Coach D: do you feel 400/800 runners need much distance running volume?

Steve Ovett told our coach that he should work with the boys on improving their 400m speed over the next few seasons “because unless they can run 48sec for 400m they have no future at 800m anyway”.

Should an athlete continue the aerobic route and hope their speed improves or would they be better off trying to get the 400 down before moving up in distance?

Would a Clyde Hart style plan be beneficial?

It's actually 50mi/week, just like he said.

This is quality oriented training, not quantity.

Not a performances in the top 60 all-time in

this event off high mileage.

And good luck running 1:42 without something

close to 33-34 running start 300m.

These guys are not slow.

DistanceorSprint wrote:

Steve Ovett told our coach that he should work with the boys on improving their 400m speed over the next few seasons “because unless they can run 48sec for 400m they have no future at 800m anyway”.

Should an athlete continue the aerobic route and hope their speed improves or would they be better off trying to get the 400 down before moving up in distance?

Would a Clyde Hart style plan be beneficial?

Why not work both simultaneously?

Coach X wrote:

SlowFatMaster wrote:

Do you or Big Fat Texas Runner have any information about Kipketer's training or Rudisha's training? You have stated that they trained like 800/1500 runners or with extensive distance training.

Even Juanterino ran up to 140km per week in the off season.

Crud.

Harry Carey wrote:

Training regimens for 400m/800m types are notoriously variable and contingent upon the athlete in question. This is very much a territory of training where what works for one athlete does not necessarily work for another.

The other important distinction to make, though, is what "distance running volume" is being used for: is it being used to condition the athlete for the endurance requirements of the race itself, or is it being used to condition the athlete for training sessions that are themselves geared to prepare the athlete for the aerobic/anaerobic demands of the race?

In some cases, the answer may very well be both, but it's important to keep this distinction in mind. Often, people think of all training as oriented to the demands of the race, but it's rarely so simple.

This is one of the better posts I've seen.

The best and simplest advice I've seen on here is:

"Train the athlete, not the event."

The otgher important thing about the post is training for the race, or training to train. You do need to do some of the latter.

I find with 800 runners that the only benefit of the longer run is to enable them to do the tougher fartlek, interval and vVo2max sessions they need to do for the intense fitness they need.

So if you think your athlete needs to be able to do an intense vVo2max workout that goes for 30 minutes, then they should be able to run at a steady pace for 40-50 minutes. You can't go hard-easy for 30 minutes if you can only run at a steady pace for that long. Once they have the fitness to do those intense sessions though, they don't need the longer steady run every week. There are too many important sessions for an 800 runner to fit in each week and I don't think they can afford to waste one on a long run every week all year. How much direct relevance does running for 75-90 minutes have to a 2 minute (or less) race?

"Training to train" is stupid. Training should be solely geared toward competition. Instead of running mileage to prepare for track workouts, it's safer and more effective to jump straight into track workouts, accepting that the first few sessions are going to be slow, and increasing intensity as fitness improves.

In the Clyde Hart 400 plans for early competition, he has a 1 mile wu and cd 5 days/ wk with the sessions, a timed 2 mile run on Saturday, and a fartlek type run on Sunday.

Could this work for the 800 runner if they toned down the pace on the M-F speed sessions, and upped the tempo on the aerobic days? Like trading a steady run for the Saturday run and VO2 intervals for the fartlek?

Coach X wrote:Even Juanterino ran up to 140km per week in the off season. He ran 400 and 800m - winning both in the 1976 Olympics in Montreal

nonsense

if he had run that much with essentially 44-flat speed, he'd have run 1'38 !!!

try more like 15 mpw back then

he ran 1'43.5wr off little more than 400 training

might be rcs wrote:

Shots wrote:

parrot d doesn't have any independent or original thoughts on training, all he does is blindly follow what other coaches do

Please name three coaches who express independent and original thoughts on Letsrun.

I was thinking the same thing. Coaches tend to repeat what has been successful for other coaches/athletes.

Maybe there is a good reason wrote:

I was thinking the same thing. Coaches tend to repeat what has been successful for other coaches/athletes.

No, coaches tend to misconstrue the reasons for an athlete's or other coach's apparent success. Demanding the names of three coaches who agree with me is ridiculous—name eleven professors of epistemology who agree that the agreement of three coaches is necessary to validate my training theories.

I think Juantorena added a semi-long easy run and a steady state run when he moved up to 800m. He ran 1:43.50.

Asdfghjkl wrote:

"Training to train" is stupid. Training should be solely geared toward competition. Instead of running mileage to prepare for track workouts, it's safer and more effective to jump straight into track workouts, accepting that the first few sessions are going to be slow, and increasing intensity as fitness improves.

Training to train can be stupid, but it can be smart. Depends on the circumstances.

I actually said in this case it's more about being able to do 25-30 min vVo2max or fartlek sessions than shorter track workouts. These are done in parks or on trails, not at tracks. Who would run 5 miles of vVo2max work round a track?

And I also said once you're aerobically fit enough to do these other sessions, you can drop the longer run and only do it occasionally.

Wncmtnrnr wrote:

In the Clyde Hart 400 plans for early competition, he has a 1 mile wu and cd 5 days/ wk with the sessions, a timed 2 mile run on Saturday, and a fartlek type run on Sunday.

Could this work for the 800 runner if they toned down the pace on the M-F speed sessions, and upped the tempo on the aerobic days? Like trading a steady run for the Saturday run and VO2 intervals for the fartlek?

I think a hard 3-4km run on Sat followed by hills (a good session, but not needed every week), can be followed by a hard aerobic effort on the Sunday. But it depends what you mean by fartlek. I woldn't want the hard parts to be too fast after doing that on a Saturday.

I'd prefer the Sunday session, after some decent lactic work on the Saturday, to be more like cruise intevals (1km-1200 each, short recoveries, volume depends on runner) at somewhere between theoretical 5km and 10km pace. You should be able to handle this on Sunday after recovering properly from Saturday. Sunday shouldn't be too taxing on the legs, more on the breathing. You have to work out what speed works for you to achieve this. I've found it's about half way between theoretical 5km and 10km speed, but it depends on the runner. Fast guys on lower volume can handle a decent speed because their speed reserve is good. It gives them a nice, intense aerobic workout, without having to run any further than they have to.

I can't remember what you had during the week. If you're a 400/800 guy, then I'd suggest something like this (base):

Mon strength and maybe an easy run including a short tempo at the end (not too long overall). I don't see the point of too much easy running for an 800 runner, esp a 400/800 runner. 10-15 mins of tempo (say half marathon speed) after 10-15 mins of easy running (to warm up) can give you a bit of an aerobic workout without overly taxing you, so you can back up and train hard the next day. Again, see what works for you.

Tues hard aerobic workout at about 3km speed, could maybe alternate fartlek the first week, vVo2max (more 2km speed) the 2nd week, intervals with walking recovery the 3rd week.

Wed same run as Mon

Thurs sprints and speed development. To include plyos, hills, sleds, leg speed drills etc.

Friday an easy day, swim if you want aerobic work.

Sat - depends what you want to work on, you don't need that hard 3-4km run every week. You could do a bunch of 800/1500 speed diagonals or hills here. Maybe do those three options in turn. The diagonals can build to 3 x 5 x 200 after a couple of sessions. Must be good, relaxed, controlled running. Good combination of aerobic and anaerobic.

Sun the cruise intervals

The tempo run is what's missing. I think the other stuff is more important.

Karma Police wrote:

Coach X wrote:

Even Juanterino ran up to 140km per week in the off season.

Crud.

150km per month, according to Frank Horwill.

I've seen a lot if people suggest swimming for long sprinters' aerobic work, but the common consensus seems to be it is worthless for longer distance racers (1500 and up)? Why is this? Does swimming increase capacity for buffering/tolerance of lactate?

Randy Oldman wrote:

Karma Police wrote:

Crud.

150km per month, according to Frank Horwill.

Yeah - 150km per month is a little different to 140km per week.

I hadn't seen that. I use it more as a way to get some additional aerobic benefit on an easier day without putting additional strain on the body. The water is supporting the body weight of course.

I've certainly seen swimmers do very well in XC races on little running training, even up to 15/16. It depends what sort of swimming you do I guess. You don't want to do it much, or shorter stuff, if you want to avoid adding bulk to your upper body. I do things like 10 x 100m with 30" rest. Another one I've seen is doing rep 50s on say 20" rest, but breathing every 2-4-6-8-2-4-6-8 etc strokes. Maybe that sort of thing is more intense and helps the middle distances more than the longer distances.

I'm talking about 400/800 here. You don't want to waste your effort (and wear and tear on the body) on longer slow jogging. You need speed, speed endurance and what I call intense aerobic fitness. They involve tough workouts that take some recovering from. A lot of people think most 800 runners neglect their endurance. By contrast I think most neglect their top end speed.

How could someone go about developing speed, while building a base? Hill sprints once or twice a week?