I am not try to advocate anything but rather trying to get a better understanding of why some elite runners & triathletes do at least some of their long runs at a pace that’s 90+ seconds/mile slower than their marathon pace. I recall an IM Talk interview with Lindsay Corbin when she mentioned doing some runs at 9+ min/mile. I have read about several other top athletes doing the same at least at some point in their season. So, what is the logic behind this? I am interested in what’s going on at the cellular/tissue/system level (e.g. muscle vascularization, metabolism effects) as well as other training adaptations/rationale (e.g. decreased injury risk while maintaining strength & fitness, easy to focus on proper form, etc.). Having a better understanding of why something is done would help me to decide what is best for my training and when it should be incorporated.
Rea BarryP’s threads here on ST. Basically, more running is better. However, running hard too often can lead to injuries.
Yes, read BarryP’s threads.
The gist of it is that most of us get plenty of aerobic conditioning from the bike, and the limiting factor for run fitness is injuries. Joints and connective tissues respond to stimulus much slower than muscular and aerobic systems, therefore one should do consistent, easy miles to condition them. It’s the only way to strengthen them without injury.
Raising your injury tolerance through easy high mileage makes it much easier to target your muscular and aerobic systems.
“Volume” is the short answer. Sure training at threshold is great, but anyone that tries to do 50+ miles per week entirely at threshold pace isn’t going to be running anywhere for very long. Slow runs give a good deal of the physiological benefits of more intense training, with a much lower level of fatigue and lower risk of injury, allowing you to increase volume and ultimately see quicker and greater improvement.
You might find this article interesting, especially Tables 1, 2 and 3 at the end. Sure, it’s written for cycling but it gives a broad idea as to the benefits of training at different intensity levels. Obviously training at *too *low an intensity isn’t going to have many physiological benefits as the blank column for Level 1 in Table 2 shows, so it’s all about striking a balance and getting your zones right.
http://home.trainingpeaks.com/blog/article/power-training-levels
I agree (and have implemented the Barry P approach for two years), but 9:00 minute miles for IM pros…? I haven’t ran a 9:00 minute pace intentionally, even on recovery runs, in a super long time. My easy pace is 7:45/mi, tempo miles hover around 6:20/mi. That seems *too *slow.
i have no choice…
Joints and connective tissues respond to stimulus much slower than muscular and aerobic systems, therefore one should do consistent, easy miles to condition them. It’s the only way to strengthen them without injury.
This is a very good point too, especially for those new to running or anyone planning on increasing mileage significantly.
Because running slowly alows us to run more frequently and frequency trumps pace.
It’s just an excuse fat runners use to justify why their long runs are so slow.
Yeah, everything you read says run slower on most days but be sure to get one or MAYBE two days of speedwork per week. I think every elite marathoner I’ve followed does this, and it seems to work for them. But I do have a few friends who run like they race (fast), and they do well too. So who knows.
It seems to make sense that running slower will lead to fewer injuries than running hard, assuming the same mileage. But then again it used to make sense that heavily padded shoes will be safer and now we all know that barefoot is the only way to go unless you want to die. Or is it you need Hokas now? Or flipflops? Or shoes made from recycled low profile tires? I forget.
I agree (and have implemented the Barry P approach for two years), but 9:00 minute miles for IM pros…? I haven’t ran a 9:00 minute pace intentionally, even on recovery runs, in a super long time. My easy pace is 7:45/mi, tempo miles hover around 6:20/mi. That seems *too *slow.
Ryan Hall does recovery runs at greater than 9 minute mile pace. He can outrun everyone on the planet save for a handful of other guys who train similarly.
Your easy pace and recovery pace are way too fast. Kind of that simple.
Maybe apples to oranges?
I guess my recovery pace would be too fast (if that’s the case), but is it safe to assume that the training practices of elites would automatically transfer over to us AGers?
I agree (and have implemented the Barry P approach for two years), but 9:00 minute miles for IM pros…? I haven’t ran a 9:00 minute pace intentionally, even on recovery runs, in a super long time. My easy pace is 7:45/mi, tempo miles hover around 6:20/mi. That seems *too *slow.
Ryan Hall does recovery runs at greater than 9 minute mile pace. He can outrun everyone on the planet save for a handful of other guys who train similarly.
Your easy pace and recovery pace are way too fast. Kind of that simple.
This…
And I wouldn’t argue with Gwen Jorgensen’s training either.
You agree with it, but you just don’t believe it, so you don’t do it. :0)
That makes excellent ST sense.
As s been mentioned - volume as measured in time, not distance. You can typically handle more volume at an easier pace because it isn’t creating as much damage and fatigue. That’s not to say all your running should be slow (relatively). Also, read up a bit on the MAF method and fat adaptation. The tricky part about being able to do increased volume by running slower is that we need to figure out where to get that time from in our busy lives. Pros have all day to train and rest. Most of us typically have a limited amount of time to devote to training so we tend to want to load up with tempo and threshold work but neglecting the slow easy stuff limits your ability to recover and adapt to the higher quality stuff.
I think it is better to look at intensity instead of speed.
The goal is to run hard when it is hard, and easy when it is easy.
If the easy runs are getting to hard, then you will not be set up to do proper hard runs/intervals.
Search for Stephen Seiler, he has done a lot of research and even been here on ST
I only know sweet spots from tennis rackets and baseball bats 
The zone 1 vs zone 2 question (both being below the first lactate turnpoint in the 5 zone system we use a lot here in Norway) is interesting. There is no physiological marker distinguishing these two “zones”. I suspect that with really high training volumes and really big motors, elite guys move move their Low intensity work down a little into zone 1 just because that zone widens. However, more recreational athletes will spend more time just under threshold intensity.
I also am still of the opinion that 3 zones works quite well for most people: Green zone (talking intensity, starts feeling like you are working after an hour, feel like eating as soon as you are finished, Yellow Zone (threshold, typical zone for those 45-60 minute workouts you hustle to squeeze in after work, pretty tough workout, but you did not have to go near your personal cellar of mental fortitude to finish), Red zone (requires mental mobilization, clear increasing perception of effort with every interval bout, no appetite for about an hour after training). And of course the most common training mistake is that a green zone session becomes yellow because of half wheeling, and the next day’s planned red zone session fades to uhhhh…pink. Show me a champion and I will show you a person with intensity discipline who plans the work and works the plan, even on days when someone rides past them that they know they could reel in
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=4941446;so=ASC;sb=post_latest_reply;#4941446
I agree (and have implemented the Barry P approach for two years), but 9:00 minute miles for IM pros…? I haven’t ran a 9:00 minute pace intentionally, even on recovery runs, in a super long time. My easy pace is 7:45/mi, tempo miles hover around 6:20/mi. That seems *too *slow.
Ryan Hall does recovery runs at greater than 9 minute mile pace. He can outrun everyone on the planet save for a handful of other guys who train similarly.
Your easy pace and recovery pace are way too fast. Kind of that simple.
One big factor that differentiates between your average age grouper and a professional is the amount of time available to run. If the intent of keeping your recovery pace very easy is to be able to fit in more training, it only works if you have time to actually follow through. if you only have 3-4 hours per week to run, you may be better off doing more running at a faster pace to increase your training load.
I used to do all my easy paced runs at 7:30/mi pace. Even at only 30miles a week my legs were always beat up and I was dealing with bad hamstring issues. Results were decent, but I struggled to stay consistent. Last year I started working with a coach who harped on me to slow down…a lot. It was amazing. All of a sudden I could do two-a-days and feel relatively fresh. I had a bounce in my step even as my mileage increased. I was running a lot more and feeling better. It was a great illustration of why this approach is so effective.
Actually I think you’d be surprised at how many hours many pros train vs. age groupers train.
The primary differentiation between pros and age groups is some combination of:
Time to recoverTalentIntelligence of training
In my defense, my training paces were set off the Macmillan pace calculator based on race results. I’m pretty sure that’s exactly what Barry recommends in one of his threads.
Actually I think you’d be surprised at how many hours many pros train vs. age groupers train.
The primary differentiation between pros and age groups is some combination of:
Time to recoverTalentIntelligence of training
Those three factors are obviously huge differentiators (although I think I’d put talent first), but my impressions are that overall time training is still significantly higher than your average amateur.
Talking just triathlon, I would guess most AGs are putting in 8-12hrs per week, of which maybe 3-4 hours of which is running (20-30miles). How much time training time are professionals putting toward their craft? From what I’ve read, it seems many are in the 20-30hrs/wk range, which is a pretty significant difference. There are some AGs who probably are putting in that kind of time, but very few.
The gist of it is that most of us get plenty of aerobic conditioning from the bike, and the limiting factor for run fitness is injuries. Joints and connective tissues respond to stimulus much slower than muscular and aerobic systems, therefore one should do consistent, easy miles to condition them. It’s the only way to strengthen them without injury.
Raising your injury tolerance through easy high mileage makes it much easier to target your muscular and aerobic systems.
This is my understanding as well.