OP,
You may be interested in the posts by Summer Blueprint here:
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=4068677
You certainly cover the 7.5 mile and 10 mile paces but I'm not sure you really hit the equivalent 5 mile pace. I can't believe it would be less than 7:20 pace and could be as fast as 7:10.
The 5 mile pace is so important that it is run every week. As others said earlier and I thought you agreed, your training will keep her improving for 5 years but you don't have that long.
you have a point, but we do pretty much all our longer runs on technical trails. Been doing that for years & no injuries so far..
When you're basically banned from running track, you have to find something else to motivate you in the winter/spring. The girls like doing the trail races, so that's what we do.
There's an elite girl in NC that I understand races half marathons seriously, but then drops down to run 5k XC in the fall. I think she runs in the low 17s.
In late Spring, we'll add some VO2 stuff, like 5-10 X 1 min @ race pace.
In late summer, we'll add more intervals & tempo work & reduce volume a little.
I wouldn't worry about injuries, you seem to have your current training down, but we thought you wanted to change things up to run faster. I'm sure when you started trail races were a great motivator. Now you have a new goal or do you?
You can't use a girl in NC as an excuse. If she is running low 17s then running half marathons works for her. If she is a born miler then lots of slow stuff will work great. If your daughter is a born marathoner, she must run faster to get better and she has to start doing it now.
9ia-wmf9-78a5w5 wrote:
I wouldn't worry about injuries, you seem to have your current training down, but we thought you wanted to change things up to run faster. I'm sure when you started trail races were a great motivator. Now you have a new goal or do you?
You can't use a girl in NC as an excuse. If she is running low 17s then running half marathons works for her. If she is a born miler then lots of slow stuff will work great. If your daughter is a born marathoner, she must run faster to get better and she has to start doing it now.
I believe you must balance speed and endurance. Looking at the OP's most recent schedule, I tend to agree with previous posters that there are too many longer runs at, inevitably, slower paces. I suggest shortening them, and finding places to run on flat, level ground so she can experience moving quicker over shorter periods, thus giving her muscles and energy systems a somewhat different stimulus. And get those short sprints in twice a week-on the flat, so she can go as fast as possible.
Eg, here's a white 14yo boy (PR 55.00 400m 2:02.15 800m, 4:14.30 (windy) 1500m). He is not an 'endurance monster',nor is he a genuine speed merchant, but has got pretty good 'basic speed'. His long run is around 55min over a hilly, but not technical, course of dirt trails. There are flat bits to stretch out on, especially at the end. He would do one faster run for 40min, and an even faster run for 25min, both on flat trails. He would also do one 'interval' session-not necessarily on a synthetic track-the toughness of which depends on the phase of training. He also does the short 30-40m sprint stuff. He is slowly getting into working on strength with bodyweight exercises. A total of no more than 30km a week. He got third in the state for XC-4km for him- so he has adequate endurance to combine with the vital speed, which 'op ed' just doesn't get. He adjusts to two interval sessions, and drops the continuous running down, closer to the XC and track finals-ie a dual peak each year.
I think this illustrates the point that, even, or, perhaps, especially, if the girl is more of an 'endurance monster', you don't need to train her even more in that direction. She will become a 'plodder' and not reach her goal. You need to push her more in the 'speed merchant' direction, especially if that is not her first inclination and comfort zone. Only then will she achieve consistently faster paces over a range of distances, including your goal 5km race.
BTW, the girl in NC is presumably Alana Hadley. For years, she has done an insane amount of mileage and tough long (as in distance) interval sessions. She is on the 2016 Olympic Marathon Trials program. Her dad, who sounds like a bit of a nutter, coaches her. It may work out wonderfully well, but, even if her goal is the marathon, her eventual neglect of 'basic (raw) speed' may come back to haunt her. It pays to cover all bases.
Sorry to be long-winded but I hope that helps.
op ed wrote:
LM wrote:I'll see if I can be a little more clear.
Point I'm trying to make is if we have a distance runner that physically cannot move fast enough to run at some arbitrary pace he eventually wants to run. We could say he wants to run sub 4 mile, but his max speed he can move is 15s for 100m.
In theory, even if this runner developed perfect, flawless endurance (realistically not possible) he would still only be able to manage about 4:02 for the mile.
Or, if we extended this out (almost ad absurdum) we could envision a runner who can physically not move faster than 22s per 100m. This runner could obviously improve endurance and get into the 20s, 19s, or even 18s (though that kind of endurance has never been remotely approached in real world).
At some point, if this athlete wants to run say...low 17s, his "speed" MUST improve. If you cannot move faster than 22s every 100m then one cant run any faster than 88s quarters.
What I'm trying to get from you is, in your opinion, how does this hypothetical runner become capable of running low 17s, given that he physically isn't capable of moving that fast initially?
No one will EVER run a distance event at close to their max speed. That max or basic speed will NEVER be a limiting factor for a distance race. Why is that so hard to comprehend?
If someone can't run faster than 15s in a flying 100m, then they will NEVER run a 60s 400m, nor will they run ANY distance longer than 100 or so meters at a pace equal to 15s per 100m. They will get slower.
Now what does that have to do with a mile or 5k? Nothing! If they can't even maintain that basic speed, how is it limiting their one mile or 5k time when such times are dependent upon a completely different energy system?
I mean, at this point I'm almost laughing out loud while typing this. Is this really over your head? How many more ways can I put it?
Sorry you had to type up your "example" two times but I've already clearly explained that multiple times throughout this thread.
Again, I don't know why this is so hard to grasp. Until you're positing a question in which your "example" is running a mile at the same pace that they run a flying 100m (which is ridiculous) your question regarding basic speed limiting any sort of distance event is pointless.
This borders on comical. So if you had a runner who had PRs of 20, 81, 5:29, and 16:45 and wanted to run a better mile you would tell him to work on his endurance? Sure, he could find a few seconds in the mile, but even if he ran the mile at 100 pace that's only 5:22.
What do you do if the guys wants sub 5? Tell him he is s.o.l.
Look, I don't normally give advice on these forums, but in case somebody reads this thread and is swayed by this argument, I've got to point this out. The thoughts on this board have helped me a lot in the past. Basic speed is always a limiting factor at 5000 meters to some extent. I'm a college coach who has had many all americans. Speed is almost never the determining or primary factor, though it can be for, say, a 10k guy who runs 28:56 three weeks after 14:19, and comes through 5k in 14:24 in that race. (That is a real example--he may have been able to break 60, but not 58, and sure, the 10k was a better field than the 5000).
To the OP: Speed alone doesn't do anything, but adding speed without sacrificing endurance actually improves endurance. Somebody is going to say that's BS, but it's true. But the trick is to add speed without sacrificing endurance. There are ways to do this, and they are very logical once you start thinking about what/how much recovery is demanded by certain types of speedwork once you're used to it. But for long term progress, long term aerobic development is really what gets somebody from 19 to 17. And at the HS level, nobody is anywhere close to tapped out. Don't stop progressing gradually there.