Yet, you offer nothing to the discussion?
In running there isn't usually a lot of "better" just "different."
Ultimately, I want my athletes to be able to run at a faster pace while producing the same levels of lactic acid. Our Easy pace is intentionally conservative and slower than what we think true LT should be. It's safer, yes, but it doesn't necessarily prepare them completely for the demands that they will see in later training sessions or especially in races.
My men's team may spend more time there because we are running 8-10k races, but really our men and women all need to handle the physiological demands that a race is going to present. Doing out medium pace we gradually expose them to something faster and what we think is closer to true LT. Same with Hard, we know that we eventually have to get there. It may take a season or a year, but if we're training well on all fronts, they should be able to handle the faster paces with a similar effort level if we have actually gotten better.
Nothing against your H sessions.
M is my critique. It is not fish and meat.
With E you know you can do it more often and longer, with H you know you have to be careful not to burn out, or to need a longer recovery.
So an over and under LT-training seems to be better for me.
lexel wrote:
Nothing against your H sessions.
M is my critique. It is not fish and meat.
With E you know you can do it more often and longer, with H you know you have to be careful not to burn out, or to need a longer recovery.
So an over and under LT-training seems to be better for me.
I don't think I would ever want to leave out the pace that we're actually trying to target. LT is a physiological intensity that isn't going to be stimulated to the same degree by the pace that doesn't reach it (E) or by the pace that's too fast to run it for very long (H).
I think they all have a place on the continuum, but I'd sooner lose the other two paces than that single one. We use E to reinforce our LT paces and to not get too greedy early on. Our hard pace is just meant to slowly step on the gas to dip into the next level without going overboard, but our meat and potatoes will always be our medium (LT) pace.
Yesterday i had a nice training unit on treadmill:
15min warm-up
5 minutes sub-threshold (around 82%Vo2max), 3 minutes @10k pace, 5 minutes sub-threshold (around 82%Vo2max), 7minutes easy pace
3 sets, no rest.
It was an under-over threshold training.
Recently i did some experiments on a treadmill (because you can hit speeds exactly), to see if it is better to run at LT or close below or at a little bit lower intensities. So far i have no conclusion ...
lexel wrote:
Recently i did some experiments on a treadmill (because you can hit speeds exactly), to see if it is better to run at LT or close below or at a little bit lower intensities. So far i have no conclusion ...
The excitement is almost too much...
lexel wrote:
Let’s define the Lactate Threshold (LT) pace as the running speed that’s sustainable for 50-60 minutes and the critical velocity (CV) as the speed that’s sustainable for 30minutes.
The Sub-Threshold pace is 5 to 10% below LT.
I am interested in your personal training experiences at that different training paces, which are all around LT.
Do you prefer one? Do you train all? How long do you train it? And so on, hope you got the idea.
Have a nice day.
So....10k pace, 10 mile pace, marathon pace....
3 x 2mi, or 1 x 1mi + 2 x 2mi @ 10k pace , is a solid and honest 10k workout....
4mi or 8-10 x 1mi or 4-5 x 2mi or 3 x 3mi @ 10mi pace, is a solid and honest 10mi workout....
10mi easy/10mi @ MP, or a straight 10-15mi @ MP, is a solid and honest marathon workout...
I remember getting to college and running mile repeats....then we started running 2mi repeats and I was hanging on for dear life!
Alan
don't strain yer brain wrote:
The excitement is almost too much...
Theories what is better to shift the LT-level.
a) Train at sub-threshold, longer
b) Train at LT for 20 minutes
c) Do intervals close above LT
As there is no clear evidence in science, i have to find it out by myself for myself, as we are different.
Runningart2004 wrote:
So....10k pace, 10 mile pace, marathon pace....
a) 3 x 2mi, or 1 x 1mi + 2 x 2mi @ 10k pace , is a solid and honest 10k workout....
b) 4mi or 8-10 x 1mi or 4-5 x 2mi or 3 x 3mi @ 10mi pace, is a solid and honest 10mi workout....
c) 10mi easy/10mi @ MP, or a straight 10-15mi @ MP, is a solid and honest marathon workout...
I remember getting to college and running mile repeats....then we started running 2mi repeats and I was hanging on for dear life!
Alan
Thanks for sharing, interesting staff.
For these 3 paces (a, b or c) which pace do you believe has the greatest effect on shifting LT ?
Or do you think they are all equal to improve LT level?
What do you mean "shifting the LT level" ?
What is that supposed to mean? What do you think it means?
don't strain yer brain wrote:
What do you mean "shifting the LT level" ?
What is that supposed to mean? What do you think it means?
Now there comes the test question.
With shifting i mean being able to run with a higher pace at LT level. vLTnew > vLTold
lexel wrote:
Yesterday i had a nice training unit on treadmill:
15min warm-up
5 minutes sub-threshold (around 82%Vo2max), 3 minutes @10k pace, 5 minutes sub-threshold (around 82%Vo2max), 7minutes easy pace
3 sets, no rest.
It was an under-over threshold training.
Recently i did some experiments on a treadmill (because you can hit speeds exactly), to see if it is better to run at LT or close below or at a little bit lower intensities. So far i have no conclusion ...
Further update from the test front:
Yesterday i did another training unit on treadmill:
15min warm-up
5 minutes sub-threshold (around 84%Vo2max), 3 minutes @10k pace, 5 minutes sub-threshold (around 84%Vo2max), 7minutes easy pace
2 sets, no rest.
The difference to the other quoted training unit was, that sub-threshold pace was higher this time (increased from 82% to 84%VO2max).
Interestingly this training unit was quite tougher as the last one and this was the reason i did only 2 sets (still 26 minutes in total around LT-level).
It seems to get proportional harder as closer the sub-threshold pace gets near LT level.
My LT level is at 86%VO2max btw.
In my experience, all you people obsessing about this are 20min 5k’s. Amirite?
Most likely you read carefully here, as i have a thread here 20 min/5k :)
I am not obsessed i could drop running at each time. However, if i do something, i try at least to do it right. How can you do something of interest without passion or half?
I think it is natural that it gets quickly harder when you crank up the sub-threshold pace in the "OFF" periods. 10k pace is quite harder than threshold so not getting the same comfortable OFF pace both feels harder at the OFFs and harder for the ONs. Now it could be the conditions of that day, but could also be the lactate levels got relatively higher.
Jon Arne Glomsrud wrote:
I think it is natural that it gets quickly harder when you crank up the sub-threshold pace in the "OFF" periods. 10k pace is quite harder than threshold so not getting the same comfortable OFF pace both feels harder at the OFFs and harder for the ONs. Now it could be the conditions of that day, but could also be the lactate levels got relatively higher.
The 10k pace was not changed, maybe you missed that.
Only the sub-trheshold pace was changed from 82% to 84%.
So these 2% more greated a much harder trainung unit, that was my point.
And this leads further to my conclusion that a training were several boys or girls or mixed or whatever run together close below LT-level, can't work as one is better one is not so good. This seems to be subpar. A solution could be to let them do the LT-level run spot-on on a treadmill.
Did you make a typo on this? 10k pace is above threshold, and running 20 minutes at 10k pace is nearly a race effort.