active network espn
Community: Exchange advice in the forums and read running commentary Resources: Personal running log, calculators, links and other tools for runners News: Running news from around the world Training: Articles and advice about fitness, race training and injury prevention Races/Results: Find upcoming races and past results Home: The Cool Running homepage
Cool Running homepage  Search Cool Running Community
12 Replies Last post: Aug 12, 2006 2:27 PM by AndyHass  
Click to view CoachB008's profile Community Moderator 777 posts since
Apr 27, 2000
Login to Reply

Aug 7, 2006 11:57 PM

Quality vs. Quantity

In designing training programs, what is more important: speed of running or volume of miles?

How does the chosen event influence said decisions?
Click to view aurang's profile Legend 1,362 posts since
Jun 26, 2003
1. Dec 21, 2007 12:05 AM in response to: CoachB008
Re: Quality vs. Quantity
Why not both? All my personal bests (1500, 5k and 10k) came when I was running relatively high volume, an average of 40 mpw, with two hard workouts a week. I've experimented with higher volume with moderate intensity and lower volume with high intensity and neither has worked out. I'm hoping to blow those times out of the water with high volume and high intensity, 50-60 mpw with 2-3 hard sessions.

http://This message has been edited by aurang (edited Aug-08-2006).
Click to view sam1500's profile Expert 57 posts since
Jul 19, 2006
2. Aug 8, 2006 4:56 AM in response to: CoachB008
Re: Quality vs. Quantity
Speed. Yes, high mileage is sometimes necessary, but track races are won by running QUICKLY. Running 100 miles a week will get you nowhere if it's all slow! I would say that for 1500m, 50 miles per week with plenty of fast running (including race pace work) is enough to run very well. I usually run less than 20 miles per week...
Click to view gurutc's profile Amateur 29 posts since
Nov 28, 2005
3. Aug 8, 2006 6:26 AM in response to: CoachB008
Re: Quality vs. Quantity
" Running 100 miles a week will get you nowhere if it's all slow!"

This is so ridiculously and absolutely true.

I trained up to 70-80 MPW last fall for Ultras and never got below a 6:30/mile pace. Back in my younger days, in the previous millenium, I had a solid 4:30 mile.

So I hit the track for six weeks and built up to 2 track days a week, dropping the total weekly mileage back to 45-50, and I am back down to a 4:55 mile. If it works for a 42 yr old 195# **** like me it oughta work for anybody.

So... Yes, there is a Speed Santa, and he lives at the track.

- gurutc
Click to view Allstarsoccer101's profile Amateur 22 posts since
Mar 22, 2006
4. Aug 8, 2006 11:46 AM in response to: CoachB008
Re: Quality vs. Quantity
quote:<HR>Originally posted by gurutc:
" Running 100 miles a week will get you nowhere if it's all slow!"

This is so ridiculously and absolutely true.

I trained up to 70-80 MPW last fall for Ultras and never got below a 6:30/mile pace. Back in my younger days, in the previous millenium, I had a solid 4:30 mile.

So I hit the track for six weeks and built up to 2 track days a week, dropping the total weekly mileage back to 45-50, and I am back down to a 4:55 mile. If it works for a 42 yr old 195# **** like me it oughta work for anybody.

So... Yes, there is a Speed Santa, and he lives at the track.

- gurutc
<HR>


Well, no kidding. You're not going to get any FASTER if you dont train to get FASTER.

Running miles as base is one of the key factors in becoming the best runner you can be. However, as gurutc seems to think, it is not the whole part of the training process.

You need to lay down that 10-12 weeks of base mileage (whether it be 40 mpw or 100mpw- whatever works for you). Following that you then add a layer (6-8 weeks) of strength work (tempos, fartleks), and then your final layer (2-4 weeks) of speed work (track workouts, final tweaking).

You can not rely on just the mileage to make you a great running. You can't assume because you are running a lot you will just become faster, there is a lot more to it than that.

To answer your question coach: during the summer is a time to just log MILES, quality is not important. When the season starts however, you start brining the quality into the occassion with Tempos and Fartleks. As the season comes to an end, you lower the quantity, tweak the imperfections with track workouts, and prepare to taper.

There has to be a good combination, but at the right times.
Click to view exciton's profile Legend 317 posts since
Nov 2, 2004
5. Aug 8, 2006 2:08 PM in response to: CoachB008
Re: Quality vs. Quantity
I ran my 5K PR leading up to my first 50 mile race. I did not do any speedwork in this time, but managed to drop my best from a 17:59 to a 17:08. Not great, I realize, but I'm a 6'5", 200 lb guy who trains mostly with ultras in mind. What I did differently in this period was increase my mileage gradually to reach 90 mpw at the peak week. My kneejerk reaction to this groundbreaking and quite surprising result was that speed training is overrated. I don't believe that anymore. But I do think that this high mileage provides (to me at least) the base that is need for racing just about any distance, from 5K to 50 miles and beyond. I think this experience of mine lines up quite well with what has become a pretty conventional, Lydiard view of training. We've all heard it: quantity followed by quality. So my vote is that both are important and that they are combined via periodization. For me, it was the first time I had really reached out for the quantity, so I broke new ground. It gives me hope that I can lower that 5K time even more with some focused speedwork.
Click to view newguy56's profile Pro 141 posts since
Jul 19, 2006
6. Aug 8, 2006 4:24 PM in response to: CoachB008
Re: Quality vs. Quantity
quote:<HR>Originally posted by gurutc:
" Running 100 miles a week will get you nowhere if it's all slow!"

This is so ridiculously and absolutely true.

I trained up to 70-80 MPW last fall for Ultras and never got below a 6:30/mile pace. Back in my younger days, in the previous millenium, I had a solid 4:30 mile.

So I hit the track for six weeks and built up to 2 track days a week, dropping the total weekly mileage back to 45-50, and I am back down to a 4:55 mile. If it works for a 42 yr old 195# **** like me it oughta work for anybody.

So... Yes, there is a Speed Santa, and he lives at the track.

- gurutc
<HR>


True.

However my distance runner junior last year ran 100+ miles for a month last summer ran his best XC season ever last year and when I trained him winter and spring with speed work he ran a 9:29 3200 meter and a 4:23 1600 meter.

I have spoken to him last week and he is running big miles again this summer I cannot wait to see how much he impoves this his senior year!
Click to view WI MTP's profile Legend 461 posts since
Jan 7, 2006
7. Aug 8, 2006 6:25 PM in response to: CoachB008
Re: Quality vs. Quantity
Are you looking long term or short term? Long term - I am always trying to add volume - While I try to have 2 quality sessions most weeks. The time frame that I have been working with is the best plan for me over a 5-7 year time frame. As soon as my body appears to handle the mileage and 2 quality workouts - I try to ratchet up the volume. If I start to break down - I slip back down and try again a little later.

It seems like once per year for 1-2 months - I do mostly volume and let the 2 quality workouts turn into 1 or none for a bit. Kindof my "Lazy", "Just running", Quantity comes 1st period.

At the same time I am still working on getting down my optimal running weight - I would guess 160-170 pounds - Although I know Ely Rono is 6'3 1/2 and 150 - I know my wife will not let me get a lean as the gazelle.

I believe that how the individual reponds to different training approaches, what their body can handle and their stregths and weaknesses would be more significant that the chosen event. At least 1500 on up.
Click to view gurutc's profile Amateur 29 posts since
Nov 28, 2005
8. Aug 9, 2006 9:29 AM in response to: CoachB008
Re: Quality vs. Quantity
One thing I forgot to mention that has relevance here in SC is that school, training, and sports seasons have already started for the year. That explains the reason why I am thinking 'now is the time for speed.' Track work builds the speed on top of strength from distance training.

If you're on summer bread for another month keep logging those miles.

- gurutc
Click to view Alex Nichols's profile Legend 439 posts since
Dec 14, 2007
9. Aug 9, 2006 1:35 PM in response to: CoachB008
Re: Quality vs. Quantity
I am one of those people who hasn't started yet, but I do start on Aug. 14th. I've gotten about 220 miles in this summer so far, starting at June 10th. Before that I never kept track of them. Quick question, is it all right that my paces don't vary that much? I haven't done any speed work this summer, I've just been getting miles in. For June until the end of July, I got in about 25 mpw, and my last 2 weeks have been in the 30's. All my runs, whether on my little 4 milers or on my 10 miler is usually between 7 minutes and 8:15 a mile. I won't suffer too much from that will I? Our coach has been telling us not to worry about speed at all, just log all the miles you can and that we'll work on speed during the season. Is everything going to go okay?

Alex
Click to view gurutc's profile Amateur 29 posts since
Nov 28, 2005
10. Aug 9, 2006 2:26 PM in response to: CoachB008
Re: Quality vs. Quantity
Everything is going to be perfect. You've got a base in. You can't train for speed until you have a base. You are ready to go!

- gurutc
Click to view Alex Nichols's profile Legend 439 posts since
Dec 14, 2007
11. Aug 9, 2006 4:03 PM in response to: CoachB008
Re: Quality vs. Quantity
Good to know, I'm going to go for my 5 mile run now. Thanks for the good news!

Alex
Click to view AndyHass's profile Legend 1,385 posts since
Dec 14, 2007
12. Aug 12, 2006 2:27 PM in response to: CoachB008
Re: Quality vs. Quantity
Both. Lean towards quantity first, then transition to emphasizing quality as the key race approaches.

At the beginning of this year, I had a 5K PR of 15:37 and 10K of around 31:45. The 5K had withstood a dozen serious attempts to break it over 3 years, usually on 70-80 mpw. This time I ran 90-110 mpw for 4 months. The 4 weeks leading into my goal 10K were 120, 105, 95 and 103. The only speed was a long tempo every week (6-8 miles) and a track session of mile repeats, 2000m repeats or 3000m repeats. Mile repeats were the shortest in the month before the race, before than it was 800-1000m repeats.

The result? I was an aerobic beast. I nearly tied my 5K PR in the first half of the race (15:38) and then closed in 15:18 for 30:57.

I did all the speed I could handle in college but it never got me anywhere (34:18) because I didn't do half the volume I do now.