I should have added, base until you are around 4:05-10 per km, then 4 weeks of sharpening, followed by 1 week taper to complete your approach?
dancan complete?
There are no phases in the Dancan system of mine . The ' sharpening' goes on with the 3 main factors to the result in a well ' brewed' mix all year round . The volume stays quite the same all year round like I use to call " The never ending story" . The runner just keeps on improving, and in many cases amazingly fast.
You have continuous sharpening? You are either pushing or pulling one thing at a time and support the others, you can’t do that very well with mixed sessions because the gain from one session is going to reduced by the other.
Are you telling me that your approach is to attempt to improve aerobic engine, anaerobic power, and lactate curve all at the same time all within the same 5/7/10/14 day cycle?
I also thought you said you follow specific training like canova, you can’t do that if you want on an everything thing at the same time?
Trying to understand your approach, help me out here.
20 x 400m @ 5 min per km pace is my maxVO2 pace right now. When I was a national elite, 2:50 min per km was my maxVO2 pace. It's okey with me that you do wonder if I actually understand training.What do I know about it after 14:20 / 29:51 @ 5000m/ 10000m. 3000m 8:20 , 10 miles 49:58 , half 66 min , marathon 2:22 and coached several winners of international bigger races and hundreds of personal bests to runners at all levels from hobbyjoggers to world top elite? 😉🤔🧙♂️
Jan. There is no vo2 max pace. There's an intensity. You cannot run 20x2 mins at vo2 max. That's just 2x20 at your 5k pace, which is nowhere near a vo2 max effort for a fat slob like you now.
From what planet do you come from? 🤔
Coaches or runners normaly of course knows that " VO2 max pace' is just a term defines a pace at 90-100 % of your max pulse. Daniels told that running intervals at 3 k pace and 5 k pace gave no remarkable difference in training effect and therefore he told best to run so called "maxVO2" intervals when less injury and overdoing risk.
By the way, please stop your harassment comments of me. I'm not fat and nowadays not even obese. I have normal weight for my height now. Try to change this your terrible behavior and there can be a good civilized debate here. 🤔😉
There are no phases in the Dancan system of mine . The ' sharpening' goes on with the 3 main factors to the result in a well ' brewed' mix all year round . The volume stays quite the same all year round like I use to call " The never ending story" . The runner just keeps on improving, and in many cases amazingly fast.
You have continuous sharpening? You are either pushing or pulling one thing at a time and support the others, you can’t do that very well with mixed sessions because the gain from one session is going to reduced by the other.
Are you telling me that your approach is to attempt to improve aerobic engine, anaerobic power, and lactate curve all at the same time all within the same 5/7/10/14 day cycle?
I also thought you said you follow specific training like canova, you can’t do that if you want on an everything thing at the same time?
Trying to understand your approach, help me out here.
Well, looks like you misunderstood me, or I misunderstood you? 🤔I don' t use ' mixed sessions' if you mean different purpose with the session in one day? Such sessions are counterproductive if you ask me. What I use in a week is a " mix " of the mainly 3 factors contribute to the final race result. The Dancan system is not a phase system like e.g Lydiard's or Canova's. You saw I put parentheses at ' sharpening' ? What I mean with that the improvement process is an always continued process and the " mixed ingredients" in the week amplifies each other like in a symbiosis.But the ' keyword ' defines the Dancan is 'ENOUGH' , only enough of every important factor to improve and reach the final goal and reduce risk of injury and overdoing. So, I do use 'specific' training but in contrast to phase systems I do it week after week, month after month ,year after year in a well mixed. " brew" .
Are you just running a few workouts here and there -- hills reps and shorter vo2max stuff -- or are you actually running foundational + recovery runs as well? How many miles/kms are you actually running per week? Are you doing any cross training? And why not run a time trial and see where you're actually at?
Hello snowy! 😃 Just like the weather here in my Sweden now. Lot's of snow and cold ..... the hillreps I have done alot of has been there to help me faster reach some kind of quite good ' ground shape' to now move on to serious Dancan System training. Because my method needs quality workouts year around I have now went indoors and hitting the treadmill daily. Feels great! I'm very well used to treadmill running and don't feel it's boring. The winter back in 1988 I did only treadmill running and got in my running careers best shape ever and won the Gothenburg Sylvestre race 10,55 k ( with a long tough hill included) in time 31:27 min ( about 2:58 / k ) . So now then I'm doing easy steady runs and faster LT2 thresholds and maxVO2 intervals. Last Sunday I ran 8 x 1000m threshold @ 6 min with essy walkrest 2 min and yesterday I ran 60 min easy ( 7:30 min / k) . I' m very happy with that 60 min easy run sustained because it's the longest I have done in many years. Everything feels great so far and today I plan a maxVo2 interval at 5 k pace 20 x 400m @ 2 min ( 5 min per km pace) . Now it's easy to keep consistency in my training when a pensioner and can run whenever I want in the days. Great feeling of 'freedom' ......continued...
Today I did 16 x 400m at treadmill @ 2 min with 90 sec easy walkrest. Had planned 20 of them but decided it could be enough with 16 of them this time to not risk overdoing. Felt easy controled and I'm happy so far how my body respond.🧙♂️
Reading some of the criticism in this thread reminds me a little bit of older training threads where somebody shared their views and approach, and some folks piled on with criticism and snark. With JS, some of the criticism may be warranted; I don’t know the validity of his claimed successes, but he is a bit self-aggrandizing and seems to think his approach is particularly novel, which it may be in some narrow ways.
I’m reminded a little of old contributions by tinman and Hadd; while they both attracted a lot of haters for discussing their individual approaches, tinman was self-aggrandizing and brittle while Hadd was more humble and didn’t make potentially exaggerated claims.
I can see some strong similarities between a few aspects of Hadd’s approach, although clearly not with many other aspects. That impression is based partly on Hadd’s voluminous writings, but also the summary one of his amateur masters runners wrote a number of years ago that gave a lot more specific detail than Hadd’s more general discussions.
While distance training is relatively “simple,” there are many different valid approaches, and in my view it can be inordinately difficult to elaborate the fullness of an approach succinctly. Even Jack Daniel’s, who codeified training in a fairly formulaic way for mass consumption, needed lengthy books to do it justice, and I think his actual training with individual athletes under his direct supervision would likely have varied to some degree from that magic formula.
So, to ask JS for a simple “plan” is asking a bit much, in my opinion. I think it’s better to pry out general principals and leave it at that. Which would still give enough grist for the critics to complain about.
I remain undecided on the overall value of JS’s approach, but I will say that two or three of the specific things he’s shared have resonated well with my own experience.
I think it’s better to pry out general principals and leave it at that
What do you think we have been trying but it’s very difficult to actually pin down, a lot of word salad without saying much from his last post, which amounts to I do stuff. With Tinman and Hadd you can describe the principles of what they did when and why however with Jans appoarch it’s the opposite, hence the criticism and why we try and learning, he can’t tell us what the general sessions he would do next week. As you said from hobby jogger to elite the training or approaches are very simple, load is 80%/90% and the other 10% is speculatively you just need to make sure it’s substantial for the athlete
That’s a very ambitious goal for the age group. Sub-20 minutes is age-graded at +/- 84%, which is national class. I can speak from experience that 21-22 minutes is a reachable goal, with decent training. Sub-20 is a VERY different plateau. There’s very few that can hit that, even in the 60-64 age group. From experience you’ll need to run the mileage base, 25-35m/wk won’t really cut it, but +40 will help. And for all the kids out there who snicker, that’s real mileage at our age. And I have my doubts about the interval distance. 600M is more like speedwork, rather than strength work. Speedwork won’t get to 20 min., you need the strength. I might think about a bit longer workout distance, at 4-6 minutes (800-1200M). Best of luck and keep us posted.
I remain undecided on the overall value of JS’s approach, but I will say that two or three of the specific things he’s shared have resonated well with my own experience.
There is nothing "magic" about, just common knowledge ;-)
Reading some of the criticism in this thread reminds me a little bit of older training threads where somebody shared their views and approach, and some folks piled on with criticism and snark. With JS, some of the criticism may be warranted; I don’t know the validity of his claimed successes, but he is a bit self-aggrandizing and seems to think his approach is particularly novel, which it may be in some narrow ways.
I’m reminded a little of old contributions by tinman and Hadd; while they both attracted a lot of haters for discussing their individual approaches, tinman was self-aggrandizing and brittle while Hadd was more humble and didn’t make potentially exaggerated claims.
I can see some strong similarities between a few aspects of Hadd’s approach, although clearly not with many other aspects. That impression is based partly on Hadd’s voluminous writings, but also the summary one of his amateur masters runners wrote a number of years ago that gave a lot more specific detail than Hadd’s more general discussions.
While distance training is relatively “simple,” there are many different valid approaches, and in my view it can be inordinately difficult to elaborate the fullness of an approach succinctly. Even Jack Daniel’s, who codeified training in a fairly formulaic way for mass consumption, needed lengthy books to do it justice, and I think his actual training with individual athletes under his direct supervision would likely have varied to some degree from that magic formula.
So, to ask JS for a simple “plan” is asking a bit much, in my opinion. I think it’s better to pry out general principals and leave it at that. Which would still give enough grist for the critics to complain about.
I remain undecided on the overall value of JS’s approach, but I will say that two or three of the specific things he’s shared have resonated well with my own experience.
Good experienced words there I think.Thanks. The three main ' building stones' in my system are the so called maxVO2 paced shorter interval reps at 5k race pace ( relatively short reps to easily be done weekly without ' overcooking ' the runner) , the so called LT2 paced threshold intervals in the upper segment of the runner's lactate threshold to trigger it to improve effective, and last what I call the aerob power easy steady pace ( LSD by Lydiard) where the runner goes at around 70-75 % of MHR . Then I just adapt the different sessions in the week to the individual runner's needs depending on next coming goalrace.
Thank you Jan, this is what we are looking forward, the rest of the runs are easy are what pace/mhr? Is it a one run a day plan or do you double or triple at all?
Thank you Jan, this is what we are looking forward, the rest of the runs are easy are what pace/mhr? Is it a one run a day plan or do you double or triple at all?
Your welcome. Well, all easy runs are to be easy steady at about Z3 ( about 70-75 % of MHR) as long as they really feels easy steady to the individual runner . If sometimes after a race or workout the runner feels tired , whitch happens to all runners, it's just to adjust the pace to be easier than normal. Then of course the easy pace sometimes will get like a jog the day before or after a race of course.
To my coached hobbyjoggers it's always only single sessions in a day, 3-6 sessions per week ( If they don't want more of course. It's not up to me to decide how much my ' customers' want in volume). When I coach elites it's also up to them how much mileage they want to do . The Dancan functions great at both low and high volume. But what I call " The original Dancan " is on 6 sessions per week, the same I did myself when national elite runner back in the -80s.🧙♂️
Good luck with the goal Jan. My money is on you doing it before end of this year.
Question for the 60-70 year olds posting in this thread. Did you notice a slow decline in your times or was there any sudden fall off at a particular age? I’m about to turn 58 and when I turned 50 I set myself a goal of a sub 18 5K every year till 60. I just barely made it last year with 17:58 (on a very fast course). Resigned myself to the fact I’m gonna get a bit slower every year now. I am definitely taking a bit longer to recover these days. I did start NSM late last year and that has helped me get my volume up with less fatigue so we shall see if I can keep my streak going.
The three main ' building stones' in my system are the so called maxVO2 paced shorter interval reps at 5k race pace ( relatively short reps to easily be done weekly without ' overcooking ' the runner) , the so called LT2 paced threshold intervals in the upper segment of the runner's lactate threshold to trigger it to improve effective, and last what I call the aerob power easy steady pace ( LSD by Lydiard) where the runner goes at around 70-75 % of MHR . Then I just adapt the different sessions in the week to the individual runner's needs depending on next coming goalrace.
What I don’t see yet (recall I have not followed any of your other training discussions) is any clear differentiation - if considered - based on the athlete’s physical disposition (let’s say more FT versus more ST for the sake of discussion), training background (very experienced with excellent aerobic fitness versus young, inexperienced and undeveloped aerobically) and target race distance. Any general comments on those three things?
Good luck with the goal Jan. My money is on you doing it before end of this year.
Question for the 60-70 year olds posting in this thread. Did you notice a slow decline in your times or was there any sudden fall off at a particular age? I’m about to turn 58 and when I turned 50 I set myself a goal of a sub 18 5K every year till 60. I just barely made it last year with 17:58 (on a very fast course). Resigned myself to the fact I’m gonna get a bit slower every year now. I am definitely taking a bit longer to recover these days. I did start NSM late last year and that has helped me get my volume up with less fatigue so we shall see if I can keep my streak going.
Thank you! 🖐🧙♂️
As it feels now I see there will be no problem for me to break 20 min 5 k this year. It's just a question how much sub 20 it will be.If I can stay injury free and healthy it will come true this year. Today I had a nice 60 min easy run @ 7 min / km at the treadmill. Good luck with your goal to keep up your sub 18 ! 🖐🧙♂️
The three main ' building stones' in my system are the so called maxVO2 paced shorter interval reps at 5k race pace ( relatively short reps to easily be done weekly without ' overcooking ' the runner) , the so called LT2 paced threshold intervals in the upper segment of the runner's lactate threshold to trigger it to improve effective, and last what I call the aerob power easy steady pace ( LSD by Lydiard) where the runner goes at around 70-75 % of MHR . Then I just adapt the different sessions in the week to the individual runner's needs depending on next coming goalrace.
What I don’t see yet (recall I have not followed any of your other training discussions) is any clear differentiation - if considered - based on the athlete’s physical disposition (let’s say more FT versus more ST for the sake of discussion), training background (very experienced with excellent aerobic fitness versus young, inexperienced and undeveloped aerobically) and target race distance. Any general comments on those three things?
Well, I love to coach runners with a basic profile of more FT than ST because their muscle fibers of predominant FT can ( in most cases, not all of course with sprinters looking like body builders ) be " transformed " to work as ST but not the other way around.
When coaching very experienced runners at all levels it's also very easy to me to just check their former training and then just " tweak" it the Dancan way. One of many examples of this in my now 10 years of coaching was a very experienced Kenyan elite with a then 2:13:46 marathon best who contacted me and asked what to do to run a 2:09 marathon. I explained to him and coached him 3 months and then he won a big international marathon in 2:10 .
When " transform" a predominant FT aerob weak runner I build them slowly from shorter threshold reps to over time be more stronger to handle longer threshold reps as well. Even the easy steady runs will be developed in the same style. 🧙♂️
a very experienced Kenyan elite with a then 2:13:46 marathon best who contacted me and asked what to do to run a 2:09 marathon. I explained to him and coached him 3 months and then he won a big international marathon in 2:10 .
What I don’t see yet (recall I have not followed any of your other training discussions) is any clear differentiation - if considered - based on the athlete’s physical disposition (let’s say more FT versus more ST for the sake of discussion), training background (very experienced with excellent aerobic fitness versus young, inexperienced and undeveloped aerobically) and target race distance. Any general comments on those three things?
Well, I love to coach runners with a basic profile of more FT than ST because their muscle fibers of predominant FT can ( in most cases, not all of course with sprinters looking like body builders ) be " transformed " to work as ST but not the other way around.
When coaching very experienced runners at all levels it's also very easy to me to just check their former training and then just " tweak" it the Dancan way. One of many examples of this in my now 10 years of coaching was a very experienced Kenyan elite with a then 2:13:46 marathon best who contacted me and asked what to do to run a 2:09 marathon. I explained to him and coached him 3 months and then he won a big international marathon in 2:10 .
When " transform" a predominant FT aerob weak runner I build them slowly from shorter threshold reps to over time be more stronger to handle longer threshold reps as well. Even the easy steady runs will be developed in the same style. 🧙♂️
I’ll admit I’m skeptical that you coached a 2:13 runner to 2:10, but if you did, big kudos to you.
I note you didn’t really answer directly about any of the three potential bases for differentiation so I’ll pose more specific questions to try to better understand your core principles.
1. You prefer coaching FT runners. But if you have an ST runner to coach (and I think this would be a majority of distance runners, and would at the least include the marathon runner you mentioned), do you approach their training differently in any way, and if so how?
2. Does your approach evolve or vary with experience and improvement in aerobic conditioning in any way, or do maintain the same balance of VO2max, LT and easy running regardless of experience?
3. Does your approach vary with target race distance? I really struggle to see any successful coach assign the same type of training to 800-1500 runners and marathon runners.
Sammy Nyokaye 2:13 in Kiisumu , Victor Kipchirchir 2:07 winning Valencia, Duncan Mayo 2:09 in Eindhoven, Elisha Kipchirchir 2:10 winning Nice-Cannes, R.K Mengich 2:10 in his debut Eindhoven and 2:08 in Paris.
Well, I love to coach runners with a basic profile of more FT than ST because their muscle fibers of predominant FT can ( in most cases, not all of course with sprinters looking like body builders ) be " transformed " to work as ST but not the other way around.
When coaching very experienced runners at all levels it's also very easy to me to just check their former training and then just " tweak" it the Dancan way. One of many examples of this in my now 10 years of coaching was a very experienced Kenyan elite with a then 2:13:46 marathon best who contacted me and asked what to do to run a 2:09 marathon. I explained to him and coached him 3 months and then he won a big international marathon in 2:10 .
When " transform" a predominant FT aerob weak runner I build them slowly from shorter threshold reps to over time be more stronger to handle longer threshold reps as well. Even the easy steady runs will be developed in the same style. 🧙♂️
I’ll admit I’m skeptical that you coached a 2:13 runner to 2:10, but if you did, big kudos to you.
I note you didn’t really answer directly about any of the three potential bases for differentiation so I’ll pose more specific questions to try to better understand your core principles.
1. You prefer coaching FT runners. But if you have an ST runner to coach (and I think this would be a majority of distance runners, and would at the least include the marathon runner you mentioned), do you approach their training differently in any way, and if so how?
2. Does your approach evolve or vary with experience and improvement in aerobic conditioning in any way, or do maintain the same balance of VO2max, LT and easy running regardless of experience?
3. Does your approach vary with target race distance? I really struggle to see any successful coach assign the same type of training to 800-1500 runners and marathon runners.
1) Well, I can of course still prove I did the coaching I tell. When I coach a ST runner compared to a FT runner there is basically no difference. Only what I told it's easier to incorporate the longer threshold reps and the easy steady runs to the ST runner.
2) Basically the same balance but the paces improve .
3) Basically the same approach but a middle distancer needs of course additional faster paces and the marathoner needs specific long runs .
Sammy Nyokaye 2:13 in Kiisumu , Victor Kipchirchir 2:07 winning Valencia, Duncan Mayo 2:09 in Eindhoven, Elisha Kipchirchir 2:10 winning Nice-Cannes, R.K Mengich 2:10 in his debut Eindhoven and 2:08 in Paris.
Bunch of lies. The only one of those you coached was Sammy Nyokaye. Who got minutes slower.