>We see what you are saying about commitment and training levels, etc. >and >improvements in those things would help the US situation. But >150, 180 or >200 mpw isn't really what is gonna get this done .... > >/Brian McEwen
100 is better than 70, 130 is better than 100, 160 is better than 130...... The Japanese seem to do quite well with ultra high mileage do they not? If you are running sub 2:13 on 100-120 miles a week then good for you, but if you are not then might as well jump up the mileage. If 150, 180, or 200 mpw isn't going to get it done then what will? 50? 70? 80? Of course mileage is only one issue here. 1. Run a lot of mileage (read: could be "only" 100, could be 150 could be whatever...it's a personally thing ,but you won't know what will work until you try it...who knows....maybe Malmo would have been 2:09 with weekly doses of $1.50...then again maybe he would have been ran into the ground...again...who knows) 2. More longish runs at marathon pace. Monkey see, Monkey do. Japanese seem to have success with it, as do the Kenyans. Have we forgotten how to play follow the leader? 10-15 miles at marathon pace. I've heard that a staple of some of the Ehiopian marathoners (or maybe used to be) is a 20 mile run with the last 10 miles at marathon pace. Who said 10 miles at marathon pace is not a workout? It's better than 10 miles at a jogging pace. 3. Fast young runners running the marathon. The post about track credentials shows that the young fast runners don't move up to the marathon. We have a couple potential sub 2:10 marathoners out there, but they are running 10ks. The marathon in this country almost seems like a second string race now. Recap: There needs to be more young fast runners racing the marathon. Running higher mileage (100-200mpw), and running more longish tempo runs that are specific to the race distance instead of the usual 10k man workouts. Alan _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
