Training statistics

Yearly statistics

From mid-1986 to late 1988: unrecorded running (no diary kept then), twice a week, with a long interruption from mid-1987 to early 1988 because of a toe inflammation which eventually was treated surgically.

Analytical remarks (2005)

Comparing these statistics (and the more detailed data in my running diary) to my race results I find my best shape tends to occur when I'm training at a volume corresponding to between 400 and 600 km/year (note this is a tiny fraction of what other runners do and books recommend), and there have been many speed-oriented training sessions in the past few months. In periods with greater distance in training I am clearly slower.

This is in sharp contradiction to what most experts and books say; to wit, that the more distance you cover in training, the better you do in races. Training schedules in books typically recommend a great multiple of what I do in training; I get injured in days when I follow such schedules. I think those schedules are only correct for runners with a high percentage of "slow twitch" fibers in their leg muscles, and that runners with a significant proportion of "fast twitch" can simply not do that kind of training, because the few "slow twitch" fibers they have get overstrained by the long runs. The schedules do not respect the individual differences in aptitude - strength type vs endurance type, sprinter vs long distance runner - , probably because those books are typically written by long distance runners from their own experience.

I think I am by aptitude not so much a long distance runner but something between a sprinter and a middle distance runner. Running long distances tends to cause injuries and make me slower. I have tried to solve this over the years by experimenting with the pace; in the late 1980s, I ran the long, slow endurance runs at a pace between 4.15 and 5.00 (minutes and seconds per kilometer). In the early 1990s, I lowered it to 5.30 to 6.00. In the late 1990s I lowered it even more, to 6.45 to 7.30 (about the slowest possible pace; this includes walking breaks). Early 2005 I raised the pace again to 6.00 to 6.30 for very long runs. I am not certain what is best, and do consider now and then to leave long runs out altogether.

In the speed-oriented training I have experimented endlessly with interval training (repeated short runs faster than the pace of your long runs), which I like very much. I have tried all possible distances, from 5 meter to 3 kilometer, all possible intensities (aerobic, anaerobic, pure sprinting), all possible breaks (complete rest, walking, slow running, short or long) and all possible numbers of repeats (1 to about 50).

The most effective to my experience are 1500 meters with several minutes almost complete rest in between (just walking around a bit on the same spot until you run back). The pace to choose may vary from just a bit faster than in the long runs (to get used to running a bit faster) via somewhat below the anaerobic threshold (to improve the aerobic energy systems of your body) to just over the anaerobic threshold (to shift the threshold and learn to tolerate lactic acid). The pace or effort should not be "flat out", and the heart rate should not reach the heights it does at the end of a race. The number of consecutive 1500 meters I have run this way has varied between 1 and 4; times have varied between 7.30 and 5.30, depending on the goal.

But the 1500s are very strenuous, so in practice 1000 meter runs are a good, easier alternative. I have run up to 5 or 6 times 1000 meter in training. The pace depends on the goal as mentioned in the previous paragraph, and also on weather conditions, road surface, shape, and what clothes I wear. It has varied between 5.00 and 3.30, and I have run 3 or 4 single 1000s faster than 3.30, the fastest in 3.15 in 1989.

I have often tried to devise a method of training using only the interval principle, and avoiding long runs. Because in my perception, long runs cause injuries, make you slower and reduce the amount of quality training (speed) you can do, because you can do only so much training in total. Also, long runs have as good as no effect on your aerobic system, once you have reached a basic level in that (because the pace in long runs has to be very much lower than any pace that would improve the aerobic system).

The problem is how to find a replacement for the one good effect of long runs; that they make the kinetic apparatus (bones, joints with all the tissue around them, tendons, muscles and motoric nerves) stronger, so that you can withstand the stress of a high pace. You need that effect, and how do you get it without running long?

Cycling and plain walking will not do (I think; I'm not entirely certain about walking yet), as they do not have the impact of running and therefore do not build up the required strength in the kinetic apparatus. The only effective alternative for long runs I found so far is a walk-run alternation, where between 15 and 50 % of the duration is walked. The exact length of the walk and run intervals is not crucial. But this alternation is psychologically hard to carry out, for the temptation to keep running without interruption is tremendous, as that is far easier than walking now and then. Before you know you forget to walk and run the whole distance, and overstrain the kinetic apparatus. Not in one run of course, but over a few weeks. If carried out consistently though, a walk-run alternation seems to have the desired strengthening effect while avoiding injury; it even "cures" existing injuries.

I have been experimenting with a walk-run alternation to replace the long runs since the Summer of 1998, but am still uncertain whether it is the right way to go, or if simply leaving out long runs altogether is better. Replacing them by pure walking is another alternative I may try one day. The problem with walk-run alternation is that over the course of months, as everything goes well, you forget the walking breaks. At first nothing happens, but after a few weeks or months the injuries return. I mean here the well-known chronic RSI-type running injuries in the lower legs; in my case mainly around the left heel, in the outside of the left lower leg and along the left shin bone. When ignored, that eventually leads to achilles tendonitis (and other, less serious problems). It's always the left side because I have a collapsed left forefoot. That is no problem in daily life, but in running it becomes the limiting factor.

One might wonder why I bother to run long distances at all; well, all available road races only offer long distances. Nice short distances like 800 meter are only run on the track, and only open to members of track athletic clubs. I am not someone who joins clubs. But I still like to take part in races now and then because it is nice to do something you are good at. In races around 5 km I was locally in the best 10% of the participants. Over longer distances I haven't found out yet how good I can be, but I keep trying.