Another data point:

45 year-old runner, running since age 16.
Last year at this time: 40 mpw(up to 51), almost nothing slower than 7:15. Time: 17:02(felt hard)

This year: 80 mpw (up to 116), less than 15% faster than 7:15: Time: 16:33(felt much easier).

The latter is off of base training only. Proper sharpening should improve things even more.

The moral of the story, and I suspect the blueprint for all training beyond the sprints = More miles / less intensity.

I label Intensity at arond 95 % of maximum and up.
Dont forget B1rian is training for 5 k, not Marathons!
But the key to all this is Recovery.

Thats a good point Kiwi, but how on earth do you recover when you are doing 100 miles a week? I guess you just get used to feeling tired all the time.

To clarify, when I said dropoff, I meant there is a tradeoff. Of course you can get faster while training farther. No one would agrue that point. It sounds like you (postmod) had a very reasonable plan for upping your mileage so that you still had enough energy to improve your speed workouts. My guess is that most high schoolers couldn't push their mileage beyond 70 MPW and still maintain good tempo and speed work.

My view is that high mileage is good for endurance, which you only need a little of for the 5K. If consistent 40 mile weeks and the passage of time has the same effect on my 5K times, I'm not going to waste a lot of time and risk injury by doubling my mileage. As Hammer says, if the race is longer, none of this applies.

Thoner -- I agree about the recovery run comment. Mega's link to Running U. suggests that a true recovery run should also be short, just long enough to get the blood working in the broken muscles.

Silverda, now I see what you're saying. Point taken. But I think that you'll never know how high mileage will affect you until you try it.

quote:<HR>Originally posted by thoner:
Too many runners, guys especially, run their recovery runs too hard when a chick runs by them, or when some fat dude in soccer shorts wearing a walkman goes panting by.<HR>

Thoner left out the dude's Todd Rundgren T-shirt, but nonetheless he again makes a good point.

If you find yourself "racing" some total stranger lurking a few yards ahead or behind on a recovery day, slap yourself in the face - hard - and slow down. If that doesn't work, bash your forehead against a tree or a sign post. This is some of the most pointless and potentially detrimental tomfockery a runner can partake in (and rec runners are always game for a random, impromptu "race" - let them have it).

quote:<HR>Originally posted by thoner:
recovery runs are indeed recovery runs. You can't run them too slow.

Make the easy miles easy and make the hard miles count.<HR>

I agree absolutely. A tendency to find your easy days creeping upward in terms of effort is likely to set off a "vicious cycle" wherein your interval days are compromised owing to incomplete recovery, leading to frustration and a greater tendency to drop the hammer on supposed recovery days, etc., until eventualy you completely suck or are on the shelf. Yet it's easy to fall into this trap - I've seen plenty of half-decent runners stuck in this holding pattern even when it's been pointed out to them.

Personally I think it's better to focus mainly on reduced intensity than reduced distance on recovery days, especially if you're in marathon training. Rather than skipping out for an easy three miles after a hard day (it takes many of us that long just to work out the fer Chrissakes kinks), puuter along until you're at or near your daily average. You may find your pace naturally increasing after you're thoroughly warmed up and loosened up, but that's fine as it's a far cry from actively pushing yourself through staleness or soreness just because you know you're only going to be out there for 20 minutes total and want to "compensate" for this.