That is a pretty nice way of breaking it down for the average athlete, Barry. Well done.

Phil

---

Dr. Philip Skiba
Scientific Training for Endurance Athletes now available on Amazon!

I swear we talked about this. You're killing me.

We have and you are certainly not to blame in any of my athletic failures. :) In large part, my complete lack of ability to stick to any schedule or even remember that I have a workout scheduled probably leads to my simplified philosophy. I know I'm not really squeezing every last bit of talent, but I am willing to accept that given my current situation in life.

Seen your shoes yet?

Chad

i read an article by a D3 cross country coach who's teams are always strong (i can't remember his name or his team). but he said that one of the workouts that his team does are intervals at goal 8km race. they start out with 800m or 1000m and as the season progresses they lengthen the interval and/or decrease the rest interval. it's a pretty simple workout, but he said that if you expect to ran a race at a certain pace, than you have to train at that pace. i would like to incorporate something like this into my training, but is too soon in the year? my racing season will start end of april or early may, but my major races won't be until the end of july, early august. one of my limiters is 10km speed, so my goal this fall and winter is to get faster at 5km to 10km. the article was a good read (it was in usa track association magazine). the rest of his training week included a distance run and a tempo run that got progressivley faster each mile ending at race pace. the rest of week was easy/recovery runs.

---

http://uwltriathlon.blogspot.com/

it's a pretty simple workout, but he said that if you expect to ran a race at a certain pace, than you have to train at that pace.

I've had way too many people tell me this and it led me astray from the real training I needed to be doing for years. Over the past few years I've cut out almost all speedwork and concentrated on more volume. Pace is pretty irrelevant as long as the time and effort are there. I have the speed to go out and run a five-minute mile on any particular day, but I can't even come close to that kind of pace in a tri run split. Here's the key--I don't have to do so to be competitive.

At the Soma Tri at the end of year I ran just under six-minute mile pace for the Quarterman and had the fastest run split of the day. Six-minute miles are not fast for a runner--I've done that for a 20-mile race before--but it is sufficient in a tri and I never run that fast in training. More endurance is the key, IMO, to maintain a decent speed after riding, not more speed.

Doing speed workouts year round increases your recovery that will deter you from doing more volume.
Doing speed at the key times of the year will put the icing on your cake, assuming you have cake.

Chad

Thanks for the post BarryP, I'm looking forward to your periodization post. As the "running in the snow" thread indicates, I have trouble with that.

The above combined with this,

"This last slide, I hope, will also help you understand why a guy who runs a 2:10 marathon trains a little differently than how books recommend that YOU train for a 3:20 marathon. As far as his body is concerned, he is running a shorter race than you are and is running much closer to his lactate threshold than you will be. Hence, he places a little more emphasis on faster training. Likewise, Mark Allen or Chris McCormick will place more emhasis or threshold and track workouts for their sub 3 hour IM runs than you should for your 5 hour run/walk. "

may be the most succinct and important "advice" given on this site this year.

It doesn't really matter how one trains if they cannot avoid injury. Nothing hurts performance more than an injury. Second, it is laughable when someone asks about running faster or cycling faster and they are told they need to do 400 repeats or lactate threshold work, without regard to how fast they are now or what their base looks like.

---

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks

CAUTION

The graphs are not drawn to scale. I tried making a graph to scale once, but the blue zone was huge (probably 5 times as large as it is drawn up there).

Off the top of my head, a 10K runner will train maybe 10 miles a week less than a half marathon runner. In place of that he will probably do half as much V02max training and maybe 50% more threshold (tempo) training.

It may seem significant, but I really homestly think you are talking about a perfromance difference of 2%. For Peter Ried that may be a big deal, but that's where the hiring of a coach may come in handy.

I used to hear coaches say all the time that a well trained 10K runner can run within 98% of his potential in a marathon, and vice versa.

I wish I had a better answer, but I can only base it off of my triathlon experience.....and that has left me sitting on the fence.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

I agree whole heartedly especially as regards the typical person doing triathlon. Given two identical typical triathlete people who want to get better and one chooses more volume and one chooses more speed work I would put my money on the one choosing more volume as seeing much bigger gains. That is, assuming that they do not get injured doing so. That being said, I suspect that those who choose to do more speed work are more likely to get injured than those who choose more volume, as long as the more volume people increase their volume gradually. If they suddenly jump from 50 mph to 150 mpw, I think injury is pretty much guaranteed. Little value in that.

---

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks

why is a faster tempo run 3 miles or so more taxing than 9 miles or so lsd? seems like in one the cardio is taxed and in the latter the skeletal/muscular system is taxed.

for older athletes (55+) is it better to run shorter but more frequently (mixing zones) or alternate days and run longer with maybe one day of tempo work?

reason i ask is being an older athlete the knees are starting to show a little wear and tear.

maybe folks like adamson, alegre, clark, buchanan can share their advice. or barry what do you suggest for the older athlete?

thanks

Actually, I think that a 3 mile tempo is equally taxing as a 9 mile run (but don't quote me on that). The difference is, in once workout you adequtely trained your lactate threshold, in the other......you ran 6 more miles, meaning you got 6 miles more worth of aerobic training.

The idea is that slower running allows you to run more, which allows you to get more aerobic benefits from it. This doesn't mean that ALL training should be aerobic. That was kind of the goal of the slides was to show how to balance your program. I only hope people take with them the principles, rather than specifc workouts.

Shorter and more frequent is usually the better formula. As an engineer I like to think of it as cyclical stress. There becomes a point where things break. If you drive over a bridge 1,000 times it'll be fine if designed to handle 1,000 cycles. However, 2,000 times might break it. So, the engineer says, "Lets inspect this bridge every 1,000 cars and replace pieces that are broken."

Your body does the same thing, however the question is......should you drive 1,000 miles in between each part exchange, or should you drive 2,000 miles before the first part exchange, but then give yourself time to rebuild the broken bridge? Everyone knows its better to do maintenance on something before it breaks.

In other words, longer harder work outs are more likely to break you. I always recommend at leat 6 runs a week. 6x4 miles will do almost as much for you as 3x8 miles, but its safer. OR you can think of it this way: If you can handle 3x8 miles safely, then you can probably handle 6x5 or 6 miles.....so instead of a 24 mile week, you can do a 30-36 mile week.

I like to periodize schedules, but if you were looking for a stadard year round program; run often, run easy, do one long run, and one 20 minute tempo run every week. Occasionally throw in a harder workout, but focus on a little more harder workouts as important races approach. Do this over and over again until dead. ; ^ )

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Good post.

The motivation for this type of post is often the frustration I have when I see people run themselves into the ground run at paces that are often two high to really have the kin dof effects they are hoping for

I would add that people should become aware of their zones, whether they use HR or pace. I know quite a few people that run too slow.

3 mile tempo = 9 mile easy, you've already been quoted you on that! I guess you can put an asterisk by it. Actually, I've looked at the smart coach (which I think is mostly based on Daniels) and the pattern for a 20-25 mile wk is something like 3-5to8(tempo/V02max)-3-8to10(long). But I've tried it and it's pretty tough, at least for me and it's only 4 runs/wk.

---

Jim_n_La
...what doesn't kill you makes you stronger, but only until it kills you - Cousin Elwood

In other words, longer harder work outs are more likely to break you. I always recommend at leat 6 runs a week. 6x4 miles will do almost as much for you as 3x8 miles, but its safer. OR you can think of it this way: If you can handle 3x8 miles safely, then you can probably handle 6x5 or 6 miles.....so instead of a 24 mile week, you can do a 30-36 mile week.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Barry,
Let's assume that you are running 9x3=27 miles a week instead of 1x5 2x4 1x10 miles = 23 miles a week.
would you still say 9x3 time running will be better for overall endurance building.
Thanks

---

--------------------------------------------------------
I see obsessed people.

Thanks Barry, I am feeling good about my last two weeks during which I did 187K of running but over 20 runs and the average run is just under 10K in length....I was actually doubling up a lot by running to and from work many days, which typically gave me 80 min per day split over 2 runs and I actuall feel remarkably good given the relative volume (for me) on top of 13 additional hours per week of XC ski, bike, and swimming.

Dev

Not exactly...but not far off. #1 is your total weekly mileage, but #2 is going to be your long run....which is more stressful and more risky, but as decent rewards.

The reason why the questions can be hard to answer is that building a training program is kind of like building an American football team. One might ask what's better, big guys or fast guys. The answer is "both." As to how many it depends on so many factors.

Honestly if you told me you were going to run a 27 mile week, the first thing I do is look at the long run and make it about 1/4 of that (as per Daniels) which is about 7 miles. Again, this assumes 7 is what you can handle, not merely what you are willing to do. Now you've got 20 left. I typically like to do 1 or 2 more runs at about 2/3 that distance, and then the rest around 1/3. So now you've got 7, 5, 5, 3, 3, 4, for 27 miles. However, that may be just as good or no better than 7, 5, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3 for 30 miles. Typically you are going to want at least one long run and probably 1-3 mediumish long runs. Fill in the rest with shorter ones. Most people are fine with 6-8 runs a week (if they are serious about it) where really serious runners with a lot of experience might run 10-12. It's not always more is better or more frequent is better etc. It's about being in the right ball park and then tweaking the program to best fit your individual talents.

Make a little more sense?

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Barry,

Just to clarify things. We all (I hope!) know what "steady" and "tempo" mean in terms of training, but from a runners perspective (on tri), would you elaborate on what you would call a vo2max or sprint work-out.

I'm understanding that vo2max sessions would be at your 11min pace, right? And sprints would be 50-100m with full recovery?

My blue zone would be "steady" or "recovery" which is typically ~1:30-2:30 slower than 5K race pace.

The gold zone is "tempo" or "threshold" which is around 1 hour race pace, meaning 10K race pace for slower runners (like someone who races a 10K in 59:50) and 10 mile race pace for faster runners. You can also run these another 10-20 seconds per mile slower but extend the run to 40-60 minutes (like a marathon paced run).

V02max is at 11 minute race pace, which is about 5-15 seconds per mile faster than 5k race pace for most. HOWEVER, one is not limted to this pace. In any zone most coaches advocate running to either side of that mark and lengthening or shortening the intervals. This isn't clear in Daniels' Formula but he's said himself that he trains people to either side of this zone. For example, an elite 10K runner might do some workouts 10 seconds per mile slower than 5K pace. It'll still stimulate V02max improvement but also simulate the event.

Speed work is defined as anything faster. You can think of that red zone not as number of miles done, but rather as total distance X intensity. The idea is that the longer your race distance is, the less and less of this training you'll need. Some may want to do 400s or 600s at just a hair faster than V02max intervals. Others may want to run 200s at mile race pace. You can also do 100s at 800m race pace. If you were training for the mile, these might even be 100 meter accelerations where the last 50 is at a full sprint. If training for the marathon, this workout wouldn't be worth the risk of injury.

There's no one right answer, but I think there is a right principle, which is that the shorter your race is, the more and more important this becomes. The longer the race is, the less and less important it is, but it should still be part of a balanced program...even if its only 5x100 at mile race pace once evey 2 weeks during racing season.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Thanks for starting this thread. Great source of information for someone fighting to improve their running.

:-)

Jodi

Barry,

In looking at that info on the long run, what do you think of how I have things set up?

I'm doing my first tri (a Half-IM) in June...but that was an addition to my training plan for doing a 50K (trail) end of Feb and a marathon (road) late Spring.

I've run a marathon and 6 half races and have been consistent about my mileage for a while, so I'm not a total newb to running, but also not an expert. I have had injury issues, but they are mostly cleared...PF, some knee problems, etc.

From June to November I was keeping my long runs between 8-12 miles with 3-4 runs a week, 20-25 miles total.

Now I'm hitting where I'll have to push those long runs longer...but I don't want to take my overall mileage too high, so it's looking like this for my next say 12 long runs progression:

12-12-14-17-12-18-21-24-10-17-7-50K

And my total weekly mileage being:

27-28-29-32-23-35-37-39-27-36-21-42

My question would be...since I'm wanting to add longer long runs so I get my body used to the distance, would it be best to run more short runs to fill in the weekly mileage (say 5-6 runs total) or keep at my 4 runs a week with one easy/short day and two medium days?

FYI--Most of my runs are at around a 9-9:30 min/mi pace, today's 12 miler was at 8:30...wasn't wearing my hrm, but it felt like I was around a 160-165 avg (which is zone 3 for me).

---

____________________
Citius, Altius, Fortius.

In general:

Long runs don't need to be any longer 13-15 miles if training for an HIM. If training for a 50K, then yes, you'll want to progress longer. I don't know much about ultra training, but one of my friends was pretty good at them. She would do one run a month that was really long (25-30 miles) but then the other long runs (1 a week) were more reasonable.

If you REALLY want to be prepared for this 50K, you are going to struggle off of 25 mpw and 4 runs a week. The long run is an added benefit to your training, but its really the weekly mileage that is going to make the difference.

IF you are going to limit yourself to 25 mpw, then you probably want to do fewer runs (like 4). However, you have to ask yourself what purpose limilting yourself to 25/week serves. What if you ran 25 in 4 runs, but then still did 2 more 20 minute runs each week. You know, get home from work, throw on the shoes, stretch for 5 minutes, then run 10 minutes a way from your house and come back. You've just increased your total training load by 20%. If this was the stock market you'd be crazy not to do it.

Remember its not that its better to run 6 times a week, its that you can run more when running 6 times a week. In the end, you need to run whatever mileage is right for you....and that depends so much on talent and experience, which will vary from person to person.....but in the end, 6 runs will always allow you to run more than 4 runs.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Gotcha. So, what I'm hearing is I shouldn't be as afraid of the higher weekly mileage as I am...and could maybe increase frequency, but pay more attention to varying the intensity. This should be as simple as adding 20-30 min's of treadmill time on my gym days in addition to my run schedule now. That would get me to the low-30's mpw now and up to the mid-40's in a month or so.

I'm using the motivation for the 50K to really build a strong aerobic base. From there I'll be cutting my long run to that 13-15 miles and focusing on improving my speed over that distance for the HIM...

Thanks for the input!

---

____________________
Citius, Altius, Fortius.

To clarify,

You SHOULD be concerned with your overall mileage, but to the extent that doing too much will lead to an injury. How much is too much, of course, is highly individual. As long as you progress grdually you should be ok.

FWIW, most people of above average running talent (meaning you aren't built like a sumo wrestler) can run 2-3 hours a week within just a month or two of starting at zero. Give that person 12 months and there are very few that aren't capable of 4 1/2 to 5 hours of running every week.

That should at least give you a ball park of what you should expect to be reasonable.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Thanks, Barry. Your insights are appreciated.

Your tempo/threshold pace coincides more or less with a tri 10k (ie a little slower than your road 10k) pace, which makes sense since most of my training will be oriented to improving efficiency at this pace.

I just wanted to bump this since I added a new slide.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485