Re: Re: New article: It’s Not Quality vs. Quantity

Welcome! Forums Running Forum New article: It’s Not Quality vs. Quantity Re: Re: New article: It’s Not Quality vs. Quantity

#17508

Ryan
Keymaster
Bart wrote:
I’ve always felt that short, hard workouts were a greater injury risk than long, easy runs.

I can’t agree more. People blame volume on injuries when, if you look at all the variables, they are frequently running way too fast on their easy days.

stealthycat wrote:
Bart – I don’t consider myself a very experienced runner, but when I think in terms of a long easy that could be detrimental, I think of a long easy (sloppy) run where you are just slugging through the miles. If you are running a long easy which is well supported by your weekly base, and are able to maintain a decent pace (relative to your own fitness), as well as good form, it could only help your training in terms of endurance. Am I lost?

I think the most frequent problem is that people have a warped concept of what a “decent pace” is. I know some people who run races much slower than me but are not willing to run a single step as slow as I do some of my easy and base building runs. Also, consider the fact that Lydiard says don’t even worry about pace on many days. Just get out and log the miles. I recall a quote from him that said something about it is very possible to run too fast but it is not possible to run too slow. By running slower, you may not get quite as much benefit per unit of time running but you will not cause harm.