Worth trying a Canova-style plan on 50mpw?

Hi OP!

I wondered if I could find this thread again and whether or not it had petered out. For a while I actually thought it was gone. It would disappoint me if it was, since it's the kind of topic that is a little rare on the Board these days, which is to say informative and useful. Let me start by saying I'm hoping something happens in the Spring in my part of the world, maybe May. The stuff I'm doing now would be applicable for pre-season, or not-quite-specific trying, for a half also, but marathon is really what I'm hoping to find.

It's cool you've seen Natepointiting before; since finding it, I've understood the marathon differently than I had before. Some on the boards (different threads) have not shown great respect for him given that he was quite a bit slower than Rupp or Farah or whoever their favorite star is. To me, however, that makes him more relatable. I can see how a more moderately talented guy could do it and although I can't put in the mileage he did, for example, I can use some of the ideas. So, is the kind of thing I described earlier (admittedly very directly influenced by Renato himself posting and by Jenkins too) 'doing Canova on 50 miles per week'?

Well, many may point out that he relies on finding athletes would have years (plural - more than just 1 or 2) of high mileage. A few years of 115-120 and a stint of more than130 might be the background for the ideal Canova subject. The marathoners often have had success at something shorter - a win at World XC wouldn't be an outlier for one of his disciples. So to suggest that big mileage numbers are an integral component of his system aren't wrong. It is a little misleading given the mileage these types have done for years already. Renato isn't instructing them to up it from 60 to 100. They already do more than that. My suspicion is that he doesn't micromanage their easy recovery days - this would be consistent with posts he's written in response to questions about minute and mundane details. I believe they'll do 15k moderate in the morning and another easy 10k later simply because that's the kind of thing they always have done on days in between hard workouts. So it might be more accurate to say "The great runners Canova coaches run high mileage" than to say "Renato tells his subjects to run high mileage". See the difference?

The 2-a-day block is also a specialty of his for marathoners and 5k specialists alike. I figured out I couldn't really double (even 2 short easy runs just doesn't work for me somehow) long ago. Perhaps that means I was doomed to never break a World Record. Oh well, I do know how to stay healthy and injury free! Didn't you point out early in the thread that Blocks aren't in the cards for you? So there's another difference, or another reason the naysayers might point out that we're not 'doing Canova '.

But what CAN we do that he prescribes? Well, specific work such as Jenkins writes about and such as I posted earlier. A poster pointed out that the workouts I mention might be unattainable for most. I'll admit this guy did mention some pretty good stuff he had done. In fact, his workouts were exactly the kind of thing that would get you ready for the stuff I wrote. And that's one of the keys. To do big long workouts with a significant amount of running at race pace requires doing shorter or easier, but similar, work before. I'm planning the following soon:

7 miles moderate (8 flat pace would be fine)

7 miles hard (hopefully close to 7 flat)

1 mile very easy.

3 miles hard (the idea is faster than the earlier 7)

1 mile very easy cool-down.

I'm not in a Specific phase now, but anticipate such starting in March, so this will help get me there. In case this seems like a tall order (anyone reading this, my goal marathon pace is 7:15 - some of you might be a minute per mile faster across the board), I recently did the 7 moderate, 7 hard, 1 cool-down. So I'm not biting off an unimaginable chunk. I've also done a moderate 20 miler trying to close strong and an 18 which I pushed, meaning faster than easy-day pace right from the start. These were since the 7+7 workout, and there will be a hard tempo workout totalling 13 or 14 total (including WU + CD) before then. I'm pretty confident in pulling off the one outlined above. Then there will be time for another hard long run (maybe 25 miles - I have a course in mind) before starting the marathon-specific sequence.

OK, that's all for now. Keep in mind I'm not bragging about anything here. I'm probably decades older than most readers of the Board. Most of you could probably do the 7,7,3 at my pace with ease. I write about it to show how the true marathon specific workouts are attainable. You build up to them, and once you get there, you do them far apart (less than 1 true long, hard specific run per week). This upcoming run is training for those, and adjusting for your own pace (hopefully faster than mine for many) you can use these ideas too. This is the closest I've been able to figure out how to do "Canova on 50 miles per week".

Seems I messed up Jenkins' name above. Did auto -correct get me? Well, what I DO know how to spell is the Magic Wizard's name. JS. Maybe I should not be harsh and just pile on more well-deserved ridicule (tempting though it may be). His ideas have SOME merit - at events shorter than marathon. As generic as his schedules are - short VO max intervals, longer AT intervals - they have some similarity to decent 10k training. Are they ideal? Not if you ask me.

But you know where JS isn't even close to the mark? Marathoning. The limiting factor of glycogen makes your VO max irrelevant 23 miles in. To be able to run one at the pace your cardiovascular limitations would suggest you could involves training specifically to avoid 'the wall'. How many runners with great 5k PRs have either entirely fallen apart or at least not run consistent with what an equivalency chart would predict?

That's where Canova-type training comes into play. Nate Jenkins is right when he points out that extension of race pace and ability to burn less glycogen at said pace is what brought the world into the modern era. Look how little change there's been in the 1500 - 10k. For decades now, not much as changed. Yet only in the last decade have the world's leading marathon times been as fast as what a curve drawn from 3k- 10k and extrapolating outward would predict.

Shoes may have brought times down a little from the best around 2:03 flat, with 2:04 low starting to become common. Getting times out of the 2:07 range, with anything under 2:09 being on the edge of world class, took a change in training philosophy. Although the Spamming Swede being mentioned was inevitable, being an obvious joke, I thought I'd pretend the poster was serious and point out the limitations of his theories.

+1

Wondering if the OP is looking at the Board, and how she has done the last 2 years.