how many miles should you run at age 14

Physical conditioning, injuries, nutrition and everything related to fitness
dasfootball90
Junior Member
Posts: 87
Joined: 06 Jul 2010, 14:21

how many miles should you run at age 14

Post by dasfootball90 » 26 Jul 2010, 15:45

hello, i am 14yr.. how many miles should i run a day so I can get fit in 4 weeks

Icy
Veteran Member
Posts: 813
Joined: 30 Sep 2006, 19:47

Post by Icy » 26 Jul 2010, 16:06

Contrary to what people think, the best way to get in shape for football isn't slow distance. Before listing options think of it this way. In a professional match they average around 6 miles in a game. That's 6 miles in 90 minutes. With a break in between! (half time) You can walk and cover 6 miles in 90 minutes (and not be tired), but they're still tired at the end of the game.

The thing that fatigues you in football is the constant acceleration and deceleration. Some things you might want to try out are

100m sprints
"suicides" 6m -> goal line -> 18m -> goal line -> half -> goal line
hill sprints
400m "sprints"
etc.

I don't want to say "long distance is evil", because if that's the case then I'm going against what I supposably believe. There is nothing wrong with long distance, and it great for a mental challenge. The thing is though in order to be ready for a match being about to run 10 miles doesn't equate to much. A couple times a week at around 3-5 miles as quick as you can would certainly be enough if you add in sprints for 3 other days.
"Somewhere along the line, we seem to have confused comfort with happiness"

dasfootball90
Junior Member
Posts: 87
Joined: 06 Jul 2010, 14:21

Post by dasfootball90 » 26 Jul 2010, 16:09

thanks but I recently just came off vacation and I am trying to get fit by the last week of August. Is their anyway possible

Icy
Veteran Member
Posts: 813
Joined: 30 Sep 2006, 19:47

Post by Icy » 26 Jul 2010, 16:14

Sure, you can become significantly better within that time. Like I said, something like 3 days of more fast paced\turning\accelerating\etc and then 2 other days of between 3-5 miles for time should do you well.

I know you want me to say some routine that *will* get you in shape, but sadly I can offer no such promise. There isn't a guide to tell you how to do it. I promise you though, regardless of what you choose to do for those days I mentioned above if you kick your ass each day you'll be tons better.

It is very rare that a routine is what makes a player\athlete. You could give them just about anything to do, and the intensity they do it at is what makes them, not the routine.
"Somewhere along the line, we seem to have confused comfort with happiness"

panchester07
Veteran Member
Posts: 3849
Joined: 27 Aug 2007, 04:25

Post by panchester07 » 26 Jul 2010, 21:48

You could give them just about anything to do, and the intensity they do it at is what makes them, not the routine.
Praise the lord all mighty!! This is true in just about anything you do .

The key to success and improvement in every area is pushing yourself and kicking your own ass. Thats how you get better. Ask any person that got anywhere. Going that extra mile. Doing a little bit more. Just when you feel like you've done enough, do one more set, etc, 110%. Don't injure yourself, but you get what I mean. Thankfully we live in a world where effort, and hard work, will get you to your goal in spite of money, color, size, wieght etc. We are architects of are own future.
to know Him is to want to know Him more"


"i don't know where the limit is, but I know where it is not"

Tocar y moverse y tratarla siempre muy muy bien..'

Juicygriot17
Junior Member
Posts: 76
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 00:08

Post by Juicygriot17 » 27 Jul 2010, 03:26

Yea, interval based stuff and sprints are the best, and throw in some long distance.

Quick question, why do coaches make you run a timed 2 mile run, when footballers run 6-8 miles in 90 minutes? seems like bull to me

Icy
Veteran Member
Posts: 813
Joined: 30 Sep 2006, 19:47

Post by Icy » 27 Jul 2010, 12:22

Mostly likely most coaches do it because "everyone else" does it.

It's not a bad test though. The 6-8 miles you do in game are nothing like going and running 6-8 miles. The 2 mile is a good balance between pace, fitness, and also mental strength due to the other two. Go shorter distance and the fastest in sprinting will probably do best, and farther and long distance people will win. Neither of which necessarily mean you're fit for football.
"Somewhere along the line, we seem to have confused comfort with happiness"

Juicygriot17
Junior Member
Posts: 76
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 00:08

Post by Juicygriot17 » 27 Jul 2010, 14:26

so do i prepare for this timed run just being football fit, or do i have to do more long distance?

klc123
Veteran Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 13 Jan 2007, 16:26

Post by klc123 » 27 Jul 2010, 14:34

How long is a piece of string?

To improve your aerobic fitness, you should be running for a period of half an hour upwards at between 70% and 80% of your maximum heart rate, which is roughly 220 take away your age.

For example;

I am 17, so my theoretical maximum heart rate would be 203. So I would be looking to run or cycle at an intensity of 70% of that, for a period of more than half an hour.

A heart rate of 142 would be good. If you go to a good gym, you will find cycling bikes that measure your heart rate while you are on them, and it works out your ideal heart rate, and lets you choose the intensity, so that you can do half an hour at 70%, followed by 10 minutes at 80% and then a final 20 minutes on 75%. That would be a brilliant aerobic workout, and the more aerobic work you do, the more adapted to endurance work your body will come, so you will run timed miles faster also.

You should be aware that aerobic work decreases your anaerobic strength, meaning you are less powerful in short bursts like a sprint.

Icy
Veteran Member
Posts: 813
Joined: 30 Sep 2006, 19:47

Post by Icy » 27 Jul 2010, 15:01

Klc, this isn't a rant against you, but I'm sick of hearing "heart rate training" when the words aerobic training get thrown out. Want a better formula? Run as fast as you can for 30 minutes, or for your set distance. Simple as that, there need not be a science involved. Work your ass off and you get results. If you're new to running, or have a condition (high blood pressure?) I can see it being semi-relevant, but other than that why not just go as hard as you can?

What do you mean by "anaerobic strength" do you mean explosiveness, or the anaerobic system?



@Juicy - First of all is there a certain time you have to beat? If so what is it? Regardless if you do 400m intervals (fu**ing brutal, but great for fitness), and slowly decrease the time to do them, and\or the rest between each a 2 mile will be a "breeze".
"Somewhere along the line, we seem to have confused comfort with happiness"

Juicygriot17
Junior Member
Posts: 76
Joined: 28 Apr 2010, 00:08

Post by Juicygriot17 » 27 Jul 2010, 15:27

well the timed run is on aug. 25th, and one kid who's tryin out said it has to be under 14 minutes, which i dont believe, but i think maybe under 13 minutes. I wanna be able to pass this because im def one of the most skillful tryin out, but my endurance is a calamity

oh and those 400m intervals are nasty, they kick my ass

klc123
Veteran Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 13 Jan 2007, 16:26

Post by klc123 » 27 Jul 2010, 17:24

Ok,

Doing suicides, where you sprint as fast as you can for long intervals builds two things. Your Anaerobic endurance, and your anaerobic strength.

Anaerobic endurance, basically is your threshold, how much work you can do without exercise.

When you perform something anaerobically, it means your respiring for energy, without oxygen, the problem with this is that it produces a harmful biproduct, called lactic acid, that fatigues your muscles and therefore performance suffers. Your Anaerobic threshold is how well your body copes with lactic acid, and how quickly it recovers between short bursts.

I'm not disagreeing with you, this is an essential part of training, because recovering quickly between short bursts is a quality all top footballers have. But it isn't going to do you any good if your doing aerobic work.

Aerobic work is when your body is using oxygen for energy, and is typically normal day to do things at lower intensity for prolonged periods of time, like walking and running. It produces a lot more energy, and there is no harmful by products. This is why you can run miles, but struggle to sprint a whole track.

The reason people do heart rate training, is because your body flips into anaerobic mode, whenever your heart rate exceeds a certain level, this is generally above 80% of your max. Below this however is aerobic, and doing aerobic work does many things.

It increases heart strength significantly, allowing it pump harder for longer. It increases lung volume, allowing you to get more oxygen. It increases your body's transport system as a whole, to make it more effective and efficient. It also stimulates the growth of red muscle, or slow twitch fibres, which are more adapted to low intensity, long duration exercise.

As you can see, there are a lot of benefits to this type of training, but I agree with you, all types of training are needed to be a top footballer.

And aerobic training decreases your anaerobic strength, because it encourages your body to break down fast twitch muscle fibres (white muscle) and produce more slow twitch, which means your endurance goes up, but your speed and strength suffer due to less fast twitch fibres.

Soccer4Life
Guide Goddess
Posts: 2068
Joined: 30 Jun 2006, 22:00
Location: USA

Post by Soccer4Life » 27 Jul 2010, 20:17

klc123 wrote:The reason people do heart rate training, is because your body flips into anaerobic mode, whenever your heart rate exceeds a certain level, this is generally above 80% of your max. Below this however is aerobic, and doing aerobic work does many things.
Just to make a quick comment, people often see aerobic and anaerobic activities as more black and white, but in reality there is no "magic" heart rate percentage that makes your body all the sudden flip one way or the other.

This isn't directed at you, as I'm taking what you said a little out of context but just an fyi for newer members.

Icy
Veteran Member
Posts: 813
Joined: 30 Sep 2006, 19:47

Post by Icy » 27 Jul 2010, 20:28

Exactly S4L

Below I'm just referencing random parts as I re-read your post so it may not make sense entirely. :P

I don't have the actual study, but lactic acid apparently acts as fuel rather than a performance inhibitor: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/16/healt ... 16run.html

A 100m sprint which is considered more or less 100% anaerobic benefits the aerobic system. It's not that you just go without oxygen in that time peroid, your body just cannot keep up with the demand. Are you not breathing hard, and your heart still pumping after a sprint?

The "benefits" of aerobic training all occur during short demanding spurts to. It's not something unique to aerobic training.

So you mean explosiveness, not 'anaerobic strength'?

I agree that distance is beneficial, but it's not some complete 180 from anaerobic training. I've seen much greater strides in distance running when doing more short\intense training than when I used to have much more distance.
"Somewhere along the line, we seem to have confused comfort with happiness"

klc123
Veteran Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 13 Jan 2007, 16:26

Post by klc123 » 27 Jul 2010, 21:47

fu** sake...I really didn't want to get into complex biology...

Firstly, I will trust my Biology teacher who has a masters degree in physiology and a PhD in animal and cellular biology over an editor at NYtimes who probably doesn't have the braincells to muster up a GCSE in Science.

Secondly. You are correct, there isn't a time when you only use anaerobic respiration. But it is black and white time in terms of heart rate for person to person in terms of when you start anaerobically respiring.

Basically, you always use aerobic respiration where ever possible, as this is the most efficient. It goes as Glucose + Oxygen -> ATP + Water + CO2. ATP is adenosine trio phosphate, which is what makes your muscle contract, it is energy in its purest form in our body.

However, when the demand for ATP increases, to the point where it is needed faster than aerobic respiration can provide, anaerobic respiration comes into play. It is less efficient, but happens far quicker, and meets the demand for ATP. Glucose -> ATP + Lactic Acid.

Depending on the demand of the exercise, the more anaerobic respiration takes place to meet the increasing demand. How straining the exercise is on the body is directly proportional to heart rate. Which is why rate rate is used as a guide line for what type of respiration is taking place.

This also brings me back to your point. The reason 100m sprinting benefits the aerobic system is that you are still aerobically respiring, just for a short period of time, which is why prolonged aerobic exercise gives the most benefit. I never said sprinting full out didn't benefit you aerobically, but its 100% proven that it isn't the best way to improve your Aerobic capabilities.

Also, I never once said that your body doesn't benefit from aerobic capability in sprinting, I merely said that sprinting is not the best way to improve it.

Lactic acid is not a fuel. The reason it slightly benefits your muscles is because it indirectly lowers the pH in your muscles which causes more oxygen to be delivered to that area much faster due to Bohr shift.

No, I do mean anaerobic strength, your anaerobic strength is a measure of how strong you are when performing anaerobic exercises, like lifting a weight or sprinting...

And your personal experience is not evidence that burst training is better than prolonged aerobic training.

Post Reply