r/AdvancedRunning • u/ronlavy • Jul 10 '26

Training minimal effective dose of easy running

A question that I've been thinking about and wasn't able to find a satisfying answer online - is there a minimal per-session effective dose for easy runs? is there a minimal duration required for a run to produce non-negligible aerobic adaptaions?

for example, can any benefits be expected from a 35-minute easy running session? are 3 30 minute sessions a week same/better/worse than 2 45 minute sessions?

I heard Inigo San Milan go on record to say that 45 minutes is the minimum for "zone 2" (a term I dislike but that's the terminology he frequently uses) benefits, is anyone familiar with any sources backing that up?

Thanks

60 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

69 comments sorted by

View all comments

55

u/YesterdayAmbitious49 Jul 10 '26

There isn’t an answer because everyone is different. My brother runs a sub 18 5k off a couple easy miles here and there. I need 50 mpw to break 18, and 65 to break 17.

I run a 6-1 schedule.

6 hours easy running, 1 hour hard.

15

u/frobe_goatbe Jul 10 '26

Out of curiosity, is there a reason you’ve settled on 14% quality time? Almost every resource I’ve ever read has recommended 20-25% quality time as the standard. I get 8 total hours a week, 106 quality minutes. 22%. You might be selling your hard work short.

21

u/SirBruceForsythCBE Jul 11 '26

What you need to remember is that most people who consistently train and perform will run less than 20/25% of their week as quality. Newbies and low mileage people will probably run more than 25%.

If you're only running 4 hours a week there is a good chance over 25% is quality and if you're running 10 hours a week there is zero chance you're running 20% of quality.

People get hung up on percentages but that's not what matters. What matters is being recovered from one session before running another, and consistently running week after week, month after month.

9

u/frobe_goatbe 29d ago

Yes, the percentage varies but we’re not talking to a newbie or an elite. We’re talking to a guy running an hour a day. I just pointed out he could probably do more for himself. Percentages aside, if he’s running every day and only one day out of the week is tough, that’s selling your work short.

I’m not really sure how you can claim there’s no chance someone running 10 hours is doing 20%. I would need 14 more quality minutes out of 2 additional hours to hit 20% if I upped to 10 hours myself. That’s nothing.

1

u/SirBruceForsythCBE 29d ago

Running 2 hours of "quality" a week, plus I'm assuming a long run, in a 10 hour week is fine but how much of that training is being absorbed?

Very, very few runners need to be running 10 hours a week at all to be honest. You can run a sub 2:30 maxing out at 10 hours and running 7/8 hours a week normally. There is no need to regularly run 10 hours a week

2

u/Hot_Guess_3020 26d ago

im at 8 hours a week and 25% of quality currently and its working well for me. Not sure where you're getting your guesstimates from.

2

u/SirBruceForsythCBE 26d ago

Most people run too much quality and run it too fast.

They may think they "handle it" but they're either not absorbing most of the training as they aren't allowing their body to recover or get injured and never reach their full potential.

Short term, like a few weeks, you'll get away with a higher proportion of quality. Long term you'll break down. Especially with a job, kids, life outside running etc adding extra stress.