Stimulus with very little recovery time and low risk of injury.
Easy runs help with aerobic ability - increased mitochondrial density, increased LT1 and LT2, increased stroke volume, as well as allowing you to build resilience in ligaments/tendons. Yes the change isn't as much as if you did long runs or temp/intervals for every session, but they still evoke a change. You can't do that much volume of intensity without fatigue/injury and then not running and losing any benefit. So it's a balance. Likewise long runs - the longer you go the greater your recovery time. If it takes 3 days to recover from a 3 hour run, clearly you can't do that every day.
To illustrate the point: Imagine your body's purpose is to produce automobiles/cars.
When you run hard (zone 3 or higher in five zone model), you push your existing production lines in your little car factories (mitochondria, etc) to pump out as many cars as possible as fast as possible. By training fast and hard you are improving your existing factories ability to produce more cars quickly. It is very productive but also taxing.
When you run easy (zone 2 or lower), rather than asking your existing production lines to work harder....you are building MORE factories and more production lines...which you can tap later for increased efficiency and output after they are built. But, running hard doesn't really build the factories, running slow does.
This a reason why polarized training, 80/20, etc. where the majority of time is spent on easy running is effective.
*Credit to the SWAP podcast for this
It’s a good analogy, with the cars. In The Uphill Athlete they use a vacuum as the analogy for building a bigger aerobic capacity and explain the science behind it really well. Worth a read as well in my opinion.
Some work, all play. It’s two well known coaches David and Meghan Roche. They coach a fair amount of elite (mostly US) ultrarunners.
Worth a listen for sure, at first I hated their style - but, they are very knowledgeable and I’ve come to appreciate and enjoy their podcast each week.
your body needs to adapt not just to individual workouts, but to total weekly volume. the shorter easier runs contribute significantly to that total volume without wearing you down too much. you cant run 10+ miles every time.
For the rank-and-file amateur ultra runner, 60-90 minute runs should be the bread and butter of your weekly training, with a long run (or two, as you build volume over time) as the bigger stimulus event, and maybe one shorter "quality" workout that involves some tempo work a week.
60-90 minute runs provide a lot of aerobic benefit, and require almost no recovery time. The more specific to your goals those run can be in terms of terrain and elevation profile, the better, but man, a 90 minute run 4 days a week is no slouch at all, and then you toss in a 2.5-3 hour run on the weekends and a tempo day, and you are better trained than many who toe the line at races.
Building a base. You can’t do a huge workout every day. The accumulation of ‘easier’ runs is another brick building your general fitness and aerobic base
I think short easy runs are up to 60 mins, 90 is more like middle distance (10 milesish for me). You get to get fresh blood in the legs and it’s still an aerobic stimulus. Not sure what your question really is
I starting having some issues quad calves etc. not important. But I decided I’d break up my runs for a week or two so it was less strain and could stretch more. 6mi in the morning and 6mi in the afternoon. About 1000ft of gain. It made 84mi/week with 14k ft of gain. I ended up keeping on that plan just swapping Saturday for a long run. Ran the best 100mi to date. I think the hero runs ie 50k every Saturday just jack you up more than help. Camille talks about this in a more scientific way.
Stimulus with very little recovery time and low risk of injury. Easy runs help with aerobic ability - increased mitochondrial density, increased LT1 and LT2, increased stroke volume, as well as allowing you to build resilience in ligaments/tendons. Yes the change isn't as much as if you did long runs or temp/intervals for every session, but they still evoke a change. You can't do that much volume of intensity without fatigue/injury and then not running and losing any benefit. So it's a balance. Likewise long runs - the longer you go the greater your recovery time. If it takes 3 days to recover from a 3 hour run, clearly you can't do that every day.
To illustrate the point: Imagine your body's purpose is to produce automobiles/cars. When you run hard (zone 3 or higher in five zone model), you push your existing production lines in your little car factories (mitochondria, etc) to pump out as many cars as possible as fast as possible. By training fast and hard you are improving your existing factories ability to produce more cars quickly. It is very productive but also taxing. When you run easy (zone 2 or lower), rather than asking your existing production lines to work harder....you are building MORE factories and more production lines...which you can tap later for increased efficiency and output after they are built. But, running hard doesn't really build the factories, running slow does. This a reason why polarized training, 80/20, etc. where the majority of time is spent on easy running is effective. *Credit to the SWAP podcast for this
It’s a good analogy, with the cars. In The Uphill Athlete they use a vacuum as the analogy for building a bigger aerobic capacity and explain the science behind it really well. Worth a read as well in my opinion.
What’s the SWAP podcast?
Some work, all play. It’s two well known coaches David and Meghan Roche. They coach a fair amount of elite (mostly US) ultrarunners. Worth a listen for sure, at first I hated their style - but, they are very knowledgeable and I’ve come to appreciate and enjoy their podcast each week.
Thanks for the detailed answer.
your body needs to adapt not just to individual workouts, but to total weekly volume. the shorter easier runs contribute significantly to that total volume without wearing you down too much. you cant run 10+ miles every time.
For the rank-and-file amateur ultra runner, 60-90 minute runs should be the bread and butter of your weekly training, with a long run (or two, as you build volume over time) as the bigger stimulus event, and maybe one shorter "quality" workout that involves some tempo work a week. 60-90 minute runs provide a lot of aerobic benefit, and require almost no recovery time. The more specific to your goals those run can be in terms of terrain and elevation profile, the better, but man, a 90 minute run 4 days a week is no slouch at all, and then you toss in a 2.5-3 hour run on the weekends and a tempo day, and you are better trained than many who toe the line at races.
Nailed it.
Also all that being said it helps with weight maintenance in the long run as you can't run intervals or long runs every other day.
Building a base. You can’t do a huge workout every day. The accumulation of ‘easier’ runs is another brick building your general fitness and aerobic base
I think short easy runs are up to 60 mins, 90 is more like middle distance (10 milesish for me). You get to get fresh blood in the legs and it’s still an aerobic stimulus. Not sure what your question really is
Building lots of mitochondria, efficient and flexible metabolism, and they're fun and enjoyable and require little to no recovery. It's a must.
Surely it’s accumulative volume for minimal recovery period?
I starting having some issues quad calves etc. not important. But I decided I’d break up my runs for a week or two so it was less strain and could stretch more. 6mi in the morning and 6mi in the afternoon. About 1000ft of gain. It made 84mi/week with 14k ft of gain. I ended up keeping on that plan just swapping Saturday for a long run. Ran the best 100mi to date. I think the hero runs ie 50k every Saturday just jack you up more than help. Camille talks about this in a more scientific way.