Distance runners: How to work past 90 minutes?

Options
1…34689…12

Replies

  • uconnwinsnc
    uconnwinsnc Posts: 1,054 Member
    Options
    This thread is getting derailed very, very badly over something I said. You guys attack, wait a little, then come in with a sneak attack a little later. Now, now, lets just relax here. My main point wasn't even about the OPs knees. It was about her lack of desire to run long distances. Ya'll crazy pouncing like this. I try and lighten the mood making a little joke about 30 being old. Ya'll pounce. I try to lighten the mood with a Bad Luck Brian, you come in and hit me harder than Tyson. I guess once the thread derails, all hell breaks lose. This thread is worse than some reddit subforums.

    9wvsCXm.jpg?1
  • Capt_Apollo
    Capt_Apollo Posts: 9,026 Member
    Options

    Seems like a dedication issue to me, because the OP seems mostly dedicated to high intensity interval training. The long runs only come on rest days, so mentally the OP is in "rest mode." I've done miles and miles and a 2+ hour run before. It is a mental drain on us people who don't train for it.

    her long runs come after a rest/cheat day.

    So she is coming off a rest day going into a 2 hour run while spending most of her time training for HIIT. That seems like a mental and commitment issue to me. Her mind just isn't prepared for it when she is dedicated to something else.

    yeah, i think you're wrong. HIIT has it's place in any long distance training plan.

    if the OP wants to increase her distance, then she has to do so little by little. increase by 10% every week.

    i'd also throw in a medium distance run once a week (half of her max), and get rid of one HIIT session.

    but the issue is most likely just needing to refuel on the run. we know very little about the OP and her training habits, yet you are jumping up and down and saying "she's not dedicated enough!!"

    It appears that her desire isn't to run long distances, though, from how she comes across in her original post. It seems that these runs are only once a week and the other days are weight training and HIIT. That comes across to me as someone who wants to lose weight, not run longer distances. Nothing wrong with not dedicating yourself mentally to long runs if it isn't your goal.

    Humans are physiologically designed to run long distances, but most of us modern, post-agriculture people have lost the desire and need to run long distances. That's all I am saying. Some people do it for fun, but those who aren't really enjoying it, will not be able to do it very long. Running 2+ hours is an absolute **** for people that don't love it.

    Oh, I see. It was an absolute **** for you, so it must be for everyone. Got it. And she didn't give any indication that she doesn't love running.

    Your just here to argue, clearly. You have contributed nothing to this thread.

    This thread is getting derailed very, very badly over something I said. You guys attack, wait a little, then come in with a sneak attack a little later. Now, now, lets just relax here. My main point wasn't even about the OPs knees. It was about her lack of desire to run long distances. Ya'll crazy pouncing like this. I try and lighten the mood making a little joke about 30 being old. Ya'll pounce. I try to lighten the mood with a Bad Luck Brian, you come in and hit me harder than Tyson. I guess once the thread derails, all hell breaks lose. This thread is worse than some reddit subforums.

    9wvsCXm.jpg?1

    so it's our fault?
  • uconnwinsnc
    uconnwinsnc Posts: 1,054 Member
    Options
    No, it is mine. I will make sure I don't get you guys so butthurt with my "she doesn't have the drive" post or the "bad for the knees" post again. :)
  • QuietBloom
    QuietBloom Posts: 5,413 Member
    Options
    No, it is mine. I will make sure I don't get you guys so butthurt with my "she doesn't have the drive" post or the "bad for the knees" post again. :)

    The only butthurt I see in this thread is yours. Probably caused by the exertion of back pedaling. Don't forget to log it!

    3313n1t.jpg
  • kelsully
    kelsully Posts: 1,008 Member
    Options
    That is a long time to be running. Bad for your knees, bad for your muscles, maybe slightly good for your heart. It is up to you if you want to run that long, I suppose.

    It is probably in your head. Very few modern people are mentally capable of running that long since it isn't a life or death situation. You aren't chasing down food and you aren't running from a predator (there are no other mammals in the world that can run as long as humans without needing a break.) Since the goal is only to finish the run, you have less of a primal drive pushing you. Only the people who make running their life can go into the 2+ hour range I'd say. If you aren't 100% dedicated, then it just won't happen. No shame in that, though.
    sorry this post is just full of rubbish I won't spend time pointing out the specifics but ignore it.


    Just run slow once you get the distance you can the build on your speed.

    Educate me, I love learning. Please inform me on all of the average people running 90+ minutes without a break. The OP said running slowly doesn't work. The OP isn't talking about distance or speed, but time. Read the post before you come in here with your, "I know everything, but I won't share any of it" attitude.


    Where is the research that says running is bad for you over 90 minutes? You are wrong.

    There is a fueling issue at play here. At somewhere between 60-90 minutes your muscles tap into different forms of fuel within your body to continue working. If you do not replace the easy to access carbs while running your body will burn the glycogen as long as it can then a body will feel like it is hitting a wall when it starts to tap into to other energy stores....for 90 minutes I can nibble on some pretzels, eat a baby food pouch of bananas and blueberries or one could have a gu packet etc. Everyone needs to play around and find the right timing and food for them (gu makes me puke but baby food is fine) I once ran for 3.25 hours with a little bit of watered down gatorade and jolly ranchers.
  • Runner5AbelTownship
    Runner5AbelTownship Posts: 243 Member
    Options
    No, it is mine. I will make sure I don't get you guys so butthurt with my "she doesn't have the drive" post or the "bad for the knees" post again. :)

    the thing is, you are misinformed. You are wrong. You are disseminating junk science. We are contradicting you and presenting correct information. If thats attacking, you are the one who needing a butt cushion.
  • uconnwinsnc
    uconnwinsnc Posts: 1,054 Member
    Options
    This thread went to hell in a hand basket.
  • uconnwinsnc
    uconnwinsnc Posts: 1,054 Member
    Options
    No, it is mine. I will make sure I don't get you guys so butthurt with my "she doesn't have the drive" post or the "bad for the knees" post again. :)

    the thing is, you are misinformed. You are wrong. You are disseminating junk science. We are contradicting you and presenting correct information. If thats attacking, you are the one who needing a butt cushion.

    I don't mind being wrong. I said long distance running is bad for the knees. I over simplified an idea I had and didn't have time to recount what I said. That is all, Bob. You guys are gonna have to start waiting in line to plug me at the rate this is going.
  • Runner5AbelTownship
    Runner5AbelTownship Posts: 243 Member
    Options
    On second thought, the flawed reasoning means that I am A Super Hero because I can run long. SO I'm totally going with that.

    *flounces cape and looks down at average people*
  • Otterluv
    Otterluv Posts: 9,083 Member
    Options
    Shoot, I run longer then that and I'm 47, only been running six months and 245 pounds at 5' 6". You have t have a strategy regrading pace and fueling, but it's just freakin moving, FFS.

    Seriously. I'm 41 (almost) 5'3" and 210 lbs. I'm not exactly an elite athlete here. I went for a 3 hour trail run on Saturday. Not to say that it was all fun and that there weren't times that I wanted to flop down on the trail. And I'm really slow. But, I still did it.
  • uconnwinsnc
    uconnwinsnc Posts: 1,054 Member
    Options
    On second thought, the flawed reasoning means that I am A Super Hero because I can run long. SO I'm totally going with that.

    *flounces cape and looks down at average people*

    Gotta wear your underwear on the outside of your shorts next time you go running, or else I'm gonna completely take back everything I said!
  • Otterluv
    Otterluv Posts: 9,083 Member
    Options
    This thread went to hell in a hand basket.

    Hmmmmmm, let's think REALLY SUPER HARD and see if we can't figure out why?
  • uconnwinsnc
    uconnwinsnc Posts: 1,054 Member
    Options
    This thread went to hell in a hand basket.

    Hmmmmmm, let's think REALLY SUPER HARD and see if we can't figure out why?

    I figured it out pretty easily. Keep trying, you'll get it.
  • vagabondgoddess
    vagabondgoddess Posts: 38 Member
    Options
    @ uconnwinsnc Saying that humans are the only animals that can run for that long is completely inaccurate. There is no need for any animal to run for that long, including humans. It is just that humans DECIDE to go longer. Actually that's not true either. There are plenty of dogs for example that could do that then nap and do it all over again. I have a golden retriever and she could easily do that.
  • MyChocolateDiet
    MyChocolateDiet Posts: 22,281 Member
    Options
    This thread went to hell in a hand basket.

    May I at least commend the offending fellow on the proper quoting of the cliche. That's rare on these boards. Also on the pompadour. You put the "pomp" in pompadour.
  • 3dogsrunning
    3dogsrunning Posts: 27,167 Member
    Options
    @ uconnwinsnc Saying that humans are the only animals that can run for that long is completely inaccurate. There is no need for any animal to run for that long, including humans. It is just that humans DECIDE to go longer. Actually that's not true either. There are plenty of dogs for example that could do that then nap and do it all over again. I have a golden retriever and she could easily do that.

    There is actually a theory that at one point in history humans actually used to run long distances as a way of survival - catching food.

    A good article that sums up what a Doctor friend of mine (also a runner/triathlete) has talked about on the topic
    http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/why-runners-dont-get-knee-arthritis/?_r=0
  • uconnwinsnc
    uconnwinsnc Posts: 1,054 Member
    Options
    This thread went to hell in a hand basket.

    May I at least commend the offending fellow on the proper quoting of the cliche. That's rare on these boards. Also on the pompadour. You put the "pomp" in pompadour.

    I am a borderline genius who says stupid things on internet forums because I try to over simplify my ideas. It is hard being me. Sometimes I come across as being completely wrong, other times only somewhat wrong. I keep on keeping on.
  • QuietBloom
    QuietBloom Posts: 5,413 Member
    Options
    @ uconnwinsnc Saying that humans are the only animals that can run for that long is completely inaccurate. There is no need for any animal to run for that long, including humans. It is just that humans DECIDE to go longer. Actually that's not true either. There are plenty of dogs for example that could do that then nap and do it all over again. I have a golden retriever and she could easily do that.

    No - humans can outrun anything. It's how we used to catch our food. We need less sleep than canines (much less) and we have greater endurance than any other land mammal. While we may not beat many animals in the 100 yard dash, when it comes to the distance chase, we've got 'em all beat.
  • Runner5AbelTownship
    Runner5AbelTownship Posts: 243 Member
    Options
    @ uconnwinsnc Saying that humans are the only animals that can run for that long is completely inaccurate. There is no need for any animal to run for that long, including humans. It is just that humans DECIDE to go longer. Actually that's not true either. There are plenty of dogs for example that could do that then nap and do it all over again. I have a golden retriever and she could easily do that.

    There is actually a theory that at one point in history humans actually used to run long distances as a way of survival - catching food.

    A good article that sums up what a Doctor friend of mine (also a runner/triathlete) has talked about on the topic
    http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/why-runners-dont-get-knee-arthritis/?_r=0

    Thats still used in some remaining tribes, they exhaust the animal. So yes, it was and is still done. I was thinking more on an era where you know, things would run after you and kill you. Of course, that could also be now...
  • KeithAngilly
    KeithAngilly Posts: 575 Member
    Options
    @ uconnwinsnc Saying that humans are the only animals that can run for that long is completely inaccurate. There is no need for any animal to run for that long, including humans. It is just that humans DECIDE to go longer. Actually that's not true either. There are plenty of dogs for example that could do that then nap and do it all over again. I have a golden retriever and she could easily do that.

    No - humans can outrun anything. It's how we used to catch our food. We need less sleep than canines (much less) and we have greater endurance than any other land mammal. While we may not beat many animals in the 100 yard dash, when it comes to the distance chase, we've got 'em all beat.

    yeppers!

Categories