Alternating 200m @ 800m pace, 400m @ 1500m pace, short rest, as many as you can do.
Step downs from 1x700m or 1x600m through 1x500m, 2x400m, 3x300m, 4x200m.
Alternating 200m @ 800m pace, 400m @ 1500m pace, short rest, as many as you can do.
Step downs from 1x700m or 1x600m through 1x500m, 2x400m, 3x300m, 4x200m.
CoachB wrote:
December/January: The speed focus was on short reps with full recovery. Starting with 5 x 40m and every week adding 10m until we reached 80m. The rest gradually creeped out as well. It was around 3 minutes when doing the 40s and 4-5 minutes when doing the 80s.
February: We started bringing in 10 x 100 with a 300 SLOW jog @ about 400m (or slightly faster) race pace. We did that twice.
That could nearly be a quote from some of our training as well. For 10x100m at 400m pace w/ 300m jog, did you get that from Run With the Best (Irv Ray & Tony Benson)? That was a staple for me in high school that I still pull out on occasion for my runners.
It's important to clarify what "speed endurance" really means. For me, "speed endurance" doesn't mean anything ; instead, it's correct to speak of "SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE", something very different because related to the distance of the race.
For a Marathon runner with PB of 2:06:30 (3 min / km), a workout of 10 times 1600m in 4'30" (that is 110% of Marathon Pace) is "specific speed endurance", while for a specialist of 1500m in 3'30" (14" every 100m) 6 or 7 km on track at the speed of 13"3 every 100m (5% faster than the pace of the race) is "specific speed endurance" (for example, 10 x 400m in 40" with 1'30" recovery followed by 10 x 200m in 26"5 with 1' of recovery).
Speed is not an objective word, when we speak of athletics events, but is something depending on the length of the event. We can consider every speed included between 100% and 105% of the Race Pace as "Specific Speed Endurance", while speeds faster than 10% of the Race Pace are workouts of "Specific Speed", but at that speed we look for a different effects.
The "maximal speed" can be included for athletes running any distance, but with a biomechanical and technical reason. In this case, we don't have "endurance" as final goal, but pure speed only.
We always need to remember than, in every specialism of "endurance", the main development is to EXTEND the speed, a little bit faster than the current PB of the athlete, that already the athlete is able to do, however still not able to maintain for the whole distance. For extending the ability to last, longer, at that speed, we need to use "specific speed endurance", where the speed is represented by the target of the athlete in his distance.
Forget all the classic classifications (alactic, lactic anaerobic, aerobic power, VO2 max, etc...).
Training can be very much easier. If I have an athlete running 1500m in 3'45", I can have a target of 3'40" for the next season. 3'40" means about 14"7 every 100m, and we need to put in training, till from the Fundamental Period, that kind of speed, increasing step by step the volume at that intensity, the length of tests and decreasing recovery times.
This is a "mathematic approach" : with this approach, we go to build in the body of the athlete the ability to run at that speed, increasing the aerobic level, the "technical memory" of the specific speed, the feeling of rhythm.
Around this we can have sessions of pure speed, and sessions of Aerobic Power and Aerobic Resistance as support. But all these workouts have the only reason of supporting the SPECIFIC SPEED, improving the ability to last longer time. For that reason, we speak about SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE workouts, different for every event.
V wrote:
CoachB wrote:
December/January: The speed focus was on short reps with full recovery. Starting with 5 x 40m and every week adding 10m until we reached 80m. The rest gradually creeped out as well. It was around 3 minutes when doing the 40s and 4-5 minutes when doing the 80s.
February: We started bringing in 10 x 100 with a 300 SLOW jog @ about 400m (or slightly faster) race pace. We did that twice.
That could nearly be a quote from some of our training as well. For 10x100m at 400m pace w/ 300m jog, did you get that from Run With the Best (Irv Ray & Tony Benson)? That was a staple for me in high school that I still pull out on occasion for my runners.
I got the 10 x 100 from this board, but it is something not too far from what I did on my own way back in high school.
Renato. I like the term "specific speed endurance" I've never heard it before but have long had my athletes do work at their goal pace. I have a question about the programming of specific speed endurance. Do you use a specific percentage of race distance to guide your workout planning for specific speed endurance? For instance in your example of a 3:45 1500 runner that wants to progress to 3:40. Running 100 @ 14.7 seconds would not be difficult for that athlete. Running 200 @ the same speed wouldn't be very difficult either provided the rest interval was long.
Since you say you use these speeds throughout the training year, what sort of durations do you use at the beginning of the year, middle of the year, etc.... Personally, I feel like starting with goal paced work with repetitions at 1/8 of the race distance is about right. Then progressing those repetitions to 1/2 to 5/8 race distance is a pretty good goal. I should note, that with my high school athletes, it is pretty rare that we actually progress all the way to 5/8 race distance because by the time we get fit enough to do that session, we are already racing fairly frequently anyway.
Hi Renato,
I have a high level of respect for you, but in the sprint training realm these are very definable terms. You can’t relate speed endurance to a Marathoner.
It’s like intensive and extensive tempo. It does not relate to distance running tempo.
I should qualify this by saying yes, there is a relatable speed endurance component to any distance raced but when talking about speed endurance we are almost always talking about specific workouts relating to sprinting.
Coach Canova - Thanks for the insight into your training philosophy & approach. Ok, regarding Speed Endurance and Special Endurance ---
Renato Canova wrote:
It's important to clarify what "speed endurance" really means. For me, "speed endurance" doesn't mean anything ; instead, it's correct to speak of "SPECIFIC SPEED ENDURANCE", something very different because related to the distance of the race.
Yes, these terms are meaningless unless defined. Many terminologies in running are not consistently/universally used. For example, "speed" can mean different things for different coaches in different training contexts.
My understanding is that for U. S. (maybe others also) high-level coaching systems, Speed Endurance, Special Endurance I, and Special Endurance II are specific terms that each refer to specific types of training sessions, and that identifying & targeting these 3 specific types of very fast running is important for speed development in the long sprints and middle distance, most especially for 400m, 400H, and 800m IIRC.
This is distinct from training event-specific capability / goal pace tolerance, which would be a broader overall training objective. Speed Endurance, SE1, and SE2 sessions would be building blocks (if I understand correctly, again not an expert).
Applying all this to, say, a developing 800m runner with 48.x 400m, 22.high 200m, a 10.high relay split, and a 600m PR of 1:19 or 1:20.
Speed Endurance example -- 4 x 120m rolling start @ 13.0-13.5 with 10 min recovery.
Special Endurance I example -- 3 x 300m @ 36-37 with 10 min recovery.
Special Endurance II examples -- 3 x 400m @ 50-51 or 2 x 600m @ 1:22ish? (not sure) with 15 min recovery.
These are different than hard goal-race-pace sessions such as (for the same hypothetical athlete):
- 3 x (4 x 200m @ 27 w/ 30-60 sec) 5 min rec
- 300m repeats @ 40
- 4 x 400m @ 54 sec with 3-5 min rec (depending on fitness)
If I understand Canova's post (above), I'd guess that he might refer to these GRP sessions as "Specific Speed Endurance" -- not the same thing as Speed Endurance, although he is using similar terminology.
All this reflects the best of my current understanding. Anybody with knowledge please correct anywhere I went wrong here. Thanks
Right - I didn't see otter's posts. I was thinking the same thing re intensive and extensive tempo sessions. To clarify for distance-oriented types, these are not the same as a continuous "tempo run".
I can't figure out how to display the chart I have on here that will give you everything you are asking. To anyone that wants it, email me at runri56@gmail.com and I will send you the screenshot and maybe you can figure out how to post it here?
In the classification vern-gambetta extensive time and intensive time are not very responsive, if we take the best sprinters, for simplicity of 10 seconds on 100 meters, their VAM/VO2max value is already on 19-20 seconds/100 meters, M Johnson in training was able to run 5 km at 3' and 26"/km, so already around 55% we are in the lactacid zone. With the exception of a well known work in Italy that are the intermittent work, with distances of 60-180 and just beyond the VAM have an aerobic effect, but already on 200 mt you have to return to the VAM/VO2max.
The wincker-gambetta classification is good, even if ATP-Cp has the max power on 70 mt (maximum human speed) as Charlie Francis also said, so the place of the 80 mt better put 70 mt, but the aerobic zone is completely wrong, in this zone better the Italian classifications like the ones of Canova in this video for the lactacide zone,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQyFGcECbEY
, then for the aerobic zone the best is that of Luciano Gigliotti.
speed- alactic power: 10-70 mt @100%-95%.
speed- alactic capacity: 10-70 mt @95-90%.
Speed Endurance: 70-150mt lactic power@100%-95%.
Speed Endurance: 70-150 mt lactic capacity: 95-90%.
Speed Endurance: 70-150 mt Lactic Speed Resistance: 90%-(90%+VO2max )/2.
Speed Endurance: 70-150 mt Lactic Resistance (90%+VO2Max)/2-VO2Max with short recovery has aerobic effect.
Fractionated short: 150-400 mt; lactic power 100%-95% and so on.
Translated with
(free version)
In the books I have read, Pfizinger, Lydiard etc, speed training is about short intervals and VO2max training is about longer duration intervals (in excess of 2 minutes).
Most runners do 400m reps. These are too long for speed, but too short for VO2max. Yet 400m reps are often described as VO2max training, although falling way short of 2 mins duration.
Can someone explain this to clear up my understanding?
Tthey are wrong, interval training was invented precisely to develop VO2max, interval training on Vo2max was born precisely on distances 150-400 mt.
So much so that in works such as 20-25 x 400 mt with rest of 200 mt in souplesse you can keep very high rhythms, even a rhythm of 3000 meters, (even lactic aea, beyond Vo2max=lactic resistance) look at the case at a high level are in the VO2max area.
obvious are not the only distances to develop the VO2max, there are also medium fractionated 400-1000 mt.
Obvious that with 1000 meters, at the rhythm 3000 meters you can do more less repetitions.
Can you please explain the general structure of creating a training plan for any distance?
What are the steps?
It depends on what distance you are training for. I mean a 400 meter person is not going to have the same speed endurance workouts as a 5-10K, or marathoner. I always raced 5K-1/2, and was not a world beater for sure.
In general for distance running that race 5k-Half, I'd say working 400s @ 1-2 mile pace with shorter recoveries- but 5K pace is good for 1/2 work, and 800s. I always like the plain Jane 400s. You can run them fast enough and then just vary the rest interval and amount of work depending on the pace. More reps less rest @ 2mile pace, less reps more rest @ mile pace. Keep it simple stupid seems to work the best in training, IMO. Easier to track progress.
5x 150 w/ 4 min recovery
or
6x 150 w/ 5 min recovery.
Doing this along with some speed work (e.g. 5x 60, or 10x 30 fly) and some longer fast reps that are specific to your race distance (like 5-8x 200 for an 800 guy) has really improved my 200-400 ability, which has benefitted me at all distances I race.
10 X 300
Walk a 100 recovery.
40 seconds.
Wide eyed wrote:
In the books I have read, Pfizinger, Lydiard etc, speed training is about short intervals and VO2max training is about longer duration intervals (in excess of 2 minutes).
Most runners do 400m reps. These are too long for speed, but too short for VO2max. Yet 400m reps are often described as VO2max training, although falling way short of 2 mins duration.
Can someone explain this to clear up my understanding?
It's all about the recovery interval, and 400s are not too long for speed, you can run them faster than 800s. As you get tired, it hits the endurance. Here is a article on how bannister did mile training.
https://www.peakendurancesport.com/endurance-training/training-structure-and-planning/sub-4-minute-mile-training-programme/Again... Very interesting but I thought this thread was about sprint training. In trying to develop a long sprinter (400 meters) there is a small aerobic component but it's not the goal of speed endurance to train aerobically. It's more for lactate tolerance (misnomer...I am aware) and to prevent muscle fatigue at near max speed.
This is somewhat different for someone running fast beyond 60 seconds. So, therefore, yes, the goal is the same in that you are looking to carry the maximum allowable velocity through whatever distance you are racing.
With the sprint events you are looking for a very long rest because you want lactate levels to return to a level to allow for maximal efforts. Sprinters in general are physically able to reach lactate levels not possible for a typical distance runner due to their high reliance on fast twitch fibers. It also takes them longer to clear the lactate and return to normal levels. Also, the goal is to not train the aerobic system at a high level. Mitochondrial density is not a targeted goal for sprint training.
For these reasons and a lot more we are talking about two different things and it is muddying the conversation.
If we were not originally discussing speed endurance which as stated before in terms of training is associated with the sprint events then I must have misinterpreted the OP. My fault if that is the case.
Wide eyed wrote:
In the books I have read, Pfizinger, Lydiard etc, speed training is about short intervals and VO2max training is about longer duration intervals (in excess of 2 minutes).
Most runners do 400m reps. These are too long for speed, but too short for VO2max. Yet 400m reps are often described as VO2max training, although falling way short of 2 mins duration.
Can someone explain this to clear up my understanding?
Because. you are not running 1 rep in isolation. When you are running 20x400 with 60s rest at 5k pace, the first 3 or 4 might not result in. you hitting 100% vo2max. The other. 16 will. The math might work out to that. you end. up doing 16 400s with 45 of works at vo2 max or 12 mins total vo2max. If instead you were doing say 6x1000 at. 5k pace with 2:30 rest, you might only spend 1.6 min (first 2 mins are getting up to vo2max) at vo2max for a total of 9 mins.
Interval is far to generic of term to mean much these days. Speed work can. be anything from running 60s all out. to a marathoner doing 10x1 mile at HM pace. Speed endurance is the same. A lot of distance guys use speed endurance. for things like 800m/1500m work. Sprinters are using it more for 200/400m pace work.
And when people talk about vo2max intervals, to a large extent you should think of it more as a reference to the pace (3k/5k for most people) than as a description of the training effect.