Training

This article was originally posted by Ryan at the original HillRunner.com Blogs.

Note: This is an article I wrote many years ago without revision. It’s become somewhat popular so I want to preserve it as it first appeared as the articles section of the site gets phased out. In the future, I may write another post discussing how my views have evolved over the years but this generally is still advice I would stand by.

No matter where a runner looks, you can’t seem to get away from the term "junk miles". Don’t run too much on your easy days, you’ll be running junk miles. Don’t go that far on your cooldown, that’s just junk miles. Don’t do that extra run, that’s just junk miles. So, what exactly are junk miles and why are they so bad?

In my opinion, the term "junk miles" is the most overused term in running. Most people will use the term to describe any amount of miles that may leave you a little tired for a workout.

So, here is my definition of "junk miles": If you are doing so many miles that you can’t get in your speed workouts at a time when your speed workouts should be the focus, you are running junk miles. Of course, this is a pretty complex definition, so I better explain further.

During base training, when you are not running hard workouts or at the very least are not focusing on the hard workouts, is there such a thing as junk miles? As long as you are keeping yourself healthy, I argue no.

What about in the final couple of months of your training (few months, whenever your focus shifts), when your focus becomes the hard workouts? I think the best way to explain this is to use an example. Let’s say you have 4 mile repeats on the plan for Tuesday and 8×800 on the plan for Thursday. Your target paces are 5:20 and 2:30 (just using rough estimates of what my paces would be). You run your 5:20 miles on Tuesday, do 5 miles on Wednesday, then come back with your 2:30 800s on Thursday. Obviously, no junk miles there. Now, let’s say you are running higher miles. You end up doing 5:25 miles on Tuesday because you are a little fatigued after your 10 miles Monday, you do 10 miles Wednesday, then do the 800s in 2:32. Are the 10 mile runs on your easy days junk miles? Some people would say yes but I say no. If you are still getting the whole workout in at the goal intensity, hitting the exact paces isn’t crucial. Your body doesn’t even know it’s running 5:25 and 2:32 instead of 5:20 and 2:30, it just knows it’s running at the intensity that you wanted to run at in the first place. You are still getting in the desired training effect, plus you are building significantly more strength on the easy days, which will help you greatly on race day. However, let’s say you step it up another notch. You do your miles Tuesday but only get through 3 of them because you are so tired. You then do 15 miles on Wednesday, then only get through 5×800 on Thursday because you are again still tired. Are you now running junk miles? The obvious answer seems to be yes. My answer is maybe. If you are in a phase where building your aerobic strength is still most important, as it would be for quite some time if training for a longer race like a marathon, no. However, if you are in the final race preparation phase or the peaking phase, yes you have.

So, there is my term of junk miles. If you are doing so many miles that you can’t get in your speed workouts at a time when your speed workouts should be the focus, you are running junk miles. However, doing the workouts a little slower than planned because you are a little tired doesn’t mean anything. As long as you get the whole workout in at the desired effort.

Now that I went through this whole explanation, I’m going to throw a wrench in it. In most cases where I see people not getting through workouts, it’s not because they are running too many miles on their easy days. It’s because they are running too fast on their easy days, what you might call junk pace. There is no harm in running your easy days very slow. You will still build the aerobic systems that the aerobic runs are designed to build and you will recover more. In fact, the longer you are out there, the more work your body will do to build those aerobic systems. So, in many ways, an 80 minute run at 10 minutes per mile can be better than a 40 minute run at 8 minutes per mile.

This article was originally posted by Ed at the original HillRunner.com Blogs.

I just read an article (Runner’s World) on beating mental roadblocks in training and racing. Some of their ideas seem so silly. It is tough to just "tell yourself" to do better or to just ignore or replace negative thoughts or to "just smile." For me mental roadblocks are more than motivation. A mental roadblock needs mental toughness to overcome any and (nearly) all obstacles.

For me a mental roadblock is brought on by some sort of physical signal from my body. Signals like the beginning of a side stitch or my breathing getting out of control or even that wonderful burning sensation in the legs. This is what I want to be able to overcome and push through to the end of the race.

I have realized that I need to distract myself with more than the silly ideas like "I really want the race shirt" or "its ok if I get a (much) slower time because I made my goal so wide open" mentioned in the article. It has to be something concrete and directly related to my goal for that workout or race. I have had some success with shortening the race mentally – "catch and pass that runner in front of you – that’s all, just pass them and hold on" which seems to work best. However, what do I do when I just cannot close that gap? Get a glimpse of the runner chasing me and try to widen that gap.

I want to learn how to ignore a side stitch as painful as they sometimes feel, running through it, working to control it and not slow down. I want to learn how to continue racing when my breathing is out of control or my legs feel like they are on fire. I want to do this without slowing down but by employing a technique to minimize the issue and engaging a superior mental toughness.

After the racing season (or maybe during the season depending on Coach Hill) I would like to start having a few workouts a month that are nearly impossible to complete. Workouts that would create tears in my eyes, which will require serious effort, so that I can start to develop that mental toughness of drawing on the pain and completing the goal regardless. We shall see what Coach Hill thinks and/or puts together for me.

Either way . . . there is more running in my future!

This article was originally posted by Ryan at the original HillRunner.com Blogs.

Interesting thoughts over at the RT/RW site.

I like the general point of this article. I’ve long believed in training by time, though I accept that most people will think in terms of miles so I think of a target time, the expected pace of the run, then assign a corresponding distance. Want at least 1 hour and expect to run around 7:00 pace? Go for 9 miles. Want at least 1 hour and expect to run around 9:00 pace? 7 miles will get you there.

One place I think the author makes a mistake is in describing the workout. The 15:30 5K runner and the 18:00 5K runner running a 5K pace workout are not running at the same intensity. The 15:30 runner is running at a higher intensity than the 18:00 runner. What’s more similar to 15:35 (shouldn’t it be 15:30?) at 15:30 race pace, 14:28 at 18:00 race pace or 18:00 at 18:00 race pace? The problem is the author discusses focusing on time and intensity, then ignores the difference in intensity between the 15:30 5K and 18:00 5K. Maybe this doesn’t seem like a big deal but think of the difference between a 15:30 5K and a 20:00 or 25:00 5K. Same concept. As he mentions, the body doesn’t know distance, it knows time and effort. This doesn’t mean the workout shouldn’t be adjusted but the reason given is, in my opinion, questionable. Maybe you need to increase recovery duration so your ratio between work and recovery remains similar. Maybe you need to shorten the workout for other reasons, such as the possibility that the 18:00 runner may not have the same base and work capacity as the 15:30 runner (though the inverse could potentially be true of course).

In the end, I’m not trying to be critical of the author or what he wrote in general. I fully agree that the body knows effort and duration. It doesn’t really know whether you’re running 9 miles or 10. It knows you’re running 70 minutes at some given intensity. That said, we should carry this premise through to workouts and realize that a 15:30 5K runner and an 18:00 5K runner are not running the same intensity at race pace so targeting the same time means the 18:00 5K runner has an easier workout than the 15:30 runner. Maybe that’s called for given other factors. Maybe, though, it isn’t.

This article was originally posted by Ryan at the original HillRunner.com Blogs.

If you’ve read my two most recent race reports, you might have noticed a pattern. About a week before the races, my training crashed. Fortunately, I bounced back in time for race day both times but I can’t keep counting on this happening.

So why did I crash both times, less than a month apart? The answer to that question appears to actually be more simple than one might think. I didn’t follow my own advice and I ran my workouts too hard. Essentially, I ran myself into the ground. I was fortunate that I recognized this both times and corrected in time but why did I fall into this trap not only once but twice in such a short time and what can we all learn about this?

The first time, it was simply a matter of getting too aggressive. I had one very challenging workout on my schedule. It felt so good to nail that workout, even though I had to dig deep to get it done, that I couldn’t resist the draw to feel that again so I ran later workouts harder than I should have. Meanwhile, easy days were not sufficiently easy to recover from such demanding workouts. I recognized this when I crashed but I then entered a shorter than usual training cycle between races and figured, with not as much time to train, I could put a little more into the workouts. Different reasoning, same trap.

I’m not sharing these examples of how I fell into the trap to make myself look like an idiot or to get your sympathy. I’m sharing these examples because they are examples of how easy it is to fall into the trap. I doubt I’m the only one here who has fallen into these traps.

So what should I have done and what will I do going forward? I’ll follow my own advice: finish every workout feeling like you could have done at least one more. If I do fall into the trap during a workout and run it too hard, I’ll take extra precautions in the following day or two to ensure I am adequately recovered before moving on.

Whether you’re running 30 second repeats or mile repeats, it’s good to aim to finish feeling like you could have done at least one more repeat. Even on long runs, finish like you could have run at least one more mile (I actually prefer feeling like I could have run at least 2-3 more miles on long runs). This will keep you from racing your hard days. Remember, save the racing for race day. On workout days, you’re generally not looking to challenge yourself. You’re looking to build yourself up. You need some stress to stimulate improvement but too much stress repeated too frequently will just break you down.

This article was originally posted by Ryan at the original HillRunner.com Blogs.

After posting about the 10% myth earlier this week, I thought it would be good to discuss the primary argument I’ve received over the years against my view on this "rule".

To paraphrase, the argument goes something like this: Sure, you could increase by 15% or 20% for a week or two but that isn’t sustainable. 10% per week is the maximum sustainable rate at which one could increase their volume.

I usually respond with the question of how long one thinks you can sustain a 10% per week increase. I’ve yet to hear a response.

If you increase by 10% per week for 8 weeks, you’ve increased your volume by 114%. If you’ve been running 50 miles per week, you’re now at 107 miles per week in about 2 months. If you increase for 12 weeks, you’ve increased your volume by 213% and your 50 miles per week base has in 3 months turned into over 150 miles per week. By 15 weeks, you’ve topped 200 miles per week. Is this sustainable? Of course not. Depending on your circumstances, you’re doing very well if you are safely running 73 miles a week in a month’s time.

The argument I’m making is that we shouldn’t focus on numbers. Focus instead on how you’re feeling. At times, you might find yourself increasing by 15-20% or even more. At other times, you might find yourself increasing by less than 5% or even holding steady for a while. Forget about the numbers and focus on how your body is responding to your increases. Your body will lead you to far better results than some arbitrary formula.

Any other questions, concerns or comments about the 10% rule or why I feel the way I do about it? Don’t hesitate to ask.