Arne Gabius EZ and LR pace: 5:50 min/mi - WHAT????? Never runs slower...

sol1 wrote:

He wants to run the 10.000 m instead of the marathon in Beijing 2015 because of the air pollution and has no idea, which distance he's aiming at in Rio 2016.

Makes sense. Run track season next year and do the similar thing as this year (Frankfurt again) and aim for that German record.

Realistically, for a German runner there are two races where you can make good $$$ and at the same time have a shot at a PR. Berlin and Frankfurt. And Berlin would be too early if he wants to run track in 2015, too.

The spring Marathons (Hamburg, Mainz) are all quite a bit smaller...

You're argument is so incomplete and biased. You failed to mention that he's run 13:12, which is elite by most people's standards. He hasn't run many 10,000m on the track, it's unfair to compare to a guy who ran a ton.

not a fan - what a couple of dick posts.

Canova is correct - nothing to learn from guys running 2h08-2h10 30-40 years ago (Salazar and Shorter - even if they were your heroes) when guys are trying to run 2h04 and faster. The game has changed and what these guy did won't get it done anymore.

What has his advising Gabius got to do with anything anyway - where did he say that he wouldn't waste his time coaching slower people - he coached Ryan Hall for a bit didn't he? And he is even an American!

13freakin12 wrote:

You're argument is so incomplete and biased. You failed to mention that he's run 13:12, which is elite by most people's standards. He hasn't run many 10,000m on the track, it's unfair to compare to a guy who ran a ton.

I am not argument.

They were Canova's feelings about what constitutes world class. He said that people that ran 2:08-2:10 were not indicative of how to train. Because they were so slow, even though Lopes and Jones set WRs and Shorter won Lake Biwa and Fukuoka 4 times, and the Olympics... they still don't matter.

I'll find what he said so that you guys can stop confusing what I am talking about with talking about Gabius. I spelled it out for you, you should read it.

I think the only funny thing is that you try to create a case, intentionally misunderstanding what I wrote, and putting in my mouth something I never said.

The fact that Shorter (PB 2:10:30 / 27'51") was away from the CURRENT WORLD CLASS is not an opinion, IS A FACT, because his PB are 7:33 and 1:34 far from the current WR.

It means that this is not "according to me", but according to mathematics.

Instead, your idea that the athletes running today 6 minutes faster than the runners of 1980 are able to do this because of the drug today available now is not a fact, is the stupid suspicion of an idiot not knowing anything about training methodology, having sawdust for his brain.

When we speak about Marathon training, we have to see at the "index of specific resistance" for understanding if a training system is good or less good.

Looking at Salazar, for example (27'22" / 2:09 estimated in NY when the race was shorter), we have speeds every 100m of 16"42 against 18"34 (89,53% of 10,000 speed).

Looking at Kimetto, or Geoffrey Mutai, or Wilson Kipsang, or Moses Mosop (who is the only one with a real PB in 10000m of 26'49"), giving them a hypothetical value of 26'40" (16" every 100m), if we look at 2:03:30 (17"56 every 100m) we can find an index of 91,11%.

This means the current training system for Marathon is better than the system of 40-30 years ago.

The fact Shorter ran 3 times faster than Arne Gabius in 10000m, and Arne ran about 1 minute faster than Shorter in his first Marathon, says not that Arne is better than Shorter, but that his preparation for Marathon, ALSO IF NOT LONG ENOUGH AND NOT COMPLETE, is better.

When we speak about methodology, NEVER we are maligning about athletes of the past, who have a precise place in the history of athletics. However, is a fact that athletes of 40 years ago, with the same talent of athletes of today, were able to run very much slower (when we speak about long distances), while for example this didn't happen in 800m (go to see the lists of 1984...).

So, when I say Shorter and Salazar were 6-7 minutes away from the CURRENT world class, this is not something "according to me", but a real fact, according to mathematics.

Instead, the opinion that the time 4-6 minutes faster than the runners from the '80s depends on the drugs now available, is a stupid suspicion of somebody having got sawdust for a brain.

And IO don't understand your point when you ask why I bother about Arne. Can I chose whom I can advice in his training, not depending on his value, for other reason than the possibility of performing at top level only (like, for example, to be his friend if the person has good education, good scientific knowledge, good character, and I like to discuss with him about athletics, physiology and other arguments ?), due to the fact I do this for free, without asking your permission ?

I can bother about speaking with you, who don't have any idea but to be arrogant and presumptuous, and cant contribute in any way to every kind of conversation, not, of sure, speaking with a nice person, with knowledge, modesty and human values which you think don't exist.

Thank you Renato Canova for your post on the training of Arne, which was very informative.

Those are astute observations Renato, but you haven't answered the real question. Why is Arne training at such fast paces? This contradicts your method. Unless this is a thing you enjoy debating about with him (which I'm sure we would all love for you to elaborate on), how does his training fit under your method?

The key was that he's not training at such fast paces, if you mean his easy and long run paces. 5:50 is not fast for a 13:12 guy.

Incidentally, when the German speaker refers to Gabius preferring "court running," I take it that he means "road running."

Renato, Rob DeCastella 3.49, 13.34, 28.02, 2.07.51a, 2.08.18. has very similar "index of specific resistance" to elite Kenyans but was training very differently.

jjjjjjjjj wrote:

Incidentally, when the German speaker refers to Gabius preferring "court running," I take it that he means "road running."

Track.

"Looking at Kimetto, or Geoffrey Mutai, or Wilson Kipsang, or Moses Mosop (who is the only one with a real PB in 10000m of 26'49"), giving them a hypothetical value of 26'40" (16" every 100m), if we look at 2:03:30 (17"56 every 100m) we can find an index of 91,11%."

Here are some NOT "hypothetical values" for 10k. I am good at math, so try these on:

Lopes -

27:42, 27:36, 27:24, 27:17 PR (last fast 10k, last 10k period) second fastest in World history.

2:08:39 debut, 2:09:21 OR, 2:09:07 for second, 2:07:12 WR (after winning WCCC for the third time)

27:17 / 2:07:12

16.37 / 18.087 = 90.51%

Treacy -

27:48.7 / 2:09:56

16.687 / 18.476 = 90.32%

Seko -

27:42 / 2:08:27

16.62 / 18.243 = 91.00%

Jones -

27:39 / 2:07:13

16.59 / 18.089 = 91.71%

DeCastella -

28:03 / 2:08:18

16.83 / 18.243 = 92.25%

Spedding -

28:08 / 2:08:33

16.88 / 18.279 = 92.34%

None of them are under 90.30% for "index of specific resistance".

These runners were just chosen off the top of my head, but they had to be retired or on their way out before the EPO era. They also had to have serious experience over several years with the 10,000m.

So does this prove that their training was better than the three that you mentioned? Their "index of specific resistance" is the same or in most cases better than those you mentioned.

Also, here is a great example ...

Gebrselassie -

26:22 / 2:03:39

15.82 / 17.63 = 89.78%

So right in the same boat as Salazar, or (in your words)...

"This means the current training system for Marathon is better than the system of (TEN) years ago."

"The fact Shorter ran 3 times faster than Arne Gabius in 10000m, and Arne ran about 1 minute faster than Shorter in his first Marathon, says not that Arne is better than Shorter, but that his preparation for Marathon, ALSO IF NOT LONG ENOUGH AND NOT COMPLETE, is better."

This is a logical fallacy. Gabius is a faster runner, at 13:12. Also he ran a flat marathon with (he stated) 3 pacers. Shorter never did that. So I would expect him to run faster, but not necessarily because of his preparation.

Give Shorter a race uncontested, 3 pacers to block until 30km and the same drugs that athletes have today and I see him running 2:06:30 just from the drugs, and 2:04:30 with the flat time trial course and pacers.

Ugh, here come the clowns. Renato was right, your head really is full of sawdust.

Coach Canova, for the fartleks (series of 2' fast / 1' moderate, 1'/1', 30''/30'', etc.), what is approximately the speed of the fast and moderate bouts? Are the fast bouts run at ~mile race pace, and moderate a bit slower than marathon pace ?

Concerning the purpose of these workouts: is it essentially a biomechanical type of workout (for creating feeling with high speed and easier technical action)? If yes, why not using longer recoveries at easy pace between the fast bouts? Thanls in advance.

Personally, I say Renato can talk out of all THREE sides of his mouth if he wants - as far as I can tell, he's the only pro coach that says anything interesting on the boards. And interesting is, in this case, a massive understatement. He's got a close advisor/friend relationship with the most interesting white marathon runner in Europe, and is literally willing to write specifically and extensively about key aspects of his training, responding directly to questions.

I also like when he kinda uses math and logic arguments that don't fully work. Because then people come on and are forced to give great specific examples of training that counteract his arguments. These rebuttals, sometimes warranted, also show some really interesting data. It also reminds me that Renato is uber clever socially, a classic positive trickster. He can talk out both sides of his mouth... at least he's got good info and he's responsive.

One point I wanted to make for the all the impulsive reactionaries on the boards, regarding the claims of 'never slower than 5:50/mile'

First of all, wasn't there just an article talking about how this is basically what Rupp and Farah run for easy days? So Canova and Salazar are, ironically enough given some of the topics emerged on this thread, ok'ing some of the same training (caveats: yes, Arne is clearly not of the track stature of either of those two in terms of 10,000pb or World medals, plus they train for different events, plus Canova's influence seems more peripheral than Salazar's hands-on with Rupp).

Secondly: some of his running is slower than 5:50. There are warm-ups for workouts. There are intervals between fast running (the slowest I saw was somewhere in 6:30 range?). It's not some 'grind it out', 'hard-nosed' idiot approach. It's calculated. Other guys have done it and are doing it. Not 14:20 guys, but 7:35 3k/61' HM guys, yes. He's clearly recovering because it's the right general pace for him to recover at, biophysiologically and biomechanically. You can't do that for 250+ km/wk without fully recovering and still race/workout so well.

Then there's the fact that Renato is coaching top Kenyans, and their training is different (not to mention individualized within Kenya). To say he says one thing about a Kenyan training prgm and another for Arne is irrelevant. There are dozens and dozens of Kenyans who can, more or less, step on the roads with a couple months of training and run the equivalent of what the average American or Japanese or German elite takes 10,000 hours to accomplish - say a 61:45 HM. So there is no generalized approach to training, because Europeans, Americans, Japanese are counting on a handful of guys in a decade span making the transition from, say 61:45 to 59:45. These guys have already all put in an adult lifetime of training before they have to make that jump. I don't have the exact stats, but roughly speaking, a couple dozen Kenyans make that jump every 2-4 of years just by going from zero training to 2-4 years training. Renato is trying to describe the training of massively different athletes. This is part of his genius and part of his cleverness.

Renato Canova wrote:

(...)

This means the current training system for Marathon is better than the system of 40-30 years ago.

When we speak about methodology, NEVER we are maligning about athletes of the past, who have a precise place in the history of athletics. However, is a fact that athletes of 40 years ago, with the same talent of athletes of today, were able to run very much slower (when we speak about long distances), while for example this didn't happen in 800m (go to see the lists of 1984...). (...)

obviously true, isn´t it? i think it was e. kipchoge (or kipsang? i don´t know), who mentioned that the top performers meanwhile know what kind of training works so they feel more optimistic and more self-confident about more sub 2:03 marathoners. the training methodology 30 or 40 years ago wasn´t that sophisticated.

"Math honor society" has made a fine point, an "index of specific resistance" of ~92% has already been reached by a few champions in the past.

The examples of Jones and DeCastella are particularly striking, as they transitioned to the marathon after a long carrier on the track, so they cannot be blamed not to have optimized the best they could their potential on 10000m.

And they reached a ~92% "index of specific resistance" some 30 years ago and more, indicating that their training was not worse than today's "cutting edge" training of Renato to optimize the "index of specific resistance". If today's runners are 4-5' faster than DeCastella and Jones, it is simply because they are faster at all distances, not because they have a superior "index of specific resistance".

Thus, I don't see any impact of the "new methodologies" in that respect. Renato's runners are obviously very well trained, but SOME runners of 30-40 years ago like Jones or DeCastella were EQUALLY very well trained, if judging through the "index of specific resistance" that all these runners could attained.

However, it is unfair to use Gebrselassie's PBs to calculate an "index of specific resistance" for him, as his PB in 10000m was established more than 10 years before his PB on the marathon - which is 2:03:59 by the way -. This would also do for Bekele. It is more reasonable to take his best 10000m time established the same year as his marathon world record, namely 26:51:20 in Hengelo 2008 (http://www.alltime-athletics.com/m_10kok.htm). This gives a "index of specific resistance" of 91,4% for him, not so bad :-)

My phylosophy is very simple :

1. We have to identify the PACE we want to run the Marathon, of course starting from what already the athlete was able to do in 10000m and HM. For a beginner, the "equivalent pace" we can identify is, for HM, about 5% slower than the PB in 10000m, and for full Marathon, about 5% slower than his PB in HM.

In the case of Arne, 27'50" in 10000m is 16"7, and 5% slower is 17"535, meaning a HM at 2'55"35 pace in 61'39".

Starting from 17"535, 5% slower is 18"41 (3'04"1 per km, or 4'54"7 per Mile), pace for a Marathon in... 2:09'30".

2. The final goal is TO EXTEND THE ABILITY TO LAST AT THIS IDENTIFIED MARATHON PACE. For obtaining this goal, we use as SPECIFIC SPEED the speed between 95% and 105% of MP (Marathon Pace), in this case between 17"5 (the fastest) and 19"4 (the slowest), or 2'55" >< 5'10". SPEEDS BETWEEN 85% AND 95% (in this case between 3'14" and 3'32", or between 5'10" and 5'34") are the SPECIAL SUPPORT for the SPECIFIC SPEED.

3. Analyzing the full volume of kms during the preparation, we can find about 10% of mileage at a very slow speed (including warm-up and cool-down), 20% at speed between 65% and 75% of MP, 20% at a speed between 75% and 85%, 25% at a speed about 85% and 95%, 20% at a SPECIFIC speed (95%-105%) and 5% at speed faster than 105% of MP.

4. Many times I explained that different speeds are different MEANS of training. They are steps of a stairs, and we MUST to use ALL the steps. If we skip some step (for example, very slow run - fast medium run - speed on track) WE DON'T HAVE PHYSIOLOGICAL CONNECTIONS AMONG THE SPEEDS, and slow run cannot support the specific speed because too slow, and high speed cannot increase the specific speed endurance because too fast.

The problem of training is to create the conditions for growing as volume and intensity at the same time, IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN STEADY THE INTERNAL LOAD. This means that, after several months of training, for a well trained athlete, running at MP implies the ability to spend the SAME ENERGIES and to carry out the SAME LEVEL OF EFFORT used months before for running, maybe, 10 second per km slower.

But when an athlete becomes Marathon runner FULL TIME, the body (and the mind...) create more SPECIFIC ADAPTATION at this type of effort. This means the athletes loses, in part, the ability to use the most powerful fuel in the best way, but becomes able to use at his best fatty acids, creating a mixed fuel specific for his Marathon speed made with more percentage of fatty acids, and less percentage of glycogen, AT THE IDENTIFIED SPEED.

At the end, ALL THE PREPARATION FOR MARATHON HAS THE PHYSIOLOGICAL TARGET TO CHANGE THE WAY OF FUELLING, and this is not connected with the total volume, but with the SPECIFIC VOLUME OF KMS RUN AT MP.

Slower speed have another well precise signification : to increase the adaptation of the body structures to stay in activity for long time (nuscles, tendons, jointures and... brain), and are widely used in case of beginners, BUT DON'T CREATE ANY ADAPTATION IN THE ORGANIC ENGINE.

At the end, se can say that the preparation for a marathon follows two different periods :

1. the FUNDAMENTAL PERIOD, with more emphasis on the general volume, for creating adaptation in the body structures

2. the SPECIFC PERIOD, where the main goal is to specialize the way of fuelling.

This difference, that we can appreciate during a single preparation, becomes also the line we follow during the development of the FULL CAREER of a Marathon runner : going ahead in his career, general runs become less important, and the percentage of volume run at specific speed becomes higher. In the last part of career, the total volume decreases, since there is no more any reason for running a lot of kms at slow pace, which cannot produce any advantage under metabolic point of view, but produce wear and tear on the body structure.

About fartlek, we use two different interpretations, depending on the period and on the final goal :

1. Fartlek for ENHANCING SPECIFIC ENDURANCE : the fast speed, in tests lasting between 1' and 3', is at 10000m pace, and the recovery is at 90% of MP. For giving some exmple, the best kenyan run more than 19 kms in 1 hr fartlek with 30 times 1'/1', and sometimes 19.5 kms with 15 times 3' / 1'.

In this case, SPEED supports ENDURANCE.

2. Fartlek for ENHANCING SPECIFIC SPEED : the fast speed, in short tests lasting between 30" and 1', is at 3000m pace, and the recovery is easy. This type of interpretation has a final BIOMECHANICAL goal.

In this case, ENDURANCE supports SPEED.

Normally, in the preparation of Marathon runners, I frequently use 1 hour fartlek with the first 40' with the first interpretation (20 times 1' at 10000m pace / 1' at 90% of MP), and the last 20' with the second interpretation (20 x 30" very fast / 30" easy recovery)

Renato Canova wrote:

At the end, ALL THE PREPARATION FOR MARATHON HAS THE PHYSIOLOGICAL TARGET TO CHANGE THE WAY OF FUELLING, and this is not connected with the total volume, but with the SPECIFIC VOLUME OF KMS RUN AT MP.

Thanks for your response, Renato. When an athlete undergoes specific marathon training, and he becomes able to make a better mix of fatty acids when running at his goal marathon pace, does this physiological change improve his fitness directly?

What I mean by this is if you have a marathon runner who aims to run 3:00 per km for the race, and he undergoes specific marathon workouts for several weeks and becomes able to run at 3:00 per km using a better mix of fatty acids than before, does 3:00 km pace represent a lower physiological "internal load" than it did before? Or is he simply able to last longer at that speed because his glycogen stores last longer?

Renato, I don't know how you have time to share all of this, maybe you are copying and pasting from notes of discussion with your friends/athletes. Whatever the case, thank you so much! I even get a kick out of your insults!