I think conventional wisdom says really only when you are hitting 75-80 miles per week or so and it just becomes impractical to schedule everything in singles. In terms of physical benefit, for most people the single long run will be more beneficial (i.e. a single 12 miler will get you more benefit than 6+6).
In your opinion.....
when is it beneficial to split up your daily miles? Like do two runs in one day versus one long run?<br><br>
ON the converse, when is it just cheating, or not beneficial?
ON the converse, when is it just cheating, or not beneficial?
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
I'd expect a fairly wide range of responses to your question. My own personal rule is that I will do singles through 60 mpw and add in a double or two from 60-80 mpw - and more if I exceed 80 mpw.<br><br>
Irrespective of your weekly mileage, I'd never say that doing a double is cheating. It's always better to get all of your mileage in than not, you'll just be getting slightly less aerobic benefit by doing a double rather than running the mileage all at once.
Irrespective of your weekly mileage, I'd never say that doing a double is cheating. It's always better to get all of your mileage in than not, you'll just be getting slightly less aerobic benefit by doing a double rather than running the mileage all at once.
Today was a scheduled 8 mile Tempo run. We set out and felt awesome. Before we know it, we look down and are going sub- 8:00's.....faster than our Tempo pace. It just felt right so we busted out 4 miles at this pace and were back to our water stop. Didn't feel like we could do four more right then, so we went home and walked the dogs with the understanding that the other four will be done tonight slowly<br><br>
Now, our Tempo runs are averaging about 3-5 miles at tempo pace with the rest as warm-up or cool down. But, this morning it JUST FELT GOOD to go fast. Maybe not the best thing, but after 2 less-than-stellar runs it made me feel good about running again....that mental aspect I feel made the choice worth it.<br>
Thanks for the input, ya'll know more about this crazy running stuff than me for sure!!
Now, our Tempo runs are averaging about 3-5 miles at tempo pace with the rest as warm-up or cool down. But, this morning it JUST FELT GOOD to go fast. Maybe not the best thing, but after 2 less-than-stellar runs it made me feel good about running again....that mental aspect I feel made the choice worth it.<br>
Thanks for the input, ya'll know more about this crazy running stuff than me for sure!!
I think there are several important factors to consider.<br><br>
First, time spent running. If you are running more than 10 hrs per week you are probably a candidate to do doubles. I have found that I can only go higher than that time consistently when I am doing doubles. For me, I approach that level somewhere around 60 miles per week. Faster runners would be able to do more miles before splitting.<br><br>
Second, the race distance you are training for. Longer distances require longer training runs, and I would be loathe to split runs if I was training for a HM or a marathon, but I think people training for 3000 to 5000 meters might benefit from doubles because they require a bit more intensity.<br><br>
Third, lifestyle. Some people just don't have the time to do long singles, and there is no doubt in my mind that short doubles are better than short singles anytime.<br><br>
Finally, I would never double up on a long run. In my opinion they have a very specific purpose that is defeated if you split them. They should ideally be in the 2 hr to 2.5 hr range, and doing two by 1 hr runs just won't give you the stimulation your legs need to adapt.
First, time spent running. If you are running more than 10 hrs per week you are probably a candidate to do doubles. I have found that I can only go higher than that time consistently when I am doing doubles. For me, I approach that level somewhere around 60 miles per week. Faster runners would be able to do more miles before splitting.<br><br>
Second, the race distance you are training for. Longer distances require longer training runs, and I would be loathe to split runs if I was training for a HM or a marathon, but I think people training for 3000 to 5000 meters might benefit from doubles because they require a bit more intensity.<br><br>
Third, lifestyle. Some people just don't have the time to do long singles, and there is no doubt in my mind that short doubles are better than short singles anytime.<br><br>
Finally, I would never double up on a long run. In my opinion they have a very specific purpose that is defeated if you split them. They should ideally be in the 2 hr to 2.5 hr range, and doing two by 1 hr runs just won't give you the stimulation your legs need to adapt.
I too have come to this point in my training and I have come to doubles this week basically because of time restraints. If I had a full week and wasn't going to be on vacation I'd probably only throw a double day in there.<br><br>
FWIW I have recently started regularly putting in higher mileage weeks and was aiming for 50 this week but then I realized I only have 5 days, so I think I'll be shooting for more like 40.<br><br>
What would you say a good split should be between your long runs and regular runs. I'm going into my senior season of XC which is 5k, and I've had my longest run of 13 miles, but regularly run 10-11 as my long run. Is it bad to have some of my training runs at like 8 miles? This in time-wise is about 1:20 to my hour long training runs.<br><br>
Does that seem all right?
FWIW I have recently started regularly putting in higher mileage weeks and was aiming for 50 this week but then I realized I only have 5 days, so I think I'll be shooting for more like 40.<br><br>
What would you say a good split should be between your long runs and regular runs. I'm going into my senior season of XC which is 5k, and I've had my longest run of 13 miles, but regularly run 10-11 as my long run. Is it bad to have some of my training runs at like 8 miles? This in time-wise is about 1:20 to my hour long training runs.<br><br>
Does that seem all right?
Alex, My daughter was a HS senior last year and I set up a program for her with a 2 hr run and a 1.5 hr run each week. She didn't do them all because she had other things going on in her life, like piano, volley ball, boyfriend, etc, but she was trained well enough to run in the provincial HS track finals this spring. Ideally I think you should run up to 2 hrs for your long run. Mid week you should run 90 min. All of the rest should be shorter. Note that I said "ideally" because if you are not used to a 2 hr run you should take some time to build towards that level. 5k XC demands power as well as endurance, so you should probably think about some Lydiardesque hill sessions on one or two days per week.
I would try to avoid splitting a key workout. Definitely not a interval, tempo, or MP. I'd consider splitting a long, easy run only if time is a constraint. But supposedly to replace a 20 mile run, you need to do a 10 in am, 10 in pm, and 10 the following am. Heck, that's 2 extra showers!! So I wouldn't "plan" that but sometimes you're at 10-11 miles and life comes up ("come get your sick kid" phonecall) and well, it happens. I try to do doubles when I'm putting in about 10 hours a week. I sometimes purposely make the first run short, so I don't find myself saying "oh, don't really need it"<img alt="wink.gif" src="http://files.kickrunners.com/smilies/wink.gif">. I will also go to doubles if weight is an issue...I tend to drop pounds with doubles.
If you're tight for time, then splitting an 8 to 10 miler into two workouts once in a while won't hurt you. But as indicated above there is a pretty broad range of opinion--the rule of thumb (e.g., Pfitzinger) is that you don't really need to do doubles if you're under about 70 mpw--I'd modify that to 60 if you're a 6 day week runner.<br><br>
Nevertheless, there are physiological advantages to doing doubles that can offset the downside of not getting the full amount in. The physiologist Tudor Bompa suggests doubles for elite-level runners, and indeed most top level programs do suggest double workouts 5-6 days a week.<br><br>
For the more recreational runner, like most of us, who max out at 40-70 mpw, you're probably better off doing singles most of the time (I've re-thought that principal for high school age runners and masters runners, and see nothing wrong with those age groups putting in a few doubles a week to bump up the mileage, while not over stressing on singles). As indicated however, you don't want to sacrifice your long run (especially if you're a marathoner)--if you're scheduled for a 15 or 18 as your long run, then do it all at once.<br><br>
I've found that doing a shake-down run before or after a hard workout (say long intervals or hard tempo) is often better/easier than doing it all at once. Say you have a 4 mile tempo run, and you want to do 10 miles that day. Think about an easy 3-4 miler in the morning, and then you can get your workout in with a lot shorter warmup and cool down than if you did it all at once. This is especially beneficial on a hot day (or cold or wet...), when you're already dealing with the elements. Of course the downside is time to get dressed, and double showers, etc.<br><br>
Another rule of thumb is to space at least about 6 hours between your workouts; otherwise you're not fully recovered and you won't gain the benefits of a double.
Nevertheless, there are physiological advantages to doing doubles that can offset the downside of not getting the full amount in. The physiologist Tudor Bompa suggests doubles for elite-level runners, and indeed most top level programs do suggest double workouts 5-6 days a week.<br><br>
For the more recreational runner, like most of us, who max out at 40-70 mpw, you're probably better off doing singles most of the time (I've re-thought that principal for high school age runners and masters runners, and see nothing wrong with those age groups putting in a few doubles a week to bump up the mileage, while not over stressing on singles). As indicated however, you don't want to sacrifice your long run (especially if you're a marathoner)--if you're scheduled for a 15 or 18 as your long run, then do it all at once.<br><br>
I've found that doing a shake-down run before or after a hard workout (say long intervals or hard tempo) is often better/easier than doing it all at once. Say you have a 4 mile tempo run, and you want to do 10 miles that day. Think about an easy 3-4 miler in the morning, and then you can get your workout in with a lot shorter warmup and cool down than if you did it all at once. This is especially beneficial on a hot day (or cold or wet...), when you're already dealing with the elements. Of course the downside is time to get dressed, and double showers, etc.<br><br>
Another rule of thumb is to space at least about 6 hours between your workouts; otherwise you're not fully recovered and you won't gain the benefits of a double.
Thanks for all the great feedback on this! <img alt="smile.gif" src="http://files.kickrunners.com/smilies/smile.gif"> I love this place!
<a href="http://www.pfitzinger.com/labreports/twoadays.shtml" target="_blank">http://www.pfitzinger.com/labreports/twoadays.shtml</a>
If you're splitting workouts in order to see the hot runner chicks on the trail in the morning and then compare them to the hot runner chicks on the trail in the evening, that's totally fine.
I do doubles at easy intensity so as to avoid overtraining. But my volume is always over 10 hours per week. I find that splitting a workout up into 60min AM and 90 minutes PM can allow it to still be qualified as "easy." I'm not yet to the point that <span style="text-decoration:underline;">any</span> 2.5 hour or longer workout feels really easy.<br><br>
There's also the "run for a couple of hours, then walk/eat for a couple of hours, then run a couple more" way of doing a long run. That's more of a way of getting a lot of time on your feet without overdoing. It's not really a double because you never stop moving.<br><br>
Relentless forward progress, no matter how slow.
There's also the "run for a couple of hours, then walk/eat for a couple of hours, then run a couple more" way of doing a long run. That's more of a way of getting a lot of time on your feet without overdoing. It's not really a double because you never stop moving.<br><br>
Relentless forward progress, no matter how slow.
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Runners Forum - Kick Runners
A forum community dedicated to all runners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about maraton, training, trails, racing, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Recommended Communities
