I look at it this way - the race happens on the run. If you have a slow run or end up walking (off a properly-paced ride), it isn't because you didn't bike enough in training...it's because you didn't run enough. Like you said, everyone is different. But, absent stringent time constraints, unless you have a really good running pedigree (like I'm guessing your 30k pal does) and can get by on it, you should really consider running a good bit more than 50k per week.

sure, thing is they didn't really have run pedigree. Is bike the main determinant of run performance for say 330 to 4 range. With more needed to get faster. With 30 to 50 needed for that result with 10 hours of biking per week

I am going to attempt a 3:30 run next week in Santa Rosa. Was running about 32 mpw in training for this IM - but I have been running 35mpw+ for the last 4 years consistently with a number of BQs, a couple of sub 1:30 HIM runs and so on. We will see if I blow up. 8 min/mile seems to be about my happy pace right now. I'll report back.

---

Next races on the schedule: none at the moment

Thanks, that seems to be the sweet spot 35 to 40 MPW. ST is a weird place, if you take the various training threads and put them together being good at IM is simple:

swim 15 to 20 K per week 5 hours
Bike at least 10 hours
Run 60 MPW 7.5 hours

so back into plus 20 hours per week. By good I mean 10 hours something. Yet the KQ all report 15 hours per week

You got this! Similar background and similar mpw in training and just put down a 3:23 in Texas. Run confident, it will happen!

Now my swim on the other hand needs a little work... S 1:18, B 5:10, R 3:23 - Total 10:02

That's a pretty bitchin' time. A 3:23 run is especially studly after a 1:18 swim. Impressive!

---

Next races on the schedule: none at the moment

Can see how approaches like BarryP help. Time wise a 7 k run is not much more impost than a 5 k run, same for a 14 versus 10 and even on a weekend running 21 is not a huge slice of a Sunday than a 15 K run.