Allan wrote:
Fartleker you deserve props for some very solid running and resisting the temptation to "chase the count" like some are doing. I remember doing this challenge in 2008/2009 when I was ramping up for my first Boston. I was consistently doing around 130k each week usually with 2 double run days. Back then I was in the top 2 or 3 on the list for number of runs and distance pretty much the entire challenge. Now I am in the 40s for quantity but near the top 10-12 for distance (I am getting old so I am just trying to average 90k or so a week and stay injury free). After 42 years of competitive running and close to 30 as a run coach it pains me to see people running 4.8km on their treadmill 5 times a day. The point of this challenge was originally to get some run consistency in the off season and not to sabotage your training by doing silly stuff. I get it that most on this group are type AAA folks and that seeing the count really go up is like crack cocaine ... trust me, I get it ... I saw a 30 day 100 pushup a day challenge that I thought I would do back in April and today is day 258 so I am about as obsessive-compulsive as they get ... but I would recommend that those that are cranking out 3 a days be really careful over the final 9 weeks of this challenge or you risk messing up your preparation for what, hopefully, will be a full slate of races next summer.
Also, along with what others have said, there is no need to drink anything on a run unless you are going at least 90 minutes in hot weather.
Thanks for adding this post of sanity. You and I are definitely the poster children of obsessive compulsive (and we're still standing doing this shit 40ish years later) and when we think people are doing stupid shit that takes a lot to cross our stupid threshold!!!
Hey I invented 100/100...I created the original rules when I realized my version (10km+ per day every day for 1000 days no days off no doubles to get to 1000km was not inclusive enough to get more people in....so I created the 30 minute min minimum, allowed for doubles, allowed for days off with essentially the goal of getting people to jack up their overall mileage through frequency. Frequency was a means to get people out the door. But like you said, you are running 90km per week and when you trained for Boston you were running 130km per week. I am running 70km per week (averaging 10km per day again).
During the first quarter of lockdown in March-May I ran 1000km in 12 weeks (83km per day). I never ran more than once per day, and often ran 15-16km. I never ran more than that, but every 3 weeks I had a full day off. But I got to 1000km faster than my original 100/100 (83 days vs 100 days). But during that time, I was doing zero swimming. I was just running and biking. I find it easier to run more when I just run and bike. The moment I add in swimming, my legs are toast for running (but my version of adding in swimming is 20km--30km per week),
On 26 Dec I loose the pool for 28 days for our local lockdown, so its just running, and some roller rides. If and when we get snow, I'll add in XC skiing (in which case my running volume will go down). But if not, my running will be higher, but as I won't have runs to the pool and back, I'll more than likely only do 1x. I only do 2x if there is a utilitarian reason (like commuting by running, or because my work schedule means I can't carve out a 90 min time block to run for 80 min....and it is almost never that I don't book at least 2 hrs to exercise. It take a lot (such as overseas flight schedules or marathon biz meetings with customer after customer after customer.....but there is always training 2 hrs early morning or late night).