How important is "moderate" pace in HM and Marathon training?

Training Advice/Discussion Marathon

Page 4 of 4

1 3 4

Next Last

6 years ago 08/28/2017 6:25am EDT

re: Football Freddie

Football Freddie wrote:
MB8020 wrote:
And, of course, there was also the famous case of Mark Allen, who under the guidance of Phil Maffetone went from 8:30/mile to 5:15/mile at the same HR corresponding to his AeT, by running only "moderate" for a bit more than a year.
Running below AeT is usually called "easy" (eg Daniels E pace or easy pace based on McMillan calculator) and paces between AeT and AnT are considered "moderate".

This is a matter of definitions. But if you want to run a majority of time between AeT and AnT, that would be a big mistake, see "80/20 training" book I mentioned above.

For an elite marathoner, the AeT pace (which defines the top of the "moderate" zone in the definition I use) is about 10-15"/mile slower than marathon pace. So for instance for an athlete with a 4'45/mile Marathon Race Pace (MRP), the AeT pace is at best at 4'55/mile.

Canova defines "Moderate" zone as between 92-97% of MRP, which means for him: MRPx1.03 to MRPx1.08, and so in the case of a 4'45/mile MRP gives the following zone: 4'55 to 5'08/mile, so, as I mentioned AT and SLIGHTLY BELOW the Aerobic threshold.

For the same athlete, Daniels (in table 5.2 of DRF 3rd ed) prescribes the following range for "E Pace" : 5'17-6'01/mile, so it is indeed below the "moderate" zone as defined by Canova. Thus when Daniels say "E pace", he really means "Easy", not moderate.

6 years ago 08/28/2017 6:53am EDT

re: Football Freddie

Football Freddie wrote:
Mark Allen is a case of massive volume at "easy" pace (30-40 hours per week across the events of the triathlon) rather than moderate pace.

At his best Mark Allen was at best potentially a 2:20 marathoner, however his AeT pace (MAF Pace) was 5'15/mile, whereas Daniel's easy zone for a ~2h20 marathoner is 6'41-5'53 range. So Allen ran "moderate" (in Canova's meaning of the word) not "easy only".

6 years ago 08/28/2017 8:46am EDT

re: MB8020

MB8020 wrote:
Football Freddie wrote:
Mark Allen is a case of massive volume at "easy" pace (30-40 hours per week across the events of the triathlon) rather than moderate pace.
At his best Mark Allen was at best potentially a 2:20 marathoner, however his AeT pace (MAF Pace) was 5'15/mile, whereas Daniel's easy zone for a ~2h20 marathoner is 6'41-5'53 range. So Allen ran "moderate" (in Canova's meaning of the word) not "easy only".

In terms of heart rate MAF pace is zone 2, which is "easy" rather than "moderate" in most systems.

6 years ago 08/28/2017 9:21am EDT

re: Coebra

Coebra wrote:
Okay-
Once again, we have a million different definitions and everyone talking past each other. Only want to mention this to help jewbacca out: otherwise I'd leave this alone.
as percentage of vvo2max
(With vvo2max pace per mile = exhaustive 3200m divided by 2)
Easy: 65-70%
LT-1: 75%
LT-2: 80%
True Lactate threshold = 83-88%
10k pace: 90-92%
5k pace: 97%
3k pace: 102%
1500m pace: 112%

So many definitions of intensity you have (LT-1, LT-2, True LT?!), so many individuals with individual differences. Besides, an average runner is able to sustain his or her vVO2max ~6-6,5 minutes, less if not prepared for that intensity.

Moderate is moderate, if you don't feel what's a moderate for you, run more, especially between the thresholds. A sprinter feels moderate while almost sprinting. Some days you feel moderate at X pace, other day in might differ significantly.

6 years ago 08/28/2017 9:31am EDT

re: MB8020

MB8020 wrote:
focus on results wrote:
There is no "aerobic threshold".
Yes, there is.
When you start running very very slowly, and progressively increases your speed, your blood lactate ([La]) will remains the same ("base level"). That may be between 8 and 12 km/h for you. Then, there is a point where the next increase of speed comes with a first increases of [La] above base level. This clearly defines the aerobic threshold.

You're a gullible idiot. There are two obscure papers on this from the early 80s and their findings have never been reproduced with statistically significant/valid data.

6 years ago 08/28/2017 9:41am EDT

re: focus on results

focus on results wrote:
You're a gullible idiot. There are two obscure papers on this from the early 80s and their findings have never been reproduced with statistically significant/valid data.

So Renato Canova is too, when still using these terms (Aet / AnT)? Why the need to play with words so seriously.

6 years ago 08/28/2017 10:16am EDT

re: jewbacca

jewbacca wrote:
Dgbkotdc wrote:
To say that moderate pace running does not produce specific, desirable adaptations is simply not true. Our thinking has become dominated by this idea of zone training but in reality aerobic benefits apply across a spectrum of paces.
I appreciate the thoughtful responses from everyone.
So let me focus on this thought for a second. There are undoubtedly benefits across the whole spectrum of paces, and Daniels says as much in his books. But he advocates for focusing on particular points in the spectrum in order to maximize the benefits you get from training, then he goes into the physiology of each key training pace.
Easy pace develops stroke volume, mitochondrial density, etc.
Threshold pace teaches your body to manage lactate.
Although he doesn't give a good reason for marathon pace, other than "I've seen good results from using it." This is in the 2nd edition. But obviously it's important for specificity in marathon training, so we'll assume it's a key pace considering the topic of the thread.
So since some have rightly pointed out that this question depends a bit on the runner in question, let's reframe the it for a runner who does 5:10 threshold pace, 5:30 marathon pace, and 7:00 easy pace. That would peg moderate pace somewhere between 5:30 and 7:00 (since it's not really well defined).
What are the specific benefits achieved by running 5:40-6:20 pace that aren't achieved by the other paces?
It sounds like some are suggesting there are gains to be made that aren't achieved by focusing on the key training paces.

Remember that DanielsÂ´books are meant for the masses and also for HS coaches with no coaching education, so he had to simplify things and thatÂ´s where his training zone concept come into play.

Elites just donÂ´t train like that. Repeats at 10k pace has no place in the Daniels system, and yet they are the most specific training for a 10k race. Moderate pace will give a slightly stronger aerobic stimulus than easy pace. If youÂ´re an elite who is already doing high mileage and relevant workout, then the next logical step is to speed up the some of the easy days.

6 years ago 08/28/2017 10:19am EDT

re: Eh??

Eh?? wrote:
jewbacca wrote:
I appreciate the thoughtful responses from everyone.
So let me focus on this thought for a second. There are undoubtedly benefits across the whole spectrum of paces, and Daniels says as much in his books. But he advocates for focusing on particular points in the spectrum in order to maximize the benefits you get from training, then he goes into the physiology of each key training pace.
Easy pace develops stroke volume, mitochondrial density, etc.
Threshold pace teaches your body to manage lactate.
Although he doesn't give a good reason for marathon pace, other than "I've seen good results from using it." This is in the 2nd edition. But obviously it's important for specificity in marathon training, so we'll assume it's a key pace considering the topic of the thread.
So since some have rightly pointed out that this question depends a bit on the runner in question, let's reframe the it for a runner who does 5:10 threshold pace, 5:30 marathon pace, and 7:00 easy pace. That would peg moderate pace somewhere between 5:30 and 7:00 (since it's not really well defined).
What are the specific benefits achieved by running 5:40-6:20 pace that aren't achieved by the other paces?
It sounds like some are suggesting there are gains to be made that aren't achieved by focusing on the key training paces.
Remember that DanielsÂ´books are meant for the masses and also for HS coaches with no coaching education, so he had to simplify things and thatÂ´s where his training zone concept come into play.
Elites just donÂ´t train like that. Repeats at 10k pace has no place in the Daniels system, and yet they are the most specific training for a 10k race. Moderate pace will give a slightly stronger aerobic stimulus than easy pace. If youÂ´re an elite who is already doing high mileage and relevant workout, then the next logical step is to speed up the some of the easy days.

How about running even higher mileage?

6 years ago 08/28/2017 10:25am EDT

re: U.N.O.

U.N.O. wrote:
focus on results wrote:
You're a gullible idiot. There are two obscure papers on this from the early 80s and their findings have never been reproduced with statistically significant/valid data.
So Renato Canova is too, when still using these terms (Aet / AnT)? Why the need to play with words so seriously.

Canova calls 2 mmol/l lactate level "aerobic threshold" and 4 mmol/l lactate level "anaerobic threshold". That doesn't give these terms any useful scientific meanings. If you make any other definition for "aerobic threshold" it will result in lactate levels all over the place and not necessarily close to 2 mmol/l. This whole thing is nothing but BS scientifically uneducated minds love to spread on message boards.

6 years ago 08/28/2017 10:33am EDT

re: focus on results

focus on results wrote:
Canova calls 2 mmol/l lactate level "aerobic threshold" and 4 mmol/l lactate level "anaerobic threshold". That doesn't give these terms any useful scientific meanings. This whole thing is nothing but BS scientifically uneducated minds love to spread on message boards.

Yet he has produced so many great runners. How many have you produced? And, there's no need to be such an aggressive...

6 years ago 08/28/2017 10:37am EDT

re: focus on results

The 2mmol/l and 4mmol/l is an approximation of the true AeT and AnT.

You might look to Andrew Jones' paper for instance (link below), where the two threshold are clearly defined (he calls them "Lactate Threshold" and "Lactacte Turnpoint" instead of AeT and AnT, but basically it is the same).

But maybe Jones is also a

6 years ago 08/28/2017 10:40am EDT

re: focus on results

The 2mmol/l and 4mmol/l is an approximation of the true AeT and AnT.

But maybe Jones is also a "scientifically uneducated minds love to spread on message boards" ;-)

https://www.exeter.ac.uk/media/universityofexeter/internationalexeter/documents/iss/paula_ijssc_paper.pdf

Page 4 of 4

1 3 4

Next Last

Reply Replying to

Username

Password

Leave the password field blank to post anonymously.

Post Preview

By posting you acknowledge that you have read and abide by our Terms and Conditions.

Remember me on this device.

How important is "moderate" pace in HM and Marathon training?

Of General Interest

This thread has already been deleted.

You have been subscribed.

How important is "moderate" pace in HM and Marathon training?

Jump To A Page

Jump To A Page

Of General Interest

This thread has already been deleted.

Reply Replying to

You have been subscribed.