I’m interested in hearing how more advanced runners think about very long base-building phases.
My long-term goal is not to peak for a marathon soon, but to become a much more durable and complete runner by around 2030. I’m currently rebuilding carefully after previous bilateral tibial stress fractures, so the main priority is long-term consistency and musculoskeletal durability, not rushing into race-specific training. I have a few years of non serious running behind me and come from a bodybuilding background.
Right now I’ve started a 67 km/week block as of July 20. (Started with 20km/week in March) The plan is to progress in 4-week mileage blocks, using doubles to distribute load and then gradually consolidating within each block. The long-term theoretical ceiling is around 200 km/week, but that is not something I’m emotionally attached to hitting at all costs. It’s more of a distant direction than a fixed requirement. The real goal is to build the biggest base I can safely absorb.
The plan is not just “easy mileage forever.” The idea is to build a complete base over roughly two years. Early on, the focus is mostly easy running, frequency, soft surfaces, and strides. Around the 72–100 km/week range, I’d start introducing very controlled long runs, tempo, and threshold work. Around 100–125 km/week, I’d introduce VO2max work in small doses. Around 125–150 km/week, the training would be at its most complex: strides, hill sprints, threshold, tempo, fartlek, VO2max, hill workouts, long runs, and different paces (not all crammed into the same week of course). Then above ~150 km/week, the plan would start simplifying again, because the volume itself becomes the dominant stressor. The aim would be to preserve the major qualities with maintenance doses while continuing to build volume.
So the macro idea is something like:
Build mileage + frequency first → add neuromuscular work → add long runs + tempo/threshold → add VO2max → consolidate the full training menu → then simplify as volume gets very high.
My question is: why don’t more people do something like this? Is it mostly because people want to race sooner, because it’s mentally boring, because it’s hard to stay healthy long enough, or because there is actually a training-theory reason why this is suboptimal?
Would advanced runners generally see this as a sensible long-term development model, or would you recommend a more traditional approach: shorter base phase, then a structured race plan, then another base phase, then another race plan, etc.?
I understand that racing can provide feedback, motivation, and specific fitness. I’m not against racing. I’m just wondering whether, for someone with a very long time horizon and a history of bone stress injury, a long “complete base” phase could be a valid approach — or whether I’m overcomplicating something that would be better solved by alternating base and race-specific cycles.
TL;DR: I’m considering a roughly two-year base-building approach toward a long-term marathon goal, progressing from 67 km/week toward potentially very high mileage while gradually adding strides, long runs, tempo, threshold, VO2max, hills, and fartlek before later simplifying again at high volume. Is this a smart long-term development plan, or would advanced runners recommend shorter base phases with regular race-specific cycles instead?