Quote Originally Posted by Swiss Toni View Post
Can see and have experienced the logic in that, apart from the association with long term anxiety. Sacrificing mileage for an increase in quality and training affect is clearly the way to get fitter and faster - it's hard to argue with that.

However, there are periods when I am not training for any races or rounds or anything in particular when I up the mileage but reduce the hard quality session for the simple reason that i like running and prefer longer runs. If anything i'm more anxious when i don't do this. This takes the more physically stressful elements out and it's lovely, pressure and goal free running. This could be adjudged to be my indulging in junk miles and whilst my speed does drop off a little, i don't find i get more anxious.

What's the theory/evidence behind it? I'd be interested to know
Yes you prefer running longer because it's easier. There's a thread called favourite race length(or something similar) and a lot of individuals were saying they prefer the longer distances because it provided more of a test. The truth is of course that they prefer the longer distances because they are easier. The test that they refer to is probably the amount of stress their ligaments and tendons are subjected to.

No amount of running slow is equal to running fast. All it does is drains the system of vital chemical resources, the very resources that should be used in producing a stronger and fitter body. As to the evidence behind it just look at the number of Tour De France cyclists over the years addicted to cocaine and amphetamines. You see that much training on a daily basis disturbs the chemistry of the brain leading to serious mental health problems like anxiety and depression.