>But, believe me, the Spanish culture about running changed deeply during the last 13 years. This fact means more possibilities of recruiting, more interest, more knowledge. This fact means that spanish runners are ACTORS of this world, not SPECTATORS like the most part of American runners, that compete among them (not always) and normally are not able (may be that they have no money enough, may be that they don't want) to meet the top runners of the world. How is possible to grow and to improve, when your movement is isolated and you don't have any model among your runners ? Your models are form the past : you talk about Shorter, Rodgers, Salazar, Ryun and many other big champions that were the best in the world. But you cannot take your models from the history, because the world is changing continuously. You must take your models from the present, and you have to live the top activity like something regarding your life, not something to see like an "affair" of other people. So, the only solution is to be more joined with top activity, knowing top athletes and thinking to them like a part of your normal world, not like something of unattainable that demoralize every runner creating alibis with other people's doping for justifying their weakness. You must better know athletics and its values, and must believe more in yourselves.<
I agree with this Renato, and many of your observations.But though the world may be continuously changing the human body remains largely the same. What we believe we can accomplish, in our wildest dreams can change.
When I began running at age 13 my models quickly became the greatest American runners that you mentioned but as I became more knowledgeable my models became also the greatest legends in running. Zatopek, Bikila, Clarke, Snell & Halberg Hill & Clayton etc. Lydiard.
Any of these can & will provide good models.
As a young runner I read their biographies over & over for motivation and inspiration as well as methodology. I believe every serious runner should know the history and development of athletics, for context.
I hope you will continue to give us your perspective. It is a great asset that the American running community needs to hear.
hello i was wondering if you could give me some help or advice of specific training sessions you would give a 3.42 1500m runner? im 20 years of age and im coming back from a 9 month injury i have built my training up to around 40 miles per week, i was hoping to run around 3.45 last summer but unfortunitly i was injured.
my aim is to run 3.45 - 3.42 this summer after getting a good strong winter of training.
I'm preparing some file that I used in international seminaries, for sending thru e-mail to Malmo. There is something on 1500 too, of course. I've not to much time, but I try to do my best for illustrating my phylosophy, giving also some example (not only schedules, but real training of top athletes).
Don't think that what I write is the truth : take it like a contribute for giving some new information and some new knowledge, but you must devise your programs. Remember that never a coach ends to learn. Passion and humilty are the most important qualities for coaching athletes, presumption the most limiting fault.
And for success in anything.
Renato Canova wrote:
Passion and humilty are the most important qualities for coaching athletes, presumption the most limiting fault.
Great quotation. Thanks.
Your sample schedule is interesting. I wonder if you have seen the training for Buddy Edelen, which is very similar to this.
You mentioned this workout:
> Tue : 40 min easy + speed (5 sets of 4 x 100m in 14)
What recoveries would you have between 100m, and between sets?
could you send those to me too? thanks
On 10th of January, near Eldoret, there is the Final of Energizer Circuit for Kenyan Cross. In the meeting, there are all the distances of cross, and a race of 15 km on road. That one is really the first competition that the most part of Kenyan runners want to do in the new season. It's used for testing their shape by many top runners, expecially who rested long time after a tough season, or who had some injury. Personally, I'll use this race for testing the improvement of some new athlete coming from different Camps on the mountains, and the road race for seeing Paul Kosgei after 3 months of stop for an injury in a knee. I'll stay in Kenya for three weeks, working in 4 different places : Kaptagat (where there is a Camp for Marathon runners, with Cheptot 2:07:59, Robert Cheruiyot 2:08:13, David Makori 2:08:49, Mark Yatich 2:09:52, John Birgen 2:09:08, and some woman as Ruth Kutol 2:27:22, Anne Jelagat 2:29:23, Jane Ekimat 1:10:44, Irene Limika 9:39.51 in steeple, Jennifer Chesinon 2:31:28, Florence Barsosio coming back after a baby), Kapsabet (a mixed Camp for Marathon and Juniores, with Rodgers Rop, David Kirui 2:08:53, Philip Rugut 59:53, Daniel Rono 60:14, Mark Bett 12:55 in 5000, and the Ugandian Dorcus Inzikuru, 9:39.51 on steeple), Iten (the group of track : Shaheen world Champion of steeple, Nicholas Kemboi 26:30, James Kwalia 12:54, Abel Cheruiytot 8:09 steeple, Julius Nyamu 8:07 steeple, Bushendich 13:12, Moses Mosop 27:13), and Kapyego on the mountains for beginners. In Eldoret can work also Paul Kosgei, Paul Kanda (60:55), Henry Tarus (2:10:14), David Kosgei (60:24), Daniel Kirwa Too (2:09:58) and some other less strong. It's the first time that I spend so long continue time in Kenya, and I'm curious to see what can happen. I will give some fresh information about the best Kenyan athletes directly from their Country. Probably, in January also some American runner (or living in US, like Marius Bakken) will go to Kenya, and I can meet them. So, you can see the big difference that there is between the official interviews on Kenyan newspapers and the real situation....
Why does the IAAF continue the coverup of drug use amongst E. Africans? Lagat was let off on a "technicality" because he's African. If he had been from France like Chouki, or anywhere else, he'd be out on his ass. Why is that?
Don't ask Renato stupid questions. Let him keep speaking on training. I don't want this thread to get ruined by more drug talk.
Do you keep in contact with Tom Ratcliffe as a KIM agent? It would be wonderful if he could get you to the US for a lecture tour or even a single presentation in Boston.
We appreciate your time and willingness to share your experience and theory.
Thanks for the info. A few questions.
1. Do you use the 60-80 metre hill workout during base building with all your runners to recruit muscle fiber capacity? Does it work better on fast twitch runners?
2. Variations of speed during track workouts for (better permeability of membranes)- to enable quicker recovery of lactate. Can you explain the permeability part- lactate shuffles out of what to go where better if more permeable???
3. Greater blood fluidity- this reduces peripheral resistance. Can you expand on the fluidity- is that the same as permeability above????
4. You mention electrostimulation with 400 meter times- do you use this with your runners and more particularly your distance runners???
I can explain how I use the systems you are talking about.
1) I always use short sprints uphill (from 60 to 100m, with a gradient of 10-15%, depending on the characteristics of the place), also during full track season (or during every period of preparation regarding marathon runners). Running long distances many times, not always fast but often moderate, athletes become unable to use completely their fibres, expecially FT. Runners of long distance become unable to have quick nervous reactions, and step by step lose capacity of MENTAL INTENSITY in efforts. So, the goal is to recruit their capacity in requiring max intensity to their brain, that means rapidity in transmitting stimula to muscles, and means also the possibility of using the most percentage possible of fibres. So, the first goal of short sprints uphill is not to improve speed, but to reach the capacity of working with the higher number of fibres in each muscle (of course interested in specific activity).
The second goal is to increase the elasticity of heart. Being a muscle, heart needs to work using a large range of possibilities. Under this point of view, if you reduce too much your max heart rate, you reduce your capacity of working. An example :
Athlete A : Basic HR 50/min - Max HR 200
Athlete B : Basic HR 40/min - Max HR 180
Athlete C : Basic HR 36/min - Max HR 180
A) is the athlete after 2-3 years of training. He's yet young, didn't work very much on long run, is able to reach a high level of HR (200) having a good elasticity in his myocardium. His coefficient of contraction is 4, as he's able to work 4 times his basic value (200 : 50).
B) the same athlete, after working 2 years in dicrection of long run, improving very much his aerobic capacity. As his heart becomes bigger, he's able to reduce his basic HR of 20% (from 50 to 40). Of course, he's no more able to have the same peak (from 200 to 180), but loses only 10%. So, now his coefficient of contraction is 4,5 (180 : 40), so the capacity of working of his heart is higher than before.
C) after thie type of work, the athlete can yet reduce a little his basic HR, using long run FAST and long intervals (2000/3000m) at speed of 10000m, with short recovery. In this way, his heart can yet become a little bit bigger, but myocardium preserves his elasticity, because heart walls are not too thick, but able to contract and to relax very fast. The improvement of basic HR is 10% (from 40 to 36), but max HR is the same. So, the capacity of working of his heart is now of 5 times (180 : 36).
The only way to keep a high level of max HR is to push your heart to its max level, only for very short time, then to relax completly. In this way, myocardium can work at its max intensity, but the effort doesn't last long time, and the muscle cannot become hypertrophic, that is damageous for health and diminutive for performances.
(Excuse my bad English, but it's difficult to explain using specific words: I hope that I'm able to explain, in any case....)
Renato Canova wrote:
(Excuse my bad English, but it's difficult to explain using specific words: I hope that I'm able to explain, in any case....)
meglio di mio italiano
About the variations of speed that I use on track, I can suppose that the main effect is to improve the permeability of membranes, but officil physiology isn't able to explain this in scientific way. This is a my supposition, looking at the results in training and in competition, and at results of tests that I periodically do.
Of course, when I put in the training of an athlete this type of tests, all training is going to better level, so it's difficult to give a very precise role to ANY SPECIFIC AND PARTICULAR TRAINING.
Anyway, I can give you some information, with some example.
KIMWETICH (800m runner, 1:43.03 in '98, 1:43.98 in '99 with an average of 1:45.9 in 25 seasonal races) : 3 sessions (one every 2 weeks) of variations, like these :
a) 5 x 500m (200m in 25.0 + 100m in 15.0 + 100m in 12.0 + 50m in 8.0 + 50m in 6.5 = 1:06.5), rec. 7'/8'
b) 5 x 1000m alternating 200m (28.0 + 34.0 + 28.0 + 34.0 + 28.0) in 2:32 / 2:33.6 rec. 7'/8'
c) 4 x 400m with 50m fast / 50m not pushing (about 5.5 + 7.0) in 50.8 - 50.2 - 48.9 - 51.4 (rec. 6')
After this work, he was able running 2:13 in Nice (1000m). In a test taking lactate (3 x 600m in 1:21 with 8' rec, using acoustic rabbit for running at even pace, plus another free), he had this values (test were 7 days after the work) :
After a) 13.2 mmol - 12.6 mmol - 13.8 mmol - 18.7 mmol (1:20.4)
After b) 11.8 mmol - 12.2 mmol - 12.4 mmol - 19.8 mmol (1:18.4)
After c) 9.6 mmol - 10.8 mmol - 12.0 mmol - 21.6 mmol (1:16.6)
STEPHEN CHERONO (last year, before running Ostrava in 12:48) :
He made 3 times 3 x 2000m alternating 400m (58/59 + 72/73) with final times of about 5:19 / 5:22 with rec. 5'
having an improvement of about 2.0 in the avaerage every time. Being in Kenya, I had not the possibility of taking lactate. Anyway, after about 6 days I used the same test (3000m + 400m with 1:30 recovery), and results were the following :
a) 7:53.8 - 54.2
b) 7:51.7 - 53.5
c) 7:49.9 - 52.6
NICHOLAS KEMBOI (last year, before running Zurich 13:01, then after Zurich before running Bruxelles 26:30) :
The work was the same (with him, James Kwalia and Moses Mosop, 27:13 in Bruxelles, 18 years old) :
3000m (500 in 1'18" / 1'14" + 500 in 1'30" + 400 in 60" / 57" + 400 in 1'12" + 300 in 44" / 42" + 300 in 54" + 200 in 28" / 26" + 200 in 36" + 100 in 13"5 / 12"5 + 100 in 18") with final times (for the different sessions) of :
8'04"2 - 7'58"6 - 7'53"4
2000m (400 in 58" / 56" + 400 in 1'10" + 300 in 42" / 40"5 + 300 in 52" + 200 in 27" / 25"5 + 200 in 34" + 100 in 13" / 12" + 100 in 17") with times : 5'12"8 - 5'09" - 5'06"3
1000m alternating 200m (27" / 25"5 + 34"), with times of
2'29"4 - 2'28"1 - 2'25"6
These times are from Nicholas, Kwalia and Mosop were not able to go so fast. Recovery between 3000 / 2000 / 1000m was of 10 min.
The first work (8'04"2 - 5'12"8 - 2'29"4) was one week before Zurich. The other two workouts were from Zurich and Bruxelles. It's interesting to see the last km of Bruxelles (2:28.4), near the level of the last km. of this type of training.
So, I cannot be sure of what happens in the body, but I'm sure about the results of this training, that, in different forms, I use with athletes of all distances (also marathon runners, for example 20 km alternating kms in 2:55 / 3:08 for an average of 3:01.5, if I want to prepare a full Marathon at 3:01.5 pace).
But, as I said before, this training is good if we are able to assemble every type of workout in a correct way. Never one training is so important, but important is the project and the globality of training.
Working with 5 sets of 4 x 100m in 14 seconds,
is it the usual 2 min rec. and 5 min between sets?
You don't see any western runners do this type of race-specific training. All is done at even-pace, goal-pace.
And here there are my two last answers.
When I speak about blood fluidity, I want to say that blood is less viscous, so can run inside veins / arteries more easy, not having to fight against the "resistance" of the walls of veins/arteries themselves. Nothing to do with the permeability of membranes : this is a characteristic of blood cells, connected with the speed of elimination of lactate from the cell. Instead, a better fluidity can derive from other factors, for ex. an increase in the total blood volume (in the best athletes, really talented for long run, after a period of good training 3-4 months long, it's possible to have a total blood volume 20% higher than before). That's the reason because top athletes normally have a lower haematocryte when in top shape : really, they have in their bodies more haemoglobin than before, but this is more diluted, so, if you test the same quantity of blood, you find a lower percentage of haemoglobin in the same quantity of blood.
Think that your blood circulation is one bottle of one litre. You put in the bottle 500gr of sugar (haemoglobin), and fill the bottle with half liter of water. Then, you shake the bottle, and you pour out 10ml of the liquid in a glass. If you test the liquid in the glass, you find 50% of sugar and 50% of water. In the case of blood, is like your haematocryte is 50%.
Now, you have a container (bottle) bigger, not for 1 litre, but for 1.2 liters. You put in the bottle 550gr of sugar, and fill the bottle with 650 ml of water. If you make the same work of before, shaking all the liquid in the bottle, and then you put a small part of it (10ml) in the same glass of before, you find 45.8 % of sugar, and 54.2 % of water. So, you say that your sugar is lower (like haematocryte for blood). Really, in your body, before you had 500gr of sugar, now 550, so your capacity in transporting O2 increased.
This is one of the physiological transformations that you can have thru a correct training, and that you CANNOT HAVE WITH DOPING. If you are able, with training, to increase of 20% the volume of your blood, you can have MORE HAEMOGLOBIN (so you can improve in transporting O2), but also MORE FLUIDITY (so your blood can run easier, and your heart has to work less, or, working the same, can improve its output).
This is the reason because I don't think that EPO can give many advantages, also if the most part of scientists and coaches think the contrary.
About electro stimulation, I don't use it, because in this way you exclude the nervous system, that is the most important motor for increasing strenght. I use only (and for very short time) after an injury, in order to re-balance the strenght in symmetrical parts of the body.
But, like mean of training, I don't believe in this system, that I consider dangerous and announcing future problems in muscles and structure.
Fascinating stuff! I was running up our mountain yesterday with one of our area graduates who now euns for Wyoming, and he was relating to me how they are researching and testing the fluidity of blood flow in his exercise physiology classes for his degree. Would it make sense to get athletes to take aspirin to thin the blood and increase the fluidity? Sounds like the Moroccan ten per day plan, but without the EPO.