Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Random Running Questions

1172173175177178200

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,660 ✭✭✭wersal gummage


    I have any number of questions! I'll try and break them up so this isn't just a total brain fart sort of thing...


    1. I guess ground contact time and cadence are closely linked? The higher my cadence the shorter my contact time?


    2. Do taller people find it harder to run at a fast cadence? I can hit the 180s/190s etc when I'm running at what is a fast pace for me, but find it almost impossible to get above around 165 at slower paces. I'm around 6 foot 3, and fast cadence at slow speed just feels ridiculous and like I'm jogging on the spot!


    3. I understand that there's a genetic limitation to things like Vo2 max etc, but at what stage would a runner be approaching their natural limits?? Years of training and marathons etc? I am only running since March / April 2020 (lock down, 2km etc). I had a reasonable level of fitness before that but nothing above average (eg I wasn't obese or gasping for breath on a brisk walk) but I had not played any kind of sport or anything taxing in a very long time so think I was coming off a fairly low base. Naturally like all sports, I came on quickly in the initial months and this slowed as time went by. However I am no quicker now than I was in January of this year. I am generally following the Garmin training programmes on my watch, so running a good deal of easy pace, some tempo, hills etc etc... I think it's reasonably well balanced. I don't go out and try and run a fast 5k more than about once every 2 or 3 months so I am by no means obsessed with times, but when I do I am not improving anymore and wonder am I hitting my natural limits (eg so quickly as from never having run in April 2020 to hitting my limits in December 2020?? Surely not?!) or would some significant revision of training approach be worth considering? Strava says this year I'm averaging 5 runs a week for 45kms. Would I need to massively up this to see improvements? My goals are not marathon etc but would like to shave a bit of time off 5k and 10k distances.


    Thanks and sorry if that's a bit of a ramble



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I'll try and answer your questions as best I can. Although I am no running expert.

    To answer your first question, yes, the higher your cadence, the less your ground contact time a high cadence also helps prevent over striding and the resulting excessive loading forces that causes in general 180 steps per minute is recommended. Although this is disputable if you think your cadence is low, you should first try and raise it by 5 or 10% of course, it's natural for your cadence to go below 180 when you are. For example, warming up or just running fast.

    As a person who is only 175cm tall, I'm not sure I'm best placed to answer your question, so I googled it and came across this thread on a triathlete website and came across this quote from an author

    "My testing has shown that taller runners need the same high turnover as shorter runners. Slower turnover increases the need for vertical displacement (up and down movement), increases use of the sprint muscle fibers (which don't have good endurance), and reduces the energy return of elastic recoil.Learn more about this in my book The Triathlete's Guide to Run Training or my DVD Evolution Running: Run Faster with Fewer Injuries (www.EvolutionRunning.com). An exerpt from an article explains in more detail below.

    Ken" 

    My apologies, I can't yet post links to where I got the above post

    To answer your final question, you are right, some aspects of your VO2 Max are limited by your genetics, but it is still possible to increase yours through training properly. I'm by no means a great runner and only recently just getting back into it after a bit of a break. All I can say is it can take years to reach your peak. Although it gets harder the older you get, it's possible you need a different training plan to help you progress the Garmin ones are okay for beginners. Personally, though I prefer to do their heart rate base plans but unfortunately, they are only available through the Connect website.



  • Registered Users Posts: 491 ✭✭Butterbeans


    Interesting article on cadence, worth a read. Another poster, @adrian522 recommended this to me previously when I had similar questions.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,030 ✭✭✭Slideways


    I really wouldn’t be too concerned about your cadence, at that tall I think a cadence of 180 would mean you would be hooting along. So long as you’re not overstriding it’s probably fine.

    Its also good to monitor your vert oscillation so you’re not wasting energy bounding along. Concentrate on pulling the road under you with your foot instead of pushing it down


    on the VO2 max, I would say that you may need to tweak your training. Do you do intervals?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,660 ✭✭✭wersal gummage


    Thanks to all.


    Slideways, I try and do some speed work which is usually either 10x400m with 60 seconds walking recovery, 6x800m with 90 seconds jogged recovery, 5x1km with 90 seconds jogged recovery.


    Is that what you mean by intervals? For clarity, it would be either of those 3, not all at once! I'd also do a 2km warm up slow jog and cool down with that. My 400m, 800m and 1km, and 1 mile times have not improved in last 9 months.


    I have found that if I do more than about 1 session like this per week I get pain in my calfs, have been to physio who said it's "post tib" and gave me some strengthening work.


    The current garmin 10k programme I'm doing has none of this speed work so I do drop out one of the garmin sessions occasionally for my own speed work. It also has no long easy run... The only easy run per week is a 6km one.

    Next weeks garmin programme (over 7 days) is

    Day 1: 3.2km easy, 6.4km @ 4.30, 3.2km easy,


    Day 2: 6.4km easy


    Day 3: 1.6km easy,

    200 m fast as can, 600m hard, 1.6km @ 4.45, 1.6km recover, repeat x 3


    Day 4: Hills, 1.6km easy,

    400m uphill hard, 400 m down moderate, jog recover 60 seconds, repeat x8

    1.6km cool down



    I have also been for a full fitness assessment /vo2 max etc the lot (got this for free would not have paid for it as I don't need it!) and all of my numbers were good apart from ground contact time/reaction time to spring back up when dropping and I've been given a lot of single leg jump type work to do.


    I'm very comfortable at high cadence when I run a bit harder, so last night I did 15km at 4.25per km pace with cadence of 175 and that's comfortable /natural/ I don't even think about cadence. But it feels absolutely horrible cadence if I do an easy run slower than 5min per km or even sometimes 5.30 per km etc. My vertical oscillating was 8.7. This means I'm propelling myself too far upwards rather than forward?


    I've said this on here before and not sure to what extend its relevant or just an excuse, but I'm almost 100kg and 6 foot 3... I feel like my cardio system has a long way to go but isn't really improving (eg I can run at say a little over 3min per km pace for a short burst but can't sustain it, so I can only hit around 3.15 per km for 400m, and only hit around 3.35 per km for 1k, but again can't sustain that for the mile.... But also suspect if I lost 20kg I'd improve times (but I'm not willing to do this, I'm not carrying any excess weight at the moment really).



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Should have added this to my last post but forgot until now.

    As we all know anecdotal evidence is the best form of evidence 😄

    I've been making more of a conscious effort to increase my cadence from around 160 to between 170 to 180 steps per minute. Before when my cadence was low I found I was suffering from a painful Achilles in my left foot so far since increasing my cadence I have not had any pain in my Achilles I only have some mild muscle soreness post run and my speed has improved.

    Although the above article is right 180 might not be a magic number it can help prevent overstriding and the associated injury risks that presents that is why it is recommended as a target.

    Post edited by [Deleted User] on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 985 ✭✭✭Miklos


    Does anyone know if there are any Irish spring marathons on the cards?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,306 ✭✭✭ariana`


    I don't know of any that have advertised yet but going on the number of Autumn marathons which have gone ahead or are going ahead in the coming weeks then I'd say you are fairly guaranteed a few. Assuming that is you're not expecting a big city one like Dublin.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,484 ✭✭✭✭Murph_D


    What’s your 5k time? What’s your VO2Max? How old are you?

    Is there a danger of ‘paralysis by analysis’ here? Running is a simple enough game. Have you considered joining a club and/or training with others?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,698 ✭✭✭rovers_runner


    Limerick is the best bet.

    Conn is sold out based on previous years rolling over.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,660 ✭✭✭wersal gummage



    Over analysing, sure yeah it's possible. I haven't really done any analysing to be honest before now and just noting that my times are no longer improving and wonder if that sort of plateau is normal or I need a new approach to my training. That's all I'm really asking, the rest re cadence etc was just some other things I wondered about.


    5k time is 20. 05 from early this year, just running around the local streets etc by myself, crossing roads and so on. Reckon if pushed right now I'd only manage about 21 or just under. Back then I was doing 1km repeats at 3.50 handy enough, 90 seconds recovery, now I'm struggling to to do the same thing in 4 mins.


    Vo2 51 per machine /wearing the mask etc (garmin watch says 57!).


    Age is early 40s.


    Don't really have set times for running so a club or others would be difficult for me, I can run at 7am or 11pm or morning or afternoon if I get a chance.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,484 ✭✭✭✭Murph_D




  • Registered Users Posts: 735 ✭✭✭Treviso


    You probably need to ditch that Garmin plan. Is the plan you posted is correct, then you are running 3 "workouts" and just 1 easy run this week - that correct? Easy running should be 60-80% of your weekly total. Say you're running 5 days a week, 3-4 of those days should be just easy running - at a pace that is embarrassingly slow. There's a lot of improvements that can be made to your times without worrying about cadence, VO2 and other stuff like that. They come into play when you looking for marginal improvements. Consistent easy running is where you'll improve most



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,660 ✭✭✭wersal gummage



    About 5. 30per km, some days a bit slower, some days around 5.20



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,660 ✭✭✭wersal gummage


    Yes that is correct, I have one easy run of 6km per week and the rest is a bit harder stuff



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,660 ✭✭✭wersal gummage


    Edit above, 1 easy, the other 3 are called steady state, tempo, goal pace repeats (but bizarrely the goal pace repeats are not at the goal pace I've set for the plan!).


    Some weeks one of this will be dropped for hills, or "super sets" (that run hard for 200m, hard for 600m etc)



  • Registered Users Posts: 735 ✭✭✭Treviso




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,306 ✭✭✭ariana`


    And the training pace calculator that a lot of people have used with those plans can be accessed here



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,484 ✭✭✭✭Murph_D


    I agree with Treviso above - your easy pace is fairly easy alright (although I wouldn't be afraid to slow some of it down a bit more), it's just that you're not doing enough easy stuff in relation to the sessions. I aim for at least 80% of my mileage being easy.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,660 ✭✭✭wersal gummage


    Thanks all, I will do that starting tomorrow. 1 hard run per week of speed work and 4 easy runs. Is there any significant benefit to increasing my weekly mileage from around 45km at the moment or is this sufficient to just stick to for a few months? Although at very slow paces I might struggle to find the time to increase the mileage too much



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,660 ✭✭✭wersal gummage



    Thanks, grateful for that and I've enough now to go away for a few months so don't want to drag this out too much but just I note that the calculator gives me speed work suggestions of times I am nowhere near capable of running.... Hopefully that's something that will improve in the future but I feel I will never hit some of the paces set out there (eg 4.48 for the mile but I can only run it in 6 now and that's all out and gasping afterwards).



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,484 ✭✭✭✭Murph_D


    Don’t worry, you wouldn’t be running a mile at that pace - much shorter reps.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,340 ✭✭✭TFBubendorfer


    There are real benefits in increasing mileage as long as you are able to recover from it. If you're doing too much and get injured it obviously will set you back, so it's a risk vs. reward equation.

    Having said that, increasing mileage for your easy runs is usually a beneficial thing. There are a few rules of thumb on how much you should increase your weekly distance (e.g. by no more than 10% a week, or by no more km that the number of days per week you are running) but in the end we only ever know afterwards if it was beneficial or not.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,976 ✭✭✭Trimm Trabb


    Question re footwear as I’m going to buy new shoes this week - I over pronate so have always just bought ASICS Gel Kayanos stability shoes through the years.

    Have got a little more serious over last year (main focus is half marathon distance but doing in a 5k in a couple of weeks and hoping for a PB sub 20). I’ve been reading a little and see people describing certain shoes as ‘fast’ - with the exception of the Nike Vaporflys or other carbon plate shoes is there certain ‘fast’ shoes that could help knock seconds off a 5k?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,582 ✭✭✭Swashbuckler


    Before responding to this can I ask why do you specify "with the exception of carbon plated shoes"? Is that an assumption of massive price tag or a lack of desire to wear carbon plated shoes? The reason I ask is it will help direct the response to you...plenty of good value carbon plated options that don't cost an arm and a leg.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,660 ✭✭✭wersal gummage




    No experience of these myself but a light shoe I've seen on their website a few times which doesn't suit me as its described as for over pronation which might work for you



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,731 ✭✭✭Ceepo


    Not going to recommend any specific brand of shoe, but maybe give you something to think about before you pull the trigger on a new pair.

    One of the key things in a "faster shoe is weight. The less weight you have to carry the better. Kayano are a heavy shoe.

    Traditionally for races people would have worn" racing flats" (pre Vaporfly) which were a lower profile and also lightweight.

    Whether any specific shoe can actually make you faster is a bit debated, but some can certainly make you more efficient and as a result may help you sustain a given pace longer.

    The newer carbon plated shoes use a different foam and is reported to give approx 85% energy return as opposed to traditional 65/70% with Eva foam. The carbon is more to give support to the stack height of the foam, as they would be to unstable without it.

    As for stability for over pronation, well that's more of a marketing plot and has absolutely no merit at all.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 738 ✭✭✭MisterJinx


    "As for stability for over pronation, well that's more of a marketing plot and has absolutely no merit at all." @Ceepo is it really?

    I'd did one of those pronation tests and over pronate and have tended to look for trainers that offer stability. Is it really just a ploy as it does limit the range that you can look at and does add a bit of expense.

    I'd be interested in finding out why you think it's just a marketing ploy? When I looked at the video analysis of my running gait I could really see that my ankles rolled significantly and with an over-pronation shoe (tried a few on) that this was corrected.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,582 ✭✭✭Swashbuckler


    Elites pronate...and they ain't racing in stability shoes!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 87 ✭✭longrunn



    Just from personal experience, so YMMV, but I was getting calf injuries in stability shoes. Tried many different pairs from different brands and still had the same issues, even though the running shop kept telling me that I'd need stability shoes. Did my own research and changed to lightweight neutral shoes and my calf issues have disappeared.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,731 ✭✭✭Ceepo


    Pronation is a natural occurring part of the gait cycle and In order to qualify that you "over pronate' you would need to have a baseline of what normal pronation is, and to that end there is no such baseline.

    The next thing is shoe manufacturers and shops would have you believe that pronation is a bad thing, (it's not) and by extension that it is responsible for a whole host of injuries. There's on evidence of this.

    Putting a medial post in a shoe may or may not prevent some movement at the foot, but we would then need to consider that we are asymmetric and not pronate on one side more than the other, and doesn't take into account that there can be as much as 10% difference in the density of the foam between right and left shoes.

    This is even before we delve into why there's is excess pronation in the 1st place, things like external rotation of the tibial bone, ankle rocker dysfunction etc.. A whole othe minefield altogether.

    All that been being said, if you're wearing a particular type of shoes and find the comfortable and aren't picking up niggles, then stay with them.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,976 ✭✭✭Trimm Trabb


    Cost isn’t my major issue here - just don’t think I’d be get the same feeling on satisfaction at this point if I got Vaporflys. I’m not against them at some point in the future but I feel like it would be a short cut at this point as I’ve been gradually moving towards the time I want anyway.

    Interesting point Ceepo re pronation as I was just thinking the other day I’ve been buying these shoes for years based on what some lad in Lifestyle told me 7/8 years ago. I’ve had calf niggles over the last year but don’t know if that is down to training overload or the wrong shoes. Although I need a quick 10k barefoot on the beach one day and was very sore for days after so perhaps that tells me I do rely on support from shoes.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,582 ✭✭✭Swashbuckler


    Personally I'd recommend NB Fuelcell TC (even the Fuelcell Rebel v2 are a decent all rounder and certainly faster than Gel Kayano) . Also recommend Saucony Endorphin Speed. Both the TC and Endorphin Speeds are widely popular...both have plates though. There are other non plated shoes you could go for but why bother!? If cost isn't an issue then the TC or endorphins are well worth it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,731 ✭✭✭Ceepo


    It's important to remember that the cause of injury's can be multifactorial. But there has never been a shoe that prevents injury.

    While I'm an advocate for some barefoot running, doing 10k of the bat wouldn't be recommended ;), especially coming from such a high heal to toe drop trainer



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,819 ✭✭✭Fann Linn


    Can anyone recommend a good app for beginners. I've downloaded the coach to 5 k and have completed that. Now I just want to carry on casually and log and track my runs in an attempt to just compete with myself and try and better my times. Ta.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 601 ✭✭✭Slow_Runner


    Strava would be the most popular, doesn't give plans but a way to log runs. Social aspect too as your followers can see ur runs, give kudos and post comments. Can be good motivation for some.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,976 ✭✭✭Trimm Trabb


    Thinking about it more and might be tempted to get the carbon plated shoes for racing - can you suggest some the value options?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 199 ✭✭Aurelian


    Is it preferable to pace using Miles rather than Kilometres even when working on a kilometer event? I presume miles give you a slightly more even pace as it is over a longer distance.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,582 ✭✭✭Swashbuckler




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,030 ✭✭✭Slideways


    I can’t see the logic about running in miles. Embrace the metric system people!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,340 ✭✭✭TFBubendorfer


    Use the same metric you are using in training, otherwise you will just confuse yourself.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,582 ✭✭✭Swashbuckler


    debatable..theres a lot to be said for being proficient in both...Generally I work in miles but I ain't running 7 x 0.62miles in training. I'm running 7 x 1k. Id work miles in easy and long runs. Id race a 5k and 10k in kms. Mix and match.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,724 ✭✭✭Enduro


    You do realise that pace = speed. Whether a given speed is expressed in kilometre per hour, miler per hour, minutes per kilometre, minutes per mile, or seconds for X hundred meters, matters not one jot. It is still the same given speed.

    Next time someone takes you for a ride in a car have a look at how the speedometer changes. If it is in KmH you don't have to wait for each kilometre to pass to see the change in speed (pace). Similarly, if it is measured in MpH. Pace doesn't have to be measured over the distance of the units being used to express it. Sprinters would never know their speed in standard units if that was necessary. So the concept of "giving a slightly more even pace as it is over a longer distance" doesn't make sense in reality.

    Running longer distances does not infer more even pacing. Using bigger units to express pace does not lead to more even pacing.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Recently got Jack Daniels book and think I understand his training philosophy and want to start with one of his plans tomorrow.

    However maybe I'm just a bit dense but how do I program something like marathon pace into my Garmin for example for easy runs he gives a pace range to follow for example easy running 7:00 to 7:51

    But for the other intensities there is no range given witch you need in order to program it into a Garmin watch.


    Using the above example I presume my marathon pace would range from 6:42 down to 6:03 with the aim of keeping it around the 6:42 mark?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,030 ✭✭✭Slideways


    You can just create a workout in Garmin connect and under the intensity select pace with the target being in or around your range. You can even have it beep at you if you go outside the range.


    Allow for a minimum of 20 secs variance or it will drive you bonkers buzzing at you



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,484 ✭✭✭✭Murph_D


    Also, not being smart here, but have another read of the book - threshold pace (the 6:03 you mentioned) is not within the range of a typical marathon pace run. It’s a completely different workout - much more difficult than marathon pace. Good luck with it all!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,771 ✭✭✭jebuz


    Not picking on anyone in particular and I'm not having a go but some of the recent questions on this thread really made me realise just how much people overthink running and take it a bit too seriously. It's a very, very simple sport, train within your abilities, do some races, keep showing up and enjoy it. We're not professionals so why do so many focus on complexity and the 1%'ers before even getting the basics right - consistency and hard work. If folks really want to get serious, then join a club and train with people better than you as that's where you really start improving and seeing the bigger picture.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 462 ✭✭joe35


    I wouldn't fully agree with this. Why do people always think they need to train harder to get better. Sometimes they need to train smarter.


    I constantly see/hear about people saying nothing beats getting the miles in, or pushing yourself harder in speed sessions.

    Yet these same people are running with very poor form, weak core, never think about doing drills or any other type of training other than go out and run.

    Even within clubs the mentality is often to push yourself harder, increase mileage.

    I see this all the time, a person slips off a small bit in there times and straight away it's, I'm not being pushed hard enough, I need to train with a faster group.

    Why not introduce some drills into your warm up. Something that might improve your economics of running.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,620 ✭✭✭ILikeBoats


    Could you give an example of some drills please?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,771 ✭✭✭jebuz


    Joe, I see where you're coming from but I'm not talking about training harder. I said consistency and hard work are the basic elements of improvement and focussing about the intricate detail of training should be way down on the priority list. Training smart is assumed, everyone knows they should train smart but unfortunately a lot just don't don't know how to.

    Kind of off the point but from my personal experience and witnessing improvements of others, nothing does beat getting in the miles in. You're training to run long distances and building your aerobic capacity, it makes sense. Where people go wrong is the intensity and volume of their miles. It takes years for most people to be able to run consistent 70-80 mile weeks yet I see some thinking they should be running 80 mile weeks and sure enough they get injured. That's been me. That's not due to a lack of drills or cross training, it's an error of judgement and lack of experience. Eventually, through running consistently you will build strength and resilience. For those weak people with poor form you talk about, I could similarly show you a lot of very high calibre runners who don't do drills or gym work but just focus their energies on the basics. They're training to run, so they run. The differences is that these people know their limits, they train so they can train tomorrow. They train within their limits. They don't obsess over diet and they don't worry about ground contact time, cadence heart rate, Vo2 max, the killer session etc. Bizarrely enough, I think it's the elites who focus less on all this stuff and it's the amateur runner that focuses more on it.

    I don't agree with your claim that within clubs the mentality is often to push yourself harder and increase mileage. It may be the case in some clubs but the opposite is true in my club where we're drilled to relax in workouts, recover between hard days and the absolute priority is not getting injured. Hard work is a given if you want to improve but harder is not always better. Nobody is saying you should finish a workout on your back, that's not good training. Caution is exercised by our coach, who himself is a former olympian but knows himself knows how simple running should be but at the end of the day it's all about the individual having personal responsibility and honestly assessing their ability. By the way, we are a fairly successful distance running club by national standards and we do not do drills as part of our warm up or otherwise. I'm not saying they don't have their place, they do but more so for the explosive track events. I myself do weekly core and mobility work on areas I feel are weak but for the most part when it comes to distance running, just run.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement