Tempo Intervals

1) Reduced overall training stress

2) Reduced injury risk

3) Longer total time spent at the particular pace

4) Less chance of overhammering

You can do more at pace with intervals vs continuous. Not to mention the obvious advantage of maintaining elevate H+ levels for a longer period of time.

Jack Daniels says:

Cruise Intervals

Plenty of scientific evidence, not to mention common sense, tells you that you can run longer at a certain pace if you take short rests than you can by running that pace nonstop, as in tempo running. This type of intermittent run/rest approach also reduces the stress level of training. No wonder the concept many years ago gave rise to interval training - probably the world's most popular form of high-level athletic training.

Now the same idea brings us a newer, more effective form of training - cruise intervals. Simply put, cruise intevals are a type of threshold-pace running in which you divide the workout into several segments that are separated by recovery periods. As a result, the lactic acid level in your blood remains quite constant, the same as in a steady tempo run. (I have actually tested this with my runners, and found it to be true even when they were running 6 miles of cruise intervals.)

A typical crusie-interval session should include a warmup, the cruise intervals and a warmdown. I generally recommend the 1-mile distance for cruise intervals but believe that any distance from 1/2 mile to 2 miles (3 minutes to 10 minutes of hard running per interval) would prove equally effective. The short rest between intervals is essential to the workout; it should last only 30 to 60 seconds.

How many cruise intervals can you do on each hard day? The general rule of thumb is that your cruise intervals should total no moare than 8 percent of your total weekly mileage. If you run 20 miles a week, do about 1 1/2 miles of cruise intervals; if you run 50 miles, do about 4 miles. Generally my athletes run just one cruise interval session per week.

Don't let a low or moderate weekly mileage total hold you back. Cruise intervals can prove particularly effective for runners in the 15- to 30- miles-per-week range. For example, a 20-mile-per-week runner might do 3 x 880 yards at threshold pace with 60-second recovery jogs between the 880s. Cruise intervals also make an excellent transition from a steady-running program to one that includes more demanding workouts.

Unless an athlete is recovering from injury or just ticking over before / immediately after a race then you're wasting your time doing intervals if you could just run the same distance without stopping!

So no 10k pace intervals of less than 10k total?

That sucks, 7x1km at 10k pace was my bread and butter earlier this year.

Coach K wrote:

You can do more at pace with intervals vs continuous. Not to mention the obvious advantage of maintaining elevate H+ levels for a longer period of time.

What?

You could do it and a session like that will tick you over but in reality you should be running 1K intervals at your 3K pace.

At 10K pace you should be doing about 18 x 1K repeats

For which distance race?

In the jack daniels 10k plan he never has anyone do more than 6x1miles as cruise intervals, and threshold is slower than 10k pace.

That's why he's a bourbon and not a coach!

Kidding aside, no one would do 18 x 1K reps ordinarily although it wouldn't be a terrible workout for a marathon.

The whole point of intervals is to get close to your threshold and doing 7 x 1K intervals at < 10K pace is simply playing at interval training. Think about it, what are you teaching your body by doing this?

Now imagine if your body is used to doing 7 x 1K at 3km pace - suddenly 10K pace becomes more comfortable and you improve. It's f'ing hard but the only way to seriously improve!

As a side note, could you imagine Mo doing 7 x 1K intervals even at his 10K pace? No chance as it would be like coasting for him and thus pointless.

I thought cruise intervals were faster than tempo intervals.

I understand completely the concept of having rest periods with the goal of increasing the speed of the efforts. I'm not asking about that.

I want to know the advantage of breaking up a tempo effort with rest when it's fairly easy to run that effort continuously. I usually use 5k + 30 seconds per mile pace.

I am pretty sure that Tempo, Threshold, and Cruise intervals are all pretty much used interchangeably by different people, they are lactate threshold intervals though.

Something like the above mentioned 7x1km cruise intervals is a decent example. Running 7km at 10k pace is pretty hard, especially if you aren't on fresh legs. Running 7x1km isn't too taxing, but you end up with the same amount of time at 10k pace.

Due to the rests, it wouldn't be exactly as good a workout as 7k without breaks, but it wouldn't be far off. The stress would be much lower though, and for people running high mileage that's important. They aren't the only workout you should do, but they do have their place.

eurunner wrote:

1) Reduced overall training stress

2) Reduced injury risk

3) Longer total time spent at the particular pace

4) Less chance of overhammering

You lose time at the threshold every time you have a recovery though as the body dips well below the line

Consider the Tempo-interval session from the perspective of an overall training plan, not purely as an isolated workout. Within the overall plan you will also want to be covering speedwork, specific race pace work, long runs/endurance, as well as general mileage and easy running. The purpose of the Tempo-interval session is to provide opportunity to train at a critical pace (for all distance events) whilst not creating so much stress that athletes compromise the other important aspects of their training schedule. As part of a long-term schedule all of these Tempo-intervals add up (and the demands of the specific Tempo-interval workout can obviously be increased as fitness increases).

If your goal race is going to be run close to 'Tempo' pace (10mile/Half Mara), then Tempo pace becomes specific and therefore non-interval Tempo workouts (or at least long intervals e.g 2 x 16-20mins) will become more important throughout the overall training plan. In this case it is the effects of other training elements that should be mitigated against in order to support the sessions focused on goal pace.

In Daniels' world, T pace is used for a straight tempo run and for cruise intervals. I like the McMillan Calculator approach, which has 4 different paces in the tempo or threshold range. McMillan's Steady State is like a long tempo run pace, McMillan's Tempo is similar to Daniels tempo. Then McMillan's Tempo Intervals are a little faster than straight tempo. Finally, McMillan's Cruise Intervals are a little faster than his Tempo Intervals.

John Kellogg calls cruise intervals "the isocapnic buffering zone" and pegs the pace at 5% faster than LTV or lactate threshold velocity. Tinman, who helps with the training program of Drew Hunter, calls cruise intervals CV intervals.

someconfusedcoach wrote:

Can someone tell me the value of doing tempo intervals when an athlete could easily continue at that pace without stopping and without breaking through their threshold?

I've asked other coaches why and have never received a clear answer.

I'm not looking for the description if the workout. I understand it perfectly. I want to know what advantages (if at all) does running the intervals have over just a straight tempo at the same pace.

Training is as much about mental concentration as it is about the actual running. And when it matters in a race, its often more about the mind. There is a necessary break in concentration in intervals, that helps overall concentration in the longer term. Racing is about constant awareness and change, even when the pace stays the same.

You're welcome grasshopper.

ukathleticscoach wrote:

eurunner wrote:

1) Reduced overall training stress

2) Reduced injury risk

3) Longer total time spent at the particular pace

4) Less chance of overhammering

You lose time at the threshold every time you have a recovery though as the body dips well below the line

Not according to Daniels. His research shows blood lactate levels remain relatively constant.

eurunner wrote:

1) Reduced overall training stress

2) Reduced injury risk

3) Longer total time spent at the particular pace

4) Less chance of overhammering

This is"+". What about '-"?

Okay, who has heard of L1 training and can explain it to me?

the reason to do intervalls in general is to increase the total volume (or reduce the load) at the target pace. For faster paces it is obvious that intervall training is the only way of doing this, in general all paces faster than 1h threshold/10k. For paces slower than 1h threshold I see no value in doing intervalls with any length of rest. At those paces on should anyway have the capacity to run continuously without having to recover much more than fill up the glycogen storages. Of course if you do a long run at those paces, it is a real workouyt and it will cost something, but doing much less volume than your capability should not.

Threshold (and to some degree 10k) work is something special I think and suitable for both tempo and intervalls. Tempo has the benefit of giving specific pace training, long intervalls can raise the volume/reduce the stress and short intervalls can give a possibility to do over-speed training, still at lactate threshold levels. I think all are variations giving a benefit.

I see in Norway people do so called low threshold intervalls such as 10x1k with 45-60s rest. I think this is too short durations and too long a rest to be an efficient use of the training time. I think that if this setup is needed to keep recovery low there is something wrong with the aerobic base capability