Speed vs Aerobic Power; Hickey Must Have Been Doing Something Right

Is this not what Seb Coe basically did? Throw another 30 miles on an underwater treadmill, and you extend to 5ks and 10ks.

also, it would appear that Efraimson is not at the top of her game, so not sure what is being talked about here.

Agreed, his plan felt a lot like Coe's training, but he also talked about repetition running at even faster speeds, which honestly I haven't seen used here in Colorado. Looking back at my notes I see that he referenced gaining insights from coach Holloway (University of Florida) and his methods of training 400m runners.

As far as Efraimson is concerned, I hope she bounces back. I'm not attacking her or Julian, just making an observation. Julian has a bunch of medalists, he is great.

Can you imagine how different her career would have been with the traditional coaches of Camas HS, then went off to UW or wherever kids from Washington go. It would have been a far different ride. No big contract that is fairly certain when you look at how she is running now. Rallied to a 2:06 in her last 800m. Just trying to raise the level of discussion. Mckayla Friker also ran poorly after leaving coach Hickey. Check out his interviews on Runner Space. Let's Run should hire him.

Over the last year I’ve become a true believer in raw speed work, plyometrics, and heavy lifting. My training philosophy is essentially that speed is the foundation, not endurance as many believe. You train yourself to run a fast 400m, then do speed maintenance along with some endurance work to run a fast 800m, and keep working your way up the ladder. A >60 second 400m runner will never be a sub 2:00 800m runner, a >2:00 800m runner will never be a sub 4:15 mile runner, and so on. Speed is essential and should be emphasized as much in the base phase as endurance development for a middle distance runner and even some long distance runners.

CopperRunner wrote:

Over the last year I’ve become a true believer in raw speed work, plyometrics, and heavy lifting. My training philosophy is essentially that speed is the foundation, not endurance as many believe. You train yourself to run a fast 400m, then do speed maintenance along with some endurance work to run a fast 800m, and keep working your way up the ladder. A >60 second 400m runner will never be a sub 2:00 800m runner, a >2:00 800m runner will never be a sub 4:15 mile runner, and so on. Speed is essential and should be emphasized as much in the base phase as endurance development for a middle distance runner and even some long distance runners.

Totally agree. Speed is super important for improving form and function as well as developing power and definitely is probably the most ignored or even vilified aspects of training.

I think where a lot of people get it wrong is that they hear something like that and immediately throw it in. Maybe they get injured or simply don't see the improvement they want to see, and toss it as a result. But with pure speed, you need to also make sure you're focusing on other athletic functions as well (strength, balance/symmetry, form drills, mobility, flexibility) so you can actually perform the reps correctly. It also has a high mechanical demand that requires progressive layering of foundational work so that you don't end up with an injury as a result of trying it willy-nilly.

But to go back to the original point... we forget that there is a neurological component to running fast. For instance, we often conflate "strides" with "speedwork." Truth is, the main goal of strides for the most part (outside of workout/race prep) is to practice running on good feeling and with the best form possible to engrain that motion, and the pace of the rep is merely a byproduct.

So if we eventually want to run 4:00 for the mile, doing 100m reps @ 4:00 mile pace and with good, relaxed form is a good start. Eventually over seasons and with continued training you can extend that further and further. That's an extremely simplistic view of it, but it was one of the cornerstones for Bowerman as well as Canova. And other brilliant coaches as well, but those are the two that come to mind of using "date" pace vs "goal" pace or using the concept of "extension."

To me the endurance part of it is really there so you can perform the workouts at the appropriate volume and pace, which is why it's still important to build an aerobic base. Because you can still use that concept described above at all distances (marathon pace, for instance, can be done year-round).

True speed comes back much quicker than aerobic strength, but if you want to run fast in July you need to practice running fast in November.

This makes sense at the longer distances. Get fast at 5k, then that will improve your 10k time. Get fast at the 10k to improve your half, and get your half time down so it'll carry over to a full. Instead of trying to simply improve on the full.

Some people want to work on the full and build that base, though, using the endurance based to do speedwork and drop down to 5k/10k that way.

CopperRunner wrote:

A >60 second 400m runner will never be a sub 2:00 800m runner, a >2:00 800m runner will never be a sub 4:15 mile runner, and so on. Speed is essential and should be emphasized as much in the base phase as endurance development for a middle distance runner and even some long distance runners.

I don’t necessarily believe that second point is true. The fastest I’ve ever ran for 800m is 1:59 (I’ve tried to go faster) but I’ve done a mile in 4:09.

Since my name has been thrown out their.

Some people have greater neurologic capacity (the ability to increase training volumes), some great anaerobic capacity and others have greater endurance capacity (Obviously, we all have a blend, it's the coaches job to figure out how to navigate each persons unique gifts). Meaning they have adaptive qualities that help them improve at different rates to different training methodologies.

Coaching Alexa Efraimson for 10 years gave me unique insights into her response times to different training methods and energy systems. She adapted very well to speed development and VO2max training (2k-3k velocities). Over the past 3 years, we were pushing the aerobic training more and more, seeing better growth potential their for her mid to late 20's, as speed tends to peak out around 22. I'm sure Pete Julian is working through the process of developing missing pieces of her development. She will rebound and run well for him (Great Coach)!

Paul Kezes (4:28 high school miler), came to run for me at Clackamas Community College. He was a much different runner than Alexa as he adapted much better to aerobic training. Running 4:02 for the mile and making the US 12k team in 2005.

McKayla Fricker had great elastic qualities (HJer in HS), moving off the ground very well. She ran 2:06.1 the year before I worked with her. We built her capacity to run race specific work, and she flourished running 2:00.81. She didn't have great aerobic capacity, although it did improve in the one year I coached her. Then she signed with Brooks, running a good indoor season the next winter.

Recently I have been coaching a high jumper, Emma Gates, Cascade HS, and really enjoying the development of her power and speed. During this year she went from 5'8" (2020) to 5'11" (3rd ranked HJ (HS) in the US) and improved her 100m from 12.81 to 12.29. Many of the insights I have gained this year (Many thanks to Dan Pfaff, Kebba Tolbert, and Curtis Taylor) will undoubtedly benefit the next 800m/1500m runner I coach.

There :)