Try to Achieve as Much as Possible on a Minimum of Training
7 Principles of Training:
#2) Try to Achieve as Much as Possible on a Minimum of Training
“Train little, hard, and often.” — Jim Peters
“Train, don’t strain.” — Bill Bowerman
Many novice coaches and runners struggle with the concept of minimal training volumes. They think more is better. And to a point it is. But for every runner, there is a point of diminishing returns in training, where the work put in is not effective at elevating performance — and may negatively impact it.
People like big numbers. Weekly high mileage totals get attention. Lydiard’s base volume of 100-mile weeks got people’s attention. It helps people listen to what he had to say.
But are 100+ mile training weeks in the base phase really necessary? Perhaps. But for most, probably not.
If your goal is to cover a distance as fast as possible, then the focus of your training should be developing your speed and extension of your ability to sustain competitive speeds over your race distance.
Part of that puzzle is developing a “base” of mileage to work off of throughout the training year. But how much mileage do you really need to do?
Many have a vague understanding of this. So they overcompensate by running more general volume because everyone says the more volume you run makes you a faster runner, right? Not quite. The more SPECIFIC volume you can do results in becoming faster. “Specific” is defined as about +/- 10% of goal race pace.
Let’s use contrast two imaginary female 5K runners who want to run 15:00 to illustrate this concept.
Runner 1 employs a training strategy of running 100-mile weeks with only 15 of those miles at specific paces, 90% - 110% of goal race pace. The other 85 miles are run at general or moderate speeds which are around 75%-65% of goal pace (6:00/mile - 6:30/mile pace). She “hammers” a fair amount of non-workout runs, let’s say 60 miles are at these moderate speeds. The other 25 miles are recovery speeds, super slow running, 8:00/mile and slower.
Runner 2 logs only 60 miles a week. But 50% of her running, 30 miles, is at 5:15 pace and faster (90% - 110% of goal race pace). The other 30 miles per week are slow recovery speeds, of 8:00/mile and slower.
Over a 10 week training period leading into the target 5K race these training intensity distributions record the follow mileage totals for each runner:
Runner 1: 10-week Running Volumes
Specific Volume: 150 miles
General/Moderate Volume: 600 miles
Recovery Volume: 250 miles
Total Volume: 1,000 miles
Runner 2: 10-week Running Volumes
Specific Volume: 300 miles
General/Moderate Volume: ** 0 miles **
Recovery Volume: 300 miles
Total Volume: 600 miles
Who do you think wins between the two?
Who do you think will run 15:00?
Runner 1 who did more total volume, but much of it General/Moderate? Or Runner 2 who did twice as much specific volume?
My money is on Runner 2. She put in more specific training, which will result in a higher transfer of training.
I realize this is an overly simplistic illustration, but the message I want to convey is specificity matters and has a high impact. General training, in the form of moderate running, while it is work, is not as effective work as a regular practice of faster running.
As a runner develops, increasing total mileage does make sense, provided the specific volume is proportionally increased as well.
In this example, if over several years of uninterrupted training Runner 2 builds her work capacity and general strength to run 100 miles a week with 50 of those miles perform at specific speeds (in the Specific Period of preparation) she will continue to improve her 5K time. But if she only adds non-specific volume, like General/Moderate volume, her improvement may stall out at a certain point because she is not advancing specific running volumes to achieve a new stimulus. Again, this is a simple illustration to explain training principles, real-world training progression is more much nuanced, contextual, and individualistic.
One final note: Context matters — a lot.
It’s why the periodization of training is important. Like seasons, at different times of the year there is a different training emphasis.
In the “base” or General period, runners establish the groundwork for future periods of training by establishing a general base of running. Moderate runs, time on the feet, mileage accumulation in low-intensity fashion is the focus. It structurally prepares for the runner for upcoming periods where faster running is the focus.
Then in the Fundamental period, the intensity of the established running volume starts to accelerate. The focus shifts to improving the pace of workouts and runs. Weekly volume is static. For example, if you ran 100 miles a week in the base/general period, you should still be running 100 miles a week in the Fundamental period, only now a portion of it is faster. In the Specific period what matters most is the specificity of pace and recovery from those specific pace workouts. Again, the overall volume should not change. If you ran 100 miles a week in base phase, now 50% is at 90% - 110% of goal race pace. The other 50% is recovery.
If 50 miles a week at 90% - 110% of goal race pace seems like a lot to you, then why run 100 miles a week in the base phase if you weren’t planning to transition a significant portion of that volume to a higher quality? If you deem in the Specific Period you need to do only 30 miles a week or 15 miles a week at specific race paces, then 60 or 30 miles a week of total running, respectively, should be enough to achieve what you want for that year.