Donavan Brazier Training: 20-30MPW?

My $0.02:

He can run successfully on 30 mpw currently b/c he has several years of endurance building under his belt (approx 15-16m 5k from HS XC) and it doesn't take much for him to maintain enough aerobic power to train for the 800.

It doesn't mean everyone else can succeed on 30 mpw

Cam Levins has BARELY improved under AlSal; all but a few races I'd actually say he sucks with Salazar as the coach.

Olympic Truth wrote:

I see you just want to argue your perspective and not listen to others. So you are great.

K.

Second Race wrote:

Cam Levins has BARELY improved under AlSal; all but a few races I'd actually say he sucks with Salazar as the coach.

I'm willing to give it more time before I decide that, but you might be right. It's hard for runners to drop mileage and keep improving. Time will tell, if it hasn't already.

Metric Miler wrote:

I broke 1:50 never running more than 30mpw. You're assessment of 60-80mpw is just your opinion. Brazier hasn't revolutionised anything with his training. This is how 400/800 and 800m specialist train.

The notion of 'special endurance' has been laughed at around here before, but it works. Jogging about for x miles a week doesn't directly help the endurance needed in an 800m in the same way that running hard 700m reps do.

Sub-1:50 is excellent. But 1:43's medalist territory & no 1:43 runner in history's done it off 20-30 mpw.

I hope that the extreme speed approach isn't working, because in part he still has last year's mpw strength & XC racing strength- that would "wear off". Last year's 40 mpw is almost double the 20-30 mpw now.

His basic aerobic capacity can improve by just the years of training. He already had a fantastic "base" given his great mile times. From his interviews he doesn't like the 1600, so I figure now he will focus 400/800.

'Pretty good' by most peoples standards, agreed. Low four minutes or even sub four is doable for him.

But this is a man that has run 1:43! That is Kiprop level speed. 4:00 makes him a terrible miler!

* 'Very good' by most people's standards.

Apologies.

Contradiction wrote:

Tell that to the numerous sub 1:50 guys who run somewhere from 60-80MPW in base phase. Perhaps you are right, we have been approaching 800 training wrong for all these years.

While I think it vastly oversimplifies things to simply apply the blanket statement that "traditional" 800m training is just "wrong" it is an unfortunate fact that a lot of distance training in US HS T&F is incredibly dogmatic and resistant to change. Probably more accurately you could say "There is a better than zero chance that while conventional training methods for the 800m yield good results, there are non-conventional methods that might actually be more effective and are largely ignored due to how wildly the fly in the face of the logic behind said conventional training."

The 20-30mpw surprises me less for its efficacy and more for the fact a well-known, "mainstream" program adopted it.

Anecdotally, it doesn't surprise me a whole lot. Coaching sprints/relays at the HS level, the guy who handled the distance runners was pretty open-minded on most things but was a firm, unwavering believer in "mileage for everyone" and his 800/1600 runners would generally reach a peak of ~40-50mpw during the outdoor season, a little more for the 16/32 focused guys. All of the top 5 or 6 guys ran XC as well, where 55-65mpw was the peak for the varsity guys.

I trained my sprinters to be largely 200/400 guys. A natural burner in the 100 was going to receive slightly different training, but for the most part, looking at it from the perspective of team goals in a weak area, i wanted guys that could handle running 3-4 events per meet, not die in a 4x4, and be able to mop up a 300h race if need be, to score points for the conference and state meet. (conference champ in the 1/2/300h/4/8/16/32 each year on average will probably be ~11.3-4/22.9-23.1/41.5-42.5/50-51/1:58-2:00/4:28-4:32/9:45-10:00)

There was still, obviously, zero dedicated aerobic development, and never once in practice did my guys actually run over 400m in any sort of interval or anything.

long story short, mileage guy ended up with 800 runners that had gone, in relays or open, 2:02, 2:04, 2:05, 2:08, 2:09

for me, at one athletes request, i put a 23.8/51.4 guy in the 800 at a regular season meet, and he ran 2:09.33 splitting 28.1 over the last 200.

at the end of the season, 3 other sprinters with PRs of 23.0-24.5/50.5-52.5

ran a time-trial 600m and ran 1:27.1, 1:28.3, 1:30.0. they came through the 400 in 60.6, 61.0, 62.1 and split 26.4, 27.3, 27.9 over the last 200m, respectively. All three of those guys would have comfortably broken 2:10 in an 800.

Not at all the same level of talent, but clearly, if the strengths of the runners matches up with what you're doing, you don't necessarily need to focus on aerobic development very much at all for the 800m.

To the guy above, Brazier may have run 1:47 in high school, a fine time in and of itself, but he was ready to run significantly faster. Look at his splits. He never got a chance to run against even national class athletes in the 800m. He was dq'd in a qualifier for an international meet. If he had ever been in a race with a guy who went out in 51, we might have seen a mid 1:45, that is, close to the national high school record.

I think you are addressing me. So give him the 1:47. That is still a 3 second improvement from a national class guy to best in the nation in 1 year. A 1:45 last year is speculation. In fact give him the 1:45, a 2 second drop at the level is very un-common. If fact name another person that went from 145 to 143 or even a 146 to 144 in one year. I would imagine that there is a person, but very few and then I would would question whether they are clean. So Nick Simmons is not doing the right thing??

And remember, I'm giving in to all of your what ifs, and still it looks fishy. That's my point. Track is dirty, very dirty. But at least its equal, they ALL take and the best guy/girl is probably winning. I doubt whether the Jamaicans are taking a super drug.

ttc wrote:

Metric Miler wrote:

I broke 1:50 never running more than 30mpw. You're assessment of 60-80mpw is just your opinion. Brazier hasn't revolutionised anything with his training. This is how 400/800 and 800m specialist train.

The notion of 'special endurance' has been laughed at around here before, but it works. Jogging about for x miles a week doesn't directly help the endurance needed in an 800m in the same way that running hard 700m reps do.

Sub-1:50 is excellent. But 1:43's medalist territory & no 1:43 runner in history's done it off 20-30 mpw.

I hope that the extreme speed approach isn't working, because in part he still has last year's mpw strength & XC racing strength- that would "wear off". Last year's 40 mpw is almost double the 20-30 mpw now.

Rudisha doesn't run over 35 ever in winter. He gas run 1:40. You really can't say 'no one in history' because you don't know.

I wouldn't have run 1:43 if I did more miles. I just don't have the genes. Brazier is extremely fast over the 400m. You don't just run mileage to stretch that speed over 800m. That isn't how it works.

For the record, in the actual racing season I'd do more like 10-12mpw. Like I said, very lazy kid.

So you think that you reached your potential off of 10-12MPW? Or at least close to it? This topic is intriguing because the 800 is trained for so differently across the world. Is it confirmed that Rudisha never runs over 35MPW by the way?

Olympic Truth,

If you run 47/400m once, you are a 47" 400m runner.

I understand you are new to the sport and Letsrun.com. We will educate your ignorance.

Olympic Truth wrote:

I think you are addressing me. So give him the 1:47. That is still a 3 second improvement from a national class guy to best in the nation in 1 year. A 1:45 last year is speculation. In fact give him the 1:45, a 2 second drop at the level is very un-common. If fact name another person that went from 145 to 143 or even a 146 to 144 in one year. I would imagine that there is a person, but very few and then I would would question whether they are clean. So Nick Simmons is not doing the right thing??

And remember, I'm giving in to all of your what ifs, and still it looks fishy. That's my point. Track is dirty, very dirty. But at least its equal, they ALL take and the best guy/girl is probably winning. I doubt whether the Jamaicans are taking a super drug.

Serious question, say I presented you with an athlete that had the following yearly progression in the 800: 1:53.3 -> 1:51.4 -> 1:49.6 -> 1:45.7. Would you also find that fishy? After all, he only progressed 1.9, then 1.8 seconds, before all of a sudden dropping 3.9s, a larger drop than both the previous years combined, from a time that is significantly harder to improve upon than the years previous. While track is certainly very dirty, I think you've allowed your paranoia to ruin your perspective when it comes to the things the human body is capable of with the right factors such as proper training, nutrition, motivation, and of course, good genetics.

Contradiction wrote:

So you think that you reached your potential off of 10-12MPW? Or at least close to it? This topic is intriguing because the 800 is trained for so differently across the world. Is it confirmed that Rudisha never runs over 35MPW by the way?

I can't say that for certain, but I am not the same type of runner as Brazier anyway. I did not have anywhere near the speed and when I was running a few more miles a week I could throw down a decent 1500m and my 800 stayed roughly the same. I was just saying that decently fast times are possible in the 800m without mileage. Someone with elite genes can take that a lot further.

Yes it is confirmed about Rudisha. 60km a week. The guy can run 45 flat FAT from the blocks if not 44 high. Different kind of animal. These guys are all fast twitch, you need to teach the fast twitch fibres to last through race specific endurance workouts. Not jogging. These guys train very hard but just differently to a typical 800/1500 guy. They will do sessions you probably have never heard of.

An example may be 3x600m at 5% slower than 800m pace with 5+ minutes recovery.

Btw he posted a run on social media the other day to show his training and it was 7km. He seemed pretty chuffed.

Olympic Truth wrote:

His basic aerobic capacity can improve by just the years of training. He already had a fantastic "base" given his great mile times. From his interviews he doesn't like the 1600, so I figure now he will focus 400/800.

I think you're right. There's probably no way he's as good of a miler as he is an 800 runner anyway. As distance runners, I think a lot of us always feel the need to "move people up" a distance. I would have paid good money to watch a 1 on 1 Fisher vs. Brazier mile but that's just me being selfish! I guess what I was getting at earlier was that he's got a little more strength than a McBride type runner to finish on a hot pace like at NCAAs.

Like I said earlier, I think he'd be well-suited to keep doing considerable base in the fall (30-50 mpw), but what do I know? Obviously whatever he's doing (drugs or not) is working. I do believe, that the mileage will help him long term but they seem to be pretty conservative with Donavan as it is.

I had a collegiate runner who was a 1:49 guy and never ran more than 600m in practice. Never did any distance, but could also run 10.4 and split sub-45.

Different training for different bodies is right.

Contradiction wrote:

...Is it confirmed that Rudisha never runs over 35MPW by the way?

"Rudisha said he typically runs 70 to 80 kilometers per week (a low number for an elite middle distance runner)."

(Converts to 43-50 miles).