Longest run when training for a 95/100?

"Tim Downie" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Okay, I know that the distance of one's longest run probably isn't the
most important part of one's training for an ultra but I'd be interested
to hear nonetheless from you ultra boys and girls what you'd do in the way
of a longest run (and when) or highest mileage weekend if you're doing
back-to-backs, in the run up to a hundred mile ultra.

I've never run a 100 (50m is the most I've raced), but *all* of my running
pals have, and they all occasionally cover from 50 to 70 miles in a weekend.

Jorge Pacheco (winner of AC100 and 2nd at Western states) usually runs a
30-20 weekend during his typical 120 mile week (I ran a 30 miler with him
once and he was kind enough to mostly stay with me).

My friend Bruce, whom I hit the track with this morning, mentioned that he
did 110 miles over a 3 day weekend when he was training to run Wasatch in
less than 24 hrs. He often finishes near the top.

At the other end of the spectrum, you've got Paul DeWitt (see link below),
who hints that his "really long" training runs are only 4-5 hours long, and
usually runs less. He just broke the course record at the Leadville 100m on
a claimed 60 mpw base...

http://www.coloradorunnermag.com/features/Issue8_TheFastLane.html

-- Dan

Tim Downie said:

what you'd do in the way of a
longest run (and when) or highest mileage weekend if you're doing
back-to-backs, in the run up to a hundred mile ultra.

Never went over 3h30m if I remember rightly. Longest week was 140km.

"Tim Downie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Okay, I know that the distance of one's longest run probably isn't the
most important part of one's training for an ultra but I'd be
interested to hear nonetheless from you ultra boys and girls what
you'd do in the way of a longest run (and when) or highest mileage
weekend if you're doing back-to-backs, in the run up to a hundred mile
ultra.

This is a loaded but fun question which will get you 100 different
answers for a 100 different people. Dan's reply coveres a few folks but
those were looking to finish near the top.

Personally my mileage seldom goes over 60/week for a 100. Dan does that
and more for 50 miles. My point, the miles per week and the length of
the long run be it a single run or b2b varies widely. Anywho, my max
long run is about 40 miles(8-10 hours) and three weeks before the race.
It also has about 10k of up and respective down, and elevation is
another variable that fits into this equation of many unknowns. 😉 My
b2b consists of 30/15 and maybe one of these. about 5-7 weeks before.
So much of this answer depends on your race goal(survive vs. finish
within the cutoff) and terrain of the race.

I'm not into high mileage but I do high quality.

-dougF

Tim Downie said:

Okay, I know that the distance of one's longest run probably isn't the most
important part of one's training for an ultra but I'd be interested to hear
nonetheless from you ultra boys and girls what you'd do in the way of a
longest run (and when) or highest mileage weekend if you're doing
back-to-backs, in the run up to a hundred mile ultra.

Doug, Dan, Trailrunner, anyone else?

My modus operandi is to do a 50M race as a training run a month before
the big show (ideally I do 2 a month apart). If that's not feasible,
option #2 is multiple back/backs of 40-50M (at least 2-3 done every
other week) and a back/back/back of 70 (30/20/20) 3-4 weeks out
(depending on your recovery rate). Lest you think the 3 long days in a
row is overkill, the Western States training camp does that. In any
case, a 30M 3 weeks out and a 20M weeks out then rest, rest, rest, eat,
eat, eat.

--
- The Trailrunner

Anti-Spam Alert: If you wish to reply, cut the *BS*

Trails of the Diablo Valley
*Running - Hiking - Nature*
http://www.geocities.com/yosemite/trails/6016/

Thanks guys for your feedback. As ever, I'll probably cobble various bits
together and do my own thing but it's good to hear a range of approachs. I
love Steve's 3 and a half hour max plan but there's no way that I'd have the
confidence to line up at the start with that as my longest run under my
belt. ;-)

I've just been reading about Badwater and now my WHW jaunt is beginning to
seem like a walk in the park by comparison!

Tim

"Tim Downie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Thanks guys for your feedback. As ever, I'll probably cobble various
bits together and do my own thing but it's good to hear a range of
approachs. I love Steve's 3 and a half hour max plan but there's no
way that I'd have the confidence to line up at the start with that as
my longest run under my belt. ;-)

I've just been reading about Badwater and now my WHW jaunt is
beginning to seem like a walk in the park by comparison!

Races like Badwater or the now defunct Barkley or the Sri Shinmoy 3,100
mile race held define reletivity in endurance. 😉

How come you looking at races like Badwater? Looking to take your
efforts up a notch or ten? You looking to fill the ultra redliner slot?
😉

Just a word of warning. An informal study done on the ultra list
suggests that the lifespan(participation, not croaking) of an ultra
runner is 4.5 years. Many of those that fade off into the sunset are
those that get the fever and toast their brains doing too many races in
a year or too hard a race. A bad marathon sucks and often chases people
away from the distance for a while. A bad 100 often scars people and
they never, ever do another. More specifically, in a bad marathon you
typically suffer the last 10k and walk. Some humiliation plus some
physical discomfort. In say a 100, you may suffer for the last 30-40
miles and if it is on a trail and your walking oodles of elevation for
8+ hours feeling like [censored] or worse.

As I said, my mileage is probably average but I do high quality. For my
first 100 my long run 11.5 hours and 12k of elevation and that was too
much as I look back. I ran 21:01 and only felt crappy that last 10 miles
and that was impatience to get done. You tend to think of ten miles on
the road and about 1.5 hours. On a trail with elevation and a glacial
pace it's many hours. By the way, I discovered I can run the same time
off long runs of 6-8 hours. A little of that is residual strength from
year to year.

I also adopt a series of races as building blocks which culminate with a
100. As Jim aka trailrunner suggests a 50 some month or so before a 100
is a great block. I find that a bit close for my taste because I like
to take a few weeks off after a 50 to fully recover and then ramp back
up. OTOH if one is doing more than one 100 in a year or great recovery
they can treat a 50 like I do a 50k. I do a 50k 2-3 weeks before a 50
mile race.

Just a few more variables for the equation of many unknowns. 🙂

-DougF

Doug Freese said:

How come you looking at races like Badwater? Looking to take your
efforts up a notch or ten? You looking to fill the ultra redliner
slot? 😉

No, a guy posted to a WHW training forum that I set up and I googled his
name (Mark Cockbain).

One of the first hits on Google turned up this.
http://www.4ar.info/print.php?id=1266_0_4_0_C

I'm not crazy enough (yet) to think I could do this. Sounds too much like a
near-death experience!

<snip>

Quoted message said:

I also adopt a series of races as building blocks which culminate
with a 100. As Jim aka trailrunner suggests a 50 some month or so
before a 100 is a great block. I find that a bit close for my taste
because I like to take a few weeks off after a 50 to fully recover
and then ramp back up.

In an ideal world, I'd do something similar but there just aren't that many
suitable events in the UK to choose from. If it were later in the year
there would be but not pre-June.

Cheers.

Tim

"Tim Downie" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Doug Freese said:

How come you looking at races like Badwater? Looking to take your
efforts up a notch or ten? You looking to fill the ultra redliner
slot? 😉

No, a guy posted to a WHW training forum that I set up and I googled his
name (Mark Cockbain).

One of the first hits on Google turned up this.
http://www.4ar.info/print.php?id=1266_0_4_0_C

I'm not crazy enough (yet) to think I could do this. Sounds too much like
a near-death experience!

oh yea, that sounds like a ball! 🙂 but what a story to dine out on.

Quoted message said:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

I also adopt a series of races as building blocks which culminate
with a 100. As Jim aka trailrunner suggests a 50 some month or so
before a 100 is a great block. I find that a bit close for my taste
because I like to take a few weeks off after a 50 to fully recover
and then ramp back up.

In an ideal world, I'd do something similar but there just aren't that
many suitable events in the UK to choose from. If it were later in the
year there would be but not pre-June.

Cheers.

Tim

Doug Freese said:

Races like Badwater or the now defunct Barkley or the Sri Shinmoy 3,100
mile race held define reletivity in endurance. 😉

Barkley's back on. Somebody in another group is doing it and just got
word a day or so ago. Apparently a lot of negotiation, and they've asked
people not to pre-scout the route.

And, gosh, don't forget the Iditarod Trail Invitational (choice of 350
or 1100 miles) that starts in 1 wk 😉

Dot

--
"You try to slow down and enjoy it. You try to look at the scenery. But
your brain can kind of go blank. All you want to do is tell your feet to
keep working."
-Cedar Petrosius, women's winner 2004 Matanuska Peak Challenge (14mi,
9000ft up and down)

respond to longest run for train for 100 miles run

gee that seems so far.
I done 40 miles on a bike and it kick my ass.
I got to do 38 miles and the next day do 10 miles
then 25 miles.
maybe evan a 30 mile and a 35 mile B to B.

there people here bike 50.
run 50 and evan bike more run and swim golf.

some do 100 a week plus
alot of people here our over any pro events. and just here daily. me one
of them.

some our faster then others.
some 3 h marathons
some 4 and some can't evan do one.

at 50 I must be at my mid life christest.

oh hell.

bike4 health.

one leg of mine is mess up.
not on any one event. most just life in general. allways hits me on my
left side.
too many major injuiriors too name.

this is why I bike.
no pain and hard impact to said leg.

it still kicks my ass on these long ride. evan if 40 miles is not long.
like 8.5 min
26 average
112 long maxs

I am average and better on a yearly base.

this maxs. I can't see in my future for some time .

A long journey alway's begin's with the first step.

"Doug Freese" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Just a word of warning. An informal study done on the ultra list suggests
that the lifespan(participation, not croaking) of an ultra runner is 4.5
years. Many of those that fade off into the sunset are those that get the
fever and toast their brains doing too many races in a year or too hard a
race. A bad marathon sucks and often chases people away from the distance
for a while. A bad 100 often scars people and they never, ever do another.

I've been doing Ultras since '81 (a 41 miler). Maybe my longevity in the
sport is a result of never doing a 100! I don't really think that *forcing*
the legs to go more than 2-3 hours is a good thing. Cortisol is not a
friendly hormone. The less time under it's influence, the better. That's
why my current limit seems to be 50m. I'm so competitive, I know I'd push
to the brink in a 100.

Back to the topic of long runs...

Even though I don't race 100's, I do feel strongly that an 8 hour run that
ends up as a shuffling / walking slog is not the best way to train, to put
it lightly. Once your legs are shot, and things start to hurt, and you
can't stride normally, and you can't even jog up hills, it's not training
anymore -- it's destruction. Nothing good happens after that point. The
key is to know when the training has stopped and the destruction derby has
begun.

A mild-paced, mountainous 50k can have a training effect for me -- I'm
stronger two weeks later. But I've never done a 50 miler that didn't tear
me down pretty well, into long-term fatigue.

Let training be training (getting stronger week-by-week). And save the
destructive efforts for racing.

-- Dan

Doug Freese said:

I also adopt a series of races as building blocks which culminate with a
100. As Jim aka trailrunner suggests a 50 some month or so before a 100
is a great block. I find that a bit close for my taste because I like
to take a few weeks off after a 50 to fully recover and then ramp back
up.

I should clarify that I do the 50M as a training run, not a race. In
fact, I do it like it is the first 50 of a 100 with the objective to
finish feeling good enough that I could go back out and do another 50.
In other words VERY SLOWLY!

--
- The Trailrunner

Anti-Spam Alert: If you wish to reply, cut the *BS*

Trails of the Diablo Valley
*Running - Hiking - Nature*
http://www.geocities.com/yosemite/trails/6016/

Dan Stumpus said:

Even though I don't race 100's, I do feel strongly that an 8 hour run that
ends up as a shuffling / walking slog is not the best way to train, to put
it lightly. Once your legs are shot, and things start to hurt, and you
can't stride normally, and you can't even jog up hills, it's not training
anymore -- it's destruction. Nothing good happens after that point. The
key is to know when the training has stopped and the destruction derby has
begun.

But a main purpose of really long training runs, 8-10 hours, is to learn
how to take it easy early. If you redline from the start, of course
you're going to be shuffling/dragging at the end. But if you walk/pace
yourself from the start, you'll still be able to run comfortably at the
end.

When I first started doing this nonsense, I thought the object was to be
macho and push until you couldn't push anymore. That worked OK for 50K
and even the first 40M of a 50M, but that last 10 was butt draggin'
time. I realized I would have to do something different if I had any
hope of finishing a 100 without doing a 50M death march. So I tried the
"start out slow and then slow down" approach as I began to extend my
training. And what do you know? I found out that soon I could do 8-10
hours, run the last 1-2 hours as strong as the beginning and still feel
good. It worked so well I applied this approach to most of my races,
even 50Ks, and while my times suffered by maybe 30 seconds a mile, I
felt a lot better during and after long runs/races. This allowed me to
go from 1-2 week recovery after long runs to 1-2 days which in turn
allowed me to train more. And in my book, that's a good thing!

Disclaimer: I'm not fast, never was and never will be, and don't *race*
against anyone other than myself. However, I do usually finish in the
top 1/3rd at NorCal ultras.

--
- The Trailrunner

Anti-Spam Alert: If you wish to reply, cut the *BS*

Trails of the Diablo Valley
*Running - Hiking - Nature*
http://www.geocities.com/yosemite/trails/6016/

"The Trailrunner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dan Stumpus said:

Even though I don't race 100's, I do feel strongly that an 8 hour run
that ends up as a shuffling / walking slog is not the best way to train,
to put it lightly. Once your legs are shot, and things start to hurt,
and you can't stride normally, and you can't even jog up hills, it's not
training anymore -- it's destruction. Nothing good happens after that
point. The key is to know when the training has stopped and the
destruction derby has begun.

But a main purpose of really long training runs, 8-10 hours, is to learn
how to take it easy early. If you redline from the start, of course you're
going to be shuffling/dragging at the end. But if you walk/pace yourself
from the start, you'll still be able to run comfortably at the end.

Well, you obviously know how it's done....I see people out there training
with that 1000 yard, deer in the headlights, lights-out stare, and it's
obvious that they don't.

You also make a good point that if you do a 50k 15 minutes slower, it's a
*lot* easier than going all out.

I'm of the school that a weekly "yellow line" 3 hour run (still feeling
strong at the end) is better training than the occasional long slow jog.
Lots of others swear by and profit from the "long hours on the trail"
school. I learned that I didn't need to do major runs in practice when I
ran a 50 miler on a lark back in the day, on 18 milers once a week, and
finished with the experienced ultra runners of my fitness level back then.

PS: Now I'm slow too! Finishing in the top third up north is pretty darn
good.

-- Dan

"Dot" <dot.h@#duh?att.net> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Doug Freese wrote:

Quoted message said:

Barkley's back on. Somebody in another group is doing it and just got
word a day or so ago. Apparently a lot of negotiation, and they've
asked people not to pre-scout the route.

There is a set of people that will be thrilled.

Quoted message said:

And, gosh, don't forget the Iditarod Trail Invitational (choice of 350
or 1100 miles) that starts in 1 wk 😉

Damn, why didn't you remind of this a few weeks ago, I might have
ramped up to do the 1100. Too expensive to do only the 350 so I'll wait
until next year. 😉

-DougF

"Dan Stumpus" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I've been doing Ultras since '81 (a 41 miler). Maybe my longevity in
the sport is a result of never doing a 100! I don't really think that
*forcing* the legs to go more than 2-3 hours is a good thing.
Cortisol is not a friendly hormone. The less time under it's
influence, the better. That's why my current limit seems to be 50m.
I'm so competitive, I know I'd push to the brink in a 100.

I understand znd thus a wise choice.,

Quoted message said:

Back to the topic of long runs...

Quoted message said:

Even though I don't race 100's, I do feel strongly that an 8 hour run
that ends up as a shuffling / walking slog is not the best way to
train, to put it lightly.
Once your legs are shot, and things start to hurt, and you
can't stride normally, and you can't even jog up hills, it's not
training anymore -- it's destruction. Nothing good happens after that
point. The key is to know when the training has stopped and the
destruction derby has begun

First off one gets to the 8 hour run through a slow build up and just
like any long run it's only the last hour or two that you slog. FWIW my
technique is set up my runs such that I'm hiking at that point in my
run. The purpose is to push your endurance every few weeks such that you
don't turn to mush in training and hopefully not race day or at least
minimize the unknown. Whether it is a 5k, marathon or multiday you can
train your muscles and endocrine system to handle these times and
distances.

Quoted message said:

A mild-paced, mountainous 50k can have a training effect for me -- I'm
stronger two weeks later. But I've never done a 50 miler that didn't
tear me down pretty well, into long-term fatigue.

Regardless of the distance you have to budget your pace and energy to
get to the end. I can race a 50 mile race and feel comfortable two days
latter. I would not dare race but my muscles are only a little
lethargic.

Quoted message said:

Let training be training (getting stronger week-by-week). And save
the destructive efforts for racing.

Dan they are NOT destructive if gradually build up over months or even
years. I always remembered how [censored] I felt after a marathon and swore
I would never go longer. If one goes at it intelligently your body will
adapt and do just fine.

-DougF

Zeno of Sidon
Born: about 150 BC in Sidon (now Saida in Lebanon)
Died: about 70 BC in Athens, Greece
Zeno of Sidon was born in the city of Sidon on the Mediterranean coast
of what today is Lebanon.

To understand the philosophy of Zeno we need to make some comments about
the philosopher Epicurus who founded the Epicurean School to which Zeno
later belonged. Epicurus, who lived from 341BC to 270 BC, founded his
own School of philosophy based on his teachings. These teachings were
designed to indicate a means of living ones life, and they aimed both to

Epicurus had no interest in science for its own sake and he was a severe
critic of mathematics.
On science he wrote:-
If we were not troubled by our suspicions of the phenomena of the sky
and about death, and also by our failure to grasp the limits of pain and
desires, we should have no need of natural science.

His criticisms of mathematics were very superficial of little importance
since he clearly had very little understanding of the subject. In 306 BC
he founded his School in Athens in the garden of his house. Reasonably
enough the School became known as The Garden.

us, namely the theory of knowledge and to mathematics.

Although Epicurus, the founder of the School to which Zeno belonged, had
no real mathematical abilities and criticised the subject from a
position of ignorance,

this is far from true of Zeno who had a
deep understanding of the subject. Zeno made deep criticisms of the
axioms that Euclid set out in The Elements. For example he claimed that
Euclid's first proposition assumes that two straight lines can intersect
in at most one point but
Euclid does not have this as an axiom, nor can it be deduced from the
other axioms.

Zeno also attacked Euclid's proof of the equality of right angles on the
grounds that it presupposes the existence of a right angle. Proclus also
says that an Epicurean (almost certainly Zeno but Proclus does not name
him) claimed that Euclid assumes that every curve is infinitely
divisible, but again this cannot be deduced from the axioms.

This is a little far fetched particularly since Zeno's aim was certainly
not this. Rather his aim was to give substantial arguments against
mathematics supporting the anti-mathematical beliefs of Epicurus.

Heath writes in [2] regarding comments by Proclus concerning Zeno:-
Zeno argued generally that, even if we admit the fundamental principles
of geometry, the deductions from them cannot be proved without the
admission of something else as well which has not been included in the
said principles, and he intended by means of these criticisms to destroy
the whole of geometry.

The papyri contain remarkable information written by Philodemus
describing the arguments of his teacher Zeno with the Stoics.
Although Zeno's Epicurean philosophy of the desire for pleasure
seems the direct opposite of the Stoic's ethic of duty, the consequences
on how they lived their lives were quite similar. The arguments
described by Philodemus concerned the foundations of knowledge.

Von Fritz writes in [1]:-
In this dispute Zeno defended the old Epicurean doctrine that all human
knowledge is derived exclusively from experience. What make it
interesting, however, is that he bases his defence on a theory ...
that is essentially an anticipation of John Stuart Mill's theory of
induction. ...

Zeno insisted that all knowledge is fundamentally derived by inference
to all cases from a great many
Of course there are many examples in mathematics where Zeno's
observations of many cases would actually suggest a false result.

"Doug Freese" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Once your legs are shot, and things start to hurt, and you
can't stride normally, and you can't even jog up hills, it's not
training anymore -- it's destruction. Nothing good happens after that
point. The key is to know when the training has stopped and the
destruction derby has begun

First off one gets to the 8 hour run through a slow build up and just like
any long run it's only the last hour or two that you slog. FWIW my
technique is set up my runs such that I'm hiking at that point in my run.
The purpose is to push your endurance every few weeks such that you don't
turn to mush in training and hopefully not race day or at least minimize
the unknown. Whether it is a 5k, marathon or multiday you can train your
muscles and endocrine system to handle these times and distances.

I think we're in general agreement. You and Jim structure your "hours on
the trail" workouts so that you're not stressing too much. Lots of people
don't, and think that it's helping them. My point is that once you get to
the mush point, it ain't training, it's too much of a tear-down.

A key benefit of long training runs, it seems to me, as Jim notes, is in
pacing.

As far as the notion of training the endocrine system:

1. I haven't read anything that says that long hours while running on
cortisol fumes helps training.

2. My biased position is that while you're pumping stress hormones, its
kind of like taking the body's own meth to keep you going while it dulls the
pain of things being torn down.

I save that kind of effort for races when I'm really motivated to make a
time or AG award. I imagine you're in the same boat. If there's no
overiding goal, I usually back down to a tolerable training pace, up until
the last couple of miles, when I let the ol' competitive juices take over.

-- Dan

Tim Downie said:

I
love Steve's 3 and a half hour max plan but there's no way that I'd have the
confidence to line up at the start with that as my longest run under my
belt. ;-)

I should mention that I didn't jump straight into the 10hrs+ range. I
started by doing a 6 hour "time trial", for ~70k distance.

Having done 6 hours without serious damage, I figured 12 hours should be
doable. Next long race was a 240k race in 3 stages 56, 120, 64. The 120k
stage is the longest single run I've done to date (both in distance and
time).

And I exaggerated slightly, I did do a 3h50 marathon as a training run.

Basically, I can't see any point in going over marathon distance, run
at target ultra pace. See Dan's posts about damage control to see why I
feel that way :-)