Culpepper's take on easy pace in "Run Like a Champion"

rojo wrote:

Alan's take wrote:

He really seems to stress that runners tend to run too slow on their easy days. He gives the exampe of how his wife improved significantly when she forcibly raised her easy pace from 7:30s to 6:30s. I find that it's better to let your body dictate.Thoughts?

When I moved to flagstaff in early 2000 - just months before the birth of LetsRun.com to train with Weldon for the 2000 Trials, I couldn't believe how slow he was running.

I had just run a marathon (well I guess he had as well as he paced me for the whole thing) but when I started back up, I was like "this pace is a joke. He's trying to make the Olympics. I can't even make the Trials and he's running this slow"

I called up John Kellogg and said, "Do you want to me secretely push the pace on our easy days like at least 15 seconds a mile, he won't know I'm doing it?"

John said, "We'll worry about the easy day pace last. It's the least important thing."

We never did increase it. That's the he went from 29:49 in 10k to

28:27.

In college he ran his easy days at 6:30 pace and couldn't break 30. As a pro, he ran way more, lived at altitude and ran way slower (definitely over 7) and nearly broke 28:00.

Now. Saying that it's important to realize he was RUNNING A LOT.

Shayne Culpepper was really a 1500-3k runner who moved up to the 5k. I doubt most female runners in that category are running much.

It's the principal that applies.

You want to generally be adding a stimulus each year. For most people, it's mileage. When you are in HS and in college, it's generally easy to add 10 mpw each year. 30 as a frosh, 40 as soph, etc. Only as a pro or if you are a mid-d guy/gal are you often maxed out on that front.

If you aren't running very much, you should run it faster. When I was at Cornell and some freshmen would say to me, "Why don't we run 615 pace on our easy days. That's what I did in HS." I'd reply. "You were running only 40 mpwl. You'd better run it fast."

So there you have it. If you are running a lot or increasing your mileage, i wouldn't worry about it. You likely won't be able to handle a faster pace. If you aren't running a lot or are more of a 5k person - maybe it makes morse sense (i hated the intenstiy of the 5k - such a grind - maybe grinding out easy days is equivalent?).

That being said, when Nick WIllis ran with my Cornell boys one day he said to me as we were jogging at like 7:30 pace, "Do you guys always run this pace." I thought he was complaining it was so slow. I was about to start making some excuse about how we only had one meet left, etc as it was very slow that day and late in the season but before he could he added, "Thank goodness. Finally a team I can run with. I can't ever run with the Michigan guys - they just go way too fast (this was when he was a pro)."

I replied, "Don't they know you are an Olymipan? Why wouldn't they jsut slow down and run your pace?" He just sort of smiled.

So it depends on a lot of factors. But I wouldn't change what you are doing if you are a long distance male based on what some mid-d female did.

While the first person I ever coached to USAs was a woman, I haven't coached a lot of them. I do think they can run faster and probably should as scientifically according to John Kellogg they dont' benefit from high mileage as much as a man.

Hard to Tell wrote:

Best post of the thread.

rojo wrote:

Finally a team I can run with. I can't ever run with the Michigan guys - they just go way too fast (this was when he was a pro)."

I replied, "Don't they know you are an Olympian? Why wouldn't they just slow down and run your pace?" He just sort of smiled.

It's a little surprising and disappointing that in 2015 such seemingly fundamental questions are still debated. Or maybe, since we don't (justifiably) put a whole lot of money into human physiology research, it isn't. But is there enough science that we shouldn't have to fall back on anecdotes? Don' know. And is the "range of ideal" really all that wide for members of the same species? Is it really quite variable, or are folks towards one end of the spectrum in fact going about it non-optimally?

Yeah, I know, I'm not helping. But what I DO think that I know is in a team situation with a wide variety of talent there are probably a LOT of people NOT training at an appropriate pace (and/or volume). I think that I was one of them once upon a time. Rojo's question to Willis was PERFECT! And it's comical. And I'm awfully confident that there are bunch of guys on the UM team - and so many others - running themselves into the ground.

Hard to Tell wrote:

rojo wrote:

Finally a team I can run with. I can't ever run with the Michigan guys - they just go way too fast (this was when he was a pro)."

I replied, "Don't they know you are an Olympian? Why wouldn't they just slow down and run your pace?" He just sort of smiled.

It's a little surprising and disappointing that in 2015 such seemingly fundamental questions are still debated. Or maybe, since we don't (justifiably) put a whole lot of money into human physiology research, it isn't. But is there enough science that we shouldn't have to fall back on anecdotes? Don' know. And is the "range of ideal" really all that wide for members of the same species? Is it really quite variable, or are folks towards one end of the spectrum in fact going about it non-optimally?

Yeah, I know, I'm not helping. But what I DO think that I know is in a team situation with a wide variety of talent there are probably a LOT of people NOT training at an appropriate pace (and/or volume). I think that I was one of them once upon a time. Rojo's question to Willis was PERFECT! And it's comical. And I'm awfully confident that there are bunch of guys on the UM team - and so many others - running themselves into the ground.

rojo wrote:

Alan's take wrote:

He really seems to stress that runners tend to run too slow on their easy days. He gives the exampe of how his wife improved significantly when she forcibly raised her easy pace from 7:30s to 6:30s. I find that it's better to let your body dictate.Thoughts?

When I moved to flagstaff in early 2000 - just months before the birth of LetsRun.com to train with Weldon for the 2000 Trials, I couldn't believe how slow he was running.

I had just run a marathon (well I guess he had as well as he paced me for the whole thing) but when I started back up, I was like "this pace is a joke. He's trying to make the Olympics. I can't even make the Trials and he's running this slow"

I called up John Kellogg and said, "Do you want to me secretely push the pace on our easy days like at least 15 seconds a mile, he won't know I'm doing it?"

John said, "We'll worry about the easy day pace last. It's the least important thing."

We never did increase it. That's the he went from 29:49 in 10k to

28:27.

In college he ran his easy days at 6:30 pace and couldn't break 30. As a pro, he ran way more, lived at altitude and ran way slower (definitely over 7) and nearly broke 28:00.

Now. Saying that it's important to realize he was RUNNING A LOT.

Shayne Culpepper was really a 1500-3k runner who moved up to the 5k. I doubt most female runners in that category are running much.

It's the principal that applies.

You want to generally be adding a stimulus each year. For most people, it's mileage. When you are in HS and in college, it's generally easy to add 10 mpw each year. 30 as a frosh, 40 as soph, etc. Only as a pro or if you are a mid-d guy/gal are you often maxed out on that front.

If you aren't running very much, you should run it faster. When I was at Cornell and some freshmen would say to me, "Why don't we run 615 pace on our easy days. That's what I did in HS." I'd reply. "You were running only 40 mpwl. You'd better run it fast."

So there you have it. If you are running a lot or increasing your mileage, i wouldn't worry about it. You likely won't be able to handle a faster pace. If you aren't running a lot or are more of a 5k person - maybe it makes morse sense (i hated the intenstiy of the 5k - such a grind - maybe grinding out easy days is equivalent?).

That being said, when Nick WIllis ran with my Cornell boys one day he said to me as we were jogging at like 7:30 pace, "Do you guys always run this pace." I thought he was complaining it was so slow. I was about to start making some excuse about how we only had one meet left, etc as it was very slow that day and late in the season but before he could he added, "Thank goodness. Finally a team I can run with. I can't ever run with the Michigan guys - they just go way too fast (this was when he was a pro)."

I replied, "Don't they know you are an Olymipan? Why wouldn't they jsut slow down and run your pace?" He just sort of smiled.

So it depends on a lot of factors. But I wouldn't change what you are doing if you are a long distance male based on what some mid-d female did.

While the first person I ever coached to USAs was a woman, I haven't coached a lot of them. I do think they can run faster and probably should as scientifically according to John Kellogg they dont' benefit from high mileage as much as a man.