Do any of you use this in your training? I haven't run it since college am thinking about running one tomorrow. I need to figure out what splits are appropriate.
Fast = 5K pace?
Slow = Tempo pace?
Do any of you use this in your training? I haven't run it since college am thinking about running one tomorrow. I need to figure out what splits are appropriate.
Fast = 5K pace?
Slow = Tempo pace?
whats the 30/40?
You need to elaborate.
Mo Money! wrote:
Do any of you use this in your training? I haven't run it since college am thinking about running one tomorrow. I need to figure out what splits are appropriate.
Fast = 5K pace?
Slow = Tempo pace?
Well, if you truly want to mirror the Ducks' intensity in this drill, I'd say you alternate mile race pace, on the fast segments, and roughly half-marathon race pace on the slower segments.
It's slightly slower than mile pace and slower than marathon pace for the second part (these guys could jog 5:20 mile pace) i would say add 5-10 seconds to marathon pace.
shrtsrth wrote:
Mo Money! wrote:Do any of you use this in your training? I haven't run it since college am thinking about running one tomorrow. I need to figure out what splits are appropriate.
Fast = 5K pace?
Slow = Tempo pace?
Well, if you truly want to mirror the Ducks' intensity in this drill, I'd say you alternate mile race pace, on the fast segments, and roughly half-marathon race pace on the slower segments.
ccrunner609 wrote:
whats the 30/40?
You need to elaborate.
a 200m at 30s followed imediately (no rest) by a 200m at 40s. Repeat (with no rest) until you decide to stop.
It turns out to be a 4:40 mile, 9:20 2 mile, etc.
To the op... you are asking what pace you should run for this workout? How about 30s/40s like it's set up to be run as? If you want to modify it, I'd shoot for the 30s to be at your mile pace and the 40s to be at marathon pace plus 15 seconds (per mile or plus 4 seconds per quarter/2 seconds per 200). Start with that and adjust accordingly.
I ran this workout 2 track seasons ago. We did it under the concept of mile pace for 200 and then 10ish seconds slower for the 2nd 200. We went on for 3 miles
Worked out pretty well. I thought I got a good workout of it
I do this workout every other week for a 1600m or 2000m with some 400s afterward. Great workout if it's done correctly. When I get the most out of it, I ran 4:40 for the first 1600 then finish 2000m in 5:48 (harder last 200 in 28). Some people end up going out in 28 then on the "easy" 200 ran a 34-35 and basically just end up slowing down of the faster 200s. I view this as a great session to work out changing gears for a kick on a more manageable level.
Correct pace: take your 10k time in minutes and multiply with 1,1. Those are your fast 200s (in seconds). Slow 200s: 10 s slower.
Example: if you run 10k in 30 minutes it should be 33/43.
I'm curious. For those of you who have done this workout, what precisely is the goal? Obviously it is a workout. But it seems to me it can be used to force a runner to be aware of the speed he is at and how to get to the speed he wants and maintain it.
Or does a runner just get a command of that when he does all the other routine workouts?
The point of the 30/40 workout is to do the 200s in 30 and 40, and do as many as you can. If you're not as fit as Rupp or Prefontaine or whoever, don't do as many.
If you adjust the times to some other slower pace, you're not doing the 30/40 workout -- you're doing a normal interval workout. Calling it 30/40 when you're running 38/50 or whatever is every bit as lame as saying "I ran a 10 mile marathon."
well. wrote:
Correct pace: take your 10k time in minutes and multiply with 1,1. Those are your fast 200s (in seconds). Slow 200s: 10 s slower.
Example: if you run 10k in 30 minutes it should be 33/43.
huh?
No, the point of the workout is to elicit a physiological response. If you are not a sub 14 5k runner, 30/40 would not elicit the same response and thus only then are you changing the workout. The OP called this the Oregon drill and only "aka" 30/40 for clarification as to which Oregon Drill. A five minute miler would be doing the same physiological workout by running 38/50 whereas they would probably only be able to do one or two 30/40s which would be an entirely different workout.
Heard through the grapevine wrote:
The point of the 30/40 workout is to do the 200s in 30 and 40, and do as many as you can. If you're not as fit as Rupp or Prefontaine or whoever, don't do as many.
If you adjust the times to some other slower pace, you're not doing the 30/40 workout -- you're doing a normal interval workout. Calling it 30/40 when you're running 38/50 or whatever is every bit as lame as saying "I ran a 10 mile marathon."
Title IX gets it. It is mile pace for the fast portion (30sec = ~4min mile pace). The "recovery" is a float at 75% (40sec = ~5.20/mile), which a slow Tempo-Marathon pace for a miler. The Oregon tradition was developing sub-4minute milers, and so this is a pace/tempo type session. Not that others (Pre/Rupp, etc.) can't also do this workout, and have proven to be able to go for miles (3-5 miles) at this pace. It is also a surging type session, where getting back to RP after less than full (in fact continuous running) recovery is difficult each additional set of 400m you complete. Another way of looking at it is accelerator on/accelerator off, in a continuous manner.
A 5minute miler (37.5/200) has NO business even trying to run a 30/40. As stated, they should be trying to run 37-38/50.