hr measurement wrote:
I think I'll jump in here an not let some important points be overlooked.
A lot commons down to how abused the term threshold and tempo are.
I don't disagree that these terms have different meanings for different folks. However, you claim,
...there have been tons of studies (including ones on runners) where things like 4x4 min at 5k pace (or faster) give better training results than 30 mins of HM paced running. But they all run like 8 weeks.
I'm familiar with 4x4min studies in the literature, and they are not at 5k pace. They are at 85-95% HRmax, or 90-95% HRmax. These paces are right around ones Lactate threshold! (A trained athlete's Lactate threshold is ~91-92% HRmax.)
I'm familiar with another study using 3.5min reps at 3200m pace, which is more intense than the 4x4min studies.
Based on my personal experience, there is a HUGE difference in depletion and recovery when banging out 4min or 3.5min reps at 90% HRmax versus at 95-98% HRmax.
We are saying the same thing. If you talk to runners about doing threshold training, everyone is talking about things like 10 miles at MP (call it 85% max heart rate) or 30 mins at HM pace (90%). Do you count that as threshold training or as high intensity work?
And yes the difference gets huge in a hurry as pace increases. The current trend is to load up on the slower stuff (40 mins at hm pace) versus the faster stuff (20 mins at 5k pace) for most of the year and then peak by doing short periods of the faster stuff.