Jakob Ingebrigtsen - Long run is 60-70 minutes

xczvzxcv wrote:

Just to respond to a certain strain of criticism in this thread:

1) you can suggest that something is a benefit without denying that other forms of training have any value;

2) you can suggest some change for his benefit without being an equivalent runner to him (his coach is a non-runner and who would meet the standard to coach him then? El G or Lagat? Maybe Tim Cheruiyot prior to 2021?) or even close;

3) you can reach an extraordinary level, as Jakob has, and still have room for improvement from new stimuli that you have not yet made use of at all.

I acknowledge a lot of this. But ref 3), sure, but be assured Team Ingebrigtsen are looking for ANY room of improvement and would not hesitate to add a longer run if they thougth or experienced it gave more improvement. They record any training and experience and data and have done adjustments all the way. They have not just trained, but have tried and failed and succeded now for 10 years on now 6 different runners (3 brothers, 1 sister, 2 external runner)

In my opinion Jakob is completely trained and very hard to improve (for 1k5 and 5k races)

He does basicly maintanance training for that distances.

Copying his training 1:1 or partly could be a mistake for most of us.

If he jumps to the marathon in the future i take a bet that he would include a long run, 2h or more.

lexel wrote:

In my opinion Jakob is completely trained and very hard to improve (for 1k5 and 5k races)

He does basicly maintanance training for that distances.

Copying his training 1:1 or partly could be a mistake for most of us.

If he jumps to the marathon in the future i take a bet that he would include a long run, 2h or more.

How is he completely trained for the 1500/5000 when he keeps improving year after, race after race?

Let's not pick apart language.

Trained with a method that includes all necessary aspects = completely trained

...but yeah, Jakob go even faster in a year or two.

^^^might^^^ )

Master Of Lolly wrote:

US runners are crazy about mileage.

30-40 miles / week is plenty for a serious 1500m runner.

And refusing to race until they feel super.

They'd be better racing a couple of times a week.

Master Of Lolly wrote:

Ingebrigtsen is also an aspiring 5000m and 10k XC specialist, therefore high mileage.

I doubt that Makhloufi was running 180km a week. And Makhloufi in his prime > Jakob Ingebrigtsen.

That’s funny. Maybe at 800 meters and below. Lol.

I mean I guess I personally believe that for a normal 1500-5k guy the sweet spot for a long run is 70-90 minutes, but with the sheer amount of threshold work Jakob does (180km for his higher weeks I believe without long long runs) really displays how much they value threshold or anaerobic conditioning work they do. And it's really working too. Jakob's long runs also seem to be very fast and 12 miles isn't too too short. While I do believe in capillarization during 70-90 minute long runs and the benefits of such, Jakob would either have to slow down a lot on his longer days or just calm it with the anaerobic conditioning. While I think going for a little longer and a little slower wouldn't hurt, whatever those crazy norwegians are doing is working

sub 14 runner wrote:

How is he completely trained for the 1500/5000 when he keeps improving year after, race after race?

Jakob has increased his km/year progressively over the last years. He seems to be not further increasing it. So his volume is capt.

1500m needs the aerobic system but also the anaerobic system, and it needs to be balanced well, because these systems work against each other. His weekly training seems to balance that well.

He does a lot of LT sessions. Based on literature this is a good pace to improve running economy.

So at the end of the day, maybe that is something for further improvement possibilities.

Like Paula Radcliffe yearly improved her running economy.

I dont want to say he can not further improve. But if i remember correctly also Gerd, his father and trainer, said he is hard to further improve.

@techno: i am not native speaker, but i will try to improve my language skills ...

thebullsreturn wrote:

HobbyJOGKO wrote:

He never runs more than 21 km or 13 miles.

In 60-70 minutes?

70 on the podcast so 5:20 miles if 21 km.

lexel wrote:

In my opinion Jakob is completely trained and very hard to improve (for 1k5 and 5k races)

He does basicly maintanance training for that distances.

Copying his training 1:1 or partly could be a mistake for most of us.

If he jumps to the marathon in the future i take a bet that he would include a long run, 2h or more.

I did very long runs before (2.5 hours easy in hilly terrain) and we thought that was good. Obviously it has an effect. For shorter racing <10k it is probably not very important and not at all a SPECIFIC training need. For Marathon, running long is specific training and needed. SPecific for marathon in time duration and pace and both can be trained in connection to a long run (but also specific workouts). For Marathon it is not a question if a long run is needed, but how used

technotronic trainer wrote:

...but yeah, Jakob go even faster in a year or two.

He has been improving all the time up to now and even this last year. That is a genetic potential he obviously have unlocked with this training and consistency (and luck). When running 3.28 and 12.48 it is a big MIGHT if he can improve more. He has trained for so long that his potential is already mostly used, but he is still young and might recover and adapt more to this training that if he had been some years older. The probability for improving or not is IMO 50/50, but the improvement cannot be much since he runs 3.28 and only 2+ sec behind the world record. 1 sec would be great. 2 would be extraordinary, but then, he has atually all the way been extraordinary

Well said.

Gjert has been very methodical, and it seems that he has made minor changes over the years to try to reduce injury risk. Jakob has been training for many years but he is only 21. If he can have one or two more years without much injury setback, my guess is that we will see him run a little faster just based on running economy.

Jon Arne Glomsrud wrote:

technotronic trainer wrote:

...but yeah, Jakob go even faster in a year or two.

He has been improving all the time up to now and even this last year. That is a genetic potential he obviously have unlocked with this training and consistency (and luck). When running 3.28 and 12.48 it is a big MIGHT if he can improve more. He has trained for so long that his potential is already mostly used, but he is still young and might recover and adapt more to this training that if he had been some years older. The probability for improving or not is IMO 50/50, but the improvement cannot be much since he runs 3.28 and only 2+ sec behind the world record. 1 sec would be great. 2 would be extraordinary, but then, he has atually all the way been extraordinary

Jon Arne

I know you are Norwegian and positive on Jakob but you are still too pessimistic about his room for improvement!

It is really quite simple and not at all specific for Jakob but if you train right aerobically you can improve your aerobic capacity for many, many years. Otherwise the likes of Gebrselassie, Lagat, Bekele, Farah and Kipchoge wouldn´t have been able to improve their marathon times up in their thirties (the marathon performance is almost 100% determined by the aerobic capacity).

And you don´t need to change your training because the continuous aerobic training will - surprise, surprise - continue to improve your bodys ability to utilize the oxygen and thus your endurance. I know, however, that the Ingebrigtsens all though they stick to same training schedule run both the reps and the long runs at a higher pace BUT AT THE SAME INTENSITY following their improved endurance. Fore example Henrik ran 10 x 1000m at just below 3:10 as a teenager. Now Jakob (and Filip) are running below 2:45 per 1000m (and 12 times). But at the same intensity (= lactate number 3.31-32).

So not only Jakob but also other young ambitious runners (Hocker, Teare, Nico Young, Gressier) can benefit from improved endurance typical into their mid twenties if the train right aerobically. That is: find the balance between hard days and recovery days (the Ingebrigtsens NEVER train hard 2 days in a row).

And why can a track runner typically not improve his middle and long distance performances into his thirties as the above runners have done in the marathon?

I think it is because you are in your physical prime in the early twenties and then your SPEED and PHYSICAL STRENGTH (strenght not understood as endurance as it often is in the US) slowly begins to deteriorate. In the beginning your improved endurance can make up for this deterioration but sooner or later your overall performance in the track distances will start to decrease. And typically in the mid twenties. But there are exceptions. Recent ones: Makhloufi, Willis, Lewandowski, Mo Ahmed, Mo Farah, Lagat.

long runs over rated wrote:

Sounds about right. It blows my mind that anyone runs longer than say 90 minutes unless training for a marathon.

It seems that 12-13 miles is plenty long for any distance up to half marathon. Maybe go 14-15 for the HM.

very good post

Further to my above post I think there are other mistakes of factual and theoritical nature on this thread:

A. The "treshold" training done by the Ingebrigtsens is NOT anaerobic training. It is their most intense kind of aerobic training. As stated above they make sure that the lactate number isn´t higher than 3.1-3.2 which is significantly below the treshold to anaerobic training. So it is a bit misleading - in my opinion - to call it treshold training.

When talking about long runs: The Ingebrigtsens´"treshold" training equals the rather fast long runs (= tempo runs) for other runners.

The Ingebrigtsens NEVER run fast long runs. The use long runs as recovery training.

B. Some people here are talking about Jakob running 100miles per week. As far as I remember from a recent interview he runs 185km per week which is 115 miles.

C. Someone was talking about the very long runs where the slow twitch fibers gets depleted calling the subsequent activity anaerobic exercise. I think this is also a mistake.

What happen is that the rarely used fast twitch x fibres take over which actually should improve the runners sprinting abilities. This has been described by my first running hero the late Peter Snell who himself benefitted from the "Lydiard Boys" ´s famous sunday Wiatarua long run at 22 miles on mountains roads. He was from the beginning told by the more experienced runners that he "would loose the best part of it" if the didn´t finish the whole 22 miles (35.4km) long run.

Snell in his early thirties initiated an academic career in the US where he gained a B.S. in "human performance" and later a Ph.D. in "exercise physiology". In his academic career he among other things verificated most of his former trainer, Arthur Lydiard´s, theories about running, including the beneficial impact of long runs on the sprinting ability. Snell was himself a superior finisher dominating completely the middle distance running in the first half of the 1960es.

From Peter Snells Wikipedia page:

"He (Peter Snell) gained a B.S. in human performance from the University of California, Davis, and then a Ph.D. in exercise physiology from Washington State University. He joined University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas as a research fellow in 1981. He was associate professor, Department of Internal Medicine and also director of their Human Performance Center. A member of the American College of Sports Medicine, Snell was honoured in 1999 as an Inaugural Inductee, International Scholar, into the Athlete Hall of Fame, University of Rhode Island".

And that's 3.1/3.2 on a LP2, if you are using a Lactate Plus, more like 2.7/2.8.

The 'Thresholds' are much lower than the 2.0/4.0 mmol that gets tossed around, probably more like 1.6/2.8 for people that are well trained