Do you run for time or distance?

quilteryoyo

I've been running for about a year now. My max distance at a slow pace has been 6.4 miles. I try to run at least 30 minutes 3 - 4 days a week. I am wanting to increase my mileage and decrease my speeds and would love to do a half marathon sometime this year. I have searched for training programs, just because I do better if I can have a schedule to try to meet. There are so many out there....some say to run for a set amount of time, no matter the distance and others say to go a certain distance, no matter the time. Which do you do?

CarsonRuns

My training program is based on distance, but that's only because it's easier to measure. The underlying framework of the plan is based on time. 6 days a week with 3 runs of 60 minutes, two of 75 minutes and one of 90 to 120 minutes. Because I have a pretty good idea what my pace is going to be, it's translated into miles because that's easier to manage when you are out there running (for me, anyway).

Either one will work fine. It's just a matter of preference. It may be a little bit easier during the build up phase to go by minutes. That way you can add 5 minutes here, 10 minutes there as you are slowing increasing mileage.

drgndancer

There's lots of opinions out there on this question, but here's mine. You have a sufficient base, and knowledge of yourself to mix it up. For long and middle distance runs, go for a specific distance; becasue your goal is distance based (13.1), and you want to have good confidence in your ability to hit distance marks. I.E. you want to know 4 weeks out from your race than you can go 10 miles, and 2 weeks out you can go 12 miles.

Since you're also interested in improving your speed (you'll get some speed improvement just from increasing you distance, by the way) you'll also want to do some speed work once a week or so. A lot (not all) of speed workouts are time based. "Run at 90% of max pace for 5 minutes" or whatever.

quilteryoyo

Thanks for your inputs. I like to keep track of my distances, but I think time may be easier for me to do, especially running around my neighborhood. I usually do an out and back, so I can go out for half the time I intend to run and then turn around and end up back home. Then, I'll estimate the distances. Yeah, I think that is what I'm going to do.

And, I'm still considering buying a garmin, so that would give me my distance.

CarsonRuns

You can map your distance on dozens of websites.

RunningAhead.com
gmap-pedomoter.com
mapmyrun.com

There are many more.

nexangelus

I just run the distance and if I improve my time, it is a bonus...this year I have improved my running times drastically just by changing the way I run...some days I run slightly faster, some slower, depending on how much else I have been doing that day or what I am mixing the running with. At the moment I am strength training and running alternately (also swimming and cycling added into the mix and rowing for cross training purposes)

I plan my route for distance and then just run it. I am not trying to beat any personal bests, as I am not an avid runner, but do so when I can for the challenge (training for a triathlon this summer at the moment).

BerryH

I love time for ease, but I've fallen foul of race specific training programmes where all runs are based on time - I was so slow I didn't cover nearly enough distance! No reason you can't mix it up during the week, when you should be doing your quality/speedwork sessions anyhow, but in the build-up to a half marathon, I'd make sure your long runs cover the specified distance from your chosen training plan.

Hal Higdon has a great set of half-marathon training programmes based around distance.

http://www.halhigdon.com/training/51130/Half-Marathon-Training-Guide

scottb81

The body adapts to specified training intensities applied to it for specified durations. During that time, a more advanced runner may cover more distance than a slower runner, but if they are both running at the same intensity (measured by HR) then they will receive the same training effect.

If two people of differing fitness levels try to either train at the same speed or the same distance they are in effect each doing two widely different workouts with different training effects on the body.

For example, two people of similar age may be doing a 7 mile run together. One is running at an intensity, measured by HR, of 128. The other is running at 155. Each is experiencing an entirely different workout. One is doing a very easy run that is excellent for aerobic development. The other is essentially running at half marathon race pace for over an hour. The first recovers and is ready for a ten mile run the next morning. The other takes several days to recover. Not the same workout at all.

If they both did the same workout at the same intensity, the first runner would still cover 7 miles but the second runner may only cover 4 miles. However, despite the different distances they would each receive the same training simulus in this case.

In my opinion, running by time and measured intensity (HR) is the superior way to train.

caveat: Some runners have a well developed sense of effort and can run at correct intensities by feel without using HR. I have found that I am not one of those and find a HR monitor an excellent tool to keep the effort level where it should be.