‘LT’ tempo runs

Yes, a cautious approach is better. Old fashioned 'LT' prescription paces are somewhat optimistic, with the danger of starting too fast and trying too hard to maintain.

I've had most success by treating my LT as 35-40 (closer to 40) seconds off my 5k pace rather than 20-30.

Admittedly, this makes my tempos just over 5:00 pace. I'm getting nearly the same benefits but I'm able to do other workouts either more frequently or with higher quality since I'm not killing myself every week with a tempo

Yeah, that sounds fine. Say you have a pr of 16:00.00 in the 5k, that’s 5:07.2/1600m, equivalent to about a 2:33 marathon- 5:51 pace, so 5:47 is roughly marathon pace, seems reasonable for a tempo run, but I feel like people forget the point of a tempo run is a high-end aerobic, moderate run, certainly not an anaerobic session, which 5:27 pace nearly is. I feel like Daniels has kind of screwed people over with his ‘1 hour pace’ idea, just a quasi-aerobic session that is too fast to be aerobic, too slow to be anaerobic, but still is hard on the body. I just feel like instead of a 3-4 mile tempo at HM pace, maybe a 6-8 mile tempo at marathon pace, maybe even slower is a much better idea, hell, even maybe a 4 mile tempo at marathon pace would be better.

Sorry but your description of anaerobic/aerobic pathways is all over the place. There’s no such thing as a « too fast to be aerobic, too slow to be anaerobic » workout. Both systems work at the same time, in different proportions depending on the distance of the workout and intensity. Running at, or slightly under, the ~4mmol lactate threshold, ie ~ 1 hour pace for 4 miles is by definition aerobic. Aerobic =/= easy running.

Both are aerobic workouts (short fast tempos and long slow tempos) and have their role in training.

I’m a collegiate runner running around 3:57/ 13:45 for reference.

We do longer tempo efforts, sometimes continuous 8 miles @ 5:10 which I guess would be marathon pace / aerobic threshold, AT (from an aerobic POV, I don’t think I can actually run that in marathon tomorrow factoring in nutrition, muscular fatigue, little specific pace work etc.)

We also do broken up aerobic threshold sessions -> LT sessions, for example 6 mi @ AT + 3 x mile @ LT (4:45-50 ish). 4 mi @ AT is a very easy workout, usually done just after a break or race.

Our « 1 hour pace » LT threshold workouts are often broken up into things like 2x4km/8x1k etc… On occasion we have a straight 20 min LT session but yes, this is relatively difficult and I personally think it’s better to break it up. Sometimes we have progressive 6 mi sessions where we start at AT and progress to LT.

And if you look at what the top guys from NAU do, it’s usually 10 mi @ AT (subT) and a combination of mile and 2 mile reps @ LT with short rest like: 2-1-2-1 or 6x1 etc… Some athletes do double LT days.

could't have said it better myself. these were concepts that I wrestled with a lot in hs, and still sometimes in college when I went too hard for a tempo run. longer 6-10 mile tempos and shorter 4ish mile or split tempos should be ran at different paces but are both important pieces in training.

I think, especially the younger you are, it makes total sense to do tempo runs closer to predicted marathon pace. If you don't have the lifetime miles & are racing the 5k or under, that pace probably feels pretty quick. You need to develop your threshold so it feels like the right effort. 1hr pace is probably going to be an aggressive workout without good endurance.

I like broken tempos so you get rest and can train at what threshold pace should be. Maybe 4 miles @ 1hr pace is aggressive but 3 x 10:00 @ 1hr pace with 2:00-3:00 jogs is doable. With something like that you get in 30:00 of running versus 20. But for a straight tempo I think a younger runner shouldn't be forced to hit a certain pace if they're not ready for it. It's natural to have a slower threshold than what a mile or 5k would predict for a 16 or 17 year old.

It's not really Daniels' fault. Back in the 70s and 80s this so called 'anaerobic threshold' pace was supposedly the Holy Grail of endurance training. Some people still think it is.

Yes and 'VO2max' is obviously mostly aerobic too. It's not surprising that there has been so much confusion over the years, when the terminology is so vague and misleading.

Interesting. I like to watch the youtube vids from various pros doing their "tempo" xyz. With middle distance runners i see the opposite (of what you describe) with increasing frequency. Guys doing 300-800 meters as tempos. Which is weird, but supposedly its done that way so you can run faster tempos and stay in that Threshold zone? I see that a lot more. But I see a ton of well known guys doing tempos and they are running clearly faster than 5k pace, but doing short repeats. I think this is the basis for the dudes from norway. I have found it hard to get young folks to do these short repeat tempos. Really hard to dial it in. Maybe you were referring to more long distance guys?

You are describing interval training. Yes, you can do x minutes at y pace and call it a tempo if you want, but lots of runners push themselves much harder than they need to. That was my point.

If you train at marathon pace insted of half marathon pace you are getting the same benefit without hurting my yourself. If you want to go down the "no pain, no gain" route, go ahead, but remember, Jane Fonda wasn't a running coach.

Congrats, you’re pretty fast, but that doesn’t really help your case because I follow other guys on strava who have PRs anywhere from 13:20-13:50 and they almost never run at their ‘1 hour pace’ for tempo runs- even 4 mi tempos- have these same 13:20-13:50 guys running their estimated marathon paces, so I really don’t don’t feel like small anecdotes like you being fast really help your case. I just don’t see a point in training at that pace, considering the fact that a tempo run is meant to be a moderate workout rather than a hard one, ~marathon pace (or maybe a bit faster, maybe down ~30k pace) makes more sense, especially a longer tempo run at marathon time pace. I’ve done 3-4 mi tempo runs at ‘LT’ pace when our coach asks us to, but they honestly really more like sub-optimal race pace runs rather than a moderate session which improves endurance.

you mong he was mostly agreeing with you.

He mentioned long tempo efforts at roughly AeT / MP, and closing some of these runs quicker, tending towards LT.

He also said that 20 min tempos at LT were rarely done, instead they were doing repeats at that pace.

Your reading comprehension is poor OP. Sorry I had to be the one to break it to you.

Which athletes are you referencing ? It could simply be that they are training at altitude and you are comparing it to their sea-level 1 hour pace / marathon pace.

Concerning my PRs, I shared them because I fit in your target question and to provide a certain level of credibility. Yes, there are many athletes that are much faster than me, but they don't train in a completely different way. The use of long tempos @ AT (marathon) + short intervals/tempos @ LT (1hr) seems pretty widespread in any distance training program.

I don't follow every notable college athlete on Strava, but I've noticed that both NAU and Stanford both run 8-10mi tempos @ AT and also do longer interval work at 1 hour pace (altitude adjusted paces for NAU). Just pulling this from Ky Robinson's (13:11 5k) latest workout: 4 mi @ 4:42/mi + hills + 2 miles @ 4:35ish. The 4 and 2 mile segments average out to right around his probably 1/2 marathon pace of ~ 60/61. He definitely isn't running 2:01 in the marathon though. If you go back on any of the Stanford workouts you'll find a mix of faster tempo intervals @ LT and long tempos @ AT. Same for NAU. I don't think my training history is anecdotal to the topic as it is pretty standard. I've had multiple coaches in my career, know a ton of athletes of different levels and have spent too many hours on LRC, and this stuff seems very standard.

Tempo sessions are not meant to be moderate, but not super hard either. There's a certain misconception that aerobic = easy and anaerobic = hard, while in fact some of the hardest workouts out there are aerobic. You might have some trouble with gauging the feeling as a (presumably) less experienced athlete. This is a whole other topic, but that's why lactate testing in training is so helpful.

Here's the brief physiological explanation on why running at AT (aerobic threshold) and LT (lactate or anaerobic threshold) is important: .

scientifictriathlon.com

Threshold Confusion: Aerobic, Anaerobic, Lactate, Functional – Help! | EP#71

Mikael Eriksson

There's a lot of confusion around the concept of thresholds in endurance sports and triathlon. In this episode, you'll get a clear and concise explanation that will help you understand thresholds once and for all.

Link:scientifictriathlon.com/tts71/#:~:text...

Basically, for a race where both pathways are contributing meaningfully (under 5k mainly) you want your lactate threshold to be as fast as possible so you can run as fast possible without relying on the glycosis (anaerobic) pathway for energy. Using this pathway creates waste H+ ions which cause intense muscle fatigue. Running at LT/just under makes your body more efficient at using the aerobic system at this pace and thus pushes your LT a little faster. Hope this is helpful. If you're still not convinced about the importance of LT work, there's a Norweigan guy who runs 3:28/12:48 that might convince you ;)