Page 5 of 5

Lower mileage - but still effective?

Posted: Tue Apr 14, 2009 11:13 pm
by Tinman
Citius -

I've reflected on that time-frame in my life when I ran really well. I ask myself often, "What would I do differently?"

Here are some initial answers:

a) raise my rotation mileage gradually to 7 or 8 miles (maybe alternate)

b) slow down my middle (medium) day

c) vary the types of workouts I do on the the third day - once I established a good foundation of general conditioning, I'd probably rotate a tempo run on hills, a long interval session, and a short rep session for speed. So, I'd set up at 9 day rotation with the flexibility to add in a day or easy running here or there as needed and adjust the rotation to accomodate racing needs.


As somone who preferred races that were 5k and shorter, I am confident that this set-up would be ideal for me. If I were to focus on marathon training, I'd have to make my key workout day "Big" and reduce the length of the filler runs (in-between key workouts).
Tinman

Re: Lower mileage - but still effective?

Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2017 9:06 am
by fasterthanslow
I am bumping up this thread. The below highlighted line intrigued me. Why is it that a runner should keep mileage constant under the 3-day rotation? However, on the next few pages of the thread Tom gives varying mileage and varying intensity examples as another approach. I am simply curious to know the answer.
Tinman wrote:Math -

There are limits to how much quality running you can do before involution of adaptitive process occurs. In my example, 5 miles per day, easy, tempo, somewhat hard, there was only 25 minutes of tempo and 15-20 minutes of faster (somewhat hard) running done (on different days). Because of my work situation (being on my feet for many hours each day) I could not run much more than 5 miles per day and still improve. Thus, I did what I could and stuck with it.

* I don't think many people can run more than double the amount of quality I did and still improve.

Here is what I might give a sub-30 minute 10k runner who wants to use the Tinman 3-day Rotation Method:

Day 1) 70 minutes of Very EZ to EZ running;

Day 2) 70 minutes, including 60 minutes of tempo running;

Day 3) 70 minutes, including 20-30 minutes of fairly hard to hard running.

I'd be quite surprised if someone could do more than the above and continue to improve. The above schedule may look easy but it will take a heavy toll on a runner. [font=]And, I'll tell you one secret I learned the hard way doing the 3-day rotation: it's better to run the same time or distance every day than vary it. I found that keeping the same distance was best, and varying the pace was ideal for stimulating growth. [/font]

Again, the above 3-day (sample) rotation would be for a person nearing or at their upper limit of capability. It is very tough and a person needs to build to it slowly or else they will crash and burn.

Re: Lower mileage - but still effective?

Posted: Fri Aug 09, 2019 3:21 pm
by rdmn
I'm about to try a 3-day rotation approach this fall with the goal of getting my 5k under 16:30 by early February. I am also curious on why the same amount of mileage every day is preferable.
fasterthanslow wrote:I am bumping up this thread. The below highlighted line intrigued me. Why is it that a runner should keep mileage constant under the 3-day rotation? However, on the next few pages of the thread Tom gives varying mileage and varying intensity examples as another approach. I am simply curious to know the answer.
Tinman wrote:Math -

There are limits to how much quality running you can do before involution of adaptitive process occurs. In my example, 5 miles per day, easy, tempo, somewhat hard, there was only 25 minutes of tempo and 15-20 minutes of faster (somewhat hard) running done (on different days). Because of my work situation (being on my feet for many hours each day) I could not run much more than 5 miles per day and still improve. Thus, I did what I could and stuck with it.

* I don't think many people can run more than double the amount of quality I did and still improve.

Here is what I might give a sub-30 minute 10k runner who wants to use the Tinman 3-day Rotation Method:

Day 1) 70 minutes of Very EZ to EZ running;

Day 2) 70 minutes, including 60 minutes of tempo running;

Day 3) 70 minutes, including 20-30 minutes of fairly hard to hard running.

I'd be quite surprised if someone could do more than the above and continue to improve. The above schedule may look easy but it will take a heavy toll on a runner. [font=]And, I'll tell you one secret I learned the hard way doing the 3-day rotation: it's better to run the same time or distance every day than vary it. I found that keeping the same distance was best, and varying the pace was ideal for stimulating growth. [/font]

Again, the above 3-day (sample) rotation would be for a person nearing or at their upper limit of capability. It is very tough and a person needs to build to it slowly or else they will crash and burn.

Re: Lower mileage - but still effective?

Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2019 2:29 pm
by sup03
I am currently running about 23-26 miles a week due to constantly being injured. Its my senior year in cross country and every year I have had issues with lower leg injuries. I can run more mileage in track (30-40 miles a week consistently) but I can't in xc. So 23 miles a week and 5k time right now is 17:26 and my question is A) basically how much would low mileage like that affect my time by the end of the year and B) Is this something that I can work with in the future? I can't seem to correct the leg problems no matter what I've done. I've gone from strength training with weights to mobility to focusing on stretching, food I eat, form, shoes, etc... all done consistently but I can't seem to get past the problems with legs not handling mileage for long periods of time. Thanks for any feedback :)

Re: Lower mileage - but still effective?

Posted: Sun Sep 22, 2019 12:57 pm
by FTIR
There are many variables that come into the question of how fast you will be at the end of the season.
They are pretty hard to list. From, what kind of a runner you are? If the 30-40 mpw in track gets you a 4:10 mile, that's quite different than if it only produces a 5:00.

To, our HS championship course back in the day involved running up a long hill in the woods.
The corresponding downhill was steeper and on asphalt. They tried it the other way but the woods part was too narrow.
With shin splint issues running that downhill would have been physically impossible.

In any case, to figure out if you can work with it, it would help if you could figure out why you can run more in track than in XC.

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=143&p=585&hilit=lot ... +runs#p585

My favorite parts are lots of short runs and avoiding uneven surfaces, even grass. In general you can do a lot with 25 mpw in terms of training but if you have to hold mileage down to "stay healthy" being able to race often is unlikely.

Re: Lower mileage - but still effective?

Posted: Mon Sep 23, 2019 8:09 am
by sup03
FTIR wrote:
Sun Sep 22, 2019 12:57 pm
There are many variables that come into the question of how fast you will be at the end of the season.
They are pretty hard to list. From, what kind of a runner you are? If the 30-40 mpw in track gets you a 4:10 mile, that's quite different than if it only produces a 5:00.

To, our HS championship course back in the day involved running up a long hill in the woods.
The corresponding downhill was steeper and on asphalt. They tried it the other way but the woods part was too narrow.
With shin splint issues running that downhill would have been physically impossible.

In any case, to figure out if you can work with it, it would help if you could figure out why you can run more in track than in XC.

Start here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=143&p=585&hilit=lot ... +runs#p585

My favorite parts are lots of short runs and avoiding uneven surfaces, even grass. In general you can do a lot with 25 mpw in terms of training but if you have to hold mileage down to "stay healthy" being able to race often is unlikely.
Thanks for the insight. I'll give more information later this week when I have time to type it out.