Question About Coe/Martin's "Better Training For Distance Runners."

bump

Excellent question!

In my interpretation of EVERYTHING I have read on Coe, and this interpretation can be (and has been) challenged, I see the following regarding anaerobic capacity:

-the book states resting 2-3x the run, or something like that. This is just a very general rule of thumb that is rarely followed exactly. Sort of like "200 minus your gae" for HR.

-Coe did a LOT of short recovery work, even in the depths of winter. (20x200m with 30sec rest, for example.)

-on one plane, a pace was achieved, with longish recovery. Then, gradually, the pace remained, and recovery shortened. (200s with 1min rest, then 45sec rest, then 30sec rest, for example.)

-on another plane, once short recovery was achieved, longer runs were employed with longer recovery. (12x200m leads to 6x400m leads to 3x800m with proportional rests, for example.)

-one variable is changed at a time. ie pace, volume, length of runs, recovery.

-so, in peak season, short recovery work is seen, as per many programs, but also, long recovery is seen due to the nature of some sessions: 4x400m at 800m pace needs long recovery, but 4x400m at 800m pace in the winter is not a good idea. 16x100m with 30sec rest at 800m pace might be better for winter 800m pace.

Hope this helps. The Coe/Martin book has been the source of much confusion/misunderstanding, particularly on this topic. It's a wonderful book imho, but certainly not perfect, containing some apparant contradictions. I expect to be challenged by other Coe/Martin experts on what I have written, and welcome it.

HHH? :)

Cheers

Darren Skuja

Skuj,

Question. If my peak race is in December (~22-23 weeks away), and I am running base miles till July, starting the first week of July; what kind of anaerobic capacity workouts would be wise to do? I would like to shy away from 100m repeats. 200's, 300's, and 400's are the kind of distances I love to run. I also like to mix things up from week to week. Heres what I was thinking for the 4 weeks in July (this might/probably will change due to unforeseen circumstanses)

1. 8x 400m w/ 3 min recovery

2. 10x 200m with 200m slow jog (recovery time will long.. I jog SLOW)

3. 10X 300m with 300m recovery

4. Sets of 200m's, 300m's, and 400m's. plenty of recovery between and reps and sets....

During these weeks, 20 minute tempos and plenty of base miles will be included. In August, I'll add aerobic capacity workouts (V02 max work) bringing me to 3 manageable workouts a week. Come fall and cooler temperature, the intensity will increase and the recoveries will shorten.

Sound decent?

Thanks in Advance

Well, I know very little about you, so these must be very generalised suggestions.

I have always been a fan of 1 weekly ancap, aercap and tempo. I call that 2.5 "workouts" per week, because the 20min tempo, which is a great idea, must not be too hard. Tempo is the easiest thing to screw up!!!

What if.....and it's just a suggestion for possible wider debate / discussion / thoughts.....but what if you did aerobic capacity now, and added anaerobic capacity later?

Weekly 6km sessions such as: 2x3000m, 3x2000m, 4x1500m, 5x1200m, 6x1000m, all with plenty of rest, all not too hard....controlled.

Would doing that first, then adding the shorter faster stuff be something to consider?

One idea might be to do just a small bit of AC work year round, but that you would spend more time on it as you are peaking. Rather than do 8x400, you do 2x400 and do not do them as often.

Sort of keeps a little a stress on that energy system.

In Better Training for Distance Runners, Coe says that the lower limit of the volume for anaerobic capacity workouts is 2,400m (not 100% sure, I don't have the book in front of me), but it was definetly more than 800m. A workout like 2x400m might be too little (IMHO.)

I think luv2run is suggesting that 2x400 is maintenance work that can be done all year round.

Another poster on another thread suggested that anaerobic capacity deserves a better name. That poster suggested we should call it Glycolysis Capacity. I agree, it is a much better name, since it is more accurate, and there is not really such a thing as "anaerobic" excercise, it is all aerobic.

I have never been fast over short distances, but three days ago I ran 10x200 with three minutes jog recovery just one second slower than my 200 PR.

I have been running 10ks and 5ks, so that was a very good workout for me to help improve my 1500m time. It might also be a good workout for others who have relatively slow 200 times, but need more speed endurance.

For runners who are very fast over 200, they may need to run somewhat slower than their best time, in order to improve speed endurance for 800 and 1500m.

wellnow wrote:

I think luv2run is suggesting that 2x400 is maintenance work that can be done all year round.

Yes. Martin does not think that people should just leave speed to one time of the year. I bet most people do not do that in that you get into group runs that are faster paced or do strides or fartlet to keep that "system" activated.

So my vertical jump is aerobic? Those Olympic lifters are aerobic? Of course not.

There are exercise intensities and pathways to creating ATP that do not require oxygen. These events are few in track (the 100 and shorter events are about it). The 200 at the national class level (<20 sec) is very little aerobic pathways.

However, man is an aerobic animal so ultimately we recover aerobically.

I do think that most people think of the energy systems as light switches when dimmer knobs are a better analogy.

But isn't the ATP oxidized?