Is this a sensible running routine, considering my background?

January 27, 2012 4:12 PM

Hey mefite runners and athletes! Am I running too fast too soon? Over the past 3 weeks, I have run 3 miles, 3 times a week, with somewhat alarming gains in speed. I know from the testimony of others that my enthusiasm could lead to injury and over training. The thing is, I have kept the distance to a strict 5k, and have only run 3 times a week. How do I stand?

I should point out that I'm not interested in losing weight, or training to compete in races. I'm just aiming for practical physical fitness, so that come summertime when there's a pick-up game of soccer or frisbee, I'll have the aerobic and anearobic capacity to keep up with the best.

Some background info might be useful though:

In November, I had followed this 3 miles, 3 days a week routine, and seemed to have had great success. I suffered no pains and generally felt great every day. Unfortunately, due to extraneous, non-relevant circumstances, I abruptly stopped running on December 3rd. But, I resumed running on January 9th, at which point I started from scratch (having lost all my progress).

So far, all has been well! But I know that I should be cautious of over-extending myself, especially since I was very sedentary during the entire month of December.

I've been focused on increasing my speed, rather than the total mileage or amount of time that I can run during a session. However, my progress hasn't felt forced. My speed increased primarily because, whenever I ran with smaller, slower strides, my gait felt unnatural, like I was unnecessarily braking myself (perhaps this is an issue regarding the treadmill?) With that said, however, I am definitely eager to run faster and faster, until I eventually plateau.

For those who might be interested, this has been my progress over the past month:

1/9: 3 miles in 32:36.

1/11: 3 miles in 31:00.

1/12: 3 miles in 30:00.

1/15: 3 miles in 28:00

1/17: 3 miles in 26:57

1/19: 3 miles in 27:00

1/23: 3 miles in 25:46

1/25: 3 miles in 25:57

1/27: 3 miles in 24:54

So, in the course of 3 weeks, I've knocked my 3-mile run down about 7 minutes, which does seem drastic considering the short timespan I've spent training. But, since I'm only running 3 miles per session, and only 3 times a week, is my rate of progress actually less alarming than it might appear?

Some extra details that might be worth considering:

-I'm a pretty thin guy, weighing 140 lbs. at 5'7".

-I have a proper pair of running shoes, fairly new and with plenty of bounce.

-I run exclusively on the treadmill, so I'm hitting a relatively soft surface compared to asphalt or concrete.

-During this past week, I haven't felt like I got a good workout from doing the run by itself. So, I have tried cross-training with bike riding after my run, amounting to 1 hour of exertion combined (~half hour on the treadmill, ~half hour on the bike machine). I've also heard that running and biking work the leg muscles in different ways, and thus they complement each other (any thoughts or experiences with this?)

On Wednesday, I felt absolutely fantastic after running and biking. I was full of energy, mentally alert and very happy. Today, however, I am experiencing a mental sluggishness and overall fatigue, and my pulse is faster than normal, suggesting that I might have overdone it. Should I continue cross-training with the bike in this fashion (2 days out of 3, half hour each), or am I tackling too much too soon?

And in general, how does all of this sound to you guys? Is it risky to focus on speed gains rather than endurance gains via increased distance, or total time spent running?

Thank you for any advice, anecdotes, and words of caution :)

posted by Sine_Agraphia to Health & Fitness (13 answers total)

how old are you? for what it's worth, i read your post and was not worried in the slightest. if you're 75, we need to talk.
posted by facetious at 4:21 PM on January 27, 2012

You're fine. 3 miles 3 times a week is a pretty moderate distance, even for a novice. Don't overthink it, listen to your body's signals and have fun.
posted by killdevil at 4:28 PM on January 27, 2012

Response by poster: "how old are you? for what it's worth, i read your post and was not worried in the slightest. if you're 75, we need to talk."

Ah, yes! Totally forgot! I'm 23 years old.
posted by Sine_Agraphia at 4:29 PM on January 27, 2012

Listen to your body. Nothing bad I see here. Also, missing a month of training is a set back, but by no means indicates you lost all progress. It sounds like the initial drop in times was due to getting back into the shape you had established in November.
posted by meinvt at 4:31 PM on January 27, 2012

At 23 you really have nothing to worry about unless you're severely debilitated for some reason.

Get out there, push yourself a little bit each week and up the speed and distance as it seems comfortable to you to do so.
posted by killdevil at 4:33 PM on January 27, 2012

In my experience, I don't usually lose all my progress when I take a break. Even if it's a month. I have run my fastest after a break. I'm not saying it works this way for everyone.

As for the cross-training question, I find that I feel a lot stronger when I run if I am swimming, as well. I don't time myself and I am not competitive, though.

I'd like to say, "Take whatever cues your body sends," but if I followed this advice, I'd probably sit around a lot more. But do take your time if you feel like it and notice what your body is up to. It's one of the joys of exercise.
posted by amodelcitizen at 4:36 PM on January 27, 2012

Another suggestion: if you're running on a treadmill, try elevating the platform as another way to modulate how hard you're working while you run. If an 8 minute pace doesn't feel challenging, try it at 3 or 4 degrees of incline and see how you feel.
posted by killdevil at 4:38 PM on January 27, 2012

Do you feel like you're running harder? The rapid improvements will plateau soon enough, as it is likely your body adjusting to the mechanics of running.

It's great that you're starting running not on a treadmill and getting a feel for your natural rhythm as opposed to just going and doing the same thing on the treadmill each time. Also, your body is likely pretty well designed for running - the best distance runners tend to be shorter, thinner people.
posted by hepta at 5:05 PM on January 27, 2012

Best answer: You're fine. You'll have no problem at all running flat on a treadmill at that distance. And good for you. Running is an amazing mood-enhancer.

If you're looking for a better workout, run outside. I don't know the science, but I can tell you from experience that moving your body through space is a much better and more difficult workout than moving your legs across a moving surface.

Also, if you do run on an elevated treadmill, vary the elevation during your run. You may end up with a calf or achilles injury if you run too long on a constant three or four degree treadmill elevation. Also, don't heel strike, or you will eventually get hurt.
posted by cnc at 5:08 PM on January 27, 2012

Best answer: When people start off with a new type of exercise, gains can be really fast, because often it's about the body learning how to be more efficient in the movements, rather than about actual increases in aerobic fitness or strength. For what it's worth, a bunch of guys I know who don't run at all recently decided to do a 5k, and they were doing 25 minute 5ks out of the box with no training. So you perhaps were unnecessarily braking yourself.

Finally, a friend of mine who runs both on a treadmill and outside says you need a 2-3 degree incline to approimate the outdoor experience.
posted by lollusc at 5:09 PM on January 27, 2012

FWIW, I run habitually on a treadmill at a 4.5 degree incline, and find that translates to outside running at a pace that's about a minute per mile faster than what I run indoors.
posted by killdevil at 5:22 PM on January 27, 2012

Response by poster: Thanks for all the responses guys. I'm relieved and excited to hear that I'm (probably) not risking injury at the rate I'm going. After reading so many previous threads where beginners are admonished by veterans for overtaxing their bodies, I figured I might be setting myself up for disaster. However, those posters would stress the importance of increasing their mileage gently and cautiously, whereas the issue of speed gains by itself was never explicitly addressed.

cnc: thanks for the info. I was actually considering to have the treadmill elevated during my next run, and would have had it at a fixed degree for the entire duration.

And I agree with you that running outside is a substantially different experience, and generally more difficult and enjoyable. I plan to take things out doors once the Winter passes.

lollsuc and killdevil: I plan to experiment with the inclines, because I've definitely noticed in the past that, after having trained on a treadmill, I was somewhat underwhelmed by my speed and strength once I set foot outside.
posted by Sine_Agraphia at 5:30 PM on January 27, 2012 [1 favorite]

This doesn't sound like too much to me, but have you considered actually running outside? it's... different. Running on a dirt track is probably better than concrete but it doesn't seem to make that much difference to me, except that running on concrete is easier/faster
posted by RustyBrooks at 9:02 PM on January 27, 2012