In the book Scientific Training For Triathletes Dr. Phil Skiba applies Dr. *Andrew Coggan *Power Training Levels to run training for triathlon ,motivated by recent run-training/performance threads I’d like to give it a try.
Using the maximal average 1h pace (lets call it FT-Pace, same as J.Daniels T-Pace) as anchor, pace based training levels are defined as:
“Junk Quality”: Daniels seems to favor training at specific paces (E/L – M – T – I – R), rather than a continuous of levels such as Coggan’s.
Dr. Skiba doesn’t include Level 6 – Anaerobic Capacity for triathletes but upper part of pace range for Level 5 seems to include Daniels R-Pace, perhaps more like a Level 6 – Anaerobic Capacity workout.
The way I see it, AC’s zones are better suited for cycling training since that’s where they come from. The same with Daniels paces, because with running it’s easier to stick to a certain pace and mantain it. So why not use both of them, it’s a subject you don’t have to re-think. Also remember that training zones are nothing more than training tools.
Isn’t Daniel’s E pace = 80% of T pace? (eg vdot 55; E pace = 7:54; T pace = 6:20) So I’m thinking L1 is <75% of T pace since 80% of T pace seems to sit quite well toward the bottom of zone2. That being the case, things might shift a bit in the levels above.
As far as its usefulness, I think it depends on the individual. I use a subset of Coggan’s zones as it is and my run training has much less (intensity) variability than my bike training. I see myself using maybe 2, at most, of the levels described below since I don’t believe in recovery runs. Of course, someone who has a need for more intensity would likely take advantage of more levels.
Is this better than Daniel’s paces? I don’t know. The only thing I take advantage of from Daniel’s stuff is the calculator which helps you establish/estimate your T pace. Otherwise his stuff is a bit too complicated for me.
Those charts look faulty to me.
I would usually run 6X1k around 2:45-2:52
and 4by1mile 4:40-4:50
that predicts a Coggan? VDOT of 63-67,
My VDOT PRs were 71, along with the VDOT training intervals.
Conclusion:
just use Jack Daniels chart, it is way better.
“Junk Quality”: Daniels seems to favor training at specific paces (E/L – M – T – I – R), rather than a continuous of levels such as Coggan’s.
Sort of. Daniels does actually advocate training at different speeds within those zones. Specifically he has a table in his newer addition where he has threshold runs (level 4) being done at slower paces if done for longer durations.
Also, I can’t speak for him directly, but I’d be suprised if he didn’t advocate some training to be done at race pace even if it didn’t fit exactly at one of his target paces.
IMO, they more or less look the same. You want to be sure, however, not to necessarily try to copy a cycling workout in a running workout or vice versa. ie…no 6 hour runs with intervals in the middle, please.
Isn’t Daniel’s E pace = 80% of T pace? (eg vdot 55; E pace = 7:54; T pace = 6:20) So I’m thinking L1 is <75% of T pace since 80% of T pace seems to sit quite well toward the bottom of zone2. That being the case, things might shift a bit in the levels above. …
Chris, my plesure, thanks!
AFAIK Daniels E-Pace is 75% of vVO2max and T-Pace 90% of vVO2max, then E-Pace is around 83% of T-Pace, in my book VDOT=55 gives E/L-Pace=7:38min/mile not 7:54min/mile, could be an error or has changed ?
Those charts look faulty to me.
I would usually run 6X1k around 2:45-2:52
and 4by1mile 4:40-4:50
that predicts a Coggan? VDOT of 63-67,
My VDOT PRs were 71, along with the VDOT training intervals.
Conclusion:
just use Jack Daniels chart, it is way better.
If your VDOT=71 (based on actual PRs) then your T-Pace/FT-Pace=3:12min/km=5:09min/mile by J.Daniels tables (2nd table in my post has the first 4 columns “stolen” from J.Daniels).
The Interval workout would be a Level 5 - VO2max one which fits nicely in the range for this zone: 2:42-3:03min/km or 4:20-4:55min/mile.
Daniels Paces lies within the corresponding zone (by construction):
E/L-Pace in Level 2 - Endurance
M-Pace in Level 3 - Tempo
T-Pace in Level 4 - Threshold
I- Pace in Level 5 - VO2max
Agree with your conclusion: originals are way better
“Junk Quality”: Daniels seems to favor training at specific paces (E/L – M – T – I – R), rather than a continuous of levels such as Coggan’s.
Sort of. Daniels does actually advocate training at different speeds within those zones. Specifically he has a table in his newer addition where he has threshold runs (level 4) being done at slower paces if done for longer durations. I have 1st edition, time for an upgrade… Quote follows.
Also, I can’t speak for him directly, but I’d be suprised if he didn’t advocate some training to be done at race pace even if it didn’t fit exactly at one of his target paces. IMHO T-Pace sound quite race-pace for oli, MP for HIM and E/L for IM, no problem here.
IMO, they more or less look the same. You want to be sure, however, not to necessarily try to copy a cycling workout in a running workout or vice versa. ie…no 6 hour runs with intervals in the middle, please. **Uhh, late advice, I just tried one of this :-))) **
No-man’s Land. In Figure 7, you will see that there are 3 shaded areas, between R and I, between I and T and between T and E. Except for MP (between T & E) these are “No man’s land of training. Training intensities that fall into 'No man’s land,” are either too easy or too hard to reap the benefits you want. You are not, as may sometimes be assumed, achieving the purpose of training the two systems on either side of the chosen intensity. What you are doing might be termed, “Quality-junk” training. At the least, it is training aimed at accomplishing an unidentifiable purpose. Always have a purpose for every training session; ask yourself the following questions: “What system do I hope to improve by doing this workout,’ and 'What am I really trying to accomplish?”
What this calculator computes for the various vdot numbers definitely varies from what you have above. I’m pretty sure I’m a vdot 55/56 which seems to align well with my true T and E paces. My discussions with others have yielded very similar numbers so something doesn’t add up.
Chris, I’ve checked that calculator and you are rigth, but my printed copy of J.Daniels Running Formula (1st Edition) gives E/L=4:45/7:38 for VDOT=55 and table 2 from http://coacheseducation.com/...k-daniels-nov-00.htm, the same.
E and L Runs. When you do easy (E) runs to recover from strenuous periods of training or to carry out a second workout on a particular day, and when you do your long (L) runs, you should run at a pace which is very close to (E) (easy-run) velocity, which is about 70% of V02max. Long runs (L), improve cell adaptation, and lead to glycogen depletion and fluid loss (important considerations for distance runners), but should not be demanding in terms of the intensity (pace) being utilized.
Be advised that the benefits of “E-pace” running are more a function of time spent exercising than intensity of running, and 70% V02max, which corresponds to 75% vVO2max and 75% of HRmax, is all the harder you need to go to get the benefits you want at the cellular level and in the heart muscle.
I don’t know about the calculator, anyone can check with 2nd edition, just in case… ?
The way I see it, AC’s zones are better suited for cycling training since that’s where they come from. The same with Daniels paces, because with running it’s easier to stick to a certain pace and mantain it.
More importantly, unlike Daniel’s training paces the training levels (not zones) that I have proposed are meant to be descriptive, not prescriptive, in nature.
is ( I believe) based off Daniels’ 2nd edition. In the second edition E/L runs were changed to E runs and they are 3-4% slower than the 1st edition. As I recall only the E or E/L runs seem to be different. However he doesn’t mention why in the 2nd edition. Paulo might know?
If you’re interested in Daniels and data overload this gentlemen went crazy and put together pretty cool excelspread sheet. It even has a section to help calculate Daniels intensity points if you are so inclined. It also gives you the first and second edition E or E/L values.
I’d agree with Paulo re: anaerobic capacity type workouts in ITU racing. This is an area many athletes/coaches neglect, even at the highest levels.
I wrote the book as a primer to get “Joe Triathlete” training smarter, using some basic principles of physiology. I left “Zone 6” out of the first version of the book because, well, the average MOP triathlete isn’t racing ITU. Perhaps more importantly, there is typically more gold to be mined elsewhere with this type of athlete. At the same time, I have often found that MOP athletes often push interval workouts too hard…they venture into “zone 6” or JD’s “Rep” zone because it is easier for them than suffering through the longer LT and VO2 efforts that will have a greater impact sustainable power/pace.
I don’t really apply Andy’s zones to running in the book…I had not yet completed the GOVSS running power output equations at the time it was published.
All this said, as Paulo intimated, all of these zones are purely artificial, man made constructs. If you look at the chart in my book, and in Andy’s chapter on training with power, you see there is significant overlap between zones. IOW: a Zone 4 or LT workout has an impact on LT, but also some impact on VO2 max. Even LSD/Endurance workouts raise VO2max to some extent, particularly early on in an athlete’s training. Be careful that you don’t end up overanalyzing zones, especially those that are in the same ballpark.
It always warms my heart when someone posts and references my book
I’ll have to look into this a bit if I have the time ths week. In his 2nd edition he prescibes training paces continually from MP to T pace for threshold runs on page 114.
For the most part, though, he contends that you should train at those specific target paces.
Can’t help you there, I only have the 1st edition, I got it when it came out. Which is really too bad, I would like to write a blog about how I just read it and it’s a pretty good book.
I’ve just looked over 2nd edition on Amazon (Also buyed it, but delivery to Argentina tooks a while…), first impresions:
Chris was rigth, new definition for E-Pace (no more E/L) is 72% vVo2max which would be 80% T-Pace(FT-Pace), just the boundary Dr. Skiba puts between Level 1/Level 2
He eliminated Quality-Junk areas (explicity stated on page 40 2nd edition) going for more continuous zones/levels
The widened Base Building intensities covers Level 1/2 (65-79 vVo2max / 72-88 FT-Pace)
The widened Marathon Training covers Level 3
T-Pace for cruise-intervals and 20’ tempo runs, for longer tempo runs (20’-60’) prescribed pace is slower up to MP for 60’
Interval training doesn’t seems to have changed very much
IMHO the changes goes in the sense of a better fit with Coggan Levels with the limits set by Dr. Skiba than 1st edition with narrower pace ranges.
