|
Post by marathondude on Dec 15, 2008 13:57:49 GMT -5
Rest and Recovery Runners tend be a very motivated once they get in the habit of training consistently to improve race performances. If training 30 miles each week is good, then 50 or 60 or 70 miles per week must be better. If three repeat miles are good to build stamina, then four or five repeats will do more. If an eight mile tempo run helps in marathon preparation, then a 12-mile tempo run has to be superior. If 18-20 mile long runs build great endurance, then 22-24 mile runs will take you to an even higher level. This is the thought process that is easy to proceed with. Runners keep adding more distance, making track sessions tougher, working harder on tempo runs and increasing long runs with certainty that their upcoming races will be correspondingly faster. However, what often happens is that fatigue, staleness and general malaise sets in. An important part of any training program has been omitted – rest and recovery. This is the first paragraph of a rather lengthy essay that includes suptopics 1) physical rest and recovery, 2) mental rest and recovery, 3) the joy of sleeping, 4) alternating hard and easy days and 5) bringing it all together. For the remainder of the essay, go to www.garycohenrunning.com , click on "All in a Day's Run" and then "Rest and Recovery." I hope this provides some useful information and look forward to your comments on this forum.
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Dec 16, 2008 23:13:06 GMT -5
In my opinion rest and recovery is a key element in training. One thing I believe in though is rest is more necessary from intense running, not really from volume. In my opinion a mistake people commonly make in training is starting anaerobic workouts too early on in their training. You must separate anaerobic training from pure speed training as well. I feel for someone to be completely trained each week they must exercise the speed in their training, but doing this without going anaerobic is important.
I never personally believed in planned easy weeks or anything like that, unless someone is tapering. If the training is well planned your volume and intensity shouldn't both be increased at the same time. Early on in a training cycle should be primarily aerobic work, mileage building. If this is properly executed you are tired, but never to the point that the goal of the day (get miles in) can not be met. Easy days are great, don't get me wrong, but I just think "easy weeks" are overdoing it. Once mileage is maxed out more anaerobic sessions are added in. I think during this transition easy days are paramount, but again this may not always mean lower volume. I think intensity is the key.
For instance Kevin, I really don't think you'd physically see much difference between 3 miles on Monday and 5 if they are done at the correct intensity. I also disagree with your comment about having rest now paying off down the road, I don't think it works that way. Rest now won't be stored and used later on in training, on the other hand aerobic stimulus will.
I always try to think of training as a curve of breakdown and adaptation. As a rule of thumb it takes 10 days for the body to breakdown and adapt to a stimulus. That means if you do a killer workout today, you really won't reap the benefits from that workout until 10 days later. In the time before that your fitness is actually broken down and then being rebuilt.
|
|
|
Post by frojoe23 on Dec 17, 2008 9:10:17 GMT -5
A lot of what Justin says is the way I try to do my training cycle. I try to maintain high mileage throughout and only add in the "speed" work very close to the end. As a guy who doesn't like to do speed, I'll forego it and add more mileage instead. So for the most part, I'll run 100-115 miles a week, until about a month out and then jump to 125-130. Most of the speedwork here come in the form of really finishing the last half of runs strong.
For Boston and Marine Corps this year, I did a lot of speed early (fartleks and mile repeats). Unfortunately, this type of work gets me in shape real fast and I just can't seem to hold that. So in both cycles, I had performances that led me to believe I could run a lot faster than I did at both marathons and it just didn't happen.
I truly believe that if you run high mileage year round, all you have to do is put in about a month of race sharpening and you will be ready to go.
|
|
|
Post by ericjoe on Dec 17, 2008 19:49:46 GMT -5
I truly believe that if you run high mileage year round, all you have to do is put in about a month of race sharpening and you will be ready to go. What percentage of your planned maximum weekly mileage do you think you should maintain all year round to be able to ramp up to a marathon in just 1 month?
|
|
|
Post by frojoe23 on Dec 18, 2008 8:15:48 GMT -5
Maybe I should have clarified that statement a little better. If you run high mileage, you are flexible to be ready for a race from 5k to the marathon. There obviously is special exception to the marathon, because your long run has to be of substantial distance to get you through.
However, I would say that from the half-marathon down to 5k, if you are running high mileage, then your long runs would have to be long enough to get you through those races.
Personally, I think that high mileage is anything 85 miles and above. 85 miles is probably the most mileage that a runner can hit in singles without really damaging their body. It would be a 20 mile long run and four 10-milers and two moderate runs between 12 and 13 miles.
|
|