I tried the Easy Interval Method so you don’t have to

Must admit, this post intrigued me enough for me to buy the book and see what it was all about. Only just started reading it…

In terms of faster running for improved “reactivity”…I think reactivity can be swapped for specificity…ie train fast to run fast. A few years ago there was a move in swimming to replace the endless yards in training for faster, more focussed efforts. The reasoning being that the biomechanics of a slower swimming stroke were subtly diff to that of a faster one.

The intervals seem to have the same goal as the extensive intervals that sprint coaches like Charlie Francis utilised for their sprinters conditioning work. The intervals were performed at a faster speed than steady state running which stayed closer in nature to the top end speed that the sprinters used.

So in this sense I can see the reasoning behind that aspect of the program, and it seems like a sound one to me.

However, surely with a bit of creativity and imagination, for those that don’t want to hit the track every day, something similar can be achieved by manipulating the variables of a run / walk program? Higher running speeds can be achieved, without it becoming too taxing.

charliefrancis.com

Tempo running for Speed Training

Tempo running will allow speed and power athletes to recover faster while also creating a greater aerobic foundation for speed and sprint training.

Link:www.charliefrancis.com/blogs/news/test

Arrogant and wrong reply from you, as expected.

You wrote "Yes, the easy run is missing with the EIM". On page 60 it says "Easy, long endurance run (...) These are easy runs (...)"

Page 46 refers to easy RECOVERY runs.

You can call me whatever u like but you are wrong. Any run in EIM has intervals, that is the basic principle, so also an easy run. And what you refered is a special training unit for half/marathon and not the basic principle.

So go home, i will not respond to you anymore, anonymous clown.

Can you expand on this a little bit? Are you saying you ran most of the 1000m intervals in 3:30-3:40 due to difficult terrain, eg hills, trails? I would imagine 3:30 for the 1000m intervals is right about where the book would recommend to be for a 3:53/8:30 runner. As a side note, I agree that it’s critical to run the jogging portions very slowly. It’s not mentioned in the book, but Klaas has said in the EIM Facebook group that he did his easy jogging between intervals at 5 min/km (or 8 min/mile). This is for a 28:20 10000m runner, so there’s really no reason for those of us who are several minutes slower than that to be going faster than 8 minute mile pace on the jogs.

I ran all my workouts outside in temperatures of about 0-10 degrees C. On poor quality concrete or bad trails the 1000 meters were between 3.40-3.30, but on rubber covered track in lane 8 backwards it was more like 3.25-3.20. The 400 intervals were almost always around 78-76, the 200 s varied with recovery sessions sometimes around 38, sometimes around 34-33. I rested one day a week and did one day of 1500 as pace training (3x4x300 75s and 4 min) or 6-5-4-3-2-1x2 (2 min).
The pace for 2000m s was 7.20-7.10. After the longer interval distances I usually jogged 3.5-4.5 min at 4.50-5.10 min/km pace (and keot always 15-30 sec walk breaks before and after). My weekly volume was around 80-90 km, sometimes I did double training. Because of the cold, I didn't run 100m's before or after, and usually just warmed up and down with 5-10 min jogs.
Now my structure is the following:
Mon-Wed-Sat: 8-10 k of longer intervals (1-2 k's) as i feel for variety with 4 min rec. ex.:1-2-2-1-2-1 k or straight 8x1k or 4x2 etc.
Thue: 15x200
Thursday: off
Friday: 1500 pace workout 3x4x300 and later some longer reps at the same pace.
Sunday: 10x400 real easy
I never really go higher than 170 (around 85% MHR) in terms of pulse, mostly around 160 for longer reps.
Translated with DeepL

Thanks for the detailed reply! I am around your level and used EIM last year with some success but plateaued after a while. I often wonder what I could have done differently, and I think being more diligent about the pace of the jogs (even the pace of warm up/cool down) could be helpful. I’ve also not used a HRM during the intervals, but coincidentally my max is about 200 so 170 is also 85% for me. I may play around with this method more, as I really enjoy it and it’s kind of perfect for middle distances if you enjoy racing frequently.

Recently started training with EIM principles after leaving my coach of 4 years. This coach got me to 29 10k, 1:05 HM, and 2:18 M with a moderately high mileage (80-100 mpw) polarized training distribution. I started off well but have really stagnated (even regressed) in the longer distances. After reading EIM, it seemed fun and exciting to try something completely different.

So far I am enjoying it and seeing progression in the 1k reps after just 2 weeks - I also feel like my stride has regained some spring! I've always loathed "recovery runs" and long cool downs as running a bunch of slow miles is not at all specific to any of my races. It has been surprisingly easy to recover from these EIM sessions as long as you run them relaxed and enjoy the brief walk breaks.

Planning to race Boston marathon in 5 weeks so I will report back! Not ideal, to switch training this close to a race but I needed a change after completely bombing my "tune-up" half a couple weeks ago haha

I'm not reading this whole thread so this bit of obviousness may have been posted already, but this should be called the "IM". There does not appear to be anything "easy" about it.

I was expecting to hear you ran some trivially easy workouts.

A better appellation would be "Consistent Interval Method", CIM. You could use CIM to train for CIM!

I would say that every workout is somewhere between "moderate" to "somewhat hard" in intensity. Every session includes a good dose of faster running with relatively long walk/jog rest.

Using this method you practice running FAST, as opposed to HARD, a lot.

Every workout should feel very manageable or you're doing it wrong.

I’ve read the book further ( but not finished it yet).

From my understanding ( which may be limited…granted) the pros of the system are that it never strays away from faster running as it core principle, (which is what it is all about surely?) but this faster running is fairly relaxed and not so draining that it can’t be repeated several times during the week (practice makes perfect after all…and running, and running fast…is a skill).

The cons however are that the long recoveries make the sessions ( especially the 1000 metre repeats) as long as any steady run, and if you do them on a track, without the varied scenery. Plus, in my opinion, the unnecessary slow jogging in the recovery, undoes the good work done by the faster running. In fact you have a longer time “practicing” slow running biomechanics than you do practicing faster running. And many people on this forum ( me being one) have complained that slower running / jogging feels like plodding and produces more aches and pains than faster runs.

Therefore I repeat my observations of my earlier post…and it’s an experiment that I will try in my own training. Do the faster repeats…BUT just walk the recoveries, no jogging required. This will be a separate muscular action that won’t confuse the body. Also it will bring the heart rate down quicker, help clear lactate faster and the big bonus is that the shorter recovery times needed will make the overall session less lengthy…a win win in my book.

Walking the recoveries completely has the problem, some would say it has the challenge, that your body gets used to it and wants to rest after each rep you do in future. It is a psychological thing. But try it on your own.

Also lactate is not cleared more if you don't run after a rep, it is cleared more if you do very easy running!

And the recovery interval should be indeed very easy, i double checked that with Klaas 1 or 2 years ago.

I personally don't believe that an 5 minutes very easy run in between ruins your gait.

Gonna give it a try.

First day i was a bit tired of my recent 10k and short on time so i did only 4 1000s around 3:50 and ahortened recovery to 2 minutes at around 4:30/km pace, which is definitely too fast.

3rd day and counting, so far feeling great.

My plan is build up for 3 weeks and sharpen another 2 for a 10k. Aiming for that elusive sub 35.

Don't be afraid of the walk breaks! I was reluctant to do them at first but its actually quite refreshing. Once or twice per week run the 1k's at the slow end of your pace range, and do the 20-sec walks - I actually feel better doing this than a traditional "recovery" run.

And to the points above about lactate.... I wouldn't worry too much about this! In my view, the point of the whole program is to run intervals so relaxed that you don't actually accumulate much lactate teaching your body to better use it as fuel. Over time, you will be able to run faster at the same low lactate level similarly to the Norwegian LT model. Did K's with a friend last week and he was at 2.5 mmol which is considered the sweet spot zone!

There is value in occasionally doing intervals at higher lactate levels which is why EIM has the weekly anaerobic mixed sessions once your are fit.

As a follow up, I’ve reintroduced some EIM sessions this week, but am wearing a heart rate monitor this time. The data is fairly interesting. I’m aiming to stay under 85% HRM on the reps and under 65% for most of the recovery (once my heart rate comes down - the walk helps it settle down more quickly). What I’ve found comparing the data to my previous attempts at this method which did NOT use a HRM is that I’m actually able to go a little bit FASTER on the reps than I used to and can still keep my heart rate under 85%, and I had to slow way down on the recoveries to get my heart rate under 65% on those. What this results in is an average pace 30-45 seconds/mile slower for the whole run including warm up and cool down than before. It definitely seems like the sessions are easier to recover from doing them in this more polarized way. I’m planning on keeping it at it while keeping my effort in check with the HRM, and will try to check back in on this thread with my progress in a few weeks.

Lexel…the possible idea that the body gets used to the walk breaks would be an issue IF I was planning to race of had any time goals in mind.

However the reason that this thread caught my attention was the idea that such a training approach possibly maintained / improved the “spring” in the running stride as compared to slower steady state running, over time.

This is important to me, as it is something that I wish to promote, with the limited amount of running I do, as I age ( currently in my mid 50’s).

Bump. How is training going for everyone still using this?

Capping of consistent 80k weeks with 6 workouts and a day off. Trying to do around 35-40 k of interval work.

Doing 4 longer EIM sessions (1-2k, mostly 2k s lately) with a volume of 6 to 10 k per session, paces around 3.30-20 per km, with 4 mins rec.

A session of 15x200, and a harder session where typically i run 3-4k worth of 200-400 m intervals in sets (ex. 4x300-4x400-4x300 at race pace with 100 and 400 walk).

Will open up my season with a couple of low-key races in May. Targeting sub 3.50 1500m in the summer.

Last week went like this:

-8x1k (2-4 min) 3.30-18 in heavy wind.

-15x200 35 to 30.9

-1-2-1-1-3k (3.30-20 pace) with 4 mins

-day off

-hard session : 12x 30 sec hills at 1500 eff with jog back, 6min rec than 5x1min 1500 eff with 1min standing rest, 6 min 1x hill almost all out (23 sec)

-6x1k 3.30-20 (2-4 min rec.) was short on time

-4x2k (3min) in 7 mins each