Slow runners unite!

Hiya,

I just got a book to loan from a colleague of mine about running and I read the below in it.

QUOTE

For example, from this table (X) you can deduce that a top runner needs 5 hours (or 300 minutes) to reach 80 km per week, while a jogger needs 7 to 8 hours. In other words, the load on the body to run 80 km per week is much greater for the jogger than for the top runner. Therefor, also in connection with the weekly volume, we speak better in terms of duration than in terms of total mileage.

UNQUOTE

I found this very interesting as I am a slow runner (even more slow than needing 8 hours for 80 km). The latest time I frustrated myself a bit in the fact that I need to spend more time for the same distance than many other runners. When I want to run 10K, I need to take more time out of my schedule than someone else.

But the above text from the book shows that I should better talk in running time than in distance. While someone else might go run eg. 60 minutes and run 10K. I run 90 minutes. So my body gets strained harder than a fast runner for the same distance.

It made me feel a bit better about my own running and I hope that for those other slower runners amongst us who might feel a bit frustrated about this too, that this knowledge might help them accept more who they are (running wise).

Cheers, Evy

[Instructor57 Graduate10]

Absolutely Evy !There is certainly research that shows this !

Time running is the key , not distance covered 👍

[Hidden in reply to Instructor57]

Indeed, I still have to convince myself a bit about it as you almost always read 'I ran XX km' and automatically I become a little jealous. So there is still a bit of work to be done in my head (what's new) 😜

[Frizzbomb67 Graduate10]

Really interesting and makes sense 🤔 The amount of time I have to find in my madly busy life is mostly the reason I don’t run for any longer than 10k . It’s good advice to help fit running into your life rather than fit your life around running 👍🏻 So, I’ve got half an hour …… 🏃‍♀️

[Hidden in reply to Frizzbomb67]

I know, it's not as if I have SUCH a busy life. But still, I also do like to have a little time for other hobbies for example. And it frustrated me that I need to spend 90 minutes for 10K while others can more easily fit it in their schedule AND have time left for other things. So now I'm going to try to keep the above in mind and just run without comparing myself to others distance wise. I can run longer than my colleague (colleague 2, not the one of the book, she has run a marathon recently). So what that we both run 10K, I can run longer than her! 😆

[cheekychipmunks Graduate10]

Totally agree BS, plus for me enjoyment is key. I love running and I want to continue loving running into my old age. I can run fast over short distances if necessary and feel happy if I get a PB, but ultimately my happy pace is one where I can pootle around enjoying myself the whole time. I also love my HM achievements, and that’s where time on my feet makes me very proud! 😅

[Hidden in reply to cheekychipmunks]

Very true, on Satursday I ran 1h52:51 and I was enjoying myself the whole way. I 'only' ran 13K in that time, but I was smiling and really enjoying my run. I could go a bit faster, but then I'd be pushing my body and there would be no enjoyment in it at all.

[CBDB Graduate10]

Hear hear … and from that quote it follows that efforts involved are rather (in general) similar to duration on your feet rather than distance covered. Being an ultra slow runner not really able to speed up very much more (knees are an issue), I do feel my efforts in a 10k are more comparable with someone running a HM.

I need the same nutrition, water, preparation, etc as the HM runner, but as someone else also said, the time spent on my slow 10k is really enjoyable.

So I think we slow runners don’t actually begrudge the time we run, but rather the distance that we don’t! 🤣🤣🤣

[Hidden in reply to CBDB]

Well said and indeed, we need as much nutrition and such as someone running more distance but the same length of time. I remember on another forum when I said I was taking gel-jellies for my 10K, someone said that for such a distance that's not necessary. I started doubting myself, but now I realize that yes, he doesn't need any fuel for 10K as they run it in eg. 60 minutes. But if they would run 1h50 like I did on Saturday, they would probably use more fuel than I did (I did not have enough fuel - was hungry for 2 days afterwards). So I should stop comparing my fuel need to others as well. Thanks!

[CBDB Graduate10 in reply to Hidden]

Yeah, I think that’s kind of right. Obviously all of this is not an exact science, but if you for example take the calories you burn as an indication, I bet similar durations correlate more than similar distances.

[Yesletsgo Administrator Graduate10]

Brilliant post Evy! You've inspired me to do a 60 minute run for my next long one instead of choosing a distance 😁

[Hidden in reply to Yesletsgo]

Go for it!

[Hidden]

I'm glad that here at least people are understanding. On another forum I posted the same thing and I got some angry replies. They are all faster runners and of course they don't agree with the idea that they exert themselves less on 10K than I / slower runners do...

[Mormor1 Graduate10]

On the garmin program I'm following the runs are all in minutes, not in distance and I think I've seen that on other programs too. I like running to time and then seeing the distance covered.

[SueAppleRun Graduate10 60minGraduate]

It’s always been about time for us except when I’m out on my own sometimes and then I’ll run a bit longer to click over the next kilometre, but yes, slow runners put in more time and it’s good to know it’s worth it