Important moments and concepts in the history and development of Intermittent training

Antonio,I am happy to see your recent GREAT posts on this thread and the fact that this thread has survived and is again appearing on the front pages!I have some questions.

Antonio Cabral wrote:

The more I see the more I believe that the matrix of all training specifics (workouts as the Americans call that) that´s race PACE, THE MOTHER AND THE PACE GUIDE OF ALL SPECIFIC TRAINING. All turns around race pace.

I think your comment is true. But my question regarding it is this: if training at race pace(lets say for a 5k or 10k) is SO vital to an athletes physical adaptation to that pace (in other words, training at race pace is so key to one being able to handle that pace during a race), then why not do it MORE OFTEN??

Now I know the obvious answer is: Because…..

a) Training at race pace is stressful, and doing it too often will either break the athlete down too much, or cause the athlete to need more recovery days, which might cause him to decrease his overall training load, and inhibit his overall general aerobic development. And ..

B) again, since training at race pace is stressful, one might only be able to do a little bit of that each day (if one were attempting to do that each day), and again overall volume of aerobic training would suffer.

So…..I see some already obvious answers to my question. BUT……..isn’t there a way around those two concerns?? If we take our 15:00 5k runner (well, let’s say he is in 15:20 pace, but is shooting for 15:00), current fitness race pace is about 74 seconds for 400 meters, and goal race is 72 seconds. So lets say the athlete is shooting for an "in-between" (in between current fitness pace and goal race pace) training pace of 73 seconds for 400m.

Why couldn’t he do a few workouts a week (besides whatever other workouts he is doing) of intermittent training of repeat 100’s at that "in between" pace? That would be 100’s in 18.25 seconds for this athlete. By taking fairly short recoveries (but enough to feel mostly recovered), this athlete could do many 100’s, and still get in a good volume of training for that workout. He might do this for 45 minutes of time (overall time, includes recovery breaks).

Would a workout such as that really be that stressful??? Any more than a steady run of 45 minutes at lets say 7:00 mile pace? If race-pace is SO IMPORTANT, why do so many athletes/coaches choose:

* a moderate-effort , slower(not anywhere near race-pace) , STEADY (uninterrupted) , distance workout of decent volume (45 minutes; instead of choosing…

* a moderate effort, faster (near race pace ), INTERMITTENT distance workout of decent volume (same 45 minutes)????

To put it another way:

* Why does "steadiness" of training always top/trump "speed" of training on the list of importance for most coaches/athletes when developing their daily training regimen for their athletes? Or, put even another way: Why is the "continuity" of the run more important than the relation of the run’s pace to race pace? Now I FULLY understand that in order to make the run not too stressful, and allow the run to be carried on for a decent volume of time/miles (always an important consideration), and be used as part of athlete’s overall aerobic development, SOMETHING MUST BE SACRIFICED on that run: either pace or continuity, because obviously one can not train both near race-pace, do it continuously (uninterrupted by rest intervals) and FOR a good chunk of time. That would be impossible. And to do even two of those things (run at race pace AND continuously) would be both too stressful and would allow the athlete to only carry out short workouts. So, since we all agree that volume of aerobic training is extremely important, and should not be sacrificed during the base phase of an athletes preparation, what about the other two factors/aspects of the daily runs? Why is the "pace" of those daily aerobic base runs always sacrificed in favor of their "continuity" if running at "race-pace" is so important as a training tool???? Why not make them intermittent (sacrificing continuity) and make them faster?

And I understand that "faster" training is potentially more stressful, and thus most coaches feel (correctly) it needs to be used judiciously. But I feel this is because they think "faster" intermittent style training needs to be either a) QUITE fast (faster than race pace) or b) used mostly for longer repeats (400 and above) or c) done with almost no recovery. All of THOSE aspects DO INDEED make intermittent "faster" training stressful on the body. But as I have shown, if the repeats are short, the pace not sub-race-pace, and the recovery intervals long enough to allow some reasonable recovery, an intermittent-style workout does not have to be any more stressful than a steady run. , but the intermittent run would allow more total training volume at/near race pace.

So why choose "slower and steady" over "faster and intermittent" ????

I am sorry to beat a dead horse on this issue ( I have bought it up many times before, yes, it is related to my interest in the Igloi style of training), but I don’t feel my questions on this subject have been adequately answered by anyone, and……This is the INTERMITTENT THREAD, correct??? :-)

THANKS!

I apologize for the italics that took over my post on the 2nd half of it. If one finds reading al of those italics difficult, here is 2nd 1/2 of the post as it should have been posted:

I also want to know the answer to this question. But for instance of soem Igloi workout posted by Orville Atkins...

30 x 260 fresh speed with 180y jog recovery (meaning at close to race pace for him)

Or another patented Igloi/Schul workout done by dozens and dozens of runners over the years (Hansen, Gorman, Schul, Beatty, etc.)

20 laps shakeups (which I assume to mean sprinting the straights; or for that matter, running very close to race pace, followed by 100 more metres of jog for recovery (or as Lance said, complete-for the most part) x 40 reps

Shakeups were generally meant to loosen a runners legs for the more arduous reps to follow. Ted Banks, former UTEP coach, used shakeups too (borrowed term, I presume from Igloi) before and often after most rep workouts too.

I estimated, based upon what Banks said, that the speed was easy to moderate, about 70% effort.

That is a good point Tinman, I think you are correct about the meaning and derivation of "shake-ups" or "shake-outs". (didn't Lydiard also speak of early morning runs as "shake-outs"/up" ?).

Such striders are more about warming up then training, but of course they can/do add to a workouts overall conditioning component/stimulus (just as a 3 mile steady run warm-up each time before a track workout might be considered a "warm-up", but is still counted by most as adding towards the overall volume of aerobic conditioning done by the athlete).

BUT......"answer's" question (well, he is adding to my question) still remains concerning regular use of race-pace short repeats. Igloi/Schul certainly ran/prosribed multiple paces (as you pointed out before, some faster than race-pace, some slower), but clearly they were OFTEN running 100-150m repeats right at/around race pace, for high volumes.

So the question still remains:

why does the steadiness/continuity (no breaks, no intermittence) of a run so often trump/take precedence over the pace of a run in most coaches/athlete's world's?

why is intermittent training only a 2-3 times a week tool for most coaches' programs? If I am correct in my assesment, intermittent training DOES NOT HAVE TO BE harder/more stressful NOR a less voluminous(total time training) NOR a less aerobic type of training than moderate-paced steady runs are. But it DOES include a lot more running at/near race pace (though it achieve this through the sacrifice of continuity, ie, it involves rest breaks).

What's more important? Being near race-pace a lot during training, or running steadily (without breaks) ? Which is stimulates the body to be more ready to race? In races, one runs STEADILY (without breaks). But one also runs QUICKLY (by definition, at race pace).

I see both slower steady runs AND faster intermittent runs being good aerobic stimulus for runners. But I think to many coaches/athletes take the STEADY/SLOWER route, and I am not sure why (I think is mainly based on a bias towards thinking that intermittent training must be INTENSE, and DIFFICULT, when it does not have to be).

antonio thanks for your reply. German Silva and Andres Espinoza did many 2000 meter repeats in dirt loops when training for the marathon. I think the brazilian Ronaldo Da Casto used intermittent training also. Some sessions of 3-4X5K with some 3 minutos recovering

Sir Lance:

clearly i am no antonio cabral. but let me tell you that it is about the recovery.

Do you think that if a runner who does the following sessions in a 7 day cycle will feel recover enough to do extra 2 day of 20-30 minutos of work at race pace? or even if you want to extend it to a 10 day cycle.

Day 1 - easy

Day 2 - 6X1000

Day 3 - easy

Day 4 - easy

Day 5 - 20X200

Day 6 - easy

Day 7 - 25-35' tempo run

In all my time coaching i haven't had an athlete who can perform more than 2-3 sessions in a 7-10 day cycle and stay healthy for more than 18 months, NEVER!! If you coach or know someone who can perform 4-5 hard sessions in 7 or 10 day cycle and stay healthy then you have a special runner in your hands.

It may be that distance coaches, by and large, don't know about the type of intermittent training you are describing. Now in sprinting, this type of intermittent training IS used--FOR RECOVERY. The type of intermittent training used for this is extensive tempo, similiar to what Antonio described for German tempo training, and it comes to about 70-75% (or less)of max speed with about a 1:4 work/recovery ratio. So a sprinter with 21.0 200 speed might do 10 X 200 in 30 with a 2:00 rest as a recovery day, and you can indeed go at 95-100% speed the very next day without overtraining.

Extensive tempo is covered in the Level-I/Level-II coaching materials, and you can find it in the "USA Track and Field Coaching Manual"...but only in the sprinting section. If you go to some of the standard distance running texts, like "Better Training For Distance Runners," you will not find any description of this type of training. You will find a description of 20X200 at mile pace with 45-60 sec rest, but that is a very different type of session (anaerobic capacity).

The types of sessions mentioned by Renato obviously work or he wouldn't be using them, so maybe distance coaches need to widen their horizons a bit (or more than a bit).

[quote]Fuerza o Resistencia wrote:

"In all my time coaching i haven't had an athlete who can perform more than 2-3 sessions in a 7-10 day cycle and stay healthy for more than 18 months, NEVER!! If you coach or know someone who can perform 4-5 hard sessions in 7 or 10 day cycle and stay healthy then you have a special runner in your hands."

Feurza:

I agree completely. If a runner uses difficult training sessions rather than moderate intensity, moderate volume ones, then the frequency of sessions done per week seldom exceeds 3 unless the volume is reduced. The combination of energetic and structural stress accumulates too much for a runner to adapt. It is the experience of coaches world-wide that doing only 2-3 harder sessions per week is generally the best method to use. I actually don't think one has to race in a session to have optimal benefit, so in my view training in the zone of optimal adaptation is the key to success. As the runner becomes more fit, they need to increase the volume, speed, or reduce the recovery, but still the important thing is to not dig too deep into the reserves of adaptation. Temporary fatigue is the key, not chronic long-term fatigue.

I understand your confusion. Why not run 50 x 100m at a quick speed (race pace or faster) daily with just enough jogging recovery instead of running an hour or more at a slow pace is what you seem to be saying? It is not only a matter of intensity stimulus that creates a faster runner. It is a matter of demand and supply that factors in the mix.

Running longer reps improves supply more than production at the local site, so it has a place in the training mix just as even longer running at slower paces substantially improves the ability to supply fuel for ATP production.

Also, it is important to stimulate the various muscle fiber types with different intensities. Slow twitch fibers respond best to intensities in the 55-75% of VO2 max range, research shows, so slow to moderate distance running is ideal for this fiber population. If 60% of a runner available fibers are slow twitch, running a good portion of weekly sessions at slow to moderate speeds is quite important.

Fast oxidative glycoltic fibers respond best to training around 75-90% of VO2 max, so moderate to somewhat strong paces are ideal stimuli for this fiber population.

Fast glcotlytic (white) muscle fibers respond to high speeds well, so if a runner has this fiber population, they need fast reps to prosper.

The exact amount, blend, and frequency of training stimuli vary some as part of the individual design of training programs for each runner. If you are a coach and have two 3:45 1500m runners, one might need more long reps at somewhat fast speeds because they have a lot of fast oxidative fibers while the other runner may need a lot of short but very fast reps to prosper. This is why there is no one perfect training program. Each runner needs something different to reach their personal potential.

Great post Tinman, keep it up!

First of all many thanks to you all - Tinman, Lance, Fuerza (i´m curious to know your citizenship), Speed Kills, Pete, Dunnes, you all - excuse me if i forget to name someone, i think that we all can improve our running knoweledge and discuss sincerly one each other in serenity and tranqulity. I´m very pleased with the revitalization of this thread that i did open. Secondly, before to enter in this discussion with my comments - to be able to comment last posts i will need to read that several times - so good are that material - i want to make a comment about something that Fuerza did post.

Fuerza o Resistencia wrote:

antonio thanks for your reply. German Silva and Andres Espinoza did many 2000 meter repeats in dirt loops when training for the marathon. I think the brazilian Ronaldo Da Casto used intermittent training also. Some sessions of 3-4X5K with some 3 minutos recovering

If i understood both mexican runner´s - Andres he is master world marathon - right? - you say they do that in dirty loops refgarding a comment that i did that the need of long reps for the marathon if you do that on synthetic trcak track that´s too much and you have a serious risk of injuries. Then as the pace for marathon workouts in long reps isn´t so fast as that - if you have a good outdoor surface that´s find. Besides 10X2000m - that´s 20kilos - 50laps over and over a 400m lap - that´s very hard for the mind, but if you do that in an outdoor that´s the best choise i guess.

Now, an hot issue. That´s not the first time that i see a reference to Ronaldo Costa (not Ronaldo de Casto (LOL)), the brazilien runner that in 1998 in the Berlin marathon did 2:06 being the first human being to run the 42.195Kilos of a marathon run in a pace faster than the mythical barrier of a 3:00/by kilo pace.

But he did that world record in a negative split. He did 1:06 for the first half (HM) and 1:02 for the second part, and Posso - his agent at that time said that he did some final kilos in 2:48/kilo pace. The only problem is that is soon ws obscured by 2 reasons. One is that Kay Kay (Khalid Khannouchi) soon break his WR, and the second is the fact that Ronaldo did run several marathons - no one faster than 2:13 (!). he did try London, 2:13 and 2:16 and ends his career with an obcure 2:26, 3 years later of that world record - with the promise that he would break the world record once again.

This said, i need to say that i did studied Ronaldo career, Ronaldo marathon training that includes lots of nutricionist advise by a professional nutricionist.

Ronaldo coach was the Brazilien Cavalheiro known as a sprint coach, similar to Renato Canova that also was a past coach of speed runners.

Asking the question of Fuerza, Ronaldo also did 1 minute, and later on 2min and 3 minutes/fast runs \"by feeling\" rec= 20-30 seconds easy jog. All takes 1h30min long, that means 60X1min(60min)/fast pace rec=59X30sec(27:30min)/jog, or 30X2min(=60min)/fast pace rec=29X30sec(=27:30min)/jog or 20X3min(060min)fast rec=29X30sec(=27:30min)/jog.

Then the training improves for 1000m track reps; 2000m reps, 3000m reps, 4000m reps and the final test that´s 4-5X5000m all that workouts in negative split.

I think that this 60X1min style also answers a lot about the use of intermittent training in the Lance-a-Lot suggested formats. This have also some relation to fartlek, that´s the bright twin brother of the interval training by feeling, with the benefice that can done outdoors.

Really the intermittent training - in lots of possible formats - we willn´t end to consider that vital to promote performance improvement. This is really the wheel invention of training distance.

One important point to remind ourselves about, covered earlier, is the idea that there are basically two types of training: genaerlized and specific. The use of intermittent training can be used in both cases. Short reps with brief breaks (interval training) can be used extensively in the general preparatory period. In the specialized period, it can then become a support-maintenance training. Longer reps can be used at any time of the year, too, but they become much more important as the goal race nears. Aslo,race exact speeds become the focus in the specialization training period.

A marathoner can use many workouts of 50 or 60 x 1 minute faster, 30 seconds slower in the genaral prep period but in the specialized prep period long repeats at marathon race pace (plus or minus a little) become really important. So, doing workouts such as 3-5 x 3k-5k contibute greatly to marathon success in the final weeks before a marathon race.

I want to clarify with the 5k suggestions earlier, that the 30 second rests were stopping in between, i.e. passive, not active recoveries.

If they were active, then there is much consideration for the speed of recovery. Usually if it is 1/2 apeed, then the time in between is the same as the run, and the distance covered is half. But there can be so many variations.

Mostly through the bulk of my running, including 800 meters through many marathons, I have used active recoveries. In contrast for the begining years, my training was exclusively resting in between. Now I am reverting to resting in between again and find this is better for me, though keeping the rests not as long. It can be either way, but I find this is better for me.

Running with a 30 seconds active recovery at slow speed, the heart rate might only come down 10 beats. Even stopping the heart rate does not come down very much, but the respiration gets more stimulus and relief in between. For me, I find this much more progressive.

In my opinion, having active recovery in between is not intermittent training, but is continuous, as you are not stopping and the running is continuous. I understand this is a question of semantics, but this is my feeling. Any time the running is not stopping, then it is continuous, even though there are intervals faster and slower.

The last 2-3 years I have done this both ways, but am favoring stopping in between, and the rests being shorter. Along with this, and instead of the active recoveries, I like doing the faster continuous steady running. So it is a combination of faster steady running, continuously, and the repetitions with short rests in between.

An example of passive vs active recovery is like this:

Passive:

40x 1:00 with 30s rests

Active:

20x 1:00 with 1:00 jogging between

These are similar as to volume, pace, and effects.

However, with the passive method you have double the time at race pace, and no jogging. It is all at race pace. Also there is more race pace covered per time. I am not advocating one way or the other, but saying that I find the passive method to give me better stimulation and recovery in between.

Antonio Cabral wrote:

Ronaldo did run several marathons - no one faster than 2:13 (!). he did try London, 2:13 and 2:16 and ends his career with an obcure 2:26, 3 years later of that world record - with the promise that he would break the world record once again.

Antonio,

Thank you for your continuing contributions. If I might ask your opinion on two things:

1) What do you think it was about Ronaldo's training that prepared him to run 2:06;

2) Do you think there was some problem with his training that did not prepare him run at that same level again and, of so, what was the problem with his training?

Thanks.

Lance

I want to comment about the use of your workout – that up to 45min total – ultra short bouts in race pace or a bit faster with short active recover.

I think that Fuerza o Resistenzia as well as Tinman they are very right about the training frequency. You see, most runner´s aren´t able to tolerate more than 2-2 ½ to 3 hard workouts in a micro cycle (7 to 10 days microcycle). Eventually in some season phase or preparing a special competition they high up the frequency, but that´s dangerous. The danger of injury or overtraining is a reality. Those damn american Tuesdays+ Thursdays hard workouts+ Saturdays race or time trial and Sunday long run in a hard pace, most of teenagers use that, this is devastating for most of them. No aerobic base of sustain, too much hard, soon they will give up to run and hate running.

Let´s take a look for the Fuerza weekly schedule as an example. I see here a latino-spanish micro-cycle design or at least a strong latino influence.

Day 1 - easy

Day 2 - 6X1000, or 10X800m or 4Xmile or 3X2000m or 2X3000m

Day 3 - easy

Day 4 - easy

Day 5 - 20X200 or 30X100m or15X300m or 12X400m or 10X500m or 8X600m

Day 6 - easy

Day 7 - 25-35' tempo run or 40min LT management (continous run) or a LT fartlek

If i want to expand the specifics i will try this style, add some more extensive to the day 2, 5 and 7

Ex:

Day 1 - easy

Day 2 – ex: 5X400m/RP rec=100m ahead on track in 50% race pace + 6X1000m + (5min to 10min long pause)+ 5X400m OR 6X1000m/Race Pace + 3X500m/all out rec=complete recover OR 8X200m+(the option are so many) + (5min to 10min long pause)+ 6X1000m/RP

My logic here is to add more charge work, and different stimulus.

Once again the individual training needs – in the season moment of his strong/weak points makes my decision. If i want aerobic power and the runner have speed (fast for the distance) but lacks of strength endurance, then i will try ASCENDENT rep. distances (ex: 5X400m+6X1000m), but if runner needs speed pace, i will tray DESCENDENT rep. Distances (ex:6X1000m+5X400m)

Day 3 - easy

Day 4 - easy

Day 5 - 20X200. Here i may use the same logic of day 2. I wil expand this workout for e:25X200m. But why not replace this workout for your “45mim "shake-ups" or "shake-outs" ?

And why not start with 20min "shake-ups" or "shake-outs", instead of your 45m and after a long pause try 10X200m ?

Day 6 - easy

Day 7 - 25-35' tempo run. This day 7 is the one that i will start to replace for your 45mim "shake-ups" or "shake-outs" early in the season, and then in a advanced training period progress for 25-30min tempo run. Do you know why? Because the shake ups/out´s is the more similar to a 25min LT run. But i will discuss that later

What i want to express here, is that i don´t agree with your idea to introduce that Shake ups/outs in the days 3,4 or 6. That will be a mistake. The best solution that´s to replace the day 2, 5 and/or 7 with Shake ups/outs or ADD that Shake ups/outs to the days 2,5, and/or 7, but let all the rest be easy days – that the only concern that´s aerobic mileage and recover/regeneration.

Consider that good sense Tinman and Fuerza comments about training frequency that - In all my time coaching i haven't had an athlete who can perform more than 2-3 sessions in a 7-10 day cycle and stay healthy for more than 18 months, NEVER!! If you coach or know someone who can perform 4-5 hard sessions in 7 or 10 day cycle and stay healthy then you have a special runner in your hands. – and consider also that your Lance workout is a good one, I will use that as i said and never full a schedule with Shakeups/outs.

In this post I comment about the training weekly frequency of that Shake ups/outs workout and how i think that´s corrcet to insert that in a micro-cycle training schedule. But next time i will comment about the benefits and prejudices of that workout relate to continuous run workout or to short or long intermittent workouts (classic short and long reps.

How to win over Paul Tergat in an Olympic marathon !

PART 1

Of course this is a my own private joke, but that´s also true, that Alberto did win over Paul Tergat in Athens marathon (and also WC Gharib), but this my post title sentence is simply to get the attention and you may analyse how the Portuguese Alberto Chaiça did prepare his second Big Games marathon that ended in a 8th Olympic place, after his first Big marathon achievement

4th place in 2003 Paris World champs.

http://www.iaaf.org/OLY04/results/gender=M/discipline=MAR/combCode=hash/roundCode=f/index.html

I do post the Alberto Chaiça training because I think that´s a good example of the use of the intermittent training outdoors and by time duration, with active recover, in this particular case.

This is the complete marathon training programme for Alberto Chaiça in the road for 2004 Athens Olympics that he did 8th place.

The programme starts in May 01, after 3 weeks of complete rest.

About the training programme I want to say something that you may understand all, programme contest:

1/the training follows basic principles that we adopt for the marathon: mileage volume, long one sessions and also Lactate Training Management that in the case of Chaiça that´s merged in daily continuous runs – in a pace that i estimate that have his maximum intensity in 3:18-3:20 by kilo (sea level) and 3:25-3:27 (in altitude). Some runs are aerobic easy runs, but some other intense continuous runs that start in warmup pace but soon that speed up to intensity to what we consider Continuous and Intensive Pace, done by feeling and HRM accuracy (up to max.HRM less 20 beats).

2/Apart from that the Chaiça´s marathon training still follows basic elements that we preserve from the typical training programme, as 1-2-3 basic workouts (1=faster than race pace by reps in short duration ; close to Race Pace in long duration reps – converted to marathon pace/duration; and 3= that I did mention in point 1/).

3/ For several reasons we decide that all training programme – workout included – would be done in outdoor. Thus, Alberto Chiaça he did several altitude stays durng this specific period, stays in hilly places – remember that Athens marathon course was very hilly also indeed. Why, the workouts were all out of track ? In several altitude stays Chaiça haven´t no easy access to a track, and as Chaiça - during all his long career - uses to train on track every week on, for that Olympic marathon - for physical and physiologic arguments we decide that´s time to change.

Other reason is the fact that most of the track that exists are down the altitude that Chaiça want to run the marathon workouts. Chaiça still feels comfortable training workouts higher than 2000 meters.

Meanwhile we didn´t change too much the workouts in his inner structure – that means relate paces and intensities to routine track pace workouts that Chaiça is used to do. The last argument for not to use track is that Athens course isn´t a flat one but an irregular course, an hilly one. Consequently with an irregular main even pace pace. Then if the marathon have that terrain conditions we may simulate similar terrain conditions in the plan.

4/One point we think that´s the key for the marathon success – at least it works with most of the runners we did train for that event distance. We try to be Extensive and Progressive along all the plan (as far as the plan goes further and further (more sets, more distance, more and more time duration). The other rule that we consider the key for the marathon that´s Active Recover. In a marathon training all training is active, including the recover – of course.

By Extensive and Progressive straategy, that means to add more sets, more reps, more total distance or longer sets as long as the programme goes on. That´s a good key to training adaptation to the the volume and the extend.

5/in the Chaiça case -as you may see - our 1-2-3 formula is (1) solved by 60sec fartlek - short duration sets with active recover. We estimate that the pace is 2:50/by kilo (sea level) and 2:55/by kilo (altitude) and the active recover period that´s 3:18-3:20 by kilo (sea level) and 3:25-3:27 (in altitude).

(2) The case of the long sets that´s quite close to what would be Chaiça marathon Race Pace – 2:07 estimate for a perfect run (but his PB that´s 2:09 in paris World Champs. Of course because that all is done in hilly terrains, the pace flows a lot, but that´s important to run “by feeling” despite he did that in very irregular course terrains.

(3) intense continue runs – LTM training and tempo runs – that is present in Chaiça schedule but not in the isolate/discriminate workout for all the rest, but simply that intense LT runs the are all merged in the daily runs. Ex: when we mention a session unity like this one 40min=10 kilos, despite that the average is 4:00 by kilo, you may consider that a run that starts in ex: 4:20/4:10 kilo pace for the first the first minutes changes for 3:30/3:20 by kilo in the next minutes and ends in 3:10/3:20 by kilo in the last period.

6/The case of hill workouts– we would like that Alberto Chaiça did more of that stuff, but since as Achilles tendon injury appears in the first altitude stay, that needs Chaiça to stop the training programme and come to Portugal to look for treatment, we exclude that good training format from the Chaiça fix schedule. We need to “sacrifice” something to solve the injury, and as they said that too much fast runs in a hilly surface that could cause Achilles tendon problems we give up. But we never give up to use hilly courses in altitude to do all the rest of the runs.

7/About flexibility exercises he did that after each training unity with no exception.

8/Some other training details as “condiments” that you can see in the training schedule as 40 kilos (26miles) in one training session in a hilly course in 2h22min – a super/extra long one, 2 hilly runs as competition time-trails or Check control tests – that´s all in the file. As you may see he did high volume mileage, and to be sincere this is in the first line of our training priorities for the marathon. In some weeks he did 160miles total.

Before to post the Chaiça training schedule to the road for Athens marathon, once again I want to say that i´m not the head coach of Alberto Chaiça. The coach that´s Americo Brito. But since i´m a very close friend of Americo, we are like close brothers, thus I have a deep knowledge what´s Chaiça training. I´m also a good friend of Alberto Chaiça.

NAME:ALBERTO CHAIÇA 2004/MAY

(after 3 weeks of complete rest)

May 01 – AM:45min =11kilos // PM: 45min=11Kilos

May 02 – AM:70min=18kilos

May 03 – AM:50min=13kilos // PM:50min=13kilos

May 04 – AM:60min=16kilos

May 05 – AM:50min=13kilos // PM:20min w/up + outdoor 10X60sec/fast rec=60sec/easy run + 20min c/down

May 06 – AM:70min+6 strides=18kilos

May 07 – AM:80min=17kilos // PM:20min w/up + outdoor 10X70sec Uphill/90% all out rec=downhill jog/2:30min + 20min c/down=10kilos

May 08 – AM:80min =17kilos // PM: 25min w/up + outdoor hilly 2X10min/fast rec=10min/easy run + 20min c/down=10kilos

May 09 – AM:80min=19kilos

WEEK MILEAGE:157kilos

May 10 – AM:60min=16kilos // PM:50min=13kilos

May 11 – AM:70min + 8 strides=18kilos

May 12 – AM:60min=17kilos // PM: 20min w/up + outdoor hilly 12X60sec/fast rec=60sec easy run + 20min c/down=11kilos

May 13 – AM:75min + 8 strides=19kilos

May 14 – AM:80min=17kilos // PM: 20min w/up + outdoor 10X70sec Uphill/90% all out rec=downhill jog/2:30min + 20min c/down=11kilos

May 15 – AM:90min=22kilos // outdoor hilly 5X6min/fast rec=5min easy run+ 20min c/down=14kilos

PM:25min=13kilos

May 16 – AM:90min=13kilos

WEEK MILEAGE:179kilos

May 17 – AM:50min=13kilos // PM:45min+6strides=11kilos

May 18 – AM:70min=18kilos

May 19 – AM:60min=16kilos // PM:40min=10kilos

May 20 – AM:60min including outdoor 10X70sec Uphill/90% all out rec=downhill jog/2:30min=16kilos

May 21 – AM:45min=11kilos // PM:45min=11kilos

May 22 – AM:30min=8kilos

May 23 – AM: w/up + Hilly Half marathon race - 4th place + c/down=26kilos

WEEK MILEAGE:141kilos

May 24 – AM:50min=13kilos // PM:50min=13kilos

May 25 – AM:60min=16kilos // PM:50min=13kilos

May 26 – AM:60min=16kilos // PM: 20w/up + outdoor hilly 12X60sec/fast rec=60sec /easy run + 20min c/down=11kilos

May 27 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM:50min=13kilos

May 28 – AM:80min=20kilos // 20w/up +outdoor 12X70sec Uphill/90% all out rec=downhill jog/2:30min+20min c/down=13kilos

May 29 – AM:80min=20kilos // outdoor hilly 6X5min/fast rec=4min /easy run + 20min c/down=13kilos

May 30 – AM:100min=26kilos // PM:50min=13kilos

WEEK MILEAGE:215kilos

May 31 – AM:60min=16kilos // PM:50min=13kilos

Month MILEAGE:759 KILOS