Learning to run 100-mile marathons thanks to the science of self-control

https://qz.com/1019928/i-went-from-sedentary-academic-to-100-mile-marathon-runner-thanks-to-the-science-of-self-control/?utm_source=qzfb

by lxm • 9 years ago

147 122 9 years ago

qz.com

bbarn2• 9 years ago

a counter-point: http://nautil.us/issue/45/power/against-willpower

mchanson• 9 years ago

A much better article.

gruturo• 9 years ago

Third excellent nautil.us article in the span of 7 days for me - I'm starting to really like their style and subjects. Whitelisted on my ad blocker, and gave them my five bucks (well, 4.54 eurobucks).

Other 2 articles I had found interesting (both found on YC):

http://nautil.us/issue/50/emergence/how-the-oil-pipeline-beg...

http://cosmos.nautil.us/short/161/how-much-should-expectatio...

Treegarden• 9 years ago

thanks, that was a really interesting article. Unfortunately it focused mainly on what "willpower" is dubious and not so much on what it is instead that helps one resist a craving. Only at the end the author wrote that the drinking lawyer had to much stress (underlying problem). But that isnt really a good general answer/explanation. I once read the book "the power of habit" and maybe that is the answer (its habits we need to control) but I am not sure.

0xdeadbeefbabe• 9 years ago

In order to resist a craving you must have a craving, and that's why I don't like to think of it as will power.

Edit: Maybe it's easier to talk about power to do things.

pkghost• 9 years ago

The willpower hypothesis is one of the larger tire fires in the disaster that is reproducibility in psychology research.

https://www.google.com/search?q=willpower+reproducibility

ttyl0125• 9 years ago

For a great summary, see: http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/cover_story...

sndean• 9 years ago

I wonder how separate "willpower" is from the central governor theory [0]? Maybe they're completely unrelated and both tire fires.

But I remember reading Tim Noakes' whole ~1000 page tome "Lore of Running" 15 years ago (in high school) which discussed the idea at length and thinking "If only I could have some control over my central governor, I could run under 4 minutes." Is that the same as hoping to "will your way" to a sub 4:00 mile?

Not sure where the research stands now.

[0] http://jeb.biologists.org/content/204/18/3225.short

anbende• 9 years ago

Easy, the tire fire is specifically in social psychology research. Other areas of psychology (e.g. cognitive, developmental, personality, etc) have their problems but in most cases no more so than other disciplines.

2309kdujj• 9 years ago

To be fair, the reproducibility crisis is widespread throughout many, many areas of science. There are many tire fires all over the place; people just started noticing it in a widespread way with social psych:

http://www.nature.com/news/1-500-scientists-lift-the-lid-on-...

Also, to be fair, the willpower hypothesis that was discredited is really about ego-depletion, the idea that willpower is (or reflects) a finite resource that is used by an array of neuropsychological processes. It's not that crazy of an idea, as there are many limits in human behavior and physiology.

mankash666• 9 years ago

Research suggests a genetic preponderance towards physical fitness. With self control, you can make it to what your body can maximally achieve. But no amount of self control can guarantee the finish of an ultra-marathon if you're genetically not designed for it. PBS/Nova [1] took a shot at the question - "Can anyone run a marathon?", and found a certain lot more likely due to their genetics.

[1] http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/body/marathon-challenge.html

aezell• 9 years ago

It seems to me that the piece of data always missing in these kinds of challenges is time. I think anyone probably can run a marathon given enough time to change their lifestyle and build the appropriate strength and endurance. If that time is 10 years, then so be it for that person. The human body is designed to adapt to stressors and environmental conditions. The time it takes to adapt is where this genetic predisposition seems to come in to play.

jackmott5• 9 years ago

Most people just walk these ultras, probably anyone healthy can do that with enough time to prepare.

As well, probably anyone healthy can slowly jog a marathon with enough time to prepare.

But not everyone can qualify for boston, or make the olympics.

jontas• 9 years ago

Source?

I participate in these kinda of events.. I'd be interested to know where you are getting your information.

ultra-jeremyx2• 9 years ago

Go ahead and try it! How hard could it be?

http://ultrasignup.com/

jmull4• 9 years ago

I think 12 of 13 participants started and finished the marathon. One washed out during training due to persistent injuries.

So, almost anyone can finish a marathon, with motivation and preparation. I can't remember for sure, but I think the participants had about a year and were given some excellent coaches whom they met with regularly.

Ultras require substantially the same kind of training as marathons, though you'll certainly have a different fueling and pacing strategy.

water42• 9 years ago

People die and people deal with it in different ways. I'm not sure what is unique about this. Lots of people learn to get in shape for marathons.

codingdave• 9 years ago

And if they all wrote about their experiences, I'm sure we'd read some of their articles, too.

TheAlchemist2• 9 years ago

Willpower or not, I feel like running is really a great thing to do. Will Smith once said (or quoted, don't remember) that one should two things - run and read books. I definitely agree with that. I used to practice sports a lot, football and basketball and that had a positive effect on my teamwork ability.

However, only when I started running I noticed how much this sport can influence one's life. There are no shortcuts, talent has almost zero influence, and it depends only on you how well you perform. I started about a year ago, more seriously about 3 months ago, and I already see how much I'm improving in other areas of life.

Danihan2• 9 years ago

How does talent have almost no influence? There are many genetic factors that would impact how strong a runner is.

You mention football and basketball, which are essentially a series of short sprints. Sprints are _much_ healthier for people than 100-mile marathons that will essentially bathe your body in cortisol.

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/the-evidence-continues-to-mou...

mmmpop• 9 years ago

As fairly average athlete myself, I think he's implying running is one of those sports that pure grit and determination can get you further ahead of the pack compared to many other sports. I'm just a skinny punk but I sure pass a lot of really buff guys when I run 5K races. Probably comes from a lifetime of running my mouth :)

the_gastropod• 9 years ago

It seems like the more paleo/crossfit "celebrities" contradict popular nutrition/exercise science, the more popular they get. I don't get it. The most influential figure in this space was probably Dr. Robert Atkins, who suffered multiple heart attacks, congestive heart failure, and hypertension. Why are people espousing the same junk science to be seen as credible sources?

ovulator• 9 years ago

I ran cross country in high school on a team that was nationally ranked. I ran my ass of all year long and trained with the team doing the exact same practices. I am short and stocky, no amount of practice is going to give me the long effortless stride of the fastest of my team mates. Like in most things, talent has plenty of influence.

hinkley2• 9 years ago

If you show up to practice and do the same things the more advanced kids are doing, they're going to get better almost as fast as you, and you will always be behind.

The only time I ever caught up with anyone was when I did more than the coach/instructor asked.

hinkley2• 9 years ago

I have a crackpot theory that participating in a physically taxing activity partly resets the hedonic treadmill.

Most of the tragedies in day to day life are really minor but most of us lack perspective. I wouldn't wish an actual tragedy on anyone, but there are people in my life who could definitely benefit from taking up an endurance sport or doing real volunteer work.

I think a half marathon or a century (100 miles on a bike) will change your tune about the line at the DMV or how they don't have the phone case you wanted in the right color.

HorizonXP2• 9 years ago

I'm a bit evangelical about low-carb, high-fat (LCHF) diets nowadays, especially keto. Personally, I'm not at the fitness level where I could conceivably run a marathon. Maybe a 5K or a half. But the article mentions him hitting walls as he hit certain mile markers, and having his wife help him reach the finish.

This guy: https://youtu.be/96VZFklUM_Q runs ultra marathons, using fat for fuel. He leaves his fellow competitors in his dust because he doesn't have to carry glucose packets to keep his body fed. Instead, he finishes his race with an avocado and bison jerky.

jackmott5• 9 years ago

He leaves his fellow competitors in his dust because he doesn't have to carry glucose packets to keep his body fed.

How do you know that is why he leaves others in the dust, vs him just being more talented, or training more, or training smarter, or just setting higher goals than the last generation of endurance runners?

Also you should keep in mind that while there is at least a plausible story you can tell about > 5 hour endurance efforts benefiting from some kind of fat burning approach, from 5k to marathon, you absolutely want to be burning glucose if you want to go as fast as you can go. This is unambiguous.

HorizonXP2• 9 years ago

I agree with the speed aspect, but I wish there were better studies that actually tested this. I realize that "explosive" power is diminished when you're burning fat vs. glucose, it would be interesting to know by what amount. Moreover, is it something that normal people need to know about or is it something that occurs at the extremes of performance?

In regards to your first point, I mean, in the video, he stated that he used to try running with the glucose packets and he stated that he got sick trying to keep it all down, and it really slowed him down. It's anecdotal evidence of course, but I wasn't trying to present as anything other than that. :-)

Edit: Holy run-on sentence. I'm going to leave it for posterity.

ultra-jeremyx2• 9 years ago

Timmy Olsen has been hit or miss as far as leaving his competitors in the dust.

There are a LOT of other factors. Who's on top in the ultrarunning world is constantly changing, and, the ultra races are extremely vaired: 100 mile road races to the Barkley Marathons.

Just last year, Karl Meltzer broke vegan runner Scott Jurick's Appalachian Trail speed record. Obviously, they had very different diets.

I think the real requirement for ultrarunning (and other long-term thinking activities) is grit. Grit includes will power but also the ability to endure.

Swizec3• 9 years ago

As someone currently training for the SF Marathon, here's my perspective on low carb and glucose packets.

Low-ish carb is great. It helps you endure long runs overall and it's a good habit in general. Especially for recovering after the race and getting all those calories back.

During the long run itself however, glucose packets are absolutely necessary. You run out of glycogen stores every 45 minutes or so. That's when you start cramping up and having trouble. A glucose packet gives you some caffeine (helps with stamina and pain tolerance), and some electrolytes (helps with cramping and hydration), and some 100 calories of sugar (helps with glycogen levels and mental fortitude).

Crucially, you aren't replacing all the calories you burn. That's impossible. In a 4 hour marathon I burn between 2500 and 3000 calories. The packets replace only 500 calories.

The difference between packets and no packets is that with packets, I am able to be a human person after a marathon. Far less cranky, far less tired, generally feeling okay. Without the packets, I'm basically a walking zombie.

That said, it took a lot of practice to figure out the right timing for those packets, to train my body to absorb them and so on. It's definitely not something you want to start experimenting with on race day. That's a recipe for puking.

mirkules• 9 years ago

The first time I tried a packet (GU gel) in a practice run, I nearly puked. It tastes like liquefied bubble gum and the taste stuck with me for the next 30 minutes. Which ones work well for you?

schrodinger• 9 years ago

I actually feel my best when I do my long (10-12 mile) runs in a fasted state around 11 am. I'd much rather eat after the run.

xiaoma2• 9 years ago

Okay, so it looks like I disagree with both you and the low carb nut.

You don't need glucose packets. They might help speed you up a bit, but as long as you've built up your range progressively, the human body can go without them. As I mentioned above, I used to do > marathon distances once or twice a month in the mountains for fun (which I realize is very different than racing. I did dozens if not hundreds of 50k+ runs and have never yet even tried a gel pack. Some of those runs were at a weight of over 90kg!

Yes, you'll burn a ton of calories. I often found I weighed in at a full 5kg less after a run and probably 0.5kg less after re-hydrating. Sure, I was never anywhere near as good at long distances as mid distances, but you don't need gel packs. At least I didn't for anything up to 50k, and I probably could have gone further if not for the logistics of carrying enough water and dealing with the heat and humidity that go along with living on a semi-tropical island.

revelation3• 9 years ago

This is dangerous nonsense. Is it possible to run ultra marathons on fat? Of course, you have enough fat stored for many many of those. Is it in any way amenable to a good performance? Not at all, and you don't need a biology PhD to realize that. The limiting factor in endurance sports is rate of oxygen uptake, fat metabolism takes more oxygen per energy yielded and is therefore strictly less efficient than deriving energy from glycogen.

Not to mention the majority of people will feel absolutely terrible trying to run in a depleted state. And there is no good reason to inflict that extra hardship on yourself when you can eat a large carb dinner and have enough glycogen to carry yourself through a half marathon

(Why can this guy still get good results? Ultra marathon is not at all a highly competitive sport. Someone to the far right of the genetic bell curve can handicap themselves with pure fat metabolism and still perform good. They would be absolutely killed in say the marathon distance where there is much higher selection pressure, if you want to call it that. Also, you don't run ultra distance at a high effort level, say 50-60% of VO2max - so here fat metabolism is naturally more pronounced anyway)

oh_sigh• 9 years ago

Half marathons are right at the very limit of depleting your liver glycogen stores(100-200g). Anything beyond that, you better be eating quick carbs during your exercise, or you will start burning fat.

gopalv2• 9 years ago

Maybe a 5K or a half ... the article mentions him hitting walls as he hit certain mile markers,

Knowing where your walls are ... that's been one of the self-reflection exercises for me. Because it is an extremely personal limit & moves about with weight, food intake, sleep debt, hydration and local weather.

The physical sensation of hitting the wall is somewhat orthogonal to all the other health benefits - it is an extremely accurate read of your physical condition on that day & tells you how you're doing.

gmuller• 9 years ago

Pretty sure Olson throws some carbs in during races (gels): http://www.timothyallenolson.com/2013/04/10/nutrition/

xiaoma2• 9 years ago

And yet Rob Krar isn't into low-carb, is pushing 40 and runs the same distances faster... For that matter, the Bison Bar mentioned in the video you linked to contains roughly equal amounts of protein and sugar! Not that it matters much. Frankly, ultra runners can get away with more mistakes since there's so much less competition at their distances.

The top competitive distance runners (a group dominated by Kenyans and Ethiopians) generally eat over 70% of their calories from carbohydrates. Naoko Takahashi said she loved Korean barbecue. Bill Rodgers, the dominant marathoner of the previous genration, seemed to live off of pizza slathered in mayonnaise. Paula Radcliffe talked about eating a lot of fruits, yogurt and granola. While many, many runners have sworn by various odd diets, it doesn't look like anyone has been able to get a sizable edge from theirs.

I only raced 5-10k ranges, but I used to run greater than marathon distances once or twice per month in the mountains for fun so I can have some personal experience with "walls". Even a skinny person has enough fat on them to run for far longer distances than any race I've heard of. The "walls" are more about glycogen limits in your muscles. Extending the wall is mostly an issue of how high your aerobic threshold is, how well you can spare glycogen at the beginning (though this probably matters less for ultras) and your running efficiency.

All three of these factors are influenced by diet to some degree but training is by far the more important factor. Strangely, caffeine has a bigger effect than macro-nutrient composition.

ramblerman• 9 years ago

This guy is definitely not keto though. He just has an aversion to high glucose gel packs which I agree with.

Here he is making a banana smoothie: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96VZFklUM_Q&feature=youtu.be...

Grustaf2• 9 years ago

”Bill Gates spent thousands of hours learning to program”

Sure, and so did thousands of others. Bill Gates clearly didn’t become a modern Croesus because he was a better programmer, this is just trying to shoehorn Microsoft into the at once self-evident and ludicrous 10000 hour idea.

paulpauper2• 9 years ago

a book that states what is otherwise obvious: a person with innate biological talent will get more 'mileage' from their 10000 hours won't sell as many copies as one that promotes the lie that 10000 hours will turn anyone into an expert at anything

majelix3• 9 years ago

”Bill Gates spent thousands of hours learning to program”

Here's the full quote: "Bill Gates spent thousands of hours learning how to program computers—but he only had that opportunity because he had the good fortune of having parents who supported his education."

I think you're in violent agreement that 10,000 hours isn't sufficient.

Grustaf2• 9 years ago

That only gives the reason how he could spend thst time, it doesn’t explain that this time was at best a part of his success.

watwut2• 9 years ago

I thought Gates success is because he was good at business and good at leading company.

paulpauper2• 9 years ago

It should be: how I learned to run 100 miles marathons due to having a high lactic acid threshold

jmull4• 9 years ago

I'm sorry, but this is all gobbledygook.

Nice ad for "sword" sportfood products, though.

For one thing, running 100 mile races isn't a very good standard for willpower or self control.

There is virtually zero use for this capability, so whether you spend 5-10 hours a week to do so or not isn't really a question of self control.

It's a question of what activities/hobbies you want to pursue in your free time.

Staying fit is a good-for-you type of thing, but you don't have to do anything close to that level of training to stay fit.

My advice, whether you want to get/stay fit or achieve some athletic endurance goal is to make sure you find a way to enjoy the training.

It takes consistent long-term training and you wont't have to worry about your willpower Or self control if you enjoy doing it.

Along those lines: start slow - the hardest and most painful part is getting started. E.g., use a C25K program; find your own goals - whether that's completing 100 mile runs, or a 5K PR, or 1000 miles this year, or an 8:00 pace or a 365 day running streak or whatever.

majelix3• 9 years ago

There is virtually zero use for this capability [running 100 mile races]

That's a major point of the article, given it's discussion of the spillover effect: "The bottom line: Practice self-control in one area of your life, and you can apply it in other parts, too."

jmull4• 9 years ago

It's nice that practicing willpower improves willpower, even across activities.

But that doesn't suggest that's the best way to do it generally, or that running in particular is an effective or efficient way to do it.

Look, I get it. I run and it takes time so there's pressure to justify it.

But I don't see why the basic truth isn't enough: he enjoys it and it staves off his feelings of impending mortality. (In this case, I suspect he may also be trying to monetize it, but who knows.)

rickpmg2• 9 years ago

I'm not so sure that's true... the example he gave about the non-dominant hand users being able to suppress their anger was questionable.

Plus, a whole slew of writers say that willpower is an expendable resource.. resist the cookie in the morning, and you will be less likely to resist a candy bar in the afternoon..

JackFr• 9 years ago

There is virtually zero use for this capability,

Oh really?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endurance_running_hypothesis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_hunting

"Lacking guns and even bows, they could hunt only by digging traps or pursuing prey across the mountains until the animals collapsed from exhaustion. Dmitry built up astonishing endurance, and could hunt barefoot in winter, sometimes returning to the hut after several days, having slept in the open in 40 degrees of frost, a young elk across his shoulders."

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/for-40-years-this-russ...

jmull4• 9 years ago

I understand the evolutionary role, I mean in today's world.

jpmattia• 9 years ago

Nice ad for "sword" sportfood products, though.

Not even. At the top of the sword page:

FORGET SUGARY SPORTS DRINKS The simple solution for hydration and fuel is here.

Follow the link to find the ingredients:

Ingredients: Maltodextrin, Fructose, Citric Acid, Salt, Sodium Citrate, Natural Flavors

olleromam91• 9 years ago

Exerting your willpower and self control is where the enjoyment comes from for many people. Proving to yourself that you can do something you never thought you could.

d--b• 9 years ago

This article angers me.

1. the guy is only an example. Willpower alone will not make you run 100 mile-race. You need the right body as well.

2. most people don't try and run 100 mile-races because they have better things to do

3. willpower and success: seriously this is really self congratulatory. running 100 miles does not make anyone a more succesful person.

4. no mention of endorphines and running addiction?

majelix3• 9 years ago

This article is less about specifically running 100 mile-races and more about doing something that requires self-control; and the claim is that doing so will make anyone a more successful person.

kvhdude• 9 years ago

i agree. i had will power to run a marathon just by myself - no event. I now have cervical herniated disc. No amount of my will power is useful. I just wish i had exercised common sense when my neck used to hurt after every long run.

sushisource2• 9 years ago

Nonsense. Unless you have some kind of disability anyone can run a 100 miler. That is completely true.

You need to get in shape first, obviously, but unless you have a condition that prevents you from doing that, you can do it.

I get the impression you haven't done much distance running, because the article is spot on when he says it's almost exclusively about determination.

#2 just seems like you're being a dick. #3 is unprovable, and #4 is something I rarely hear any serious runner talk about, and it certainly isn't the reason I run at all.

ErikAugust7• 9 years ago

I run ultras and mountain races. I ran one this Friday night into Saturday morning - a 12 hour overnight trail race where I managed 100K (62mi) in 11 hours and 23 minutes.

Anyway, let's throw out willpower and even genetics for a second so I can bring up something: In today's age, virtually no one is even remotely close to their physiological limits.

Literally, hundreds of people (elite marathoners, a few ultra marathoners, cross country skiiers) out of billions of people are bumping up against physiology. These people will do anything for the smallest performance gains (1%).

Really, if you have not achieved a level where you are ~5-8% body fat and run consistently at 100 miles (or more) a week, you are not anywhere that close. Trust me. This is kind of even standard for competitive college distance runners - and even they are likely making mistakes that hold back their development (diet, drinking, running too many miles at too fast of a pace, etc.)

Yet we can take someone who is 20% body fat, and runs 10 miles a week. You will find this person finishing an 100 mile ultramarathon. It's not that uncommon, if the time cutoffs are liberal. 18 minute miles is walking pace.

The author even mentions he didn't think he was obese. He just didn't know the reality of things, I'd argue. He had to have this concept of willpower (concentration) to learn. And to change his diet and training habits. And even his understanding of what is possible.

It's magical to chalk things up to grit - but there is so much process of knowing how the lows feel during a race, what to eat while training, how fast to do each run while training, how much to run while training, how to stay hydrated while racing, how to get nutrition while racing, etc.

"Tough" or "in control of self" to me is too emotionally loaded.

Edit: I almost feel bad writing this because it takes some of the magic that gets marketed about it. But this is a science-oriented crowd and should be exciting to know there is more of an opportunity for the objective than a lot of people believe.

ErikAugust7• 9 years ago

Look at the consistently great 100 mile trail runners in the US - Ian Sharman, or Jeff Browning. Year after year. Look at how thorough they are. They are coaches because they know what to do and then they execute.

kentt2• 9 years ago

18 minute miles is walking pace.

Thank you for pointing this out. I'm so sick if people telling me they ran a marathon only to find out they walked. I'm totally fine with that being an accomplishment to finish, but it's entirely dissimilar to those who were racing.

atom-morgan• 9 years ago

Marathons? I have people tell me this for 5ks.

rickpmg2• 9 years ago

What an elitist comment. People do marathons for different reasons. Time is just one factor. Some people actually (gasp) do marathons to prove something to _themselves_.

It's one thing to be proud of your own time, it's entirely unsportsmanlike to criticize someone not as good as you.

tedmc2• 9 years ago

It is racing for them.

sushisource2• 9 years ago

Yeah, it's a little frustrating to have some person say to me "Oh yeah, I ran a marathon too!". Ok, yeah, you completed it... six hours slower than I did. You walked a marathon.

I'd disagree though that the grit/toughness thing to me is too emotional. My marathon time is 3:38 - reasonably fast for an amateur, but nothing blazing. ~8 minute pace. I know that getting that time faster is 100% about my commitment level. I know I could be faster, but I just don't want to invest the time and pain in it. I enjoy running, but I'm not trying to be super competitive.

So I think it is emotional for 99.9% of people. Only those .1% of people you mentioned are hitting the physical limits, as you said.

In other words, I agree with your facts, but I think the interpretation is wrong (or I'm misunderstanding). The key ingredient is the willpower, the consistency, and that comes from an emotional place.

ErikAugust7• 9 years ago

It may be semantics - I think I agree with your statement. The desire to not only know what it takes to be great, but to execute on that has its origins in emotion, at least. There has to be motivation for it as it's obviously not necessary to survive, haha.

rimliu• 9 years ago

I walk a marathon in about 6 hours and 12 minutes. Do you run it in 12 minutes?

proee2• 9 years ago

Well then I'm sure it's frustrating when a professional who runs a Marathon in close to 2 hours, hears you say the same thing.

logicallee2• 9 years ago

Literally, hundreds of people (elite marathoners, a few ultra marathoners, cross country skiiers) out of billions of people are bumping up against physiology

The human race didn't fight tooth and nail for 40,000 years to give everyone education, a code of laws and civilization, safe lives that include both work and leisure, so that I could bump into the limits of my physiology. How is that a normative goal?

There are no mountain lions chasing me whose escape pushes me to the limits of human physiology - and I for one prefer to keep it that way!

nicky0• 9 years ago

You're probably one of those people who would happily exist as a brain in a jar wired directly to the internet.

gaius6• 9 years ago

fight tooth and nail for 40,000 years to give everyone education

On the one hand that's true but on the other hand, the vast majority of people aren't operating at their theoretical mental limit either, either way a vast amount of wasted potential.

gaius6• 9 years ago

hundreds of people (elite marathoners, a few ultra marathoners, cross country skiiers)

I'd add elite soldiers to that list, which would take it up to tens of thousands maybe.

ErikAugust7• 9 years ago

Sure - I could go with thousands... and maybe tens of thousands.

LeifCarrotson2• 9 years ago

There's a significant distinction between racing at the limits of your physiology and the limits of your commitment to the sport and your training going into the race.

I think the latter may be more interesting and useful: not many can afford the time commitment to eating, sleeping, and training to the max. But when a high-school kid takes 30 seconds off his 1600m PR in the meet with the rival school? That's just because he didn't know he had more available.

ErikAugust7• 9 years ago

Certainly a fascinating component.

There is also the case of the people who can rise above what their physiological markers predict, somewhat consistently - and then conversely, people who are strikingly under performing.

tbenst• 9 years ago

I ran at an elite D1 collegiate program. The vast majority of runners will get injured at 100 miles per week, assuming a reasonable pace no slower than 7 min / mile. Slower than that is not useful training for Olympic events. Our top runner was a 13:30 5k and 29:20 10k at 70-80 miles per week.

Ultras are a different beast entirely, as its more of a "survival" test of muscles, ligaments, and bones than that of sustained running performance--even top ultramarathoners will walk during races. Ultras are about physiological limits of our bodies to handle stress; the 2-hour marathon is about the physiological limits of running.

ErikAugust7• 9 years ago

"Slower than that is not useful training for Olympic events."

Lydiard-ians would disagree - at least for a base phase.

But I will agree that if you are running even 7min/miles for your easy and recovery runs, many get injured at 100 miles a week. Many do. And that disrupts their development in the worst way possible!

Interesting article on that: http://www.letsrun.com/news/2006/09/wejo-speaks-why-i-sucked...

But sure, I also agree - ultras versus marathons are different types of limits. Or mountain races versus marathons versus something like an ultra like Badwater.

tedmc2• 9 years ago

Sure, experience is a factor (and GMA helps with this), but training when you're tired, but need to, when you don't want to, or when you're sore from the speedwork or doing a b2b run takes self control. Not putting the wrong things in your mouth, takes self control. In a race, it takes self control to not go out too fast, to eat when nothing looks appetizing, and to keep moving when aid stations look like bombs went off from all the people laying down.

Badwater is (more) brutal now that it has a night start, and experience only counts for so much...

runamok• 9 years ago

100 miles a week will tax the bio-mechanics of most people in the first world. Granted doing those 100 miles at 10 min/mile is far, far easier than doing it at 6:00 to 7:00 pace. And doing lots of LSD (long slow distance) DOES have proven physiological effects.

But please don't treat 100 mile weeks as some trivial task. I have been running for > 25 years and have run from a 4:40 mile to a 2:44 marathon and 1:15 half and my max week was 84. I was doing consistent 70 mile weeks in college for a while and finally couldn't continue due to injury.

I do agree with your core point that most people have no idea what their true limits are. I have seen friends who hated to lose pass out at the finish line of a race. I find I don't even improve until I hit about 40 miles a week with at least one LT run of 4 to 6 miles and a >= 13 mile long run. That only takes about 4 to 5 hours a week (not including extra showers, drives to runs, necessary strength work, etc.) I guarantee most spend far more than that on Netflix et al.

P.S. Congrats on your race!

dogruck• 9 years ago

I have finished six or seven 100 mile races.

I've observed that the only apparent constant among all finishers is above average fitness, a reasonable approach to food and drink while racing, and a total commitment to finishing.

Every race has some bare foot runners and some Hoka devotees. You see fat people and thin people. Old and young.

Every finisher suffered tremendously, yet he or she refused to quit.

pcunite• 9 years ago

Every finisher suffered tremendously, yet he or she refused to quit.

I'm touching these words on my monitor. I can feel the pain. Ugh ...

Gargoyle• 9 years ago

I favorited this post because the top level comments are a perfect HN self-parody.

jmcdiesel• 9 years ago

The fact that so many of the comments here are focused on running and its pros/cons and not on the actual point of the article (self control) ... its kinda strange for HN to completely miss the point by such a big margin...

scintill76• 9 years ago

And so I set about fortifying my sense of self-control, based on the following factors: [Standards, Monitoring, and Strength]
Strength: ... I built my mental strength by running even when I didn’t want to—when I was sore, stressed, or sleepy.

He built his will power by doing things he didn't have the will to do? One of the pillars of his self-control is that he has self-control? Maybe I'm missing something or jumping on the easy mockery, but this seems circular or common-sense.

09bjb• 9 years ago

I don't see a problem with this. Habits are self-reinforcing, good or bad. If you can interrupt a bad habit once, or start a good habit once, you give yourself more momentum for the next go-round. You have X probability of successfully doing it the first time, and you may or may not do what you set out to. But whether you do affects the probability that you'll do it the next time. And I'd be wary of anyone that claims that they never, ever, have any say in the matter when it comes to doing something once, even if it's hard.

I do agree with you in that by this same logic, you have a better chance of arriving at great self-control if you start with decent self-control.

Bjartr• 9 years ago

I'd be wary of anyone that claims that they never, ever, have any say in the matter when it comes to doing something once, even if it's hard.

When I hear "I don't have a say in the matter" I read frustration, not dismissal.

I'd posit that when people say that, they don't mean it literally. Or, rather, it's the best they can articulate the internal struggle. I've found the language I know (English) to not provide me with the tools to describe the nuance of the sensation of lacking self-control or willpower.

What I describe going forward is hard-won from long term introspection, and it still falls short of effectively communicating what I am really trying to say.

I would wager that, for a not insignificant fraction of people, when they tell you they "don't have a say in the matter" they are trying to articulate the feeling/sensation of having the intellectual understanding of the situation i.e. (paraphrased for brevity) "I should do X because it has benefits Y and Z, instead of A which has downsides B and C" but where merely having that understanding is insufficient to compel (willpower, initiative, motivation, w/e) themselves to action, for however long they choose to linger on it in their mind.

terheyden• 9 years ago

Totally agree; I was most interested to hear how he cultivated his fortitude. What a letdown.

mdekkers• 9 years ago

Indeed. Started reading to learn more about willpower and the science behind it. Didn't actually learn anything about how to build willpower, other then "if you have it, you can do a lot of things"

watwut2• 9 years ago

Doing sport as a hobby is pleasant. If you want test willpower, try sitting totally bored on playground every day because it is good for kids, try to come home sooner despite peer pressure and career hit because you matter for kids.

Alternatively, try doing boring work you hate for hours because bills needs to be paid. It is less pleasant then doing sport you like.

Dowwie• 9 years ago

chewable caffeine tablets? what could possibly go wrong with a combination of those and ultramarathons? (/s)

samnwa• 9 years ago

Can someone explain the point of all this? Is this to challenge your own ability to stick to a plan? Is it to impress others? The motivation alludes me entirely.

didibus2• 9 years ago

I didn't see any science in this article. I was disappointed.

didibus2• 9 years ago

I think what's good about fitness goals, is that they're all very achievable. If you are motivated, you're chances of success are almost 100%. There's not a lot of factors out of your control apart from the limits of your own body. In that sense, they're good for moral and confidence. If you struggled at other things, taking a goal whose success is in your hand, and for which failure has no consequence is a good way to test if you're the problem or not.

Learning to run 100-mile marathons thanks to the science of self-control

Related Stories