On a scale of 1 to 10 with 10 being race pace effort, let's say I run my tempo runs at a 9 instead of a what some would say "comfortably hard" (maybe an 8). What are the consequences?
On a scale of 1 to 10 with 10 being race pace effort, let's say I run my tempo runs at a 9 instead of a what some would say "comfortably hard" (maybe an 8). What are the consequences?
Tempo runs are at 100% race pace effort. Just not for a full race distance.
The potential impact is that too much effort will leave an athlete flat for other workouts. However some people are better off putting more actual effort in tempo/TT type runs and less into actual workouts comprising repeats of some sort.
SMJO wrote:
Tempo runs are at 100% race pace effort. Just not for a full race distance.
The potential impact is that too much effort will leave an athlete flat for other workouts. However some people are better off putting more actual effort in tempo/TT type runs and less into actual workouts comprising repeats of some sort.
"100% race pace effort."
Yeah, if the race is an hour long.
Which is what I alluded to.
SMJO wrote:
Tempo runs are at 100% race pace effort. Just not for a full race distance.
Nice definition. My easy runs are probably race pace for some obscure long distance too. My cooldowns are sub race pace if the race we're referencing is the 24 hour run.
Let's assume he's a 5k guy doing 25 minute tempos at race pace plus 15 seconds. Is that bad and, if so, why?
so, if I'm training for a 1/2 half marathon, what's the correct pace..1/2 half marathon effort or goal pace effort? I do 2 tempo runs a week and sometimes split them up into 2 long intervals if that makes a difference.
vdot1 wrote:
so, if I'm training for a 1/2 half marathon, what's the correct pace..1/2 half marathon effort or goal pace effort? I do 2 tempo runs a week and sometimes split them up into 2 long intervals if that makes a difference.
You're not asking the right question; you should be asking what's the correct effort.
vdot1 wrote:
so, if I'm training for a 1/2 half marathon, what's the correct pace..1/2 half marathon effort or goal pace effort? I do 2 tempo runs a week and sometimes split them up into 2 long intervals if that makes a difference.
I've never heard of the 1/2 half marathon. 6.55 miles? Weird. Why not just call it a 1/4 marathon?
Hard tempo runs have been my ticket to race pr's. Or, at least, pr's in workouts if I end up being too tired by race day to run as well. Seriously, though, you can make a lot of improvements by running tempos hard and making them faster each week or two. I've dropped 47 seconds and another 35 seconds in my last two 4M tempos and if I can drop another 75 seconds (I got to 20:50 about fifteen months ago, which is a bit slower than my 5k pr pace and considerably faster than my 5M, 10k, and 1/2 Marathon pr paces), I'll be ready to break all those pr's.
let's say we're of identical 5K ability (15:30ish or something).
Monday
you: 4mi tempo @ 5:00-5:05 pace. you went close to balls out.
me: 4mi tempo @ 5:15-5:20 pace. hard but controlled.
Wednesday
you: legs are still shot from Monday hammerfest. thus you wait until tmr to do
a workout.
me: i'm recovered & doing another 4mi tempo @ 5:15-5:20 pace. i've done 8 miles of quality running in 3 days, you've done 4.
extend over an entire season, i get more fit than you as i am able to do more quality running within that timeframe.
if you're going to REALLY hammer workouts, you might as well just race & have a result to show for it.
you might as well race wrote:
let's say we're of identical 5K ability (15:30ish or something).
Monday
you: 4mi tempo @ 5:00-5:05 pace. you went close to balls out.
me: 4mi tempo @ 5:15-5:20 pace. hard but controlled.
Wednesday
you: legs are still shot from Monday hammerfest. thus you wait until tmr to do
a workout.
me: i'm recovered & doing another 4mi tempo @ 5:15-5:20 pace. i've done 8 miles of quality running in 3 days, you've done 4.
extend over an entire season, i get more fit than you as i am able to do more quality running within that timeframe.
if you're going to REALLY hammer workouts, you might as well just race & have a result to show for it.
ok, that makes sense. thanks.
you might as well race wrote:
let's say we're of identical 5K ability (15:30ish or something).
Monday
you: 4mi tempo @ 5:00-5:05 pace. you went close to balls out.
me: 4mi tempo @ 5:15-5:20 pace. hard but controlled.
Wednesday
you: legs are still shot from Monday hammerfest. thus you wait until tmr to do
a workout.
me: i'm recovered & doing another 4mi tempo @ 5:15-5:20 pace. i've done 8 miles of quality running in 3 days, you've done 4.
extend over an entire season, i get more fit than you as i am able to do more quality running within that timeframe.
if you're going to REALLY hammer workouts, you might as well just race & have a result to show for it.
That's too simplistic. Lots of variables with recovery - I've known guys who could do a balls out tempo Monday and come back for hard intervals Wednesday then PR on Saturday. Some people might also do better with one really hard workout and a medium one than with two fair workouts.
Tempo is a vague, useless concept. There are date and goal pace. Once base has been accomplished, some running should be done at date and some at faster than goal. Eventually, date and goal become identical. Drawing up programs, with false precision, neglects the variations in people's responses to training. There is simply no physiological basis for preferring tempo to date, other than recovery time. But easy days should always follow hard days, esp in the pre-racing training block. Lydiard never trafficked in false precision. That people improve with tempo doesn't mean they wouldn't improve more with serious date pace efforts, mixed with faster than goal efforts.
By itself it isn't a huge issue. But if two days later you have a 15 miler planned, and your overly hard tempo prevents you from doing that well, you've cost yourself something. Also, you may benefit from doing MORE work at the SLOWER tempo run pace.
runner who professes wrote:
Tempo is a vague, useless concept. There are date and goal pace. Once base has been accomplished, some running should be done at date and some at faster than goal. Eventually, date and goal become identical. Drawing up programs, with false precision, neglects the variations in people's responses to training. There is simply no physiological basis for preferring tempo to date, other than recovery time. But easy days should always follow hard days, esp in the pre-racing training block. Lydiard never trafficked in false precision. That people improve with tempo doesn't mean they wouldn't improve more with serious date pace efforts, mixed with faster than goal efforts.
can you clarify by what you mean by date pace? Are you talking about current fitness to date?
Training is all about balancing training benefit with wear on the body. The point of the tempo run is that it gives you some decent aerobic stimulus without much wear. A decently fit runner should be able to consistently complete a hard workout the day after a tempo with no problem.
When you push the pace on a tempo, you're increasing the training benefit slightly, but you're increasing the stress on your body significantly. You're running hard enough to break your body down, but you still probably aren't running hard enough to get the full benefit associated with running a true hard workout.
You're better off to decide what you want. Either run a tempo or do a hard workout. Hanging out somewhere in between doesn't make sense.
decide what you want wrote:
Training is all about balancing training benefit with wear on the body. The point of the tempo run is that it gives you some decent aerobic stimulus without much wear. A decently fit runner should be able to consistently complete a hard workout the day after a tempo with no problem.
When you push the pace on a tempo, you're increasing the training benefit slightly, but you're increasing the stress on your body significantly. You're running hard enough to break your body down, but you still probably aren't running hard enough to get the full benefit associated with running a true hard workout.
You're better off to decide what you want. Either run a tempo or do a hard workout. Hanging out somewhere in between doesn't make sense.
I'd draw the analogy that enduring physical stress is like spending money. You have a limited budget to work with. You only have so much money to spend (i.e. you can only take a certain amount of physical stress). Your goal is to allocate training so that you get the most benefit possible while staying within your budget.
Under this analogy, hammering a tempo run is like paying 50% more for a product that is only 10% better.
you might as well race wrote:
let's say we're of identical 5K ability (15:30ish or something).
Monday
you: 4mi tempo @ 5:00-5:05 pace. you went close to balls out.
My only problem with this is that even a "balls out" tempo (for me at least) does not even sniff my race pace. If I am within 30 seconds per mile of my race pace, I am usually @ what feels like 90% + effort and pretty spent for at least a day after. Nonetheless, I feel like I need to run this hard relative to my RP to get in a decent workout. Running a solo hard sustained run in many ways much tougher for me than a race, although it's at a significantly slower pace.
I'd also argue there is a certain physical benefit to the tempo in that done right it can help you to learn to run smooth and feel strong at quick paces, rather than always being tense and hammering.
If you blast every tempo you don't necessarily get that.