My point to the 800m training is very simple. Improving endurance without losing anaerobic capacity and sprinting speed. Year after year. It´s so simple that it´s hard to believe but it works.
This is alot what Snell did. Maybe there isn´t need to run that much but anyway, if you can improve endurance without losing speed, then the second lap of the race will get better and better. Speed+endurance=speed endurance
U.N.O. wrote:
Speed+endurance=speed endurance
On the whole I agree but this I disagree with. Some people have good 200 speed (22-23), good endurance (20 miles at 6 minute pace is their long run, but cannot put it together for 800m-1500m.
probably lack of specific training. With this kind of endurance, they should be flying.
xxx wrote:
probably lack of specific training. With this kind of endurance, they should be flying.
What specific training...my uh... friend wants to know so he can stop sucking so bad at 800m-1500m
Some race simulation workouts for 1500m/5000m a la Tony Benson
This seems like a good thread to link this article from an old (2002) British Milers Club newsletter. "Optimum Speed Distribution in 800 meters and Training Implications". It starts on the third page of the PDF file, though the page itself is labelled "1".
Good read, talks about the different energy systems, and how one should race and train in light of knowing about the energy systems.
One of the best articles about running I've ever seen..excellent!
How about some race times? Running a 20mi run at 6mpm is a very vague effort. What about race times between 400-13.1 and what is the correlation? I am guessing your not as aerobically strong as you think.Without knowing any details I am guessing your LA system isn't developed. Sounds like a case of doing a lot of slow distance instead of steady. You can run fast because of the CP system provides most of the energy.
not always wrote:
xxx wrote:probably lack of specific training. With this kind of endurance, they should be flying.
What specific training...my uh... friend wants to know so he can stop sucking so bad at 800m-1500m
bump
not always wrote:
U.N.O. wrote:Speed+endurance=speed endurance
On the whole I agree but this I disagree with. Some people have good 200 speed (22-23), good endurance (20 miles at 6 minute pace is their long run, but cannot put it together for 800m-1500m.
When I say endurance I mean endurance near at vo2max paces. So race results of those "some people" at 3k-5k (1500m-mile too) would be better indicator of high end endurance than capacity in the long run I think.
But I would like to know more of guys from your example. What are their race results at 800-5000m distances (if they have ran those..)? For me that kind of speed and endurance at the long run feels quite good compination. That kind of long distance or marathon pace-endurance is definetly an asset but from that on I think it is a matter of improving the real high end and more 800-1500m spesific endurance, at 3-5k paces.
A common mistake in these sessions is that you end up to train your anaerobic endurance at the end of the session, or worse from first interval on if the pace is too fast.
You will need to train your anaerobic side too but only a short period before competitions so be careful with vo2max-sessions in the base period. Better to use longer repetitions at slower paces in the winter or so.
Aerobic v Anaerobic work
Study that i read was 54% aerobic/ 46% anaerobic
you get 12 seconds of "free" anaerobic from the energy stored in a rested state in your muscles, so you might as well get out hard and not waste it.
in my experience, the race is aerobic from then until about 250m to go....you have to train to feel "comfortable" even at face pace so that you can reacts to the two kicks that occur in every elit 800m race.
250m to go or so the pace changes usually be someone forcing the issue and you have to react in one to two strides, you start to feel the burn but your strength work lets you power through and keep your basic stride.
With 120 to go the race begins, either you are there or you are off the pace, but at this point it is completely anaerobic and you are flat out...most runners will shift and sit like a sprinter and see if they have more energy in the muscles, but at this point you have 15 seconds or so until the monkey is on your back and you rig up. So dont start the flat out too early!
I agree that the anaerobic system is much more endocrine related (ie enzymatic) and you can tune it up in 6-8 weeks...you also get stale REALLY fast once you are peeking (4 weeks and it is tough to keep super sharp).
Aerobic work is more physiological, capillary development, cellular, oxygen transport, etc..improve your power/body weight ratio so that you are increasing "horsepower". At the end of the day you have the motor (legs) moving the luggage (upper body). You can REALLY keep improving this at least into your late 20s if you train consistantly and stay healthy on your feet.
Peter Coe also address improving power for stride length with hills/circuits, and as we discussed before nervous system by running slight downhills fast with turnover. in the 800m a 1 percent improvement is 1 second, so you might make a 1:43 guy run 1:41 this way, and Coe certainty did.
Also, ALOT easier if you are working with someone with an enormous amount of natural talent. In the running group I worked out with our High School times were 1:51 (me), 1:50, 1:49, and 1:48.
Would you say that someone who can run 22-23 and 20 miles in 2 hours has the potential to be world class over 800m-10000m meters? I would say that world class performances over those distances have a LOT to do with heart and lung size, or VO2 max.
What if the runner in question does not have a good oxygen uptake? That would not effect the 200 meter time obviously, and maybe not the 20 mile/marathon time as that is at a much slower pace.
Maybe ability of
23
50
1:55
4:25
15:30
33:00
1:12:00
2:30:00
So good 200 time, good marathon time, but weaker 800/mile/5k times.
Could this person change to
23/50/1:50/4:05/14:20 with VO2 work? Is that the only main factor?
Renato Canova has stated on past threads that to improve one's specific endurance, you have to run within 10% of the pace- from 90-110% race pace. So for a 1:52 800m, between 12.6 and 15.4 seconds per 100 is specific training. This is not the only kind of training necessary (far from it) but it increases in importance as one's main race gets closer. What is important is increasing both the speed (via hill sprints and circuits) and the endurance (via long runs, tempo, and VO2 max workouts) during the off season, then focusing on speed endurance at about 90-95% of competitive speed, and finally focusing on race pace. Note that Canova states that he never likes to have the same type of session multiple times per week. He also likes to avoid producing too much lactic acid except at critical points when the system must be trained because lactic acid production damages the aerobic and neuromuscular capabilities. There are only a few really tough race pace type workouts like 2-3X600m- maybe once per 10 days in the competitive season. Even in the competitive season much of the work is stuff like 10X500m at about 90% of 800m pace and workouts like 2X1000,2X800,2X600,2X400,2X200 with the first slower and the 2nd at 90% of the maximum for the interval's distance.
I'm no expert at Canova's training though, although it would be great if he would chime in on this thread with any helpful information, like how many quality days per week an 800 meter guy should run.
In the past Canova posted some good advice on the 800. Maybe someone can find the link. I have not been able to find it. Hopefully it is still somewhere on this forum.
not always wrote:
Would you say that someone who can run 22-23 and 20 miles in 2 hours has the potential to be world class over 800m-10000m meters?
Maybe ability of
23
50
1:55
4:25
15:30
33:00
1:12:00
2:30:00
So good 200 time, good marathon time, but weaker 800/mile/5k times.
Could this person change to
23/50/1:50/4:05/14:20 with VO2 work? Is that the only main factor?
Running 20miles in 2hours is good but world class elites are different story. For 800m runner it is great even to elites but is it necessary that is another question.
About those under-over distance pb´s it is odd that 800m time is only 1.55. The way to improve is, if the anaerobic side is taked care properly enough (probably is, it´s easy to do), to focus on endurance. Not just long runs or anaerobic threshold or vo2max work alone but all together.
Though you still have to train that anaerobic capacity stuff all year along to avoid losing it, but the main season to that kind of work is only a short period before competitions.
Here is some good stuff from Renato Canova:
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=458338&page=1canova just misapplies the emphasis on specific versus general aerobic training for the 800m. His thinking is stuck because he has never experienced it himself as a runner. All the brilliant thinking in the world (which he clearly possesses) is not worth squat if it has been been specifically applied and one can only specifically apply it when one has experienced it himself. So please stop quoting Canova on the 800m because it is just not correct. Personally the only people i am interested in regarding the 800m is Lydiard, Cerutty and to a lesser extent Coe (although Harry Wilson was also great i just don't have as much info on him)
regarding general training methodology i really like Canova - he is very clear. (i hope that mitigates any bashing :))
wellnow wrote:
The first few seconds of any race are mostly Anaerobic.
In the 800m the FIRST LAP is the more Anaerobic.
The second lap is mostly Aerobic.
Don't believe what you read in most of the textbooks. The authors simply copy what has been written before, with little regard to accuracy or being up to date.
hi wellnow, it's been a while ... how are you?
So once again we meet on this issue - the currency of the Lactate Shuttle and the Central Governor for example isn't really a problem - it just hasn't been fully applied to the previous thinking ala Hill. When it is and i think Noakes is onto it there won;t be any debunking of aerobic v anaerobic at all - they will simply be linked together in a relationship. It won;t be out with the old and in with the new at all.
Re: the first laps as being more anaerobic than the second i feel that the base line in determining this is incorrect - for the simple reason that before we begin the race we are already predominately aerobic, and even moreso if we have had a correct warmup. It is the resting state aerobic that isn't being considered when this fact is being stated.
what do you think?
There have been a ton of pretty good coaches that don't have any meaningful running experience. Personally I think a lot of canova posts have some translation errors (or I am missing background to understand).If you have already decided who your Gurus are, what is the point of reading this thread? The is no doubt that Lydiard is right that you want to build your aerobic system. It is a lot more debateable if you running 100mpw with 1 tempo run at mp a week is the best way for all runners.
flow wrote:
canova just misapplies the emphasis on specific versus general aerobic training for the 800m. His thinking is stuck because he has never experienced it himself as a runner. All the brilliant thinking in the world (which he clearly possesses) is not worth squat if it has been been specifically applied and one can only specifically apply it when one has experienced it himself. So please stop quoting Canova on the 800m because it is just not correct. Personally the only people i am interested in regarding the 800m is Lydiard, Cerutty and to a lesser extent Coe (although Harry Wilson was also great i just don't have as much info on him)
regarding general training methodology i really like Canova - he is very clear. (i hope that mitigates any bashing :))
[quote]OR wrote:
If you have already decided who your Gurus are, what is the point of reading this thread? The is no doubt that Lydiard is right that you want to build your aerobic system. It is a lot more debateable if you running 100mpw with 1 tempo run at mp a week is the best way for all runners.
[quote]
i've found some guru-like coaches but probably not all of them so i continue looking around with open eyes.
I'm not sure if the 100mile thing is set in stone. What i know now is that it is necessary to continue to push your own personal boundaries outward - and increasing volume is step one surely - step two being increase intensity - and there are a myriad of ways to achieve this. For a starter Lydiard would shift from simply running for 1 hour to something slightly different. The change is from time based running to distance based running. So instead of running for 1 hour at a certain pace (best aerobic pace) he would find out how far it took to run that hour and mark it. Next time the goal is to reach that marked point faster. So this is a specific way to gradually increase intensity one step on from steady paced running. Fartlek could well be the next step.
flow wrote:
So instead of running for 1 hour at a certain pace (best aerobic pace) he would find out how far it took to run that hour and mark it. Next time the goal is to reach that marked point faster. So this is a specific way to gradually increase intensity one step on from steady paced running. Fartlek could well be the next step.
I thought that during the base phase it was supposed to be the same effort but the times came down on their own, without any additional effort.