Masters Weekend Runs and Races

DHaaga,

Betting on my 49ers last night was a no-brainer...betting on Ravens?? WOW! Who saw THAT coming?? I'll save any smack talk about KP's team and our potential match up next week for later in the day...frankly (although I HATE to root for Seattle), I've got to pull for them SeaChickens just so that we keep home field advantage going into next week's NFC championships.

Oh yeah, this is a geezer running thread...managed just 36 miles BUT two track sessions including 10 x 400 with just 30 seconds recovery...you gotta know that by number 6 or 7, that 30 seconds feels like it gets shorter and shorter with every rep. Got a rust buster 1500 meters next Saturday (big GULP!)

Have a fine week.Enjoy today's games.Run like you mean it!

MF

Nice workout DH -

I had a solid week - 44 miles, one good fast interval workout and one 9 miler in the hills. Plus a double, just for old time's sake.

Feeling good, feeling loose, putting in the miles getting ready for Spring.

(And trying to stay ahead of my 15 year old)

What is the reasoning for the 200 meter jog? The time in between must vary a bit for each one- 1:30- 1:45? Or do you track that? I always felt it a bit more telling to run intervals with specific standing rests between. When I want to cheat a bit or not feeling all that confident, I choose to jog between intervals because I know I can make it last a bit longer.

I can't imagine the purpose is to keep your HR at a higher level, because the point of the workout is to run at 5K pace and HR is pretty much irrelevant as it returns to a certain % before beginning the next interval.

Just curious, not saying it wasn't a great workout or a tough workout because it is, I'm just wondering as to why some choose to jog and others rest between intervals. Do you personally find it any different.

For myself- standing rests are more difficult as I tend to push each interval a bit harder and the specific rest gives me a better idea of my overall cardio conditioning.

Thanks

Did you perform these on the track? Would you say that you can hold that pace for a 5K- road? Track? 3:24 is 17:00 - is that your goal?

Thanks again, sorry for all the questions, but I have a pretty good reason for them.

Skate et al, here is an alternative to interval training as we know it

http://www.newintervaltraining.com/

...the reps are a little slower and the rest interval is actually run, not jogged...I've used this with success in the past...makes great sense.

MF

PS, looks like we're headed to Atlanta...eeeeeeessssh!

Interesting - thank you

Example - Traditional Repetition Training session

12 x 400 (3,000) [90” rest or jog]:

Converts to a New Interval Training session

12 x 400 (5,000) [100m r/o] – or better:

3 x 4 x 400 (3,000) [100m r/o and 3’ easy running] – or better:

3 x 4 x 400 (400s @ 3,000, 1500, 5,000, 3,000) [100m r/o and 3’ easy running]

Four decent runs. Also la very good free weight session. Feeling good.

hi Skate. I was aiming for 3:25 for 1000m b/c think of 82 seconds/lap as 5k pace currently. Most recent 5k 17:56, but that was a tough road course, and these repeats were on track. I did run 17:05 on an easy course in early November, which would equate to 3:25's.

Length of recovery -- I don't measure HR. Agree with you that a jog distance makes the time imprecise. I guess I'm inconsistent on this, as I do use timed recoveries for hill repeats (which I always do on treadmill) and for cruise intervals and marathon-pace segments. It's only the 5k pace intervals or mile-pace (e.g., 400's with 200 jogs) intervals where I use a jog distance as the recovery.

Pfitzinger/Douglas books, which I like a lot, say 50--90% of the work time is good (so if the run is 4 minutes, recover for 2:00 to 3:36). I think 200 jogs for 1000 repeats are on the low end of this range, almost too low. I move it to 400 jogs when the repeats get up to 1200.

As to why jog rather than stand -- dunno, just used to that and feels better to me.

When i was on a college team (JV, lasted one X-C season and part of indoor track before severe knee problems), we did everything on a set time between "go"'s (400's every 2:30, miles every 10:00), so slower guys like me got less rest!

cheers,

Dave

Hey there everybody, good to see so many different perspectives as far as training goes. I guess we all have to adapt to what works best for us at this age (even though I still feel like a youngster). I’m starting to see my limitations for the really hard stuff though, and realize speed work in January is very hard.

At any rate, I never complain about the weather here in the NW (at least not all the time), but when it goes from 50 degrees to the high 20’s, it’s a little of a shock to the system, especially when I’m trying to do a little more speed oriented stuff. My lungs burn pretty bad. Such has been the case this week. I guess it’s something to complain about right. Thankfully no rain; that would just be a double whammy of death for me. I’m not insulated enough to keep warm out there for too long; though I should just suck it up like everyone else.

Not too shabby of a week though, as I managed some speed and strength stuff despite some windy and colder conditions. There has been morning ice around here as well.

Tuesday was a track workout with my brother which consisted of a

mile: 4:55 (relaxed pace) 800 recovery

800: 2:06 (hard pace) 800 recovery

600: 1:36 (hard pace) 600 recovery

400: 1:02 (hard pace) 400 recovery

200: :29 (hard pace) 800 recovery

Mile: 4:59 (relaxed effort)

I’ll say right now it wasn’t as easy as it looked on paper (if there is such a statement), but I was happy to get through it. My calves really felt tore up afterwards, and I wasn’t even in spikes. It was good to finally get on the track and roll a little bit, haven’t done that since the summer.

Thursday was a 600 time trial, and I had no expectations. It was naturally cold and windy, but I had two other guys to run with thankfully. I didn’t look at my watch until I finished and was pleasantly surprised with a 1:27.8. I wasn’t all out, but I don’t think I could have made it to the 800 mark in under 2:00. I was starting to lean back with 50 meters to go and my form was starting to slip. Probably would have swam it in for a 2:03 or something, but I blame it on the earlier workout from Tuesday and the cold weather that evening.

Finished the week off with an 8 X 1mile workout with 90 second recovery between each. 4:59—5:00—4:59—4:59—4:59—4:59—4:58—4:56. Again, I didn’t think the workout looked all that hard until I attempted it. Last year I actually took 3:00 recovery between intervals, so that’s probably why it felt so hard this time. There is definitely a big difference between doing this workout in the warmer months, then in the chilly 28 degree mornings around here. I was pretty bundled up and restricted.

All in all, I think my training for this year is going stronger then last year, and I felt pretty good about last years results. I don’t want to overdo anything though, so I’m cautious about getting too greedy with my training. We’ll definitely see how things go in the next several weeks. A few indoor races to dust the rust off, and then XC Nationals.

I even started lifting weights again to see if that might make a difference this year. That’s a whole other thing in and of itself. I’m sore all over now.

Sad to see the Seahawks come up short this year, but it sure was fun to watch. I guess I’ll root for the 49ers now. Until next week,

Ahrlin

dhaaga wrote:

As to why jog rather than stand -- dunno, just used to that and feels better to me.

Dave

6x1000 is a classic here in the UK and almost every group I know does 200 jog. If there is a coach with a watch he is in the same place, and if there is a wind blowing you can even things out a tad by having three straights into the wind and two against. Not very "sciencey" but good reasons nonetheless.

I like the "New Interval Training" too. Not very new actually. In my 20s under John Hovell we had a great group who progressed on Tuesday nights from a steady ten miler to doing 10 miles with harder 600s thrown in every mile, with instructions to drop back to 6:00 pace between reps but not jog. That got us really fit before we went near a track.

I'm now ten weeks out from the Euro Indoor 3000m and starting to get psyched up. First week back after a cold, so kept the speed easy, but got 70 in. 2400-1600-800 around 10k to 5k pace to ease the lungs back in on Tuesday, and 10x300 (100 jog) at 3000m pace on Friday. Hopefully some harder sessions to come next week...

Happy training all..

Dave

I was actually thinking of 6 x 1000's on the road this Tuesday for a workout, which is why your workout intrigued me. I plan a 5K certified course/flat next Sunday. I was hoping for a 17 flat after 9 weeks off from a hamstring injury followed by 12 relatively easy weeks of running. This 5K would test my fitness. Not interested in the 5K as I'm more of an 800/1500 runner though and I have goal of 4:15 in the 1500- mid April perhaps if I can stay healthy and on track.

I suppose I tend to think of intervals as a ratio between effort and rest. Like you mentioned the 50%-90% range. Certain intervals at certain paces deserve a 1:1 some faster intervals may take 1:2 So a 60 second sprint make require a 2:00 rest. In the case of the 1K's I like the 50% - 3:25-3:30 1K would be about a 1:45 rest in between. I suppose if you were doing 12 of them though you would be running slower like 10K pace and might only take 1/3 rest compared to the time of the average interval.

Referencing your college days- that hurts, but I suppose the only way for the coach to keep every together or at least starting together. Wouldn’t be too much difference if it were only a few seconds, but if a runner is a good 30 seconds back or more, boy they would be working much harder and over say 8 intervals would have 4 minutes less rest than the faster runners, which means inevitably they would have to be running their intervals a bit slower just to get through the workout because the ratio would be less. Who knows. I wonder if there is any real scientific evidence showing an actual improvement between running intervals with a jog rest or a standing rest?

Thanks-

If I complete the road intervals on Tuesday I'll let you know my time and see how the experiement works out for me on Sunday- if I can hold back and keep on pace the first mile (no faster than 5:20 1st mile)

All I can say MikeF is "That was a classic Falcons game. But we'll take it. Whew!" The Monkey is gone. Damn your Niners QB is a MONSTER.

46 mile week with a third Tue in a row of strength work, 2nd Sat of 8 x 200s @35 with 35 sec rest - damn I'm slow and damn that's hard - course it's 28 outside. Hoping the consistency of LSD every Sunday pays oof too.

Good week oh ye Masters.

Go Falcons!

KP,

I did watch that Falcons game...just an INCREDIBLE finish under pressure...whoa! Even better than the Baltimore win...just amazing...wish we did not have to travel next Sunday but so be it...two very very worthy opponents...we should have a beer wager just for posterity...Oregon beer versus my local Sonoma brew???

Oh, and nice training week ;{

PS Pat D's boys (Broncos) went down...down hard!

Hello, chiming in late here. I ended up with 37 miles last week, with one rest day. I was ambitiously planning on three workouts, but the 6x(300/200) workout on Monday plus the 10x400 on Thursday were as much as I could handle. I took Friday off, but I still felt sluggish during my 10 mile easy run on Saturday. Sunday, I had most of the classic symptoms of overtraining, so I abandoned any plans for 1000m intervals or a tempo run and did an easy 6 followed by core/plyos. The plyos alway seem to put the pep back in my legs and loosen things up.

As far as 1000s, I tend to stick with 5x but with no more than 90 secs rest in between. That seems to be a good indicator of what I can do in a 5k. When I lead the summer track workouts, I'll start everyone out doing them closer to 10k pace with 400m jogs, which lines up well with base training. We gradually increase the pace and shorten the recoveries to end up closer to 5k pace with 200m jogs between.

Scott

Skate wrote:

Referencing your college days- that hurts, but I suppose the only way for the coach to keep every together or at least starting together.

Over here people tend to sort themselves into groups who can usefully train together, whether at college back then or my local track now. I agree, more than 5-10sec out and you're better off in a different group. Or having fun with handicaps.

I don't know about others here but I was always taught (and have always felt) that I recover better jogging slowly than standing still. If I have a minute or more to kill, I'd rather roll forwards slowly 100m than stand around. With 90sec rest, 200m is easy to cover. And with a longer rest, I don't want to get stiff. This just seems to add momentum to the session and every distance runner I know does it this way. On the other hand, I know 400/800 types who like to lie down in their (verrryyyyy loonnnggg) recoveries and I am sure that's not good for you.

[quote]

I wonder if there is any real scientific evidence showing an actual improvement between running intervals with a jog rest or a standing rest? {/quote]

Very recent study:

Two groups ran 30sec reps at a controlled speed, with 30sec rests, for as long as possible. The ones standing still in the rests got more reps done before falling off the treadmill (or whatever happens), but the ones jogging the recoveries showed a greater improvement in VO2 during the study.

I also noticed that at the last winter Olympics, the US XC skiers would pedal exercise bikes slowly during their 3 minute rests in the paarlauf. Apparently research showed they reprocessed more lactate and recovered better.

Why not try both on your reps - jog one, stand for one - and tell us if the reps afterwards felt any different?

OK MikeF you are on!

I'll wager one big bottle of Double Mountain Hop Lava from the great water and town of Hood River Oregon. No Age Grading. No Handicap Mile crap. Just a head to head battle of my Falcons vs your Forty-Niners. Winner pays up in person somewhere in 2013.

KP

Thanks for the info.

The 30 second runs were at 105% maximal aerobic velocity - but for which distance? If it was a 5K for example and you are in 17 flat shape your MAV is 4.9 meters per second. Maybe 155 meters covered in a 30 second time period, not all that hard.

For an 800 meter runner overall cardiovascular conditioning is not quite the yardstick though. I have run 800's at 2 flat when I could run a 15 flat 5k and when I was only in 17 flat 5K shape I also could run 2 flat. I remember quite a range of 800 runners in college who fell somewhere in between.

At least this study is a start but far from sufficient in answering the question.

I would guess that for longer races you probably get a better benefit with the active rest intervals.

{Why not try both on your reps - jog one, stand for one - and tell us if the reps afterwards felt any different?}

Yes, they feel different – knew that. As I said before, I usually try and run more intensely after passive rest. Active rest is less accurate, because the time of the passive jogs over a certain distance vary, especially as you grow more fatigued. I would have to experiment for an entire season- with just active rest and then one season with passive rest just to get a more valid answer to which is a better system. Of course I won’t do that. I’ll be on the look out for more research studies.

Dave, only completed 5 of the 6 x 1k’s. I’ll see how it compares to my time on Sunday. I will say that I think standing around for 1:45 when it is cold, is probably not the best idea. So maybe active rest is the better mode in the winter. Next time I’ll take 90 second rests, perhaps jog in place a bit- as these are road intervals and not on the track.