Marathon distance intervals

don't try this if you have low iron

Anybody :-)? There must be somebody, elite or non-elite, who has tried this in the history of running! I'm thinking that it might work especially well for people in the, say, 2:20 - 2:50 range. For running a little slower than marathon pace for up to around 2 and a half hours is perfectly do-able in training, and if one is faster than 2:20, one can cover the entire distance or more in this time; and modern elites indeed do such runs in training.

But if one is slower than 2:20 or so, this begins to become difficult. Slower than 2:50 or so and breaking up into intervals still won't allow one to cover the distance without too much damage, probably. But between 2:20 and 2:50, or something like that range, breaking up the distance into long intervals might make it do-able in training I think.

Some Japanese marathoners have done similar stuff. Seko did workouts like "30 x 1km in 2.55 or 6x5km in 14.30 (one-minute jog recoveries)"

Source:

https://www.runnerstribe.com/tuckersweekly/the-marathon-is-my-only-girlfriend-training-of-famous-runners-toshihiko-seko/

long run variations wrote:

It may sound crazy, but it seems to me that something like 10 x 4km, or maybe 10 x 3.5km, done at steady pace (a little slower than marathon pace) with say 800m jog rest could be an excellent, and do-able, way to cover the marathon distance in a training session, probably replacing a long run. For example, running an entire 30km at a reasonably steady pace is standard marathon training long run. Breaking into intervals should surely allow greater volume without necessitating much greater recovery? Psychologically the intervals would seem easier. I'm planning to try it, but am wondering if others have, or what people's thoughts are!

The breaks are of little benefit. Sure your heart rate and breathing go down but it isn't like you can refuel or your legs will recover from the pounding with a 4 min jog.

Plenty of people have do workouts with 25-30k of hard running (MP). I can't think of anyone who gets away with 35k+. The closes would be the Special blocks where you do volume like that but over 2 workouts.

behind the wall of sleep wrote:

Some Japanese marathoners have done similar stuff. Seko did workouts like "30 x 1km in 2.55 or 6x5km in 14.30 (one-minute jog recoveries)"

Thank you for the interesting link! I can definitely believe that Japanese runners have done this kind of thing, thanks for the suggestion. If anybody has an example where the intervals cover around marathon distance or over, I'd be very interested.

dadsfadsfdasfdsafdas wrote:

The breaks are of little benefit. Sure your heart rate and breathing go down but it isn't like you can refuel or your legs will recover from the pounding with a 4 min jog.

Plenty of people have do workouts with 25-30k of hard running (MP). I can't think of anyone who gets away with 35k+. The closes would be the Special blocks where you do volume like that but over 2 workouts.

You could be right. I was thinking more of a pace that is steady but a little below marathon pace (probably). For an example of an elite marathoner covering around marathon distance in a continuous run, see the following, where there is an example of Kipchoge doing 40km in 2:26 'on a tough route'.

This may seem astounding, but I don't think it is: the key point is not to run for too long. If you are quick enough to be able to cover 40km in under 2:30 in training, it shouldn't cause much more impact than a slower runner running 35km in that time.

Canova has also mentioned in various threads examples of his runners doing continuous runs from slightly under to slightly over marathon distance.

The question is whether intervals make it easier for slightly slower runners. As you say, it could be that they do not. But it is conceivable to me that varying the pace could help a bit; although one cannot really refuel, the jogs should allow one to 'shake the legs out a bit', lower lactate levels, and lessen the pounding for a little while, which might allow one to continue for 5 - 10km more than otherwise. After all, ultramarathoners can run slowly for a very long time, even in training in some cases, so decreasing the speed clearly helps in general; the question is whether it helps enough in the case we are discussing (steady pace 3 - 5km intervals with say 800m - 1km jog breaks) to be worth it.

Why would you run intervals slower than the race pace?

If you're trying to do something long because you're getting ready for a marathon, run a fartlek that is very long, like an hour and a half, where your rest is slightly slower than marathon and your 'on' is nearing half marathon pace. Say you're an 80 minute half marathon runner, and and a 2:55 marathon runner. You could run a 90 minute fartlek alternating 3 minutes at 6:10-6:15 pace followed by 2 minutes at 7:00-7:10 pace.

A 2:15 type guy could do this same workout alternating between 4:50-4:55 pace and 5:25-5:30 pace. 54 minutes at the faster pace and 36 minutes at the slower pace.

This is a challenging workout, the same thing but for only 60 or 75 minutes is more manageable earlier in a marathon buildup.

long run variations wrote:

It may sound crazy, but it seems to me that something like 10 x 4km, or maybe 10 x 3.5km, done at steady pace (a little slower than marathon pace) with say 800m jog rest could be an excellent, and do-able, way to cover the marathon distance in a training session, probably replacing a long run. For example, running an entire 30km at a reasonably steady pace is standard marathon training long run. Breaking into intervals should surely allow greater volume without necessitating much greater recovery? Psychologically the intervals would seem easier. I'm planning to try it, but am wondering if others have, or what people's thoughts are!

Since when is 30k (18.6 miles) any kind of marathon standard? In most training plans long runs are typically 20-23 miles, MP runs are usually 10-15.

10x4k + 800m rest would be 30 miles without even an allowance for a warmup and cool down, that's insane.

No no no no no wrote:

Why would you run intervals slower than the race pace?

The idea is to 'extend' the long run. Instead of running 30km or 35km at our usual good, steady long run pace, how can we get up to 40km or beyond? It is too hard (unless you are sub 2:20 or quicker) to do 40km continuously. But maybe one can do it with intervals.

To improve as a 5km runner, one does threshold work (slower than race pace). One can do a continuous tempo run, or one can do intervals, the latter of which allow more total volume. The question is whether one can apply the same principal to marathon pace; obviously the analogy is not exact, but there may be something to it.

U B crazy wrote:

Since when is 30k (18.6 miles) any kind of marathon standard? In most training plans long runs are typically 20-23 miles, MP runs are usually 10-15.

10x4k + 800m rest would be 30 miles without even an allowance for a warmup and cool down, that's insane.

'Standard' was meant in the sense of it being entirely normal to run 30km (or more) in the course of marathon training.

It need not be exactly 10 x 4km, this was just an example. The main point is to extend the long run to at least some degree.