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

Pete

Relating paces concerning gola event distance, we don´t take that much in easy days, or typical easy days. We just relate that in what´s considered workouts. The pace in routine continous runs we use "cruise pace" so easy that can´t affect negatively your need to recover, but most of that is by "feeling" not a determined pace.

But i can say to you that in sea level a runner like Alberto Chaiça 28:08 and 2:09 he does most of his runs from 3:40 minutes/kilo up to 3:10/kilo. Well warmup and cooldown and very easy days are never faster than 4:00 to 4:30 by kilo.

Soon i will post next months - June, July and August, I´m working on that.

NAME:ALBERTO CHAIÇA 2004/JUNE

June 01 – AM:70min=18kilos

June 02 – AM:50min=13kilos // 20min w/up +outdoor hilly 15X60sec/fast rec=60sec /easy run + 20min c/down=18kilos

June 03 – AM:60min=16kilos // PM: travel to an Altitude Stay – Font Romeu – France

June 04 – AM:40min=10kilos

June 05 – AM:60min=16kilos // PM:60min=16kilos

June 06 – AM:75min=19kilos // outdoor hilly 2X15min/fast rec=4min /easy run (HR fast:166/easy run:122avg) + 20min c/down=16kilos

WEEK MILEAGE:161kilos

June 07 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM:60min=16kilos

June 08 – AM:90min=23kilos // PM:60min=16kilos

June 09 – AM:60min=16kilos // PM:70min+6 strides=18kilos

June 10 – AM:80min=19kilos // outdoor hilly 20X60sec/fast rec=60sec /easy run + 20min c/down=16kilos

June 11 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM:60min+4 strides=16kilos

June 12 – AM:80min=20kilos // PM:60min=16kilos

June 13 – AM:80min=20kilos // outdoor hilly 3X10min/fast rec=4min /easy run (HR 158-118/166-123/168-110) + 20min c/down=16kilos

WEEK MILEAGE:248kilos

June 14 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM:80min=19kilos

June 15 – AM:1h40min=28kilos // PM:60min=16kilos

June 16 – AM:60min=16kilos // PM:60min=16kilos

June 17 – AM:90min=22kilos // outdoor hilly 25X60sec/fast rec=60sec /easy run + 20min c/down=16kilos

June 18 – AM:80min=20kilos // PM:60min=16kilos

June 19 – AM:75min=18kilos // PM:90min=23kilos

June 20 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM:60min=16kilos

WEEK MILEAGE:262kilos

June 21 – stop by injury - achilles tendon in the right foot

June 22 – rest - travel to Portugal for injury treatment

June 23 - AM:50min=13kilos //Get back to Font Romeu altitude stay once again// PM:40min=10kilos

June 24 – AM:50min=13kilos

June 25 – AM:45min=11kilos // PM:50min=13kilos

June 26 – AM:45min=11kilos // PM:60min=15kilos

June 27 – AM:60min=16kilos // PM:60min=16kilos

WEEK MILEAGE:118kilos

June 28 – AM:60min=16kilos

June 29 – AM:70min=18kilos

June 30 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM:60min=16kilos

Month MILEAGE:838 KILOS

First of all it is wonderfull to see such a great post. All the hard work and detail is appreciated. It is important to note, that while Mr. Chaica has had alot of success in that last two years, he is injured quite often...I'm not beliteling any of the training-which is needed for such success-especially for a marathon. The workload has to be high. One can see, much of the relative success to the specific training. If you want to be successful on the track you need to train on the track. Much of his work seems very similar to Rosa Mota's training. Mr. Jose Pedrosa had a similar approach, but given her body type she was injured less frequently than Chaica. I wonder if you have any lab data for either of these athletes? I know that Rosa was amazingly effecient, and had a very low lactic acid buildup, which enabled her to be so good in the marathon.

I have quite a few of the training scheduels that you have posted, some of them originals and copies of M. Igloi, Kuts and so forth. The emphasis on quantity was emphatic with his group, but the short rests were also the 'core' of the system.

In today's systems they seem to use 'too' much rest, in broken intervals, the active rest is replaced by time, not distance and time together. That is 10x400 with 1' rest is not equal to 10x400 with 200 rec. in 1'. The the 1' rest only is in some cases too much, or too little. But if you can keep data of how you feel during a 200-1'rec, then you know exactly how much to add or subtract.

Anyway just reflecting on you awsome post.

JD

(I am replying to Fuerza, but this could really be to anyone/everyone.....)

I appreciate all the feedback from the posters who responded to my posts/questions, but I still feel that most of you are answering me my based on some possibly incorrect assumptions you have about the type of workout I am describing, some possibly incorrect assumptions about training in general, and possibly just a continued misunderstanding of what I am trying to make clear.

Are you reading the part where I wrote (several times I believe)-

SHOW ME WHY VERY SHORT REPEATS AT 5K/10K RACE PACE WITH SUFFICIENT REST INTERVALS IS HARDER/MORE STRESSFUL ON THE BODY THAN A MODERATE-PACED(much slower than race-pace) STEADY(no breaks) RUN?

SHOW ME! Don’t just assume that it is, if you have not done the workouts or coached runners using these workouts! And if the workout feels a little too stressful, either shorten the repeats even more, slow the pace a little (run them at 10k race pace, maybe these are better 10k workouts), or increase the rest intervals a bit.

Example: a 16:00 5k runner runs 45 minutes(total time) of 100m repeats at just-a-bit-slower-than-race-pace, with rest intervals. 16:005k is 77 400m pace. That means each 100 could be run in around 19.25-20.0 seconds (5k race-pace to just slower). This runner might have decent speed, and might be able to run 12.5 for 100m with a running start.

*SO HOW IS RUNNING 19.25-20.0 SECONDS 100’S STRESSFUL/RISKY TO HIS MUSCLES/TENDONS? It should not be, since it is well of his full capabilities of top speed running. Muscle pull/tear risk should be minimal.

* AND HOW IS THIS TRAINING STRESSFUL CHEMICALLY/HORMONALLY TOO HIM? If he is taking breaks every 100m, and watching his HR during repeats and rest intervals, and not allowing his HR to climb above 85% of max HR at any time (lets say max HR is 200, and his HR reaches a workout max of 160-165 ONLY during the end up each repeat and beginning of each rest interval), then he is not performing above his LASS (anaerobic threshhold) at any time, and is not inducing a lot of acidity to his muscles/body. During the recovery his HR would drop to, lets say, around 135, and he would begin the next repeat. In the end his avg HR for workout might be 155, with fluctuations between 135-165.

Why is that above workout NECESSARILY HARDER than a workout of steady running at a moderate pace(lets say around an avg of 7:00 –7:15 per mile), where one begins slowly (with HR around 140), picks up the pace very gradually and only somewhat, reaches a top HR of 160 for the last 1/4 of the run, and also avg’d THE SAME HR of around 155 for the 45 minutes ??

So question 1 is: is the faster intermittent run really harder/more difficult/more stressful than the slower steady run? If not, why do intermittent runs always need to be considered hard/difficult sessions??

Now IF we establish that the type of workout I describe is not necessarily a hard/difficult/stressful one, and is similar in stress to the moderate-paced steady run I described, then the next question becomes:

* WHICH WORKOUT IS MORE BENEFICIAL?? One that involves running closer to race pace in very short bursts with rest intervals, or one that involves steady running with no breaks at paces nowhere near race-pace? And remember, both runs are done for SAME amount of time, AND are run using the SAME energy systems ( runs have same avg HR’s, don’t put athlete in Oxygen debts, and are run with HR’s always in the range of 70-85% max. Of course the intermittent workout has more HR fluctuations, but even during rest interval, HR does not go below 135. )

Both workouts, in my mind, would involve/induce the same aerobic-conditioning physiological adaptations, but one (the intermittent one) would induce better neuro-muscular adaptations to race pace. Aren’t such neuro-muscular adaptations essential to an athlete’s development? Can such adaptations ONLY be induced twice a week??????

It seems that most everyone one here, accept Speed Kills and to a certain extent Antonio, seems to be assuming the following:

* Intermittent training must be a quite stressful/difficult form of training. Or at least to be useful, it must be quite stressful training. Why? I don’t think it has to be.

* Everyone in the world trains on a "couple hard sessions a week, all the other sessions are easy" schedule. So many athletes I have seen use, hard, easy, and MODERATE/MEDIUM sessions. Why only sessions on each end of the spectrum (hard or easy)? I don’t believe this is how all athlete’s train. So maybe my session is not a hard or easy session, but a moderate one. What’s wrong with THAT? What’s wrong with fitting some moderate sessions in along with the easy and hard ones?

* So-called "easy, recovery runs" are ONLY just that: their only purpose it to enhance recovery from previous hard sessions. I beg to differ. Such runs may indeed speed recovery (over doing nothing at all, or of course compared to another hard session), but they are clearly ALSO producing fitness adaptations/gains (increasing one’s overall endurance base). And what many of you call a "recovery" or "easy" day I believe is more stressful to the body than one might realize: 15 miles of running (maybe accomplished in two sessions) at any pace places a stress on the body. Maybe only a slight one for a great athlete, but then running some very short repeats at SUB-SUB-SUB-max-speed and at a HR well below LASS, with proper rest intervals, should ALSO not be considered stressful to such an athlete. RIGHT?

I am simply making an argument for the use of intermittent training as a training tool that can be used as….

A) MORE than just a hard/difficult session, and therefore can be used…

B) MORE than just 2 or 3 times a week, and therefore can be used…

C) IN PLACE of some slower STEADY runs that everyone seems to think is the only way to run a "non-hard" workout.

As I have said in the past, several of Igloi’s athletes used intermittent training sessions THIRTEEN TIMES A WEEK (twice a day, except once on Sundays). And these were not just a couple random "special" athletes. These were MANY athletes from two continents (at least) from different generations. And if some had injury issues, so many others thrived. Now I am NOT going to argue against the idea that possibly such COMPLETE reliance on intermittent training was not too much of a good thing (it probably was in many cases, and certainly ignored other types of useful sessions), and that too many of these workouts were run at efforts that exceeded a moderate effort (I am sure that too many did), but such concerns does not sway from believing that regular use of intermittent training DOES NOT NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE a too difficult program . One can always tweak an intermittent session (again, by slowing down the pace, or shortening the repeat distance, or increasing the rest interval) to make it quite moderate on the body while STILL MAINTAING the benefits of the workout. For instance using rest intervals of VERY easy jogging (practically walking) combined with walk/standing breaks hasten recovery (compared to moderate jogs for recovery), and allow a quicker return to faster running. On that point I agree with Dunes Runner who wrote:

" 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."

OK, I am done, because I see some very interesting posts from Antonio on Chaica’s training. I am interested in studying it. But until someone adequately answers/refutes my questions/claims, I will use intermittent training MORE than just a couple sessions a week and not ONLY for "difficult" sessions. I will let you all know someday how that experiment turns out for me!

You are right JD

Alberto Chaiça did his 3rd pubis operation a month ago, but the recover is done and he did start the plan for Helsinky WChamps with compltly recoverd from the operation. He is very motivate right now, but this plan will be diferent since World Champs marathon that´s a different course than what did Athens. Not so hilly, not so many warm weather as Athens.

Look, Chaiça he is very thin, like Rosa, and very efficient. I have one opinion about marathon runners. is that marathon runners they may be thin, but you have to see the muscle shape, or they hardly have muscular resourse (reserve) to continued after the "fuel" is gone - carbos.

For me this is one problem that Tergat faces. he is very thin, but also you don´t see to many musclature - the muscles are flat. If you look for Baldini, Gharib, Khannouchi, Ronaldo Costa, Vanderly Lima, you see thin guys but yiu also see muscle shape in their legs and harms.

Do you understand me? An opposite example is Wainana - no muscles at all, and he hardly manage the last miles of a marathon.

A agree with you that for aerobic power short reps may be done with active pause. In my opinion you are right when you say "In today's systems they seem to use 'too' much rest, in broken intervals, the active rest is replaced by time, not distance and time together. That is 10x400 with 1' rest is not equal to 10x400 with 200 rec. in 1'. The the 1' rest only is in some cases too much, or too little. But if you can keep data of how you feel during a 200-1'rec, then you know exactly how much to add or subtract.

Greetings

Antonio Cabral wrote:

Besides the prolific use of the intermittent training in running distance that´s not 30sec/30sec or that kind of idiot formats. In what pace? People uses are 100m reps, 200m reps, 300m reps, 400m reps, 500m reps 1000m reps and so and so – that´s modern interval training – not 30sec/30sec – this is a joke, rarely done by any top class runner. What´s the top class runner or average runner that uses 30/30 intervals – only swimmers ! may the ones from Billat, that portuguese-french female runner that she coaches.

The problem here is that she, instead of using a protocol with real cases or real workouts she did “invent” a her own 30/30 to study the problem.

So he uses 60/60, that's also what Billat is suggesting. Not much different from the 30/30 workout....only a bit shorter.

Antonio,

Ive just read this thread. Excellent stuff. Regarding Brendan Fosters training however I can give you more information. Brendan never ran bulk sessions such as 25 x 400 on the track. The maximum number would be 12 and the recovery 90 seconds . He actually did not run any track sessions during the winter season other than when the Commonwealth Games were in New Zealand early in the year and in 1977/78 when he felt that his pace was lacking in the 1977 season. From age 17-20 he was running about 50 60 miles per week with the winter consisting of steady runs intersparsed with hill sessions - both long and short hills. From March onwards the training was quite intense with 20 x hills on Mondays Track session Tuesday 8-10 x 400 with 200 jog. 2 x 2miles on grass fields Wednesday . 10 x 200 on track on Thursday with 30 secs recovery. Friday easy run : Saturday fartlek and Sunday easy long run 10 miles. At this stage Brendan was a good runner showing occasional flashes of being capable of better but not great. His first breakthrough was to win a very good cross country race beating some of countrys top runners in 1969. He had an average track season following this. During the winter 1969/70 he moved to Leeds and I persuaded him to increase mileage to 100 per week This consisted of steady running but we would slowly build pace up on a few runs and then maintain it up a hill before backing off before building up again. These were not hard efforts but probably going form 6 min miling to about 5-15s. After a couple of Months of this he felt he was not running well at all and he had not raced, having missed the start of a planned race. His first race was the National P E Championship cross country and he was going to pull out on the Thursday before the race but I knew how well he was running as I had recently ran 5 miles in 23 minutes and he was going as well if not better than me. He won the cross country race by a minute and was converted to high mileage. He continued 100 miles a week until March when his weekly schedule changed: 4 mile run in mornings: Monday 10 miles off road fartlek which might consist of reducing length efforts say 2 x 1mile: 800: 2 x600 3 x200 and 3 x100 hills. Tuesday 10 x 400 x 90 secs recovery on track in 59/60 Wednesday steady 10 miles : Thursday 4 mile run in morning ; Lunchtime 2 sets of 6 x 200 with 30 secs recovery and 4 mins between sets on grass: PM 5 miles; Friday 2 x easy 4-5 miles. Saturday various- could be 300s or fartlek or whatever felt like doing - no set session. Sunday 15 miles. During summer he won Commonwealth Games bronze in 1500 and before that showed he would be a force at longer distances when he moved up by giving Kip Keino hard race over 2 miles.

The following 2 years entailed similar training and he won bronze in Euro 1500 and 5th in Olympic 1500. In 1973 the move up to 5k was made. Training in the winter 72/73 was again at around the 100 miles per week mark but the change over in March/April to faster work now differed. 5-6 miles run in mornings.Evenings. Monday 10 miles : Tuesday 10 x 400 x 90 sec: Wednesdays: 10 miles: Thursdays AM 5: Lunchtime: 6 x 300 x90secs: Eve 6 miles: Friday 2 x 5 miles: Saturday 3 x 1600 on track 4-5 miles recovery 4-12s Sunday 20 miles - 2 hours. He broke world 2 mile record and his first 5k was 13-23 winning British Champs. During winter leading to Commonwealth Games in January 2004 Mileage was increased to 110 on occasions and sessions leading up to Games included 10 x 300 x 45 secs av 42.8 ; 8 x 400 x 90 secs av 60.2 ran in snow and wind in full tracksuit and 6 x 800 with 4 min rest av 2-01.5 He ran 13-14 finishing 2nd to Ben Jipch and I felt he would have won if he had had a sharpening race beforehand. After a short break Brendan ran mileage until April of around 100 per week without sessions other than a Tuesday when the 10 mile club run consisted of a steady pace with 3 bursts of up to a mile with just enoug heasy run after each effort to the let better runners catch up. During 1974 summer when Brendan ran world record 3k and won Euro 5k his mile had built up in June July August 100-110-120 miles a week still including sessions and races with usual sessions still included with few more reps but not many more ie 3 x 1600 x 5 min rest av 4-10.2 Week leading to World record: Mon am 10 miles steady: pm 10 miles steady: Tue am 6 miles steady PM 10 x 400 x 90 secs as above. Wed AM 7 miles steady: PM 2 sets 8 x 200 x 20 secs recovery. Thurs AM 6 miles: PM 8 miles - legs sore: Fri AM 5 miles PM 5 miles : Sat WR 3k 7-35: PM 4 miles I can post changes in training when Brendan moved up to 10k if interested.

Keep it coming, Lindsay. This stuff is priceless.

I would also like to add onto Lance's post and maybe eventually end up asking a question out there somewhere because I tend to agree with his philosophy. Basically for those of you who cannot comprehend what he is trying to say it comes down to the intensity of the easy days. What is more beneficial? Say:

a 40' slog on the road looking like a jogger with a fanny pack (let's say closer to the end of the week for a 15' 5KM runner at 4'30"/km)

or a warm-up (getting the muscles warmed up slowly, another Igloi concept) of say 20' and than 20-30 shakeups at around 10K race pace (close to 32')

So what is more beneficial given the easy day?

Why is it that some people advocate this LSD style of training when they could also get a neuromuscularly conditioned workout (muscle memory and perceived exertion feelings)that is still eays and not too taxing on the legs? People tend to underrate this whole "run by feel" method(and by using terms like hard, fresh, middle, short) in almost every session. I know some runners who cannot for God to save them take off their watch and see what pace they are running in sometimes 100 meter increments (but in longer races, 400M increments). It doesn't matter about time. If you win the olympic 5K in 15' flat with a 46" last lap that is running by instinct not "oh we're running 80 seconds per 400M, that's 40 seconds per 200M, 30 seconds per 150M, 25 seconds per 125M, and 20 seconds per 100M". Running is all about instinct not time. So is competetition. If you run a PR by 45 or so seconds in the olympic games to win (think billy mills, also another advocate of speed/feeling/intermittent training) then you have won by feel. If you check your watch the last 100M of some local 5K to see what you run it in you will not be a good runner. It is all about instinct and feelings of effort (otherwise you would never know how fast or how slow you are running). But enough about that. I will post later because I must be back to work. But before I go I have to ask a question here:

I haven't gotten Schul's book in the mail yet (it's been 4 weeks since I sent in money) so I don't know alot here, but does anyone have an idea why Igloi used a 60' longer run per week (I have heard Beatty doing it at what would be considered long run pace or "patient tempo")"? Was it for the benefits of the traditional long run even though it would be quite short for a person (like Beatty, able to run 3:55/13:48)?

Ok, I post later.

Yes well said sir. But, I wonder if the musculature is that important. There has been alot of research reguarding tendon strength vs muscel...And as we know Tergat is 5x WXC champion which requires great muscel power. I dont know if the bulk has much to do with it, flatness of muscels and all, the economy and genetic predisposition of the athlete is of great importance. And some just have a better (mind) for the marathon than others, do you understand this too? One can see the excellence of marathoner through their mind set. It is obvious for someone like Tergat, who is a genetic phenom, that through his successes in cross country he would do favorably in the marathon.

As for some of the athletes you mentioned, I saw and trained with Ronaldo in Brasil when I lived in Belo Horizonte, his coach and my coach at the time were good friends. He is very thin, very. When he went to train with Carvalheiro, who was more of a sprint coach he excelled initially for that year (i beleive) because he had never done extensive pure speed work---then from there the decline, because he no longer had that traditional base work that he had with Henrique-his first coach. Which was predominatly long reps, i.e. 5-6x1500 and longer with medium active rest was a timed distance. He would run some of these under 4'00 and on a dirt track, which I agree with you: It reduces pounding and enhances the endurance/speed/power at the same time.

You can look at most of the athletes you mentioned and they continue to have many problems with injuries. Lima was also quite prone to injuries, what saved him was that he was able to train effectively (specifically) over a long period of time without injuries. Gharib is holding up well, for now, but the marathon requires leaness and great tendon stregnth, this I feel (along with good bones-lol) helps reduce injuries. I do remenber that Tergat has had a few tendon injuries much like Geb, but this is due to all the track training. He is now in a funk, which usually happens to athletes after setting a WR.

I am happy to see Chaica doing well, without Antonio Pinto, who now seems to look heavier than Carlos Lopes, we are very slim indeed in the distances in Portugal. It is ashame because we have great venues for training. Yes I know Rui Silva, may become our best overall runner, but not past the 5k I believe.

Salutations

JD

For Lance,

I'm intrigued by your question.

PERHAPS the continuous easy runs stimulate something in the slow twitch fibers and the like that doesn't get activated as much by the intermitent "easy" runs.

That is, maybe when one alternates the slow with faster running the fast twitch type fibers get excited and do a more significant amount of work (even during the slower parts) than they would during the continuous slow runs.

While these types of runs seem like they would be beneficial to shorter distance runners, my intuition leads me to believe that someone attempting to train for marathon races would be wise to include a lot of continuous slow runs--especially during the early and late phases of training.

Also note from Bob Hodge's site the training of Bordin before the Olympic gold.

"* Recovery Training = controlled fartlek training as follows:

1' fast(1' jog) 2' fast(2' jog) 3' fast(3' jog) 4' fast(4' jog) 5' fast(5' jog) + 10x 1'30"(1'30" jog) + 10x1'00"(1'00" jog)"

Hello confusedd

Thanks for your reply.

First of all, the comments above Billat that i did concerns the question of training based in VO2 pace, something that Alberto never used in his life. I want to profit the occasion to say that by some curiosity and the ask of a foreign physilogist, nothing more, some years ago, before his first marathon try, Alberto Chaiça did a maxVO2 test in Switzeland that in that occasion he did comepete and win Staus cross. The physiologist said 2 things: that Alberto have one of the world highest max.VO2 capacities and also that according that he have the potencial to do 2:07. Or we didn+t pay no special attention to that, i don´t know his max.VO2, neither Chaiça, neither the head coach, and about the secons affirmation that he will do 2:07, he didn´t that yet. I hope that this is enough to make you understand that´s not the format of a workout 30s/30s or 60s/60s or 90s/90s that really matters. What matters is the workout target, and if you did read the Alberto schedule with attention, despite that among other - he did similar intervals in te 1:1 ratio - the pace of the fast reps and the pace of the recover have nothing to do with VO2 concepts, or VO2 relate, and if have, that´s completly involuntary. As you may read the target of that workouts that to run a bit faster than marathon race pace, and besides i´m no expert about VO2 training, i know that the pace is diffrent that what Chaiça does.

Then if ther´s some similarity among what BIllat does and what we did - that´s unvoluntary and a coincidence.

Now, you may understand this. During the 11 years of his career, Alberto Chaiça did every week short reps over the track.

The more similar and practical outdoor workout to replace the typical 400s with 200m active recover that Chaiça does all career long we did judge that´s 60s/60s, it will be idiot to try 68sec/400m with 56sec/200m recover that´s the range average of the workout we pretend to do, then we opte to do 60s/60s. But i garantee you that if we have any accees to a track in altitude places we did stay we will have done 10-15-20-25X400m/68sec rec=54-60sec, instead of 60sec/60sec.

Of course that in my in my intro about what Chaiça did i said that he did a 2:50/2:55 by Kilo pace in that 60sec reps or long minutes reps that´s really a pace percent from race pace similar to 400m/68sec some 105% from an estimate 2:07 marathon Chaiça´s potential.

I did say this in my intro, you may read in this thread the reasons i justify the use of this 60sec/60sec - we haven´t a track. If we did opte to use that, is not by our willing. You may read that i said that ther´s no tracks acess available in the altitude we want to do that. Otherwise we will have done reps workouts by distance.

For all the rest i keep think the same about Billat, about that called VO2 workouts and that among top class runners that i know.

You may understand that not all that shine is gold. tThere are things that shine and look like gold but that are just bargains. The giold shines but that´s a noble material, expensive and rare, bargains are things with no category at all.

First of all many thanks, you hounor me and i think that us all by post Brendan Foster training.

My memories of Brandan are enough to consider him one of the best from golden years. When i was young i did subscribe Athletic Weekly and i had the occasion to read some training schedule from Brandan.

Of course that i thanks your generosity if you want to continued to post Brendan Foster schedules.

But i have some questions for you, Sir.

1/what in your consideration made that Brendan have that rare quality that´s to speed up the pace close to 3kilos/2miles during a 5000m race - to lead the run in front of the lead pack up to the end - knowing that it had been a well suceed running strategy to win 1974 Rome 5000m EC 1974 - (in your post you did write 2004 ? Do you think that´s simply a natural innate talenty or do you think that the training is directed to that running tactic ?

2/I did read that he did 3 sessions a day often. If so, what´s the impact of that use have in the mileage volume (you say that he did 100 miles and more weekly)? 3 session daily it helped to train mileage volume. How he manage that?

3/I know that after 1975-1976 Brendon become also well known to break road relays stage records. Or that relay runs were/are ery popular durinmg the late winter, early spring, thus during mileage build up. Correct? Or what´s the influence and contribution of that road runs for Brendan late season in the track achievements/performances ?

4/Eventually if you post more Brendan training material may be that this my question makes sense. I´ve read a Brendan Foster interview in the net (i guess that´s in Cool running site from Australia) and he says that in some moment of his career his coach did a important change in his workouts training model - from the english classic use of intervals from the 60´s eaqrly 70s, - intense pace with long recocer (90sec) to a king of track fartelek - he rusn the event distance in a continuum (non-stop running) but with fast periods (several distances) with jog in between. he consider that a change that made a decisive improvement. Is that correct?

5/One more question. Why do you think he wasn´t able to use that his own staretegy of outquick and lead the race, in 1976 Monteral Olympics 10000m and 5000m ? I know that he had no time to warmup in that 10000m race that Viren did win and that carlos lopes did second place, but he did that against the same Viren in Rome 1974 in the 5000m of course, and about the 500m of that olymopics?

6/Last question. I did admire Brendan a lot. But ther´s one detail that is strange and curious for me. Brendan body build and his weight. Sometimes, despite he did many miles and he was on the top of rankings in some photos it looks a fat man, not the physical profile of the thin athlete we imagine as such a good runner.

Many thanks.

jdflash and also Dunner Runner

Carvalheiro was also the coach of Robson da Silva, the sprinter right?

Ok, will you help me to justify the quickly fall down of Ronaldo Costa.

Ronaldo is a humble guy, very poor, but Brazil that´s not the best country to have money. Brazil, in athletics they only know jump and triple-jump (Ademar Ferreira da Silva; Nelson Prudêncio e João do Pulo and actually Jadel). Also some good sprinters and also José Luis Barbosa 800m-1500m.

In distant running they only know Sâo Silvestre de S. Paulo

New Eve road run that Tergat did win 5 times, but if you go back, great names did win there; from Zatopec to Frank Shorter, from Carlos Lopes to Ronaldo Costa they all did win that race.

First they put too much pressure in Ronaldo after that WR.

Second, the marathon is a very susceptible distance. One little detail and you get out some months of hard training. I think that in this particular is what did happen to Tergat really. Apart that he is the WR, i don´t consider him a marathon runner not yet. He did expectaions out in London in his first marathon attempt, he did poor in Chicago, he did failed in the olympics and now he failed once again in London.

You see what í´m try to say ? That he was a good cross, and he is still an good half marathon runner, but the marathon needs somethimg more - carbo depletion management. But i think that you are right - motivation plays a decisive role.

Also you need to have culture of the effort. ther are very good runners in 10000m that are never good in the marathon distance.

In marathon there are 2 types of runners, those of fast courses, pacers and commercial marathons and those of competitive marathons - big games. In that particular we may say that belgium Karel Lismont or Valdemar Cierpinsky or the spain Abel Anton or Martin Fiz or the UK Ian Thompson or Abere Adere and why not Hannes Holmén Finn european marathon winner - they are all Bid Games marathon profilers, but runner´s like Tergat or Khallid Khannouchi are runenrs for fast commercial marathons.

Ronaldo is a one of 9 brothers i guess and have a twin brother also. One day they essay a kidnap to Rinaldo, to get the money that he did win while running, but they did kidnap his twin brother instead of him.

Ronaldo training have the peculiarity that preparing the marathon he did low-mileage according the mileage mainstream marathon standards, he used to high up the volume mileage up to one week before the marathon race. Preparing Berlin 2:06 Ronaldo Costa never did more than 110 miles a week. His coach didn´t agree with mileage tapper. The longest and hard long one session was done 8 to 10 days before the marathon. The day after the long runs that was used to run te hard workout with long reps.

The interview I did mention about Brebdan Foster is this one

http://www.geocities.com/ewen_99/r2000_02.html

Mr. Lindsay. About this question and answer and because this is is the central subject of this thread the "intermittent training" I would love a your comment about Brendan answer.

Have there been any major changes in training patterns over the last decade?

I think the most significant change has been that around 1970 everybody used to run repetition and interval type sessions like 10 x 400m or 20 x 200m or whatever. Nowadays training is more geared to the event. For example from 1978-80 when I was racing over 10,000m one of my first training sessions of the season would be to run a 10,000m of sprinting and jogging on the track.

The way the Russians are going they've got it all wrong. They assume that because ten quarters is what so and so used to do, then if I do twenty I'll be better than that. You should run the kind of training you're going to run in races. There's not a lot of point if you're a 10,000m runner of never running more than 800m reps in training. Basically the thing is to get the pulse rate down and get the heart built up in size by the long steady distance work and then be specific about your training. The long steady runs are only general conditioning and don't count as specific training.

In the early days I used to run 10 x 400m on Tuesday, 6 x 300m on Thursday and maybe 20 x 200m on Saturday. In later years the sessions were 5000m of sprinting and jogging, maybe three x one mile or five laps fast and five laps slow with a very fast middle lap. The workouts always focussed on how I was going to race.

Foster did change over the years to more continuous fast and slow running (400s with easier paced but short running breaks), plus he later used long reps such as 3 x 1600 in 4:10 as he approached his world best in the 3,000m (he ran 7:35.2 even while training hard that week). This conforms to the methods that many of the best elite runners in the world use in our modern days.

Here is a quote from Bren when asked about a good week of training:

"It varied as I got older and moved up in distance. From 1974-78 I ran about 120 miles a week. I would run five miles and occasionally ten of a morning. Through the winter I would run steadily and never did any track or speed worl. Once a week, when Gateshead Harriers was in its heyday, I would have a ten mile run with the club. The pace was all right for me but a lot people used to have a week's rest before the run. The Tuesday night run became quite famous as it was televised a couple of times.

In the summer I'd also run 120 miles a week with ten miles or more in the morning and a track session in the afternoon. Of course if I was racing I would taper off. My training wan't any different than any else's. I just ran, regularly and consistently between 100-120 miles a week year round."

I will post another quote or two from in the next post.

MORE ON BRENDAN FOSTER:

Q: Have ther been any major changes in training patterns over the last decade?

A: "I think the most significant change has been that around 1970 everybody used to run repetition and interval type sessions like ten quarters or 20 x 200m or whatever. Nowadays training is more geared for the event. For example from 1978-80 when I was racing over 10,000m one of my first training sessions of the season would be to run a 10,000m of sprinting and jogging on the track.

The way the Russians are going they've got it all wrong. They assume that because ten quarters is what so and so used to do, then if I do twenty I'll be better than that. You should run the kind of training you're going to run in races. There's a not a lot of point if you're a 10,000m runner of never running more than 800m in training.

Basically the thing is to get the pulse rate down and get the heart rate built up in size by the long steady distance work and then to be specific about your training. The long steady runs are only general conditioning and don't count as specific training.

In early days I just used to run 10 x 400m on Tuesday and 6 x 300m on Thursday and maybe 20 x 200m on Saturday. In later years the sessions were 5000m of sprinting and jogging, maybe three x one mile or five laps slow with a very fast middle lap. The workouts always focused on how I was going to race."

The previous post should say get the pulse rate down and get the heart built up, no heart rate built up.

Here is a couple of weeks of training prior to his 7:35.2 for 3,000m:

July-August, 1974

Sun Jul 21: 20 miles steay run.

Mon Jul 22: (am) 10 miles steady to work.

(pm) 8 miles steady run.

Tue Jul 23: (am) Steady 5 miles.

(pm) Track 7pm. 3 x 800 (4-4 1/2 mins rest). Cold windy night. Average 2:01.3. Very Hard session, needed it. Ran 4 x 100m on grass afterwards.

Wed Jul 24: (am) Steady run to work, 9 miles.

(pm) 2 sets of 8 x 200m quite hard (20 secs rest). 4 x 100m. Quite tough session. Total 6 miles.

Thu Jul 25: (am) Steady run, 6 miles.

(pm) Steady run, 5 miles.

Fri Jul 26: (am) Steady run to work, 6 miles.

(pm) GB v Czechoslovakia 1500m race in Edinburgh. 1st 3:41.2. (2nd F. Clement 3:41.7)

Sat Jul 27: 15 miles with Mike Baxter, quite fast.

Week's total: 110 miles

Sun Jul 28: (am) Track at Gateshead. 3 x 1600m. Nice day. Average 4:10.18; equals best ever. Very hard.

(pm) Steady 10 miles run. Very tired, but felt better than I thought I would.

Mon Jul 29: (am) 10 miles steady.

(PM) 10 miles steady.

Tue Jul 30: (am) 6 miles steady run.

(pm) Track at Gateshead, lunchtime. 10 x 400m (90 secs rest). Average 59.49 secs. Quite hard throughout.

(pm) 8 miles steady run.

Wed Jul 31: (am) Steady run, 7 miles

(pm) 2 sets of 8 x 200m (20 sec rest). Recovering well.

Thu Aug 01: (am) Steady run to work, 6 miles.

(pm) Steady run, legs sore, 8 miles.

Fri Aug 02: (am) Steady run, 5 miles.

(pm) Steady run, 5 miles.

Sat Aug 03: Gateshead Games. 3000m in 7:35.2. World Record.

Quite pleased with last lap.

(pm) 4 miles steady run.