What was your average weekly mileage (total miles for year/52) in 2009?

[grasshopper]

Does this represent an increase, decrease, or neither compared with 2008?  How did this manifest in performances?  What factors influenced an increase or decrease?
A decrease for me (97 in '08 to 82 in '09), also resulted in an overall stagnation of performances across the board, 5000m-marathon. Took on more personal obligations, so less time and energy to train and the result thus came as little surprise at all.

[Ryan]

I don't have the precise tally but both 2008 and 2009, due obviously (for those who have been around long enough to know why) to taking on more non-running responsibilities, have been way down from where I have been in the past. My performances haven't been suffering as badly as I expected but they have definitely been trending downward.

I'm hoping to get my average mpw into the 70+ range in 2010 and see some bump in my performances as a result. If I accomplish both, I'll still be well short of the days of 100+ and the corresponding race performances but I'll be happy, considering the different responsibilities I now have taken on. I'll also be looking toward continuing the trend back upward in both volume and performances as Shayla grows older and needs/wants me around less.

[MothAudio]

I averaged 64.1 MPW in 2009. And even though I've averaged 2300 mpy for the last 5 years this was a huge upshift over 2008 when I was injuried for 6 months when I just barely ran 2000 miles. I had one of my best years ever in 2009 @ age 52. No, I didn't set any personal bests but ran my fastest 5k and marathon since 1995!

I was shotting for 2000 miles and ran 3300. Getting over PF I'd struggled with for 2 years helped as I ran pain free. And just stringing together all those 2000 mile years. I also ran my recovery runs at true recovery pace while blasting my quality days harder than ever. That and being in a mileage game. Something I've done for a while but it for some reason this year the more I ran the more my body adapted to it.  

[Ryan]

By the way, interesting poll. I'm also finding it interesting at the other location I saw that you put it up, where people constantly chat about their commitment to running and how hard they work at it but are now saying that the range of options you offer is way too high. Currently, 76% of those over there averaged less than 60 mpw? Interesting. I suppose those who talk about their big mileage are just not responding to that poll yet. Maybe we'll see the numbers change when they start responding.

[grasshopper]

Yes, good points and I hope none are allowing their feelings to be hurt by this.  I confess that I do not follow that mileage game stuff nor do I sift through bloated race novels and weekly/monthly threads, so I was truly not aware of the norm for level of training among regular visitors.  I simply presumed that a populace of forum visitors which apparently has a focus on the marathon would feature more who average more than what would amount to a barebones training level for most college runners who race over, at most, 10k. 

The reported level of training there is indeed divergent with the amount of time spent parsing it out on a daily basis.  Then again, I have noticed that most of the good runners I have ever known (workaday family men and women) as a rule have hardly any interest in internet running chat and are faster across the board.  I guess there must be a strong correlation.

[Andrew A.]

I will be a non-voter, as I simply do not track my mileage over the week, month, or year.  While my log would have it, I switched logs (from Athleticore to Strands) mid-year and simply do not feel like compiling both.  Hopefully Strands has a statistical feature that will make it easy to respond to the 2010 version of this. 

Unfortunately, I know all too well how easy it can be to get bogged down by people who want little more than to drag you down to their level.  They seem to be personally insulted at the suggestion that there could be a far better way of getting faster than the one they have chosen and proselytize about based on shoddy evidence.  Of course, these are the type who seemingly have little problem at all spending work hours (retirees and housewives excepted) pondering ways to talk in circles about their perspective on running to keep their illusion alive and then doing so on internet forums.  Not exactly an environment that inspires genuine excellence.  It represents far more negative energy than I care to try to counter, what would be the payoff?  Notice that the better RT writers who are known to have regular presence in online forum settings - Scott Douglas, Kevin Beck, Jim Gerwick - effectively avoid the RT forum.  In Beck's last foray into that forum - to defend a fellow RT writer from some malcontent's insecure ranting - he was attacked from all sides, including blows from benighted moderators.  All three can be seen posting regularly on Letsrun, even, yet essentially never on RT.  Quite telling, no?

[Ryan]

Posting on Letsrun but not RT because of the attacks? Yes, that says a lot but it's not totally surprising.

[Garboni]

I don't really know my average weely mileage but it was probably somewhere around 35. If I get it up a bit more this year, I think that would be nice.

[Double]

I rarely go to Lets Run because you have to sift through way too much crap.

Like the question.  I averaged 200 a month until December when I came up lame.

No question, when I get into that 60 - 80 wheelhouse I run my best.  Not even sure I could tolerate 80 for too long of a time. 

Did little faster stuff last year as I had to teach myself to enjoy running again.  Thinking about incorporating some basic hill routines next year.

Thinking about blitzkrieging Boston in 2012 when I am 50.  Be a good time to get back into the 2:40s for the last time.

Until I'm 60.

[r-at-work]

interesting poll... I voted in the less than 60... while 2009 was my second best year since I started keeping track (2003), it was one of fits and starts. My current project is 50 states marathoning (mostly for stress relief from the rest of my life)... Looking back at my year I had a few weeks with 70+ and weeks either side of marathons with very low mileage. I am jogging through these marathons, enjoying them a lot, not needing much recouperation.. but looking at the numbers I am wondering if I need to be tapering quite so much. It starts to add up as I did seven marathons in 2009, up from 4 each of the two previous years. As it is I am only doing a two week taper, I'm just not doing enough mileage to NEED three weeks, and I am not planning on running any faster... I'm sure there are those here who have 'trained through' marathons, not to hijack the thread, but, how does that change your recovery?
-Rita

[Ryan]

Rita, I'm sure I was coming from a bit of a different angle but I trained through long runs of the marathon distance and longer without changing my schedule at all. Of course, that was averaging 120+ miles per week and I had built up to the long runs.

My question back to you would be what your long runs look like on non-marathon weekends. If in the 22-24 mile range, I'd think you could consider the marathon an extended long run and treat it pretty much like a normal long run. If lower, then some taper/recovery would probably be needed but I wouldn't think a 2 week taper would be necessary if you're not looking to race.

[Anne]

I don't keep track of my mileage but I know I'm under 60 miles a week.  This past year my mileage was probably pretty close to the previous year, the difference being how I ran those miles.  I ran with a faster group this past year, did more track & hill work outs then before.
The results were 4 PR's in '09, never did that before so something worked.