So, if a 5K race is between 88-93% aerobic (Sports Medicine 2001), then why are we doing so much anaerobic work? Shouldn’t we work more TEMPO & less, say, 400’s?
Sure, I see the other 7-12% in the above numbers, but it seems like we might—just might—be getting wrapped-up in too much speed work.
Let's just run!
Observation? wrote:
So, if a 5K race is between 88-93% aerobic (Sports Medicine 2001), then why are we doing so much anaerobic work? Shouldn’t we work more TEMPO & less, say, 400’s?
Sure, I see the other 7-12% in the above numbers, but it seems like we might—just might—be getting wrapped-up in too much speed work.
Let's just run!
Because intervals are aerobic, too.
Well, you need to be comfortable running at 5k pace which requires a lot of speedwork. Yes, it's aerobic, but if you only work the aerobic, when it comes to race day and race pace, you wouldn't be able to use your full aerobic potential without a lot of speedwork. You've got to be able to run fast, but relaxed, and that takes a lot of practice. I would think of speedwork for the 5k runner as running drills, even.
I read before that 1500m runners, dropping to marathon pace, tend to be the most efficient runners. That same principle applies.
Brent wrote:
I read before that 1500m runners, dropping to marathon pace, tend to be the most efficient runners.
But if they are only 1500m runners they have no (known) marathon pace! How can a sub-4 mile guy that has never trains longer than 12 miles at a time and has never raced longer than some 8K college XC race know his marathon pace?
I question everything wrote:
But if they are only 1500m runners they have no (known) marathon pace! How can a sub-4 mile guy that has never trains longer than 12 miles at a time and has never raced longer than some 8K college XC race know his marathon pace?
I'm not sure if this is tongue-in-cheek or not, but just because somebody hasn't run a particular race doesn't mean you can't estimate reasonably well the pace that they could potentially run for some distance. We have a pretty good understanding of the relationship between duration (time) and achievable pace for the human body.
Don't think of running as something which fits into a distinct category (aerobic, anaerobic, etc).For a 2:30 marathoner, 5:30 pace and 8:00 pace are both largely aerobic. However, that doesn't make them the same. Different things are happening at different paces, even if they are largely aerobic. As such, you need to work in a range of paces around race pace in order to become effective when running it. Thus, speedwork for the 5k.In addition, you can also develop your cardiovascular systems by slower running; this is simply because this development requires significant time, which therefore requires a slower pace.
Observation? wrote:
So, if a 5K race is between 88-93% aerobic (Sports Medicine 2001), then why are we doing so much anaerobic work? Shouldn’t we work more TEMPO & less, say, 400’s?
Sure, I see the other 7-12% in the above numbers, but it seems like we might—just might—be getting wrapped-up in too much speed work.
Let's just run!
Ingrid Kristiansen had the same thoughts - there is an interesting ( Lengthy ) discussion here -
"So the message is very clear to all middle distance runners: Forget about the high risk and painful anaorobic training. As you can see, it has less importance than earlier believed. Go out in the woods and run more, mostly long runs, plus some intervals and fartleks. "
Brent wrote:
Well, you need to be comfortable running at 5k pace which requires a lot of speedwork. Yes, it's aerobic, but if you only work the aerobic, when it comes to race day and race pace, you wouldn't be able to use your full aerobic potential without a lot of speedwork. You've got to be able to run fast, but relaxed, and that takes a lot of practice. I would think of speedwork for the 5k runner as running drills, even.
I read before that 1500m runners, dropping to marathon pace, tend to be the most efficient runners. That same principle applies.
Even 1500m pace is more aerobic than anaerobic.
Which is more aerobic, which is more anaerobic:
16x200m with 400m walk/jog recovery.
16x200m with 100m walk/jog recovery.
The problem is people's understanding of what limits a workout...
16x200m with 400m....is more anaerobic. IE: you are limited by how fast you can run 200m
16x200m with 100m...is more aerobic. IE: you are limited by your ability to maintain that 200m speed, your ability to recover.
In general...
Intervals with less than adequate recovery: aerobic
Intervals with more than adequate recovery: anaerobic*
*Needs to be short and fast, 400m or under.
Alan
Muscle memory and efficiency.
A couple of things:
1. It is a lot easier to coach and practice running economy running 400s on track than a long run.
2. Unless you are blessed with natual speed, practicing ruuning fast in training allow you to race laps at a fast pace comfortablely. Even if you have great endurance base, running 65 second laps will feel like you are sprinting if you don't 60 second laps.
3. Also, in championship races, even if you have the strenght to stay with the leaders, you still need to accelerate to almost a sprint the last couple hundred meters.
1.) You can practice running economy on 150's (or controlled 200's) & NOT tie-up, right?
2.) "Running fast" is a relative term though. My fast is different than your fast. My aerobic pace may seem fast for you (or vice versa). I guess that is sorta like my answer/observation to #3.
3.) Some would argue that you do NOT have the strength to stay with the leaders if you have to get into a "kicking contest" at the end.
I'm not arguing. I'm simply trying to figure out how much "speed work" a 5K runner should do.
Observation? wrote:
1.) You can practice running economy on 150's (or controlled 200's) & NOT tie-up, right?
2.) "Running fast" is a relative term though. My fast is different than your fast. My aerobic pace may seem fast for you (or vice versa). I guess that is sorta like my answer/observation to #3.
3.) Some would argue that you do NOT have the strength to stay with the leaders if you have to get into a "kicking contest" at the end.
I'm not arguing. I'm simply trying to figure out how much "speed work" a 5K runner should do.
First of all, you have to define what you mean by "speedwork".
Second: the best way to practise running economy is to train at race pace. A tennis player trains his technique best by hitting the ball just as hard in training as he does in matches, not harder or looser.
probably because most people training for a 5k dont run enough mileage.
Runningart2004 wrote:
Which is more aerobic, which is more anaerobic:
16x200m with 400m walk/jog recovery.
16x200m with 100m walk/jog recovery.
The problem is people's understanding of what limits a workout...
16x200m with 400m....is more anaerobic. IE: you are limited by how fast you can run 200m
16x200m with 100m...is more aerobic. IE: you are limited by your ability to maintain that 200m speed, your ability to recover.
In general...
Intervals with less than adequate recovery: aerobic
Intervals with more than adequate recovery: anaerobic*
*Needs to be short and fast, 400m or under.
Alan
While I get what you are saying, it depends on the intensity too.
The one w/ 400m rest can be way more aerobic depending on the pace of the 200's and the jog rest.
anyone calling 400m reps "speedwork" is way of course already...
speed <150m
I second the request for definitions. I think speedwork and anaerobic work are not the same thing.
I would say:
- Speedwork (e.g. 3K-5K paced repetitions) is highly aerobic
- We are not doing so much anaerobic work, anymore (not like in the 90's)
- Tempos are important for building stamina
Observation? wrote:
So, if a 5K race is between 88-93% aerobic (Sports Medicine 2001), then why are we doing so much anaerobic work? Shouldn’t we work more TEMPO & less, say, 400’s?
Sure, I see the other 7-12% in the above numbers, but it seems like we might—just might—be getting wrapped-up in too much speed work.
Let's just run!
This was the entire idea behind Lydiard, and later, John Kellogg's interpretation of it. If you look at what JK recommends for a 5k guy as a normal 2-week cycle during the early season, it is hugely aerobic. Even late-season is aerobic mostly.
Here's JK's 2-week schedule for a "good journeyman 5k runner" during the early to mid-season (dug up from my magical bag of JK wisdom)
S medium length run
M warmup, drills & strides, 3x15min starting close to marathon pace, progressing to tempo pace, and then dipping down a bit to "crest load pace," which'd be between 10k and 15k race pace.
T medium length run
W warmup, light drills, strides, 60min progression run with 35min of it at "high end pace", 3min rest, then 6x100m builups
T medium length run
F warmup,drills & strides, 8-10x1kkm starting at around 10k and down to 5k pace or a bit slower. 60-90sec rec.
S medium length run
S medium length run with a few buildups at end
M warmup, light drills/strides, 60min progression run with 35min of it at "high end pace", 3min rest, then 6x100m
T medium length run
W warmup, drills & strides, 20x400m starting at 10k pace or so and progressing down to faster than 5k pace. 40-45sec rec.
T medium length run
F short to medium length run with a few buildups at end
S RACE
So three sessions (including race) that could be described as "anaerobic" in 2 weeks, and 3 that could be described as "high end aerobic." Easy mileage to fill out the rest. Plus some strides. You could do the math to figure out how much % would be anaerobic, but my guess would be "not much."
once you've worked a lot on the aerobic component with lots of miles for many years, the 5k is almost like a middle distance event,right?
Look at guys like pre and El G (when he raced 5k- 12:50). They were able to run wicked fast 5k's without too much traditional "aerobic work"- lots of intervals, speedwork. You can look up both of their schedules online and find em no prob. The 5k has strength oriented slow twitch guys (certain young guys that are waiting to move up to 10, HM or M) and speed guys a la El G that aren't looking to race much above 5k. If you're a slow twitch guy your body will probably feel better with high aerobic mileage, if you're speed oriented and do well at shorter distances, then Speed day-easy day with a once weekly long run or long tempo will work better. Speed days have a huge aerobic component, and you can get plenty of the aerobic development you need from easy days (short jog). At the 5k, there's a large split between guys that do better with high aerobic mileage and guys that do better with a bowerman-esque miler-type plan.
-A wannabe Letsrun guru