(Although I am responding to Dan's post, this is not necessarily directed at him more than anyone else.)

The problem with the some of the blanket statements being thrown around here regarding volume and intensity (other than the fact that everyone probably needs their own particular approach to training to reach their full potential) is this:

The majority of medical research indicates that injuries in runners are probably best correlated to volume / mileage, not intensity. An interesting study in triathletes in particular indicates that more years of experience, not less, were a risk factor for preseason injury, and that in season injuries were most correlated to mileage run (not intensity) and injury history.

See:


Walter SD, Hart LE, McIntosh JM, Sutton JR. The Ontario cohort study of running-related injuries. Arch Intern Med. 149:2561–2564. 1989.

Burns et al. Factors associated with triathlon-related overuse injuries. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 33(4):177-84. 2003.

Macera CA, Pate RR, Powell KE, et al. Predicting lower-extremity injuries among habitual runners. Arch Intern Med. 149:2565–2568. 1989.

Jacobs SJ, Berson BL. Injuries to runners. a study of entrants to a 10,000 meter race. Am J Sports Med. 14:151–155. 1986.

James SL, Bates BT, Osternig LR. Injuries to runners. Am J Sports Med. 6:40–50. 1978.

Wen DY. Risk factors for overuse injuries in runners. Curr Sports Med Rep. 6(5):307-13. 2007.

Lysholm J, Wiklander J. Injuries in runners. Am J Sports Med. 15:168–171. 1987.

Marti B, Vader JP, Minder CE, Abelin T. On the epidemiology of running injuries: the 1984 Bern Grand-Prix study. Am J Sports Med. 16:285–294. 1988.


Note that I'm purposefully leaving biomechanical factors out of the discussion, though some of the papers above address those factors as well.

In my sports medicine practice, my experience bears this out. Moreover, the people who run a lot of quality seem to get acute injuries like ankle sprains by taking a bad step, often by running quality on a surface they should not be, or doing something silly on the bend of the track. The people who end up with overuse injuries (i.e. ITB, PFS, etc) are often running too much, or running too much too soon.

Much of the idea that there must be large amounts of volume before intensity can be traced back to Matveyev's analysis of the Russian Helsinki Olympic squad. (He basically published the team's approach to training as the gospel of training. If I am not mistaken, it was mostly the track team. He gave them surveys). There was a lot of criticism of this at the time within Russia...those alternative viewpoints did not make it to western audiences. Somewhat more sophisticated (and more recent) views come from people like Tschiene and Verkhoshansky. However, they formulated their approaches by working with elites almost exclusively. Volume before intensity (even according to Tschiene) will work in relative beginners, but this is not to say it will work any better or worse than anything else.

Marky makes the good point that there needs to be distinction between most age-groupers and most professionals. They are different protoplasm. Case studies of individual athletes, be it Scott, Allen, Reid, or whoever, are not nessecarily relevent. Did I apply a "raise the left, fill the right" approach to Joanna's training this year, sure I did. Does that mean that a similar approach would lead to a world championship / world record, or even just a PR performance, for anyone who tried it? Not hardly. In my estimation, the idea that any athlete, regardless of ability, will be more likely to be injured in one way than another (provided they don't do anything stupid) is probably meaningless. Doing dumb things gets people hurt, period. If people were just a little honest with themselves about where they are now, and then made an honest assessment of their potential and goals, and stopped doing things that clearly hurt, my medical practice would be a lot less busy.


Phil

---

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

If people were just a little honest with themselves about where they are now, and then made an honest assessment of their potential and goals, and stopped doing things that clearly hurt, my medical practice would be a lot less busy.

we wouldn't want that now would we? ;-)

---

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App

My apologies if this has been answered already, but what if you are training for a sprint or Oly. How would this differ according to your philosophy?

---

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

- For sprint: general phase would be more like easy, steady, tempo pace/power or under 90% of threshold pace/power and specific would be somewhere around threshold-VO2 max or 91-120% of threshold pace/power
- For Oly: general phase would be more like easy, steady, V02 pace/power and specific woulld be between somewhere around tempo-threshold pace/power

---

Jorge Martinez
Head Coach - Sports Science
E3 Training Solutions, LLC
@CoachJorgeM

I'm sure I'll mess something up here.

Trail: It is not a MarkyV philosophy. He was just vocal about it...see Herbert's 'fastest mouth in the sport of triathlon' comment on the ST interview...so Dan specifically called him out on it. You can read some of Paulo's (Mark's coach) old posts and might be able to glean the same thing. You can pick up the Daniels running book and a summary of what you will find for a marathon is a prep period (no speedwork, maybe strides) followed by some speedwork (FAST 200s, 400s with ample recovery) and Intervals (VO2 max stuff), and then a marathon specific period of long runs with marathon paced running or tempo intervals as well as weekly workouts of more LT based intervals. The 5k/10k program would be a little bit different and have more interval based (LT - VO2 max) workouts near the end of the program. Endurance Nation has their athletes do a lot of quality on the bike during the winter and then the IM specific training closer to the IM.

BarryP: This doesn't exactly answer your question, but to the posters who have asked about specificity...that to me is what it is about. In the Noakes post from another thread, that is what Mark Allen did in the final 8 weeks before Hawaii. As the race approaches, the training mimics the race effort. If you are doing an IM, it could be that you've done the harder VO2/LT work earlier and that your last 8-12 weeks are volume and less intensity focused. If you are doing a sprint or an olympic race, it could be that your last 8-12 weeks are more intense with less volume than earlier inthe season. Either way, I would be willing to bet that you did at least several weeks of lower intensity training to get ready for whatever your next phase is.

As for pros using this approach? I don't know, but I would be willing to bet that most of those pros who disappear for the months of August and September are focusing on their Hawaii specific training.

---

Brandon Marsh - Website | @BrandonMarshTX | RokaSports | 1stEndurance | ATC Bikeshop |

"The majority of medical research indicates that injuries in runners are probably best correlated to volume / mileage, not intensity."

perhaps this is because it's a statistically insignificant number of the millions who do run actually do intensity training.

any decent running coach will tell you that you can't start intensity until you've built a base. if you want to be a good runner, you have to create and maintain a base. if you want to be a great runner, you have to create and maintain a much larger base. few world class runners today at 5k and up are able to compete successfully on less than 90-120 miles a week, and east africans are typically running 100-160 miles a week.

i don't know how you carve out of this paradigm what causes injury, but i can tell you one really flipping great way to injure yourself, if this is pre-season and you haven't been running: go out and do three speed sessions this week instead of three base runs this week.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Part of the problem with the current state of the discussion is that we are bouncing between talking about Professionals as well as mincing those thoughts with the thoughts that are applicable to amateurs. We are not being concise enough.

Mark,

I noted that and addressed that back in post#127.

You are right - what you do is dependent on what you have done and where you are at. You can't and should not paint with a broad-brush here( as some seem to be doing) nor is it an all this or all that discussion either.

Here are two generalities that in my view are dead-on when I look at the tri population as a whole:

1. Like the individual I was addressing in post#127, many new triathletes in the sport for 3 years or less, with minimal or no run background would do well to follow Dan's protocol or the 100/100 - this will give them the base that they are lacking. Don't over think it - just run. More will be more for these folks

2. Many vet's who have been at it for a number of years( 5+) and who are serious about lifting and raising performance, and have been doing a decent amount of run mileage, would benefit hugely from some faster paced run training. These folks are very often in an LSD rut. But again - no need to overthink it - just get out and start laying down some faster paced run workouts, intervals, fartlek, tempo etc a couple times a week . . . For these people less may be more.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

For these people less may be more.

ha! proof that you do not understand the concept of "More is MORE"

that group that you are speaking of doing less is in fact doing more

---

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App

Not to you in particular, but one thing that clouds these discussions is most "average" triathletes idea of LSD. I've had people say that they don't get faster doing LSD only workouts. When I ask how much they typically its a variation of "4 time per week 15-20 miles" Thats commendable for general fitness, especially with swimming and biking mixed in, but if you are doing 15-20 mils per week spread over 4 runs, you are missing the L and the D part of LSD.

Styrrell

ha! proof that you do not understand the concept of "More is MORE"

that group that you are speaking of doing less is in fact doing more

Mark,

I think I understand it fully.

Perhaps a bit of clarity. They need to do less of a certain kind of running. Not stop that type of running completely just stop doing that type of running ALL the time. You know the type - plodding along for ALL runs at exactly 9:00min/mile. Then they wonder why they can never run faster than . . . . . . . 9:00min/mile! It's because that's all they do. That's all they have done for 5+ years. Sure increasing volume for these folks will help - but many don't have the time. So go the other way - spend more time running faster!

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

see... you used 'more' in your clarification. ;-)

---

36 kona qualifiers 2006-'23 - 3 Kona Podiums - 4 OA IM AG wins - 5 IM AG wins - 18 70.3 AG wins
I ka nana no a 'ike -- by observing, one learns | Kulia i ka nu'u -- strive for excellence
Garmin Glycogen Use App | Garmin Fat Use App

[snip]

let me revise and extend comments on this, if i may.

i mentioned that an easy way to get injured is to start your running campaign off by doing speedwork sessions in place of basework sessions. every running coach will tell you this.

that established, another easy way to get injured is through overuse. i'm not advocating overuse. i'm advocating use. i'm running between 4 and 5 miles a day right now. that's what i can handle without injury, if i wear good shoes that are appropriate to my footfall, with orthotics, mostly on trails. i can do this 4 to 5 times a week. so that's what i'm doing.

there are two ways for me to insure injury: do these miles, or even shorter distances at a high rate of speed; and run 7 miles a day instead of 4-5 miles a day. each is inappropriate for my fitness right now (and i'm talking about anatomical ability, not just physiological ability).

next week some of these runs will be at 6-7 miles. the week after that, perhaps more. were i to do february's miles now, or march's miles in feb, then i'd be in danger of developing an overuse injury. the articles you cited frequently have in their titles injuries do to overuse. i have no doubt that overuse generates more injuries than speedwork, because so few people engage in speedwork. but it's a false choice to say that you pick your poison: overuse or speedwork. i think you're playing with fire to imply that speed training is the alternative to speed after basework. to do so you must conflate base training with overusage, and that's a straw argument.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

" if i wear good shoes that are appropriate to my footfall, with orthotics, mostly on trails"

Red Flags 1, 2 and 3.

No wonder you have problems running without injury.

Get minimalist shoes, ditch the orthotics, and run on a track or treadmill.

And the "S" part is not supposed to be there in the first place. People should not be running slowly so much as running EASILY, letting the pace fall where it may. Perhaps we could call it "LED"?

You realize that the guy you are directing these points to once ran 31 min 10K and 4:19 mile. I suspect he knows about footfall, impact of orthotics vs minimalist shoes.

By the way, are you saying use treadmill or track so that you can control any momentary ballistic loads on a technical downhill? I don't see the downside of a flat dirt trail.

So if we cut Slowman's balls off... Even then... he wouldn't be close to world class?

---

-

The Triathlon Squad

Like us on Facebook!!!

He's not running 31min's now is he? Orthotics are one step from a wheelchair.

Track and treadmill keep me injury free and off icy, muddy, wet trails/roads.

In essence I believe that orthotics are like crutches in that they mask the problem and help you work around them. I only run in neutral cushioned shoes cause I am only as strong as my weakest link. That being said, I am 43 not 53 so perhap at 53, my tune will change to "anything that can help keep running"...by then, perhaps the choice is orthootics or nothing, cause you are dealing with a lifetime of accumulated injuries, some of which there is no real "coming back from"....you'll need the 50+ crowd with 35 years of running experience to answer that....don't give me some 53 year old guy who just started running at 47 and is a studly runner 36 min 10K runner. I want data from guys with at least 70,000 lifetime run miles.

I'm up over 50,000 so my chassis might need some outside assistance in the foreseable future....don't know, but prefer to steer clear of orthotics like you.

Dev

"Get minimalist shoes, ditch the orthotics, and run on a track or treadmill."

scary to know what sort of advice is out there.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I added a little emphasis for you up there...just again making my point about individuality of athletes.



Perhaps you misunderstood me. I made no argument regarding picking poison. In fact, I never even used the term "speed".

I think the mistake is conflating base training and "long slow distance" training. In my opinion, base training is a period where you have a broad focus on all relevant physiological adaptations. IOW, a runner would be well served to do some appropriate, directed distance running, and some 200's, 400's, 800's at appropriate paces during the base period. The mix is determined on an individual basis, based upon the individual strengths, weaknesses, and injury history of the athlete. Then, as the season progresses, you develop what is most critical for race success at the distance they are focusing on. It doesn't mean you drop anything wholesale. The mix simply changes.


I think perhaps you and I are talking past each other, i.e. our respective definitions of "base" and "speed" are pretty different. Given your history (you were an 800M runner, right?), I suspect your idea of speed work is probably a lot faster than mine.


Phil

--

---

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

Don't worry - you don't need to be "old" to run in orthotics. Many olympic runners in their early 20's do as well ;0

I have Butch Reynolds mold to prove it ...

We are just not all biomechanically perfect like the idiot who wrote the line apparently is. I'm sure he would never wear glasses either since then he would continue to need them forever! LOL!

---

____________________________________
Fatigue is biochemical, not biomechanical.
- Andrew Coggan, PhD

"I added a little emphasis for you up there...just again making my point about individuality of athletes."

there's two sides to this coin. different athletes respond to stimuli differently. up to a point. but there is no such thing as a system. or even a science. or medicine, unless you acknowledge the sameness of people. the scientific method and everything that flows from it is based on the truism of sameness. accordingly, sameness is a much stronger platform on which to rely than individuality though, yes, there is room for adjustment under the broad umbrella of "this is what works."

"In my opinion, the mistake is conflating base training with "long slow distance" training."

i would agree with this, if you'll allow this proviso: for most triathletes, base training looks, and tastes, and smells a lot like LSD, at least for a good while. LSD as gerry lindgren employed it is 240, 270, and even 300 miles per week. you can in fact have success with this, tho few people ascribe to that training regimen these days. but LSD was largely instead of speed, not prior to speed. i never advocated this.

but base, for a guy who's got little fitness, and little speed, and only spare mileage on his resume, is going to look like LSD to the casual observer, and the "L" in LSD is relative: L can be 3 miles to a guy with no mileage. where i would part ways with the LSD guys is that after 3, or 4, or 6, or 8, or 12 weeks, depending on the person, and the hole he's got to dig himself out of, a larger and larger portion of base miles give way to targeted higher-quality work.

remember, my beef was not with speed/intensity. my beef was with speed/intensity before base, or instead of base.

"I think perhaps you and I are talking past each other,"

that could be. perhaps there not much space between us. but i do remember one thing that sticks with me, and that is your method of determining fitness: that 800m time trial. this is what scares me. you'll have to talk me down from that fear.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Can we just drop the letters L S and D out of this thread.

We're talking about banking miles at maximum aerobic speed. There is nothing about this that is slow and there not neccessarily any need to go long...just bank distance as fast as you can aerobically so you can get up the next day and repeat.

OK keep D...we are trying to accumulate miles....just axe the long and slow parts.

You can't teach an old dog new tricks...

You sell orthotics, don't you?