how many do it? pros and cons?
You dont get the physiological benefits of a long run by splitting it up. Why would you do this?
how many do it? pros and cons?
The long run is overrated. That’s not to say you don’t need long runs - of course you do – but simple consistent weekly mileage and race-paced running matters more. Don’t worry if you do this occasionally. You will still get great benefits.
Plus there have been times when I’m fighting off an injury when two, 10-mile runs has allowed me to get the volume I needed where one 20 miler would have left me injured.
What you say is all true, and you dont really NEED to do a long run every week if the ironman is your goal. However, when you DO do the long run, say every other week or 3, then dont split that one up.
I’m having a complete brain fart and can’t think of the actual terms but I’ll try to explain anyway.
Your mid week mid distance run is acceptable.
Your weekly long run it is not.
You need to train your body to make the fuel conversion. You need to run long enough to reach that point…1.75hrs to 2 hrs usually (running) This is the term I’m not coming up with. Although not the only reason, certainly one of the most important. There are other physio factors as well. Like building the bone density.
Of course, I’m assuming your talking about training for an IM or at least a Marathon…then it probably dosen’t matter as much.
Added:
Agree with the above poster as far as frequency…Although I do say weekly above…every other week or every 3rd is probably acceptable.
I’ve trained for a few Ironmans by splitting the long run into two 90 minute runs. Splitting it into 2 runs helped reduce injuries and I took the time to ice between runs. Also, I trained at a faster pace on each run. This led to a faster pace on race day as well.
But then it is not a long run it is 2 medium runs?
I thought there was a thread on this a while back that concluded it WAS ok to split the long run? The gist of it was that it allowed you to get more miles in at a better pace while reducing the potential for injury. A good old guy strategy to eek out few more years of performance.
Anybody remember this?
Feel free to call it what you like. Just responding to the pros & cons. A number of athletes do this to help reduce injury, keep their pace up & mentally it can be tougher to head out on the second run when you are already tired than it is just to do one long run.
You’re correct…and I guess the difference would primarily be whether you’re training for a straight marathon vs training for an Ironman.
I based my earlier post soley on the Marathon training I’ve done, been coached on and training programs I’ve seen. None that I’m aware of advocate breaking up your long runs. And as I understand it, it was to train your body thru the phase were it switches over from one sorce of energy…stored carbs to burning fat…(I think I got right) Since the 2nd sorce of fuel takes longer to convert to energy there is a short period there where you are literally running on empty. You want to get more efficient at making the conversion.
Now I’m sure the physio experts will at some point correct me or enlighten me.
Re: the Ironman training I’m following it does state to TRY to keep the long runs complete and avoid breaking them into shorter segments.
An ealier poster also mentioned breaking a run into two 90 min runs…which from my understanding should about get you to the fuel change over point.
Wait a sec. What is the time in between? Like you do one run in the AM and the other in the PM? Or like more spread in the week?
can you explain to me why you dont get the same physiological adaptation from spliting a long run in 2? I m very interested in hearing your answer. How much different do you think there is???
Anyway, my coach Paulo does split long run for me, it s something we have done since we started working together and i have made huge gain from this. I do hope it will keep working this well for me but so far, i slip all my long run days in preparation for ironman… i trust paulo on that…
There definitely was a thread in the last month or so, but it focused on splitting the long run in connex with training for an ultramarathon. I couldn’t find the thread on a search, but it’s out there…
While training for my first ultra (JFK50), I found that splitting up my long run was very helpful. Once I got to the point where my weekly long training run was longer than a marathon, I started splitting that long run up. I would do a long run in the morning and then a shorter run in the evening (early on it was 18+10 and I built up to about 28+7). I found that this was easier on my body, easier on my brain and easier logistically (fueling, weather changes, etc.). I believe (though have no scientific proof) that I was getting similar physical benefits from this system of splitting up the runs. I also found out very quickly that trying to go back out and run for a second time in one day was no easy task. It definitely taught me to respond to muscle exhaustion even if my calorie loss had been restored. And, I didn’t get injured.
When training for a marathon or an Ironman, I personally don’t split up the long runs, but I could see how someone who is newer to distance running or someone who is worried about over-use injury might find this a good idea.
You’re correct…and I guess the difference would primarily be whether you’re training for a straight marathon vs training for an Ironman.
I based my earlier post soley on the Marathon training I’ve done, been coached on and training programs I’ve seen. None that I’m aware of advocate breaking up your long runs. And as I understand it, it was to train your body thru the phase were it switches over from one sorce of energy…stored carbs to burning fat…(I think I got right) Since the 2nd sorce of fuel takes longer to convert to energy there is a short period there where you are literally running on empty. You want to get more efficient at making the conversion.
Now I’m sure the physio experts will at some point correct me or enlighten me.
Re: the Ironman training I’m following it does state to TRY to keep the long runs complete and avoid breaking them into shorter segments.
An ealier poster also mentioned breaking a run into two 90 min runs…which from my understanding should about get you to the fuel change over point.
WOW… i m speachless… i dont even know where to start with this
fuel change??? there is no such thing… your body dosnt do that… intensity of exercice dictate the source of fuel that you burn running on empty for a short period…WOW
please do not post such lie anymore…
I did it last year. I would actually split it up into 3 runs on a weekday, due to time: 5-6 mi in the AM, 10 mi at lunch, 5-6 mi PM- did this a few times. Its certainly a lot better than nothing, but I think it is important to run for 90+ minutes once you’ve already been moving for several hours. I slowed down dramatically after mile 15 of the run, and part was due to this (1st IM, so maybe not all the endurance of a multi-year veteran?)
Next IM, I plan on doing the “traditional” long bike brick of 100+ miles w/ 4-6 mile t-run one weekend, and alternating with a 3-4 hour bike, 1.5-2 hour run the next. All this training really leads up to being able to hold the pace after the halfway point of the IM marathon, and you have to get that fatigued to be able to train past it.
Or more eloquently: more is more. If that doesn’t work, you’re not doing enough. Since it didn’t quite work for me, guess what I’ll be doing the next few years? :-]
I split it up into up to 2hrs 30mins early am then another 30mins at noon. Why? because i don’t want to run more than 2:30 in training, yet i still want to get a decent amount of *quality *mileage for the day without risking injury.
Screw you Johnny0
I respect your athletism but you tact and spelling suck.
I thought I made it clear that I didn’t have the terminology right but here is what I was trying to say in laymans terms
From Marathon and beyond
Energy Dynamics 101
“Hitting The Wall is basically about running out of energy,” says Dave Martin, Ph.D., Emeritus Regent’s Professor of Health Sciences at Georgia State University in Atlanta—chemical energy, that is, stored in the form of adenosine triphosphate (ATP) and obtained from the breakdown, or metabolism, of energy-containing fuel. The runner’s primary fuel sources are carbohydrates (in the form of blood glucose and glycogen, a polymer of glucose stored in the muscles and liver) and fats (free fatty acids in the bloodstream and muscle triglycerides, molecules containing three fatty acids).
Fats might seem to be the logical first choice of fuel for endurance events; not only are they the most concentrated form of food energy, but even the thinnest runners have enough body fat to get them through 600 miles. Alas, it’s not quite that simple. Fatty acid metabolism requires plentiful circulating oxygen, a precious commodity when you’re running at marathon race pace. Carbohydrate metabolism, on the other hand, requires less oxygen. In fact, cells can derive energy from carbohydrates either aerobically (in the presence of oxygen) or anaerobically (in the absence of oxygen).
If you start your marathon at a reasonable pace for you, your fuel consumption ratio will be about 75 percent carbohydrates to 25 percent fatty acids, according to Martin. During the race, as carbohydrate supplies begin to dwindle, that ratio changes as your body begins to rely more heavily on fatty acids.
What does all of this have to do with hitting The Wall? Let’s start with the pace. It’s common, in the excitement of the moment, to start out at a pace that’s too fast for you. Big mistake. Your heart cannot pump enough blood to ensure a steady supply of oxygen to the muscles. At this point, your muscles have no choice but to burn glucose in the absence of oxygen. The anaerobic metabolism of glucose, as it’s called, is inefficient, yielding only about 1/18 as much energy (in the form of ATP) as aerobic metabolism. To make matters worse, among the by-products of the anaerobic metabolism of glucose are lactic acid and hydrogen ions. As these waste products continue to accumulate in the blood and tissue, they will not only make your muscles feel as though they are on fire, but they can also inactivate the enzymes that govern glucose metabolism. You’re toast.
Even if you’re racing at a reasonable pace and you’ve done a good job of carboloading in the days before the marathon, you still have only about 2,000 calories worth of glycogen stored in the muscles and liver; that’s about enough to get you to—surprise!—mile 20. If you manage to deplete your glycogen reserves, say hello to The Wall. As mentioned before, burning fatty acids requires plentiful oxygen, so as fatty acid metabolism increases, your heart must work harder to pump more oxygen-carrying blood to the muscles. It may be difficult or impossible to maintain your pace, especially if you’ve lost enough water through sweat to become even slightly dehydrated (this causes your blood to become thicker and therefore harder to pump). In addition, fatty acid metabolism itself requires glucose; as someone once said, “Fat is burned in a carbohydrate oven.”
Of course, you can do things to make sure you stay well hydrated and maintain an adequate supply of glucose during the marathon, and you’re probably aware of most of them. Begin to carboload a few days before the race to make sure that your muscles store as much glycogen as possible. Fortunately, the old, frequently stressful and unpleasant depletion/loading program has fallen out of favor with most runners. Martin recommends eating a balanced diet with a higher-than-usual percentage of carbohydrates as you’re tapering before the race. As the body increases its glycogen stores, it also increases the amount of stored water, leading to slight weight gain but also making more water available for sweat during the race.
Make sure that you are well hydrated before the race, and eat a light, carbohydrate-rich meal no later than two hours before the race. And by all means take advantage of the water, sports drinks, and other glucose-containing foods offered at the aid stations!
Many people also find that sports gels provide quick boosts of energy, although Martin admits that he is not a big fan of them. “Picture this poor soul who takes a blob of GU but doesn’t quite manage to get a cup of water. Now he’s got this thick 100 percent solution of stuff in his stomach that he can’t absorb. I’m a firm believer in energy drinks rather than just water.” Other favorites include defizzed Coke (Frank Shorter used to swear by it), which is a good source not only of carbohydrate but of caffeine as well (the role of caffeine in preventing fatigue is discussed later).
Martin also points out that nonworking muscles cannot transfer their glycogen reserves to working muscles; once glucose is inside a muscle cell, that’s where it stays until it’s metabolized. “This might be one reason why many marathon runners prefer a race course with periodic, slight elevation changes,” he says. “This allows the glycogen reserves to be shared among a larger group of working muscles.” Runners who are racing on a very flat course might consider occasionally varying their pace or stride length to mobilize unused glycogen stores.
Johnnyo,
What he was referring to what the point at which the muscles run out of stored glycogen. In marathon running this is known as “hitting the wall”. At that point, a key source of fuel for your activity has dried up. The body is forced to rely more upon the burning of fat. And so, there is, in that sense, a “fuel change”. Usually the athlete is forced to slow down as a result.
He is not posting lies.
Here are some interesting reading:
http://www.pfitzinger.com/labreports/longruns.shtml
http://www.mcmillanrunning.com/marathonlongrun.htm
http://mysite.verizon.net/jim2wr/id44.html
http://mysite.verizon.net/jim2wr/id88.html
.
My coach starts the split around 15 miles for IM training. So, 12 and 3. The split never goes above 4. So a 20 mile run would be 17/3 or 16/4. I have been doing it for over 2 years and like it although it scared the hell out of me the first time I did it – I thought body parts were going to fall off (I’m old). They didn’t. Her stated reasons are: 1) reduced injury; 2) better form near the end; 3) learn how to run on dead legs. While I trust her implicitly, I was by coincidence in a position to ask some nationally recognized coaches what they thought of the split when this first started. They all said she was right.