Sub 1:50 800m Training

ss wrote:

If you think about it makes a lot of sense that the second lap is more aerobic (this is assuming a normal race. The ones where they go out in 55 and close in 50 might have slightly different results).

During the first lap, your aerobic system takes a while to get to be fully functioning but you have a ton of CP stores and your anaerobic capacity has lots of room. So for the first 45-60 seconds of running you are going to get a lot of energy from anaerobic sources. During the second lap the aerobic system is ready to contribute more energy and the CP and lactate system are not able to continue to generate the same amount of power.

That being said, I don't really see why this matters other than exercise science geeks if the laps are 40/60 or 60/40. How does it change your training?

I do agree with you in part at least but i really want Mr Wellnow to put forward his specific reasoning so i can analyse it.

However, surely the CP stores are not all used up if one does not sprint too much over the first section of the race Saving some of the CP stores for the last part of the race instead when they will be of more use - ala my favourite hat wearer Dave Wottle.

also, there has to be the consideration that a correct warmup will elevate the aerobic system to as near as is possible to that needed during the race.

And there is also the consideration that right now, as i type these words, almost all of my energy requirements are being provided by the aerobic system. When a runner is running there is still this factor going on as well.

In the end it is the second lap that taxes the anaerobic side of things to their maximum and not the first lap. Possibly we should be talking about this maximisation instead?

Sorry, my response was probably half in resonse to your post, and half to those who are terrified of anyone doing speedwork through winter! My fault - I didn't really make that clear.

I still think there is plenty for an 800 runner/coach to learn from Charlie Francis though - there is no doubt he knew a thing or too about pure speed and I would hope everyone would agree that top end speed is a vital ingredient in the mix.

Moving onto a slightly less defensive note, when indoor facilities and warm weather is unavailable and top end speed is not really something that can be safely worked on through the winter, what is the best way for an md runner to get into that speed-work without risking injury? I know so many md runers who spend winter building a great aeorobic base, and doing a lot of threshold work only to have something pop as soon as they try and run anything at race pace come spring.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree about whether aerobic or speed work is harder. Personally I've always found the longer stuff physically easy, and only really a psychological challenge, but then maybe thats just me.

omg i love Dave Wottle so much

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/715483/dave_wottle_at_the_1972_olympics_in_munich_germany/

burlamacco wrote:

Old sub 4 et al: What do you think of this winter training?

Monday: AM Hill sprints / PM Tempo run

Tuesday: Plyometrics and weights

Wednesday: AM Easy run 40 min / PM Fartlek (sth. like 5 x 3 min with 2 min rest)

Thursday: Tempo run

Friday: AM Easy run 40 min / PM sprints or Hills (sth. like 8 x 2 min with 90s rest), one week sprints and the next hills and so on

Saturday: Longjogg 75-90min

Sunday: off

Thanks for your advice.

In general, really good structure. You should be fatigued after the wednesday fartlek, so I would bag the second tempo on thursday and run 50-60 minutes at aerobic threshold. Also agree that Tuesday should include another 40-60 minute run...comfortable pace.

Hills just concentrate on extending the backkick...exaggerate the form so you get the resistance on the full hip motion. It feels a bit strange and will definately slow you down but it is better work for translating to the speed you'll do in the spring.

Be careful building into this regime....I am suggesting upping the mileage load but dont do the increases all at once....very gradual so you have a chance to acclimate.

at some point you knock out another every other sunday and run 13 out of 14 days.

best of luck!

I lived under coaches that really felt strongly about speed work, in consistent and intense doses through the winter. I think they were missing a few points that both he research and the anecdotal evidence of those who have ended up running at elite levels suggest.

1. I see three components of middle distance speed work....pure power, neuro-coordination and reactivity, and speed endurance.

I agree that Pure Power (stimulated through weights and short hill running <25 seconds) should be addressed consistently, and works such different systems that it wont interfere with your basis general aerobic prep work. The nuance is that you have to act like a sprinter -- short, highly intense reps and alot of sitting around resting in between. I see coaches pushing the rest on hill work in the winter and I see injuries and mistimed peeks.

Neuro coordination is another element that you have to address and stimulate through the regime..plyos and drills are meant to focus on quickness, not power. "High Knee" drill over 40 meters what I would notice is toward March how much less my feet would "wobble" when they touched -- I would be in balance, my middle body would start to relax, and the turnover improved. It feels muscular but it isnt....

Speed endurance is the phase that I think the evidence points to saving until near competition. I just dont think you can work in anything near full effort intervals above 200m without expending energy that competes with your aerobic training, and possibly stimulate the enzymatic response that will bring you to mistimed peeks and mistimed stale periods during the competitive season. 3*3*200 at 800m pace is not an appropriate workout for January, unless you want to peek February 15th.

A separate point...

The Muscle hypertrophy response to resistence has a relatively fast response -- muscles are used to being used and torn down on a daily basis and rebuild over a 48 hour period. Other physical systems (blood flow, red blood cell density, capillary developement, mitochondrial density, energy transport systems) all take a longer time to hypertrophy....Thus the idea that you "feature" that training for 9 months of the year, and layer in the last two months of pure work specific to th event you are running...As a young athlete I was impatient, and I wanted to drill fast times in practice to give me more confidence and benchmark my progress...Coach "g" would scream at us "FOCUS" --particularly if we started to hammer an interval, and really hammer into us that you had to "LIVE LIKE A CLOCK" --ie worry about the CONSISTENCY of what we were doing rather than the QUALITY during the dark winter months. Teasing those trigger levels in your body -- AT, LT, -- changes your physiology invisibly and takes time and effort. All the research we do and study of great athletes I think is useful because it lets you adopt the philosophy and have faith in it even when you or your athletes dont feel like you are getting faster in the fall or winter and can't see how a 16 mile run could possibly influence an 800m sprint.

Again, apologies in advance for the rant....

Thanks OS4 - great response.

I agree with you on the speed endurance point from a scientific point of view, but for me as an individual I do like to have the occassional session of speed endurance work - they are in my program once every 3 weeks at the moment. My coach understands I need the psychological benefit I get from those sessions - I like to remember what it's like to do that sort of session to make sure it's not too much of a shock to the system come spring-time.

If I were just a machine I would probably do things differently, but I've come to realise I need to work my head just as much as my body to make sure I train effectively through the year. I think it's important an athlete communicates these things with their coach so that programs address the needs of the individual athlete rather than just copying what others have done in the past. Obvioulsy this is dependant on having a coach who is open minded enough to realise the way they have trained people in the past isn't the only way to go.

I am not sure you CP is really all used up (I am guessing it just falls to contributing some small amount of energy) but I don't think Dave Wottle necessary used them at the end of the race. I am pretty sure he just paced his race better (more even splits) and the guys in front died.

Your warm up helps but look at the studies of people doing interval workouts outs (3-3 versus 5-5). Even during the second interval it takes time(30-60s if memory serves) to get from 50-70% vo2 max (what they are at during the recovery) up to 95%+. I am guessing that their aerobic system is working harder than yours is after your warm up.

The second lap definitely has pushed your anaerobic system to the max. It has peaked and started its decline in ability to generate energy. If you have any way of increasing anaerobic capacity or anaerobic power, you definitely should be doing that.

author name wrote:

Pmoax,

Johnson was and Powell is a 100m runner! How you can suggest training like a sprinter to middle distance runner?

Sprinters haven´t hardly any slow twitches, that´s why they can´t or won´t like to do any steady slow running.

Sure an 800m runner have to do sprinters type training but also in the winter especially, he/she trains almost like long distance runner. If he/she wants to get the level of endurance to there where it should be. It´s a mixture of various paces and hard work.

And those longer race-pace sessions are a waist of time in the winter, those should be 100m (at maximum) reps only. Those you can do much more and, what is more important, without too much of lactate.

ok well you missed the last part where I stated that el guerrouj and powell both started out as soccer players. guerrouj played until 16 and I belive asafa to the same age as well. That means most of their youth they trained the same way. 1500m is not really as much a distance race as it is a middle-distance race so tj's point about people being content having 800m runners train with 10k runners is spot on. The 800m is a race, train for that race not another one.

If those longer sessions are just a waste of time then elaborate more what you can do with 100m and how its benifical. I'm not sure how you would structure that.

Additionally if you would read my post within its context, tell how would you train the lactate system then? The 800 is such a lactate derived race that you are leaving very little time to develop it. One ocassional session like that opposed to cramming in several sessions at the end of the year, tell me which one is going to get better results with a youth.

Very good post, all your posts have been very informative.

But your last comment... I really do not think a 16 mile run would provide any sort of significant benifit to an 800m runner.

Additionally 3X3X200 @ 800m race pace should not be a full effort interval training as you stated, its ~85% of your absolute speed for that distance. I can't tell anything else about that workout because you did not specify rest intervals between the sets or the reps. There are so many other variable besides distance and time that you can manipulate to achieve what your goal is at that point in the season.

I do like what you said about neuro coordination and I belive that aspect is many time overlooked. Weight training, plyometrics, and absolute speed work are very taxing on the nervous system and help train it to improve its effeciency.

Hi Pmoax - I've got a feeling I'm occupying the middle ground between you and several other posters!

I'd suggest that threshold work is the main work adressing the anaerobic demands of an 800 that needs to be done through winter (presuming the athlete isn't doing an indoor season). I personally find that 3 months of tolerence work (having done a bit every few weeks to keep me mentally prepared for them) gets me as far as I can go in that respect. At the moment I'm largely giving myslef the tools to do that tolerence work as well as possible.

For that reason at this time of year I'll be training as follows - technique and top end speed (2 sessions), power (2-3 sessions), threshold work (1-2 sessions), and developing my aerobic system (5-6 sessions).

Some people might say there's not enough aerobic there, but I know that if I just do longer steady runs I lose my speed VERY quickly and I have to dedicate WAY too much time to getting it back and risk injury in doing so. If I could run sub50 of long runs and half a dozen strides slower than race pace a week I might do things differently, but unfortunately I can't!

[quote]tj wrote:

For that reason at this time of year I'll be training as follows - technique and top end speed (2 sessions), power (2-3 sessions), threshold work (1-2 sessions), and developing my aerobic system (5-6 sessions).

quote]

is that within one week or do you use a different durration for your microcycles. what would you define as top end speed and power? and what do you do for threshold work besides tempo runs? sorry for all the questions I'm just trying to get some more insight, it seems like you have a good plan.

Pmoax

My main point of winter training is to make fast twitches more aerobic in nature, of course training the slower ones too without loss of speed and power. In fact in the winter I try to increase the elements of speed like power but also frequent sprints are weekly in my routine. So those 300m reps interrups that aim, those are teaching fast twitches more glycolytic though after some repetitions the aerobic demand will increase.

So that´s why I use shorter reps, just for the race pace familiarty.

Anaerobic capacity takes only short time to train to be at best, compared to the aerobic side.

I´m 27years and did my personal best last summer so this works for me at least.

cheers, so if it isn't all used up at the start, then it would be available for the end or to cover second lap surges. I have to disagree with Wottle not using some at the end of his race - he really needed to find some extra zing as he closed on the finish to continue making up the gap on the Russian. Zing = CP

thanks but i'd love it if you rewrote this paragraph because i'm quite confused. And/or maybe point me to a good study on this.

i'm thinking it only declines if the athlete has gone into lactic overload - this didn't happen in lots of great races like Snell's Olympics and his Modesto Run, Wottle's 800m, and some 1500s like Ovett's World Cup 1977 and Vasala v Keino in the 1972 OG 1500m.

flow,

I'll add to your question, with my own related question. I am still struggling with what a specific ratio of aerobic/anaerobic energy production means.

Isn't the problem in an 800m race something accumulative? How does the acidity of your blood, or level of blood lactate behave, over the two laps?

What I mean to say is, why does it even matter that fast runs are more aerobic than previously thought, or that the second lap is more aerobic than the first, when the real issue is the uncontrolled accumulation of lactate, or H+?

4 months of Base, 4 months of "Strength" -- power endurance, 2 months of Pace to Sharpening, 1 month -6 weeks peek competition,

Old sub 4.

A question for you. you have already outlined a common week for you in your base period. Could you do the same for the strength, sharpening and peaking phases of training. The mon to sunbday type model.

You seem to have great knowledge but another queston. What do you think of frequency of racing? Good/bad?

Great thread!

Anyone have info on the training of the top lads. Anyone like Kipketer, Cruz, Coe, Borza etc.... Specific info would be great. Surely they haven't all kept their training secret.

flow wrote:

wellnow Mr Apple

i'm still waiting for you to prove to me the first lap is more anaerobic than the second. Please provide something and be prepared for a discussion about it. It might not be so cut and dried as the physiology experiments prove.

flow

At all times we must re-synthesize ATP because that is what all living cells use as their energy supply. When we start a race, we initially use Creatine Phosphate to re-synthesize ATP. In an 800m race this CP store is being used withing the first second of the race and it starts to run out within a few more seconds. CP is an anaerobic fuel. Following the CP breakdown, there is also the Adenylate Kinase reaction, which is also anaerobic, but which supplies much less energy.

The third and most important anerobic fuel source for middle and long distance runners is supplies during the breakdown of carbohyrates, muscle glycogen and liver glycogen. During these reactions known as glycogenolysis and glycolysis, phosphates are recycled to supply Glycolytic ATP, sometimes simply refered to (somewhat misleadingly) as glycolysis, and also refered to (in an extreme example of bad science) as "Lactic"

This glycolytic ATP supplies energy very quickly and in large amounts and contributes greatly to the energy requirements of sprints from 60m up to 400m It also supplies a large proportion of the energy in the first lap of an 800m race. In the second lap, the amount of glycolytic ATP is much less, because by then a much larger proportion of the Lactate wich was produced during the first lap is being used as a fuel for aerobic respiration, and a much smaller proportion of glycolytic ATP is being used to fuel muscle contraction.

Mr. Ray wrote:

flow,

I'll add to your question, with my own related question. I am still struggling with what a specific ratio of aerobic/anaerobic energy production means.

Isn't the problem in an 800m race something accumulative? How does the acidity of your blood, or level of blood lactate behave, over the two laps?

What I mean to say is, why does it even matter that fast runs are more aerobic than previously thought, or that the second lap is more aerobic than the first, when the real issue is the uncontrolled accumulation of lactate, or H+?

I don't think that lactate accumulation or even H+ accumulation is the problem in an 800. I think the problem is maintaining running form as much as possible. We all slow down in the finishing straight and how much this happens depends on how well we paced ourselves. If we add ideal pace judgement to ideal fitness we get the ideal race.

But of course there is no such thing as the ideal pace judgement or the ideal fitness, since every race is different.

However, how can we improve running form? The traditional reply has usually been along the lines of improving aerobic and anaerobic conditioning, but I think that these components come normally and naturally in any well trained runner (anyone who runs a lot) The problem as I see it is not one of aerobic/anaerobic balance or conditioning but of improven neural conditioning, that is the ability of a runner to hold concentration for longer, because when concentration starts to wander, you start to work harder and harder while your stride gets shorter and shorter.

This is one reason why long steady runs or even long slow runs are a good idea. You can practice holding your stride together in a much better way than you can when you are running hard. Would it be true to say that Lydiard was anti LSD training in favor of what he called "best aerobic pace" training? I think occasional LSD trips are a good idea, because you can really focus on maintaining a rock solid running style which can be carried over into high intensity work within a few days. The Ethiopians also practice this type of training. I know that Peter Coe was also anti LSD, saying that long slow distance makes long slow runners, but he missed the point. Yes regular LSD trips will bum you out man, but once or twice per week is good, especially after a race or hard workout. In my experience, this works better than lots of steady mileage, which just makes most runners tired.

author name wrote:

Pmoax

My main point of winter training is to make fast twitches more aerobic in nature, of course training the slower ones too without loss of speed and power. In fact in the winter I try to increase the elements of speed like power but also frequent sprints are weekly in my routine. So those 300m reps interrups that aim, those are teaching fast twitches more glycolytic though after some repetitions the aerobic demand will increase.

So that´s why I use shorter reps, just for the race pace familiarty.

Anaerobic capacity takes only short time to train to be at best, compared to the aerobic side.

I´m 27years and did my personal best last summer so this works for me at least.

Let me start off by saying that what your doing probably is benificial and working but not in the manner suggested. Fast twitch muscles cannot become more aerobic and they cannot become more anaerobic. Fast twitch are fast twitch muscles they function through their designated energy pathway.

Still nobody has given me a reason with any scientific backing for long runs and their bennifits for 800m training.