I LOVE tempo runs...I'll replace the intervals in the plan with tempos. Thx

[blank]

I followed a Higdon intermediate plan last winter and spring and ended up not making it to the starting line at the NCM. The combination of five days a week of running with a marathon paced run on Saturday followed by an LSD on Sunday was killer and, by not listening to my body, I ended up with a tibial stress fracture. Just a word of caution if you do follow a Higdon plan.

On the advice of a sports doctor I have switched to three days a week of running (1. tempo or steady state, 2. speed work, 3. LSD) and two days of cross training (cycling) and I am faster than I’ve ever been. I feel a lot fresher for every run and I am enjoying my running a lot more. If I were to to start training for a marathon again I would just add one more easy paced run.

I think you have to find your own way. Perhaps five days a week of running will work for you but exercise caution and listen to what you body is telling you. Best of luck.

[MichaelMc]

I wrote a great big post on this, which seems to be lost...

Reader's Digest version: for pure effectiveness in terms of improving marathon times IMHO a program that is biased towards mileage with some speedwork will trump any 3x per week with cross training program in the long term. Adaptations to (new) speedwork tends to be quick, but they taper off quickly and they limit the amount of total running you can tolerate injury-free. A program with more volume may show a less dramatic increase in aerobic fitness, but improves endurance and efficiency better PLUS it builds your capacity to train more. The more RUNNING base you build, the more training you CAN do, just like compound interest.

If I needed to improve for a race in four weeks, I'd work speedwork. If I wanted to improve my running over the next few years I'd do a blended program. Other sports or interests can and do affect it too.

[Jwolf]

Personally I find that easy runs on otherwise rest or cross-training days help keep me running better on my hard days. I recently learned, however, from my lactate testing, that many of my easy recovery runs were doing very little for my aerobic fitness. They were good for keeping loose and moving on otherwise rest days, but it's possible to do short runs too slow to be effective aerobically.

See that's the thing... I could mail-in an easy recovery run on those other days, or I can go hammer out a wicked Spinervals workout on the bike. Which is more effective?

It depends on what you want out of your next running workout.

If you want to keep improving your cycling, then yes, you need to do both, but if you want the most out of your running, a taxing spinervals workout might not be the most effective for your running improvement.

Even if the spinervals are using completely different muscles (and not all are different), if you are getting into lacate threshold territiory, you might not be able to train lactate threshold for running as well the next day.

Personally I find that I run my quality runs a LOT better when I'm doing a lot of easy mileage during the week. So for me, a hard spinervals workout on an easy day would definitely be defeating the purpose of the easy day.

John Hill (the coach I mentioned before) tells his runners that if they cross-train on the non-running days it should be aerobically non-taxing. He says one easy run/week is ok, but really discourages running more than 4 days/week. It's not a super-low mileage plan, though-- they'll get up to 90K/week with 36K long runs by the end of the program, and are already at about 60K/week 4 months out of Vancouver.

[ROW]

Kirsten Vergara, a 13 year old girl only runs 3-4 days a week. She was winning races when she was 11. Now she is 13 and in grade 7, she ran a 18:11 5km. Pretty crazy when she could win all ofsaa for my age for girls. Not sure what the better approach is, I never would have a chance to only run 3 times a week. Right now i'm building base, and in track, I have to do what my track coach wants, then base again in the summer, then xc. It seems to help a lot of people. And I think it could make me better, but I don't ever have a chance too.

[Garrett]

Kirsten Vergara, a 13 year old girl only runs 3-4 days a week...

I was about 50m behind her w/ 400m to go in the STW 5k this year and was presented with a lose/lose situation. Either finish behind a 13y/o girl, or be an **** and out kick a 13y/o girl...

...it was an easy choice:

the male and female winners, each of them said the biggest change they have made to their training as Masters is to rest more, cross train more and only run 3-4 runs a week.

This probably works great after years of building a solid running base.

[MichaelMc]

Hey, it is a RACE: I'm with you all the way... you big bully!