no interval work success?

Agreed in a major way.

Did you actually train with Ron Daws?

Tinman: what do you think of a middle-distance runner using this steady-state training for base training, i.e. medium mileage at easy-to-harder tempo vs. higher mileage at slower pace? Seems like it would translate well- I keep thinking of Walker's, Scott's and Snell's ten-milers at 5:00-ish pace (scaled to fit the abilities of us mortals, of course). Of course, they were also doing lots of 90-100 mile weeks, but converted to time, even that is like 80-90 for a

4:20 miler, and is the peak mileage. So it seems to me that averaging 70-ish in base phase for such a miler (who might also have a full-time job, etc.) with lots of solid 8-10 milers would be a decent target.

What do you think?

this question is directed toward tinman, but anyone may reply.

tinman stated that one loses the ability to improve their vo2max (or, at least, the potential max) after one's mid-twenties. being a 25yo 1.5years into running -- with no vo2max work under my belt -- i said, "dang it, why did i get into this great sport so late?" tinman replied -- a page back -- that one ought to do 3-4 minute efforts with plenty of recovery in order to work v02max. this seems pretty consistent with everything else that i have read.

although i have waffled back and forth trying to determine just why i run and just what distance i would compete -- if i ever actually get into a race -- i recently determined that 10k to marathon best suits my racing and training temperment. it has been with great interest, then, that i have read and re-read the "double whammy" thread --

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=149651&page=3

-- and its implications for hadd's style of training --

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?board=1&id=91048&thread=91048

-- as well as, lydiard's and the japanese system of marathon training, of course. what i gather from the 'double whammy' thread is that one first develops his/her AEROBIC CAPACITY via long distance running at marathon pace or slower (with an appropriately high ANAEROBIC CAPCITY as maintained by regular 100-150m sprints). it is through months of this work that one may then rightly look toward 3/5k > half marathon paced efforts (per contested race pace) in order to develop AEROBIC POWER, which is simply the percent of your capacity which you can actually use in a race (that is, you might have a great aerobic capacity, but if you don't train at race pace, you won't be able to see how great it is). in my mind i have always imagined a motorcycle ramp that you build with aerobic distance work ... how far you go off that jump depends upon the height of that ramp, of course, but it also depends upon your bike, and if you don't work on the bike, you either don't make it up the ramp, or you just tip off the edge when it's time to race. :)

i mention all of this because i am trying to locate "vo2max" within the exphys theoretical scene of the "double whammy" thread (as "balance" has presented it). it seems to me that vo2max could be synonomous with aerobic power. if this is the case, then it is not a good idea to work vo2max during the base phase of marathon development. this seems clear. which in some respects, puts me -- or any other mid-twenty's runner just starting out -- in a predicament. how do we build both our aerobic CAPACITY and our aerobic POWER (which apparently loses its upper malleability some time soon) when their development is mutually exclusive ... and! we realize that our peak running years from now to our early 30s, giving us only 5-7 years to maximize our lifetime potential. in training for 10k>marathon, do we sacrifice some aerobic capacity development by shortening a base period in order to work aerobic power? that is, 3 months capacity, 2 months power, (race, if you want to), rest, repeat ...

furthermore, does what i ask even make sense? the "double whammy" thread mentions that the pre-competition phase includes 1) looong distance to lower the anaerobic capacity (apparently you want to stay away from looong distance during the base phase ... though long (say 20 miles) is okay) which you had kept high during the base phase with short sprints (to ward off the 'double whammy' ;) ), 2) aerobic power workouts at race pace (say, 1200s at 10k pace and 5ks at half marathon pace). does this work reduce aerobic capacity, stop aerobic capacity development, or simply slow-down that development? if the latter is the case, then it seems one isn't going backward by working on vo2max while keeping distance high, but is simply putting a hold on development. is this true?

anyhow. that's just a long rambling question. perhaps a shorter one would be: how/why does v02max development stop in one's mind-twenties? and what does this mean for someone starting out in his/her mid 20's and interested in racing 10k to marathon ditances with 5ks thrown in for fun measure, but not for world records or anything like that. ;)

-hrm

Matt

get in a winter of steady mileage of varying speeds and distances and then do the same sort of summer programme again.

If nobody has mentioned her yet, I'd like to mention Kim Mortensen (who admittedly burned out big time when she got to college, but supposedly that was due to an eating disorder). Her coach wrote an article about the training of the Thousand Oaks HS team.

Any post-collegiate types use this 'same distance every day' approach?

hrm: Briefly, I think the "VO2max maximization by mid-20s" refers to typical runners who start out younger (teens). If you are starting out at 25, you should have several years still of VO2 development, if I read correctly. This is how I've trained some older (over-30) athletes (VO2 early, more LT training as years go on) with very good results.

hrm: Briefly, I think the "VO2max maximization by mid-20s" refers to typical runners who start out younger (teens). If you are starting out at 25, you should have several years still of VO2 development, if I read correctly. This is how I've trained some older (over-30) athletes (VO2 early, more LT training as years go on) with very good results.[/quote]

Doesn't this go against the old aerobic base first law? What's the basic schedule you give to your 30 plus runners? More details please. Very interested in this idea.

If you are a typical 4:20 miler, say 18-22 years old, then I would prescribe 75 miles per week as you base training, including one or two 5-10 milers at 77-80% your current mile pace per week during your base training. If you are in 4:30 mile shape now, then 77% is 5:51-5:38 per mile, by the way.

A runner in 4:00 mile shape, using my formula, would do regular 10 milers at 5:12-5:00 per mile.

Vo2 Early? wrote:

Doesn't this go against the old aerobic base first law? What's the basic schedule you give to your 30 plus runners? More details please. Very interested in this idea.

The idea is getting the best return for your training investment at whatever stage of development. Sure, a whopping aerobic base is great at any stage, and is the precursor to long-term development, however, it has a low return on investment compared to VO2max in the first few years, certainly for distances 10k and below (which is, arguably, where you SHOULD be starting). This is one reason why so many High School runners improve quickly on intervals, even without an adequate base of aerobic work- however the price paid for the latter is high risk of injury and performance drop-off if workloads are improperly managed, as they often are at the HS and even collegiate level.

Now certainly you must periodize in conjunction with this VO2max development, spending a substantial portion of the training year on primarily aerobic running. But overall the idea is to bring up the VO2max with carefully integrated interval training and regular mesocycles and microcycles of interval/fartlek training, then when development shows a definite plateau (typically 2-5 years, depending upon age, etc.), introduce a greater volume and proportion of mileage and LT work. For an experienced competitor, racing, time trials, and a modicum of interval work will bring VO2max up quickly and easily, if LT and aerobic base are adequate. Concurrently in all phases, you must work on running economy with drills,hills,strides, etc. to optimize speed and power development.

The easiest way to think of it might be to train like a 1500-5K runner initially (with periodization of Base, Pre-Competition, etc.- reference Daniels,Coe/Martin or Benson for schedules), then move up gradually to higher mileages and LT work as your physiological profile matures. Of course, you must make serious adjustments if you are only interested in finishing a marathon the first year of training, but we are talking long-term optimal development, which may not coincide with short-term wish-fulfillment. Most over-30 runners have to be carefully managed through this, as it is very easy to overtrain while doing VO2max work, especially if you are working from a minimal base. When in doubt, ease back on the volume and intensity and err on the side of more aerobic work and lots of easy recovery running. But improvements on the order of three minutes for a novice 21-min. 5K runner are quite reasonable, even in older athletes.

In the last sentence, "improvements of three minutes,etc." is for the first year of quality training.

Tinman wrote:

If you are a typical 4:20 miler, say 18-22 years old, then I would prescribe 75 miles per week as you base training, including one or two 5-10 milers at 77-80% your current mile pace per week during your base training. If you are in 4:30 mile shape now, then 77% is 5:51-5:38 per mile, by the way.

A runner in 4:00 mile shape, using my formula, would do regular 10 milers at 5:12-5:00 per mile.

Thanks for the info, tinman, sounds very much like the "scaled adjustment" I was talking about. I presume your 4:00 miler would be doing slightly higher mileage in base phase, to account for a workload based on time, and the faster paces used on training runs.

The amount of mileage a 4:00 miler does in base training varies relative to experience and natural attributes. Without knowing specifics, I would recommend 90-100 miles per week.

Tinman: I had some good success in 1990 by just doing tempo runs, long runs and also running 1-2 hours in a very hilly area north of Reno. I did not do any intervals, wear spikes or even run on a track for about 6 months, and I ran 2:23 (going through the half in 1:08) at Columbus in 1990.

The tempos were 8miles, 12 miles, 16miles (5:20-5:40/mile) and the long runs were 18-30 miles at 5:30-6:00/mile.

The recovery runs were 6 miles of jogging twice a day. Once a week, on wednesdays, I'd go to the hills, and run up and down very steep hills on dirt roads for 1-2 hours.

After my track race on 23-July, I plan to follow a similar programme to this, but I will probably do some workouts such as 8x1mile at LT pace with 90sec rest.

I don't do well in spikes either.

Jason

Mayerhoff:

When you have a free moment, email to me about marathon training. Tinman at

runfastcoach@gmail.com

semi surprised, and maybe in my skimming of the posts I missed - but no one has mentioned Bob Deines of late 60s early 70s era. His approach was in the opposite direction of most posts I've seen. He was one of the earlier proponents of LSD - not the Tiomothy Leary type. What set him apart from most was that he ran pretty fast times (2:18 marathon and some respectable 10ks as I recall and some +/- 9:00 two mile and same ballpark 3)

Can't fully remember but I'm pretty sure Joe Henderson did some articles on him for the then legit Runner's World. Seems like the workout 'times' were ~8:00 per mile or so @ long runs.

That was at a time when quite a few distance guys were experimenting with the training stuff - and Lydiard was relatively new. Group I was in mixed Lydiard and Igloi for the most part and viewed Deines as a bit peculiar. BUT - results talk. Given his training regimen he had a surprisingly effective kick.

So we might as well add Ed Walkwitz to the list who managed a 2:23 marathon and a good 50 mile.

I also think that Dave MacKenzie, who won Boston in 1967 did little but steady runs. In Joe Henderson's "Road Racers and Their Training" Mackenzie said he did 100 mpw over undulating country at 6:15 pace. In "Kiwi's Can Fly", it's noted that he didn't work at shorter distances. Maybe Kim Stevenson knows.

Not 100% sure on this Rich. All I know is that Dave McK trained over West Coast roads at a 'Fair clip" (Whatever that means !).

The West Coast here has a very high Rainfall (in excess of 100 inches) also the Roads are "quite" Hilly.

So Dave would not have trained in easy conditions.

With the hills it would have been not too unlike Jack Foster's Training.

Dave ran 2:12 at Fukuoka, Just cannot recall what year.

From the Runner's Training Guide

Clarke had his own straightforward style of training, something like that of the New Zealanders but without the emphasis on peaking. Clarke believed his "peak" to be where he was at tht moment.

Fred Wilt says, "He did not believe in attempting to gradually build up his physical condition to a peak for a maximum effort at certain times of the year, nor did he advocate training slowly in one season of the year and very fast in the other. Rather, he remained racing-fit the year around, and gradually increased the quality of his training over his lifetime athletic career.

For Clarke, training was a continuum. He seldom trained on a track and never used a stopwatch during workouts." This consited of mainly road or cross-country runs twice or or even three times a day. Most runs were less than 14 miles, at paces approaching five minutes a mile.