I've seen a number of excellent posts by Canova and replies but they are often lengthy and sometimes confusing. I was wondering if someone could consolidate them into a list of bullet points on his philosophy and major workouts.
I've seen a number of excellent posts by Canova and replies but they are often lengthy and sometimes confusing. I was wondering if someone could consolidate them into a list of bullet points on his philosophy and major workouts.
Funny you should ask. I'm just wrapping up an article/essay of sorts on Renato Canova's training methods. Here is as brief of a summary as I can give--it's a selection from the introduction.
Canova categorizes specific workouts as belonging to one of four categories: regeneration, fundamental, special, and specific.
Regeneration is easy running that is designed to expedite recovery from hard training sessions. According to Canova, blood lactate levels can remain elevated for 2-3 days after a hard effort if a regeneration run is not used to ‘flush out’ the body. Regeneration is a pace approximately 60-70% of the anaerobic threshold (AnT). Canova uses the example of a top marathoner with an AnT of 4:30/mi. For him, regeneration pace works out to 5:55-6:00/mi or slower.
Fundamental training is comprised of long, continuous runs at roughly the aerobic threshold (AeT) or a bit slower. Canova illustrates this pace with a 15:00 5k runner (presumably female). Her pace for “fundamental” workouts would be in the range of 5:33 to 6:00 per mile. If we compare this to Daniels’ VDOT charts, we find that they predict an aerobic threshold (AeT or “M pace”) of 5:32/mi, very much in line with the high end of Canova’s training. Interestingly, the low end of the fundamental training pace dips into what some might call “junk mileage.” Certainly, there must be benefits at running a ‘relaxed’ long tempo run, as opposed to pushing the limit every single time—this will be explored later in more detail.
Special training focuses on extending endurance at about 90% of the speed of your focus event, as well as improving mechanics at faster than race pace—105% or more of the speed of your primary event. So, a 13:00 5k runner might do 1000m repeats at 13:20 pace, but at a high volume, or he might run fast 300m repeats with long recovery. Longer competitions (cross country and the 10,000m for a 5k runner) are also classified as “special training.” For marathoners, however, special training is exclusively faster and shorter than marathon pace.
Specific training is focused on the speeds most pertinent to your specific event. In short, specific training occurs at 95% to 105% of the speed of your event.
After understanding Canova’s four broad training categories, we can better understand his training philosophy; namely, that the most important training is that which is conducted at the speed of the race you want to run. That is, your “specific training” matters most. All other training exists solely to support the specific training. Furthermore, improvement comes from the supercompensation in response to a training stress—so as the athlete reaches higher levels of fitness, the training stress must be different and greater in magnitude. The overarching question during the early and mid-season training is “how can we better prepare ourselves to sustain and recover from a high workload of race-pace training?”
A season under Canova consists of a six-month training cycle, comprised of (predictably) an introductive period, fundamental period, special period, and specific period.
The article itself is about 8 pages long. Would like like me to email you a draft version of it? I have to proofread it and check a few things, but I will make a thread when I've finished it.
Yes, I would love to read the article, please email me at the name linked email.
Northern Star wrote:
Regeneration is a pace approximately 60-70% of the anaerobic threshold (AnT).
Did Renato make such a reference to anaerobic threshhold?
If so, I'm surprised that he did.
Canova uses the example of a top marathoner with an AnT of 4:30/mi. For him, regeneration pace works out to 5:55-6:00/mi or slower.
Again, did Renato mention anything about anaerobic threshhold at 4:30/mile? I was under the impression that Renato did not consider there to be an anaerobic threshhold.
60-70% of 4:30/mile would be 6:25 to 7:30/mile.
Fundamental training is comprised of long, continuous runs at roughly the aerobic threshold (AeT) or a bit slower.
Again I question this, as I don't recall Renato emphasizing any aerobic threshhold.
If we compare this to Daniels’ VDOT charts
I see no point to doing such a thing.
So, a 13:00 5k runner might do 1000m repeats at 13:20 pace, but at a high volume, or he might run fast 300m repeats with long recovery.
I don't recall Renato including 300m repeats with long recoveries for 13 minute 5k runners. For 800m runners, yes.
For marathoners, however, special training is exclusively faster and shorter than marathon pace.
The training he posted leading up to the Boston marathon ranged from slightly faster, to primarily slower than marathon pace. In the latter period, there was hardly any running that was faster than marathon pace.
Northern Star wrote:
Funny you should ask. I'm just wrapping up an article/essay of sorts on Renato Canova's training methods. Here is as brief of a summary as I can give--it's a selection from the introduction.
Canova categorizes specific workouts as belonging to one of four categories: regeneration, fundamental, special, and specific.
Regeneration is easy running that is designed to expedite recovery from hard training sessions. According to Canova, blood lactate levels can remain elevated for 2-3 days after a hard effort if a regeneration run is not used to ‘flush out’ the body. Regeneration is a pace approximately 60-70% of the anaerobic threshold (AnT). Canova uses the example of a top marathoner with an AnT of 4:30/mi. For him, regeneration pace works out to 5:55-6:00/mi or slower.
Fundamental training is comprised of long, continuous runs at roughly the aerobic threshold (AeT) or a bit slower. Canova illustrates this pace with a 15:00 5k runner (presumably female). Her pace for “fundamental” workouts would be in the range of 5:33 to 6:00 per mile. If we compare this to Daniels’ VDOT charts, we find that they predict an aerobic threshold (AeT or “M pace”) of 5:32/mi, very much in line with the high end of Canova’s training. Interestingly, the low end of the fundamental training pace dips into what some might call “junk mileage.” Certainly, there must be benefits at running a ‘relaxed’ long tempo run, as opposed to pushing the limit every single time—this will be explored later in more detail.
Special training focuses on extending endurance at about 90% of the speed of your focus event, as well as improving mechanics at faster than race pace—105% or more of the speed of your primary event. So, a 13:00 5k runner might do 1000m repeats at 13:20 pace, but at a high volume, or he might run fast 300m repeats with long recovery. Longer competitions (cross country and the 10,000m for a 5k runner) are also classified as “special training.” For marathoners, however, special training is exclusively faster and shorter than marathon pace.
Specific training is focused on the speeds most pertinent to your specific event. In short, specific training occurs at 95% to 105% of the speed of your event.
After understanding Canova’s four broad training categories, we can better understand his training philosophy; namely, that the most important training is that which is conducted at the speed of the race you want to run. That is, your “specific training” matters most. All other training exists solely to support the specific training. Furthermore, improvement comes from the supercompensation in response to a training stress—so as the athlete reaches higher levels of fitness, the training stress must be different and greater in magnitude. The overarching question during the early and mid-season training is “how can we better prepare ourselves to sustain and recover from a high workload of race-pace training?”
A season under Canova consists of a six-month training cycle, comprised of (predictably) an introductive period, fundamental period, special period, and specific period.
The article itself is about 8 pages long. Would like like me to email you a draft version of it? I have to proofread it and check a few things, but I will make a thread when I've finished it.
thanks
Before you call the roofer, you must finish the house first. Best is a 10 story house or so. The bigger, the better. Once the house is finished, the roofer will take care of it.
A good summary of Canova's training written by a native English speaker would be a great resource. Maybe he'd even review it and sign off after a few iterations - you might even end up with a joint book deal one day...
Knowing the temperament of this board, I would suggest you be very careful about how to define the paces. Obviously any training article has to define the paces used to be meaningful. If you say something like "I am going to use percentages of the athlete's current 5k pace", or even "I am going to use percentages of the athlete's current 5k pace, and include equivalents in brackets where they seem to correspond to Daniels zones", then you're probably pretty safe. But if you mention pseudo-physiological terms like anaerobic/aerobic thresholds, you risk any thread turning into an argument about whether they exist, what they mean and what the numbers are.
The best thing might be a table showing paces for people running 13:00, 14:00, 15:00, 16:00 etc. People can get their heads around this easily.
I suggest also being crystal clear about the event in each section of the article. If the basic one is about 5k training, one could then say "what's different?" about 800m, marathon and so on.
Good work so far, and I look forward to reading more...
Surf the web or letsrun for duncan kibet james kwambai and marathon training or something here renato explains his views and why these marathon runners "ran amazing 2 hour 4 minute marathons out of the blue" They where trained by a then 27 year old clauddio berardelli.
Very intresting
It is a bit different from the jack daniels approach i have been reading about lately in terms of general endurance building. He splits it up more like say for a 16 low runner jack daniels will prescribe 4.15 minutes per kilometer or slightly below 7 minutes per mile for easy and long runs.
Renato says that you either regenerate or have to run fast enough to support the workouts. SO regeneration is slow in this case at 8 minutes per mile or slower maybe a tad faster.
But endurance so you can go faster on workouts and thus faster on races is faster then daniels for 5000 it goes like say 16.15 5000 runner 100 meter speed is 19.5s per 100
so he needs to run at 19.5 x 1.25 to 1.15 or 3.44 to 4.04 per kilometer on his endurance runs. This will help make 1000's at the track at 3.15 per kilometer feel easy and make 3.15 per kilometer on races feel easy so you become relaxed at that pace and will probably race even faster.
Did Renato make such a reference to anaerobic threshhold?
If so, I'm surprised that he did.
Yes, he does reference the anaerobic and aerobic thresholds in the original thread, though he usually speaks in percentages of race pace. Here's the original thread:
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=2959804and he says
For every event we have different speeds of REGENERATION, but normally the right speed is about 60-70 % of the speed of the Threshold. So, in case of a top Marathon runner, having a Threshold about 2:48 per km, we can speak of Regeneration when he runs slower than 3'40" / 3'45". In this case, 3'45" or 5' have the same effect, but many times running too slowly provokes mechanical problems.
60-70% of 4:30/mile would be 6:25 to 7:30/mile.
It's his math, not mine. Renato Canova--instead of doing 4:30/(0.6) like an American would do, does as follows:
4:30/100*(30) + 4:30 = 5:51
Because 70% slower than 4:30 pace is 4:30 plus 30% of that speed. Regardless of whether or not you believe this is "correct," it is how Renato Canova calculates all paces, so you have to roll with it. Also I think in this example he pulled numbers off the top of his head and did not calculate precisely.
Again I question this, as I don't recall Renato emphasizing any aerobic threshhold.
In this thread:
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=1363335&page=1he emphasises it
85% (3:27 per km) : the goal is to increase AEROBIC ENDURANCE, that is connected, more or less, with the AEROBIC THRESHOLD. You can start with 15-18 km, for going till 30km. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH MARATHON.
If we compare this to Daniels’ VDOT charts
I see no point to doing such a thing.
I know how you feel about the aerobic and anaerobic threshold, but they are useful for relating topics to Western audiences and are fairly well-known and accepted (whether or not you think that's correct). Why I compare it to the VDOT tables is fleshed out in the body of the article.
I don't recall Renato including 300m repeats with long recoveries for 13 minute 5k runners. For 800m runners, yes.
For a 5k runner, fast 300s are special training--they improve mechanics and "metabolic support" at 105-110% of race pace. Here's a workout Saif Saaeed Shaheen did in 2006:
Afternoon: 2 sets of 5x300m, 30sec between repeats and 2:30 between sets
avg. 38.3 for first set of 5, then 39.0, 37.3. 37.2, 37.3, 37.0
Now, this is in the specific period, so the recovery is much less than it would be in the special period--remember, workouts evolve by increasing volume, increasing repeat duration, increasing speed, or decreasing recovery. It's also a part of a "specific block," so he did 4x1600 in the morning.
Again, check out the thread I liked to above about speed of long runs. In it, Renato says:
110% of speed (3:00 less 18.0 = 2:42) is HIGH SPEED ENDURANCE. The goal is to increase the ability in producing lactate. We can use this speed for a global volume of 3000 / 3500m, using intervals from 400m to 600m, example 400 / 600 / 400 / 600 / 400 / 600 / 400 in 64.0 / 1:36 with 1:30 of recovery.
Speed faster than 110 % (for example, 200m in 27.0, 400m under 60.0, 1000m under 2:40) : have a MECHANICAL goal, and/or can work for increasing the LACTIC POWER. We can use only few repetitions with very long recovery.
(he's talking about percentages of 5k pace here.)
The training he posted leading up to the Boston marathon ranged from slightly faster, to primarily slower than marathon pace. In the latter period, there was hardly any running that was faster than marathon pace.
Correct. Special training comes before specific training. The specific training is within 5% of marathon pace, and the special training only exists to create support for the specific training. In addition, Canova says that in the marathon, the distinction between special and specific training is not so clear, as the marathon is an event of extreme extension (vs. the 5k, in which it is possible to do slower running for longer than the duration of the race, and also faster running for shorter than the duration of the race).
Excellent work North Star. You should copy and paste the document here, or maybe just create a quick Google doc and paste the link.
Northern Star wrote:
a 13:00 5k runner might do 1000m repeats at 13:20 pace, but at a high volume, or he might run fast 300m repeats with long recovery.
Northern Star wrote:
For a 5k runner, fast 300s are special training--they improve mechanics and "metabolic support" at 105-110% of race pace. Here's a workout Saif Saaeed Shaheen did in 2006:
Afternoon: 2 sets of 5x300m, 30sec between repeats and 2:30 between sets
avg. 38.3 for first set of 5, then 39.0, 37.3. 37.2, 37.3, 37.0
So, you're considering 30 seconds to be a long recovery, and one 2:30 break between sets?
I personally feel that you're trying to change what Renato Canovo has said, to something totally different, trying to fit all the square pegs in round holes that don't fit.
That is your perspective, from your point of view, and maybe some people see the same things, and agree with you. If you look at Canova, you must see At or AT, or vDot or Daniels.
But when I look at Canova principles, then I want to see Canova principles, not some totally different interpretion that, honestly, does not fit in any sense of what has come from Canova!
Perhaps it would be interesting to see different people's summaries of the principles they see from Renato Canova.
But trying to translate it to something totally different, to me, that has no point at all.
Anyway if some people like that translation to something else, then that's fine for them, but will prefer to read Canova directly from Canova.
maybe off target wrote:
Excellent work North Star. You should copy and paste the document here, or maybe just create a quick Google doc and paste the link.
Actually he should send a copy to Renato to proof.
And then paste the google doc link. We all want to see it!
J.R. wrote:
Northern Star wrote:a 13:00 5k runner might do 1000m repeats at 13:20 pace, but at a high volume, or he might run fast 300m repeats with long recovery.
Northern Star wrote:
For a 5k runner, fast 300s are special training--they improve mechanics and "metabolic support" at 105-110% of race pace. Here's a workout Saif Saaeed Shaheen did in 2006:
Afternoon: 2 sets of 5x300m, 30sec between repeats and 2:30 between sets
avg. 38.3 for first set of 5, then 39.0, 37.3. 37.2, 37.3, 37.0
So, you're considering 30 seconds to be a long recovery, and one 2:30 break between sets?
I personally feel that you're trying to change what Renato Canovo has said, to something totally different, trying to fit all the square pegs in round holes that don't fit.
That is your perspective, from your point of view, and maybe some people see the same things, and agree with you. If you look at Canova, you must see At or AT, or vDot or Daniels.
But when I look at Canova principles, then I want to see Canova principles, not some totally different interpretion that, honestly, does not fit in any sense of what has come from Canova!
Perhaps it would be interesting to see different people's summaries of the principles they see from Renato Canova.
But trying to translate it to something totally different, to me, that has no point at all.
Anyway if some people like that translation to something else, then that's fine for them, but will prefer to read Canova directly from Canova.
Just to recap: Northstar was only wrong on one thing, although a fair interpretation might be that 2:30 rest is a lot for a 5k runner.
Why so aggressive J.R.? Any criticism that makes sense?
In fairness, he did cite Canova specifically referring to aerobic/anaerobic thresholds.
What I got out of Canova's posts: Run 80-120 mpw for 7 years then we'll talk. I feel like any discussion of his training principles that doesn't start there is missing the point.
J.R. wrote:
123guy123 wrote:Northstar was only wrong on one thing, although a fair interpretation might be that 2:30 rest is a lot for a 5k runner.
Why so aggressive J.R.? Any criticism that makes sense?
Not so! I only mentioned one thing.
And I did not say NS was wrong. I'm sure he is right IN HIS OWN MIND. That is not the same as reporting Canova's principles about training, but rather some relationships he sees in his mind, not the same as Canova training in print.
Is that so aggressive, to be saying the truth? What is distortion then, happy days? I must be living a sheltered life to not know of such things, thank goodness.
I don't know, maybe he's wrong, but based on this thread (particularly the fact that he responded to each of your criticisms with specific cites and and you didn't have a response) my guess would be that you are right IN YOUR OWN MIND but that is not the same as Canova training in print. Just stating the truth.
J.R. wrote:
So, you're considering 30 seconds to be a long recovery, and one 2:30 break between sets?
I personally feel that you're trying to change what Renato Canovo has said, to something totally different, trying to fit all the square pegs in round holes that don't fit.
That is your perspective, from your point of view, and maybe some people see the same things, and agree with you. If you look at Canova, you must see At or AT, or vDot or Daniels.
But when I look at Canova principles, then I want to see Canova principles, not some totally different interpretion that, honestly, does not fit in any sense of what has come from Canova!
Perhaps it would be interesting to see different people's summaries of the principles they see from Renato Canova.
But trying to translate it to something totally different, to me, that has no point at all.
Anyway if some people like that translation to something else, then that's fine for them, but will prefer to read Canova directly from Canova.
Well I tried to point this out but you did not listen--Shaheen's workout was during the SPECIFIC PERIOD. Not the special period. The 300s during the specific period is likely to have evolved from an earlier workout (becoming longer, less recovery, faster). It's just an example to show that 5k runners do indeed run fast 300s.
Please read this over again. I posted it already, but this is what Renato himself says:
110% of speed (3:00 less 18.0 = 2:42) is HIGH SPEED ENDURANCE. The goal is to increase the ability in producing lactate. We can use this speed for a global volume of 3000 / 3500m, using intervals from 400m to 600m, example 400 / 600 / 400 / 600 / 400 / 600 / 400 in 64.0 / 1:36 with 1:30 of recovery.
Speed faster than 110 % (for example, 200m in 27.0, 400m under 60.0, 1000m under 2:40) : have a MECHANICAL goal, and/or can work for increasing the LACTIC POWER. We can use only few repetitions with very long recovery.
emphasis added. it's 1:1 recovery for the 600s and more than that for the 400s.
I think it is very funny that you have judged my interpretation based on two paragraphs from a 4200 word article. You can continue to read from Canova himself. However he has not ever consolidated his writing into one coherent piece. I'm not trying to say "Canova is Daniels" or anything of the sort. Unfamiliar concepts are best understood by contextualizing them relative to familiar ideas. A scientist will compare electrons to planets orbiting the sun, because that is something you understand. Likewise, Daniels is one of the most familiar philosophies to an American. I realize you have a vendetta against Daniels training (and AT and AnT), but by comparing and contrasting, we can reach a better understanding of the underpinnings of a program. Perhaps I'll see if I can get in touch with Renato himself (though I'm sure he's a busy man) to read over my understanding of his philosophy.
Northern Star,
Could you provide us with a sample week of training for each of the four phases?
I think this would help us undertsnad Canova even better, since most of us think in terms of specific workouts, mileage, progressions, etc...
Suppose we're dealing with a runner who runs primarily 5K to half-marathon distances (15:30 and 1:10 being the median it seems on these boards)
Thank you.
123guy123 wrote:
based on this thread (particularly the fact that he responded to each of your criticisms with specific cites and and you didn't have a response)
My response is that I already responded, not the same thing.
So I can either type it 1000 times and you can read each one of them once.
Or you can go ahead and read what I typed just one time, 1000 times.
So I choose the latter one because it is easier for me to just toss a pebble in the lake, and the ripples go in every direction. Maybe you prefer a dump truck dumping garbage and bolders in the lake, this way you can bury the Canova ideas and somehow BINGO they change into vdot Daniels and At whatever crazy thing you want to change them into, which is something else but not the original.
So I already said this and I don't need to write 8 pages to try to twist it and change it to something totally different.
See. So I'm not going argue about something so stupid. You are welcome to think what you want to think, and change it to whatever you wish it to be.