Should You Run For Time or Distance?

[@violindalola]

In Jr high we focused on time on feet running for beginners. We ran all of 1st period . As we gained more time on our feet we started focusing on mileage distance for time. We ran before 1st period all the way through 1st period to have enough time to get to those distances we set for the week. The man knows what he is talking about. I did cross country and track all the way to college. 10 years. Now getting back into it after leaving college and been out of it for years.

[@leerunsultras]

@violindalola the perfect run background I wish they had similar here in the uk 🇬🇧

[@justanoldfashionedrunner605]

in all honesty, there is no controversy at all in your preferring running on time. It took me 40 years to finally understand, running on time is freeing your soul, opening up a new happy world and let you fly without any limits. No pressure, no bad feelings, no guilty conscience, no overtraining, no burning out, no more puking before a planned workout.........and now..... running the highest mileage of my life, being eager to go for a run every day, enjoying the time out in the woods, living life at its fullest......

[@leerunsultras]

I love this message mate. Well done keep getting out and being active 👏

[@expatadventureturkey9324]

Always appreciate your insight, thanks for all you do for our community 🤙🏽

[@leerunsultras]

@@expatadventureturkey9324 thank you mate appreciate it

[@MissRoxyFlower]

Thank you so much! Really appreciate your answers and it makes a lot of sense! When you google training plans for ultra running most of them focus on increasing distance each week - which is what I have based mine off - but I like what you said about time on feet and the reduced pressure to achieve a certain distance. It also massively makes sense when adding interval and hill sessions in. I am going to give it a go! Thank you again, and ignore the haters - if they can't understand the "one of many options" concept then more fool them - it's about experimenting, research and finding the best that suits the individual. Also... enjoy your holiday! 😎🏖

[@leerunsultras]

Thanks,hope the training goes well. Let me know how it progresses

[@rennleitung_7]

Time and distance both have their purpose. I assume, if you're a track runner like Ingebritsen, having a high amount of certain distances in your training will give you good results. This might be a reason why people that come from relatively short distances to ultra running focus on distance when time on feet might be the better measure.

[@leerunsultras]

Exactly mate, a way better metric to follow for the most part

[@kahlis]

Hopefully you did not feel that I am hating you. That is not the case. Sport sciences are a hobby of mine and I like asking questions. That is how learning is done. Sadly I did not get the conversation going on that I wanted.

[@leerunsultras]

@kahlis wasn't your comment mate. You made a valid point. It was another comment stating didn't know what I was talking about. Clearly I have over 20 years of experience. All question you asked were valid. It was another person commenting calling me an idiot

[@kahlis]

@@leerunsultras did I get you right on your comments. How I see what you were trying to say that people could take it as a strating point. The 220- age and if they are using the 5 zone system then they should aim for that 60-70% when doing zone 2. Amd if you want to spend the money and be more acurate you should take the lab to get the exact results. I agree with you that the 5 zone model does not have up to 80% of max hr. Maybe some really elites in some cases but in general no. Could they get confused with the 3 zone and 5 zone model?

[@leerunsultras]

@kahlis I think so, matt Fitzgerald uses lactate threshold in order to assess hr zones and recommends an easy intensity is. 75-80%. But my point still stands the traditional somewhat outdated method of 220- age is used in comparison with the 5 zone method. Personally my self I take my max heart rate from a recent hard 5k of 188bpm I then take away my resting heart rate which currently sits at 50. I then times it 0.7 and add back on my resting heart rate which gives me 146. Which funnily enough is my MAF heart rate. 180 - 39 +5. So it's quite good how it collaborates.

[@kahlis]

@@leerunsultras it's been a while since I've read Fizgeralds 80-20 book. Seems odd that he is recomending such a high values. I'll have to re read it. MAF gets it right sometimes. I quess the point on MAF and the point you are also taking is that people mostly should slow down and run easier. I use the Karvonen model and also test the max HR. Once a year I do a lab test just to check things out. I've noticed that when you are older. Like me, 45. And have trained for years. The basic calculation models mostly get it wrong and you just have to start testing things out.

[@leerunsultras]

​@kahlis yep that's what my whole message is mate. If you had me on insta you will see that all I preach is that people don't run thier easy runs easy enough. Even when they think they are running easy. Chances are they are probably not. Because when people say you should go off RPE that is totally skewed by their inability to assess how hard they are running or just by thier egos 😂😂😂😂

[@BenNotley]

I'm a professional runner 🤣🤪

[@leerunsultras]

@BenNotley you pretty much are bro 🤣

[@BenNotley]

@@leerunsultras cheers mate! 🤣👌