50+ Masters Training and Racing Open Forum

KPdx wrote:

Did 5x 1000 with 2min rest averaging 3:55 or 19:35p for 5k and then 3 days later ran 19:13.

A year ago, I ran 5 x 1000m with THREE-minute recoveries -- reps were 3:52, 3:46, 3:48, 3:44, 3:41. That totals 18:51. My next 5K race was 13 days later -- 19:13 (same as yours!). That's slower than the workout total by 22 seconds. I think it demonstrates how the recovery duration affects the training pace relative to racing pace.

With his total of SIX reps, and only 90-second recoveries, I agree Allen53 is looking at a potential 5K race well below 20 minutes. 19:45, maybe even 19:30, as you say.

If I go back further in my logs, when I ran 5 x 1000m with two-minute recoveries at 3:26 average -- (17:10 total) --, my 5K race time was 17:32. Coincidentally, like last year, that race was 22 seconds slower than the 5 x 1000 workout total.

It was 12 weeks later when I actually matched that 17:10 in a 5K race.

For VO2max-type workouts, I try to hit 5K goal pace, or what's probably closer to 3K race pace. So, usually the recoveries need to be relatively long -- approaching a 1:1 ratio with the rep duration. That was my take from Daniels' writings back in the early 2000s, so that's what I've stuck with since then. Today was a planned 6 x 880y, a workout I've run many times over the years. Three-minute recoveries today. Unfortunately, I had to abort after only four -- hamstring said "stop." It was risky to even attempt the workout, but I felt worth a try to stay on schedule for a 5K in two weeks. Oh well, I'll rest it for a couple days and reassess.

KPdx wrote:

Allen,

Did 5x 1000 with 2min rest averaging 3:55 or 19:35p for 5k and then 3 days later ran 19:13. And I always aim for negative splits in my hard workouts. Started at 4:05 ended at 3:48. Who knows, maybe it was the hilly course, possibly the cooler weather. I know the 5k was a LOT harder for me than the 1ks. I reckon you are ready for a good race as well... something in the 19:30-19:45 zone?

KP

I noticed you ran a 5K 3 days after that training session. From what I have been seeing that is a bit close to the race day for most people? At 56 I think I would need a bit more recovery to have zip in the legs.

Did that benefit you in some way? 19:13 seems like a pretty good time- if I were able to get that time this year I'd be very satisfied and frankly quite surprised.

Ran 42 minutes today out on rolling hills at medium pace and felt pretty good- legs were a bit tight but other than that no repercussions from yesterday's workout.

Well, looking again at the second example I gave above, I see it was exactly the same as your workout, KP, yet the reps were still quite a bit faster than actual 5K race pace. Meanwhile, your 1000s were slower than actual race pace.

So, the recovery duration isn't the key variable. I guess the difference is the relative effort while running the reps? I usually have in mind an optimistic 5K goal pace, or, as I mentioned above, probably more like 3K race pace, which is how Daniels used to describe VO2max pace.

Chiming in on the 5k training... I've gotten to a pretty good place with very little trackwork/reps and just tempos and a long run. I've only recently added shorter reps in preparation for next weeks mile. I think I've done one 800 workout a month or so ago. I'm being much more careful these days as a lot of track work really kills me. As opposed to 3-4 years ago when I was doing them all the time. In my opinion 6x1000 might be a bit much. Especially 3 days out from a race.

So with that, a late report on last week had me at 55 miles. I did 12x200 w/200 jog test on Tues averaged 37.5. 10 on Saturday went well at about 7:20 pace. Steady prog from 8:00-6:35.

Tonite I'm doing KPs suggested 400-600-400-200 workout. I'm backing off the all-out stategy a bit as my only goal is to make it to the starting line next week in one piece! I can see this workout doing me in if I don't watch things. So I'm planning on 76, 1:52, 75, 35. That will be a good day and I might be able to walk in the morning!

Have a good one,

Dave

Racerdb wrote:

Chiming in on the 5k training... I've gotten to a pretty good place with very little trackwork/reps and just tempos and a long run.

Dave

+1 Always have ran my best after an extended period of weekly lactate threshold runs of about 5 or 6 miles at 85percent mhr. Long runs never been able to consistently do long runs but would like too.

Dave think u r smart not doing too much in prep for the mile last time 2017? I recall you were really running well until you went all in on the mile.

Today was my best feeling wise threshold run 3 loops in the hilly soft sand in 36 minutes nice and steady at 168HR my youthfull threshold HR was 172 for about the same amount of time so I am getting there.

Racerdb wrote:

... I've gotten to a pretty good place with very little trackwork/reps and just tempos and a long run ...

It might be good for me to emulate your current approach. Since re-introducing weekly VO2max repeats 7 weeks ago, my paces have actually gotten slower.

In July, I added threshold workouts. Those paces progressively slowed, too, culminating in that embarrassing 15K race on August 4th.

I blamed cumulative fatigue, although the knee, hamstring and hip issues probably impacted as well.

If I keep racing, my next two are 5Ks. Then a 15K in October. Maybe best to run a couple 7- to 12-mile progressions each week as the only hard days (plus a long run perhaps every nine days or so).

Fast Talk podcast, ep. 51: Polarizing your training, with Dr. Stephen Seiler

https://www.velonews.com/2018/07/podcast/fast-talk-podcast-ep-51-polarizing-your-training-with-dr-stephen-seiler_473325

Allen1959 wrote:

Racerdb wrote:

... I've gotten to a pretty good place with very little trackwork/reps and just tempos and a long run ...

It might be good for me to emulate your current approach. Since re-introducing weekly VO2max repeats 7 weeks ago, my paces have actually gotten slower.

In July, I added threshold workouts. Those paces progressively slowed, too, culminating in that embarrassing 15K race on August 4th.

I blamed cumulative fatigue, although the knee, hamstring and hip issues probably impacted as well.

If I keep racing, my next two are 5Ks. Then a 15K in October. Maybe best to run a couple 7- to 12-mile progressions each week as the only hard days (plus a long run perhaps every nine days or so).

As you know once you start dipping into the well the reserve will only last so long. Tempos and critical velocity work perhaps a little longer, but not so with intervals. Some have advocated shorter cycles for masters athletes which seems to make sense as you age. Important to keep the turnover as well as the strength. Instead of a four month build/up, why not two?

IMO Old Runners should do most of their speed work a bit slower than Lactate Threshold. To keep the speed without the metabolic stress they should also do Van AAKEN style workouts stuff like 500 meters or 75 seconds which ever comes first at your current mile pace then take a FULL recovery and maybe do another one if you feel good. As a 5k race approaches then maybe some 800s or 1200s at race pace but also full recovery with maybe a couple workouts to tax the system.

So the older runner should stay closer to top fitness using lactate threshold along with speed that does not tax the metabolic system.

Here is my cherry picked article to support my position;)

Why is Lactate Threshold Training Beneficial

Lactate threshold training leads to improvements in: aerobic energy pathways, anaerobic energy pathways, the anaerobic threshold and sustainable % VO2max, time to exhaustion and lactate clearance. The lactate threshold is related to the % type I fibres (Coyle et al., 1991), mitochondrial aerobic enzyme activity (Coyle 1995), and also appears to be related to mitochondrial size and density, aerobic enzyme concentrations, muscle capillary density, and enhanced fatty acid metabolism. Since type I fibres have the greatest concentration of mitochondria it seems logical that training that leads to the greatest stimulation of type I fibres, and hence mitochondrial aerobic enzymes – the recruitment of type I muscle fibres reaches its peak at the lactate threshold – would be the best stimulation for increasing the LTVO2. Since training at an intensity around the lactate threshold, can be performed for much longer, and can make up a greater percentage of total training, with reduced physiological stress than training at 100%VO2max, this may be the optimum training intensity for raising levels of type I aerobic enzymes. Therefore, the use of lactate threshold training may serve as a compromise between volume and intensity (Weltman et al., 1990), allowing a greater training volume, at an increased intensity than moderate/easy training, but with a reduced risk of overtraining than is the case with high intensity interval training (HIIT sessions).

One other important factor to consider with lactate threshold training is that there is a decreased risk of over training compared with HIIT sessions. The main reason for the reduced risk of overtraining, is due to the reduced levels of catecholamines (stress hormones) during tempo/lactate threshold training, compared with HIIT sessions. Although, there is a slight rise in the level of catecholamines at the point of the lactate threshold, the concentration of catecholamines rises sharply at intensities above the lactate threshold. Therefore, training at the lactate threshold is the optimum training intensity for improving aerobic fitness, lactate threshold, and exercise economy, whilst reducing the risk of overtraining associated with training at much higher intensities. Because the levels of catecholamines are much lower, when training at the lactate threshold, than at higher intensities, it allows you to complete a significantly greater percentage of training at the lactate threshold, than you could if training at higher intensities.

Charlie wrote:

Dave think u r smart not doing too much in prep for the mile last time 2017? I recall you were really running well until you went all in on the mile.

Yep!... I haven't felt the same since.

Quick update on the workout. I survived and it really didn't feel that bad. Maybe I could have made it harder but I exceeded my goals. Track was hot...about 84 deg.

2 mile jog to the track

400 74.8 400 walk

600 1:52.3 600 walk

400 72.9 400 walk

200 34.1 200 walk

2 mile jog home

So, I'm still thinking 5:06-5:08'ish is a reasonable goal. 5:04 is a 90% but that might be a stretch.

Dave

Road miles and 5Ks/5000s not withstanding. I prefer the longer stuff. Life begins at 8K.

Over the past 6 weeks I've been setting up for 5K and we'll see how it goes. Did one 4K race and a 5000 m on the track, one 15K road (so a long threshold) race, and a road mile. For workouts I cut back on the LT, and other than the 15K only did a half a session (10 minutes). Did some three or four CV sessions, but in two of those I closed with some V02 type work. I also included a weekly speed session, short but sweet, with about a mile worth of reps (e.g., 4X 70-80 sec sec) or 5X 1 minute, or 6-8X 45 seconds.

For most of the rest of the year it's tempos and CV with a set of pick ups or short hill reps. It seems to have worked oka so far for my n of 1.

I might run an indoor mile or two next winter but that will be coming off of hill work and XC strength.

I've been running well over the last several weeks. Training is going good. I raced some and each time ran faster than I expected. I ran a 1-mile race and a couple of 800s. The first 800 was really good and the second one was great.

Yesterday, I started working at the local small-town high school. I haven't done that for years so I will have to figure out a schedule or just do what I can. It will get more difficult when I will teach a couple of college night courses on M and W starting on the 26th.

Today I ran over 6 1/2 miles total. It was speed on an incline. First I ran 8 X 220y up faster then 220y down slowly.

After a break for a couple of minutes, I ran 8 X 110y up with 330y... It was a lot of fun.

Good luck.

I get it that running 5x1000 3 days before a 5k race is foolish. However, this one was simply to survive a test from my calf injury - to see if I could go the distance of a 5k without stopping. I didn't really care if I was fresh/recovered. And frankly surprised to run anything under 20:00.

You are ready to rock that road mile Dave. Smash it!

KP

Allen1959 wrote:

Racerdb wrote:

... I've gotten to a pretty good place with very little trackwork/reps and just tempos and a long run ...

It might be good for me to emulate your current approach. Since re-introducing weekly VO2max repeats 7 weeks ago, my paces have actually gotten slower.

In July, I added threshold workouts. Those paces progressively slowed, too, culminating in that embarrassing 15K race on August 4th.

I blamed cumulative fatigue, although the knee, hamstring and hip issues probably impacted as well.

If I keep racing, my next two are 5Ks. Then a 15K in October. Maybe best to run a couple 7- to 12-mile progressions each week as the only hard days (plus a long run perhaps every nine days or so).

Fatigue for me as well and also; ankle, Achilles, PF, IT band, hamstrings, hip, back, shoulder & neck (the last three compliments of a MV accident).

It's really amazing how much toll high-impact physical activity will take on the body over decades of being active. I always thought that eating healthy, getting plenty of sleep and daily excercise (both intense & moderate), I'd end up like Jack LaLanne. But Jack wasn't a runner and probably had some above average aging-genetics working in his favor.

Interesting article on the increase of joint replacement surgery with younger patients. The section on "Injuries and changing expectations" is interesting. I have two arthritic joints that I'll have to eventually make that tough decision. If I recall correctly, two great ones in Frank Shorter & Dick Beardsly have had knee replacements and still run?

Even at slower speeds one should be conscious of good form and reducing braking forces.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Even at slower speeds one should be conscious of good form and reducing braking forces.

I’ve always thought “good form” was overrated. By that I mean it is difficult to judge. Efficiency is the key to distance running and it can take many different forms.

oId guy wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Even at slower speeds one should be conscious of good form and reducing braking forces.

I’ve always thought “good form” was overrated. By that I mean it is difficult to judge. Efficiency is the key to distance running and it can take many different forms.

I’ll buy that. Specifically thinking proper arm carriage, slight forward lean, hips level, full foot plant with extension...reducing braking forces. Of course this varies by person. For me, I know I can get sloppy at slower speeds. If I am trying to increase my volume I need to be conscious of economy of effort.

Allen53 wrote:

Fast Talk podcast, ep. 51: Polarizing your training, with Dr. Stephen Seiler

https://www.velonews.com/2018/07/podcast/fast-talk-podcast-ep-51-polarizing-your-training-with-dr-stephen-seiler_473325

Interesting. I'm basically living in Zone 2 at the moment. The left ankle posterial tibia problem is stopping me doing speed work at the moment. The foot basically 'flaps' at the moment at speed. I'm normally relatively forefoot, coming from a lower-middle-distance background, but at the moment I'm a heel-striker on the left, little pressure on the mid-foot, then a little bit of a push-off once the foot has roll-forward into the toe-off position.

It's not bad in the 7 to 7:30 range, but gets untidy at a faster, as ground contact time is a longer on that side.

I wouldn't want to push it by running too long either, so I'm on 3-4 miles per day, trying to avoid losing too much fitness and gaining too much weight.

I'm interested to see what fitness impact doing 3-4 a day at a steady pace all the time has. Interesting run yesterday - 3 miles in 22:11 (7:24 pace), with 7:38 first mile (including hobbling a bit until warmed up), 7:12 and 7:22 (into a typical Florence, Oregon, coastal wind). On that, though average heart-rate was only 121 (didn't crack 120 until about 14 mins).

On recovery it seems like it's possible to knock out 3-4 miles a day at 7:20/7:40 without any leg fatigue.

Since there isn't going to be any racing or speedwork until the ankle is better, I'm happy enough just to be keeping moving at the moment. Going to be interesting to see if these does maintain reasonable shape, and whether being comfortable at 7:20 pace is going to translate to being able to run 5k at say 6:30 pace. My Garmin just tells me it's somewhere between 2.5 - 3.0 effort, basically maintaining, so there's hope!

I can't use marathon or half marathon paces, as I was much, much slower at those distances than shorter. My marathon pace was about 18 minutes slower than my 3000m indicated, or to reverse that, my marathon time points to a 3000m that is over a minute slower that I ran, and a mile nearly 47 seconds slower, and that was a marathon that I ran with virtually even splits!

Anyway, I hope in about a month's time, the ankle is back to where I can start running some reps again. On age grade for what I ran at 56, I should be able to run around 19 min 5k, but it would be good to break 20 (or 21 for that matter) to start with!

The term HIIT is the Tempo overused not well understood and taken out of context. Here is a really in depth article Seiler co wrote that I thought was pretty good overall . One thing I will add that is included in the article but not really emphasized but is discussed. Keep a close eye on how you are responding to the training.

You got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em

Know when to walk away and know when to run

https://www.sportsci.org/2009/ss.htm#_Toc245522381

Conclusions

Optimization of training methods is an area of great interest for scientists, athletes, and fitness enthusiasts. One challenge for sport scientists is to translate short-term training intervention study results to long-term performance development and fitness training organization. Currently, there is great interest in high-intensity, short-duration interval training programs. However, careful evaluation of both available research and the training methods of successful endurance athletes suggests that we should be cautious not to over-prescribe high-intensity interval training or exhort the advantages of intensity over duration.

Here are some conclusions that seem warranted by the available data and experience from observations of elite performers:

• There is reasonable evidence that an ~80:20 ratio of low to high intensity training (HIT) gives excellent long-term results among endurance athletes training daily.

• Low intensity (typically below 2 mM blood lactate), longer duration training is effective in stimulating physiological adaptations and should not be viewed as wasted training time.

• Over a broad range, increases in total training volume correlate well with improvements in physiological variables and performance.

• HIT should be a part of the training program of all exercisers and endurance athletes. However, about two training sessions per week using this modality seems to be sufficient for achieving performance gains without inducing excessive stress.

• The effects of HIT on physiology and performance are fairly rapid, but rapid plateau effects are seen as well. To avoid premature stagnation and ensure long-term development, training volume should increase systematically as well.

• When already well-trained athletes markedly intensify training with more HIT over 12 to ~45 wk, the impact is equivocal.

• In athletes with an established endurance base and tolerance for relatively high training loads, intensification of training may yield small performance gains at acceptable risk.

• An established endurance base built from reasonably high volumes of training may be an important precondition for tolerating and responding well to a substantial increase in training intensity over the short term.

• Periodization of training by elite athletes is achieved with reductions in total volume, and a modest increase in the volume of training performed above the lactate threshold. An overall polarization of training intensity characterizes the transition from preparation to competition mesocycles. The basic intensity distribution remains similar throughout the year.