Quit using the word "Tempo"

Yes, sir.

I'll stop using the word "tempo" if you stop using the word "cokmpletely."

I'll stop using the word "tempo" if you stop using the word "cokmpletely."

well put.

ccrunner609 wrote:

Quit using the word "Tempo"

No

They're called "tempo" runs and not "VO2 max pace" or some such other bullshit runs for a reason. They're not about pace, they're about perceived effort.

If you're using them to describe "easy" or "all out" paces, then you're using them for the wrong purposes. Those runs would be classified under "easy" or "all out" efforts. Tempo runs are moderately fast-paced runs that usually end up being near 10k or half-marathon pace.

They should not feel like races, because there are a bunch of other factors that allow you to run faster in races (namely, rest and competition). And they should certainly not feel easy.

ccrunner609 wrote:

this term in running is cokmpletely useless. It means absolutely nothing when describing a run. when you say "Tempo run" you could be describing anything from an easy pace to a all out pace. The word needs to be used with a commonly known physiological pace or not used at all.

My suggestion is we use the correct terms to describe any type of run at any pace.

aerobic pace

lactate threshold

aerobic threashold

anaerobic threshold

VO2 max pace

VVo2 pace

all of these physiological paces can all replace a meaningless word like "tempo"

Wow, I've just seen you bitch about this on 4 threads that are all on page 1. Shut up already. The word tempo is readily understood by all, it's the pace you can run for approximately an hour, or it's 10 mile race pace, or it's HM race pace. That's your range.

"Tempo runs are moderately fast-paced runs that usually end up being near 10k or half-marathon pace."

This ends the thread. Thank you.

No one should be expected to call it some crazy scientific term. We're already perceived as nerds, let's not fuel the fire.

LOL at all of you, you just made my point by using the word tempo and by your examples made it even more of a vague term.

the definition is "the rate of a repeating event".....vague and is unassigned when used by itself. To understand the meaning or purpose of a "tempo run" you need to assign a pace or physiological pace to it.

Amended:

"Tempo runs are moderately fast-paced runs."

There is no required speed for a 'tempo run'. Also know as: run to the bar, getting after it, uptempo, hammering it, etc

The degree of difficulty and required recovery varies greatly depending upon length and speed of the "tempo run".

Alan

Tempo is a synonym for rhythm.

Some people would argue that these physiological aerobic, anaerobic, lactate thresholds, and VO2max don't exist, and ask to quit using these meaningless fictional terms.

You just can't win.

Daniels is pretty clever, coming up with E, M, T, I, and R paces. No ambiguity, just look it up.

but by not assigning an actual physiological pace, your "tempo" is vague and doesnt tell anyone what type of workout you are actually doing.

Runningart2004 wrote:

There is no required speed for a 'tempo run'. Also know as: run to the bar, getting after it, uptempo, hammering it, etc

The degree of difficulty and required recovery varies greatly depending upon length and speed of the "tempo run".

That's what I was implying with the definition used. I did not say that a tempo run MUST BE at 10k or HM pace, they just typically end up being around that pace.

Length of a run will always be a factor in the perceived effort, and a longer race will always dictate a slower pace. For example, a 4-mile run at 5:30 pace may require the same amount of perceived exertion as, say, an 8-mile run at 6:00 pace. (Again, this is just an example and the numbers are relatively arbitrary).

To the OP: Nobody cares what the definition of the word "tempo" is in other contexts. We're not using the word in contexts other than describing a run, and it's a pretty universally understood term amongst runners. Sure, we may have slightly varying definitions of it (see above response to Runningart), but almost any runner you talk to will understand the purpose and requisite intensity of a tempo run.

Daniel's "T" pace stands for threshold. For elites and sub-elites, "T" pace is approximately half marathon pace, if not a couple of seconds slower per mile. It's the pace you could sustain for 1 hour if putting forth race effort.

This is clearly defined. It's also the same thing as a tempo run as far as I'm concerned. Some people like to do their tempo runs in an accelerating fashion, and don't really achieve Daniel's "T" pace until the midpoint or end of the run.

Running is an art, not a science!

ccrunner609 wrote:

but by not assigning an actual physiological pace, your "tempo" is vague and doesnt tell anyone what type of workout you are actually doing.

As rekrunner alluded to, there is a whole bunch of scientific evidence that pretty much disproves the existence of "physiological paces."

Question: How did you determine the pace you ran in your first 5k? Did you calculate how fast you could run beforehand (doubtful, since you'd never run the distance before), or did you estimate your finish time and run by feel? Do this more often, and a "tempo" run won't be so vaguely defined for you.

Again, it's about perceived effort. An effort level of 7 or 8 (on a scale of 1-10) will vary in pace depending on a number of factors, but the amount of work you FEEL like you're doing will always be the same.

Bro,

There is no "lactate threshold."

so stop.

the body doesn't go "anaerobic" that would mean there is the absence of oxygen. oxygen is always present. try nonoxidative metabolism.

also it should be vVO2 not VVO2.

also VO2peak is more accurate than V02max.

also, what about running at a pace greater than vV02peak? you didn't mention that.

something something, glass houses.

You're an idiot.

It's an effective term. Everyone knows that it represents the fastest pace one can maintain for an hour. For most people on this board, that should be between 10 mile pace and half marathon pace. (Assuming 10 mi 60 min)

Easy.

the smartest letsrunner wrote:

You're an idiot.

It's an effective term. Everyone knows that it represents the fastest pace one can maintain for an hour. For most people on this board, that should be between 10 mile pace and half marathon pace. (Assuming 10 mi 60 min)

Easy.

No you are an idiot to think that most people on this board can run 10-13 miles in an hour. As for the term, I have never used it because it doesnt provide enough material at what pace someone is running.

Good story was last fall, Bob Schul and I were sitting around talking and he sais, "can someone tell me what the hell the word "tempo" means? Its a vague word that doesnt entail what physiological state you want to run in"

I would agree with the only American to ever win the 5000 meter gold. Also I have spent time with Jack Daniels and Jim Spivey and neither of them prescribe to using a vague term like "tempo", they like to use physiological terms that detail what pace you are running.

Pennsywania School wrote:

Daniel's "T" pace stands for threshold. For elites and sub-elites, "T" pace is approximately half marathon pace, if not a couple of seconds slower per mile. It's the pace you could sustain for 1 hour if putting forth race effort.

This is clearly defined. It's also the same thing as a tempo run as far as I'm concerned. Some people like to do their tempo runs in an accelerating fashion, and don't really achieve Daniel's "T" pace until the midpoint or end of the run.

Running is an art, not a science!

Daniels definition is too fast. If you can run tempo runs at HM pace then your HM sucks - and the reason for that is that you've been killing yourself in tempo runs.