I thought I'd add some key quotes here:
_________
"According to his wife and training advisor, Sandra, Khannouchi always runs negative-split long runs, warming up for several miles, and then running just 15 to 20 seconds slower than his marathon pace. The last three miles, he goes for broke. "He tries to run them at about his 10-K race pace [4:30 to 4:40]," she says."
_________
"In recent years, more coaches and runners have turned to marathon pace as the foundation of their long-run strategy. Here's a common approach, supported by many experts, including Jack Daniels, Ph.D., author of Daniels Running Formula, and popular online coach Greg McMillan: Run the first 10 miles of your long run at an easy pace, then gradually accelerate to marathon pace over the last eight to 10 miles. A number of coaches believe in alternating your weekend long runs. That is, do an EZ-all-the-way long run one week, and an MP-based long run the next."
_________
"Leave it to Daniels, the master of tempo training, to figure a way to introduce lactate-threshold workouts into a marathon plan. "I favor a variety of long runs," Daniels says. "You just have to be careful that your long run doesn't affect another quality workout that's coming up."

Here's a particularly clever Daniels-endorsed way to do tempo training on a 20-miler. Start with two miles at EZ pace, then do 4 x 2 miles at LT pace, about marathon pace minus 30 to 50 seconds per mile. Between the two-milers, jog easily for two minutes. Finish your run with 10 miles at EZ pace.

Jason Karp likes to use LT pace for the last three to four miles of a long run. "It's a key physiological variable," he says. "If we can improve someone's LT, they'll run a faster marathon." "

---

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

So essentially it should be good to do that at the end of a long run as long as your body can recover from it and thats where the distinction lies?


Grant

---

Grant
----------------------------------------------------
Proudly sponsored by Desoto Sports
Please Support CAF every little bit helps http://raceforareason.kintera.org/grantreuter

That's the key to any training. Getting as much in as possible, while still getting the recovery. The idea is to just know how much is too much.

Barry, approaching the long run is difficult. There is a biomechanical component that needs to be addressed. I see too many people changing their natural form while they try to run slower. e.g. Too much verticality in their gait as they try to slow down or body rocking back and forth.....and they are doing this for a LONG time. This leads to injuries which could be avoided. IMHO, the long run should be built up slowly with one's natural gait and HR serving as dual limiters. It will take people longer to achieve their mileage but once adapted they are able to run their long runs at a more efficient/faster (biomechanical and physiological) pace.

Good Post

Woody

I like fast finish long runs, but I don't think they should be a staple type of workout for most. I would think that they are beneficial for 1/2 IM training, maybe Oly--but that would be a stretch. You, and RW, discuss these workouts without really explaining what they prepare the athlete for.

Should we do these all the time? What if a 13 mile long run at MP + 60s is really challenging for the athlete? Should they start incorporating a fast finish too?

If the athlete is ready for this type of workout, when in their training should they incorporate it?

Also, you fail to address that Khannouchi is injured. A lot.

You, and RW, discuss these workouts without really explaining what they prepare the athlete for.
_____________

I can offer my opinion on that after lunch. Do you have any thoughts?

---

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

When training for Xterra's a couple years ago the recommendation I got (from UCD Sports Medicine) was to take the long run and divide up as follows (this example assumes a 90 min long run:

15 min w/up
20 min easy
20 min moderate
20 min fast
15 min cool down

So the middle portion of the run was divided into thirds with increasing intensity. Seemed to work well and was not bad to recover from. I'd say you'd need a good base first.

Not to speak on Barry's behalf, but ... I believe long runs with a fast finish better stimulate what its like to go at goal pace (marathon pace for example) after you have already expended a lot of energy -- ie, can you really do a few 7 min. miles after 90 min .of easier running (even if its 8:30 pace)?? If you can't do a 15-20 miler and "finish fast" you had better reassess your goal. I nearly always throw in 3-5 goal pace miles near the end of a long run when marathon training, but still "cool down" for a mile or 2 ...

If a 13-miler at MP+60 is "really challenging" then MP may be too ambitious ... As far as when to incorporate, I don't see why anyone can't include GP miles from the beginning. So an athlete's first 10-mile long run might just include 10 min. at GP, then build up over 3-4 months so their 20-milers would include 30+ min. at GP ...

QUOTE: I can offer my opinion on that after lunch. Do you have any thoughts?

In longer events, like a marathon, where the athlete is running/racing at a pace faster than an aerobic type of effort they will start to slow down, fast finish long runs train them to find a way to run fast when they're tired.

It's probably not the only way to train to be able to do this, but it's one way.

For most, in a marathon, running fast will mean being able to maintain their goal pace. For Khalid, Tergat, it means creating a selection. Most of us don't have to drop two miles at 10 to 15 sec. faster than goal pace in a marathon to be successful.

For the 1/2 IM'ers it probably means really running for the whole 13.1. But most of the field isn't able to run faster than they would if they just went out for a training run! A fast finish long run may not be the remedy for that. It makes some sense to me that a good goal pace for a 1/2 IM Run split is an open Marathon goal pace. Maybe a bit faster.

Even for the Oly distance, some of us aren't blessed with fantastic 10K speed, so how do we train to run fast after a really hard bike--well we can do bricks--which, like the fast finish long run is training us to run well on tired legs. I prefer a fast finish long run to a brick, but that's just me.

I would like to see a post about the Lessing Paradox -- that guy can consistently run really fast in a 1/2 IM and didn't he drop a 76 half-marathon split at IMLP after leading the bike?

QUOTE: "As far as when to incorporate, I don't see why anyone can't include GP miles from the beginning. So an athlete's first 10-mile long run might just include 10 min. at GP, then build up over 3-4 months so their 20-milers would include 30+ min. at GP ... "

I would contend that, while this may be a good workout, it's not addressing the same limiter that a 16miler (or more) with a 1/2 hour fast finish will address.

"tempo" long runs are as important as "EZ" long runs.
"EZ" long runs will help the runner become more efficient, especially with fat burning focus.
"tempo" long runs will help the body & mind of the runner being more aware of a marathon-like env.
* Firstly it will help you with figuring out your marathon pace: If you have trouble running @ marathon pace or slightly faster for about 4 miles toward the end of the long run. Then you will definitively not be able to hold that marathon pace for the whole marathon.
* Secondly, if you run @ marathon pace or slightly faster for about 4 miles toward the end of the long run, then during the marathon, your body and mind will be like hey been there/done that I know how to deal with that...

Fred.

"I would contend that, while this may be a good workout, it's not addressing the same limiter that a 16miler (or more) with a 1/2 hour fast finish will address."

This assumes that most people don't run 15-20-mile long runs year round ... So, as you build up your long run for a marathon or half (from a 10-miler 6 months out to a 20-miler 1 month out) include GP/MP/tempo during them -- at least a little bit -- from the very beginning ... That's all I am saying.

First I want to clarify that my real experience with coaching/running is for 3K - 10K races. Also, I don't have a ton of experience with MP runs with or without a long run. So I can only really speak from what I've read and a bit of intuition - fair enough?

1st off - I like to see the long get to be as long as possible without compromising the rest of the week's workouts. For some that may be 10 miles. For others it could be 20. From there it will depend a lot on the demands of the race distance relative to the athlete trying to complete it.

MP runs, in gerneral have more benefit to those who intend to race at that pace, which should include the marathon and the HIM for most athletes. Note, by MP I really mean ~ 85% of max HR or ~ 15-20 seconds/mile slower than LT. For slower people who are just trying to finish a marathon, their actual marathon race pace will be significantly slower than what I just described.

Given this, however, I think there IS a benefit of the longer MP run (60 minutes) compared to the shorter LT run (20-40 minutes) for most race distances. I like it as an alternate workout. I think you can only gain so much by doing 20-40 minutes at LT week in and week out. Though that pace is optimal, one needs to throw in some LT + intervals along with some longer LT - workouts to try to stimulate you rbody in different ways (many top coaches believe this as well).

In addition, I think there is some value to one training for the half marathon or longer to throw in some LT paced running in the middle or end of *some* long runs. Again, like stated above, I think you can only get so much out of running the same long run week in and week out. Once you have hit a point where the long run really just maintains your fitness, then you may want to throw in an added stimulous. Running the last 3 miles at LT of a medium length long run will simulate running at LT while tired, much like you'd have to at the end of an HIM, mary, half, etc. I don't believe, however, that this will be nearly as beneficial for 5K and 10K training.

The MP runs in the middle of a long run (the real topic here) are of value for someone who is actualy capable of running a marathon @85% of their max HR, or 15-20 seconds per mile slower than LT. Anyone slower than that simply needs to build endurance and focus on weekly mileage and the length of their long run. Very strong IM runners may also benefit from this type of training. Provided the runner IS strong, I'd still like to see them getting in regular 18-22 mile runs and, perhaps, throwing in the MP run during the long run about once every 3 weeks (as per a Pfitzinger artilce I read).

Also note that Daniels has written online ( and aludes to it in his book) that the shorter LT paced runs in th emiddle of long runs will offer the same stimulous but be less stressful on the body.


Soooo.....IMHO, a variety of the workouts would be good for a competent runner racing a mary, or an HIM (or an IM for a top level runner). The weaker runner should focus more on the long run and weekly mileage. Strong runners racing a half would do all of these except the MP run during a long run. As the race distance gets shorter, the less valuable a throwing fast stuff into a long run becomes.....with possible exceptions to the top elites who can easily crank out 20 milers without blinking, but even then they might be better served by just training harder the day after.

---

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

QUOTE: "The MP runs in the middle of a long run (the real topic here) are of value for someone who is actualy capable of running a marathon @85% of their max HR, or 15-20 seconds per mile slower than LT. Anyone slower than that simply needs to build endurance and focus on weekly mileage and the length of their long run."

This distintion is huge. If an athlete isn't at this level there are perhaps more readily achieveable gains.


So, what of the training for an Olympic distance triathlon event. Would you prescribe a fast finish long run? Given the athlete could run a marathon at the pace above?

So, what of the training for an Olympic distance triathlon event. Would you prescribe a fast finish long run? Given the athlete could run a marathon at the pace above?
__________________________

I'm on the fense about that. I think you are correct (did you say this?) that there's more value from a brick than a fast finish long run, though I may stick one or two in during a season.

For an OLY I'd just leave the LT work in the tempo runs, though I think there is some value from hour long MP runs as an occasional alternative. It also depends on how much time they spend training every week. If they just aren't going to schedule in a lot of training, then these harder "mix workouts" may become more valuable. Someone who only runs, say, twice a week may want to do an hour long MP run one day and a long run with an LT paced last 3 miles the second day....just a thought.

---

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

Who do you mean is a really strong runner? A sub 3h IM and sub 2.5h marathon or what?

I personally think that one should always run as fast as possible. The speed depends on your fitness and the type of training you are doing. Last year i only ran 3 times / week b/c i wanted to focus on the swim and bike, so i ran my long run at 4:20-4:30 min/km (3h-3:10h marathon finish) even when i did 2.5h of running. I think that made me real strong at all distances, my main focus is on IM distance.

One work out that i did a couple of weeks before IM Germany was 1.5h in distance tempo and then i did 6x1000m on 3:30 min/km with 1 min rest between. I got really sore but 3 days after i did 16:25min in a sprint. After this workout i felt like superman when i was running :-)

So i think that you shouldn´t be afraid of running fast on your long runs, just be sure to take it easy a couple of days after.

I personally think that one should always run as fast as possible.
_______________________

Jocke,

Out of curiosity, do you come from a running background or a cycling/swimming background? The only reason I ask is that I have learned that you can push a lot harder in a cycling or swimming workout than you can in a running workout on a day to day basis. If you were only a runner (and not a triathelte) I think you'd quickly realize how badly "always running fast" will be for you (this is assuming 7 days a week of running).

However, I agree with you on some level. If you are only going to do a few run workouts a week AND have already gotten yourself in shape, then yes, most of the running should have some intensity (don't know about "as fast as *possible*"......but I'll go with "some intensity").

Running a 15-20 miler "as fast as possible" every week will get you in a lot of trouble fast. Even Khannouchi who is known for insane long run paces does them 20 seconds slower per mile than he is capable of.

IMHO, in your specific example, I think you have a pretty good program put together. Either you know your stuff or you have a really good training instinct. Most "novices" (I'm not calling *you* a novice) that I know would make a mistake of taking 3 minutes rest on those 1000s. That's fine for 4-8 week blocks before an A race but it tends to be counter productive over the long run. The fact that you keep your rests short keeps you closer to your lactate threshold during your workouts, something that can and should be targeted throughout most of the year.

if you want to read more of what I think on that subject, do a search on Runtraining1 once the search function gets fixed.

---

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

not really a paradox as such.. long runs are supposed to be slow to reduce injury, not specifically for training adaptations. Adaptations are maximized by maximizing the stress, the trick is to find a sustainable level of stress.
I don't believe Khannouchi succeeded in this, given the struggles he's had with injuries over the last several years. Was it worth it, to get those world records ? well that's a question..

Personally I like to keep my long runs really slow, even with the much-despised Gallowalk breaks in them. I ran six marathons in the 3:06 to 3:10 range over several years, while doing fast long runs, before figuring this out. Running 2:40 required me to do much slower long runs..

Thanks Doug. It looks like it truly is an issue for debate, particuarly regarding the risk of injury. After reading your post I think I'm going to re-evaluate my training plan (I am very injury prone).

---

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

I don't disagree that most long runs should be done really slow.

But, sometimes a new training stress can be applied--a fast finish long run is such a training stress.

Maybe one or two of these are good within the build phase before a marathon or 1/2 IM. As my original post stated, I don't think these should be a staple.

They're very hard.

To answer some of your Q.

I don´t come from any sport but i´ve been active all my life (i´m 29) before i started with tri 5 years ago. Last season i went real serious with triathlon.

With "as fast as possible" i mean that you should hold the maxium pace that is right for the time of the year and the exercise you are doing. I don´t believe that you should run slower than you have to but this don´t mean that you should hammer all the time.

Right now i´m focusing on the run and are running 6 times/week. To handle this i´ve slowed down quit much...i running as fast as possible and it´s not possible to run that fast :-) I only run fast 1 time/week, right now it´s 5x10min with 2min rest between, the pace is just under LT.
Last week i ran: 2x60min, 2x90min, 1x2h and the intervals. A total of 95k and only about 12-13k fast.

Very interesting threads, i´ve read nr 2 and 3. I think it´s interesting to read and discuss people who think "outside the box".

Cheers!

Such a regimen would work well for everyone as long as they didn't get injured. Almost everyone would get injured doing this. Hence, the lower stress type workouts have evolved.

Frank

---

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

I my experience everyone with a world record feels that every injury was worth it to get to where they got too. (And in my experience everyone with a world record has gotten hurt to get there - swimming)

I had this same conversation with my coach not too long ago, and my opinion is that when you push the pace in workouts significantly, essentially training to a pace instead of LT or a heartrate, you significantly increase your chances of a breakthrough race. You also significantly increase your chances of blowing up in races, getting hurt in training..etc. In the end though, which years will norman stadler be remembered for? Right now its 2004 and 2006.. not 2005. I'd rather blow up in 10 races and win one, especially if its a big one, than finish well 11 times near the front, but never quite there. He felt that the more conservative path was best.

Wins get you sponsors, recognition, medals.. 8th usually gets you the satisfaction of being 8th. just a thought.

And what lower stress type workouts would that be, Frank?

; ^ )

---

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

The issue isn't whether or not to push the pace or train hard, but how we should use our training time most effectively.

Apply stress, take it away, get stronger. Repeat.

What type of stress, when, how often?

Let's say you've been training for a marathon for 14 weeks you have 8 weeks left. You need to taper in there so that leaves 4-5 weeks of build. What do you do with that time to get the best out of it? If you're training to run 6:10 pace for 26.2 miles you should probably dial that in so you have an MP workout every week. Threshold is important so lets throw some of that in there. What next? Let's say you'll have 2 weeks of increased volume and intensity and then a rest week and then two more volume and intensity weeks. I say throw throw 2 fast-finish long runs into the last week of volume/intensity on those cycles. But I would say that those would be the only ones in the Marathon prep.

"I say throw throw 2 fast-finish long runs into the last week of volume/intensity on those cycles. But I would say that those would be the only ones in the Marathon prep."

Why just a couple? During a whole 3 months of training? As long as you are running long anyway, why not run at goal pace a bit more often? Not that it will make or break you ...

"Why just a couple? During a whole 3 months of training? As long as you are running long anyway, why not run at goal pace a bit more often? Not that it will make or break you ... "

It won't make you, but it will probably break you.

It won't make you, but it will probably break you.
___________________________________________

I nominate that for post of the year! Well put.


Running , particularly, is a big balancing act full of trade offs that you have to contend with. For every shorter, faster run, theres a longer run you could have done that day. For every longer slower run, there's a faster run you could have done. What about long AND fast? There are consequences. I had a coach once tell me that you want to find your limit and train just short of it because going over will end your season.

Jocke brought up an intersiting point with regard to tri-training that you *should* be able to go longer and harder more often because of the days off in between (assuming you are taking them). I'm still in th elearning stages of figuring out where this limit is as I think our sport is still in the early stages of figuring out exactly how this can be done most effectively.

In one of my earliest posts on base training I explained the reasons behind lots of "LSD" (zn 1 & 2) running. Early in the training cycle it is the most efficient way to get the most out of your training with the least amount of consequences (given the time, of course).

Re: kannouchi - I had originaly intended to hit on this point, but fogot. Kannouchi, though he has set world records, is also trying to win races. In order to do so, he needs to be ready to drop a mile or two in his race that is well past his LT to separate himself from the pack (dejavu? Someone else said this, right?). For the rest of us who don't win marathons....is there a point? Just something to think about.

BTW - There's a local marathon coach that I run with occasionaly. he has a fairly conservative plan for all of his Boston qualifiers (including a female who's gone 2:43.....he has a PR of 1:06 in the half). We discussed the very aggressive plan that a friend of mine has used, and tweaked, for three years now an has run dissapoining maray after dissapointing mary. The guy has gone sub 52 for 10 miles and 1:13 in the half, but has only run 2:44, 2:53, and 2:55 for his marathons. He runs high volume and high intensity a lot.

---

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

"Jocke brought up an intersiting point with regard to tri-training that you *should* be able to go longer and harder more often because of the days off in between (assuming you are taking them). I'm still in th elearning stages of figuring out where this limit is as I think our sport is still in the early stages of figuring out exactly how this can be done most effectively. "

I don't necessarily agree. A triathlete has two other sports to train for--as such if they are training in a balanced way they may have less energy to spend on running sessions because of the needed recovery from the other sport's quality sessions.

Barry,

A few thoughts.

I think there are two considerations here for the 'serious' and 'experience' runner:

1) What constitutes a long run?
2) How do you best do them?

So:

1) To my mind there are three definitions of a long run - the incidental, the non-marathon race specific and the marathon. The first is simply the longest run you do. If we're honest it probably has less to do with specific endurance considerations, and more to do with a mix of habit and an ingrained idea that it 'burns fat' (and while I understand that it's true that the longer the run without fuel, the greater the body's tendency to burn fat as fuel, it is to my mind not as worthwhile as greater overall training stess leading to more likely calorie deficit). The second is, at its peak, a longer than race pace run used to train the body for the stress of continuous running on race day. It's a 'time on your feet' thing dealing mainly with impact stress. The third is similar to the second, but tends to never actually approach (let alone exceed race distance).

2) I'm not a fan of unfocused long runs. I'd rather see overall fitness raised with sweet-spot tempo work at CP90 than trudging around for hours without real purpose. However, once you have a goal race that is going to ake over 60 mins to complete, I think that long runs have a place in the progression as follows:

STEP ONE - get running (volume through frequency, then duration to a max of 60min runs at slow pace. Thanks to Paulo and Gordo for finally convincing me of this)
STEP TWO - get fit (maintain duration but increase proportion of time spent at CP90 from 0% to ~30%)
STEP THREE - get race ready (maintain duration - but NOT % of time - at CP90 as STEP TWO, but aditionally build one other weekly run up to a xaimum of race mileage+1 for up to half-marathon etc, or to 2.5-3hrs/20-22miles for marathon. For a marathon, this can and should take a while.)
STEP FOUR - final touches six to two weeks out from the race (drop the distance of the long run slightly but do sections of it at Race Pace and with a fast 'finish' - my fast finish builds through 15 mins and ends 5mins before the end of my run. Exactly how much Race Pace and the size of the blocks depends on the race and the athlete. THIS IS NOT SOMETHING TO DO WITHOUT THE OTHER STEPS SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED! Alternatively, run other races: halfs and 20-milers for the marathon, 10Ks and 10-milers for the half.)

Obviously intervals etc are not in here, but I think a periodised approach to the long run is best. In some ways, long runs are to below-FT racing what tempo and intervals are to over-FT racing, and I wonder about their value outside of race-prep (unless it's a case of "I fancy a long, run today, wanna come?").

---

Stuff I like:
PBscience Triathlon Coaching and Lab Testing

so what was your run split at IM Germany? I'm just interested, b/c it's a pretty uncommon training plan.

It not so much the speed of the run, it's working within your HR target workout zone. Runs vary depending on what phase of training you are in. For example early pre-season running, your long run should be in HR zone 2.5 to 3.0. Then as the season approaches you may want to start your LSD run in 2.5 to 3.0, then finish strong in 3.0 to 3.5. Basically it is all about HR, speed will come after you put in your milage and train your heart and body to run faster with a lower HR.

I can imagine what kinds of workout the one guy runs. Sounds like a classic over-trainer (a 2:44 is pretty decent, though) ... Tell us about this coach's "conservative plan" ... Somewhere (RW probably) I read that one current marathon coach keeps his subjects running at 80 % of goal pace at least 80 % of the time (for those who like formulas) ... High mileage, built up very slowly over time, though ... Conservative like that?

In my last marathon buildup, I would like to think I trained right, but maybe not ... In a "typical" 60-mile week, I might do 12 to 18 of those miles at goal pace or faster (tempo): 8-10 would be done during my 10-12 mile "medium long run (goal pace run)" ... 4-5 would be done during one tempo or inteval session ... and 3 or so during my 15 to 22-mile long run ... Everything else was at least 1 min. slower than goal pace ... Pretty traditional ... Maybe even more mileage at slower paces would have been better ...

would you consider it being a dick if one pointed out that a 'paradox' is a 'contradiction', but you don't explain where the contradiction is here...because he trains with specificity?...running fast to get fast is a paradox?...if anything the contradiction is that running slow is a way to train for running fast...as has been pointed out here, many, many people, including world class athletes, believe that one should train as hard as they can while allowing for maximum recovery and avoiding injury....so kanuch follows this plan...what is the paradox or contradiction?

"And two-time U.S. Olympic marathoner Pete Pfitzinger cautions that slow running can also become sloppy running after 15 miles or so, which could lead to injuries."

This is what I found with my long runs, and my solution was fairly simple. I run at just slightly slower than my current 7:35-8:00/mile comfort pace, but not so much slower that my form changes. It's pretty difficult for me to run at a 9:00 pace and maintain the same form as I do at 7:45. So I run at 8:00 to 8:30 or so, and take occasional walking/stretch breaks every couple of miles. It was far more punishing and I was far more sore when I ran slow than when I ran at a comfortable pace and take occasional breaks.

---

---

Experiment of one, but this has been my experience over the years with longs runs, and I experienced a modest amount of success as strong runner in triathlon competition.

1. The long run needs to be staple of your training plan year round. The actual length will vary depending on the time of year, but suffice it to say that, unless you are focussing on something else it's good to get out at least once a week for a run of at least one hour in duration.

2. Personally I found a strong correleation between the pace that most of my longs runs were done at over years and years, and the best possible pace that I could hold the whole way in an IM triathlon. I could typically hold a pace of a minute per mile faster than this in 1/2 IM race runs and in standalone marathon races. Most long runs and non-specific training runs were done at 7:00 min/mile.

3. In the off season, it was just about getting the run done at X-pace. I did not really concern myself with it. However, in early season and in specific race prep, I would up the pace in the final half or final quarter of the run to 1/2 IM race pace and then hold this pace until the end of the run( for me this was about 6:00 min/mile)

4. I would regularly do long runs in as hilly terrain as I could find - sometimes 2 hours of constantly going up and down. For some reason I found these sorts of runs, very helpful for the specific demands of triathlon running. Not sure why, but I surmised that in a traithlon you are NEVER running on fresh legs, and running up and down hills does take a bit of a beating on the legs. If I could hold a steady 6:00/mile at the end of 2 hours of going up and down on fatigued legs, I knew I was ready for a good triathlon run performance( assuming bike fitness was there as well).

Just some personal observations.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

That's somewhat the same type of training I do. Long runs week in and week out, lots of hills in base training and then some more focused paces as a-races approach.

It seems to me that for IM training your long runs and long bikes are really important--like a quality type of emphasis--so solid long runs are essential.

Do you find that you can run a lot faster after the taper than you can even train during a build? Last year I barely hit 6:20 pace at all during training but run a 30K at 6:19. I'm not sure if others have the same experience with run training for triathlon.

"Do you find that you can run a lot faster after the taper than you can even train during a build?"

I found that I would carry around a fair amount of fatigue in my legs during bigger volume training in the build up to important races. I knew that I had hit the taper dead-on when I would get off the bike, and have to hold myself back on the first few miles of the run, but still running a a good pace - even in an IM. That was my sign that I had hit everything just right.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

"Jocke brought up an intersiting point with regard to tri-training that you *should* be able to go longer and harder more often because of the days off in between (assuming you are taking them)."

Barry,

Thats a good point. If you come to triathlon from a modest to strong running background, you will find that you can get by on LESS running and still maintain decent standalone running performances and run strongly in triathlons. This was my experience and I suspect it is yours as well. You will not set absolute running PR's, but you can still come amazingly close to them or get right back to them quickly if you focus on running for a month or two. But it's true, you do less running miles per week, and the running that you do, when tri training, becomes VERY focused. For years my run training for triathlon was very simple: 1 long run on the weekend, 1 higher quality run during the week( tempo, intervals, hill repeats), and 1 other run, possibly a brick. That would often be it. However there were times, when I would just focus on running for a month at a time, say in the off-season, but once into balanced pre-season and in-season tri training, it would typically be just three runs a week. However, that's for me, an experienced runner who before coming to triathlons had run 6 -7 days week and up to 80 miles/week, for 5+ years.

As they say, your mileage may vary :)

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

I'll know more after Boston this year. Basicaly it's high mileage, two workouts a week (W, Sat) and two long runs a week (medium long on R, Long on Sun). The workouts progress gradualy with more and more LT, and MP work as the race gets closer with some hills, fartlek training, or short speed workouts (like 200, 400, 600, 400 , 200, done!) mixed in. I think he only had them do 3 weeks of V02max.

My friend, on the other hand, was hitting intense long runs, MP runs, and V02max interval sessions 4 months out from the race in addition to high mileage weeks. I just felt it was consitently too much combined with a lot of intensity for too many months.

---

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

Sorry to sound stupid but when someone mentions a 1hr Tempo or 1hr LT run is this including warm up/cool down times? E.g. does a 1hr tempo run account to a 1:20-1:30 running time or does it mean that 30-40mins will be at temp pace with the rest warm up clool down running?

STEP THREE - get race ready (maintain duration - but NOT % of time - at CP90 as STEP TWO, but aditionally build one other weekly run up to a xaimum of race mileage+1 for up to half-marathon etc, or to 2.5-3hrs/20-22miles for marathon. For a marathon, this can and should take a while.)
___________________
fade, what is CP90?

I'm curious about your maximum long run. It's not consistent with what I've read or what I know a lot of college programs do. At the U of D (which our coach modeled a lot of his program off of Gerogetown) we did alternating 15 & 18 mile runs on Sundays. Also you can see in Running with the Buffaloes that UC was doing 2 hour long runs....all for training for a 5-6 mile race.

On the otherhand, I know an elite duathlete who never ran for longer than an hour. I was just curious if you could elaborate a bit. Thanks.

---

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

It will probably depend on who's talking. This is where the training can get confusing because one man's tempo run is another mans marathon paced run (in fact, Daniels' definition of tempo run is Friel's zone 4. Friel's zone 3 he calls "tempo" which is similar to Daniel's MP run).

Typicaly, a Lactate Threshold run (LT) is a run of 20 to 40 minutes at around 1 hour race pace. This can be extended to 60 minutes of running but the pace gets slowed down a bit (otherwise it would be a race) to marathon pace, which *should* be 15-20 seconds slower per mile.

The LT runs (I call tempo runs) are ~88-92% of MaxHR. MP would be closer to 85% of MaxHR.

Typicaly, if one does a "1 hr tempo run" they really mean a run at about 15-20 seconds slower per mile than 1 hour race pace. This should be in addition to at least 10 minutes of warm up and 10 minutes of cool down. So, yes, the 1hr "tempo run" would encompass 1:30 of total running.

Again, it all depends on who's talking about it.

---

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

CP90 is the best effort you can sustain for 90mins. It has become my standard 'tempo' run pace and equates pretty well to the AC sweet-spot training as just slightly below FT.

I'd reverse the question and ask: If the race distance is x, why would you bother to run anything more than x+1mile at most? What would you hope to gain from those miles that you wouldn't also gain from doing them as a separate run?

I just don't see a need for long runs greatly in excess of race distance, particularly not for the kind of people I work with (who would consider me, and my lowly 6-min miles, 'fast').

---

Stuff I like:
PBscience Triathlon Coaching and Lab Testing

Experiment of one, but this has been my experience over the years with longs runs, and I experienced a modest amount of success as strong runner in triathlon competition.

1. The long run needs to be staple of your training plan year round. The actual l...........
_________________

That's a nice summary, Fleck.

---

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

CP90 is the best effort you can sustain for 90mins. It has become my standard 'tempo' run pace and equates pretty well to the AC sweet-spot training as just slightly below FT.

I'd reverse the question and ask: If the race distance is x, why would you bother to run anything more than x+1mile at most? What would you hope to gain from those miles that you wouldn't also gain from doing them as a separate run?

I just don't see a need for long runs greatly in excess of race distance, particularly not for the kind of people I work with (who would consider me, and my lowly 6-min miles, 'fast').
______________________

Thanks fade. I typicaly use, then, CP45 - CP120. I try to varry it up and hit different sides of the lactate threshold.

Re - Long run, I'm going to do a little research on that. I don't have a good answer right now. What I DO know is that succesful programs use a long run of 90 - 120 minutes and that I have had a lot of success using them myself and with my athletes.

It has to do with basic aerobic development, though I can't be certain *why* one long run would be any different than just plain high weekly mileage.

I'll get back to you.

---

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

so what was your run split at IM Germany? I'm just interested, b/c it's a pretty uncommon training plan.

---

My runsplit at IM Germany was 3:17h and this was nr 30 runsplit of all in the field. It was very hot that day and i lost 7min between km 25-35 but manage to pick up the pace during the last 7k. My goal time was 3:10h and it was my 3 IM.

Is there any reference to what % of max he's running at?
Perhaps he's so efficient that even at that speed it's still a tempo run, till he goes flat out at the end.
-HWM

For my Boston training I've had to "sacrifice" some of the running I did in the Fall marathon training to incoporate tri training back in so I'm ready for Eagleman in June. So I'm doing four sessions a week. Usually this is a medium distance tempo or stride session (Tuesday), a medium-long run (Thurs.), a recovery run which I've made into a brick on Saturday's ride and my long run on Sunday.

I'm using a modified version of the 18 week "55 or less" plan from Pfitzinger-Douglas for the schedule. I used the 24 week 55 or less for my BQ in November and basically only ran the entire time. My long runs were averageing in the 7:30's and my race day performance was a 7:21 pace. I didn't follow my nutrition plan right and the last two miles were uphill, so I lost a lot of time in the last section or it would have been closer to 7:15 pace.

For the Boston training my long runs have been similar except this past weekend's 20. I was smooth and consistent and averaged 7:06 for the day with a 6:32 final mile. I've been trying to do just what is being talked about with at least picking it up for the last mile on each long run. Last night I had a 14 miler and averaged 7:16. My goal for Boston was to beat my 3:12:40 I did for the BQ and try and break 3:10. Based on my recent longer runs I'm at or below my goal pace. And my recovery doesn't seem to be having any issues.

Now, I'm not sure if it is that my strength and speed are geting better after the load of miles last year, if I just had two really good training days, or if I need to re-evaluate my goal time, but I think that running the long runs at or below my goal pace has been a positive thing. I guess the thing to see is how I perform come April and whether or not the faster mileage catches up with me and kicks my azz on race day. But I think as long as you are smart in your recovery and cross training and get enough rest and nutrition that one could handle the faster paced long runs and be okay.

---

_____________________________________________
Rick, "Retired" hobbyist athlete
Trying to come back slowly from acute A-Fib

His marathon pace is typicaly around 4:50/mile. So 20 seconds slower would be 7% slower than race pace.

According to McMillan:

http://www.mcmillanrunning.com/...unningcalculator.htm

he would recommend a long run pace of ~30 to 60 seconds a mile to slower than race pace. His charts are pretty consitent with Jack Daniels' charts. So, I think you bring up a pretty good point. They are faster than typicaly recommended, but not *that* much faster.

To compare, mcmillan recommends long runs of 7:30 to 8:00 a mile slower than race pace for the 3 hour marathoner (7min pace).

So, in the BIG picture, it appears that Khalid is only running a little quicker than normaly recommended, but does finish with a hard 3 at the end.

Thanks HWM....until you posted that, I never really thought of it before.

---

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

No sweat...I always try to look at the big picture (...just not alway sure what I see??).
In any case the guy's super-fast at any pace.
-HWM
www.slopesports.com

I'd reverse the question and ask: If the race distance is x, why would you bother to run anything more than x+1mile at most? What would you hope to gain from those miles that you wouldn't also gain from doing them as a separate run?
__________________________

Fade, I did a little digging and got this out of Malmo (ex elite US steeple chaser). He has typicaly felt that the long run is over emphasized, but even still:

"....... It was sometime during the mid to late 80s that long runs became sacrosanct at the expense of doubles and mileage in general. The result was that competitive runners started training the way of Runners World icons - Galloway and such. The results were dismal. You will not find any successful programs that apply a disproportionate amount of mileage into one day. Serious competitive runners would be much better off limiting their long runs to 14-16 miles and then spreading the mileage and frequency over the other 6 days of the week. Only after establishing a consistent pattern of proper training should runners bother with 20+ milers."

The thread referred to 3K-20K races, though I can't be certain he wasn't responding to marathon training.

Anyway, I've done a little digging and the best answer I can come up with for now is that there may be no *proof* that a long run is more effective than more shorter runs. What I do know is that anyone who is any good (runners) do them. I believe the theory is that you get every benefit of aerobic development that you do from other runs, but that those extra miles at the end of the run place an added stress on the system that stimulates more adaptations. Mark Wetmore of UCs XC team believes that it was the addition of a long run that got Alan Culpepper to break through some time barriers in the 1500.....that's a short race.

So, even though it may not intuitively *make sense* do do a long run, there has been proven success with it.

Now, as a *triathlete* you become limited with the numbers and types of workouts you can do. So, it may be that though a long run is beneficial, you could better spend your time doing other things (ie...instead of run 2 hrs easy, bike 1hr hard followed by a 1hr hard run, for example). Greg Watson never ran long but was a very succesful duathlete.

How does that sound?

---

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

Surely there are some other running groups like mine.

This is a great topic.

We've got another long run tommorrow, training for a marathon on March 4th. I've got a running group which takes the view that the long run ought to be as close as possible to race pace, by that I mean, they run the pace they want to run IN THE MARATHON---as a gauge of whether they are ready for the marathon.

We all do anywhere from 3:38 to 4:05 marathons---very very slow to many of you, but my point is going to be here, you would be shocked to find out how many running groups use their long run, for THE PACE to prepare in the marathon. Most everyone is about 3:50. We are 40-55 years old. All of us have done about 3 marathons.

So, according to most experts, the long run pace for most of us, should be 9:30 to even a 10 minute mile, one and a half minutes slower than 8:30 or a 9:00 race pace.

But that's not what we do. The long run is run in each mile in 8:45 to 9 minute mile. Two years ago, I think it was a 10 minute mile when we started running, for long runs. Each year its 30 seconds faster. If it goes over for five seconds this year on a 9, not good. You can lolly gag back there and thumb it down, but the pack will be doing THAT. So, you don't have to, but that's what the pack is doing.

I say 9 minute mile, but some of the miles are like, 8:24, now and then. Usually lodged by the people preparing to run the half marathon. They are all happy and smiling and shit.

Everyone has their watches and Garmins, and its nothing over 9 minutes, all the way. So, you know, when I wake tommorrow, for our long run, I'm not running 1.5 minutes slower than Race Pace (which would be about a 9 and half minute mile), I'm running RACE PACE, and the interesting unknown thing is, who can keep that pace ALL THE WAY to the 20th mile.

Its a competitive contest. Unspoken.

At about mile 14 or 15 on, there's usually only one guy left and one girl who are still going strong, everyone else is "worked," right about at mile 14 or 15. It looks like the Bataan Death March, single file bullshit at about mile 15. Everytime.

So, every other week, I have to blow them off and just go run easy long, by myself, just to build aerobic capacity.

Barry, thoughtful stuff as usual.

I like Malmo’s thinking I’d just reverse the trend, particularly for the non-gifted runner. As you probably recall, my emphasis is on getting them to run effectively, then get fitter through short runs. I think (though I have no proof to hand) that the INJURY-risk (which is potentially greater the less biomechanically ‘gifted’ you are) is going to be lower for shorter, sub-FT tempo runs that it is for longer, though slower, runs (total weekly mileage being equal).

I agree that good runners do long runs. But the fact that ‘good’ runners do them is not in itself an argument for ‘bad’ runners to do them, as the two groups limiters may not be the same. The added stress of in effect ‘stacking’ a 4-miler straight onto the back of a 10-miler will certainly provide more stress than separating the two runs. However it is the added stress, if added too early, which is exactly what concerns me. I don’t think that runners shouldn’t do them. Indeed I believe they have a central role. I just think that there’s a danger when we say ‘Culpepper, Radcliffe, Tergat does X therefore X is always good’ (which I know is slightly misrepresenting your position, but in my experience is what the over-enthusiastic almost always read into discussions like this).

As a triathlete, I think the mix needs to vary according to the athlete’s specific needs, because we’re juggling three sports and very often three different balances of strength and weakness. Triathlon, far more than running, is hard to fit into a one-size-fits-all programme. How I suggest the triathletes I coach approach their running depends very much on what their running needs. The interplay between three sports creates a very different overall training stimulus than for the single sport athlete, and so I’m wary of taking too specific a stance for triathletes (and for anyone wondering, my earlier post was directed at the process I’d suggest for single-sport runners.)

BTW, for clarity, in fade-speak:

good runners = naturally gifted runners (light, biomechanically resilient/efficient etc).
serious runners = eager to train hard to improve, not necessarily natural runners (though they may be athletically gifted in other areas) but are well motivated and like to push themselves.
experienced runners = people like me. serious runners who have been at it for a while.
bad runners = a poorly chosen term, perhaps. Those whose biomechanics are not well suited to running. They may love the sport, then may even go quite fast, but they aren't natural (or, very often, natural looking) runners.

---

Stuff I like:
PBscience Triathlon Coaching and Lab Testing

Barry,

I enjoy seeing that there are some coaches out there that actually are thinking things out and not just reading and doing with their athlete's. I now coach a men's xc/distance squad in college and am certainly not a run of the mill cookie cutter coach with regard to how each athlete is trained.

Being a serious (take it for what you will) marathon - distance runner, I have found that, like many have said on this thread - including you, that it all depends on where you are at and where you want to go with your training. When I trained with a group a few years ago, we would usually hammer our long runs, in addition to probably running too quick on other days. After awhile, the hard long run was such a given that it was factored into the workout scheme. We got down to where we would run like KK and run near 9:20 for 3200 at the end of a 20+ miler. The biggest gains from something like this is that not only did we get used to running fast when tired but we also had a HUGE confidence boost. Many times in the longer races, it seems to be the mental part that holds most back.

With regard to the triathlon, I have my ideas of how I will train for the HIM and IM but I would think that there are very few people that could handle anything like a similar workout to KK, at their own given percentages of effort comparitive to his. Also I don't think it would be benifical unless it was figured to be one of the only two running workouts of the week. That is currently how I am training and probably will continue to until Buffalo Springs. Two running workouts, two bike workouts and just a lot of swimming with solid tech. There are a lot of different ways to train as you noted and I don't want to claim I know it all.

I posted a training log on this forum that had day to day info of how we trained leading up to the 2004 marathon trials. It might give you a better day to day feel for how the Hansons runners trained and still do. You can find it here: http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...ng=runner-x;#1188172

Good post though.

---

-------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.westtexasendurance.com - Powered by Brooks, Powerbar and pizza.

I didn't read every reply here and I may be saying something that has already been said 40 times.
These athletes are at the top of their game, if you could run 150 MPW without injury you could train at race pace as well.
Look at the pro's half marathon and marathon PR times, they are almost the same pace. This means they are running almost as fast as they can for 26.2 miles.

Most of us "humans" here on ST need to train at 1 to 2 min slower than race pace on long runs or we will be hurt most of the time.
That being said when I trained to qualify for Boston last year I trained at near race pace for most of my runs, but I didn't run a lot of weekly miles and allowed a day of recovery between runs.

A couple of key points I pull out of what you were doing according to the other thread (which I've only briefly skimmed):

1) No real 'long-run mileage spike'. With a lot of UK club runners you tend to see a weekly mileage that hovers at 45-60minutes once a day on week days, but with a huge long run spike at the weekend (something I think was counter prodiuctive. Your daily mileage (albeit broken) was always pretty big and you must have been used to soaking up the miles, hence the long runs apparently not being that much of an issue.

2) Your 'speedwork wasn't really, was it? It rather looks like it was quality tempo work (2 and 3-mile reps). If you were running non-stop, how long could you have held that 4:50 pace?

3) I notice the 'easy' 4 was an evening session for you, with the key session in the morning. Have you ever tried the other way around? And if yes, which did you prefer?

---

Stuff I like:
PBscience Triathlon Coaching and Lab Testing

Fade,

Before I get into what I or the group that I trained with did, I want to say that I do not feel that this is the right type of training for anyone looking to do triathlons and even marathons if you are not a well seasoned high volume runner.

Getting back to your key points:

#1 - Excuse my ignorance but what level are the club runners you talk of that are only running 45 - 60 minutes a day during the week and what events are they training for? Are the triathletes or purely runners? There have been some really good marathoners through the years that have ran lower mileage, 80 miles or so, but there have been a staggering number of good marathoners who have ran 100+ miles a week. I was probably averaging around 16 - 18 miles a day during that part of my training, going off memory now, so running a long run of 18 - 22 miles wasn't that much of a shock to the system. Most of the other guys I was running with were averaging 18 - 20 miles a day, so it was even less of a factor to them. This is regardless of running two a day runs or just one run a day, because all the training was hard for the most part. Only running those longer runs allowed us around 24 hours with no other training to recover. Whether we fully recovered or to a point that was good enough cannot really be found but I think for the most part we did recover enough. The mental gains were huge though and I personally feel like those out weighed any physical fatigue we worked through.

#2 - There was never real speedwork done with the group. Speedwork to me is actually working on top end speed which would mean intervals of 200 meters or less. You cannot go all out for more than around 5 seconds so about 50 - 60 meters is true speed work. Everyone has a different idea of what they consider speedwork to be though. The 800's were as fast as we would do during marathon phase and they would usually be at around 2:18 - 2:20 pace for 10 or so. I have since added more of this type of work to my training in marathon phase. I came from a more quicker end track workout type backround and enjoy doing that type of work. Most of the workouts done would be considered tempo like work. How long could I or my training partners at the time held onto 4:50 pace? It is just guessing because we didn't try to do it but considering we ran a Half Marathon at around 5 flat pace as a controlled tempo run at the end of the week we ran 4 x 3 mile in 4:48 pace and 10 x 800 in 2:18 or so, I think we could have at least 4:50 pace for a half marathon after backing down a week for it. The point wasn't how long could we hold 4:50 pace for, it was how easy can we make 4:50 feel in long workouts so that when we backed down to 5:00 minute pace for the marathon would feel like a jog.

#3 - I never did two runs a day before training with the group. I have since stopped doing two a day runs because of adding biking and swimming. I liked the idea of getting the longer and always harder effort out of the way in the morning. There were a few days were I did run longer in the afternoon/evening and I didn't like it because I had to worry about what and when I ate and sometimes watch a nice day turn to a poor weather day come longer run time. Training longer in the morning to me just allows me to enjoy my day more. I could eat whatever I wanted and still hit a 4 - 6 mile run.

---

-------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.westtexasendurance.com - Powered by Brooks, Powerbar and pizza.

Runner-x,

Fear not, we are of one mind when it comes to suggesting this sort of training for any other than the most meticulously prepared runners.

1) Well, the UK running-only club-running scene (what would be considered the 'core' of the UK running race scene) incorporates a fair range of ability levels and levels of experience, but 'good' for men would be considered as sub-20 5K, sub-40 10K, sub-90 1/2M. Very good would be sub-60 10-mile, sub-3 marathon. (Yes, the standard is not high. There was a local race this morning, and a training partner of mine race 34 for 10K on a reasonably quick course and came 4th.)

In general it's noticable that they tend to train for 30-60 minutes per session (for most that's 4-8/9 miles) for all sessions except their long run, which they usually do by distance (so the marathon many are doing 20s and 22s that take them in excess of 3 hours to complete and are therefore three times the length of their next longest run).

2) This is what I thought, though for what it's worth in UK parlance, speedwork and hard intervals tend to be interchangeable terms used to mean any running above FT that is not continuous. (I shall try to remember to make the distinction exact in future!)

3) Your point about eating provides an interesting perspective. Again, most UK running clubs do harder sessions in the evening, so here we tend to see those few who do do doubles doing the opposite to you (and I think it's six to half a dozen as to which is best, though as I say, often the choice isn't there).

---

Stuff I like:
PBscience Triathlon Coaching and Lab Testing

Every person will do some exercises to keep their healthy and to be strong. In this process sum may succeed but some may fail. People who are failed to do so don't worry as I can help you in providing some work out plans. So that people who want to reduce fat, and people who want to be athletic. Can become what they are opting for. Don't bother about all these things. Visit my train me online web page so that people can well get what they are looking for their body. Don't be late be faster.
-----------
Simon
workout programs

I think it is very simple. Train as you race. If you want to race fast and long (IM, half IM, marathon) you should train fast and long. If there is a recovery "penalty" time, you should take it. No need for hard training the 2 days after a long and fast run. No need to train hard the day after a long and fast bike ride. But this kind of training gets you as close to race day efforts as you can get. If you can make the training faster or longer during the season, you are building up, and progressing. If you crash during the season you have done too much for your fitness.

how did you do in IM Germany on that program?

alvaro
planetaTri.com

Some good stuff in this thread, Barry and all. I have always worked in the concept of running harder during long runs (much like riding harder during long bike rides). The amount, intensity, and frequency of such efforts absolutely will vary with individuals, and probably over time. I can do less of it these days and still maintain adequate recovery for follow-on work (I'm 40 now, so go figure....).

I just invested in a Garmin 405 recently after moving and having no real good training route references in my immediate area. I haven't looked at it much during the runs, but have looked at the results (about 20 runs now). Without paying attention to paces, I'm seeing that I naturally fall in/around McMillan ranges for any particular efforts, whether speedwork on the track, tempo, or long run...though my long runs tend toward the middle of the range...I find the slowest pace in that range inordinately slow at this point. So anecdotally, I guess I'm confirming at least that approach...as well as advocating for some harder effort in long training beyond the simple "log the miles pace".

You should switch and run London so you can see how KK does in person. Although at Boston - you'll get to see how Hall runs....

I think long runs are over-rated. I asked Terrence Mahon (Team USA Running coach) how often his runners run over 20 - and he said "almost never". He did say they may do it once every other week in the final few weeks of marathon prep. For them - 20 miles isn't even 20% of weekly mileage and its not even 2 hours. Those guys/gals are machines and they rarely run over 2 hours yet why do we? They do a lot of doubles though - so they run frequently and they run a lot of miles per week. They also run slow a lot (counter to the "run fast all the time" crowd.

So my opinion - I'd take doubles/frequency and miles/week over a long run any day.

Fast vs. slow - I vote slow most of the time. I think its fine to throw in MP pace in a shorter long run or some T-work but it really makes the recovery longer - so you pick your poison and decide where you want to work hard during the block and where you want it easy....I do think its key to make easy = easy and hard = hard.

Last thing - we train for optimal steady state work/pace - keeping it even - minimize surges. Elites train to handle surges - stay with the lead pack yet finish strong.

Dave

In gordo's book Going Long, I remember he had a build period where you would, more or less, build a large base of mileage, then a peaking period where you would start doing what he called Breakthrough workouts. Kevin Purcell once emailed me and suggested that this peaking period be 3-6 weeks depending on your experience level.

Having said that, a lot of running programs treat the marathon the same way. Pfitzinger wrote an srticle a while ago describing different ways to do a long run, and Jack Daniels also provided some long run workouts with intensities mixed in.

Likewise, I typically suggest doing "MCmillab Paced" long runs (aerobic zone.....~1:30-2:30 slower than 5K pace) as you build the length of the long run. Only after you have built that solid foundation do you begin incorporating intenisty into the middle. So, for example, you might build from a 10 mile long run to a 22 mile long run over the course of 20 weeks. Then you start substituting in 16 mile runs with marathon paced or threshold paced running in the middle.

A lot of this depends on how comfortable you are with a 22 mile run and how fast you ware going to run this marathon. The above will likely be done by a guy running in the low 2:XX range. A guy running it in 4:XX probably just needs to get in a bunch of aerobic runs in.

---

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

Barry, if it weren't for injury prevention and/or overtraining prevention wouldn't all of our running be at race pace? (or shorter intervals of just faster than RP?)

I don't know that this is revolutionary. It's just a case where some of the best runners are seen to be able to do more without injury or burnout. It's most likely their ability to withstand this training that has made them great...not the mere fact that they do this training. So I doubt it applies to the rest of us so much.

Not really. There are many different paces at which you should train for different reasons. Here's a quick synopsis as defined in Daniels' Formula:


Repetition training (I call this speed) - Primary benefirt is more neuro muscular. I liken this to working out on a punching bag. When you dio this, you teach your hands to hit faster and harder. When running at high speeds, you teach your feet to do the same.

V02max training - This is the most effecient way to build up your body's ability to take in and process oxygen.

Lactate Threshold Training - This is the most effecient way to increase the pace where your body starts to produce more and more lactic acid (or lactate...and can never remember).

Aerobic Training - This is the most effecient way to improve your aerobic system.

Though these are all related, think of them in a sense of 4 different components of running much like a football quaterback might have different components of his game that he might want to work on (throwing arm, balance, vision, etc.) We try to do these different workout paces to best target different components in our running. No one can simply run race pace all the time without consequences. Even an elite distance runner who can, say, run 40 miles a week at race pace is doing so at the expense of potentially running 120 miles a week at a slower pace.

What *does* happen as one gets more fit (or more talented) is that different components become better developed and the emphasis can shift toward other components of training. I might want a brand new runner to do nothing but aerobic running for 4-6 months. This would be less effecient for an veteran runner as his aerobic system is already very well developed. He would be better served focusing on some of the other training paces.

In a nut shell, its just like making a good dinner. You need the right mix of the different ingredients.

I will agree, however, that runners with more miles under their belt *can* tolerate more intense running, but to say that they would ideally do all of their training at race pace would be a bit of an over exageration.

---

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

Barry
This scale will maybe interest you. It is from the Norwegian Olympiatoppen, the institution that is behind the Norwegian skiers, rowers, paddler, cyclist etc. It will give you some level to think speed and duration.


http://www.olympiatoppen.no/fag/utholdenhet/oltsintensitetsskala/page594.html

One other thing, the long run should be measured in minutes/hours, not miles. A ok national runner will easily run over 10 miles in an hour. A 100 MPW is for a good runner less than 10 hours of running (not for me ;-) Talking about miles without talking about speed or level will not tell anything. Personally I think most people get to little out of their miles, but that is another discussion ;-)

But I think you just confirmed my point. Imagine a world where no one could get injured and they never failed to recover.

Then it might actually be optimal for all running to be at and above race pace.
Remember geometry lessons? A square is a rectangle, but a rectangle isn't a square.
In the same way, anaerobic running is also aerobic.

Biomechanical efficiency, LT, VO2 max, and aerobic systems are all covered by fast intervals with a sufficiently short rest period. I think ALL slower running is a compromise to our mortality.

The real question for an athlete is how much of what intensities can be TOLERATED without detriment. Everything you say about training is dead on, but I think we do this to avoid injury. Again, it's just a theoretical discussion because no one can tolerate 15 miles a day of 68 second 400 repeats...but if someone could. That might be a great way to train for a marathon. Or 45 minute 10 milers every day....Just sayin'.

I think long runs are over-rated. I asked Terrence Mahon (Team USA Running coach) how often his runners run over 20 - and he said "almost never". He did say they may do it once every other week in the final few weeks of marathon prep. For them - 20 miles isn't even 20% of weekly mileage and its not even 2 hours. Those guys/gals are machines and they rarely run over 2 hours yet why do we? They do a lot of doubles though - so they run frequently and they run a lot of miles per week. They also run slow a lot (counter to the "run fast all the time" crowd.

Well said. What matters is the frequency and consistency and the total mileage.I would rather run 10 miles six days a week for 60 miles then run 45 miles with a 20 miler thrown in.


So my opinion - I'd take doubles/frequency and miles/week over a long run any day.

---

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

Only if you could do that on into infinity....but if you could, you wouldn't need to train. Part of training is putting a "stress" on the body that it has to recover from such that it rebuilds itself stronger.

In the real world, there is going to be some limit to the stress you can handle. Maybe we are talking symantics here, but.....roughly speaking...12x200m at mile race pace is equivalent to 6x1000m at 5K race pace, which is equivalent to 60 minutes at marathon race pace, which is equivalent to 2+ hours running aerobically.

In other words, X, 3X, 7X, 10X at the different paces. As long as X is some finite stress, then that relationship will apply (though it may be different from athlete to athlete).


But, if we do want to speak of unrealistic hypotheticals, then all contend that you won't need to train because you already posses infinite fitness and can move at the speed of light, thus able to acheive infinite mass while moving at this speed. You could cause the universe to implode on yourself. We'd either have to kill you, or recognizing that E=MC^2, we might want to plug you into the grid and harness that inifnite energy. ; ^ )



In all seriousness, there is a tradeoff at the different paces, and yes.....it has to do with, more or less, how the body wears down.

---

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

Absolutely! The key to a good long run is to go far enough to put a little extra stress on the body but not so far that it significantly cuts into you weekly training load.

---

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

Well...let's be clear, though, doubleplay..."slow" for these guys is in the 6's. "Recovery" runs are in the 7's.

Its relative.