The 10 percent rule is a tried-and-tested rule that has been both welcomed and rejected by the running world. One side is all for this rule and are in full-support of runners who incorporate it into their routine. On the other side, whilst some of them might think that in some instances it's useful, as a majority feel that it is not something that is as beneficial for runners as other methods.
Before I go into a couple of reasons why each side hold the views they do, I'll quickly explain what the 10 percent rule is. The 10 percent rule is designed for those who are wanting to increase their running distance safely. This happens by increasing your usual distance by 10 percent each week. So for example: if you run 1 mile for a week, the week after you increase by 10% to 1.1 miles, and the week after increase to 1.21 miles, and so on.
For
The first point of view we're going to look into is the 'for' view, those who are in favour of the 10 percent rule. The people who hold this opinion about the 'golden running rule' argue that you will often see runners injure themselves unnecessarily simply by increasing their running distance to more than they can handle, and so do themselves damage because their body is not physically capable of keeping up with the extra demand. This is especially true when an upcoming race or event is to take place. Often runners will increase their distance dramatically in order to prepare for the big day, but by the time the race/event comes round they find their ankles are hurting, or their knees are throbbing, and they also go ahead and take part in the race/event - which can lead to injury.
For runners, or any competitive sport, often their biggest enemy can be themselves because they are too enthusiastic about wanting to do better, or have lots of energy and believe they can do what they can't, and so don't use their heads and increase by too much. It may seem like a very slow process but after only 8-10 weeks your distance will be much improved. For example say you are running 5 miles at the moment, after 10 weeks of applying the 10 percent rule you will be (increasing by 10% on the first week of application) running a distance of roughly 12.8 miles a week.
Against
Okay, so above was the argument 'for' the 10 percent rule, now to move onto the argument 'against'.
Increasing by 10 percent each week, whilst people for this will say it's a gradual change, in actuality it's quite the opposite, especially for those who are in the beginning stages of running.
It would be better to increase in distance after the runner's body has adjusted to the new distance and not after a specific time because each person have different capabilities, so for example, would rather increase by 25% after 3-4 weeks of running the same distance than increasing by 10% each week. Even though 25% is a bigger increase in distance than 10%, your body has had a much longer amount of time to become accustomed to a particular distance and for stamina to have improved enough where an increase in 25% is doable. Then after another 3-4 weeks (or however long it takes to become used to it) you can increase again.
They acknowledge that the 10 percent rule has been useful for some people, but do not agree that it is a rule that everyone should adopt because of the different stages people are at and the different abilities they have. Also an increase in 10% each week for people who are just starting running is too much, especially if they only run once a week.
Also, their is more than just distance to take into consideration. Other aspects, such as speed, agility, muscle and joint tension, weather and frequency, should also be looked into so that a runner improves their overall ability - not just distance.
Conclusion
So after writing about the for and against arguments surrounding the 10 percent rule, you can make your decision whether or not to apply it to your running routine. I personally am not for or against this, I think it's more about personal preference.