wellnow wrote: Km reps in 2.30 are standard fare for the top 1500-10000m runners.
10 of them?
With 60s rest?
There you go again, wellnow, fabricating impossible workouts. 4x 600 at 800 pace with 5 minutes rest. Yeah, right......
wellnow wrote: Km reps in 2.30 are standard fare for the top 1500-10000m runners.
10 of them?
With 60s rest?
There you go again, wellnow, fabricating impossible workouts. 4x 600 at 800 pace with 5 minutes rest. Yeah, right......
I think you are greatly minimizing how spectacular these workouts are. I agree with one of your last statements that (North) Americans don't necessarily understand how hard the very top end guys train, but nothing that Bekele or Geb do can be easily replicated, even in scale.
For one thing, 60 sec rest is virtually no rest. I agree with the original critic who said in effect that 10x1k with 60 sec is superior to your 5k best. My own experience and vicarious experience suggests the same.
I think the optimum approach is to do 4-6 at the targeted time, and experiment with the rest. If you can eventually do 5 @60-90 sec rest, you are probably ready for
a big p.r.
wellnow wrote:
I didn't see him do the session, but it has been reported here several time and you should realize that the top athletes do such sessions as these.
Bekele has reportedly done 8 x 1200 in 2.58 -3.03 before one of his World Record attemps
Km reps in 2.30 are standard fare for the top 1500-10000m runners.
How do you think they race so fast? As an athlete, you are only as good as your training, and you can do much higher quality sessions that you think you can.
It seems to me that there is a lack of awareness amongst American runners and coaches about speed endurance and how and when to apply it. Why did rojo start a thread expressing surprise that Ramzi would do 8 x 1000 in 2.30 with 90 seconds recovery before the Olympics? Was rojo really surprised at this? There were some silly comments on tha thread and some good ones too.
Look at Renato Canova's sessions, his runners train exceptionally hard, but recover very quickly, and you can do this too if you really want to.
You seem to be forgetting what the original poster said
I'm just talking about in a normal VO2 max workout. A good solid effort but not extreme or anything.
The examples you gave are not example of a NORMAL VO2 max workout and I would say aren't even VO2max workouts. Every athlete whether elite or not has that workout that they do that has no specific purpose other than to give them confidence. Just because Haile did 10x1000m in 2:30 doesn't mean that it is a normal workout for him or that is a VO2max workout. Also Ramzi's 8x1000m in 2:30 with 90 sec rest doesn't mean it is V02max workout and just because he did it before the games doesn't mean it is a normal workout. I would say all the examples are extreme and are obviously peak workouts.
Doing 6 or 7 reps at 5k pace (or about a second per 400 faster near the end of the session) and taking a walk/jog that's just long enough to let your pulse drop to about 65% of maximum is sufficient. That's "not extreme or anything." The recovery periods will probably be about 2/3 to 3/4 of the run periods, but you'll get to the point where you can judge it just by when you feel ready to go again and find a challenging effort which increases in a steady, linear fashion and only becomes a bear by the last couple of reps.
I've seen numerous world class runners from the 1970s to the present do up to 10 reps of 1k at close to 5k pace with just over a minute of "shuffling" between reps, so that's doable for some runners but it's liable to fall into the extreme zone if you try at all costs to hit 5k pace and maintain exactly a minute rest. Many of the world's elite are very proficient at metabolizing lactate as a fuel, which is one trait (among others) that lets them recover very quickly between reps, so they can often do repeats that boggle the minds of average runners even more than some of their world class race times. Some runners just have that ability. You can train it for sure, but some people will always be better at those types of workouts just like some people will always be faster than others in absolute terms. So don't force yourself to do 10 x 1k at 5k pace with a minute rest just because some other guy did it. Also remember that even if you can do something, that doesn't necessarily mean you should every time you attempt it. If you feel like you're pulling a bulldozer on the last 100 meters and you're tying up, gasping and grabbing your knees after 5 reps, 10 reps won't be any better than 5 or 6.
Nearly any running that's providing enough of a stimulus to train you at all will help improve your oxygen uptake to some degree. The main benefits of working at 3k to 5k pace are 1) those speeds familiarize you with the pace for commonly run race distances and 2) the reps can be of just the right duration to lock into a good, fast rhythm that keeps your heart rate and respiratory rate high for a couple of minutes at a time (and you can operate at that pace for a total time that's longer than the duration of your race).
If you really want a session that works your heart's ability to pump large volumes of blood for several minutes at a time (one of the main determinants in maximal oxygen uptake), try running on an uphill of about 6% grade for 2:00 to 2:30 at a time at the same effort you'd run 6 to 8 800m to 1k reps on the track, turn around at the top, do a slow jog halfway down, then run a stronger (but not hammering) pace the rest of the way down, walk/jog for 1-2 minutes at the bottom and repeat 6 to 8 times. Make sure you're already accustomed to hill running before doing this - you don't want to get an Achilles tendon injury from the uphills or bang your joints and strain your quads on the downhills by just jumping right into the workout with no prior hill running under your belt. And don't do this one too often; that means do it two - maybe three - times a month. This works the heart better than level surface repetition running.
Workouts like these are just like notes in a musical piece - be careful that you don't become good at playing the notes but meanwhile miss the music.
i watched bill brasky run 25 x 1k @ 2:41 avg. he ran the last one in 2:25. afterward i noticed what looked like yellow sweat was actually the stain from a 10-egg mixer he drank right before the workout.
The Bramble and the Rose wrote:
Doing 6 or 7 reps at 5k pace (or about a second per 400 faster near the end of the session) and taking a walk/jog that's just long enough to let your pulse drop to about 65% of maximum is sufficient. That's "not extreme or anything." The recovery periods will probably be about 2/3 to 3/4 of the run periods, but you'll get to the point where you can judge it just by when you feel ready to go again and find a challenging effort which increases in a steady, linear fashion and only becomes a bear by the last couple of reps.
I've seen numerous world class runners from the 1970s to the present do up to 10 reps of 1k at close to 5k pace with just over a minute of "shuffling" between reps, so that's doable for some runners but it's liable to fall into the extreme zone if you try at all costs to hit 5k pace and maintain exactly a minute rest. Many of the world's elite are very proficient at metabolizing lactate as a fuel, which is one trait (among others) that lets them recover very quickly between reps, so they can often do repeats that boggle the minds of average runners even more than some of their world class race times. Some runners just have that ability. You can train it for sure, but some people will always be better at those types of workouts just like some people will always be faster than others in absolute terms. So don't force yourself to do 10 x 1k at 5k pace with a minute rest just because some other guy did it. Also remember that even if you can do something, that doesn't necessarily mean you should every time you attempt it. If you feel like you're pulling a bulldozer on the last 100 meters and you're tying up, gasping and grabbing your knees after 5 reps, 10 reps won't be any better than 5 or 6.
Nearly any running that's providing enough of a stimulus to train you at all will help improve your oxygen uptake to some degree. The main benefits of working at 3k to 5k pace are 1) those speeds familiarize you with the pace for commonly run race distances and 2) the reps can be of just the right duration to lock into a good, fast rhythm that keeps your heart rate and respiratory rate high for a couple of minutes at a time (and you can operate at that pace for a total time that's longer than the duration of your race).
If you really want a session that works your heart's ability to pump large volumes of blood for several minutes at a time (one of the main determinants in maximal oxygen uptake), try running on an uphill of about 6% grade for 2:00 to 2:30 at a time at the same effort you'd run 6 to 8 800m to 1k reps on the track, turn around at the top, do a slow jog halfway down, then run a stronger (but not hammering) pace the rest of the way down, walk/jog for 1-2 minutes at the bottom and repeat 6 to 8 times. Make sure you're already accustomed to hill running before doing this - you don't want to get an Achilles tendon injury from the uphills or bang your joints and strain your quads on the downhills by just jumping right into the workout with no prior hill running under your belt. And don't do this one too often; that means do it two - maybe three - times a month. This works the heart better than level surface repetition running.
Workouts like these are just like notes in a musical piece - be careful that you don't become good at playing the notes but meanwhile miss the music.
There are a couple of points here I have to address. One is that we (almost) all have the ability be to very proficient at metabolizing lactate as a fuel, this is a natural process for survival not just a metabolic trait of highly trained endurance athletes. The reason highly trained endurance atheltes can recover quickly is simply because they are more efficient at holding the right amount of neuro-muscualar co-ordination for longer, whereas a less well trained runner loses that concentration sooner requring more effort to maintain the pace.
The so called aerobic benefits or VO2 Max training effect of the training efforts mentioned in this and other threads is over stated. Once an athlete is fit enough to do theses kinds of workouts, they can no longer expect to see an increase in oxygen uptake.
Another point I disagree with is the idea that hill running can cause achiles problems, this is extremely unlikely since the speed is low. In most cases it is speed which causes achiles problems in runners due often to too much tensions in the calf muscles. The main benefit that I see from hill running is exactly this, a reduced impact on the muscles which allows hard training to be continued in the days after faster paced workouts, thus ensuring good recovery, whilst maintaining intensity.
another canuck wrote:
I think you are greatly minimizing how spectacular these workouts are. I agree with one of your last statements that (North) Americans don't necessarily understand how hard the very top end guys train, but nothing that Bekele or Geb do can be easily replicated, even in scale.
For one thing, 60 sec rest is virtually no rest. I agree with the original critic who said in effect that 10x1k with 60 sec is superior to your 5k best. My own experience and vicarious experience suggests the same.
I think the optimum approach is to do 4-6 at the targeted time, and experiment with the rest. If you can eventually do 5 @60-90 sec rest, you are probably ready for
a big p.r.
I think that Gebresealassie's 10 x 1000 in 2.30 with 2 minutes recovery at 8000 feet altitude is one heck of a workout.
When I did those 10x 1000m in 3.03 I ran every 4 minutes, so my recover was actually 57 seconds. I was in about 31.30 shape for 10k, maybe 31.00 for 10000m
I think I was in very good shape for a 40 year old, but not exceptional by any means. The best African runners train very much harder than this and yes their spectacular training matches their spectacular racing. When will mzungu match their performances of the last few years?
... we (almost) all have the ability be to very proficient at metabolizing lactate as a fuel, this is a natural process for survival not just a metabolic trait of highly trained endurance athletes.
We also (almost) all have the ability to sprint. It's a natural survival mechanism present in most people, not just world class sprinters. But the best sprinters are better at sprinting than the average Joe ... and Joe can get better but won't ever reach the Olympic level. We can all consume O2 to produce energy and we can improve our general capacity and sport-specific capacity for doing so, but each of us has our own ceiling. Processing lactate similarly has a different ceiling in different athletes whose hormone levels (testosterone, thyroid hormone, etc.) and fiber composition allow for expression and manifestation of lactate transport proteins. Thyroid hormone, for instance, dramatically increases expression of certain lactate transporters. Almost anyone can train this aspect of exercise, but certain runners will always be better at it and/or will receive more benefits in that area through training at certain speeds they are suited to run at.
The reason highly trained endurance atheltes can recover quickly is simply because they are more efficient at holding the right amount of neuro-muscualar co-ordination for longer, whereas a less well trained runner loses that concentration sooner requring more effort to maintain the pace.
This is part of it for sure, but it's likely the flip side of the same coin as lactate metabolism. Of course, when we delve into pabulum like this, we're starting to play notes and not music. That aside, we have to recognize the athlete is a whole organism whose systems compliment each other - the ability to run efficiently (or economically) at certain speeds runs somewhat parallel to the ability to process lactate, whether or not there is a cause/effect relationship between these two variables. For example, a high Type IIa fiber composition is normally accompanied by a high level of the transport proteins which deliver lactate into those fibers which are invoked at 5k race pace. The 13:00 runners are able to use their engines in a certain way which makes them economical at 62 seconds per lap, and this has to do with more than simple mobilization of motor units. In extreme cases, athletes like Joaquim Cruz are much, much more economical at faster speeds than at slower speeds (relative to runners as a whole), while the Dick Beardsleys of the world would never be able to acquire this type of economy at 4:00 mile pace no matter how much they worked on it.
Is this due to structural matters? To fiber distribution? To a naturally high (or low) O2 uptake? To an innately high (or low) ceiling for lactate metabolism? Some or all of the above? In the end, for the runner trying to do x reps of y distance at z pace, it doesn't matter. Either he can run all of those reps at that pace or he can't. So what if Haile G can run 10 1ks at faster than 5k race pace? If you can't do it, just run 5 or 6 or 7 of them and keep trying to get fitter. And if you can get to the point of doing 10 reps at faster than 5k pace and none of your performances are getting any faster or you're not becoming a better racer, what did you accomplish? You were just training to train. Of course, some people might be happy with that accomplishment on its own merit, but most people would prefer to get 5k and 10k personal bests. So don't worry about copying the world record holder's workouts, even with corresponding pace alterations. They may not be right for you yet ... or may never be.
The so called aerobic benefits or VO2 Max training effect of the training efforts mentioned in this and other threads is over stated. Once an athlete is fit enough to do theses kinds of workouts, they can no longer expect to see an increase in oxygen uptake.
Pretty much true. Once you have a high enough level of general conditioning (read: "unscientific," hard-ass, old-school training), have a stabilized weight and a healthy diet and sleep patterns, almost anything you do will work for you. You can make decent music out of your available notes.
Another point I disagree with is the idea that hill running can cause achiles problems, this is extremely unlikely since the speed is low. In most cases it is speed which causes achiles problems in runners due often to too much tensions in the calf muscles.
Could be that hill running itself isn't a root cause of Achilles trouble, but even so, a muscular issue which could lead to an Achilles problem will still be more likely to become symptomatic when doing uphill repeats without having first developed the necessary structural and muscular health. Regardless of speed, the mechanics change on hills, creating a greater pre-stretch to the ankle when going uphill and resulting in much more sudden eccentric loading to the quads when going downhill. Jogging speeds shouldn't pose a threat even for a runner 6 months removed from looking at a hill, but there's no way sane runners would do 6-8 reps at 5k pace uphill as their first steps taken on a hill in the last several months. No "root cause" explanations necessary - this is plain common sense, much like not trying for an end-of-summer tan on your first day at the beach.
The main benefit that I see from hill running is exactly this, a reduced impact on the muscles which allows hard training to be continued in the days after faster paced workouts, thus ensuring good recovery, whilst maintaining intensity.
It's resistance work that ultimately improves running economy (by minimizing the GTO inhibitory mechanism and reducing the electromechanical delay) as long at it's complimented by later plyometric work and short speed to optimize the stretch-shortening cycle. Maybe that jargon is just another way of saying the same thing.
Well, in typical message board fashion, we've discussed a few individual notes and failed to teach anybody how to make it musical. So let's add this: Run more. More. Still more. Start running some of it faster. That snippet of advice right there is worth all that came before it.
Is this John Kellog? your writing style seems familiar; style over substance.
The first part of your post is a very long winded way of saying that some runners have more fast twitch fibers than others, yes thank you, we already know that.
Now, about running economy and efficiency at a certain pace. They are not quite the same thing. A runner with a high VO2 max is less economical than another runner with a much lower VO2 max who runs the same pace, this much we know, but just because runner B is more economical, it doesnt mean that they are as efficient as runner C who can hold the same pace for longer.
Runner C can beat them all because he is better trained.
Yes it doesn't follow that just because a runner can train harder they will race better. People who race better than they train may have psycological problems with racing but this should not detract from the message that at some time in the training schedule, very hard speed endurance sessions can be a considerable benefit, especially if the runner recovers quickly from such training.
Your closing comment is not helpful. There are reasons why speed endurance sessions are the most important aspect of training. All the tough running in the World won't make us faster, it's speed endurance that teaches us how to optimize our performance more than any other type of training, because we have to learn to hold those stride patterns for longer in order to race better.
I still don't believe the 10x1k with 60 second rest in 2:30 at 8000 feet workout. Prove it. Looking at Shaheen's training it doesn't look like he does anything even close to that hard, and I've never seen anything about Geb that indicates he trains that hard either.
Don't you think Shaheen ran 2.38 k's over the barriers?
That's 7.54 pace, slightly slower than his World Record.
Don't get distracted by any references to Geb or Bekele's training.They may be the only 2 in the world who could do such workouts. In Geb's book, there is reference to a workout observed that was a tempo run to start, 5x1200 @2:55 and then a 90 min run in the pm. There is also reference to 2x5k in 13:20 on a slightly uphill course.
I agree that most other world class guys don't seem to run as hard, but they are close.One of the things that Canova prescribes is a shockingly fast rest for his marathoners, such as 5x5k in 15:00 with the rest being 1k in 3:30!
Wellnow I agree with you totally that the no.1 emphasis should be on speed endurance.Moorcroft ran the same basic speed endurance for years;4x600 and 4x1000.He started as a 17-18 yr old at 1:30 and 2:40 and ended up at 1:23 and 2:24.
I am incorporating more and more speed endurance into my program.
wellnow wrote:
Is this John Kellog? your writing style seems familiar; style over substance.
I don't understand why you had to do that. You guys were having an interesting discussion, and I (and I assume at least a few others) was enjoying reading it and felt like I was learning some things. Just because you guys disagree about some things doesn't make either of you wrong, and it certainly doesn't make it right for you to insult another poster. All that part of your last post does is sidetrack what is turning into a pretty interesting thread.
Not An Expert wrote:
wellnow wrote:Is this John Kellog? your writing style seems familiar; style over substance.
I don't understand why you had to do that. You guys were having an interesting discussion, and I (and I assume at least a few others) was enjoying reading it and felt like I was learning some things. Just because you guys disagree about some things doesn't make either of you wrong, and it certainly doesn't make it right for you to insult another poster. All that part of your last post does is sidetrack what is turning into a pretty interesting thread.
Because wellnow is one of those guys who can´t take it that others have a different opinion and perhaps (God forbid!) knows better than him.
wellnow wrote:
Don't you think Shaheen ran 2.38 k's over the barriers?
That's 7.54 pace, slightly slower than his World Record.
i actually dont think he ran them over barriers
idiot alert wrote:
wellnow is one of those guys who can't take it that others have a different opinion and perhaps (God forbid!) knows better than him.
hahaha that's like saying michael jordan is "perhaps" a better basketball player than stephen hawking
wellnow is like one of those nfl players who sees the best boxer as some sort of challenge to his manhood and is insecure and deluded enough to think he could beat the world heavyweight champion.....yeah, right, he'd get his block knocked off in the first few seconds
also, ever notice how blowhards that don't have any real experience or expertise to draw on always resort to cutting other people down when they realize they're embarrassingly overmatched? like the bright colors on a coral snake, this behavior is one of nature's warning signs telling you to steer clear of a hazard
Thank you for a very coherent and enjoyable post. You managed to cut through all the BS that was posted, reduce it to something that made sense - and do all that without resorting to ad hominem attacks on wellnow, which is more restraint than I might have shown.
Please, keep posting, and ignore the crap out of him if you have to.
I just find JK's posts to be pretetious.
Now back to the subject. The best runners do extremely hard sessions, but many posters on this thread seem to be in denial about this. I don't see JK or anyone addressing this issue, and I have stated that this is a typical American trait, not to cause offense but to stimulate debate.
I meant to say pretentious. Style over substance. Why does he post under so many different names etc?
5k Racer wrote:
How many 1k repeats at 5k race pace, with a 400 jog recovery, would a world class runner do in workout.
I'm thinking 8 but want to get others thoughts as well.
I'm just talking about in a normal VO2 max workout. A good solid effort but not extreme or anything.
I withdraw my question. Thread over.