Mr. Renato Canova can you explain the reason of mixed intervals

Good question, i would be glad to know the effects of such training in greater detail...

Renato was talking about increasing final kick with such training... as long interval drives you to high lactat saturated environment, and you have to push on short interval...

Anyway, it would be great if Renato could explain it again...

The final kick is not connected with the max speed of the athlete (also because everybody can arrive in the last lap with the leader in a race of 5000 or 10000m, or in the last 300m in a race of 1500m, is part of the same group as value), but with his ability in recruiting the most part of fibres (also FT, Fast Twich Fibres) when there is in his muscles a high accumulation of lactate.

In order to train the muscle fibres to be recruited in an ambience with high level of lactic saturation, we need to enhance the level of lactate BEFORE using short distances.

We can repeat this type of training modulating recovery times. For example, short recovery after a long interval (between 1'30" and 2'), and longer recovery between every couple (4' / 5'). This situation can bring the athlete in raising his An Threshold in a period of 2 months, about, if his previous aerobic training is good.

Same thing when we work for increasing the level of STRENGTH ENDURANCE, using circuits uphill. We need to carry on every exercise (may be technical or direct sprint) at max intensity, because only with the max intensity we can train the muscle fibres to be recruited.

So here's the mixed intervals workout progression that appears in this week's running times:

1) 3 sets of 2k/200 - 2k at 5k goal pace, 200 at 5k goal pace minus 20 seconds/mile - 2 min jog between intervals, 4 min jog between sets

2) 3 sets of 2k at 5k goal pace minus 10seconds/mile, 300 at 5k goal pace minus 25 seconds/mile - 2 min jog between intervals, 4 min jog between sets

3) 3 sets of 1600 at 5k minus 10 seconds/mile, 300 at at 5k goal pace minus 25 seconds/mile - 2 min jog between intervals, 4 min jog between sets

4) 3 sets of 1200 at 5k goal pace minus 15 seconds/mile, 400 at 5k goal pace minus 30 seconds/mile - 2 min jog between intervals, 4 min jog between sets

5) 3 sets of 800 at 5k goal pace minus 20seconds/mile, 400 at 5k goal pace minus 35 seconds/mile - 2 min jog between intervals, 4 min jog between sets

According to what was written here, workout 3 is easier than workout 2. Recoveries are the same, paces are the same, but the long intervals are a full lap shorter. Is this correct, or is there a misprint in here somewhere?

Workout 2) looks brutal. Even 3 x 2k at 5k pace is a pretty tough workout. Make the 2ks even faster and add in 300s, wow!

So the mixed intervals are for increasing final kick, the same as modified circuits uphill. If i understand it correct, you use mixed intervals on track when you have athlete lacking specific endurance, and you use mixed circuits uphill when you have athlete lacking strength endurance... in both examples athletes also work for increasing final kick? ...

In what situation you decide to use training like

1x2000m

5x400m

1x1600m

5x300m

1x1200m

5x200m

for example, or something like this.

The next question is connected with one of my athletes. I think he have good strength endurance as on competition the easiest part of course for him is uphill (compared to others, he always benefit when course goes uphill- cross country course)... but he have problems running strong pace for long time. He also have many problems if pace is high from the begining, he needs to drop pace a bit after few km, and becouse of that he loses the groop of runners and after when he feels ok again he is not able to catch them up.

What training you suggest to do? If i want him to be able to run strong pace for long time.

To be honest this athlete can do it , he just does not want to run hard , he shows strength on hills he is capable just not motivated , do just enough and when enough gets hard he does not want to do more.

yeah, workout #2 is loltastic... i don't bekele could even run one single 2k at 5k pace-10 seconds/mile... that would be about 4:50 for 2k-- el g has the world record at 4:44, i think...

I don't agree that speed has nothing to do with the kick. It doesn't have everything to do with it, but has a significant effect.

Certainly, lactic acid tolerance matters, as does aerobic ability (general term) , strength, elasticity, and AT.

All these things will help a runner get to the point where the kick starts in a better position to kick. Speed reserve is extremely important for all distances. Everything else being the same (which of course, is never the case), he or she who has the most speed will win.

Speed also helps endurance, as the athlete with better speed (everything else being the same) will use less energy at a given pace.

There are different possible reasons. But my first hunch is that his leg speed is poor. Running fast is not the same as running fast uphill. It's the difference between strength and coordination.

But, if his leg speed is poor, that mean's he'll be least efficient on flat, fast courses, where the average pace will be faster. Hills slow the pace down. If it's slowing the pace down to a pace his legs are more comfortable with, it will benefit him. If he's also strong, it will benefit him more. Either way, speed work would help.

workout #2 wrote:

yeah, workout #2 is loltastic... i don't bekele could even run one single 2k at 5k pace-10 seconds/mile... that would be about 4:50 for 2k-- el g has the world record at 4:44, i think...

I doubt one should take the world record pace nowadays as the basis for these calculations.

But I don't think that this is what Bekele can run nowadays.

say, we calculate for a 13 flat 5k. That is about 4:12 or 252 seconds per mile. multily that by 1.25, which would give you 315 seconds for 2011 meters or about 313 for 2000. That is 5:13. Deducting Renatos 12 seconds (10 per mile) would give you a 5:02 for 2k.

If you went down to 12:45 for 5k it would still be 5:06 minus 12 seconds coming down tto a 4:54.

10 seconds off WR pace.

Taking 12:37 would give you 5:03 minus 12 seconds, or basically your 4:50 per mile.

6 seconds off WR pace

That's a brutal workout and I am not sure that anybody can complete that. Anybody else got some insght? Did I maybe misunderstand something?

this does seem a bit crazy...

if you read the article steve magness said to base it off of your goal 5k pace, than subtract those respective seconds off for each workout.

maybe if you do this workout, it will prep you up for the race because the race will feel so easy after this workout.

What I don't get about the pace calculations is that they don't affect all runners equally. A 25 minute 5k runner running 5k pace minus 10 seconds is only running marginally faster, while a 13:00 5k runner is running significantly faster. The question I have is, what is the target audience for this article - I always looked at RT as geared toward teh more competitive runner, but that may not be the case here.

I got alerted of this by email, so I figured since I wrote it I'd respond.

Don't go by the paces. They are just generalized guidelines for runners much slower than those on letsrun. :)

I also had a typo in there (because we originally had it exact paces for a X 5k runner, but then changed it and I missed it when I changed it...The 2nd workout should be 5k-5sec/mi not 10. My mistake guys!)

The general idea of that one particular workout is get slightly faster on the long and short, while decreasing the length of the long segment and increasing the distance of the short.

Anyways, don't get caught up in the minutia. The basic idea should be to start a little slower than 5k goal pace and progress down to where the 800 is a little faster than 3k goal pace. On the other side start out around 3k pace and work down to a pace a little bit faster than mile pace...

It's also important to remember that this is just one example for a specific reason. You can use blends for various other reasons and the pacing/length of reps/rest will vary depend on the goal.

It's not about the workout, it's about what is trying to be accomplished in the workout...You're only limited by your imagination.

If you want to see how blend workouts fit into the training program, look at the workouts of my HS guys here during track. You'll see plenty of blend workouts and hopefully realize what they are doing and why they are there:

http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AVvfZ7tD21qOZGR4a3g3NmpfMTlmamJra2Jzdg&hl=en

Okay, back to never going on letsrun again...

[quote]Renato Canova wrote:

For example, short recovery after a long interval (between 1'30" and 2'), and longer recovery between every couple (4' / 5'). This situation can bring the athlete in raising his An Threshold in a period of 2 months, about, if his previous aerobic training is good.

quote]

Because this makes sense for even non-elite runners, what are the mmol values you are looking to obtain from the athlete to flood the muscle with lactate for the shorter (fast twitch) part of the mixed interval?

Is there a good way to guess this without a lactate meter?

In other words, is there a rough amount of time (in very broad parameters) that produces enough lactate to make this an effective workout?

To ask which level of lactate we can reach (so, you ask for a NUMBER) is like asking how many HP you need in a car for increasing its speed. This doesn't have sense.

If you have a car 1000 of cilindrate, having 70 HP, is good to reach 90 HP. If you have a Formula One, having 900 HP, they try to enhance the power to 910.

This is a big mistake of these articles, looking for a generalization of the human machine.

Never an amateur can imitate the program of top runners, for the following reasons :

a) He as of sure less talent

b) Consequentely, he cant reach the same results, and for that reason he has less training

c) Talent is connected with morphology and physiology. About physiology (something we cant see), depends on the capacity to reach a high level of lactate, and on the ability in removing quickly the lactate from the muscle fibres.

You can avoid in training some basic mistake (for example, to do every day the same thing), but the answer of your body to the proposals is limited, compared with the answer of a top runner.

In any case, the secret is to use different stimula, alternating them in order to have the effects of supercompensation.

Renato Canova wrote:

Never an amateur can imitate the program of top runners, for the following reasons :

a) He as of sure less talent

b) Consequentely, he cant reach the same results, and for that reason he has less training

c) Talent is connected with morphology and physiology. About physiology (something we cant see), depends on the capacity to reach a high level of lactate, and on the ability in removing quickly the lactate from the muscle fibres.

You can avoid in training some basic mistake (for example, to do every day the same thing), but the answer of your body to the proposals is limited, compared with the answer of a top runner.

Renato, what do you feel are the physical factors of talent?

Especially what are the physical differences of talent between world class runners, and runners who are good but not quite at the national class?

Luka Ljubic77 wrote:

On Message from mzungo, you posted something about Mo Farah, and you said : He maintained the workouts used before, adding something new, for me very significative :

a) short sprint uphill -

b) long and fast run (the global increase in volume was about 20%) -

c) mixed intervals on track (for example, sets of (2000 + 300) + (1600 + 300) + (1200 + 300) + (800 + 300) + (400 + 300), with 2' recovery between tests inside the same set, and 5' between sets, at pace in altitude of 5'25" - 4'12" -3'06" - 1'58" - 54", with all the 300m between 40" and 41")

That explains his kicking ability!

Mr. Canova,

thanks for sharing your knowledge, very interesting

Besides the use of different stimula, can you give some training advice for amateur, not talented runners ?