TINMAN shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence as CANOVA if discussing racing over 10K
TINMAN shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence as CANOVA if discussing racing over 10K
OutlawG wrote:
TINMAN shouldn't be mentioned in the same sentence as CANOVA if discussing racing over 10K
You’re being generous. Canova has coached what, a dozen sub 13 guys and a dozen sub 27 guys right? Plus Silas kiplagat in the 1500 (3:27), among other Olympic qualifying 1500m runners, multiple 1:44/43 800m runners, the steeple chase WR holder, not to even mention women.
Brazilian Guy wrote:
jamin wrote:
I've listened to Renato Canova talk about this philosophy before and phrases it in terms more of athlete mentality.
For example, say you have a runner who wants to improve from 2:30 marathon to 2:20 marathon. Say he can run at 2:20 marathon pace for 1:50 max. If the runners is a Kenyan, he thinks in terms of "I need to increase the time I can sustain my goal marathon pace for 30 minutes longer," whereas if he is American he thinks in terms of "I need to increase my marathon pace by 13 seconds per mile to reach my goal."
So, if a Kenyan goes to the market he thinks, I need to buy a dozen eggs, while the American thinks, I need to buy twelve eggs.
Which one is more correct?
+1
Han Solo wrote:
donairs wrote:
This thread should be renamed Tinman vs Strawman. I would guess Canova is not being represented properly.
Exactly this.
As a guy who has put many dozens of hours into reading everything he's written, I feel like I have a pretty decent grasp on his philosophy and how it works.
Those saying Tinman works based on current fitness and Canova bases it on goal fitness are either misinformed, trolling, or willfully ignorant.
Early in training Canova uses the INTERNAL LOAD aka, perceived effort training to avoid the athlete going too fast or having to worry about hitting splits, etc. From there, he uses the athlete's current fitness to set training. Don't confuse this with training at goal race pace, which I feel some of you are doing.
If they figure the athlete can run a 2:15 (3:12/k) marathon currently, with a goal of 2:10 at the end of the cycle, the workouts will be based on that. There will be runs slower than this pace, and workout at this pace, and some faster than this pace. Let's say the classic Canova workout, 6-7 x 3000m at 100-103% of marathon pace. He will run them at 3:12 - 3:06/k.
What some are you are saying is that Canova will base the 100-103% on the pace of 2:10 (3:05/k), so the workout would be run at 3:05 - 2:59/k. He would also agree that would probably be overtraining.
And yeah they run workouts faster than race pace, but so does everyone. You all are getting caught up on black and white details that aren't really black and white.
Tinman athletes run workouts at 3k race pace - while that's technically probably a little too fast to be realistic "goal 5k pace", it ultimately serves the same purpose, which is to have a physiological effect on the body of improving economy, lactate buffering, etc, which will push the athletes 5k pace faster over time.
Ok so I definitely did not understand Canova's training philosophy correctly.
Sorry that I made you all so mad.
Han, do you have any resources in particular you use for understanding Canova? I’ve read many let’s run threads and “something new in training” but am looking to go a little more in depth
UmbrellaMan wrote:
I have been reading about Canova recently and I have noticed that he seems to focus on goal pace training. In theory, it seems like a good idea to try to extend the length of time that you can run at your goal pace for a certain race distance, but then I was listening to a podcast with Tom Schwartz and I was reminded about how much he dislikes goal pace training. I think Tom definitely presents a better argument, he is able to explain the physiology of training at goal pace vs. current fitness level.
What does everyone else think? Goal pace training or current fitness training?
Wow!!! There's a lot of theories being tossed around about this. Rule of thumb (whether from the 1960s or 2020) is that it's always wise to train at a level time and distance wise that you can accomplish for the prescribed workout. In addition to that training, whether a shorter distance or an abbreviated number of repeats you must touch on "Goal Pace" at some point. I firmly believe that either prior to and or after a prescribed session that "Goal Pace" work is done. Whether repeat 100's, 200's, 400's. etc...for the race distance and pace you're training for. The key is to slowly acclimate yourself to the "Goal Pace" and eventually make it more comfortable. Over time your "Date Pace" should improve and ideally come close to "Goal Pace" and then adjust accordingly. The whole idea is to work toward replacing "Date Pace" with "Goal Pace". Simply rinse, wash, and repeat until you reach your max. This may take a season or more to achieve, this is not a quick turnaround and will take time so be patient.
"Go Run One"
Hey, thanks for giving me something to complain about. I live for that. Now get off my lawn!
LateRunnerPhil wrote:
Runner10287 wrote:
Training with different workouts at different pace with appropriate volume at current fitness pace. Over time your speed and endurance will improve so whatever the current fitness pace is becomes faster.
The thing is that it's possible to keep doing faster and faster intervals week after week, due to trying harder and relying on anaerobic energy / higher lactate values, without racing faster in a goal distance (say 5k).
Let's say someone can run a 5k in 16:40 (3:20/k). He starts doing 5x1k each week, starting at 3:20/k. After a few months, he is doing them in 3:10/k, trying really really hard and racing the workout. He jumps into a 5k race, thinking he is ready for 3:10/k (15:50), but only manages another 16:40. Despite training at paces faster than his current 5k ability, he did not get faster in the race. He was training at too high lactate levels, and his body couldn't recover from the hard anaerobic intervals each week.
Tinman (and yes, many, many other coaches) would have him do 5k paced intervals at 3:20/k for a few months, then let him do another race. If he manages a 15:50, the intervals become 3:10/k - he has proven now that he has really improved, and is not just hammering the intervals harder. If he runs a 16:15, the intervals become 3:15/k.
You can see it time and time again in HS kids who run faster and faster each week in their intervals and then the race comes and they are very disappointed, finding out they didn't improve. Chances are, they trained at paces FASTER than their current ability too often, and turned into "workout heroes", instead of training at paces that are physiologically optimal for them based on their current fitness.
The faster stuff in moderation. Give your legs a taste of a pace faster than your race. BUT DO NOT OVER DO IT!
Yes, moderation. Injury comes from total workload being too much, and running when too tired. If race pace itself causes injury, it is only due to bad form or lack of mobility. Race pace and faster should be fine, just make segments shorter and have adequate recovery. No one-legged workouts on shin splints.
Runner10287 wrote:
LateRunnerPhil wrote:
The thing is that it's possible to keep doing faster and faster intervals week after week, due to trying harder and relying on anaerobic energy / higher lactate values, without racing faster in a goal distance (say 5k).
Let's say someone can run a 5k in 16:40 (3:20/k). He starts doing 5x1k each week, starting at 3:20/k. After a few months, he is doing them in 3:10/k, trying really really hard and racing the workout. He jumps into a 5k race, thinking he is ready for 3:10/k (15:50), but only manages another 16:40. Despite training at paces faster than his current 5k ability, he did not get faster in the race. He was training at too high lactate levels, and his body couldn't recover from the hard anaerobic intervals each week.
Tinman (and yes, many, many other coaches) would have him do 5k paced intervals at 3:20/k for a few months, then let him do another race. If he manages a 15:50, the intervals become 3:10/k - he has proven now that he has really improved, and is not just hammering the intervals harder. If he runs a 16:15, the intervals become 3:15/k.
You can see it time and time again in HS kids who run faster and faster each week in their intervals and then the race comes and they are very disappointed, finding out they didn't improve. Chances are, they trained at paces FASTER than their current ability too often, and turned into "workout heroes", instead of training at paces that are physiologically optimal for them based on their current fitness.
The faster stuff in moderation. Give your legs a taste of a pace faster than your race. BUT DO NOT OVER DO IT!
I hate to be the bearer of bad news....but if your body can't handle doing 6x800 at goal (reasonable goal) 5k pace without getting injured, then you probably aren't destined to run that pace for an entire 5k anytime in the near future.
albanese wrote:
This is the dumbest answer I have ever seen. A dumb justification of Tinman's DUMB training.
1- Nobody recommends sprinting a threshold workout.
2 - Tinman's only decent athlete just missed the most important race of his career due to injury
3 - The idea that you can run a pace in a race that you've never hit in practice is foolish
Haters gonna hate on LetsHate.com. Same ol' same ol' hate.
Tinman acts like he created hard running, and for the reason I’m out
albanese:
Are you familiar with the training and racing of Ed Whitlock? Multiple world record holder from 1500m to the marathon as a master. Training? Jogging in a cemetary for 1 or 2 or 3 hours.
Still sure that you need to train at race pace?
SlowFatMaster wrote:
albanese:
Are you familiar with the training and racing of Ed Whitlock? Multiple world record holder from 1500m to the marathon as a master. Training? Jogging in a cemetary for 1 or 2 or 3 hours.
Still sure that you need to train at race pace?
Yes, you should absolutely train at and around race pace. Ed Whitlock is a terrible example. He broke weak marathon age group records. Brogan Austin may not train at race pace, but he has lots of workouts faster and slower than race pace and gets the same physiological benefits.
SlowFatMaster wrote:
albanese:
Are you familiar with the training and racing of Ed Whitlock? Multiple world record holder from 1500m to the marathon as a master. Training? Jogging in a cemetary for 1 or 2 or 3 hours.
Still sure that you need to train at race pace?
Yes I'm still sure.
If you are trying to break 13 in a 5k (sub 4:10 per mile), you need to consistently run faster than LT pace in training.
In the marathon, if you can hold 5 min pace for 18 miles, why would you train at 5:10 or 5:15 pace even if that's your true marathon PR pace? There's essentially no additional injury risk running marginally faster, especially if you slightly adjust the volume. You can run every workout at 5:10 or 5:15 pace and it's extremely unlikely it will get you down to 5 flat pace for the full marathon.
SlowFatMaster wrote:
albanese:
Are you familiar with the training and racing of Ed Whitlock? Multiple world record holder from 1500m to the marathon as a master. Training? Jogging in a cemetary for 1 or 2 or 3 hours.
Still sure that you need to train at race pace?
You forget that Whitlock raced all the time.
I did not forget any such thing. Even Steve Scott described summers in Europe as "jogging and racing" so it can work at an elite non-masters level.
SlowFatMaster wrote:
I did not forget any such thing. Even Steve Scott described summers in Europe as "jogging and racing" so it can work at an elite non-masters level.
“In Europe” is the keyword, these runners were not jogging and racing for the months preparing for their competition. While in Europe they have all of their training under their belt and are here to do one thing, run fast times. That’s why they mainly end up jogging and racing, they’re either doing what they came to do, or recovering for more
UmbrellaMan wrote:
Ok so I definitely did not understand Canova's training philosophy correctly.
Sorry that I made you all so mad.
I was going to add something similar.
At the risk of butchering everything Canova builds up from GENERAL to SPECIAL to SPECIFIC phases, transition from INTENSITY to EXTENSION. The "goal pace" stuff would only be in the SPECIFIC training.
albanese wrote:
Runner10287 wrote:
The faster stuff in moderation. Give your legs a taste of a pace faster than your race. BUT DO NOT OVER DO IT!
I hate to be the bearer of bad news....but if your body can't handle doing 6x800 at goal (reasonable goal) 5k pace without getting injured, then you probably aren't destined to run that pace for an entire 5k anytime in the near future.
Yeah, I’m pretty sure that’s what he meant. Maybe you should read a bit slower?