LateRunnerPhil - Peaking with Tinman Training for a 5k PR (6 weeks) / Training Log

webby wrote:

Thanks, Philipp. That's clear enough! The post right above his guessing his answer is what I would have guessed, too, based on his prior advice:

"If we added race pace work it would look like 3-4x1k @ CV + 3-4x400 @ 5K race pace + 2-3x200 @ 800-1500 pace."

Hope your legs have recovered now.

My legs felt MUCH better today. Super easy 5 mile jog yesterday (even on tired legs), eating lots of carbs and quality sleep fixed them. If the legs are fine I can hold 180+ cadence at any pace which is very efficient. If there is too much muscular fatigue, from hill sprints or running too fast, I only have 170 and running is neither enjoyable nor does it feel right.

We are talking here about peaking - if you only do CV+TinmanTempo+Easy LR all year long, you NEED to increase the stress if you want to peak and also elevate your VO2MAX. The important thing is to know exactly in what shape you are on the day of the VO2MAX session, because just going 5 secs/k (~8 sec/mile) too fast in a VO2MAX 1k rep can ruin the entire session. The CV is just an extended warm-up in the 3x1k @CV, 3x1k @VO2MAX session, key is to get in 3k of quality work at roughly 3k pace and then do the quick 200s on tired legs.

Sydney Masciarelli did exactly the same workout, longer warm-up and 3x1k@3k pace a few weeks before her 9:31 3k as HS sophomore on a workout Wednesday. This workout works great and is a great preparation of the even harder 3xMile this week (I plan to go faster than 3:20/k - 3:12/k - 3:06/k, which is around 5:15-5:05-4:55). I did the same workout last year on October 30, with splits of 5:36-5:28-5:18. I also plan to do some speed work in spikes after, 400-300-200 (only used spikes 2x so far in March).

LRP, this thread was a good read. Thank you for sharing your training.

Did / do you do your easy runs at the pace that Tinman’s calculator suggests? I have been using Daniels paces; on the faster side of what he suggests. These current training paces are in Tinman’s easy / moderate or moderate range.

I run low mileage (under 15 weekly) mostly because of pseudo injuries and paine. I wonder if I am overdoing these runs and I could benefit from lowering speed.

LateRunnerPhil wrote:

Sydney Masciarelli did exactly the same workout, longer warm-up and 3x1k@3k pace a few weeks before her 9:31 3k as HS sophomore on a workout Wednesday.

Haha. You know you're in good shape when you think of 3x1000 @ CV pace as a warmup for 3000 meters at VO2max and 1600 meters at 800 pace. I wouldn't call that the same as Sydney's workout -- at all. But more power to you for taking it in stride.

Why do you keep insisting that your CV pace is 3.20 per km? That's your 5k pace.

I don't mean to hijack the thread but just want to inform everyone here that Bekele is running Berlin at the end of this month, in case you haven't seen on some of the other threads.

Banana Bread wrote:

I don't mean to hijack the thread but just want to inform everyone here that Bekele is running Berlin at the end of this month, in case you haven't seen on some of the other threads.

LOL! DNF or DNS!!

someone has to ask wrote:

Why do you keep insisting that your CV pace is 3.20 per km? That's your 5k pace.

Because that's the pace that feels right, with holding back. And more importantly, I'm improving week after week running exactly the same effort (from 3:40/k to 3:20/k in ~10 weeks).

I don't have a current time-trial time, my 5k could be anywhere between 3:12-3:22/k. After the race I will know if it was too fast, if I underperform. Judging from most Workout Wednesday videos my pace is indeed too fast, as my breathing is much heavier when doing CV and when doing VO2MAX than when others are doing them. The day after a workout running is usually painful and I can only do a 5 mile recovery run, which also shouldn't be according to Tinman (training shouldn't be so hard that running the next day is strongly affected by it). Also, in the past I raced the 5k only around the pace I did my perceived 1k's@CV at, which confirms your theory.

But I'm also not the typical distance runner, I'm more fast-twitch based so it's easy for me to go out too fast during reps and still be feeling that I'm doing fine even tho it's too fast for my level and I won't race anywhere near what I should. We will see.

Looking back I should have replaced some Saturyday Tinman Tempos with 2400m time-trials on the track and derive my current CV and VO2MAX pace off that as Tinman recommends. I could have done something like 2k WU, 1k tempo, strides, 2400m TT, 4-5k tempo, 4x200, 2-3k CD instead of 10k Tinman Tempo + 6x30s hills.

webby wrote:

LateRunnerPhil wrote:

Sydney Masciarelli did exactly the same workout, longer warm-up and 3x1k@3k pace a few weeks before her 9:31 3k as HS sophomore on a workout Wednesday.

Haha. You know you're in good shape when you think of 3x1000 @ CV pace as a warmup for 3000 meters at VO2max and 1600 meters at 800 pace. I wouldn't call that the same as Sydney's workout -- at all. But more power to you for taking it in stride.

The interesting thing is that she was super fine and relaxed during that workout, whereas I look to be putting in more effort during CV (10k pace) as she is during VO2MAX (3k pace).

Maybe this is because I have more fast-twitch muscles and strong anaerobic system, so I run more anaerobically at many different paces (with heavier breathing). But also, she races equivalent to what her workouts suggest (she raced 9:31 off 3x1k @3:10-3:09-3:11), whereas I tend to underperform somewhat.

RunningNoob420 wrote:

LRP, this thread was a good read. Thank you for sharing your training.

Did / do you do your easy runs at the pace that Tinman’s calculator suggests? I have been using Daniels paces; on the faster side of what he suggests. These current training paces are in Tinman’s easy / moderate or moderate range.

I run low mileage (under 15 weekly) mostly because of pseudo injuries and paine. I wonder if I am overdoing these runs and I could benefit from lowering speed.

I run them by feel, important thing is to not run them too fast. Occasionally I run them too fast because I feel good or run a very hilly route and then it negatively impacts my workout the following day.

When I ran low mileage, I was also permanently injured. My legs weren't ready for running, I didn't know what I was doing an all runs were way too fast. I started improving when I slowed down my easy runs from 150-160 HR to 140 and lower. This allowed my to build mileage from 8 mpw to 20 mpw to 30 mpw to 40 mpw..... 1 workout a week was a enough. When I ran 3x a week, one was a long run (starting at 40 min, building to 60 min) at 140 HR, one was another easy run at 140-145 HR and one was a workout, first a Tempo run 5-6k at 155-160 HR and then after some weeks I replaced it with 4x1000 at a quicker pace. I got my HR zones off lactate testing.

Now since I'm fitter I can run slightly faster during easy days, at 145 HR than 140 HR. The ideal range according to Tinman is 70-79% of max HR for easy runs. Beginners should be at the lower end, experienced runners can be at the upper end, especially if they are fast-twitch runners (best time in 800m) as jogging around at 70% HR makes the legs feel bad/weird (that's the case for me currently).

If you are fitter, you should be able to run faster at the same heart rate.

70-79% MHR is not easy. 60-70% is the standard for most runners. Easy runs are supposed to be easy, and actually fast twitch runners should be slower on an easy run, not faster. Did you really get that from Tinman? I thought he was supposed to be some kind of super guru who knew about this kind of stuff? Or did you just misinterpret what he wrote?

That's because you are too obsessive about these things and need to address your problem. The reason you feel weird running slow and better running faster is because you are addicted to the adrenaline and that is going to cause you problems.

Phil, I have run hundreds of races, very successfully and so have thousands of posters here. You do an awful lot of preaching with little to back it up.. If you really want to improve you need to do a lot less talking and a lot more listening.

1) Yes, of course my pace at 140 HR (77% max) increased. But I'm also producing significantly less lactate at any HR. My lactate at 145 HR is still extremely low now and much lower than it used to be at 140 HR in the past when I wasn't well trained.

Look at this graph, which shows 4 lactate tests (protocol was 5x1600 in the first three and 5x2000 in the last):

December 2017 - black

April 2018 - green

June 2018 - blue

March 2019 - red

All tests were done on a 200m indoor track with same temperature and conditions.

What can you see?

a) My pace at 140 HR is always increasing.

b) I did not improve much from April-June 2018. During this time, I did plenty of hard/all-out intervals (Daniels VO2MAX 1k's) and hard tempo runs. What happened is I got stronger anaerobically, able to go out really fast during races but I did not improve my stamina or race times. This was a learning lesson and I decided to switch to Tinman and trust in the training of my coach which was slow but similar (CV reps instead of VO2MAX 1k's).

c) My lactate at 140 HR was 1.8 in the first test, 1.9 in test 2 & 3, and only 0.9 mmol in test 4. My aerobic system got much stronger due to the CV training, Tinman Tempos and increases in mileage that I'm producing less lactate not just at faster speeds, but also at the same HR.

2) Daniels gives 65-79% for easy runs in his book and online calculator. When my glycogen stores are low, and my legs are fatigued I run at a lower % but my max HR is also much lower during that time. My max HR changes between 170 and 183 depending on conditions, fuel status, hydration status, weather, stress, etc. In November last year I ran an all-out mile at 170 HR (my max at that day) in 4:55, which was my first mile TT ever. Why max HR so low despite all-out effort? It had 15 degrees F, I had an all-out XC race just 2 days prior to it and exam stress in school.

Tinman uses 70-79% for easy runs which takes into consideration the fact that max HR can be lower. Salazar doesn't specifiy a percentage but says that Mo and Galen run their easy runs in the 140s and at a brisk pace (5k+90s/mile) and that it's fine if they don't feel super fresh for each workout. He rather makes the easy runs effective and develop fitness than to do junk miles and be fresh at the workout.

3) My easy runs are (perceived) very easy now, no matter the HR. A 140-145 HR easy run can feel better and easier than a 125 HR easy run when I'm depleted and my legs are trashed. However, I still make mistakes. Sometimes I get rolling on easy runs, especially when there is a hill and I easily run it up with 155-160 HR. While the run is fine and feels easy, the next day tempo run couldn't be completed at the goal pace and was slower than it should have been. I wasted precious glycogen on the easy run the day before which I shouldn't have done.

Tinman's thoughts on it? Check here:

He states that easy runs can be too fast BUT also be too slow, and 70% for a fast-twitch based runner might be too slow as he would only use ST fibers at that pace which he doesn't have nearly as many as a ST runner.

good post.

phil, listen to this guy. there are a few things which contradict each other in your training, so that your goals may be at risk. what is actually important to you: your personal "effort level" or an exact pace?

some posters have mentioned that your cv sessions are too fast but you reply that it feels just right. and with the easy days it's just the opposite. you cling obsessively to a specific heart rate (which is also too high and spoils your recovery somewhere) instead of keeping your easy days really easy. i also wonder about your easy days, if you add so many all-out hill sprints afterwards, that your legs will be unusable for days after. why 10 sprints after a medium long run and when you feel tired? and more important sessions to come soon?

wisenheimer at work wrote:

good post.

phil, listen to this guy. there are a few things which contradict each other in your training, so that your goals may be at risk. what is actually important to you: your personal "effort level" or an exact pace?

some posters have mentioned that your cv sessions are too fast but you reply that it feels just right. and with the easy days it's just the opposite. you cling obsessively to a specific heart rate (which is also too high and spoils your recovery somewhere) instead of keeping your easy days really easy. i also wonder about your easy days, if you add so many all-out hill sprints afterwards, that your legs will be unusable for days after. why 10 sprints after a medium long run and when you feel tired? and more important sessions to come soon?

I don't care about HR on easy days, I use it more as an upper limit. For example today I felt good and got in the 140s, when I saw 145 I took back a little back to make sure it stays in the low 140s. My easy runs are all at extremely low perceived effort. I rarely get over 140 HR, usually only if I choose a route that has a long hill/mountain where it goes up quickly if I keep a solid pace.

The 10x10s hill sprints on asphalt definitely were a bit too much, as my legs had no power on the much more important Tinman Tempo the next day. I wanted to do the hill sprints as an alternative to strides, but they are much harder of course. I think doing 6-8x15s hill sprints a bit slower (~800m effort) would be better than almost all-out (~400m effort). My CNS is also shot for 1-2 days after all-out hill sprints which prevents me from running fast. Tinman would never recommend the hill sprints all-out, this is more what Hudson/Canova/Magness have in their plans but I agree with you if I do short hill-sprints instead of strides the day before a workout it should be around similar effort and not balls to the wall just because there is no injury risk.

Also, I'm thankful that so many people trying to help me. My important session is actually tonight, a 3xMile from 5k to 3k pace (trying to do 80s laps during the first, 77-78s laps during the second, and 74-75s during the third). Then two easy days followed by a 6k tempo run that's more aggressive (3:30/k-threshold) on the track. If my CV is too fast, I will struggle during the tempo run as it would be my 10k pace, but I think it will be fine and below 170 HR hopefully.

LateRunnerPhil wrote:

Look at this graph...........What can you see?

I can see 18kmh as your fastest pace, which is 16.40 for 5k, but you claim it's your CV pace.

I don't know exactly what Tinman's description of CV pace is, but I suspect he means the fastest sustainable ventilatory threshold i.e. the fastest pace we can sustain without burning any fats, whilst still having plenty glycogen in reserve?

At such a pace lactate wouldn't rise unless you became dehydrated and blood volume dropped and the concentration rose. Tinman himself told me something similar to that last point in 2004; beware of misinterpreting lactate data.

You seem to be hoping that you will keep shifting that lactate curve to the right by doing efforts at 3.20 per km, but this would only happen in a state of glycogen depletion and it would feel extremely tiring. It may happen in time but with thousands more miles in your legs.

You claim to be following Tinman's methods, but you aren't in contact with him are you?

You are doing very well, but you need to address the serious runner's mindset which means confronting the obsessive nature to succeed by trying too hard. Every serious athlete has to recognize this aspect to their psyche constantly and know when to back off and when to push hard. Every good coach in the world will tell you the same. Every good experience runner and ex runner will tell you the same.

Again, there are thousands of runners like me on letsrun who have done hundreds of races with much success. Put it this way 5000 runners posting on letsrun who have averaged 200 races each, that's One Million races between us and that's a conservative estimate. That's a lotta experience to draw on.

Your excuses for sub par tempo runs are very odd. The body is not that delicate and finicky. Your glycogen levels are not that impacted just because you put a bit too much effort in a hill the day before. More than likely it's a sign as to what is wrong with your training.

rational wrote:

You are doing very well, but you need to address the serious runner's mindset which means confronting the obsessive nature to succeed by trying too hard. Every serious athlete has to recognize this aspect to their psyche constantly and know when to back off and when to push hard. Every good coach in the world will tell you the same. Every good experience runner and ex runner will tell you the same.

Well said, rational. One of the things I love most about running is that it rewards brains as well as brawn. You can't be great without the will to push your limits, but restraint is almost as important. Fierce competitors get a taste of super-human speed and get ravenous for more -- so the more we love the intensity, the more patience matters.

webby wrote:

rational wrote:

You are doing very well, but you need to address the serious runner's mindset which means confronting the obsessive nature to succeed by trying too hard. Every serious athlete has to recognize this aspect to their psyche constantly and know when to back off and when to push hard. Every good coach in the world will tell you the same. Every good experience runner and ex runner will tell you the same.

Well said, rational. One of the things I love most about running is that it rewards brains as well as brawn. You can't be great without the will to push your limits, but restraint is almost as important. Fierce competitors get a taste of super-human speed and get ravenous for more -- so the more we love the intensity, the more patience matters.

Exactly, and that's why now I hold back during all the easy runs, tempo runs and CV sessions. Only since I changed that I started improving. Before I tried running, but always got injured and never improved, because I did the wrong training (in my case too intense).

The 1k CV reps I'm doing are quick but far from a deep effort. In the time between April-June 2018 I did the intense training, 1k reps with highest possible average and I did not improve during that time. I would run them at 3:35/k with dry heaving during last 1-2, and only race a 5k at 3:40-3:45/k. After I slowed them down to 3:45-3:50/k I started improving.

The lactate test is not a maximal effort test - in fact my coach removed two levels, one during the first and one during the third test, where lactate exceeded 9 mmol (on the 3rd test I almost blacked out, running 3:20/k as last rep which he removed). Tinman recommends around 5.5 mmol for the CV intervals, which is above threshold (4 mmol). I should be within that 5.5 mmol range, as well as the 90-94% HR he prescribes for CV intervals. HR doesn't work well for me at intense paces, because my legs and breathing limit me the most.

I agree with most here that what we need right now are races and time-trials to see where I'm standing. Based on training and how I'm feeling it's really hard to say what I could actually run/race and what shape I'm in. First race is a 6.4k road race with price money on 9/14 followed by the peak 5k race on 9/24 (course is supposed to be a bit short but I will use GPS time).

LateRunnerPhil wrote:

I felt good yesterday and hammered the easy run which negatively affected my tempo run. Legs just couldn't get going and I had much lower cadence than normal. At least I pushed through even though I considered quitting at times. Was also warm & humid despite running at night.

I see this as a basic and common error in training: feeling good on a scheduled easy day and running too fast, in this case 'hammering' an easy run. You know the purpose of easy days yet sometimes still make this mistake. On some easy runs you mention your heart rate going higher than expected. If running to heart rate, why not stop and walk briefly as the Ingebrigtsen's have reportedly done on easy runs?

Another giver of +1 wrote:

LateRunnerPhil wrote:

I felt good yesterday and hammered the easy run which negatively affected my tempo run. Legs just couldn't get going and I had much lower cadence than normal. At least I pushed through even though I considered quitting at times. Was also warm & humid despite running at night.

I see this as a basic and common error in training: feeling good on a scheduled easy day and running too fast, in this case 'hammering' an easy run. You know the purpose of easy days yet sometimes still make this mistake. On some easy runs you mention your heart rate going higher than expected. If running to heart rate, why not stop and walk briefly as the Ingebrigtsen's have reportedly done on easy runs?

That was an exception. I ran the first hill 4 minutes at higher heart rate and the second 5 minutes at higher heart rate (around 150-160, which is exactly Tinman Tempo/MP zone instead of 130-140 HR which is my easy HR). So I had 9 minutes at Tempo HR during an easy run, which isn't ideal but shouldn't really destroy my legs for a tempo the next day. The issue was the 10x10s all-out steep hill sprints I did after the easy run, which recruits 100% of my muscle fibers and causes heavy muscular fatigue.

Not a big fan for HR anyway - like Tinman says, it depends on way too many things. I mainly use it to see how I get fitter over time.

Yesterday I did my peaking workout - 3x1600 from 5k to 3k. Pace was fast - 5:16, 5:04, 4:55. 10 months ago I did the same workout in 5:34, 5:26, 5:16 on higher heart rate.

My HR was quite low yesterday despite very fast pace. Anyone knows why I can't get to high HR during repeats at fast paces? (~3k pace). Breathing was very heavy and legs got weaker at the end but for my heart and cardiovascular system it was a low effort. It seems that my aerobic system is not strong enough to contribute much at these speeds, and I use a lot of anaerobic energy. I also didn't sweat much which I usually do when I run at more aerobic efforts (even on an easy run I sweat more than during the mile repeats!).

Finally, my legs were also weak during the 400-300-200 I did afterwards. I couldn't get going and I only split 64-48-29 (goal 62-45-28) at perceived 800m effort. So the 3xMile at 5k->3k must have caused a decent amount of fatigue in the legs. Did everything in the LT4, originally planned to use spikes for the faster stuff but I haven't used them and don't wanna risk anything 3 weeks before my goal race.