My biggest question is; If I want to be running a 6:30/mi pace come next season, should I just try and work it in through 2x per week interval sessions and gradually building the duration of those intervals? Or is there another method?

I'm thinking if I start logging 60-70mile weeks I'll either get burned out or injured. I probly should be happy with a 1:40 next year and try to do the 1:30 in 2010, but Im an American dammit... I WANT IT NOW!

Here is some info to try and digest on training and recovery with additional stuff I found throughout my education in this sport. It's long but informative.

….At the practical level, muscles within the body are composed of differing fiber types. These can be classified as slow twitch (or Type I) fibers, fast twitch oxidative (Type IIa) fibers and fast twitch glycolytic (Type IIb fibers). These fiber types have quantifiable differences in a number of aspects. For the endurance athlete, particularly marathoners and long-course triathletes, two of the most important distinctions are:

Time required for Glycogen replenishment

Studies have shown that Type I fibers deplete their glycogen stores at a slower rate than Type II fibers (Saltin & Karlsson, 1971). The practical implication here is that if an athlete is to stay below the recruitment threshold for Type IIa fibers, they will be able to accomplish substantially more training in a given week. This recruitment threshold has been physiologically defined as the “Aerobic Threshold” (Skinner and McLellan 1980). In popular literature, coaches such as Gordo Byrn and Joe Friel have defined this as Zone 2 or “Steady” training. Interestingly, all of the fore-mentioned coaches have concluded that, during the preparatory phase, this is the most important training intensity. Yes all of this is very interesting, you may say, but how does this relate to the 100 mile week? Read on.

The other important factor that distinguishes fiber types for an endurance athlete is the time required to replenish muscle glycogen stores after a long or hard workout. This is one of the prime determinants of recovery in an endurance athlete (Terjung et al., 1985) and consequently, if the endurance athlete can utilize fibers that recover more quickly during the bulk of their training, they will simply be able to train more and accumulate more of a training stimulus. Studies have shown that slow twitch fibers, when fully depleted can be replenished in as short a time frame as 10-22 hours. In contrast, fast oxidative glycolytic fibers, when maximally depleted can take 24-48 hours to replenish, even with a high carbohydrate diet (Piehl, 1974, Casey et al. 1995 ). So, the simple implication for the endurance athlete is that, if they want to maintain a solid training load from day to day, most training should be at or below the recruitment threshold for FOG fibers or, as Friel and others call it, the Aerobic Threshold.

The other constraining variable here is that, if the athlete wants to fully replenish their slowtwitch glycogen stores in preparation for the next session (generally 12-24 hours away), they are limited to ~2 hours of training per 12-24hrs at or around the AeT (to allow for the 10-22 hour recovery time). To make a long story short, this 2-4 hours of training at “your best aerobic effort” is precisely what Arthur Lydiard recommends for his athletes during their base phase of training. Incidentally, it is also echoed by one of the most successful swimming coaches in the world – Bill Sweetenham, who explains optimal volume for base training as “The most training volume that can be completed at 40-50 beats below maximum while still allowing the athlete to be fully recovered for the next training session - generally 12-24 hours away.” (Sweetenham, 2003)

At 2 hours of steady running per day, this equates to ~100-130 miles of training. For sports such as swimming and cycling, which do not exhibit the eccentric loading of running, recovery is quicker (O’Reilly et al., 1987, Sven et al., 1998) and, at the elite level 4 hours per day of training at the aerobic threshold is frequently accomplished. (Sweetenham, 2003, Lucia et al., 2003).

The potential for improving the work rate at the Aerobic Threshold is greater than perhaps any other physiological intensity, and in reality is the only level of training that one can expect to see improve over the course of a decade or more. Anecdotally, Mark Allen reported improving his pace for his 155bpm test progressively over the course of 10 years. While, no studies of elite athletes have been sufficiently long to quantify this improvement, Dr. Timothy Noakes in Lore of Running calculated that Allen’s aerobic threshold effort equated to a fat oxidation rate 50% higher than what had been seen in young national class athletes in the laboratory (Noakes, 2003). The protocol for such improvement was simple. For at least 3 months each year, Allen capped his HR at what he defined as his “aerobic maximum”, 155bpm. In addition, Bill Sweetenham, former national swim coach for Australia, devotes two full years to Aerobic Threshold training in the development of his junior elite swimmers (Sweetenham, 2003).

So, what does all of this mean to me, as a competitive Iron-distance triathlete looking to fulfil my athletic potential? It is the author’s opinion that one of the negative effects of the ‘trickle-down’ of advanced periodization concepts to the general masses is that, while annual periodization is an effective way to change the program of an elite athlete to prevent plateaus, rarely does an age-group athlete get anywhere close to a plateau of their foundational systems before (for the sake of variety), they decide to add more advanced training to their program. If 2 years of training, with the bulk of it below a heart rate of 150, is good enough for young elite swimmers, whose event typically lasts 50 seconds – 2 minutes, surely it is good enough for you as a sub-elite long course athlete (whose event may last 10-12 hours).

So, in practical terms for a long-course triathlete, Lydiard’s 100 mile training week equates to 2-4 hours of “steady” training per day (every day!!) until you witness a distinct plateau in your training volume and training pace. At that point, it may be time to make your shorter sessions faster and introduce training that approaches your Anaerobic Threshold.

Section from: http://www.gordoworld.com/alternativeperspectives/2007/06/lydiard-method...

The other part is JDs Formula info, Same site:

Part 1: Long Term Athletic Development

Alan Couzens, MS (Sport Science), CSCS, PES

The most frequent quandary I have witnessed as a coach and an observer of elite coaches over the past 10 years relates to the fundamental questions of ‘how much?’ & ‘how hard?’. The best coaches that I have seen seem to have an innate sense of appropriate volume and appropriate pace based on the developmental level of the athletes that they work with. Still, this unique skill of determining appropriate workloads is something that seems to, as a best case scenario, take many years, many trials & many errors to develop. So, where does the committed athlete turn in an effort to determine some reasonable, concrete parameters in determining appropriate workloads for themselves? Certainly, hiring one of these accomplished coaches is a good starting point. Another option is to review some of the literature written by these great coaching minds. Frequently, however, it has been my experience that the very best coaches only understand their decision making processes on very abstract levels. They just have a “feel” for what their athletes should be doing. A notable exception to this can be found in the formulae of running coach and scientist, Jack Daniels. Jack is renowned in the running community as the “numbers guy”. He revolutionized the way that we determine appropriate running pacing with his V-DOT table and has left several implications on the table that have a direct impact on your long term planning as a triathlete.

1. If you want to train faster then prove it by racing faster.

The crux of the Daniel’s approach is that there is a narrow band of optimal training paces/intensities that train each physiological system. The clear implication for this is that while you may be able to do your intervals faster or harder than what your own respective VDOT recommends, if you do so, you will not be training the physiological mechanism that you are targeting for that workout. In short, the only way to move up a level in your pace recommendations is to prove that your VDOT has increased via race results.

2. If you want to train more, then prove it by racing faster.

In the second edition of Daniel’s Running Formula, Daniels takes a look at fitness programs for beginners, recreational athletes & sub-elite athletes. While he doesn’t directly relate these programs to VDOT, he does provide recommended mileage and time guidelines for each program. This approach to training, i.e. using fitness/competition level to determine training volume and intensity has also been epitomized in the New York Runners Club programs written by Bob and Shelly-Lynn Glover (Glover, 1998).

I find this method particularly applicable to long-course triathletes, who often take the complete reverse approach to this, i.e. I want to race faster therefore I have to train more. No, if you want to train more, you must prove it by racing faster. For every individual, there is an optimal volume (& speed) that will lead to improved racing performance. This optimal volume is related to their own specific limiters, their biomechanical idiosyncracies and their specific lifestyle constraints. However, within these factors, there exists a general range of optimal training volume for various performance levels.

So, what is this optimal volume? A few guidelines from Daniels and others to consider:

In Daniels’ Red (intermediate) plan, for runners who can complete a 20 mile training week under 3hrs (which, for the numerically obsessed out there, works out to a flat base pace of <9:00 per mile or a V-DOT of 47), he recommends building from 20-35 miles per week before racing anything up to half-marathon distance. This program has very limited training beyond tempo intensity. In other words, if you are not running 40-52mi p.w. at a base pace of 8:20 or better per mile, in Daniels opinion (and mine), you are not ready for focused speed work. Importantly, he also points out that runners of this ability level are not ready to target a marathon, which provides some pretty interesting implications for Novice triathletes who sign up for an Ironman with similar fitness numbers

In the Blue (advanced) plan (for runners with a base pace of ~8:20/mile or better/VDOT of 51), Daniels recommends 40-52 miles per week (over the course of 16+ weeks or ~2% increase per week). This phase of development represents more of a focus on speed work (interval training/VO2max sets). In my opinion, this may still be a little early for the use of VO2max sets if the athlete is concerned with developing to their ultimate potential. For instance, former Aussie National Swim Coach, Bill Sweetenham, did no focused VO2 max training for his swimmers until after they had reached National Qualifying level (In Daniels-speak, this would equate to a VDOT of ~64). Daniels also continues to point out that this level of training is not really optimal for Marathon preparation

In the Gold (sub elite) plan (for runners who can complete a 60 mile run week at or better than ~7:45/mile, representing a VDOT of >57), Daniels recommends 60-75 miles/wk of running and asserts that when a runner is of the calibre to handle this training program, they will be prepared for the specific training necessary to prepare for competition of any distance. This level of fitness ties in nicely with Sweetenham’s recommendations of attaining a VDOT of 60+ before engaging in ‘specialized’ training (i.e. race-specific speedwork).

After completing the Gold level of development, the athlete will be ready to undertake any of Daniels’ specialized elite training programs (ranging from 800m-Marathon), presumably in accordance with the personal strengths that they have discovered in the course of the general developmental programs. This form of long term athletic development, moving from a general to a specific focus over a long time period is reminiscent of the plans espoused by periodization guru Istvan Balyi (2005). It is Balyi’s contention that an athlete should be progressed very gradually over the course of 10 years (or 10,000 hours) if they are to achieve their full athletic potential…….

…….pulling all of this together, here are a couple of key observations from the data that you can apply to your own long term plan:

1. It still takes a long time to get good.
That is, it takes a long-term commitment to appropriate, consistent, moderate training to even get close to approaching your potential. We are talking about net mileage increases of ~6-7 miles per year (not 10% per week)!! Setting up a basic week that changes slightly every 6-8 weeks is, in my opinion the best way to apply this progressive, gradual overload long-term.

2. You need to get fit before worrying about getting fast.
If 13 year old kids can swim 4:37 for a 400 with no speed-work, then you really need to question how appropriate speedwork is for you as a sub-elite long course athlete. The key to continual improvement in VDOT (& VO2max) is a consistent application of aerobic volume, not “bleed from the eyeballs” intervals. As Gordo’s progression shows, the key to continual improvement in VDOT (& VO2max) is a consistent application of aerobic volume, not “bleed from the eyeballs” intervals. G’s fitness reached Sweetenham’s criteria for the inclusion of focused speedwork in 2003, when he was an 8:46 Ironman!

3. If you want to be a better runner, run.
If you want to become a faster runner, to a very large extent, you have to run. While the Daniels plan is specific to running, if you take a look at the VDOT values of triathletes, it becomes apparent that you don’t get to discount a whole lot of run mileage in the name of cross training!

One important caveat: That is not to say that the vast majority of Iron Distance athletes out there cannot significantly improve their running split with appropriate bike volume and race execution. However, there comes a point (AFTER these factors are maximized) that the only way to improve your run split is to become a faster runner.

The implications on long-term development for non-elite athletes are certainly something that struck a chord with me when reading the 2nd edition of Daniel’s running formula. As illustrated above, for the most part, the numbers tie in very well with both real life athletic development and proposed developmental plans from some other proven sporting coaches, including Bill Sweetenham and Istvan Balyi.

I took some time off my run using the Furman Marathon plan, dropping my half marathon time from 1:33 to 1:29:10. It's less miles than you are running now. The risk of injury is pretty low becuase it only requires three runs a week... they are all just hard runs.

Scott Murr, one of the program directors is a multiple time Kona qualifier and is really nice about sharing his tri training schedule.

http://www.furman.edu/first/fmtp.htm

Yes I realize I'm asking for a christmas miracle to make this type of improvement in 1 years time. Winter in MN suxs for riding. @#$@%@ Beginning post Twin Cities Marathon, my plan is to run 4-5 times a week, with long runs up to 18 miles every 3rd weekend cycling through 10/15/18. Biking on the trainer 3 times a week, 2-2hr session on the trainer... oh good god. And 1 long ride outside weekend ride on the mtn bike. And 2-4k swims; drilling drilling, LSD, drilling. Maybe mixing in a weights session here and there.

I figure if the top guys are putting in 70miles running a week, perhaps thats overkill if not unsustainable for a mere mortal such as myself.

For an IM marathon I feel that bike fitness is a HUGE factor -- so get as much strength on the bike as you can to help hit that run goal!

I think the lots and lots of base miles and the harder/intense ride balance depends a lot on your background. First couple years base is really important, but the years after, once you have some mileage in your legs, I think the intensity of the rides becomes more and more important (year round).

If you are looking to get in good run training in on 12 hours/week, I would say split it up 50/50 between the bike and the run. 6 hours running (one long run not more than 15 miles until 3 months out from your IM per week, one moderate run around 8-10 miles at goal marathon pace, and a couple easier, shorter recovery runs), and 6 hours cycling (make the cycling sessions count, you can recover more easily from a hard session here than on the run, and with less chance ofinjury). If you can swim decently, you won't need to train for this until a couple months out. As you get closer to your goal race, I would cut back on the running some and add more cycling to prep for the 56/112. After the bike is where I faultered in my half. 2 weeks prior, I cruised a 5 mile race/tempo in sub 28, but was barely able to string 7:40/mile at Steelhead. Your run strength may be there, but it doesn't do you a lick of good if you tap your reserves on the bike.