Copying training from elites: Dos and Don'ts

not to be a stickler but its hard to say brahh because a lot of it is based on how long someone has been running and at what level...injury history, training history. generally count on reducing the intensity and volume down from the elites.

It also depends what copying it is. Running a mile at 3000 pace is tough regardless but there's not a huge difference if takes 4:00 or 4:30. But doing more other work is where I'd cut. I know a few people who copied a NAU 3k workout and kept the mile at 3k pace, but removed a couple of 400 reps (mile) and removed a mile at threshold.

do

It's hard to say, but in general I think the main thing is to emulate general training principles, not specific workouts. I guess take note of how they periodize workouts targeting different physiologic systems and then introduce workouts aimed at training to run a specific type of race. Also, in general, with elite athletes, the pace difference between races of different lengths becomes a lot smaller, and it becomes harder to define a physiologic pace based on how long it can be maintained (e.g. someone running a half marathon under an hour vs someone running it in 80 minutes - the way that is paced in relation to the lactate threshold is different). Also acknowledge that their easier runs are comparably a lot easier to their race pace compared to a non-elite runner, and that's probably okay.

Yes. Fully agree. I have noticed sometimes finding "equivalent" pace for elite workouts can be difficult. I often see paces around 3' per k for many elites and this seems fairly effortless but not totally clear if its exactly threshold or even slower.

Also agree on the easy runs. Efficiency and strength surely make their 7 minute jogs much easier than the equivalent easy pace for slower runners. I would be interested if this applies to all runners or is more pronounced with distance runners. I could see 800 runners not maintaining their usual level of efficiency when doing slow jogs vs a 5k/10k runner.

why wouldn’t you do 12x300 instead of making them run for longer and the have a lot less rest? There is some hand waving about elites recovering quicker but 12x300 would be a heck of a lot closer to matching the stresses..

Bad coaches copy workouts

Good coaches tailor workouts to their athletes strengths and weaknesses

It is funny you mention this compromise because I almost used that in my example! I think it really is a matter of personal choice at that point. I personally like using 400 repeats for milers to match the race feeling of individual laps within the race itself. But 300s you are right would be a much more accurate copying of the stimulus as you get each rep at the same time at goal pace but, again, I think the broader point of the workout is to replicate race split distances (lap pace) so it is helpful mentally to practice that.

I think this is the interesting thing when adapting training from any source (not just the running log of a successful runner) but there are all these small decisions to make that are really individually dependent. Yet I've found that people's guiding principles are helpful to understand because, while there isn't a distinct right or wrong between these two workouts, it does help to have sufficient justification behind your decision.

How slow they run their easy days. If guys who are running close to 13 minutes are running 7:00 or even slower on their easy days, then non-elites should also be running their easy days very slow, probably slower in comparison. 7:15 pace is three minutes per mile slower than a 13:30 guy’s 5k pace. Non-elites probably need to run even slower than 5k pace + three minutes for the same effect.

My opinion is that you’d be far more successful looking at what the best highschool and good college teams are doing.

Pro athletes get all day everyday to focus on stretching,recovery,nutrition etc. While scholarly athletes better simulate what it’s like training as a normal person. You have class/work and other non running related things you need to attend to. This alters your workout schedule and recovery time a good deal.

Pro athletes are also 0.1% talents, who have coaches that understand their exact biomechanics/vo2max/etc. I think the 800m is the event that highlights how this can cause issues the most. Clayton Murphy runs 70-75 mpw, lots of 3-5 mile tempos, 1k repeats, mile repeats, 400m repeats with short rest etc.. Will Sumner runs 10-15 mpw, lots of 100-150m repeats, 300m repeats with long rest, and plyometrics like sled sprints, doing the majority of his aerobic work on a bike or elliptical. These two athletes will both be in a 1:43-1:45 range this year, but they train completely differently and neither would be fast enough to be relevant if they picked up the other guys training.

You can also look at longer distance guys like Galen Rupp, who ran LOTS of miles and almost all of them were under 6:00, many under 5:00. When one goes to copy this kind of training they assume they should push their easy pace as far as possible and also push their mileage as far as possible, it works for galen so it’ll work for me right? Your achilles’ tendon will be donezo in 2 weeks.

i have not seen many elites doing their main run of the day that slow. I see a lot more 6:30 at altitude runs which map to the pretty standard 2 mins off 5k pace. See Jakob who say he does easy runs at 3:45-4:00 kmpace. I am sure someone runs that slow for their main runs but they are the exception.

you do see those slower runs but they are often the 2nd run of the day.

And How you map the easy run pace of somone with a load of 150km+ km/week to some one running like 80 km/week probably isn’t 1:1. You need to evaluate programs as a whole rather than just picking pieces

There were several "How They Train" books that came out or had been out as I got serious. Runner's World always had three training profiles in each issue. It was my favorite running reading. I just looked for guys doing things that I thought I'd like doing and try it myself, sometimes with a bit of tweaking or blending in some things from other runners I'd read about.

And a lot of them were garbage. There was some 32:30 chick who was doing all her easy runs at 5:30. In general it was also hard to get a view of the whole program. But yeah they were fun to read if you realized the might not be 100% accurate. I do remember eyestone doing like 130mpw. In 6 days….

I always try to keep all the stuff simple. It's not so much adding x minutes to this or that or copying this or that and adjusting it up or down, What's important is that you're working out the same stresses to the same systems. Running just isn't that complicated. It's easy to come up with a workout for a middle school or a high school or a college athlete that has the effect of a good threshold run, vo2, race pace, speed, long run.... I mean aren't you just trying to hit all systems. It's not a popular opinion but I feel that everybody is doing the same stuff and just slightly different ways to make it sound magical. In effect everybody's doing daniels. I just don't know it. There's only so many ways to stress your body's systems/ fuel sources. I will say I find periodizing nearly impossible with young runners. They now want to peak for spring summer fall and indoor.

hire a coach

My biggest takeaway from elite training logs: coaching is the what makes the difference. The people trying to do this alone won't get very far.

Well, if you thought a lot of them were garbage you'd ignore those and incorporate things from the ones that weren't.

I'd go so far as to say that if you're copying any specific pattern from elite training you're probably doing it wrong. Even adjusting workouts for time rather than distance completely misses the point of what good training is.

Elite runners are at a level of training and talent where their physiology, training constraints, and performance constraints are just fundamentally different than us normal runners. A seasoned elite has pretty well maxed out a lot of the basic aspects of fitness -things like cardiac output, mitochondrial capacity, capillary density, etc. In contrast, for a recreational runner, one or more of these basic things is the usually main limiting factor of performance. We're dealing with largely different training priorities so copying the pattern of a training system is foolish.

In addition to different training priorities we also need to understand that an elite's training zones and race paces are different relative efforts. AeT/AnT are typically higher %'s of max effort and closer together for an extremely well-trained athlete so defining any of their training efforts as a particular "zone" often isn't translatable to a rec runner. Elites have a wider range of relative effort to work within. "5k pace" is not a directly comparable effort for a 13-minute runner vs a 20-minute runner because those are physiologically different events. This gets even more extreme when you scale up to the marathon.

I think it's still worthwhile to look at the fundamental principles and logic behind elite training, but we then need to use those to come up with our own solutions, which may look very different than the pattern of elite training. Figure out the basics well and have the confidence to experiment and zero in on what works best for your particular training and performance constraints.

Definitely not true that most people are doing Daniels, but he is still extremely influential. I would also disagree with your point about running not being complicated and it just being the goal to hit all systems. You want to tailor workouts to runners to emphasize systems that pay the greatest dividends. So for your 25-minute 5K novice, you can focus almost exclusively on building up the length of their easy runs. For your 15-minute guy with a huge base, the formula will be very different. Different body types have different needs. You may find that your former swimmer responds really well to some extra speedwork and your former basketball player makes huge gains from more threshold workouts.