Success with lower mileage/higher intensity runs

Triathlon Forum
1

I am 45, been running for about 7 years. Had some success running high mileage back in 2008 and 2009 (50-70 mpw marathon training) but IT Band issues forced me to reduce mileage and I started doing triathlons. Since 2010 when I started racing tris, my run mileage has been between 25-40 mpw depending on the time of year. Since Labor Day I have dropping the swim and bike and tried to focus on the run for a few months to see if I can get my run times back down under 18 for 5k and under 38 for 10k. I have averaged close to 50 mpw for the last few months and have not seen much improvement. Running sub 6:00 pace is a real struggle. Recent 5k was 18:24. I have been doing one tempo run per week, and an occasional 10k pace workout like 5x1200 or mile repeats at 10k pace with short rest, and a long run of 12-13 miles. Compared to 2008 when I was 41, running even 50 mpw now seems like it is beating my legs up and leaving me tired and sluggish. I used to run tempo run at sub 6:15 pace for 4-5 miles, now running 6:30 pace feels like a major effort.

I’m considering switching to a lower mileage and higher intensity approach to see if that helps. Looking to see if any other master runners have had success with that approach. In other words, instead of running 50 mpw (spread over six days) with one tempo run and a long run (10-13), I would try running 35 mpw spread over 4 days with mostly high intensity. I was thinking of something like this:

Sunday: Long run progression, increasing pace each mile until last 3-4 are at half marathon pace (6:30ish).
Tues: 9 miles with hill repeats, either half mile or mile long very steep hills run all out with full rest.
Thurs: 9 miles with 3-4 at tempo pace, or long intervals at 10k pace.
Sat: Brick run (after one hour of intervals on the bike), 2 miles at 5k effort, then cooldown for a few miles.

I would mix in some shorter 5k intervals every other week to vary the workouts, but the idea is to run at a much higher intensity with more days off and less weekly mileage. I don’t have a problem with injuries running high intensity in the past. Curious to see if that kind of approach has worked for anyone else. I realize that doing shorter and more frequent runs is a better approach for many people who are new to running, but I have a lot of experience and a big running base since 2005, so I am not too concerned with running only four days a week. I just feel at this point that I need to run faster on a regular basis in order to race better.

2

I have had luck using the FIRST plan (3 dpw running, all quality runs) as a training plan.

3

I have had good success this past year just running quality instead of quantity. Maybe 25 miles a week, long runs are just 6 or 7 miles.

4

** I have had luck using the FIRST plan (3 dpw running, all quality runs) as a training plan**

Awesome.

The problem I have with these statements of the messaging of the OP are twofold:

  1. With endurance sports training, it’s never all one thing or the other. It’s not black and white. It’s not all high volume vs all intensity. Althuogh reading posts like this on forums, it seems that’s the way people want it to be. The reality is it’s all shades of grey. And that shade is going to be different at different times of the year and beyond that, it’s going to be different for different athletes.

  2. In and extension of #1, there is a common mistake, to put training into time-line silos. Example: Athlete claims that they shifted to a high intensity focus this year and had huge success after years of high volume training. It’s not that the higher intensity training, was not helpful, it’s that all those years of higher column training were more helpful and part of who the athlete was going into the year of higher intensity training. You don’t just close one door and open another . . , lot’s of shades of grey!

5

Substituting intensity for volume is only going to beat you up more, and increase the likelihood of injury.

It’s probable that you’re doing the majority of your running too fast if you always feel tired and sluggish. I do the majority of my mileage 2-2.5 minutes slower than my 5k pace.

What most folks are missing is structure. 50mpw in and of itself is great, but most people just run in no man’s land (too slow to be helpful, too fast to recover). Slow down for the majority of the miles, and that should enable you to hit your key workouts each week. Tempos and long runs most of the year, and then 5k/10k work 8-12 weeks out from your ‘a’ race. You don’t need much more than that to realize your potential.

6

I hear what you are saying about the pace of regular training runs. My 5k pace right now is 5:55/mile. My training runs are 8:00 to 8:30 pace, so it’s not like I am running marathon pace (7:00) on days where I am planning a hard workout. I think part of the problem is that for me to get to 50 mpw, that means getting up at 5:00 a.m. most weekdays and very little chance to sleep in and recover. I have no time to run at lunch or after work due to my family schedule. I have struggled with getting up 4 weekdays and trying to run 7-9 miles each time and get home before 6:30. In the Winter it is that much more difficult due to darkness and weather. I will run in any kind of winter weather, but it’s the lack of sleep that affects me. And no, going to bed at 9:00 p.m. with two teenagers and a 9 year old is not an option.

I have found that the hill repeats, which are one of the toughest workouts I do, do not beat me up as much as track work. Maybe I should incorporate that type of workout once a week.

7

I second what snackchair wrote.

I was successful in running lower mileage at higher intensity - successful in getting injured. Speed kills, and as we get older (I will turn 53 this month) speed kills more quickly.

When I was younger, I ran lower mileage at higher intensity with pretty good results. But over time, no can do. It takes me longer to recover from a hard 4 mile run, than it does from an easy 10 mile run.

There is a reason why there are fewer and fewer competitors in the older age groups, and it isn’t because people lose interest in racing as they age. Running is hard on the body. That’s why old guys bike.

Good luck.

8

** I have had luck using the FIRST plan (3 dpw running, all quality runs) as a training plan**

Awesome.

The problem I have with these statements of the messaging of the OP are twofold:

  1. With endurance sports training, it’s never all one thing or the other. It’s not black and white. It’s not all high volume vs all intensity. Althuogh reading posts like this on forums, it seems that’s the way people want it to be. The reality is it’s all shades of grey. And that shade is going to be different at different times of the year and beyond that, it’s going to be different for different athletes.

  2. In and extension of #1, there is a common mistake, to put training into time-line silos. Example: Athlete claims that they shifted to a high intensity focus this year and had huge success after years of high volume training. It’s not that the higher intensity training, was not helpful, it’s that all those years of higher column training were more helpful and part of who the athlete was going into the year of higher intensity training. You don’t just close one door and open another . . , lot’s of shades of grey!

About 50 Shades I think

9

I second what snackchair wrote.

I was successful in running lower mileage at higher intensity - successful in getting injured. Speed kills, and as we get older (I will turn 53 this month) speed kills more quickly.

When I was younger, I ran lower mileage at higher intensity with pretty good results. But over time, no can do. It takes me longer to recover from a hard 4 mile run, than it does from an easy 10 mile run.

There is a reason why there are fewer and fewer competitors in the older age groups, and it isn’t because people lose interest in racing as they age. Running is hard on the body. That’s why old guys bike. .

ditto. er… I mean “X2” or ^^^^this

oh, and yeah- you do need to get up at 5am every morning to get your runs in. that’s just the way it is. hill work (if you have the achilles for it) is a good way to get in some intensity without the pounding damage.

10

Decline in running performance with age, as reflected by WAVA age-grade factors, begins in earnest at about age 40. At constant age grading, a 38:00 10k at age 41 translates to 39:10 at age 45, and an 18:00 5k translates to 18:33. (YMMV) Age-grading can help you set expectations, if you don’t it become self-fulfilling.

I don’t have any real recommendation on your running program, other than to say that low-volume, high intensity never worked for me, personally, and integrating a running schedule with cycling is still a mystery to me.

11

+1 to what Fleck said.

Here’s generally how I recommend you approach your situation. BEGIN with a balanced approach targeting optimal fitness, and then modify it to suit your needs.

Lets say, for example, that “35 mpw” is your limit. The training phases don’t change. See my 3 part plan in the link in my sig line, but I’ll try to summarize here:

3 phases of training:
Base building
transition (maintenance)
race phase

A lot of triathletes like long summer seasons, so I recommend a lot of base work in the winter, followed by alternating transition and race phases in the summer (4 -6 weeks or a race phase leading up to A race, followed by 4-6 week of transition phase, race, transition, race, etc.)

Base building is all easy running.
Transition is one tempo run a week (except for IM).
Race phase is often a second race specific workout each week.

For each phase you increase your training loads until you hit your maximum fitness level, OR your maximum avialable training time…which ever comes first. For you, its 35 miles. Once you reach that point, you add intensity in the form of threshold/tempo training. That might mean that in the winter instead of running 50 miles a week, you might run 35 miles a week with two tempo runs a week. During the racing phase, you might do 1 interval workout + 2 tempo runs, with one of them being mixed in with your long run.

No matter what, I recommend running as many days a week as possible. 35 miles in 5 days might be a 15 mile run with 3 of it at a faster tempo, two 6 mile runs with tempo or intervals, and two easy 4 milers.

Like Fleck said, there are shades of gray. I recommend taking a balanced program and making it a little grayer rather than trying to go from a white program to a black program.

12

Thanks for the response, very helpful to read. One of my concerns is that I wanted to try a run focus this Winter to see if I could improve my race times. Once tri season starts, I will not be able to devote as much time to the run only, and the bike training really affects my run performance. So I guess you would suggest still trying to base build as many miles as I can handle, and then include one tempo run per week. If I am going to target a half marathon at the end of February, base build until mid January with mostly easy running, then incorporate some half marathon speed work for the six weeks leading to the race, such as longer tempo runs, cruise intervals, and progression long runs? I can probably devote 40-45 mpw from now until the end of February if I keep most of the runs at an easy pace.

13

I think my run has declined much more drastically than the age graded tables suggest. I ran 35:57 (10k) and 16:57 (5k) at age 41. At age 45, I ran 18:24 and probably would be no faster than 38:10 for 10k. Of course I am carrying an extra 10 lbs on me which is also a huge factor. You know how they say for every lb gained add 2 seconds per mile to race pace? That estimate is very accurate for me unfortunately. Even if I dropped 5 lbs, my 5k pace should drop by 10 seconds per mile.

14

I’ve heard endless stories about the whole ‘more intensity / less mileage for great results!’ line, as well as the idea of using that more in the offseason and save the bigger mileage training for racing, but I have to admit - this approach doesn’t work well for me at all.

I’m much, much more successful going from hi-volume/lower intensity training (like 2 hour runs or 4 hour bikes) toward shorter/harder stuff than vice versa. I’m sure some people are different, but I find that I get too beaten down and demoralized when I go from my speedy 5k/10k self to start doing long runs and trying to keep elements of the speed/intensity I built up.

In contrast, when I’ve got a good volume base of run or bike, even if there’s very limited intensity work, I can really hammer the VO2 or LT intervals, even with more numbers of repeats.

I’ve tried both methods extensively in my 20 years of running, and every time, it’s the old-school ‘volume-first, speed-second’ for me.

15

You second post is more telling of your situation. Like most folks, you’re having trouble finding the time to stay in top racing shape. I don’t have an answer for that, but I will throw out a simple training week plan that you can try this winter.

M: 6.2 Easy (47:00)
T: 9.3 Workout (65:00)
W: 6.2 Easy (47:00)
T: 9.3 Workout (65:00)
F: 6.2 Easy (47:00)
S: 12.4 Long Run (1:30:00)
S: Rest

16

It’s interesting that most of what I read on this forum supports that approach, but the opposite for cycling. I guess that is due to the lack of impact with cycling, and the fact that it is difficult to mentally handle long rides indoors during the Winter, at least for me.

When I ran the sub 17:00 5k a few years ago, that was off marathon training with only tempo running and long progression runs, zero speedwork. But I maxed out at 70 mpw. No way can I handle that volume of running now, but it was amazing how easy the 5k was after coming off a big base. Seems similar to what you have found with your training.

I just wish I could find the time to run in daylight rather than 5:00 a.m. I think I would prefer the treadmill in a bright room with music as opposed to running in the dark with only a headlamp.

17

A large reason why running is ‘just run’ and cycling/swimming are ‘go HARD!’ is that cycling and swimming are not weight-bearing.

With running, the weight bearing nature of it, combined with the fact that we’re naturally hard-wired for running (we naturally fall into our most economical strides, contrary to what a lot of ‘chi’ runners and other folks like to say) means that just spending a lot of time on your feet will give a pretty good stimulus. Of course, the shorter the race, the more fast training you need to do, but you can get pretty good for an AGer just by doing volume with very little speedwork.

Riding a lot helps, yes, but without specific attention to the FTP (harder efforts), you won’t improve as much as you would have running.

18

My guess is that you might need to act your age. 2 recovery days of short easy between hard sessions.

19

repeat… short easy

20

I second this.

I second what snackchair wrote.

I was successful in running lower mileage at higher intensity - successful in getting injured. Speed kills, and as we get older (I will turn 53 this month) speed kills more quickly.

When I was younger, I ran lower mileage at higher intensity with pretty good results. But over time, no can do. It takes me longer to recover from a hard 4 mile run, than it does from an easy 10 mile run.

There is a reason why there are fewer and fewer competitors in the older age groups, and it isn’t because people lose interest in racing as they age. Running is hard on the body. That’s why old guys bike.

Good luck.