The last 100 mile a week guy to win Olympic 800m gold, Steve Ovett. That was a long time ago. It is not his fault numerous nations boycotted 1980 Olympics but boycott did occur. If you want to do well 800m, ask, what would Trainer Mickey Goldmill say? Grease lightning speed. If you're a teenager, learn to sprint a fast 200m & 400m. By the way, Steve Ovett worked on his 200m & 400m sprinting as a teenager.
This was a highschool category, not for some greasy 40 year old men to rub their sweaty fingers over their keyboards while sipping a Coors Lite, I wanted actual feedback.
This is Letsrun. You have to wade through a mile of crap to get to anything intelligent. At least nobody has said w0ke yet....
Aerobic capacity is a significant component of 800m performance. The current understanding of physiology is that certain aspects of aerobic capacity are best developed with fairly long, relatively easy aerobic running.
Still need to qualify what we're calling a "long" run here though. IMO opinion it should be proportionate to the weekly volume and not a huge proportion. For someone running 30-40mi/week a 6-8mi "long" run with a bit of a progression in the last few miles is probably plenty for a lot of 800m runners.
The continuous long run probably doesn't need to be done year-round either. Maybe it's something one does in more pre-season/fundamental training and then in the season, they combine tempo intervals and the long run into one somewhat long, moderate-effort day just to maintain aerobic capacity.
Genuinely trying to see what the concept behind this is, considering many 400m guys easily stretch to the 800 without “endurance” training but more specifically the benefit of long runs for “endurance” training. I tend to notice most long runs are used for recovery and end up just putting stress on the joints leading to injuries.
The energy system substrates for the 400m and 800m are very different, with a significantly higher proportion of the energy in an 800m being produced aerobically.
Long runs aren’t for recovery. They’re for developing greater aerobic capacity through stimulating the development of myoglobin, mitochondria and blood vessels.
Yes, I think this is the one of the more direct answers to the OP's question. After 1 min of hard running, the aerobic system starts to play a large role. Improving the athlete's cardio and mitochondrial framework are the reasons for the "long" run, perhaps better termed as "longer" run for these individuals. It's important for their muscles to be well-versed in slow glycolysis (the breakdown of glucose in the presence of oxygen so that pyruvate can enter the TCA cycle rather than being converted to lactate as it is in fast glycolysis).
800m runners should also be doing their long runs in zone 3 rather than zone 2 in the 5-zone heart rate model so as to more effectively improve muscular endurance and emphasize slow glycolysis more than oxidative fat utilization, the latter of which is far more applicable to your longer distance guys.
***After 30 mins of continuous running, diminishing returns begin to happen, and even more so after 60 mins, so it's not bad advice to limit an 800m runner to a 60-min long run, for example.
Don't listen to anyone telling you a long run is "aerobic training." It is delusional bro science from last century.
Are you breathing hard on a long run? It is like lifting 20 pounds and calling it weight training. It will train you "aerobically" to handle a very measured, easy effort for a long time. That's exactly what you DON'T do in an 800.
"Aerobic training" for an 800 runner is hard interval workouts, that leave you gasping for air for most of 20 to 30 minutes. VO2max work.
You could benefit from long runs to hold weight down, but there's plenty of other ways to do that.
Don't listen to anyone telling you a long run is "aerobic training." It is delusional bro science from last century.
Are you breathing hard on a long run? It is like lifting 20 pounds and calling it weight training. It will train you "aerobically" to handle a very measured, easy effort for a long time. That's exactly what you DON'T do in an 800.
"Aerobic training" for an 800 runner is hard interval workouts, that leave you gasping for air for most of 20 to 30 minutes. VO2max work.
You could benefit from long runs to hold weight down, but there's plenty of other ways to do that.
And is your 800 athlete to do VO2max work year-round? No. Let them do their longer runs in the off-season and pre-season to grow and maintain their cardio fitness.
There are obviously many ways to skin a cat, but knowing the different physiological impacts of your training is important. Every session needs an intelligent reason behind it and there is no cookie cutter approach.
As another poster stated, the 800 is >50% aerobic. Plenty of 800 stars today run 70+mi weeks in base phase. Some don't, but they get volume by doing a lot of VO2 / Threshold intervals instead of longer runs. "Sprint only" type training almost always results in inconsistent performances, poorly timed peaks and poor performance in rounds.
Genuinely trying to see what the concept behind this is, considering many 400m guys easily stretch to the 800 without “endurance” training but more specifically the benefit of long runs for “endurance” training. I tend to notice most long runs are used for recovery and end up just putting stress on the joints leading to injuries.
The point of a long run is the same for 800 runners as for milers and marathoners. The better your cardiovascular system is at delivering oxygen throughout your body the faster you can run. Obviously that's not all there is to it. It's very true that many good 800s have been run by people who don't do long runs and it's also true that a long run for an 800 runner doesn't need to be as long as for people racing longer distances. But if an 800 runner wants to cover all of his bases he'll do some version of a long run.
No, that's not it. Oxygen uptake doesn't increase as you mature. You've been making this misinterpretation for decades.
Endurance is a neurological skill development. You and others keep ignoring/denying this over and over and over ad infinitum.
As another poster stated, the 800 is >50% aerobic. Plenty of 800 stars today run 70+mi weeks in base phase. Some don't, but they get volume by doing a lot of VO2 / Threshold intervals instead of longer runs. "Sprint only" type training almost always results in inconsistent performances, poorly timed peaks and poor performance in rounds.
Why is it accepted as a proven truth in T&F, 800m, greater than 50% aerobic event? How did physiologists get to that percentage? Physiologists usual test subjects are university physical education students. You are making assumptions about elite 800m athletes based on test results by 3 minute 800m females and 2 1/2 minute 800m males.
I never stated on this thread or other threads or other writings, 800m should be sprint only training. There are trade-offs. No one would argue (10 to 15) mile runs are ideal for 200m speed development. At best, some of you will say: Ten to fifteen mile runs will not hurt speed development. Some of you will say: Steve Ovett sprinted 47.xx 400m while logging 120 miles per week. My response: Exactly! Just think how fast an 800m man S Ovett would have been if he were focused on being the fastest 800m man possible.
Trade-offs in T&F are real. Many T&F athletes will hurt their 100m & 200m potential by training as a 400m specialist. Some 100m & 200m T&F athletes need Feed the Cats type training to thrive. Just know no matter how you train, there are trade offs. Also know: 800m results are more strongly coorelated to 200m personal best than 5000m personal best. Since the goal is to average 3 to 5 seconds slower than 200m personal best four times in a row, how in the heck are 15 mile runs and 80 miles a week going to get you there?
As another poster stated, the 800 is >50% aerobic. Plenty of 800 stars today run 70+mi weeks in base phase. Some don't, but they get volume by doing a lot of VO2 / Threshold intervals instead of longer runs. "Sprint only" type training almost always results in inconsistent performances, poorly timed peaks and poor performance in rounds.
Why is it accepted as a proven truth in T&F, 800m, greater than 50% aerobic event? How did physiologists get to that percentage? Physiologists usual test subjects are university physical education students. You are making assumptions about elite 800m athletes based on test results by 3 minute 800m females and 2 1/2 minute 800m males.
I never stated on this thread or other threads or other writings, 800m should be sprint only training. There are trade-offs. No one would argue (10 to 15) mile runs are ideal for 200m speed development. At best, some of you will say: Ten to fifteen mile runs will not hurt speed development. Some of you will say: Steve Ovett sprinted 47.xx 400m while logging 120 miles per week. My response: Exactly! Just think how fast an 800m man S Ovett would have been if he were focused on being the fastest 800m man possible.
Trade-offs in T&F are real. Many T&F athletes will hurt their 100m & 200m potential by training as a 400m specialist. Some 100m & 200m T&F athletes need Feed the Cats type training to thrive. Just know no matter how you train, there are trade offs. Also know: 800m results are more strongly coorelated to 200m personal best than 5000m personal best. Since the goal is to average 3 to 5 seconds slower than 200m personal best four times in a row, how in the heck are 15 mile runs and 80 miles a week going to get you there?
Some 800/1500 runners might benefit fitness wise from higher mileage, but 400/800 runners maybe not so much.
First I mostly agree with you. But a lot depends on what level of competition you are talking about. HS runners doing a "long" run of 6-8 miles every week to ten days, is good for aerobic development, and if anything it allows them to be fit enough to handle the other faster training necessary. So the LR is more support for their real workout days, than anything specific to the event. They don't need to be going on long slow slogs.
I think most HS 800m runners CAN just do tempos, vo2max reps, and some easy miles and get plenty fit without the BIG weekly long run of 10+ miles.
This was a highschool category, not for some greasy 40 year old men to rub their sweaty fingers over their keyboards while sipping a Coors Lite, I wanted actual feedback.
You've gotten feedback. Yes, some of it is useless and idiotic but some of us have actually put some thought into giving you useful replies. This may surprise you bet even greasy 40 year old men sipping Coors Lights may have been around the sport for quite a while and learned a thing or two that you haven't.
Don't listen to anyone telling you a long run is "aerobic training." It is delusional bro science from last century.
Are you breathing hard on a long run? It is like lifting 20 pounds and calling it weight training. It will train you "aerobically" to handle a very measured, easy effort for a long time. That's exactly what you DON'T do in an 800.
"Aerobic training" for an 800 runner is hard interval workouts, that leave you gasping for air for most of 20 to 30 minutes. VO2max work.
You could benefit from long runs to hold weight down, but there's plenty of other ways to do that.
And is your 800 athlete to do VO2max work year-round? No. Let them do their longer runs in the off-season and pre-season to grow and maintain their cardio fitness.
How is their cardio fitness going to "grow" doing slow long runs in the off-season?
The whole time they are doing it, their cardio fitness is shrinking. Only when the serious stuff resumes does it grow again.
The answer to your stupid question (I sure hope you're nobody's coach) is you do VO2 max as much as possible, based on your racing season and your burnout limits. Obviously your athlete will need breaks, but don't kid yourself. The break is rest, not "aerobic training."
Genuinely trying to see what the concept behind this is, considering many 400m guys easily stretch to the 800 without “endurance” training but more specifically the benefit of long runs for “endurance” training. I tend to notice most long runs are used for recovery and end up just putting stress on the joints leading to injuries.
I think it depends on the kind of 800 runner you are.
There are speed based 800 runners and also endurance based 800 runners (the 400/800 type and the 800/1500 type if you will)
I still think that long run is essential for even the 400/800 type, but they should be incorporating SLIGHTLY more speed than aerobic. The 800 is a bit more speed than it is endurance, anyways, which is a good reason why your 400 guys have no problem running it.
The mileage of the 400/800 guy probably will at MOST run like 20-25 mpw, while doing a lot of speed and weight training in between. Their "long run" weekends would probably be only 6-8 miles, while you're typical 1500M/3000M guy would run like 12 or more.
There is a reason why people like Will Sumner who, despite only running ~15 mpw, was able to run 1:44. He didn't run that time off of endurance, he ran that time because he can split 44 in the relay.
However, you also have people who are more endurance based like Nick Symmonds, who would often save himself classically in the back of the field for the first lap or so, and then strike with ~200 to go.
However, even people like Symmonds, Coe, etc would run 46 in the relay split. Coe split 45x in the relay back in the day, even though he was more the 800/mile type
Which is exactly why speed needs to be the priority in the 800 meters
The point of a long run is the same for 800 runners as for milers and marathoners. The better your cardiovascular system is at delivering oxygen throughout your body the faster you can run. Obviously that's not all there is to it. It's very true that many good 800s have been run by people who don't do long runs and it's also true that a long run for an 800 runner doesn't need to be as long as for people racing longer distances. But if an 800 runner wants to cover all of his bases he'll do some version of a long run.
No, that's not it. Oxygen uptake doesn't increase as you mature. You've been making this misinterpretation for decades.
Endurance is a neurological skill development. You and others keep ignoring/denying this over and over and over ad infinitum.
I can't recall ever saying anything about neurological development in the decades I've posted here. If you've found an actual post where I've denied that there's a neurological part of developing endurance I'd love to see it. I also seriously doubt that I've said that oxygen uptake increases as you mature so if you've got an example of something I've written claiming that it does you might want to post it. Otherwise I'm not going to say much more to you. I'm not going to debate with someone about things I've never said but who thinks I have.
they are trying to teach you how to be a solid 2-2:10 afterthought XC guy running TF as conditioning for the fall. not how to actually compete at the 8. to compete at the 8 you need to be able to run a 50-60 split and not be exhausted. it's mostly speed with some strength. to me they should emphasize 200-1200.
i think they have the 8 confused with the mile or 3000 or 5k or 10k or XC or something. there, yeah, you're not facing the same risk with a speed guy. speed will struggle to keep up. so you should be doing your metronome stuff where metronome running leaves behind the fast people, not where you are chasing me.
personally i don't think you need more than about 3-4x race distance per day in training. sprinters do not run 16x100 to run a single 100. and you can say part of our race is how you finish, but if i give up freshness and power to hold on at the end of the race, i might not break 12.
also, the guy who mentioned "base" is finessing that he's not talking about in season training. yeah, it might help to have "some" baseline fitness, within limits, but not as your race prep. to me the deal is you need to be able to run high 40 low 50 to run the necessary split to compete at a college level. i am sure pros need some distance work to compete at their level but it's counter-intuitive. there, everyone is fast so being mileage ready might help. but if you run like 2:10 if you ever want to win a race it's can you stay with the lead pack and not be exhausted which is not prepared for like you are staying with the lead in a 5k or on a 4:20 mile pace.