The Norwegians train very high volume with slower intervals <3.5 mmol(15k pace) and <2.5 mmol(marathon pace). Their long runs are also run very easy @ <2.0mmol.
Contrast that to American high schoolers/college runners who do comparatively less volume but very fast intervals (faster than 5k race pace) and comparatively fast long runs (5:50/mi pace).
Which training approach is better?
It depends what you're training for, and the stage of periodization.
But in general, I'd say the high volume/slower interval approach.
Read Marius Bakken's paper for an explanation.
Lack Tate wrote:
The Norwegians train very high volume with slower intervals <3.5 mmol(15k pace) and <2.5 mmol(marathon pace). Their long runs are also run very easy @ <2.0mmol.
Contrast that to American high schoolers/college runners who do comparatively less volume but very fast intervals (faster than 5k race pace) and comparatively fast long runs (5:50/mi pace).
Which training approach is better?
Well, a Norwegian teenager won a gold medal at the Olympics. When is the last time someone who trained like an American high schooler won an Olympic gold medal?
Lack Tate wrote:
The Norwegians train very high volume with slower intervals <3.5 mmol(15k pace) and <2.5 mmol(marathon pace). Their long runs are also run very easy @ <2.0mmol.
Contrast that to American high schoolers/college runners who do comparatively less volume but very fast intervals (faster than 5k race pace) and comparatively fast long runs (5:50/mi pace).
Which training approach is better?
I want to say slower and higher volume but at the end of the day I don't know if there is an objective answer to it. Both should be utilized in any sort of training regime, and it really just depends on time of year, race specialization, ect.
Also worth noting that at least for American high schoolers, there isn't a need to train for anything longer than 2 miles for most of the year. Over the course of their entire high school career the average American high school runner will literally never run anything over 5k, and even then only during cross country.
I also do think the less volume but faster approach is mostly limited to high school anyway. It seems most American pros do tons of stuff resembling double threshold and other long and slow stuff, and as someone with a ton of buddies in various college running programs, I can tell you that a number of colleges, which probably translates to most of them, do something similar.
Lack Tate wrote:
The Norwegians train very high volume with slower intervals <3.5 mmol(15k pace) and <2.5 mmol(marathon pace). Their long runs are also run very easy @ <2.0mmol.
Contrast that to American high schoolers/college runners who do comparatively less volume but very fast intervals (faster than 5k race pace) and comparatively fast long runs (5:50/mi pace).
Which training approach is better?
They don't train like that year round. Banken started to typer of his mileage slightly and running faster intervals in April before his summer track season.
This post was removed.
higher volume/ slower intervals. something important to realize is that some people need way more speed work to round into shape than others. ive had kids who seem like they peak off of faster stuff within 3 to 4 weeks, and I've had kids who seem to take 12 weeks to get there. if you need 12 weeks, you are going to need a longer period of lower and faster than someone else might.
but that base, for the most part, should be whatever your version of higher and slower is.
high school xc coach wrote:
higher volume/ slower intervals. something important to realize is that some people need way more speed work to round into shape than others. ive had kids who seem like they peak off of faster stuff within 3 to 4 weeks, and I've had kids who seem to take 12 weeks to get there. if you need 12 weeks, you are going to need a longer period of lower and faster than someone else might.
but that base, for the most part, should be whatever your version of higher and slower is.
Agree 100%. Pretty much any distance runner can safely benefit from higher volume, slower aerobic interval training for most of the year. And as you stated, some runners can sharpen to a peak performance in 3-4 weeks (endurance monster types) once shorter faster intervals are added, while others (generally the speedier types) can not only handle, but require, a lot more of the fast stuff to perform their best.
Good take!
A couple things 1) the Norwegians do faster running at race pace & 2) they're running their high volume threshold workouts at fast paces because they've trained that system a ton. It's not like they're out there jogging on their double threshold days.
A lot of training overemphasizes a weekly "speed" workout where you're hammering race pace intervals. Sometimes those runners lack strength when it comes to distance racing. There's a balance to training. You need to work both systems. I'd rather build up an athlete's strength, keep them happy, and add in some race pace work in season.
It's not like the Ingebrigtsens never run faster than 15k pace. If they are closer to a race they also train at race pace. Their success confirms that they must do their training right
They do just as much speedwork as everyone else. It may be a lower percentage because they do more total volume.
I defenitely say ENOUGH volume and individual EXACT calibrated quality workouts.That's the very effective and smartast way to go .- The Magic Running factory by Coach J.S - 🇸🇪🧙♂️🖐
I defenitely say ENOUGH volume and individual EXACT calibrated quality workouts.That's the very effective and smartast way to go .- The Magic Running factory by Coach J.S - 🇸🇪🧙♂️🖐