all posts post new thread

Bodyweight Running: Frequency vs Duration

Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)

Dom DelRosso

Level 4 Valued Member
I'd like to find out the views of members of this forum, and also possibly be pointed in the direction of further reading.

When talking about running it's hard to ignore the MAF method. Run longer at lower intensities. The question I have is are you able to replicate those effects by replacing the long sessions with multiple shorter ones. I understand that at a certain point you are unable to simulate the same impacts as a long duration session, but could you get to say an 80% solution?

For reference on my own I would consider a 40 minute run a longer training run, and the shorter ones 8-12 minutes running to PT formation and back (typically with KB swings/strength before hand and calisthenics prior to formation) but Monday-Friday. Once a week I try to do a longer ruck/hike for upwards of 2 hours, but the majority of my work is focused on these runs.

On my own testing I just completed the Norwegian Foot March (18.6 miles in 4:30 w/25lbs) following the program above. I've always been a decent rucker, but didn't go too far outside the range of my abilities in performing this test with just the previously mentioned training.
 
I think something starts metabolically at around the ten minute mark so a twenty minute run would only offer ten minutes benefit. Over simplified and unsubstantiated.
Perhaps twenty minutes as a minimum, not the 8 to 12 you suggested.
 
I understand that at a certain point you are unable to simulate the same impacts as a long duration session, but could you get to say an 80% solution?
I would say yes.
In the following post I have linked to some studies on accumulated vs. continuous training

Pavel recommends Steady State for "cardio", i.e. stretching the heart:


Typical recommendations that fly around are to train at least 30 minutes continuously above 110 BPM HR to build a bigger heart (But below Aerobic Threshold).

However, current research indicates that overall there seems to be no difference between continuous and accumulated exercise (for example 1x30 minutes vs. 3x10 minutes) with respect to VO2-max, Resting-HR, BMI, cholesterol, and other measures. Accumulated exercise actually seems to give a bit better results (at least for relatively inactive people that start training), especially with respect to fat/weight loss.

But I have not found if this holds true for stretching the heart. Does anyone know a study on it? Or could you point me to the right keywords? I don't even know the technical term for "stretching of the heart" or "healthy heart growth".

I am asking because I often can find 10-20 minute slots for aerobic sessions, but 30-60 minutes are hard to come by for me.

Some Publications:
Meta-Analysis by Murphy et al. (2009): Accumulated versus Continuous Exercise for Health Benefit
Meta-Analysis by Murphy et al. (2020): The Effects of Continuous Compared to Accumulated Exercise on Health: A Meta-Analytic Review
Typical study with "walking" as exercise: Multiple short bouts of exercise are better than a single continuous bout for cardiometabolic health: a randomised crossover trial
 
Ah! Exactly the sort of thing I was interested in finding. The link to the old post is greatly appreciated as well!
 
I think something starts metabolically at around the ten minute mark so a twenty minute run would only offer ten minutes benefit. Over simplified and unsubstantiated.
Perhaps twenty minutes as a minimum, not the 8 to 12 you suggested.
There was a slight relation to the studies mentioned by Bauer of a lack of correlation/proof of to metabolic health for the repeated bouts at least from the reading I just did (please don't cite me)

I may try and force myself to run longer a couple days a week for those additional benefits...but I really don't like to run.
 
I think there might be trade-offs and benefits to whatever you do. Multiple bouts are probably favourable when it comes to breaking the monotony of sitting too much. This is also discussed in this article by Fabio Zonin:

Maybe longer sessions are better for stretching the heart. But who knows. Overall both approaches seem to have similar effects. Do what you can :)
 
I think something starts metabolically at around the ten minute mark so a twenty minute run would only offer ten minutes benefit. Over simplified and unsubstantiated.
Perhaps twenty minutes as a minimum, not the 8 to 12 you suggested.
I seem to remember the big changes don’t start until the 30 minute mark
 
You could try mixing long slow running with jumping rope. Jumping rope one minute on and one minute rest or two minutes on and one minute rest. Then repeat until you have been jumping rope for 6-8 minutes total (not counting rest minutes).

Frequency is three aerobic sessions per week (i.e Sunday, Tuesday, Thursday). One week two long slow runs and one jump rope session. Next week one long slow run and two jump rope sessions.
 
You could try mixing long slow running with jumping rope. Jumping rope one minute on and one minute rest or two minutes on and one minute rest. Then repeat until you have been jumping rope for 6-8 minutes total (not counting rest minutes).

Frequency is three aerobic sessions per week (i.e Sunday, Tuesday, Thursday). One week two long slow runs and one jump rope session. Next week one long slow run and two jump rope sessions.
Jump rope is amazing for short sessions. 10 mins of skipping no breaks feels like a 30 min. Higher end zone two run.
 
I'd like to find out the views of members of this forum, and also possibly be pointed in the direction of further reading.

When talking about running it's hard to ignore the MAF method. Run longer at lower intensities. The question I have is are you able to replicate those effects by replacing the long sessions with multiple shorter ones. I understand that at a certain point you are unable to simulate the same impacts as a long duration session, but could you get to say an 80% solution?

For reference on my own I would consider a 40 minute run a longer training run, and the shorter ones 8-12 minutes running to PT formation and back (typically with KB swings/strength before hand and calisthenics prior to formation) but Monday-Friday. Once a week I try to do a longer ruck/hike for upwards of 2 hours, but the majority of my work is focused on these runs.

On my own testing I just completed the Norwegian Foot March (18.6 miles in 4:30 w/25lbs) following the program above. I've always been a decent rucker, but didn't go too far outside the range of my abilities in performing this test with just the previously mentioned training.
@Dom DelRosso - you have a unique situation because coaches like Arthur Lydiard would say that a 2hr continuous run each week is non-negotiable BUT you have a 2hr ruck / march which maybe a might fine substitute!

From my experience (with no scientific trials to back this up) I believe that rucking and running do have some cross-over benefits.

I suspect that, depending on your running goals, short - more tailored run sessions between 20-30min could get you further along the way to be a faster runner within your tight parameters. Perhaps 2-3 per week.

Some examples of that might be a threshold session 5min w/up > 20min at desired pace > 5min c/down.

or intervals 8min w/up > 7 x 1min fast + 1 min easy pace > 8min c/down easy pace. etc. etc.

Curious to hear what others think...
 
Hello,

For 'general health and / or performance', one needs a base to build upon. Once this base is here (and not developped at the expense of something else), everything becomes easier.

This base is: Strength and aerobic capacity.

One can improve the latter with interval training, at least up to a certain extent. At some point, one can develop some aerobic deficiency syndrome. This can occur if one only runs S&S without LSD for instance. It may only be seen with 'long' runs (2-3+ miles).To reap all the benefits, one need to work on MAF (or similar protocols with low HR and 'a lot' of volume), paired with interval of some sort. MAF without volume would not be optimal in general.

A 3x a week template could be:
- 1 tempo run (intervals of event pace or slightly above)
- 1 A+A session (swings/ snatches / sprints)
- 1 easy long run
[optional: 1 moderately long run]

What follows could be an example of LISS / interval template :

Kind regards,

Pet'
 
I found 30:00 6-7x/week to offer dramatically better ROI than 60:00 3-4x/week, targeting the same (low) intensity level. This was probably the single most productive change I've ever made to my running training, perhaps second to slowing way down--for me, it broke the cycle of constant overuse injuries and let me start accumulating and gradually increasing volume.

I haven't tried less than 30:00/session, ultimately being limited by the amount of laundry I'm willing to do, but I don't think I've found the lower limit on session duration.

ETA consider this from Stephen Seiler: . Seiler tends to interpret internal/external drift at an easy pace as the "money time", if you will--he's said elsewhere that this is the taxing but effective part of the session. In light of my personal experience, it occurs to me that we could just as well take the opposite approach and try to accumulate easy-pace volume while minimizing internal/external drift. Ymmv.
 
Last edited:
I found 30:00 6-7x/week to offer dramatically better ROI than 60:00 3-4x/week, targeting the same (low) intensity level. This was probably the single most productive change I've ever made to my running training, perhaps second to slowing way down--for me, it broke the cycle of constant overuse injuries and let me start accumulating and gradually increasing volume.

I haven't tried less than 30:00/session, ultimately being limited by the amount of laundry I'm willing to do, but I don't think I've found the lower limit on session duration.

ETA consider this from Stephen Seiler: . Seiler tends to interpret internal/external drift at an easy pace as the "money time", if you will--he's said elsewhere that this is the taxing but effective part of the session. In light of my personal experience, it occurs to me that we could just as well take the opposite approach and try to accumulate easy-pace volume while minimizing internal/external drift. Ymmv.

ROI as far as what? 30 min. In zone 2?
 
ROI as far as what? 30 min. In zone 2?

Better return on investment--less fatigue and fewer nagging injuries, similar effect on running performance. (Actually, comparable levels of fatigue and nagging injuries, but a lot more total activity. But same deal.).

I don't have my zones precisely mapped out, don't think it's worth the trouble if you're dealing with varied terrain and weather, but I'd average about 10bpm under MAF for the whole 30min, and in turn the first 10-15min of warming-up were a good deal below that.
 
Considering the many variables involved (including ones goals and aspirations) it seems that many approaches will ‘work’.
I have always favoured the more or less classic… 2-3 short runs (30-45min ea.) and 1 long run (60 - 120+) / week.

I usually cycle in a similar fashion… 2 short rides ( 1-2hrs ea.) and 1 long ride (4-5+hrs) / week.
 
I’m predisposed to shoot for a total of an hour of aerobic development every time I go out.

That may be a brisk walk (3x per week), a brisk ruck at 35-50# (3x per week), and jogging/jogging intervals or something else like rowing or street strider.

Over the next several weeks, I will work to replace a walking session and a ruck session with jogging.

But I always shoot for an hour.
 
Hello,

I agree with @offwidth 's opinion. Most of the "classic" approaches are based on a long run and 2 or 3 shorter ones (which can include tempo / interval run). This is what we can read in TFTUA for example.

However, depending on the goal (performing or just finishing), it remains possible to at least finish with a fairly low weekly mileage:

I guess that what is important is consistency over intensity. For long races, there's also a lot of walking.

Kind regards,

Pet'
 
@Dom DelRosso - you have a unique situation because coaches like Arthur Lydiard would say that a 2hr continuous run each week is non-negotiable BUT you have a 2hr ruck / march which maybe a might fine substitute!

From my experience (with no scientific trials to back this up) I believe that rucking and running do have some cross-over benefits.

I suspect that, depending on your running goals, short - more tailored run sessions between 20-30min could get you further along the way to be a faster runner within your tight parameters. Perhaps 2-3 per week.

Some examples of that might be a threshold session 5min w/up > 20min at desired pace > 5min c/down.

or intervals 8min w/up > 7 x 1min fast + 1 min easy pace > 8min c/down easy pace. etc. etc.

Curious to hear what others think...
I would 100% agree that a longer session like that is non-negotiable for health (especially when done in the woods/nature).

I typically try to play with pace on alternating days. Some may be pushing my pace, while others is just a nice slow and easy jog on in.
 
Hello,

For 'general health and / or performance', one needs a base to build upon. Once this base is here (and not developped at the expense of something else), everything becomes easier.

This base is: Strength and aerobic capacity.

One can improve the latter with interval training, at least up to a certain extent. At some point, one can develop some aerobic deficiency syndrome. This can occur if one only runs S&S without LSD for instance. It may only be seen with 'long' runs (2-3+ miles).To reap all the benefits, one need to work on MAF (or similar protocols with low HR and 'a lot' of volume), paired with interval of some sort. MAF without volume would not be optimal in general.

A 3x a week template could be:
- 1 tempo run (intervals of event pace or slightly above)
- 1 A+A session (swings/ snatches / sprints)
- 1 easy long run
[optional: 1 moderately long run]

What follows could be an example of LISS / interval template :

Kind regards,

Pet'
My own training has slowly been changing after reading the article. I used to be highly regimented on when I was swinging, pressing, etc. Now I'm more flexible, although I do still run to PT each day generally with some swings before hand.
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom