I’m sure it’s been discussed here (my search didn’t find much, but my search skills may be suspect), but I would be interested in opinions regarding the benefits (or, more likely, costs) of splitting up a weekday run or two. Example: I have a 8 or 9 mile run scheduled for IM training on a Wednesday but, because of time constraints, only have time for 5 miles in the morning. I then do another 5 miles at noon—thereby adding in a couple of extra miles overall because I’m feeling guilty about the shorter morning run. I would definitely not do this for my long weekend run, but I’d be curious about the costs of doing this from time to time during the week.
As a mid to back of the packer, it worked fine for me. I would run my long run every 2 weeks with a single run and on the off weeks use 2 or 3 runs in a single day. Still came out about the same vs IMs where I did all of my runs as single bouts. I definitely felt better at work during the day. I had to run in the early a.m. on Thursday, then take the kids to school, and spend much of my 10 day at work on my feet. If I broke it up, I tried to do one portion longer than the other and go a bit above long run pace. For the second run, I would try to not slack off, but by the end of the day I would take whatever I could get.
Good luck,
Tim
I just started doing these recently. I have done alot of swimming in the morning and running in the afternoon or trainer in the morning but never running until recently. I dont know if the cardio benefits are the same but my legs still feel like I ran 16 miles whether I broke it up into to 8’s or one 16. At the end of the day they are still just as sore. I dont think I would replace a weekly long run with a day of 2 runs but if your looking to get miles in your legs I don’t see a difference.
I’d love to hear more from the “runner’s” on this forum.
When you split a run, the training stress decreases because your legs recover a bit between the two runs.
If this is an easy run, go for it. If it’s supposed to be a workout, no dice. Or you could make one easy one harder.
When you split a run, the training stress decreases because your legs recover a bit between the two runs.
If this is an easy run, go for it. If it’s supposed to be a workout, no dice. Or you could make one easy one harder.
Agreed–which is why I’d never do it for a long run. I don’t know that my legs feel much more rested by doing 10 split 5/5 than they do going 7 or 8 straight. . . perhaps a little bit. . . which is why I’ve added a few miles and then used the first 5 as an easy run and the second 5 as a harder / tempo run. It’s a bit of an experiment, as I have a long running race coming up that is early in my IM training plan–so I’m trying to get in all of the miles while not burning out. Plus, time is a precious commodity in my life and this plan (if done even just once a week) helps quite a bit.
Sorry, I hate this expression, so forgive me, but it’s the only thing that comes to mind. I think this might be a good example of “over-thinking it.” The difference between doing a 9-mile run as a single run vs two separate runs is almost entirely insignificant. What is significant is to do as much running as possible without injuring yourself or impacting the quality of your other workouts. How you achieve that goal is going to be driven primarily by your own schedule. If you don’t have the time to do a single 9-mile run in the morning then you should feel completely confident doing it as two separate runs (5 miles each; one in the morning and one at noon).
Look, almost all of us have significant time constraints. Just get in whatever training you can when time permits. Being successful at IM is mostly about how creative you can be with your schedule in accommodating your training.
Thanks, Chris
splitting a run is a great way to increase quality across a duration of exercise if you do it right. Done right, its a great way to get faster and increase your endurance within the same 24hr training period.
I know this will get somebody foaming at the mouth, and while I really dont want to have to resort to posting in a CYA sort of way; I’ve learned its necessary given all the rabid Cool aid guzzlers on the site.
example: 10 mile run: athletes current performance is a consistent 8:34 pace at 127bpm for 15k, with decoupling occurring by +4bpm for same pace to cessation of exercise at 20k.
This same athlete could create 2 separate training protocols separated by 4 to 8 hours (lets say) of work, or life in general. Protocol 1 could be a 10k run of 6x 1 mile at 8:14 pace with a recovery jog to 65%of MHR between each interval (recovery distance not considered part of critical distance).
Run 2 could be another 10k distance, but at 8:34 pace or 127bpm (whichever control factor produces the faster run). This type of training might not be your bag if your strictly adhere to increasing duration or intensity during difference training cycles.
just an idea…
I have many of my clients do this especially for their long run pre IM - 2:30 hours or so - physiologically it really makes little if any difference. Although many say they feel recovery is a tad faster.
Sorry, I hate this expression, so forgive me, but it’s the only thing that comes to mind. I think this might be a good example of “over-thinking it.” The difference between doing a 9-mile run as a single run vs two separate runs is almost entirely insignificant. What is significant is to do as much running as possible without injuring yourself or impacting the quality of your other workouts. How you achieve that goal is going to be driven primarily by your own schedule. If you don’t have the time to do a single 9-mile run in the morning then you should feel completely confident doing it as two separate runs (5 miles each; one in the morning and one at noon).
Look, almost all of us have significant time constraints. Just get in whatever training you can when time permits. Being successful at IM is mostly about how creative you can be with your schedule in accommodating your training.
Thanks, Chris
Good points. Yes, the concept of “overthinking” did occur to me; I just want to make sure my training is specific enough to the (eventual) event, in this case IMWI. During my first IM, I had somewhat fewer time constraints and was able to get in the longer weekday runs in one shot. Of course, it didn’t really seem to help me on the run, as I eventually blew up anyway. So without giving it too much more thought, I will take the solid advice above and work some split runs into my schedule.
I think if we all put together the ideal schedule for ourselves it would probably look different than what we can execute in reality. We, including myself, often get into silly debates about what protocol works best when so many of us aren’t simply executing our training in consistent manner. I think my protocol is a joke for the most part. It’s nothing fancy, special, etc but my consistency (most years) is often 2nd to none. And my consistency is very much related to how creative I’m willing to get with my schedule. When my season starts, the only time I miss a day is when I feel I need to rest. I always find a way to put in the hours.
Consistency is everything. My feeling is that any debate or discussion about protocol details is mostly useless until the athlete has proven they can commit to a consistent schedule for about 3 years.
Thanks, Chris
Split runs - I do them two or three times a week, in the form of my commute. Sure, maybe I’d be better off with longer, single runs - but the fact of the matter is that these are miles that I wouldn’t otherwise be running. (Restricted both by daylight, and lets face it, motivation - tough to motivate yourself to set out from your house for a run after a long day on your feet, but if it’s your only way home . . . )
I don’t know, maybe somebody who actually knows something about run training will tell me that I’m sabotaging myself by training like this - but at this point, I’m inclined to think that it’s a good thing to get more miles, even if they’re not perfect miles.
Been there, done it…works just fine.
Total training load is much more important than the length of your “long(est)” workout.
as others have said, i think with the exception of getting a longer run in there somewhere, whatever allows you to run more is going to be the right answer here.