So I'm getting back into running after competing in high school and college. Well, mainly injured throughout college.... I took off once I finished college a little over 2 years ago and now I'm trying to get back into running. In college I was a MD runner and our MD coach always wanted us to go fairly slow on our easy runs, and the distance coach always wanted his athletes to go quicker on their easy runs (considerably faster even though they weren't more fit).
I see it posted here pretty frequently that you should do your easy runs really easy and your workouts at the correct effort and you'll get the maximum amount of improvement from your training, but I also see it posted here that if you picked up your easy run pace and still do the workouts at the same pace you'll get the maximum amount of improvement. I have friends who are elite level post-collegiate runners and some will say that they basically jog their easy runs, do workouts at the right pace (hard), and do long runs a bit quicker. Other friends who are elite will say that they gained a lot of improvement from picking up their easy runs considerably and using them as another aerobic day, slowing down in workouts a tiny bit (mainly tempos), and doing long runs a bit quicker.
So which is it? I can see the slower easy runs being more beneficial for a speed-oriented runner since they'll thrive off of the workouts, not the aerobic work, and I can see the faster easy runs working for the aerobic powerhouse runners. Is this really true, though? Salazar is known for having his athletes go pretty quick on easy runs, right? What does Canova do? Or Aden?