My sister recently sent me this article from the NYT. I feel like I was talking to one of y'all recently about this....
Is this guy full of shit or what? Part of me agrees that, for older folks or overweight folks, taking walk breaks is a great idea - it is lower impact and probably keeps you running at a faster pace when you're running, and keeps you out for longer amounts of time.
I just don't buy that it will help "fitter" people - people like us - run faster times at long distances. I mean, what could be the possible benefit, once you're over a certain aerobic fitness threshold? (Assuming you're not crazy injured.) I'm also skeptical of the fact that he only thinks it's necessary to run 3 times a week - 2 20-60 minute runs and one long run on the weekend.
What do you guys think? Do you know anything more about this guy's "science" behind all this?
5 comments:
I think this came up in the car ride back from Providian. The article in NYT uses the venerable "proof by anecdote"
From what I hear, the backlash Galloway got from the running community was so strong he did eventually revise many of his recommendations. I think you're now supposed to run the whole way if you're faster than some certain cutoff.
For people running for fitness, it really does make sense to walk. Most people are going to walk during a marathon anyway, so they might as well walk on purpose rather than because they're too tired to run.
But Galloway originally wanted everyone to walk during marathons, which is insane. I remember a Scott Douglas article (no longer on his website (http://www.scottdouglas.biz/?page_id=4) ), in which Douglas called Galloway out. Douglas asked Galloway for advice on running a 3:00 marathon (he's a former 51:00 10-miler, but was getting older). He took Galloway's advice and documented how incredibly awful he felt following it. That's just anecdote, too of course. But when Galloway claims things like "100% success rate" you know he's delusional.
Douglas also investigated some of Galloway's more outrageous claims. These included that the winner of some small marathon (I don't remember which) had taken walk breaks, and that an elite runner (again I forget who) had taken walk breaks when nearly breaking the world record.
Douglas found the guy who had taken walk breaks winning the small marathon. That was true, but the guy's finish time was far slower than his PR. The guy told Douglas he hadn't been racing the marathon at all. He was using it as a tempo workout of 4x10,000 (or something like that), and walked between his reps.
As for the elite, it was also true. He had walked a couple times in the final miles, gripping at stitches in his side.
I also remember one of the Letsrun guys' April Fools posts was about how Galloway actually ran the entire distance when qualifying for the Olympic 10,000.
Conclusion:
Science - I have not clue. I don't think people mix running and science very much yet.
Is Galloway for real - He seems to think so.
Is it effective - it's probably fine for the lady writing the article.
That's my 2 cents.
Ah, thanks for this post, Mark. I think this is really interesting stuff.
That "post by anecdote" thing really pisses me off. How does this stuff get printed?
Katherine,
I think you probably have a more strenuous standard for truth than most people.
Good information Mark! I want to say the elite Galloway was talking about was Ronaldo da Costa.
I think the real answer is the following:
$$$$$$$$$$$
Cash money! You can make BUCKETLOADS of dollar bills telling people what they want to hear so they feel good about themselves not trying hard, esp. if you have credentials like Galloway has.
You have to admit, the guy is good at marketing what he's got. Some compare him to Dean Karnazes. Controversial, but in the end they're making a living whether people love them or hate them.
Post a Comment