Here's the thing. You take 90 seconds jog, and it's slow, both the heart rate and lactate levels will drop during each recovery. A good workout but not a good race simulation. You take a 50 second 200 after each race pace 1000 and after about two, heart rate and lactate stay level throughout the workout. It's mentally easier because of the slower pace but it's the closest you will get in a workout to the physiology of the race. If you really want to do 2ks with 90 seconds rest, do 4 and get in 400 meters during that 90 second rest. I actually use 5x1600 with a 400 in 1:40-1:45 for 32-34 minute 10k runners. 5x1600 with 90 second 400 for 30-31 minute 10k runners. One example of how well this predicts is a runner who went 5x1600 at just under 5 with 90 second 400 jog rest and then hit 30:53 in a race. On the other hand, I've had runners hit 5x1600 in 5 flat with 60 seconds rest - not fast jog - and they can't break 33 for 10k.
Could I break 33 mins. in the 10k based on this workout
Report Thread
-
-
In prepping for the marathon I would do 3 x 3000 on a rolling course in 10:00 or a little better. My 10k PR was no where close to sub-33, but I did not race hard short (e.g., most of the time my 20km and then 15km splits provided my 10km PR). I did run mid-2:30s and was ready to run this workout in 9:50 x 3 and was in low 2:30 shape when I got injured (semi-permanently and turned to racing on the bike).
-
sisyphus wrote:
Here's the thing. You take 90 seconds jog, and it's slow, both the heart rate and lactate levels will drop during each recovery. A good workout but not a good race simulation. You take a 50 second 200 after each race pace 1000 and after about two, heart rate and lactate stay level throughout the workout. It's mentally easier because of the slower pace but it's the closest you will get in a workout to the physiology of the race. If you really want to do 2ks with 90 seconds rest, do 4 and get in 400 meters during that 90 second rest. I actually use 5x1600 with a 400 in 1:40-1:45 for 32-34 minute 10k runners. 5x1600 with 90 second 400 for 30-31 minute 10k runners. One example of how well this predicts is a runner who went 5x1600 at just under 5 with 90 second 400 jog rest and then hit 30:53 in a race. On the other hand, I've had runners hit 5x1600 in 5 flat with 60 seconds rest - not fast jog - and they can't break 33 for 10k.
Interesting ideas.....but would you recommend running ALL workouts in this manner (that is, with faster running between intervals)? Some may argue that while your method provides a more realistic (physiologically speaking) race simulation, it doesnt allow for one to sustain max VO2 pace for as long. Thats is, with the shorter/faster recoveries, one would be forced to slow down and not stress VO2 max as effectively (thereby negating the very purpose of the workout) - how would you respond to that argument? -
I thought I had mentioned that this was based on the workout as "an indicator". My bad if I didn't make that clear. Indicators need to have very short rest which is fast enough to keep lactate and heart rate up. Actual workouts done week in, week, out, don't have to be like this, and indeed, can be done at a higher quality if longer rests are taken. Keep in mind we are talking 10k pace here. VO2 pace is faster than 5k pace. So 5 x mile at 5:00 would be more of a vO2 workout for you. And yes, while I know some people of your level who could hit this workout with a 60 second rest, I don't recommend it. 5 x mile with 3 minutes rest accomplishes pretty much the same thing without delivering the same beating. I have given up to 8 minutes rest in mile repeats at 3k race pace with good results but find the workouts take too long. 3-5 minutes seems to be the best. Thousands at 3k-5k pace can be done with 60-90 seconds so long as the volume doesn't climb too high. For anything more than 6, I'd take 2-3 minutes. Once again, I have done 6 x 1k with 5 minutes recovery with great results, but like slightly shorter.
-
sisyphus wrote:
I thought I had mentioned that this was based on the workout as "an indicator". My bad if I didn't make that clear. Indicators need to have very short rest which is fast enough to keep lactate and heart rate up. Actual workouts done week in, week, out, don't have to be like this, and indeed, can be done at a higher quality if longer rests are taken. Keep in mind we are talking 10k pace here. VO2 pace is faster than 5k pace. So 5 x mile at 5:00 would be more of a vO2 workout for you. And yes, while I know some people of your level who could hit this workout with a 60 second rest, I don't recommend it. 5 x mile with 3 minutes rest accomplishes pretty much the same thing without delivering the same beating. I have given up to 8 minutes rest in mile repeats at 3k race pace with good results but find the workouts take too long. 3-5 minutes seems to be the best. Thousands at 3k-5k pace can be done with 60-90 seconds so long as the volume doesn't climb too high. For anything more than 6, I'd take 2-3 minutes. Once again, I have done 6 x 1k with 5 minutes recovery with great results, but like slightly shorter.
Actually my bad,re-reading your earlier post, you did indicate that it was more of a race simulation than a workout (so not better, just different). I guess I am a little fuzzy on what a VO2 max workout is, since I thought my 8 x 1k (90 secs. rest @ 5-10k pace) fit the criteria. Do you think that the workout isn't as effective as it could be then? Perhaps I should have gone 8 X 1k @ 3:05-10 with longer rests (2-3 mins. rest)? Thanks for your responses by the way! -
Personally, I'm kind of old school where if you get a hard workout in, it was good. From a technical point of view, the VO2 people will usually say a VO2 workout should be between 3k and 5k race pace. As I said earlier, I'll give workouts with long rest or short rest, fast jog recovery or standing recovery. The difference being the longer the recovery, the faster we run. I was just telling a fellow coach I'd go an entire season with the only quality I gave being the Oregon Drill and still think we'd have a good season. I think your 8x1k was great workout; while it didn't get you to Vo2 max, it's still going to make you faster. That's the most important thing. The Daniels running formula is a great book. Before it came out though, lots of great runners just went out and ran by feel. Look at Greg Meyer or Steve Scott's logs. (you can google them) There's no way to classify them to any system but they produced two of the best consistent performers the US has ever had. My biggest thing is not to try to read too much into workouts. They are the means, not the ends.
-
I think you need to develop your speed and speed endurance first. When I was 33 years old, I ran a (30:30)10k, but it was backed up by leg speed. On the track I ran a (3:46) 1500 and a (1:49.1) 800 that year. The key to running fast from 30 to 35 years old is to have a Sub Master training program. Not a program form your twentys. Your body will not respond to those workouts the same. You are a Sub Master runner, so train like one.
-
As others have said, probably not.
I recently ran 33:30. It was a pretty hilly course, a minute slow according to a calculator I use.
5*2000 with 90 seconds rest with about a 6:40-6:45 average.
5*1000 with 81 seconds rest in 3:09 (I did a 4:30 cycle)
3*1 mile in 5 flat with 5 mins rest
8*600 in 1:48 with 1 min rest
I also did about 90 miles a week and these workouts were all done by myself in the dark at a high school.
I think you are pretty close though. -
You just answered your own question! If you think you can only handle 3:23's (33:50 10k pace)with a short 50 second 200 meter rest, then how on earth would you think you could run sub 33? Based off this comment I would think a sub 34 would be a stretch!
-
daniels follower wrote:
You just answered your own question! If you think you can only handle 3:23's (33:50 10k pace)with a short 50 second 200 meter rest, then how on earth would you think you could run sub 33? Based off this comment I would think a sub 34 would be a stretch!
Itend to run a lot faster in races. I find it very difficult to run workouts at my 5k pace. That being said, I do realize now that a sub 33 is pretty far fetched at the moment. Maybe I should have said 3:20's :) -
sisyphus wrote:
Personally, I'm kind of old school where if you get a hard workout in, it was good. From a technical point of view, the VO2 people will usually say a VO2 workout should be between 3k and 5k race pace. As I said earlier, I'll give workouts with long rest or short rest, fast jog recovery or standing recovery. The difference being the longer the recovery, the faster we run. I was just telling a fellow coach I'd go an entire season with the only quality I gave being the Oregon Drill and still think we'd have a good season. I think your 8x1k was great workout; while it didn't get you to Vo2 max, it's still going to make you faster. That's the most important thing. The Daniels running formula is a great book. Before it came out though, lots of great runners just went out and ran by feel. Look at Greg Meyer or Steve Scott's logs. (you can google them) There's no way to classify them to any system but they produced two of the best consistent performers the US has ever had. My biggest thing is not to try to read too much into workouts. They are the means, not the ends.
I think part of my confusion comes from the fact that part of the reading I have done on 5k/10k training advocates a lot of race pace type of work in the 4-6 weeks prior to one's goal race. The other part espouses a focus on VO2 max workouts in the same 4-6 week buildup to your key race. I always thought they were one and the same - and so focused my 1000m repeats at my 10k pace. Now Im being told it isn't a "true" VO2 max workout as it doesn't fall within the 3-5k range. So I suppose I need to decide to focus on longer workouts/shorter rests at 10k pace.....or do shorter/more intense work at 3k-5k pace......or maybe Im overthinking things? -
jrm wrote:
As others have said, probably not.
I recently ran 33:30. It was a pretty hilly course, a minute slow according to a calculator I use.
5*2000 with 90 seconds rest with about a 6:40-6:45 average.
5*1000 with 81 seconds rest in 3:09 (I did a 4:30 cycle)
3*1 mile in 5 flat with 5 mins rest
8*600 in 1:48 with 1 min rest
I also did about 90 miles a week and these workouts were all done by myself in the dark at a high school.
I think you are pretty close though.
Thanks for sharing some workouts!.....I would think we are very close in ability based on those times...so hopefully if you did 33:30 on a challenging course I can do it on what seems to be a relatively flat course. -
HotPanOliveOil wrote:
Im trying to figure out what kind of pace to aim for in an upcoming road 10k. I did the following workout today:
8 X 1k (road) - 1:30 jog recoveries
There is not enough information to there to get any kind of relation with a time for a race.
#1- Are the 1k's accurate;
#2- Does the overall incline come out to be level;
#3- Most importantly, how fast are the jogs?
If you are jogging 200's then that's quite a moderate easy jog. If you're jogging less than 200 then that's quite a long recovery. If you're jogging 300 meters then I'd say you're definitely ready to break 33 for a 10k. -
I vote overthinking. If you're training hard, but smart, without overworking, you're like 90% of the way there. Just a thought, in deciding between tempo, 10k pace and vo2, why not hit the trifecta in one workout. An example might be 2 mile at tempo pace (roughly 90% 5k), 60 seconds rest, then 2x mile at 10k, 60 seconds rest, then 4x1k at vo2 with 2-3 minutes. Play with it, have some fun. I wouldn't do every workout like this, but it's a nice way to bounce between systems and mix it up, especially as you focus on a big race.
-
sisyphus wrote:
I vote overthinking. If you're training hard, but smart, without overworking, you're like 90% of the way there. Just a thought, in deciding between tempo, 10k pace and vo2, why not hit the trifecta in one workout. An example might be 2 mile at tempo pace (roughly 90% 5k), 60 seconds rest, then 2x mile at 10k, 60 seconds rest, then 4x1k at vo2 with 2-3 minutes. Play with it, have some fun. I wouldn't do every workout like this, but it's a nice way to bounce between systems and mix it up, especially as you focus on a big race.
Thanks, I like this idea. It works well since I have a 5k/10k/Half Marathon on my schedule next month. That being said, the 10k is the one I want to put most of my focus upon. Mixing tempo days with VO2 max/10k pace - never tried it but Ill give it a go next week. -
J.R. wrote:
[quote]HotPanOliveOil wrote:
There is not enough information to there to get any kind of relation with a time for a race.
#1- Are the 1k's accurate;
#2- Does the overall incline come out to be level;
#3- Most importantly, how fast are the jogs?
If you are jogging 200's then that's quite a moderate easy jog. If you're jogging less than 200 then that's quite a long recovery. If you're jogging 300 meters then I'd say you're definitely ready to break 33 for a 10k.
#1 - The 1k's were measured using my Garmin....I find Im usually a few secs. faster per km on a track.
#2 - I would say the overall incline is close to being level
#3 - The jogs are very slow (I would say first 30 secs. almost walking, then next min. a slow jog) - definitely not floating through the recoveries -
daniels follower wrote:
You just answered your own question! If you think you can only handle 3:23's (33:50 10k pace)with a short 50 second 200 meter rest, then how on earth would you think you could run sub 33? Based off this comment I would think a sub 34 would be a stretch!
So if I could only do 400s in 75-76 with a "short, 50 second 200 meter recovery", no way could I race a 5k at that pace, right? -
edumacator wrote:
So if I could only do 400s in 75-76 with a "short, 50 second 200 meter recovery", no way could I race a 5k at that pace, right?
I'm not sure if I understand this question as there is no volume for the 400s but 11x400 @ 72-74 (200 in 50)is a pretty standard workout for my 16 flat type runners. If you couldn't do 11 in 75-76, I wouldn't plan on coming anywhere near that in a race. 5x800 @ 2:30-2:32 (200 in 50) is usually my test effort for a sub 16; the earlier workout is a stepping stone to get to this one. -
How fast have you run this year and how old are you?
-
Wer&* wrote:
How fast have you run this year and how old are you?
I am 33 and have been injured most of the year (except past 3 mos. have been solid). I did a Half marathon in 75:05 recently (3 weeks ago). Since then I have begun doing 5k/10k type workouts (e.g. 5 X mile, 8 X 1k, etc.). Last Spring I ran 34:08. but have been having much better workouts this cycle and have had a bigger/better buildup as well
