Training

The Science of Performance

Mileage-Based Training

A Logical Analysis

Part 2

In part one of this analysis we learned that the common practice of recommending training based on mileage results in slower runners training at a higher training load than faster runners. Part 2 continues our analysis of mileage-based training.

What Should Be Versus What Is

Does conventional training wisdom clearly and unequivocally recommend lower mileage for slower runners so that the training load for the slower runners is not higher than that for faster runners? Are weekly mileage recommendations based on an individual’s performance in order that all will be training at a similar load?

I believe that the answer is no. Mileage-based programs do not recommended weekly mileage based on a calculation of training load, nor are runners of varying performance levels given guidelines as to what weekly mileage will result in an optimal training load. Even Mr. Pfitzinger, who spends 4 pages discussing training load in his Advanced Marathoning book, makes no allowances or recommendations in his marathon training program for runners of varying performance. Though he provides marathon training programs of varying weekly mileages,. he makes no recommendations as to which to select based on a runner's performance. Runners are told to select which program to follow based on how many miles they are currently running, not their current performance.

I know of only 1 source that recommends varying weekly mileage based on individual performance. That source is Bob Glover in his book Competitive Runners Handbook. Glover classifies runners into 8 performance categories and then provides a weekly mileage guide for each category. He writes, “In this book, runners are divided into categories by their race times. By identifying your level, you can structure your own training program. The categories are used to establish guidelines for weekly mileage, long runs, and speed workouts.” For example, if a runner finishes in the 50% of races he is classified as a "basic competitor". Those who finish in the top 25% are classed as "local champion". Table 5 shows the 8 categories and their performance as a percent of finishers in a race.

Table 5: Categories of competitors, from Competitive Runners Handbook

Competitive Level	Race Performance as % of Finishing Times
Novice Competitor	below 50%
Intermediate Competitor	below 50%
Basic Competitor	50%
Competitor	60%
Advanced Competitor	65%
Local Champion	75%
Semi-Elite	80%
Elite	90%

Glover divides runners into the 8 categories and bases his recommended weekly mileage on the race distance and individual performance. His recommended weekly mileages for the sub-elite competitors is shown in table 6. There is some overlap in the range of recommended weekly mileage for the different classifications, but it is obvious that his intent is to NOT have all runners, regardless of individual performance, striving to build to a similar weekly mileage. I wasn’t able to find any discussion in his book about training load, but his variable weekly mileage recommendations do result in some balancing of training load across the 8 categories of runners.

Table 6: Weekly Mileage Guide, from Competitive Runners Handbook

Race Distance	Novice / Int. Competitor	Basic Competitor	Competitor / Adv. Competitor	Local Champion
5k	10-20 mpw	15-25 mpw	30-40 mpw	30-60 mpw
10k	15-25 mpw	20-30 mpw	30-50 mpw	40-70 mpw
1/2 Marathon	20-30 mpw	25-35 mpw	40-50 mpw	50-70 mpw
Marathon	30-40 mpw	40-50 mpw	40-60 mpw	50-80 mpw

Glover categorizes runners based on performance, but that isn't to say that he is dictating that any person must forever remain in a particular category. Under Glover's program, as performance improves the runner increases weekly mileage in relation to those improvements. A novice competitor today moves into the basic competitor category and then on to the competitor category tomorrow as his/her performance improves. As you can see, he is not suggesting a person is forever stuck in a particular category.

The reality of Mr. Glover's program is that it does provide some equalization of training load. Whether you agree or disagree with his classifications, and whether you agree or disagree with his recommended mileages is not the point. The point is that unless a mileage-based program makes some allowance for and provides some guidance on training load, then it requires slower runners to train at a greater training load than faster runners.

The bottom line is that all mileage-based programs that don't make an allowance for performance ultimately end up having some number of runners training at too high a load and some at too low a load, until each individual hopefully at some point figures out their own optimal training load.

Which Comes First - Performance or Mileage?

Now comes the question, which comes first - performance or mileage? Does a runner increase mileage in expectation of improving performance or does he increase mileage with each increase in performance?

Let's say we have a 5k novice competitor running 20 mpw. Does this runner continue to train at 20 mpw and only increases his mileage each time his performance improves, or should he go ahead and increase his mileage to that of the basic competitor or the competitor level in anticipation of his performance improving to match that particular weekly mileage?

Consider the answer to the question in relation to training load. If the training load incurred by this runner at 20 mpw is pretty much optimal, then he will improve his performance most by staying at that training load, only increasing it when improvements in performance demand it.

Increasing the load now, via increased mileage, before his performance merits it may result in a higher training load that is actually less effective because it is higher than optimal for this runner at his current level of performance.

It doesn't really matter which way you vote - voting for increasing mileage first or voting for waiting until performance improves - because neither is completely correct.

Why are both answers wrong?

What Training Programs Should Talk About

Both answers are wrong because neither includes training load in the conversation. Training load is a very real and important piece of the training puzzle. It should play the prominent role in every training program. All training discussions, recommendations, etc. should include, if not be centered on, training load. Any focus on weekly mileage should be discontinued, as should any weekly mileage goals, replaced with a emphasis on training load.

Each runner should strive to determine their individual optimal training load, regardless of how many miles per week that optimal training load is. How do you determine your individual optimum training load? Dr. Noakes points the way:

“How, then, do you determine the individual training threshold at which your training volume produces maximum benefits? I would suggest that your first priority is patience – you have many years to answer this question, so a measured approach is essential. Take the long-term view that running is something worth doing for at least 5 to 15 years and that, during that time, your goal should be a progressive but gradual improvement. This is to be achieved first by finding the training volume that produces the best results and then by gradually increasing the intensity of some (perhaps 15% to 30%) of that training to optimize training.

Thus, your weekly training volume during the more intensive training period of the year can be gradually increased until the point of optimum training is identified. This training threshold can really only be identified if you train both less and, finally, more than this optimal amount. Accordingly, your training volume needs to be increased gradually and progressively until the training volume at your individual threshold is identified. This corresponds to the training volume that produces a deteriorating, not an improved, racing performance. The identification of this training threshold is a crucial exercise in ultimately helping you determine how you achieve success. Runners such as Bruce Fordyce and triathlete Mark Allen who consistently achieve levels of excellence, largely owe their success to their ability to identify their individual training thresholds that they never again exceeded in their training.”

Pete Pfitzinger echoes Dr. Noakes comments,

“Try recording your training this way for several months and see if you can detect your individual strain threshold. If you can find the combination of training load and monotony that puts you over the edge, then you can keep your training strain below that threshold for optimal training and optimal marathon performance.”

The right thing to discuss is training load and identifying your own individual optimal training load should be at the top of your list of things to do. Training load is what all training programs should talk about, not weekly mileage.

Summary

Most runners use mileage as their shorthand way of quantifying training. This is a mistake.

Training load, not mileage, is the best method for quantifying training.

Individual workout training load is calculated by multiplying duration x intensity. training load = duration x intensity.

Weekly training load is calculated by summing the total individual training loads; Monday training load + Tuesday training load + Wednesday training load, etc = weekly total training load.

When two runners follow the exact same "mileage-based" training program, the slower of the two runners is training at a higher training load than the faster of the two runners.

Every “mileage-based” training program that doesn't account for individual performance ultimately has some runners training at too high a load and some training at too low a training load; i.e. training is not optimal.

To correct for the mistake of improper training load, all “mileage-based” training programs should convert to "training load-based" programs.

Runners should record and track their weekly training load.

Runners should record and track their performance.

Runners should gradually increase weekly training load over time and compare it to changes in their performance. This will allow the runner to identify their individual training threshold and their optimal training load.

Top

Next

Home

Training