Which workout is more impressive?

training is not a competition, it is preparation for performance.

also, 3:30 per km is 5:15 for 1500m, so they already are faster than tempo pace.

Cheers.

20 x 400 with rest down to 120bpm at exact individual paces is better than both ! :)

okay, I've read your post again and realised it might have meant something different.

first time around I read, "not to let it slide into fast tempo territory" as meaning that you didn't want to run them too fast. so I pointed out that they already were too fast because they are faster than tempo pace already.

however, you might also have meant that you didn't want them to slow down to tempo pace because they are meant to be faster than tempo pace.

so, then I see that you are running them off a 30% recovery, but intervals would normally be around 70% - 100% recoveries so a 5:00 repeat would have a recovery of around 3:30 - 5:00. your current recovery would seem to imply that you are, conversely, not running the repeats fast enough.

this leads to one of two conclusions:

1) these are tempos, and your comment about not wanting them to slide into tempo territory is a misunderstanding on your part of what you are doing.

2) these are meant to be somewhere between tempo and easy, say around marathon pace, which would in turn suggest that tempo pace for you is not 3:30 per km.

only you would know which of those two applies, but either one suggests to me that you need to adjust your training paces.

Cheers.

COACH J.S Ã¥ ä à ¶ wrote:

20 x 400 with rest down to 120bpm at exact individual paces is better than both ! :)

No, it's a completely different session with a different emphasis.

COACH J.S Ã¥ ä à ¶ wrote:

20 x 400 with rest down to 120bpm at exact individual paces is better than both ! :)

So say I was running 16 flat for 5000m what time would should I run each 400m in?

Impressive workouts wrote:

1) 4 x 3000m with 3' rest in 10:03, 10:00, 9:58 and 9:52 (9:58 avg)

2) 8 x 1500m with 1'30'' rest in 5:04, 5:03, 5:01, 5:00, 5:00, 4:59, 4:57 and 4:54 (4:59 avg)

Same pace pretty much, but the second one required more focus not to let it slide into fast tempo territory(which would be close to 3:30 km pace in my case)

I'm not really sure about this on but usually it's a lot harder to do double the rep distance at the same pace even with fewer reps.

Interested to hear what other people think.

4 x 3k and 8 x 1500 both are 12k of work.

Both are run at the same pace.

In the 4 x 3k there are 9' of rest.

In the 8 x 1500 is 10:30 rest. So more rest.

And it is harder to go 10' at pace X than 5'.

On top of that the 8 x 1500 felt harder.

So the 4 x 3k was more impressive.

No way my marathon pace is 3:20. It's (in my mind at least) a half marathon specific workout, where I wanted to put a good volume while still running slightly faster than half marathon pace. The rest was purposely shorted because the goal was not to put that much intensity.

Pikachu wrote:

4 x 3k and 8 x 1500 both are 12k of work.

Both are run at the same pace.

In the 4 x 3k there are 9' of rest.

In the 8 x 1500 is 10:30 rest. So more rest.

And it is harder to go 10' at pace X than 5'.

On top of that the 8 x 1500 felt harder.

So the 4 x 3k was more impressive.

this is right. despite of form on the day, long rep workouts are more taxing. i bet that most of us would have stiff legs for a longer time after 4 x 3 (9' rest) than after 8 x 1.5 (10:30 rest).

(couldn't finish my post)

If I wanted to run them faster I would have done 4-5 of them with 3 minute rest. (It's actually a common workout for me).

In this case It would be around 5k-8k pace of course. In my experience shortening the recovery forces the body to be more economic at slower paces. It wasn't necessarily a harder workout than the 3000m, it just required more concentration because the rest goes by pretty fast, especially in the second half.

So in theory running 3:20 (5:00 at 1500m) will make my goal half more doable which is running 3:27 (5:11) over and over.

I probably would have gotten the same (if not more benefits) with a 12km tempo at goal pace, but those are harder to recover from.

My paces are probably, 3:15, 3:28 and 3:40 (km) at 10km, half and marathon respectively.

COACH J.S Ã¥ ä à ¶ wrote:

20 x 400 with rest down to 120bpm at exact individual paces is better than both ! :)

My DOOKICAN system is better than all three! I have internalized 9 winning results in 18 moths with individual paces and recovery. For example, one of my Kenyon runners (24:57 10k for second place) runs 10x150m hill sprints. His individual recovery is to jog back down the hill before he starts the next rep.

Magic!

Impressive workouts wrote:

So in theory running 3:20 (5:00 at 1500m) will make my goal half more doable which is running 3:27 (5:11) over and over ... My paces are probably, 3:15, 3:28 and 3:40 (km) at 10km, half and marathon respectively.

silly me. Ihadn't considered race specific workouts.

thank you for your explanation, it makes a lot more sense now and I learned something useful.

Cheers.

4 x 3000m is better. A very good HM predictor workout.

The 4 x 3000m workout is harder because doubling the distance at the same pace more than doubles the intensity, even when doubling recovery (recovery also has a diminishing return, e.g. 2 minutes rest doesn't make you recover twice as much as 1 minute). Think about it using this extreme example: I can run 16 x 100m in 15 seconds with 30 seconds rest easily, but 2 x 800m in 2:00 with 4 minutes, or any amount of rest for that matter is impossible for me. The extra rest time from doing shorter reps helps a little too.

Pikachu wrote:

4 x 3k and 8 x 1500 both are 12k of work.

Both are run at the same pace.

In the 4 x 3k there are 9' of rest.

In the 8 x 1500 is 10:30 rest. So more rest.

And it is harder to go 10' at pace X than 5'.

On top of that the 8 x 1500 felt harder.

So the 4 x 3k was more impressive.

Q.E.D.

100m to 800m is a 1/8 ratio

1500m to 3000m is a 1/2 ratio

Top speed could be your limiting factor in your specific case (sub 2).

Also how would one scientifically define "resting twice as much"? It's not like 3000m requires "twice more effort" than a 1500m. There are diminishing returns as recovery goes up of course. But a speedier guy could benefit a lot more from doubled rest also.

The workouts are probably equally demanding.

The first one is more impressive.

Workout number 1 is more impressive. Both workouts have the same overall distance at the same pace with the same total rest. However, the longer blocks of running (fewer times stopping running) is the more difficult workout.