Question for Antonio Cabral

Thanks for your reply Antonio, I really appreciate your thoughts.

My long term goal is the marathon. However as I believe I am more of a ST type of runner, it is my intention to improve my 5k/10k time in order to have an effect on my future potential at the marathon. I was planning to periodize my training to achieve two annual peaks (6 months focus on 5k/10K then 6 months focus on the marathon).

The reason that I didn't mention the interval recovery is because I am still unsure what it should be for the different types of workouts. Is there some formula that I can use?

Lastly I appreciate your comments about using other interval distances and I will adapt the plan as you suggest. I also appreciate that having a long plan is not a great idea, and it is better to adapt the plan depending on how I respond to each workout. However i still haven't learnt this art and I'm always unsure what type of workout my body needs at any particular time, so it is easier for me to have a fixed plan.

As always your thoughts and suggestions would be much appreciated.

Many thanks

Tom

About the interval recovery length.

If the runner does specific race pace intervals, he might use the longer length recovery (passive recovery) that permits him to hold the race pace.

Imagine that the runner is a 3:45/1500m (that is 15ecs each 100m) . he might use one specific interval as this one, 4X600m/80secs or 3X800m/2:00min. To able him to run so he can do the long length recovery as necessary. 2-3-4-5mins if necessary. The main goal of specific LONG intervals IS THE FOLLOW RACE PACE and the INTERVAL RECIOVERY IS JUST INTRESTING TO BE LONG ENOUGH TO ABLE YOU QUITE COMPLETE RECOVERY (600m-800m is quite long relate to the 1500m event). To try to run during the interval recovery of specific intervals LONG TYPE it´s not necessary and most of the cases it´s not just useless and inconvenient.

However as I said early on, in early phase of the training periodisation, and the runner isn´t ready yet to face hard, long specific intervals you might cut/divide the workout into short intervals while maintain the same pace. Ex: you aren´t ready for 4X600m or 3X800m then you might try in the early phase 6X400m/60secs but with short recovery than 3X800m. If the distance is half of the key workout then the interval recovery can be an half as well. If he runs 3X800m/2:00, he can run 6X400m/60secs with 60secs recovery.

The interval recovery of special intervals it´s more complex.

Thanks Antonio,

As I understand it, the recovery for long intervals at race pace is not important, the only thing that is important is to recover long enough to be able to complete the next interval at the correct pace.

However I had thought that generally for intervals at 3k-5k race pace the recovery should be the same time or slightly less than the time it takes to complete the interval. Am I wrong?

Could you also provide a typical progression of workouts at slower than race pace (90%-95%), that evolve into specific workouts at 100% race pace?

I would also be grateful if you could explain the interval recovery for intervals at slower than race pace. (10k pace, 1/2 marathon pace)

Thanks again

Tom

Yes, 1:1 you are right somehow but not absolutely.

Think about one 1:50 800m runner for example, and he does one specific workout of 3X500m/69secs AVG at race pace or 4X400m/55secs AVG. Both 500s and 400s are SPECIFIC WORKOUTS, but despite the set distance is 500m or 400m RELATE TO THE DISTANCE EVENT IT`S LONG INTERVALS !

However with both 3X500m 04 4X400m 800m race pace it´s quite impossible 1:1 recover ratio, it seems more 1:2 or 1:3 or 1:4 or 1:5. Again, specific long intervals at racepace target don´t sacrifice the race pace in the attempt use short lenght interval. This long intervals race paced kind aren´t interval training, are just repetitions.

But, i understand your question. If you run 4-5X2000m or 3-4X3000m or 3-4X2mile might be 10k to HM race pace, there if you do 1.5:1 or 1:1 ratio, or 1:1.5 eventually it´s ok.

But if you run long specifics 5k-10k goal race pace (800s-1000s-1200s-mile-2000m repetitions) the 1:1 or 1:4/3 but if you feel necessary do 1:1.5

I don't normally chime in on these threads but I have a question that I think is really important to understand in regards to some of the ideas you are presenting.In order to progress into using specific work you suggest that an athlete should be at 95% of shape condition but not if they are only at 70%.

Antonio Cabral wrote:

As i said above, the introduce of high specificity workouts, or don´t it depends what´s your shape condition. If you are at 95% your shape condition, you want to compete in October you shall introduce some kind specific workouts right now, with no problem. But if you are (let´s say) at your 70% shape condition, in this case you may delay the introduce of specific workout. The rule is to introduce the specific workouts as soon as possible.

Do you have a means or method of assessing where someone is in regards to their peak shape condition? How do you know if someone is at 70% 85% or 95%? Do you use a test or are there specific markers you look for? Comparison to previous results? What if you have no previous results to compare to.

I am also very interested on how hearing more on how special workouts are progressed since you said it varies from how special workouts progress.

Good question.

I need some time to write it because my english it´s poor.

However i want to answer two aspects.

One is what´s 100% shape ? The shape you are when you do one PB is 100% shape related to that distance event.

Second, you ask me "What if you have no previous results to compare to ?". In this case the best solution is to start one good traininbg programme and try one first competition.

I will continue.

I greatly look forward to it when you have the time. And no worries about your English, I can't even begin to write in your language. So we appreciate the effort greatly.

Speaking of writing in another language I realize my last sentence was poorly written. I meant to say...

I am also very interested in hearing more on how special workouts are progressed since you said it varies from how specific workouts progress.

Special and Specific can be kind of tricky to differentiate at times in the mind and typing since they are such similar words.

TJ wrote:

Thanks Antonio,

As I understand it, the recovery for long intervals at race pace is not important, the only thing that is important is to recover long enough to be able to complete the next interval at the correct pace.

However I had thought that generally for intervals at 3k-5k race pace the recovery should be the same time or slightly less than the time it takes to complete the interval. Am I wrong?

Tom

Not Antonio, but we had some "spirited" discussions on Marius's old board.

It is my experience that if you are doing specific training for races such as 3k-10k and trying to run them at race pace (ie, 6 x 800 @ 3k pace), then you should be able to do them on a 1:1 work:rest ratio. If you need more recovery, you probably have selected a workout that is too difficult.

This is not to say the workout could not be made productive. Let's take our guy Tom, he is a 16:40 5k guy. Let's say he does 6 x 1000 in 3:20. If he is close to 100% shape (in Antonio's words) then he should be able to easily do the workout with only 3:20 recovery. That would be a specific workout. If Tom is only in 17:20 shape, he may do the workout but take 5 minutes recovery. That would be appropriate early in the training cycle as he is trying to work his way toward his peak shape. The workout is not as race specific, but he is still getting 6k of race pace work.

Is this correct?

Hi Antonio,

I have been enjoying reading your ideas and appreciate that you are willing to share your insights and answer questions.

If you can help me specifically related to fatigue, both short term and long term and how to approach recovery.

I have been running for close to 30 years competitively and have experimented with various training methods with various levels of success.

What I still have difficulty understanding is knowing when or how best to read fatigue signals in the body so that it doesn't become chronic. ( subjective and or objective signals)

The pattern I have is that I may be successful with an approach, but failing to recognize when it best to and even how to best regenerate, find my performance stagnate or even fall backwards. Later running becomes more difficult than I had discovered after a break of 6 weeks for example.

First, short term, when and how to back off ( e.g. Pace, mileage, days off). Second, must one best take 4-6 weeks off after a major season or can one simply jog easy for a time to avert chronic fatigue from the stresses of running?

I don´t think so. I think that what you say is an absurd somehow.

First of all, your example is not correct. 3k pace workout is specific for 3k run event but IT´S NOT for a 10k run for a 10k event. 3k pace for a 10k run it´s not specific it´s special, because it´s too distance from 3k race pace target event. Specific is everything paced exactly on race pace or 98-97% or 102-105%. This is yout first mistake of specific workout interpretation, one misunderstand.

Second it´s completly false that if you need longer lenght interval the workout lenght it´s too dificult or shall be avoid. Dificult ? What´s too dificult ? I might agree. But do you want to run progress with easy workouts, without difficult workouts ? You willn´t get there. You need not hard or easy workouts, you need rich workouts, adequate workouts relate to the training need.

As i tried to to justify it´s true that if the specific workout is in the training zone fater than vVO2max, - then with high percent of anaerobic effort, you need more than 1:1 ratio. That are all 800m, 1500m/mile and 3000m SPECIFIC interval workouts.

Since that the lactate is very high if you run for a longer distance in your 800-1500/mile pace, you need a long recovery of many minutes, longer lenght than every interval set.

Imagine that you run this wokout. 6X600m at 800m race pace to prepare a 800m run. Afeter the second of the third set your are in high lactate. It´s impossible to run this workout without longer recover than 1:1 ratio.

I give you one real example. Do you know who was Fermin Cacho, 1500m olympic winner, eurpean champion, sub 3:30. His coach used to run one late interval session to test him for 1500m. The workout consists in 3X1000m at Cacho´s 1500m pace. Very fast indeed and very long, each set long, and the total workout 3000m very long because exceeds to 1500m run distance, but one very good workout, top of the specific. Do you know how lenght recovery needed Fermin Cacho, how much time his coach give him between each 1000m set. 11 minutes of walk recovery that he is able to complte this very difficult workout, but a good specific one.

Do you want to know how many time Rui Silva used to do in between 2X1000m+1X500m+1X300m, that is a 1500m specific workout ? 8 minutes of recovery.

Do you want to let me know that they can be more productives with 1:1 ratio that what they were with long ratio recovery ?

In both cases, Rui and Cacho eventually they were best runners than Marius Bakken whatever. Rui did run several times against Marius in 1500m as well as 3000m flat ansd he did win everytime. Rui confesses me that Marius couldn´t win over him never. This remembers me Carlos Lopes when in 1984 before LA olympic marathon they ask him: Don´t you fear Alberto Salazar, he is so strong and he run in his country. Do you think that i ever let Salazar beat me in US ? I don´t. He didn´t really.

You can use the intreval it pleases you, but i tried to argue why in this specific long race pace intervals, why longer recovery lenght intervals is more productive, it´s because anaerobics. You couldn´t say why short recovery lenght is more productive. You just say can be done, ok let´s admit that can be done with short recovery buit what´s the benefit to do 1:1 than 2:3 or 1:2 whatever ?

Hello Antonio!

A very fundamental question to you.

Why is it that some can only run 16.30 5k while others can do 13.15? Both are doing high level training.

What exactly is it that the 13.15 runner have and not the 16.30?

Is lack of bacic speed?

Is it muscle fibers?

Is it smaller lungs VO2max?

Mental bariers?

Low muscle strength?

No springy muscles?

Activity in childhood?

What exactly is it this talent that Regalo, Domingos, Mamede, Silva, Lopes, Baumann, Bakken, Cacho, Schade, Zatopek, Viren, Vaatainen and yourself have and not

the 16.30 runner do not have?

When I go to the track I see all this different abilities even inside the same training groop. Can a top coach like you or Canova with iteligent training bring for example an 18min 5k runner down to 13.20? or is this just for a few extreme talents?

Thank you for presentation of the portugese system

You need to search your questions on science biology, sport physiology, phychology, socilogy, environement whatever.

I´m just one distance coach that my training approach in based in training methodology.

I don´t know to answer your question, and i really don´t take time to find out what´s the reason some are faster than others.

As coach my task is to find out what´s the best training that one particular runner shall do to performance progress attempt.

One thing i might garantee. Everybody that is wealthly, be fast or not, is trainable, with organised stimula that what´s training is all about, everybody can be fast.

This morning, among other my runners, i coach one early fat individual that when i accept to coach him at his 39 years old he was 80kilo weight and he did 51min/10k. After 3 years of training he did the 10k in 38:20, the HM in 1:23 aand his marathon debut in 2h59min. This is one example that everybody might do some perfromance progress to a certain limit, depending of his own talent.

Antonio,

You answered every persons question but mine. Perhaps you are considering my question, or prefer not to answer.

I imagine you agree that recognizing fatigue is an important part of training. The greatest liability I have come to recognize through the years is not knowing how to recognize types of fatigue, what to ignore and what not to ignore and subsequently how to respond.

I appreciate your insight on training and hope that you might share your ideas on this subject with me.

Thanks Kindly.

Mike

Antonio, thanks very much for this fantastic thread.

What you have written down reminds me a lot of some good training groups in the UK in the 1980s, which I was lucky to be part of, and a lot that has been written by UK coaches.

When we discuss recovery ratios, some common figures used to be quoted in the UK, but these were all for SHORT reps (relative to race distance). We'd use things like this...

800: 2:1 recovery e.g. 6x200 [1min]

1500m: 1:1 recovery e.g. 8-10x400 [1min]

3000: 0.5 rec e.g. 8x600 in 1:42, 45sec rest

5000: 0.25 rec e.g. 6x1000 in 3:00, 45 sec rest (100 jog)

These would all be tough workouts, maybe done in springtime; the recovery was definitely incomplete and they might feel as tough as a race. For easier sessions it's very common to take twice the recovery above.

When a rep becomes more than about 1/4 of the length of the race, it starts to get tougher. You start to need a LOT more recovery.

"Descending distance" is very popular here, also known as a "speed endurance" workout. So, after a while doing things like 24x200 or 10x400 at 1500m pace, you move to sessions like...

1000 [8min]; 700m [6min]; 600 [5]; 2x400 [3min]

In practice nobody worried much about the recoveries; you aim for a "full recovery" and go when you're ready. The idea was to lengthen the distance run at race pace from week to week, maybe getting a bit faster on the last few reps.

In my best season at 1500, 1500-pace work was there from January onwards (for a July peak); the "length of the longest rep" built up from February to May; but I wasn't as tough as Cacho and could never do 3x1000! The 'descending distance' approach is a little easier mentally. Was this used in Portugal?

--

We also never really used the General/Special/Specific terminology used by you and Renato Canova, but I can see it was all there.

Antonio Cabral wrote:

I don´t think so. I think that what you say is an absurd somehow.

First of all, your example is not correct. 3k pace workout is specific for 3k run event but IT´S NOT for a 10k run for a 10k event. 3k pace for a 10k run it´s not specific it´s special, because it´s too distance from 3k race pace target event. Specific is everything paced exactly on race pace or 98-97% or 102-105%. This is yout first mistake of specific workout interpretation, one misunderstand.

I think I didn't explain myself well enough. What I meant is that when training for events in the 3k-10k range, a 1:1 ratio is appropriate when doing longer (800-1600) intervals. I gave the example of 6x800 at 3k pace for a 3k runner training for a 3k race, not a 10k.

Of course, I also understand runners need to train at paces faster than their goal pace. As you stated, for a 10k runner, 6 x 800 at 3k pace would not be specific to the 10k, but it would still have value

Antonio,

I have enjoyed reading your comments in this thread and others on here regarding Portuguese training methodology and recently also this article on Rui Silva:

http://www.britishmilersclub.com/bmcnews/2002spring.pdf

I was wondering if/how this type of training might be adapted in European countries where the winters are more severe than Portugal and track work might not be possible? Can the long reps take place on road/woodland loops? Might the short reps be interpreted through a fartlek system?

Many thanks!

Look More Closelerly wrote:

Do you have a means or method of assessing where someone is in regards to their peak shape condition? How do you know if someone is at 70% 85% or 95%? Do you use a test or are there specific markers you look for? Comparison to previous results? What if you have no previous results to compare to.

Antonio Cabral wrote:

Good question.

I need some time to write it because my english it´s poor.

However i want to answer two aspects.

One is what´s 100% shape ? The shape you are when you do one PB is 100% shape related to that distance event.

Second, you ask me "What if you have no previous results to compare to ?". In this case the best solution is to start one good traininbg programme and try one first competition.

I will continue.

I wanted to bring this question and partial answer back up.

i didn´t answer your question, not because out of consideration, but because i have nothing to add.

Might be that in my training method i do only 2 hard workouts per week, sparsly with 2 days at least, i rarely use 3 workouts per week and if i see the need of more hard training i prefer to expand the 2 week workouts, than to violate my 2 week workout norm.

All the other days out of workouts the runner does aerobic runs and 1 day or 2 the following hard workouts the aerobic runs eventually are just easy regeneration that able fatigue recovery.

While train hard, fatigue is normal, natural, what needs to be done when fatigue is present is take the needed period with easy training to recovery from fatigue, and other aspects out of training that influence fatigue: sleep, good eat and drink, rest, and if the fatigue is for some problem like sickness, or lower level of iron, minerals, vitamins or verey other nutrient, it might require something suplementary AND LEGAL to avoid the poor condition.

The problem it´s overtraining that requires long lenght rest and the decrease or avoid hard training and sometimes it´s necessary to avoid every kind of training for some period.

The feedback of the runner, the skill of the coach and the diagnostic of the doctor, all this is interesting to prevent overtraining an sometgimes to do the right program to prevent high level of chronic fatigue.

Excuse me if i misundertood something, but i gues that i could do my opinion anyhow.

However I was waiting your answer to my question. The question is this one.

If the interval target is to run one specific interval at race pace event, and we know that the recovery lenght is not just second interest as might be long enough to permit the runner quite complete recovery in between sets, DO YOU SEE ANY BENEFIT, ANY INTEREST TO DO SHORT RECOVERY LENGHT, or your 1:1 ratio than LONGER RECOVERY ?