What Are Your Thoughts Regarding This Workout (Part 1)?

Sometimes we do configure track sessions in order to beat boredom. Other times we configure track sessions in order to simulate race conditions. Neither is the case with this workout, however.

athleticsfreak wrote:

Is the purpose for speedwork, variety to beat boredom of regular sessions,simulate race conditions or just a random idea?

Thoughts please- lots of confusion re:aims and objectives!

Skuj, I actually like this workout you suggested a LONG time back even better: 1600m + 4x400m + 1600m

I like ending the workout on the single long capacity runs (the miles).

400m jogs all around? Purpose?

Do you like ending on the short stridish runs (200's) or the long capacity runs (miles)?

Skuj wrote:

Neither is the case with this workout, however.

would you mind elaborating on what exactly IS the case with this workout? maybe then you can get some educated feedback.

citius99 wrote:

Skuj, I actually like this workout you suggested a LONG time back even better: 1600m + 4x400m + 1600m

I like ending the workout on the single long capacity runs (the miles).

400m jogs all around? Purpose?

Do you like ending on the short stridish runs (200's) or the long capacity runs (miles)?

Personally, citius, I LOVE ending with a long capacity run. Some will argue that "slowing down" at the end of the workout = bad, not race simulating etc. But I prefer 4x400 + 1600 to 1600 + 4x400. Or 800-600-400-200-1000.

Maybe we'll get a lot of response here, positive and wonder...I mean negative. Let's give it some more time before getting to the point of all this, shall we?

Skuj wrote:

Let's give it some more time before getting to the point of all this, shall we?

That's just stupid. It's obvious you have no clue as to what the purpose of this workout is/was or the importance of an overall training plan/macrocycle.

Gotta agree it's a dumb workout. I think the OP is a troll who just likes to see his name on the index. Give it a break, troll.

mdsc83k wrote:

I think you might want to be more specific about the paces of the reps.

For instance, do the 1600s at 10km pace, with the 200s at 800m pace. Big contrast, with the 1600s giving more recovery.

or

the 1600s at 5km pace and the 200s at 1500m pace. All at faster pace, little contrast.

What about the recovery period after the 4 x 200m? Another 4 mins?

Yes, 4min after each 4x200m. There is plenty of rest in here. The whole session would take 60min+ to complete. Even if you did 5km and 800m pace, I feel that pace would not be destructive given these rests, and given my initial comments regarding the mature runner who has trained in such a way as to run and recover well from a 20km. 10km and 1500m pace would actually not be very hard at all in this session. Would you agree?

Skuj wrote:

1600m + 4x200m + 1600m + 4x200m + 1600m + 4x200m + 1600m + 4x200m

4min recovery surrounds each 1600m, and 30sec recovery is inbetween each 200m.

1600m at 5k to 10k race pace. 200m at 800m to 1500m race pace.

This is for mature runners who can very comfortably run and recover from a 20km.

The workout lacks intensity while overdoing volume. I recommend eliminating the 1600s in favor of 800s/1200s at 3K/5K pace. Also, a reduction in the number and placement of 200s is required. I suggest only keeping the last set of 4x200 at a much faster pace -- say, 600m pace.

So, most of you think this workout is brilliant, then? ;)

Skuj wrote:

So, most of you think this workout is brilliant, then? ;)

I'm sorry, but I don't think much of it. This workout reminds me of ones that well-meaning, but not very knowledgeable, coaches come up with when they are trying to be "creative." They are driven by some poorly perceived ingenuity, rather than solid training theory.

I wonder, where did you get this?

It is much like an old Dellinger workout from the 80's and 90's. The Dellinger workout is in fact sets of 1200m w/ 400m jog + 4 x 200m w/ 200m jog. The 1200's are at 5k pace and the 200's are at mile pace. I know this for a fact. The workout works well to accomplish mixed pace to 1) increase total workout volume (a common Dellinger practice) and 2) familiarize the athlete with the ability to surge mid-race and return to race pace and have it feel comfortable. Check out Dellinger's principles for more elaboration on the idea. I believe this would be the callousing principle. I'm surprised some of these workouts haven't been discussed on the boards before.

I got it from my head. Don't be sorry.

Skuj wrote:

I got it from my head. Don't be sorry.

Oh! In that case I am sorry.

will wrote:

It is much like an old Dellinger workout from the 80's and 90's...

Not in the slightest. Dellinger was a stickler for NOT mixing paces during workouts. He never would have suggested anything even remotely similare to this rubbish.

not rubbish at all, this. mixing 200s and 1600s in this manner is very innovative indeed.

will wrote:

It is much like an old Dellinger workout from the 80's and 90's...

u r wrong wrote:

Not in the slightest. Dellinger was a stickler for NOT mixing paces during workouts. He never would have suggested anything even remotely similare to this rubbish.

You don't know a damn thing about Dellinger. Almost all of his workouts involved varied pace, similar to the one cited above.

If Malmo doesn't seem sure enough (since he ran with Dellinger's guys for while) perhaps Dellinger himself might be authoritative enough of a source. Check out his book, The Competitive Runner's Handbook from 1984. Almost every set of workouts in there has some mixed pace workout starting at 800m and going through the marathon.

Most coaches involve varied paces in their training plans. It's not new nor innovative. This workout, however, is a very odd mixture of such ideas. I'm not too sure I like it, especially with no context.

great session idea skuj. i really like the 4min breaks surrounding each block, thereby allowing for some fast running without accumulating too much.