Here's a theory in response to the original question--not even a theory, just an idea thrown out there because I've had a similar experience: pretty easy to get myself to where I could hang with teammates on long runs (even hard ones) and short, quick stuff. But the long intervals were exhausting through much of the season, and even teammates who finished well behind me in races could do those long intervals faster and better under control.
The idea: maybe some of us aren't strongly FT or ST, but are pretty evenly split between them (even in the context of distance running; I don't know what the percentages would be--maybe 65-35?).
And maybe, since each fiber type exists in some abundance (for us), we have a fast-twitch way of running and a slow-twitch way. Someone on the sub-1:50 training thread mentioned that he noticed a drastic difference in his form depending on pace; he might be one of these, too.
On a long, moderate-to-quickish run, my slow-twitch teammates run with a style that looks like their racing form (though slower, of course). They are using the same fibers and same basic action as in a race, but just at a slower rate. The same holds true for their 400s on the track. As long as they have the discipline not to start flailing, they're using a mix of fibers and a running action quite similar to what they do in a race. That's because they just don't have enough FT for a drastically different system to kick in. They have a smooth transition from one speed to another; their top end just isn't very fast.
Same for the purer FT types, the Mamede types. They're using one system, or, maybe more accurately, their FT fibers are ALWAYS an important part of the picture, even on a longish run. They'll just tire out sooner because they don't have as many everlasting ST fibers. Again, fast 400 are just a more intense version of the same basic thing they do in races. Smooth transition between paces.
So, for both strongly ST types and strongly FT types, any sort of sensible training along the spectrum of paces is mechanically very relevant to racing.
But what about people who are pretty strong in both FT and ST, able to function well in a sprint (and, let's say, in other sports demanding some quickness) but also to run for a long time without stopping. Neither system is dominant, neither is there when you haven't been training, but they both have potential. My theory: for people like that (like us, I'll say), endurance training makes us better at endurance training, and sprinting makes us better sprinters. Our distance running form looks very different from our sprinting form, each perhaps a caricature: shuffling marathoner stride on the one hand, violent knee-pumping on the other. In a race, especially a cross country race with hills and surges, we can sort of get away with a bit of alternation from one system to the other. But those darned unforgiving long intervals hit us right in our weak spot. We don't have that smooth pace transition of the more pure FT and ST types, so our other work (long runs, short quick stuff) doesn't help us as much in the middle as it helps our teammates.
Then, somewhere in the middle of the season, it feels like a mechanical shift occurs, we hit our stride (more literally than is usually meant), and start running the long, fast stuff (repetitions and races) a lot faster with less effort. Somehow we've found the efficient way to run at that pace, but we didn't benefit from much direct transfer of our "base" work, where "base" refers to the customary (perhaps wrong-headed? perhaps sensible for most people?) mix of high weekly volume, lots of "threshold" type work (however you define those thresholds), and some short, quick stuff sprinkled in. It took us longer to translate that work into a hybrid system that we needed for races.
Or is it just me?
Whether this idea makes any sense or not, I am eager to hear Hadd and Cabral discuss training for intermediate types, people who aren't obvious Mamedes or Lopeses, but somewhere in between. When they get to it...