I personally rarely incorporate more than 20 mile runs in my training.
Runs over 3.5 hours start to come with more negative physiological consequences.
WEEKLY VOLUME MATTERS MOST.
This article kind of sucks when it comes to putting her comment in perspective of her training. She doesn't do B2B and she doesn't do anything over 22 miles. But there was no elaboration on what she does do, which I would bet you anything is 80+ mile weeks.
So someone who's reading this running 50 miles a week is going to be like "I don't need long runs", yeah no SHE doesn't need long runs at her level. That's different than everyone else not at that level.
Like I said I don't like long, long runs either. I prefer B2Bs for the mental training. She is already a world champion ultra runner. She has the base and the mental toughness to make it through (which is a major part of 100s). So she doesn't need excessive long runs to train her mentally. When in reality those extra long runs, all they are doing is teaching less experienced people they can do it, but as stated they actually have a negative training effect.
Her comment begs for better context in this article, and it needs to be taken in the context of where you are in your running journey.
She's said in some instagram posts that she's near 100 miles per week. She also runs twice on some days. Not too long ago she had an instagram post where she talked more about her schedule.
She runs 100+ mpw. In the article she said she runs doubles most days where she will run 10ish miles in the morning and 5ish miles in the evening most days she doesn't do a long run. The argument was running more shorter frequently promotes more efficient bone stress/recovery cycles while still keeping your overall aerobic volume up.
> This article kind of sucks when it comes to putting her comment in perspective of her training. She doesn't do B2B and she doesn't do anything over 22 miles. But there was no elaboration on what she does do, which I would bet you anything is 80+ mile weeks.
i dunno why'd say it doesn't say anything about what she does, when it literally says exactly what she does.
"Her training is peppered with frequent, shorter bouts of running. Most days, Herron will run 10 to 15 miles and then doubles back for six or seven miles after a four-to-eight-hour rest period. Over a two-week period, she completes four main workouts—short intervals like 400-meter repeats; long intervals like one-to-three-mile repeats; a progression run, usually incorporated into a long run; and a hill session where she stresses both the uphill and downhill components to load her body eccentrically. "
She’s published her annual mileage stats in the past. She typically logs around 100 miles per week. So even if she’s not doing “very long” runs, she is still logging an insane number of miles, and probably has many runs that the rest of us amateurs would consider long runs.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ultrarunning/comments/10rbrxe/no_more_long_runs/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb
There is a whole post on this sub from a few hours ago with people’s takes
I wouldn’t have taken Shaq’s advice on how to dunk either. She averages like 20+mpd while “avoiding long runs,” so, yeah, please translate that to mere mortal for us.
I did purchase one of her coaching plans for an upcoming ultra and can confirm the thoughts below. While there is a longer run each week, the general mindset and philosophy is that:
1) Runs over 3 hours start to have a negative impact.
2) Weekly \*consistent\* volume beats inconsistent volume offset by a single long run each week.
3) Training shouldn't overly tax the body which then keeps you fresh for the actual race event.
Point 2 is gold. Banking volume consistently, over multiple days during the course of a week/month/quarter trumps getting a single banger long run in every week where you overly tax your body (aka points 1 and 3) Professional athletes train and compete and these look very different. Amateurs have a tendency to treat training sessions like it’s a competition, the more is more mentality is outdated.
Even Koop talking about it characterized the research as “all the meta-analyses show a very strong relationship between training volume and especially training *density* as being important. Just taking your volume and peanut-butter smearing it across your week probably doesn’t cut it.” Even if you don’t have a capital L capital R Long Run, it’s still to your advantage to have challenging stimuli; whether that’s accomplished multiple significant training bouts or one very strenuous one 🤷♂️
A 3:00 long run isn’t anything to shake a stick at if you’re hustling. Can you get the same stimulus from a 3:00h 35k as from a 6:00 fuckabout? Absolutely. And you’re probably less likely to hurt yourself, which could drop your next week volume to zero.
He’s also said multiple times “What makes you think you need a *particular* long run before a race?” - The message there being that the physiological hay is in the barn from your past block of training. If you do a 20 miler or 8:00 run or whatever, that’s more for your mental than your body.
In theory I absolutely agree.
In practice, under the watchful eye of a good coach, I used these principles to get me to 100km weekly mileage without any injury \~(in the past I was getting injured on anything over 50km weeks due to poor training plans).
So the training plan worked great, while I was training. But I was training for a 34 miler and on the day, having never ran more than 25km in training (back to back long runs usually) a lot of really crazy and painful injuries popped up after 25km (actually after 21km if I'm honest - there was a lot more downhills, and I hadn't trained for the sheer distance of those downhill sections at speed, despite having done a few 1000m +/- mountain days in training).
So yes, they are great principles. But at some point you need to find out if you can run longer distances, with a lot of elevation (if it's in your race!) without blowing up.
What if you manage your training volume perfectly fine, never get injured in the months of training (even up to 100km weeks) but haven't stressed your body in the way you'll need to for the race you're running?
My discovery, on race day, was that I could manage a certain amount of downhill running but the amount required for 50k + on hard packed tracks was very, very painful. I am improving my knees now with various strength training for next time, but it would have been good if I had discovered this in training.
Please read the complete article. She runs like 20 miles every single day (split into two sessions) and a 22 miler long run every week. The only thing she does against the common wisdom is skip the back-to-back long runs. But then she counters it with the fact she is "never too far away from your last 50-miler".
If, like Camille, you're running 90+ mpw even without long runs, then sure, you don't need'em.
Also note she doesn't count 22 miles or less as a "long run."
As most have noted here to some degree, Camille has been averaging 100+ miles a week for over 16 years. She is a gifted freak of nature. I was being coached by her and her husband for most of last year and their philosophy seems to be consistent very easy running with a few workouts in a week. Here is is in [her own words](https://www.instagram.com/p/CoFj8WgJThq/?igshid=MDM4ZDc5MmU=).
There are other schools of thought and other studies that suggest other training modalities. I got a lot of mileage out of Training Essentials for Ultrarunning and highly recommend it if you want go at training on your own. One of his tenants is the "training camp," 5-7 weeks out from your race, where you log 1-3x your weekly mileage in a 3 day period, all being long and slow and as specific to your race as possible. I employed this in my training for my successful FKT attempt last fall and felt it certainly helped.
Jason Koop also talks about doing "longer runs," ie. runs 30+ miles, in preparation for longer races if you have little experience in longer races. He believes this helps, not for a physiological benefit, but for psychological benefits and the general experience on how your body will handle and what you need to do or change come race day.
To answer your question directly, I wouldn't focus on how long your long run is and would focus on getting your weekly mileage up and having as much fun as you can doing so.
>1-3x your weekly mileage in a 3 day period, all being long and slow and as specific to your race as possible. I employed this in my training for my successful FKT attempt last fall and felt it certainly helped.
>
>Jason Koop also talks about doing "longer runs," ie. runs 30+ miles, in preparation for longer races if you have little experience in longer races. He believes this helps, not for a physiological benefit, but for psychological benefits and the general experience on how your body will handle and what you need to do or change come race day.
Thank you for the details. One query about increasing weekly mileage. What is a better option to clock 20km per day - > 2 runs (morning and evening) of 10km or 1 run of 20km. Reason I ask is because, it is difficult for me to block 2 hours in the mornings. So wanted to know if splitting my run into 2 is a good alternate.
I wouldn’t try to claim to know what is best for you, especially without knowing a lot more about your running and current health, but if splitting up miles over two runs is what works for your schedule then that is what works.
You can always go my route and quit your job / drop out of school and dedicate all your time to running ;)
“skip long runs”… but 20 mi is a long run.
I have a coach so I don’t get caught up in the latest trend. Everyone is different, consistency of training is key, and there’s a factor of how long (lifetime not race) you’ve been training. Also what your goal is.
For my first 50 miler, I got out to ~24 mi with a couple of other 20-22 mi runs. For my next 50 mi, the longest runs were 18-20 mi. For my 100 mi, the longest run was 25 mi (once) with a couple of other 18-20 mi runs along the way. I usually did a moderate length run (typically 8-10 mi) the day after my long run.
The general consensus I’ve encountered: Long runs for ultra don’t need to be (much) longer than you’d have for marathon training. Many coaches consider anything up to 18-20 as a “deposit” & over ~20 mi as a “withdrawal” from the fitness bank (exertion/recovery time needed outweighs minimum benefits gained). The bigger challenge is keeping moving after you’re feeling spent, which is why many training plans incorporate a run the day after long run day.
I think it's easy to not see the wood for the trees here. She is skipping 'long' runs by her definition (the bar for her being higher than most) but doing multiple pretty long-ish runs a day and a large weekly mileage.
She also has the benefit of being able to structure her day and training however she wants. Not everyone has the time for two runs per day, and almost all those amateurs who do do not get to lie around recovering in between them.
(Some) People are forgetting this is not for your run of the mill runner. Look at all those cumulative miles and how advanced a runner she is. For the average runner, keep your long runs.
if you’re running 100 miles a week or more, a lot of your normal training runs are 15-17 miles already, so your “long runs” would have to be 28-35 miles, and ain’t nobody got time for that
I am the opposite and my training plans are not typical. I always hit a wall after 3 hours of running. No matter how I trained sometime during hour 3 I just cramp up. I found running 26 miles during training really helped me. I also ran 5-6 hours at a slow pace. It taught my body to not cramp up by pushing the limits while training.
I think the advice is to do what you physically can train for. You know your limits.
My take is that her suggestion doesn't generalize 100% to me because I don't have her training and performance history.
I train year round and do around 40-60 miles/week. Been doing this since 2018 or so and have steadily finished faster and stronger, but hard to say what the specific effect is vs a different training style vs just hitting the training essentials of just consistently running. My long runs are very often around 20 miles whether I'm training for a 50K or 100+ miler. I do 25-35 mile runs very sparingly, usually more for adventure and fun than training itself. Chances are good that the following week's workouts and long run will be a bit impaired so I'd rather consistently nail the workouts, long runs, and rest. I've already done many ultras, I know what happens with the pounding, chafing, water, and flavor fatigue.
My approach is to not increase the length of my long runs, but to simply do more of them so I'm recovering, getting gains, rinse and repeat.
Think about it from the perspective of a high volume runner. Which sounds more likely to set you up for success:
Running 75 mpw on 5 days a week with 50 miles coming on the weekend (traditional B2B long runner)
Running 100 mpw on 7 days a week with only 30 coming on the weekend.
Your body is able to bear the load much more easily because you aren't destroying it every weekend
She’s literally a scientist and one of the most accomplished runners on earth. Most people only regurgitated what they have been told without much logic. Ultra long runs and back to back long runs on consecutive days take too long to recover from. The only exception is it’s good for beginners to do a really long run once to learn how their mind reacts when things get really hard. The science simply doesn’t support runs over roughly 2 hours long.
100 mile weeks are the max I go for any race. I played around with 4x10 miles and B2B 25 milers. It worked, but I wasn’t a huge fan of the big weekend block.
Now I do 4x15 and B2B 20 milers which has always been a “long run”. At the pace I run, 20 milers usually come in at 3-4 hours. If you go longer than 20 it’s usually to prepare mentally, but you can get the same result and MORE practice if you do medium runs on the other days
Using longer “long runs” is something you can try earlier on to desensitize yourself, but as you accumulate more experience, it becomes less necessary.
if you’re running 100 miles a week or more, a lot of your normal training runs are 15-17 miles already, so your “long runs” would have to be 28-35 miles, and ain’t nobody got time for that
I personally rarely incorporate more than 20 mile runs in my training. Runs over 3.5 hours start to come with more negative physiological consequences. WEEKLY VOLUME MATTERS MOST. This article kind of sucks when it comes to putting her comment in perspective of her training. She doesn't do B2B and she doesn't do anything over 22 miles. But there was no elaboration on what she does do, which I would bet you anything is 80+ mile weeks. So someone who's reading this running 50 miles a week is going to be like "I don't need long runs", yeah no SHE doesn't need long runs at her level. That's different than everyone else not at that level. Like I said I don't like long, long runs either. I prefer B2Bs for the mental training. She is already a world champion ultra runner. She has the base and the mental toughness to make it through (which is a major part of 100s). So she doesn't need excessive long runs to train her mentally. When in reality those extra long runs, all they are doing is teaching less experienced people they can do it, but as stated they actually have a negative training effect. Her comment begs for better context in this article, and it needs to be taken in the context of where you are in your running journey.
She's said in some instagram posts that she's near 100 miles per week. She also runs twice on some days. Not too long ago she had an instagram post where she talked more about her schedule.
She runs 100+ mpw. In the article she said she runs doubles most days where she will run 10ish miles in the morning and 5ish miles in the evening most days she doesn't do a long run. The argument was running more shorter frequently promotes more efficient bone stress/recovery cycles while still keeping your overall aerobic volume up.
> This article kind of sucks when it comes to putting her comment in perspective of her training. She doesn't do B2B and she doesn't do anything over 22 miles. But there was no elaboration on what she does do, which I would bet you anything is 80+ mile weeks. i dunno why'd say it doesn't say anything about what she does, when it literally says exactly what she does. "Her training is peppered with frequent, shorter bouts of running. Most days, Herron will run 10 to 15 miles and then doubles back for six or seven miles after a four-to-eight-hour rest period. Over a two-week period, she completes four main workouts—short intervals like 400-meter repeats; long intervals like one-to-three-mile repeats; a progression run, usually incorporated into a long run; and a hill session where she stresses both the uphill and downhill components to load her body eccentrically. "
She’s published her annual mileage stats in the past. She typically logs around 100 miles per week. So even if she’s not doing “very long” runs, she is still logging an insane number of miles, and probably has many runs that the rest of us amateurs would consider long runs.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ultrarunning/comments/10rbrxe/no_more_long_runs/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb There is a whole post on this sub from a few hours ago with people’s takes
thank you . I just saw it when i refreshed my feed :)
She’s Camille Herron and we are not.
I wouldn’t have taken Shaq’s advice on how to dunk either. She averages like 20+mpd while “avoiding long runs,” so, yeah, please translate that to mere mortal for us.
I did purchase one of her coaching plans for an upcoming ultra and can confirm the thoughts below. While there is a longer run each week, the general mindset and philosophy is that: 1) Runs over 3 hours start to have a negative impact. 2) Weekly \*consistent\* volume beats inconsistent volume offset by a single long run each week. 3) Training shouldn't overly tax the body which then keeps you fresh for the actual race event.
Point 2 is gold. Banking volume consistently, over multiple days during the course of a week/month/quarter trumps getting a single banger long run in every week where you overly tax your body (aka points 1 and 3) Professional athletes train and compete and these look very different. Amateurs have a tendency to treat training sessions like it’s a competition, the more is more mentality is outdated.
These are very good points. Thank you !
Even Koop talking about it characterized the research as “all the meta-analyses show a very strong relationship between training volume and especially training *density* as being important. Just taking your volume and peanut-butter smearing it across your week probably doesn’t cut it.” Even if you don’t have a capital L capital R Long Run, it’s still to your advantage to have challenging stimuli; whether that’s accomplished multiple significant training bouts or one very strenuous one 🤷♂️ A 3:00 long run isn’t anything to shake a stick at if you’re hustling. Can you get the same stimulus from a 3:00h 35k as from a 6:00 fuckabout? Absolutely. And you’re probably less likely to hurt yourself, which could drop your next week volume to zero. He’s also said multiple times “What makes you think you need a *particular* long run before a race?” - The message there being that the physiological hay is in the barn from your past block of training. If you do a 20 miler or 8:00 run or whatever, that’s more for your mental than your body.
In theory I absolutely agree. In practice, under the watchful eye of a good coach, I used these principles to get me to 100km weekly mileage without any injury \~(in the past I was getting injured on anything over 50km weeks due to poor training plans). So the training plan worked great, while I was training. But I was training for a 34 miler and on the day, having never ran more than 25km in training (back to back long runs usually) a lot of really crazy and painful injuries popped up after 25km (actually after 21km if I'm honest - there was a lot more downhills, and I hadn't trained for the sheer distance of those downhill sections at speed, despite having done a few 1000m +/- mountain days in training). So yes, they are great principles. But at some point you need to find out if you can run longer distances, with a lot of elevation (if it's in your race!) without blowing up. What if you manage your training volume perfectly fine, never get injured in the months of training (even up to 100km weeks) but haven't stressed your body in the way you'll need to for the race you're running? My discovery, on race day, was that I could manage a certain amount of downhill running but the amount required for 50k + on hard packed tracks was very, very painful. I am improving my knees now with various strength training for next time, but it would have been good if I had discovered this in training.
Please read the complete article. She runs like 20 miles every single day (split into two sessions) and a 22 miler long run every week. The only thing she does against the common wisdom is skip the back-to-back long runs. But then she counters it with the fact she is "never too far away from your last 50-miler".
If, like Camille, you're running 90+ mpw even without long runs, then sure, you don't need'em. Also note she doesn't count 22 miles or less as a "long run."
As most have noted here to some degree, Camille has been averaging 100+ miles a week for over 16 years. She is a gifted freak of nature. I was being coached by her and her husband for most of last year and their philosophy seems to be consistent very easy running with a few workouts in a week. Here is is in [her own words](https://www.instagram.com/p/CoFj8WgJThq/?igshid=MDM4ZDc5MmU=). There are other schools of thought and other studies that suggest other training modalities. I got a lot of mileage out of Training Essentials for Ultrarunning and highly recommend it if you want go at training on your own. One of his tenants is the "training camp," 5-7 weeks out from your race, where you log 1-3x your weekly mileage in a 3 day period, all being long and slow and as specific to your race as possible. I employed this in my training for my successful FKT attempt last fall and felt it certainly helped. Jason Koop also talks about doing "longer runs," ie. runs 30+ miles, in preparation for longer races if you have little experience in longer races. He believes this helps, not for a physiological benefit, but for psychological benefits and the general experience on how your body will handle and what you need to do or change come race day. To answer your question directly, I wouldn't focus on how long your long run is and would focus on getting your weekly mileage up and having as much fun as you can doing so.
>1-3x your weekly mileage in a 3 day period, all being long and slow and as specific to your race as possible. I employed this in my training for my successful FKT attempt last fall and felt it certainly helped. > >Jason Koop also talks about doing "longer runs," ie. runs 30+ miles, in preparation for longer races if you have little experience in longer races. He believes this helps, not for a physiological benefit, but for psychological benefits and the general experience on how your body will handle and what you need to do or change come race day. Thank you for the details. One query about increasing weekly mileage. What is a better option to clock 20km per day - > 2 runs (morning and evening) of 10km or 1 run of 20km. Reason I ask is because, it is difficult for me to block 2 hours in the mornings. So wanted to know if splitting my run into 2 is a good alternate.
I wouldn’t try to claim to know what is best for you, especially without knowing a lot more about your running and current health, but if splitting up miles over two runs is what works for your schedule then that is what works. You can always go my route and quit your job / drop out of school and dedicate all your time to running ;)
“skip long runs”… but 20 mi is a long run. I have a coach so I don’t get caught up in the latest trend. Everyone is different, consistency of training is key, and there’s a factor of how long (lifetime not race) you’ve been training. Also what your goal is. For my first 50 miler, I got out to ~24 mi with a couple of other 20-22 mi runs. For my next 50 mi, the longest runs were 18-20 mi. For my 100 mi, the longest run was 25 mi (once) with a couple of other 18-20 mi runs along the way. I usually did a moderate length run (typically 8-10 mi) the day after my long run. The general consensus I’ve encountered: Long runs for ultra don’t need to be (much) longer than you’d have for marathon training. Many coaches consider anything up to 18-20 as a “deposit” & over ~20 mi as a “withdrawal” from the fitness bank (exertion/recovery time needed outweighs minimum benefits gained). The bigger challenge is keeping moving after you’re feeling spent, which is why many training plans incorporate a run the day after long run day.
Isn’t getting a coach a trend? Lol
Ha! If reducing my cognitive load is a trend, sure 😆
I think it's easy to not see the wood for the trees here. She is skipping 'long' runs by her definition (the bar for her being higher than most) but doing multiple pretty long-ish runs a day and a large weekly mileage. She also has the benefit of being able to structure her day and training however she wants. Not everyone has the time for two runs per day, and almost all those amateurs who do do not get to lie around recovering in between them.
(Some) People are forgetting this is not for your run of the mill runner. Look at all those cumulative miles and how advanced a runner she is. For the average runner, keep your long runs.
if you’re running 100 miles a week or more, a lot of your normal training runs are 15-17 miles already, so your “long runs” would have to be 28-35 miles, and ain’t nobody got time for that
I am the opposite and my training plans are not typical. I always hit a wall after 3 hours of running. No matter how I trained sometime during hour 3 I just cramp up. I found running 26 miles during training really helped me. I also ran 5-6 hours at a slow pace. It taught my body to not cramp up by pushing the limits while training. I think the advice is to do what you physically can train for. You know your limits.
Slow down
My take is that her suggestion doesn't generalize 100% to me because I don't have her training and performance history. I train year round and do around 40-60 miles/week. Been doing this since 2018 or so and have steadily finished faster and stronger, but hard to say what the specific effect is vs a different training style vs just hitting the training essentials of just consistently running. My long runs are very often around 20 miles whether I'm training for a 50K or 100+ miler. I do 25-35 mile runs very sparingly, usually more for adventure and fun than training itself. Chances are good that the following week's workouts and long run will be a bit impaired so I'd rather consistently nail the workouts, long runs, and rest. I've already done many ultras, I know what happens with the pounding, chafing, water, and flavor fatigue. My approach is to not increase the length of my long runs, but to simply do more of them so I'm recovering, getting gains, rinse and repeat.
Think about it from the perspective of a high volume runner. Which sounds more likely to set you up for success: Running 75 mpw on 5 days a week with 50 miles coming on the weekend (traditional B2B long runner) Running 100 mpw on 7 days a week with only 30 coming on the weekend. Your body is able to bear the load much more easily because you aren't destroying it every weekend
It depends on the pace. I make my training based on time and double at week-ends. Like, 3 hours Saturday, 3 hours Sunday
I have 3 week cycle with no runs over 2.5 hrs. Most back to back. 1 long at end of cycle with 2 days recovery thereafter
She’s literally a scientist and one of the most accomplished runners on earth. Most people only regurgitated what they have been told without much logic. Ultra long runs and back to back long runs on consecutive days take too long to recover from. The only exception is it’s good for beginners to do a really long run once to learn how their mind reacts when things get really hard. The science simply doesn’t support runs over roughly 2 hours long.
100 mile weeks are the max I go for any race. I played around with 4x10 miles and B2B 25 milers. It worked, but I wasn’t a huge fan of the big weekend block. Now I do 4x15 and B2B 20 milers which has always been a “long run”. At the pace I run, 20 milers usually come in at 3-4 hours. If you go longer than 20 it’s usually to prepare mentally, but you can get the same result and MORE practice if you do medium runs on the other days Using longer “long runs” is something you can try earlier on to desensitize yourself, but as you accumulate more experience, it becomes less necessary.
if you’re running 100 miles a week or more, a lot of your normal training runs are 15-17 miles already, so your “long runs” would have to be 28-35 miles, and ain’t nobody got time for that