Marcus says that 200s after a tempo are USELESS. Completely contradicts TINMAN training

UmbrellaMans wrote:

Listened to the final surge podcast where Jonathan Marcus says that 200s after a tempo are useless because the body is too tired.

Because who tries to run a fast last 200 at the end of their race when they are tired?

Got to love it when young guys think they have the world all figured out.

Everybody should know by now that Marcus will say outrageous things on Twitter and podcasts to stir the pot and get a reaction out of people.

That being said. Marcus has had few, if any, athletes stick with him as a coach for any extended period of time and has had very limited success. Not somebody to look towards for coaching advice IMO.

Depends on what the main element the runner is trying to develop. He's said this on his podcast with Magness and they were discussing doing before or after tempo runs depending on what they are trying to develop. If the tempo is most important, do the tempo first. If developing speed is most important, do the 200s first. They were saying you should be most fresh for what you are trying to develop.

depends on context wrote:

Depends on what the main element the runner is trying to develop. He's said this on his podcast with Magness and they were discussing doing before or after tempo runs depending on what they are trying to develop. If the tempo is most important, do the tempo first. If developing speed is most important, do the 200s first. They were saying you should be most fresh for what you are trying to develop.

Tinman does the same. Sometimes he prescribes the faster stuff, like 150s or 200s first and then adds on a tempo/threshold afterwards. Most workouts however are tempo first, speed later.

Drew Hunter had a monster kick (outkicked Grant Fisher twice) from a large distance despite having lower 200/400m speed than GF. Whenever Drew started his kick 500-600m out, he was able to destroy GF.

So is the "max speed development" really what distance runners should strive for? Hunter was great at running fast for a long duration at the end of races, even tho he didn't have the best max speed. But he was literally running the highly feared sprint finish of Fisher out of him and ended up beating him.

Same with runners like Bekele - he was able to kick like a monster not because he has 47s or so 400m speed, but because he was so strong aerobically that he barely produced any lactate at 13:00/5k 27:00/10k pace. Then he was able to close very close to max speed in around 51-52 and destroy the others who already produced lots of lactate just hanging on the quick pace.

Math Wannabee wrote:

The more you dig into exercise science the more it should become clear that even the experts know absolutely nothing in terms of the entire system. Just take one look at this metabolic pathways map. We focus on VO2 and Lactate threshold because those are parameters we can measure in the lab.

http://www.metabolic-pathway.com/fullMap.html

Why does that map contain photosynthesis? I'd like to run a solar-powered marathon.

my 2c wrote:

Math Wannabee wrote:

The more you dig into exercise science the more it should become clear that even the experts know absolutely nothing in terms of the entire system. Just take one look at this metabolic pathways map. We focus on VO2 and Lactate threshold because those are parameters we can measure in the lab.

http://www.metabolic-pathway.com/fullMap.html

Why does that map contain photosynthesis? I'd like to run a solar-powered marathon.

Because it's a map of all life, not just a map of humans. The point remains.

You think that whether a runner does strides after a tempo run is going to make any difference at all in performance? Interval workouts are where speed is developed.

Where did you see Bekele’s lactate values published?

SDSU Aztec wrote:

You think that whether a runner does strides after a tempo run is going to make any difference at all in performance? Interval workouts are where speed is developed.

It entirely depends on what you mean by strides. In the context of this thread, the Tinman 200s are basically a mini version of an interval workout, which you start in a semi fatigued state post tempo run. It seems likely to me this has some advantage effect to be gained for your aerobic power.

This thread is getting confusing because people are tossing around the word "speed" without defining what they mean. We have about 3 different contexts floating around right now.

Math Wannabee wrote:

This thread is getting confusing because people are tossing around the word "speed" without defining what they mean. We have about 3 different contexts floating around right now.

Jmar does that on purpose. Takes ambiguous words and terms, which are plentiful in the running world, purposely assumes the wrong meaning even though the correct meaning is quite clear, and then makes some vacuous point about a training philosophy supposedly being wrong.

Since the obvious responses have been made, I've got a question. Let's say a 5k - marathoner wants to increase top end speed. Let's say for some reason they want to work on this after tempos. Let's say for some reason they want to do 200's. Not ideal, but can't we all agree that if a runner who has been neglecting speed work did this, they actually would develop speed?

What proof does jmar have that speed can't be developed at all when fatigued? I think it's an absurd idea. Nothing is that black and white. We can agree it's not ideal but when we are talking about distance runners, not much speed is necessary. A world class 5k/10k guy needs a low 50 400m. That's not fast enough to necessitate true optimal speed work.

Canova simulated a 5k and 10k race in elite Kenyan athletes, and found out that in the middle of the race (~13 min and ~27 min) they were in a lactate steady state. This was pointed as one of the main reasons for the African dominance, since their lactate levels remain steady and don't go up higher and higher like for most athletes. And then when comparing the final kilometer, Canova's test showed that the runners who were at lower lactate during the race (e.g. steady at 4 mmol) were able to produce more lactate and kick harder at the end.

Essentially these African's are able to finish very fast in both championship and fast races, and often their last lap is very close to their self-reported 400m PR (say closing in 51 when 400 PR is 49).

I agree that this is very interesting data, and should be explored more in a controlled environment. Would also be good if Canova himself could jump in here.

You happen to remember where you read it? I’d be interested to check it out. As I recall East Africans tended to have a higher steady state than most others, like 6mmol versus closer to 4mmol for most others at ~10K pace.

Remind me again of how JMar's teams fared while he was a college coach.

just saying... wrote:

I actually think Tinman's athlete's have greatly underperformed.

LOL. "Greatly" underperformed, no less. Any competent coach would have had that group (that wasn't offered good pro contracts elsewhere) winning U.S. championships by now?

I really don't like to throw words like this around but JMar is a total loser. I'd tell him to quit coaching but he's not really a coach, is he... he's just a guy with a Twitter account and half a dozen of followers.

Get a haircut and a real job, you loser.

You happen to remember where you read it? I’d be interested to check it out. As I recall East Africans tended to have a higher steady state than most others, like 6mmol versus closer to 4mmol for most others at ~10K pace.

Not the original poster, but I've seen the document. Starting on the second page, you'll see three athletes progressing through a race simulation workout throughout a season. The first athlete has a simple 5x1000 with progressively more stable lactate values as the season progresses. The second athlete runs 5x2000 and ends his third and final session with 1200m "free" and is able to spike his lactate quickly well beyond any of the race pace values from earlier in the season. The third athlete runs 4x1200 + 800m max. In this third case, we see a clear progression in the ability to kick as the lactate levels leading up to the final 800m stay lower. So, the first session, the athlete is already capped out at 14.6mmol and can't generate any more lactate or speed for the final 800m. By the second session, the athlete goes into the kick at 13.3mmol and can generate some more lactate and a faster 800m. By third and final session, the athlete begins the kick off of just 10.8mmol and can summon a dramatic surge of lactate and consequently a much more aggressive final 800m.

Link here:

A bit ironic, but it is actually in Magness book - Science of Running. Magness is the long-year podcast partner of JMar and one of his best, if not the best, friend.

He wrote an article about it here:

When not with JMar Magness is actually quite smart and writes some good stuff. It's just the combination of them gets toxic and they really get something out of calling other coaches dumb and stupid and making fun of their training methods.

If a world class 1500m to Marathon man, maybe you do your ten mile tempo runs a bit under 47:30. If you're a 15:30 to 1630 5K XC runner, maybe you do your ten mile tempo runs a bit under 57:30.

Ten mile tempo runs, for me, more times than not means sore Achilles toward the end and after run. Life is risk/reward. Doing sprints immediately after tempo runs exponentially increases probability of Achilles rupture. I prefer doing sprints in a separate workout. If you gals & guys want to do 200m sprints after tempo runs, you will do what you want to do.