Are continuous tempo runs dead?

Part of me agrees with the Jakob failure and idea proposed here that for 10k and up you really need a continuous tempo run of significant duration. Even if it's M pace. But I have to concede I'm a big fan of the "Norwegian lower mileage" thread and follow sirpoc and Strava and he just ran an outstanding hilly half , easily in line with his 10k , if not arguably better when you consider the course. He doesn't do anything more than 3*3.2k, 6*mile or 10*1k. So I'm on the fence.

Yep. I was one of those athletes. I never learned but I also never got injured, so I was just exhausted and raced badly all season. But at least I loved the grind!

Typical D3, right?

This is a great thread. The quality of posts is really much higher when the topic is training instead of pro running (or certainly "other" topics).

There are pros and cons to everything, and a well-executed 6-8 mile run at ~40 seconds slower than 5k pace is an excellent workout. It's just very hard to execute right. A suitably intelligent/patient/well-trained runner might be able to consistently execute their tempo runs, but a lot of things can go wrong:

1) Run a pace that feels good, but you realize by the end it was too fast
2) Feel "off" at the beginning, and never quite get past that feeling
3) Start too fast/slow, under/overcorrect when you try to adjust pace, and never settle in
4) Pick up a twinge, and not know whether you should stop or not

I personally enjoyed tempo runs, but have always struggled on them. I've fallen into each of the failure modes above, multiple times. Meanwhile, intervals at threshhold are a very similar workout that would almost always go smoothly.

It's a little hard to explain why tempo runs are so difficult, but one reason might be that you're trying to hold a precise pace at an effort where you don't have a lot of sensitivity. At closer to race pace, try speeding up by 10s/mile, and you'll feel it right away. On easy runs, pace differences that small barely matter. Tempo runs are this weird middle ground where you do want to lock in the pace, but it doesn't feel (to me) like a natural equillibrium. If pacing in a race is like running on a knife's edge, a tempo run is like playing that game "desert bus".

Another way to put it is that you're doing "race-like" things: trying to lock in your pace, running continuously for several miles, but your adrenaline level is (or should be) barely higher than an easy run.

There are certain cases where tempo runs might be essential (half marathon or marathon training, perhaps a newer runner who struggles to hold any pace). Or maybe you're actually good at them, in which case bully for you! But there's something to be said for doing workouts that you can reliably execute well. For me, that has never been tempo runs (much as I enjoy them).

Maybe I'm just weird on this, but it seems from the rest of the posts that many of you have had similar experiences.

I agree with starting a tempo/ threshold run cautiously but there is a difference between a tempo run and a progression run.

The benefits of a tempo seem to increase significantly from cumulative time at LT2. (LT2= Fastest possible pace where lactate levels are elevated but stable) Time outside that specific zone, which to me, is a fairly tight 10-15 second band, works different systems and isn't really tempo work.

To wit, if I'm doing a 4 mile tempo @ 5:40/ mile pace after a 2 mile warmup and stretch it's perfectly fine to run the first mile in 5:45 and then keep the last 3 just under 5:40.

However, if I go 6:00, 5:40, 5:35, 5:25, I didn't run a 4 mile tempo. I warmed up for a mile, ran 2 miles at tempo, and then 1 mile at 10k effort. The first mile isn't fast enough to reach LT2 and the last mile will push lactate levels past LT2. So instead of 20+ minutes I got in example 1, I only get 10-12 minutes at LT2 in example 2.

I'm another one of the people using a modified Norwegian approach (high weekly volume at threshold-ish paces, workouts from 25x400, 12x1000, 6-8xMile, 6x2000, etc), and I've actually found much more success with this for HM and Marathon than for shorter races 3000-10000. I'm also historically a more fast-twitch runner, so this isn't just my natural body bias.

I live/train at altitude (Denver) so my shorter distance times are dampened by that, but I really struggle to break through the 16:40 mark, despite running a 1:13 half at sea level. I think for me, the lack of continuous tempo runs doesn't give me the experience of continuously ramping oxygen debt and increasing lactate that I would need to feel for a race. HM is slower than the inflection point where all that stuff scales up over time, so the races where I'm truly riding the pain train (eg 5k) often revert back to HM pace when I get really tired.

I think continuous tempos for that specific application would be tough - you can't really do a tempo at 10k pace, or if you do it's going to be very expensive in recovery cost. One thing I've experimented with once (and likely will do again) is split reps: do the first ~1000m at around marathon pace to get your HR, O2 consumption, and lactate levels up, and then 600m at 5k pace to get used to the feeling of that ramping discomfort without beating up my legs with too much 5k pace work. It felt quite difficult during it, but I didn't feel overly sore the next day.

I coach at the collegiate level and over the years the importance of the long run has shifted a lot for us.

I view the long run more as a way to get your muskoskeletal system right for the LT1 and LT2 work. When you ask a guy to do a 3 mile warmup, 8 mile LT1, 3 mile cooldown….well I hope he had at least ran 14 miles for a long run.

With that being said, I no longer stress about getting it in after races if recovery is the goal. Long runs for the 5k-10k elite level is also dropping out of favor. They rather do a 3rd workout of something else (VNTC speed development, Norwegian hill reps, etc) than slog away at an 18 miler.

I still think the run itself is great to do in a build-up, but at some point the length of the run is more for maintaining a good structural foundation and not much about moving the needle on your fitness.

We have also gotten a lot better as a team over the last few years. When I first got here, we did longer broken threshold (2-3 mile reps) or Daniel’s style tempos. We were okay. Then we shifted to exclusively heavily chopped up threshold and even Tinman CV work. We did a lot better. Now we do heavily broken threshold (mile reps) and longer tempos where they run at like projected marathon effort. We are a lot better. Had our first group of multiple sub 14:00s last year. We have always been an NCAA bubble team but maybe this is the year we do it. Now, if I could do lactate testing they would be great!

For the men racing 8k-10k, longer and slower tempos are great. Don’t throw them out.

Also! Do your tempos and threshold in trainers. It helps the athlete dial into effort because they know they don’t have the Vaporfly assist. Carbon shoes also mess you up and can cause stress injuries. Was talking to my buddy at Wake Forest about this. Data will come out soon about the injury risk. Save it for big race pace sessions.

Agree with so much of this! We start with 1ks or 5 minute intervals and progress over a kid's career as they gain experience. An older varsity runner is likely doing 2x2 miles at threshold with 1-2 min. in between. When we have kids that we know are going into a high caliber D1 college programs, we will work to get them some continuous 3-4mi. tempos (usually over winter where they are at a low risk for overtraining) to prep them for that level. Our injury rates have decreased significantly since switching to broken tempos over continuous.

OP here. Some great responses so far. I’m shocked this thread is getting as much traction as it is.

FS 14 - I’m surprised to hear that you’re against using carbon shoes. It seems like every pro and a majority of college programs are using carbon shoes for their workout days, including tempos and threshold.

To clarify my original post, the 8 mile tempos at 5k + 1 minute were treated as its own workout day. I couldn’t do this and then do a workout the next day. I don’t think I could even run 5k + 90s on hills and dirt and in trainers on a regular basis as a non-workout day. I got the impression that some posters thought this was a regular run pace and it wasn’t.

People believe this and say this as they believe it obvious. However, one can and should reject such ideas until they are proven.

It's like saying: A 40 minute run "and I hope I'm stating the obvious" is more effective physiologically than 2 different 20 minute runs.

Well, is it? Are you sure? Would someone doing 6 sessions of 40 minutes be fitter than someone doing 12 sessions of 20? There is ample reason to doubt such a claim. In the same way, I think it is obvious that one will receive various benefits from running fresher at tempo pace, dropping their HR and raising it again, doing the workout with less strain, etc. etc., even when considering the same volume.

Great post, and thanks for sharing your experience. Totally agree about the long run. It's a great tool to prepare you for other workouts, but unless it becomes a workout in itself, it has minimal impact on race fitness.

I might throw in some long runs with CV/LT2 fartlek in the second half for a highly trained runner preparing for a 10k, but only if it's someone who's accustomed to high mileage and/or can run a marathon that's equivalent to her shorter race distances. And even then, not every week.

To follow up-how would either of you, or anyone else for that matter, see this if the focus were older runners focusing on the marathon? For the sake of discussion let's assume that the runners in question have significant running background, and are running marathons equivalent to their shorter races. Is the cost/benefit of a hard long run at 85%+ of marathon pace, or with MP/HMP segments, worth it if the marathon is the primary focus? Or would you still consider the purpose of the long run to be providing the ability to run harder/longer workouts at faster paces during the week, and therefore continue to run slower long runs?

I think a lot of people tend to view each workout by itself too much. If doing those 40 minute tempos instead of 2x20 or whatever makes you reduce your total weekly and monthly workout volume, it's unlikely you're actually getting more benefit in aggregate, even if the 40 minute tempo gives a better stimulus than a 2x20. A lot of people I know just build their whole week around one huge workout, and then if that workout goes poorly they're crushed and feel the need to prove their fitness even more the next big workout. You gotta view your whole training block in aggregate rather than day by day or week by week.

It's funny - the older I've gotten, my opinion on this has changed dramatically. A decade ago, tempo runs were my bread and butter, run at between HM and M pace for around an hour.

These days, I don't seem to have the mental fortitude for it, and there's less days I feel "good". To me, if I fall off tempo pace mid-workout, it's game over, mentally. But if my mile or 2k reps are off, I can just back off 5-10s/mile and still get the work in.

Had a real-life experience years ago where I have having to rearrange some furniture by myself. While moving a rather large heavy coach to other side of the room, an interesting though process occurred to me. Stressing a certain physiological point (such as lactate threshold or aerobic threshold) and seeking improvement in it, can be view somewhat favorably to pushing a large couch solo across a carpeted room. You can't just push in the same spot all the time or you loose your leverage, you have change your angles and points of pushing regularly in order to continue to make good progress. Push just in one corner and eventually you end up just spinning around or off course.

So when working to improve our pace at lactate threshold, we regularly change up how we stress it, by doing continuous tempo runs, by doing LT repeats, by doing progression tempos, by doing wave tempos (minimal overload, minimal recovery). And we change the distance/durations and/or number of repeats.

Also important to look at exactly what you are trying to do, even small nuisances like are you trying to improve your pace at LT to trying increase how long you can hold it. Am I trying to do the tempo run for 3 minutes longer than last time or am I trying to do it 5 seconds per mile faster. In a marathon cycle we may be looking to improve out pace at LT early in a Fundamental Phase and then lengthening out long we can hold later in that phase. Then in Specific Phase trying to narrow the gap between LT and AT paces.

Training theory and application is a wonderfully fascinating combo of art and science. Don't limit yourself too much by just doing what you see/hear elites doing.

Not doing long tempos certainly hurt Jakob in his half attempt. I do think shorter races can get away with just broken tempos. However 10k and longer you need that continuous feel.

For the marathon, the long run is usually the key workout during the specific period. You could vary it up with some very long, specific workouts that aren't quite your "long run," but for anyone who isn't a pay-the-bills professional, it's just too complicated. (e.g., 80 minutes of fartlek with a warmup and cooldown isn't easy to fit in on a workday, and then you're wrecked and should probably just be taking a nap.) I usually don't prescribe a pace for long runs during general/pre-competition phase, but I look at how much faster my athletes' long runs are getting as an indication that they're getting ready for more specific training.

I don't worry about LT2 at all during marathon training. It tends to get pretty strong anyway, but the cycle ends up being too long if you have to take a period to emphasize LT2. For an experienced runner in decent shape, you're basically doing two things in a marathon cycle. First you get the VO2max back to near peak. An experienced runner is not going to improve his or her VO2max, but it does oscillate during the year depending on fitness level, so you basically do some 5k/10k type training, with high total volume, while increasing the distance of your long run at a comfortable pace. The difference between this training and true 5k/10k training is that we modify recoveries to ensure that blood lactate stays fairly low, and we don't do any longer reps at 5k pace. There's no point in trying to accumulate significant oxygen debt over the course of a workout for a marathoner.

Once you've got that high-end aerobic capacity back, then you're in the specific period, and you're just trying to maximize your fractional utilization of VO2max over the marathon distance. There's a huge mix of workouts you can do, but the common thread is that they're long, and they're mostly within 5% of MP. Slower than that isn't really specific, but it could be part of the workout (e.g., 85% of MP for 10 miles followed 95% of MP for 8 miles). Whether to extend MP or to gradually increase the workout pace to MP, or a combination, depends on the athlete.

Candidly, I don't think we have a good physiological model for marathon fatigue or marathon fitness. A lot of texts will say it's all about glycogen depletion. I think that's not just wrong, but pretty obviously wrong. Not that glycogen doesn't matter; it's just a solved problem. If you carboload and take significant carbs while racing, then glycogen is not a limiting factor at this distance. Over the years I've increasingly come to think that the marathon is mostly about mechanical muscle fatigue. Also, and this has been observed at shorter distances as well, you tend to rely on less well trained fibers as the race progresses, so an effort that feels comfortably aerobic to start can actually be approaching LT2 by the end, even at a constant speed.

Nice post, but you meant 27 to 29 minute 10k runner right?

Well said, I think you articulated perfectly why a lot of us struggle on the continuous threshold runs.

This and 800 guy's posts should be pinned. Along with several other great contributions to thread, this is why I still come to letsrun. Reminds me of the training threads on here from the 2000s

Once in the specific phase, for a marathoner, what then do you prescribe mid-week for the hobbyist?