IndianaRunner

[WarriorXC09]

I have always been interested about who the highest mileage teams are. I have here the top 5 in-state. If you know this information submit your results. I would like them to be accurate so don't wote if you truly have no idea. Also if you think your team is high mileage leave your team name, highest mileage per week, and name if you wish. If you know how many miles any of these teams do please post that as well.

[Prefonbain]

The Shields brothers were said to often be high mileage (up to 90), not sure if the entire Fishers team is or not

[Colin]

I know Fishers runs very high mileage, especially some of their past runners. Calling Columbus North a high mileage program wouldn't be inaccurate, but it's all individiualized for each athlete.

[XCinIN]

I would be more interested in how these guys lay out their miles more than the total of miles logged. If they run 90 a week do they break it up into three runs a day of say 5 miles x 3 times a day or do they run twice a day or just once. There are so many ways to log miles that some of these guys just make up miles. Some of the mileage just doesn't help in training. This would be interesting to most of the runners that are just starting out or maybe even the older kids. I find this very interesting the ways everyone trains. It seems everyone has different ideas and things that work and things that don't. It's all good but interesting to hear what works for each of them. It never works for any two people the same way.

[xccolonel]

The poll will probably end up being useless.

As far as real contributions I don't have a clue what kind of mileage most of those teams do.

EDIT: I just now read the post above me, and he made a really good point. Volume per run is way more critical than total miles in a week.

[4SStar4sstar]

This thread is ridiculous and anyone who coaches or leads workouts and labels themselves or other teams as high or low mileage is beyond unqualified. Everyone knows that every runner is different. If a coach has a philosophy of having a team full of nothing but high mileage guys, he's setting himself up to have a few runners that respond and the rest will be hurt and/or achy and/or worn out by the end up the season. The idea of Paavo camp is nice, if you already know that the kid responds, but sending a kid there for the sack of sending a kid there is dumb...sending WHOLE teams there is ludicrous.

With that said...from experience, high mileage isn't that significant or big of a deal...it's how the miles are done. For example...if you do 100 miles in a week, only about 30-45 of those miles really need to be "workout" miles...the rest could/should be easy-moderate runs and usually, if we are speaking of high schoolers...should be broken down between 2 runs a day. I'd never suggest a high school kid cresting 65-75 miles a week anyway...that is, if you want them improving much after high school.


-4SStar <><

[tomwelling]

This thread is ridiculous and anyone who coaches or leads workouts and labels themselves or other teams as high or low mileage is beyond unqualified. Everyone knows that every runner is different. If a coach has a philosophy of having a team full of nothing but high mileage guys, he's setting himself up to have a few runners that respond and the rest will be hurt and/or achy and/or worn out by the end up the season. The idea of Paavo camp is nice, if you already know that the kid responds, but sending a kid there for the sack of sending a kid there is dumb...sending WHOLE teams there is ludicrous.

With that said...from experience, high mileage isn't that significant or big of a deal...it's how the miles are done. For example...if you do 100 miles in a week, only about 30-45 of those miles really need to be "workout" miles...the rest could/should be easy-moderate runs and usually, if we are speaking of high schoolers...should be broken down between 2 runs a day. I'd never suggest a high school kid cresting 65-75 miles a week anyway...that is, if you want them improving much after high school.


-4SStar <><

I'm not sure you really understand much about Paavo....

[ihaveran]

From being around the grant county area. Ive heard that Oak High School has one lowest mileages around their area. From 25-30 miles a week.

[WarriorXC09]

With that said...from experience, high mileage isn't that significant or big of a deal...it's how the miles are done. For example...if you do 100 miles in a week, only about 30-45 of those miles really need to be "workout" miles...the rest could/should be easy-moderate runs and usually, if we are speaking of high schoolers...should be broken down between 2 runs a day. I'd never suggest a high school kid cresting 65-75 miles a week anyway...that is, if you want them improving much after high school.


-4SStar <><[/quote]

I totally agree, I know that there is no way that i would be able to handle 80-90 miles per week, or even 70 for more than one week per month, This could result in serious injury, however coaches that do this seem to turn out prettty good runners, i'm guessing it has mostly to do with natural ability to handle the miles. I know that our coach dislikes the high mileage and bases his training more on speed, threshold, and other workouts. We usually do 3weeks of sustained miles and then have a cutback were we cut back miles per week by about 15-20 and speedwork stays the same. The most miles that I will probaly be doing during high school would be around 60 per week. This seems sufficient enough to me. I agree that a high schooler would not improve much if they were doing 80 per week, then when they go to college they level off or improve little because they can't increase mileage much from what they were already doing. The point of this is just to find out who the teams are who attempt the most mileage during training.

[cc_logbook]

This thread is ridiculous and anyone who coaches or leads workouts and labels themselves or other teams as high or low mileage is beyond unqualified. Everyone knows that every runner is different. . . . The idea of Paavo camp is nice, if you already know that the kid responds, but sending a kid there for the sack of sending a kid there is dumb...sending WHOLE teams there is ludicrous. -4star

Maybe you should've kept the focus on mileage instead of trying to start a thread on the Paavos. From the standpoint of both a coach (who has had runners go on the Paavos) and a parent (who has had children on the Paavos), I must respectfully observe that you don't know what you're talking about here. My son ran 20 miles total during his week on the Paavos, for that's where he was LEVELED. Some of my runners have run as much as 70 miles, while others have run as few as 20 -- in all instances, the mileage was totally dependent upon where they were LEVELED. Speaking from firsthand experience, by "LEVEL" I am referring to the fact that NO runners (if they HONESTLY fill out their training profiles coming into camp) make big jumps in mileage at Paavo North or Paavo Missouri camps; the training level is individualized for each runner based upon what level of mileage he or she is training at coming into the camp.

If you want to start a thread on Paavo, that's your business, but don't bring Paavo into a discussion of "high mileage" when one of the basic tenets of the Paavos is the notion of training levels.

And that's all that I have to say about that.

[Colin]

The idea of Paavo camp is nice, if you already know that the kid responds, but sending a kid there for the sack of sending a kid there is dumb...sending WHOLE teams there is ludicrous.

I'd never suggest a high school kid cresting 65-75 miles a week anyway...that is, if you want them improving much after high school.

I agree with some of the posts in response to this, most notably the one right above mine. There are a lot of people that swear against "Paavo" without any real understanding of what it is. I'm sure when I was younger, I might have said the same thing. That was before I educated myself on what it is. Now, I'm not saying that every good coach has to believe in the system or run the program. There are many different ways to train for distance running. In fact, the four most successful boys programs in this decade (Carmel, Columbus North, Franklin Central and Northridge) all run very different programs. I'm just saying that "Paavo", or what's really called the PPM program, can definitely work. I know of at least two teams that will most likely be in the state finals that sent their entire teams to one of the camps this week. In fact, the originator of Paavo is Marshall Sellers who coached a state championship team at Elkhart Central in the late 60s or early 70s. It certainly doesn't involve randomly throwing 16 year olds into 70 mile weeks.

Also, lots of runners with successful post-high school careers ran that kind of mileage later in high school. I know that Christian Wagner ran around 70 miles a week his junior and senior years and had an excellent career at Wisconsin. Drew Shields ran around 90 miles a week in his peak volume time.

[4SStar4sstar]

I think I'm being misunderstood. I'm not saying you can't be successful after hs if you do high mileage. There is a difference with how pol respond. Also, I kno what paavo is all about. I'm only against whole teams going. Kids that know how to stay healthy and are ready for that training I'm all about them going.


-4sstar

[logic_cat]

I'm a big believer in Paavo. Unfortunately Ive been getting hurt by running more than 35 miles a week so me and Paavo don't go together to well.

[cc_logbook]

Also, I kno what paavo is all about. I'm only against whole teams going. -4star

No, I don't think you do [know what Paavo is about]. If you understood my earlier comments about the leveling, then what earthly objection could there be to an entire team going? The kids who are ready to run 20 miles run 20, those ready to run 50 do 50, and so on. Would you object to an entire team going to All-Star? Or the Begley camp? Or Brahm's? Or any other?

By the way, I know for a fact that Columbus North has kids all over the spectrum: runners at 20 miles a week and runners at 70 miles, and that's exactly the way they would be handled at a Paavo camp, so why not get them all together at a camp which will fit their training level precisely?

[4SStar4sstar]

Also, I kno what paavo is all about. I'm only against whole teams going. -4sstar

No, I don't think you do [know what Paavo is about]. If you understood my earlier comments about the leveling, then what earthly objection could there be to an entire team going? The kids who are ready to run 20 miles run 20, those ready to run 50 do 50, and so on. Would you object to an entire team going to All-Star? Or the Begley camp? Or Brahm's? Or any other?

By the way, I know for a fact that Columbus North has kids all over the spectrum: runners at 20 miles a week and runners at 70 miles, and that's exactly the way they would be handled at a Paavo camp, so why not get them all together at a camp which will fit their training level precisely?

Missing my point and I understand what you are saying. Labeling teams as "high mileage" or "low mileage" for that matter is not right. Everyone is different...leveling off of the runners when they arrive is not what happens...they are all separate locations of the camps. I know about paavo, like I said. I've seen what paavo does for kids...it either makes them better or makes them worse. You are seeing what I'm getting at right? The ones that get better are those that respond well to the higher mileage and those that don't, they get hurt. If you send your whole team to the camp geared towards lower, then the ones well prepared are being short changed..if you sent them all to the higher mileage, the ones that aren't prepared get their health risked. If you think I know nothing about what I'm talking I DO!

For more information so YOU can see what I'm talking about...http://www.paavorunningcamps.com/
btw, don't have to sound so condescending...


-4sstar <><

[4SStar4sstar]

I answered your question and am done as long as we are no longer adding to the discussion of TEAMS that are high mileage or low mileage as it is obvious that categorizing them as either isn't correct.

-4SStar <><

[Symmonds800]

I can assure you that Noblesville is not a high mileage school

[royalrunner]

I know CN is pretty high mileage, but i think carmel is more quality over quanity, although last winter i know walden and kinn were doing some pretty big long runs...

[no_excuses]

I can assure you that Noblesville is not a high mileage school

I can remember over the summer someone posting that Ryan Ferguson and Collin Ginebaugh were around 70 mpw.

[tomwelling]

Also, I kno what paavo is all about. I'm only against whole teams going. -4sstar

No, I don't think you do [know what Paavo is about]. If you understood my earlier comments about the leveling, then what earthly objection could there be to an entire team going? The kids who are ready to run 20 miles run 20, those ready to run 50 do 50, and so on. Would you object to an entire team going to All-Star? Or the Begley camp? Or Brahm's? Or any other?

By the way, I know for a fact that Columbus North has kids all over the spectrum: runners at 20 miles a week and runners at 70 miles, and that's exactly the way they would be handled at a Paavo camp, so why not get them all together at a camp which will fit their training level precisely?

Missing my point and I understand what you are saying. Labeling teams as "high mileage" or "low mileage" for that matter is not right. Everyone is different...leveling off of the runners when they arrive is not what happens...they are all separate locations of the camps. I know about paavo, like I said. I've seen what paavo does for kids...it either makes them better or makes them worse. You are seeing what I'm getting at right? The ones that get better are those that respond well to the higher mileage and those that don't, they get hurt. If you send your whole team to the camp geared towards lower, then the ones well prepared are being short changed..if you sent them all to the higher mileage, the ones that aren't prepared get their health risked. If you think I know nothing about what I'm talking I DO!

For more information so YOU can see what I'm talking about...http://www.paavorunningcamps.com/
btw, don't have to sound so condescending...


-4sstar <><

Leveling runners off when they arrive is exactly what happens. They have you write down your training for the previous three weeks leading up to the camp, and based on that they assign you a mileage for the week. Yes, Paavo encourages runners to increase their mileage- but to do so intelligently and after building up slowly. There are tons of runners at each Paavo camp whose mileage ranges from extremely low to really high. It is completely individualized.

By the way, cc_logbook definitely knows more about Paavo than you (no offense). He is probably about the only one on this board who knows more about it than me (and he knows considerably more than me....) Sorry, Colin- I think I still have you beat in terms of Paavo knowledge.

[theprimeminister]

I know about paavo, like I said. I've seen what paavo does for kids...it either makes them better or makes them worse. You are seeing what I'm getting at right? The ones that get better are those that respond well to the higher mileage and those that don't, they get hurt. If you send your whole team to the camp geared towards lower, then the ones well prepared are being short changed..if you sent them all to the higher mileage, the ones that aren't prepared get their health risked. If you think I know nothing about what I'm talking I DO!

For more information so YOU can see what I'm talking about...http://www.paavorunningcamps.com/
btw, don't have to sound so condescending...


-4sstar <><[/quote]

it really sounds like you don't knwo what you're taling about. i've never heard of a kid going to a PAAVO camp, filling out his training log honestly, and then coming back worse for it. as far as i know, working hard at a safe level and getting outside of your comfort zone is almost guaranteed to make a runner better. aslo, saying that you shouldn't send your whole team to a certain camp is like saying a team shouldn't all have the same coach during the season, because that coach's training philosophy may not be best for all of his athletes. it's a ridiculous stance to take, and maybe you should better acquaint yourself with some of the results that PAAVO camps have procured for runners over the past 37 years

[TheChasePack]

About Paavo: I have never been a part of a paavo system or claim to know a whole lot about it. But I do have teammates who have been on the system and I have a few opinions about it.
1) I don't know if it is true or not but from what I have heard, Columbus North is not on a pure Paavo system. I have been told that Weinheimer has done what every good coach should do in taking a system they believe in and tweeking it to make it their own. I don't believe that the only reason that Columbus North is beating Perry Meridian and others every year is just because they have more naturally talented runners.

2) From my experience, kids coming off the paavo system have a harder time adjusting to being college runners. This is not to say that the kids don't have successful careers, but they tend not to make the jump right out of high school. I think a big reason for this is the adjustment from an individualized program to more of a team program. Kids on the paavo system tend to get used to running by themselves since they have these runs and paces completely planned out for them no matter what everybody else is doing, where in a majority of college programs incorporate much more of a team aspect. A great example of this is Nick Polk at GVSU.

3) I don't think a generalized program like the Paavo system works for everybody. You can't just sit there and say, since this kid did this today he's going to do this tomorrow because thats what the paper says. Everybody is different and recovers differently, races differently, and has a different style that works for them. Paavo is a cheap and easy way to make up for poor coaching skills and lack of enough knowledge to do your own thing. Live by the saying "If a team is better then you, don't try to be like them, try to be better than them." The paavo system settles too much on just being content on being like them.

[TheChasePack]

About higher mileage: This is kind of a huge pet peeve of mine on every running message board I have ever read. I think the trend in America away from high mileage is simply caused by laziness, because it has pretty much been proven over and over and over again that training at higher mileage leads to better racing no matter the distance.

1) (I know I'm using professionals in these first examples but it is a general comparison on common knowledge since I don't know what most high schoolers run in practice) Why is it that Kara Goucher started running PR's in the 1500 and 5000 meters when she started training for marathons? That goes against everything people believe in? How can you get that kind of speed from running marathon training? Or how can Nick Simmons be such a good 800 runner when he is running over 100 miles per week? Shouldn't he just be training speed? Well for Simmons, just watch his race. Look how strong he is over the last 200-300 meters. The difference between his training and many other 800 runners training is the higher mileage and that is why he is strong from 600-800 while everybody else is strong from 0-600.

2) Who cares if you improve by huge margins in college? If you could run a 14:45 on the track for 5K in high school and get to college and are only able to run 14:00, are you worse off than the kid who makes a jump from 18:00 down to 15:00? It is not only harder to make those big jumps when you are running higher mileage, but also when you are running at a national level. It is a common theme to point at all these national champion high schoolers who were high mileage and say they "never do anything" and "are only all-Americans now". I feel that his is such a mute point as there is no way to tell how well they would have done in college if they had run lower high school mileage, and I would argue that they would actually do much much worse in college if they would have come from low mileage programs.

3) I feel that 99.99% of the claims against higher mileage are from people that have never ran more than 60 miles in a week. Every single person I have ever personally known to significantly increase miles have not had an increase in injury or suffered more burn out or and of the things these people claim that are inevitable. They actually tend to be less injury prone and run faster. I got a stress fracture in high school and was almost constantly injured running 40-60 miles per week. I am now running 80+ miles per week and have not had any injury issues. I have a teammate who posts on here often that is in the same boat. I also had a teammate in high school that was hardly ever injured, decreased his mileage at the program he is at now, and got a stress fracture weeks before his freshman track season started (he did not run cross country). I think the myth that if you run low mileage and get injured, then you aren't good enough to run high mileage is hugely hugely inaccurate.

4) The only program I am rather confident is a high mileage program is the most successful program in the nation at York High School. Again, there are many claims that these guys do nothing in college, but on the other hand they turn out many many more successful collegiate runners than schools of similar size. I don't think they just have better natural runners than everybody else every singe race, but rather there is something in the training that tends to work.

[WarriorXC09]

You really seem to know your stuff ChasePack. Seems like you do alot of research about this. However, I still feel like doing ridiculous amounts like 90 miles per week would do nothing but injure me. Even if I attempted this,my pace would be so slow I just don't see how it could help me. This might be because my coach has never allowed me to do high mileage. I have over and over asked him to increase my mileage but he flat out refuses because he insists I will get injured. Bumping up steadily could help me but only 5 more miles per week each new training season won't cut it beacuse all I will be doing my senior year of track is 60mpw. Your logic makes sense but others do as well. I feel like this will continue to be debated for years to come.

[Logic_Runner]

I know CN is pretty high mileage, but i think carmel is more quality over quanity, although last winter i know walden and kinn were doing some pretty big long runs...

Sup guys it’s Walden. An average week for me is around 50 mpw not going to go to in depth to our actually training, but the longest run we do is around 10 on Sunday. We do have a have a cardiovascular development class (jogging) at Carmel. Carmel has block schedule so the class meets every other day. We normally get about another 10 miles a week from the class but the runs are sort of a joke and more for team bonding and to enjoy running. Also sometimes they are like circuits on the track with like stopping and doing some sort of strength exercise (like push ups or sit ups) or something else sort of stupid. So I don’t really count these runs into my actual training mileage. Its all pretty individualized here for the greyhounds. No one does the exact same thing as any of the other 100 kids on the team everyone does what there ability and fitness allows. All in all royal runner (Will Wartenberg) doesn’t know much about our training.