Mr. Renato Canova: Could You Please Answer a Question About Effective Ways to Improve the Lactate Threshold?

I have read in runners world, that ''JD says that there is no point in running over 70 miles a week''. And I had allways thought that when running experts, cite that fact. They are not looking at all the data. Or they are just reading into the data what they would like. I had a gut level feeling that, people had miss read your ideas about training. And cited part of one of your studys to prove there point. I am very glad, that this feeling I had was true. You should make a point of letting more people know the whole picture when it comes to the effects of training. And what they can or cannot gain from doing high milage. Or high intensity. Or I fear that your going to end up being, accused of being the guy who told eveyone to run low miles and easy. Which for some reason ended up produceing proformace levels that where lower then people would have liked. Imagen that, you no matter what you do it turns out that you have to do that style of training with 100% commetment to get to where you want to go as a runner.

I fear that the great work that you are doing to explain training theory, will be lost in the shuffle. As lazy people who find that they cannot run low miles, easy. And still race as they would like, will blame you. And the fact that ''JD'' says there is no need to run over 70 miles a week. And the true information and vlue of training theory will get tossed out with aloing with the whole notion that you dont have to work hard to be a good runner.

Bottom line is that I think that you need to make sure to let people know know that. There is more then one road to the top, and you have to work hard at whatever path you cuse, be it high miles, or high intensity. From reading runners world I allways get the idea that you felt that one only need run 30 miles a week, with a three mile tempo, a few 400m reps to run to the top.

Are you talking to me or to Jack Daniels, PhD?

I don't recall ever saying that people should just run 30 miles per week and expect to reach their potential.

I tell high school coaches often that they need to not focus on intervals until their kids are running 50 miles per week. Actually, if I could be assured that the kids wouldn't hammer every single run like a lot of collegiate kids do, I would say that running 60-70 miles per week without much fast, sustained interval work is better for them than running 40-50 with lots of intervals. I like the idea of juniors and seniors running 60 miles per week with lots of aerobic and anaerobic threshold training and sprints, uphill and on the flats, instead of lactic acid reps such as repeat 400s.

For collegiate runners, they better realize that if they aren't hitting at least 65 miles per week, they are not going to come close to what is possible. In my opinion, 70-80 miles per week should be a goal for people seeking to run well, and more than that for people who are wanting to hit the elite levels in college and beyond.

The training plan needs to include more than just putting in mega-mileage slow. Figure that 75 miles with fast aerobic, sprints, and a small amount of max vo2 for a junior and senior in college is better than 100 miles slow with 400m reps in high volume.

No matter how you do it, you gotta reach some high volume, include some fast aerobic running (AT to LT), and sprints plus Max VO2 for mature runners. So simple, yet so many people want to train like runners did in the 50s, but without the high volume of the 60s and 70s. Doesn't work.

Moderate volume training, say 70 miles per week with the mix previously mentioned, done for several weeks, is a lot better training than 100 miles per week done with no regard to balance.

Tinman

Tinman wrote:

I do not intentially split aerobic and anaerobic threshold (aka Lactate Threshold) into zones. All is continous, I contend, in the energy spectrum.

For example, in my view, running 4 miles at 4 mmols (LT) is equal to 8 miles at 2 mmols (Aerobic Threshold) is equal to 16 miles run slowly at 1 mmol. Tinman

I do not follow this. The body reacts to most training in an exponential fashion rather than a linear fashion as your statement suggests.

Back to the original post...

"...I have seen your other works where your athletes use long threshold work like 4x5K..."

I believe Renato has said this is for the marathoners and is run at marathon effort. 20k of intervals is very doable if done at marathon effort, even better if done as part of a long run, though very difficult. As far as intervals at "tempo" pace I've seen suggestions on Marius Bakken's site for up to 50 minutes worth of intervals (like 5x10min). Take a look at Rod Dehaven's training (www.allsportrunning.com), and you'll see lots of 3-4x2mile repeats and 2 x 4mile repeats. Take a look at Inubushi's training (http://www.bunnhill.com/BobHodge/TrainingLogs/inubushi.htm) you'll see 4x5k at 15:30, 4x3k at 8:50, 15x1k at 2:56-8. So as far as long intervals go it looks like a total of 6-8 miles at around halfmarathon effort and 10-12 miles at around marathon effort seems to be pretty successful.

Alan

Hallo, I'm the REAL Renato Canova, not the moron answering at the beginning of the post. I'm now in Zurich, and was around for some meetings (Stockholm, Heusden) where I could also see some american runner. You are improving in your competitivity, to meet the best runners of the world is the correct way for growing overtaking your current limits. Regarding the question of the post, I try to explain the system that I use for increasing the Threshold.

1) If I want to investigate about the Threshold of an athlete, normally I find a level about 7-8% lower than the pace of 5000m PB (if a specialist of this event), or the same level of the pace of HM (if a good specialist of Marathon and HM). So, the level of AnT is different, according to the different attitude and the different type of training that athletes use.

2) If my problem is to INCREASE the AnT, my behavior must be different according the type of athlete that I want to train.

When I speak about 4x5km, for example, I don't speak about AnT, but about AEROBIC THRESHOLD, that is the Threshold most important for a Marathon runner. My goal is, at first, to increase the AnT of about 3-5% during a period of 4-3 months before the competition, but secondly is to increase the Aerobic Threshold (AT) bringing it very close the level of AnT. When the difference between the 2 thresholds is about 5%, the athlete is resistant enough for beeing prepared for running a good Marathon.

Instead, if I have the goal to increase the AnT of an athlete running, for example, 5000m, the system must be different. I have to use a combined work that has different means : short and continue distance at 95-98% of the race pace (4-6 km, that we call "fast short continue run") ; long intervals at a speed of 2-3% faster than the race pace (for ex., 4 x 2000 rec. 3 min, or 3 x 3000 rec. 3 min, for an amount of about 2 times the length of the race); medium intervals at a speed of 3-5 % faster than the race pace, using very short intervals (f.e., 3 sets of 6 x 500m rec. 45 sec. between tests, 4-5 min between tests). The combined action of these workouts provokes an increment in the level of AnT. You must support all this type of work with a very big volume of full Aerobic run (70-85% of the pace of the race, if you are a specialist of 5000m). Without this, the AnT grows in short time, but the athlete cannot preserve his shape for long time.

Still different the situation for a specialist of 800m. In this case, we must understand if the athlete is a sprinter (Konchellah, Juantorena, Mutua), a full 800m runner (Kipketer, Bungei, Sepeng) or a middle-distance runner (Coe, Cram, Yiampoy). In any case, the phylosophy of training is the same : to use short tests (300-600m) for a total amount of 3-4 km, at the pace of 90-95% of the pace of the race (for an athlete running 1:44, 13.0 pace every 100m, 90% is a pace of 14.3 (600m in 1:25.8) and 95% is a pace of 13.65 (300m in 41.0), increasing step by step number of repetitions, cutting recovery time. In these cases, long run has only the mean of regeneration, and is not important for the final goal.

Good luck to the US runners this night in Zurich (and of course to Shaheen also...)

Thank you, the real Renato Canova.

Ignore those morons who bring you and your athletes down.

PUSH IT REAL GOOD!

-SALT & PEPPA

You ought to try and dig up the original HADD thread, where you should find more than enough info to get you going.

Monty

Oh thank you very much Mr. Canova for the excellent reply.

Best wishes,

Leonard

Renato, if I may ask about this 5000m part as I am a 5K specialist.

These sessions, if I read them right, seem extraordinarily difficult for a runner to complete.

For instance, you said long intervals at a pace 2-3% faster than race pace (5000 meter pace) and gave the example of 3x3000m. But let us look at a very top athlete attempting to do this session, like Gebrselassie.

12:39.36 is a pace of 2:31.87 per 1,000 meters, or 7:35.16 at 3,000 meters. So, (and perhaps I am simply reading your post incorrectly), Gebrselassie would do 3 7:35 3,000's with just 3 min. recovery between!

This I think is quite impossible. I was looking at those workouts above and, with the possible exception of the 600m workout, I do not think I could finish any!

A man named John Kellogg used to post here a lot about lactate threshold training, and the example of trainig he gave were sessions such as 10-15 repetitions of 3 minutes at about 5K pace+30 secs./mile or a 25-30 min. continuous run at this pace.

It was stressed that the Anaerobic Threshold (or Lactate threshold, although I believe they are slightly different) is a steady state, comfortably hard effort with a steady value of lactic acid (4 mmol).

Those sessions you gave above would seem to be much harder than a steady state effort, comfortably hard.

Please let me know what you think and I thank you for your great contributions to this board.

Bumping this for Renato to see.

John Andrews

First Gebre 12:39:36 that´s a single world record, once in a lifetime. You may not based your calculations in a once in a life time or an old PB and consider that Race Pace to estimate averages. This is the first mistake people do. They calcul race Pace by their PB´s and often they are not in that physical condition. In the Gebre´s case will be more realistic to calculate a RP around 13:00 min.

About Gebre workouts:

<>...Jim Denison, Haile's official biographer notes: "I think it's key that the altitude factor is stressed here and remember the hills, too. His coach Jos Hermens feels that Haile's great training will never be appreciated because the times are so effected by altitude. Hermens cited the following as an impressive track workout Haile once did before Atlanta in 1996, of course again considering altitude: 5 x 1000 at 2:28; 4 x 400 at 55; 3 x 300 at 40; 2 x 200 at 25." ...>>

Secondly Renato said "FOR EXAMPLE" he didn´t said "in your case particular you are able to do". Do you know what are an examples? That´s figurative. Also Renato said"long intervals ..."for an AMOUNT of aabout 2 times the lenght of the race" he didn´t said "PRECISELY for 2 times the lenght of the race".

Third, 5000m top class runners (12:36 to 13:12 they are able to do at sea level 3X3000m with 3min interval close 8:00. I´ve seen 20 years ago (!) portuguese Fernando Mamede (13:11/27:13 PB´s) do 3X3000 sub 8:00. he did that naturally...

Four. To prove that each individual that´s a individual case, Carlos Lopes (13:16/27:16) wasn´t able to do 3X3000 faster than 8:20 average.

Race pace for Gebrselassie is not 13:00 for 5,000. I used his PB as an example that even when in sub-12:40 shape, I am sure he could not do 3x3000m in 7:35. He races tactical 3K's in 7:30-7:33. He could not do 3 of them that fast with 3 min. recovery between. Geb just ran 12:55 in London and is preparing for the Olympics. He ran the second half of the 10L last year in 12:58. He is in far better shape than 13:00, or he would not bother showing up at the Olympics.

And when Renato gives training examples, he also uses an athete's PB. That's just the way you do it.

No need for petty insults. I know what an example is. The example provided, for any runner, seems dubious. I do not know of any runner, elite, national class, or otherwise, who could do 3 repetitions of 60% of their race distance with just a 3 minute recovery. And I never said anything about the volume of the work. 2 times 5000m equals 10,000 meters. 3x3000m adds up to 9,000m. I was not using the example of a 10,000m worth of volume session.

8:00 for 3,000 is not 7:35 for 3,000, no matter how you try to twist the numbers. 8:00 is 13:20 5,000 pace, lower than Gebrselassie's 10K pace. Take the example of Dan Browne, Tim Broe, or Jon Riley, all runners in the 13:16-13:20. range. They could assuredly NOT complete a session of 3K reps in under 8:00.

Riley ran an indoor 3K this year in 7:57 tying up. Guys like Webb and Ritz, also runners with PB's in the 13:20 range (or in Webb's case, the potential thereof) did some indoor races around 8:00 for 3K (Ritz ran maybe 7:58 as a I remember).

So your example is of no value.

If you read Mr. Antonio Cabral's articles on Portuguese training from Marius Bakken's site, Mamede is an outlier who was notorious for unbelievable workouts and comparatively pedestrian races.

Same example. Cabral noted that Lopes never did a sub-60 second quarter in his life during a workout. Notoriously UNDER-achieving workouts, fantastic races.

The original question I had for Renato is that the workoput he provided as THRESHOLD work seemed instead to be examples of VERY intense VO2 MAX work.

I mentioned that John Kellogg gave lactate threshold or anaerobic threshold workouts as continuous runs of 25-30 minutes or repeats of 3-4 minutes with short recoveries at a pace roughly corresponding to a range of 10,000 pace+ 15 seconds per mile or so (faster or slower in this range depending on rep distance).

But Renato's "Threshold" pace was cited as substantial work at faster than 5,000 meter race pace.

So there is either a divergence in definition of terms or a bid difference in the training of the system.

John...

X_runner IS the same Cabral you are quoting from Bakken's site.

Thought you'd like to know.

of course Lopes was able to do it faster, he ran 3x3000m under 8:20 in a race(27:16=~8:10 per 3000m) i guess he simply didnt run it faster in training, the same with the 400s, you say he never couldnt do a session of 400s under 60secs-fact is he ran a 1500m in 3:40 so he was able to do 4 400s under 60sec without any rest.

My guess is he didnt like anaerobic training very much and and like you say in your article on mb.com:"the training has to be inside of you", he simply didnt push himself to the max in repetiton in interval training, what is probably one of the reasons for his success that he was very carefull with not building too much lactate(like Bowerman advocated).You say he did 30-40min tempo runs at 2:50/km pace, 8:20 is 2:46-7/km.

3x3k with 3min rest@5k-pace seems a bit too hard for me, usually 2x3k with 2-3min rest can determine 5k-pace but may be Mamede never raced his best , could have run much faster than 13:11.

John Andrews:

I am guessing that Renato was mixing his race distances. In previous posts, Renato has discussed using paces in the 2-5% faster than marathon race pace for marathoners and 3-5% faster than half-marathon pace for 5k-10k runners. I think this is a simple mistake due to writing quickly and in a language that is not his primary one.

The concept, as I took it, is not different in context than that of JK, Dr Daniels, or me. Simply put, running some longer tempo runs or long reps at a modest pace (near half marathon race pace or the equivalent (I said 8% slower than 5k pace, for example) is one good possiblity. Doing reps at 12k to 10k pace is another good possibility for improving LT.

Tinman

John Andrews

You justify your discussion with me with my own articles. You made me go to Antonio Cabral articles - my own articles really and read myself ! That´s funny...

You take wrong "chrono" conclusions, eventually the same as you take "insults" from my last post.

First of all it was not my intention to offend you ! Eventually you took my opinions as insultes, due to my poor english. Excuse me. I´m not an expert in Sheakespeare language neither in its US version. Thus don´t read that as an insult really.

I do no an attorney for Renato to ask the questions you ask him. That´s up to him to ask and clarify hs own ideas.

My original intention that´s to help in doubts that you get but that i don´t - you see…

One side I understand your doubt about different workouts to improve AnT – that´s the original question for Renato and also I know what´s the key of your doubts. Just think of that. If the improvement of a certain physiologic quality that´s the just to train specifics workouts in the same pace that it occurs, then if your target that´s to improve your 5000m PB – you were training specifics only at Race Pace. You may understand that LT improvement that´s also to do 3X10X500m in 1:15/1:25 with 45 intervals for a 27:40 10000 runner specialist(also an example).

Thus Tinman he is wrong saying that Renato wrotes quickly in a different language than his own and thus the mistake. Simply Tinman and didn´t understood. Eventually the workout paces and workout total set distances that are a bit inflated in long reps as 3X3000m example. You see Renato deals with world top clsss runners and forgets the average runners. Eventually 3X3000m in 102-105% RP that´s more typical workout for a 10000 specialist. But the whole idea remains correct in Renato post. That 3X3000m and all the rest workout exampoles they are also AnT goal targets, not just effective for that LT purpose, because as Tinman said recently “all works in a continuum”.

John. My only intention it that I judge "wrongly" taught i know the answers to your doubts - thus i try to clean your doubts about the workout paces but you get more doubts...Excuse me, i was wrong. You are the kind of the guy that asks the questions but he is waiting a certain "kind of answer" not other opinions - as my own, and if the other opinion that´s not what you expect you feel offended.

Finnaly, from all those Webbs, Ritz, Alan Webb he is not a 5000m-10000 specialist either so he isn´t a 5000m specialist in that classification or am I wrong again ?

I hope that Renato clarifies all that your questions, better than myself for sure.

Antonio,

There are many of us who value your messages greatly, as well as those of Renato.

I wish you would post your messages much more often.

tinman, my athletes have been feeling like they're almost having to walk their Aerobic THreshold runs at your prescribed pace i.e. plus 1min per mile from 5k pace. Also, their short tempo runs also feel to easy using your prescribed pace of .93. Consequently, I've allowed them to carry on running at the pace they feel comfortable at which is alot faster. It's not affecting their recovery. Any reaasons why I should hold them back? any reasons why their tempos feel too easy?