Anyone run a marathon using only high intensity intervals for training?

That's pretty much what Zatopek did. If you're lucky Orville Atkins will see this and tell you a bit about training for the marathon with Igloi which was nearly all rep work. You can develop yourself aerobically quite well on interval work but you'll need a certain volume of it and most people find it more pleasant to get most of that volume in with steady runs.

HRE wrote:

That's pretty much what Zatopek did. If you're lucky Orville Atkins will see this and tell you a bit about training for the marathon with Igloi which was nearly all rep work. You can develop yourself aerobically quite well on interval work but you'll need a certain volume of it and most people find it more pleasant to get most of that volume in with steady runs.

Well, except Zatopek did not just run 2-3 times per week and while he did a lot of intervals, he also did a lot of mileage in the process, at a fast pace. But sure, go ahead OP - do 80x400 3 times a week for 16 weeks. If you don't get hurt, you just might run a pretty good marathon. Let us know how it goes.

Missed the 2-3 times a week thing. Good catch. Thanks.

I tried this. I was working with a coach who loved the Igloi approach and we ran intervals/fartleks probably 4 times per week. He also hated the idea of the big long run so we did a hard track workout Saturday mornings, 1-hour moderate Saturday afternoons, fast finish long-ish run Sunday mornings. This generally totaled 30 miles so. He felt that this would prepare someone for any distance. I focused on 5k/10k generally. I set PRs in the 5k, 10k and half marathon so I decided on a whim to try the full marathon. I felt fantastic and fast through 19 miles and then a miserable death march out of nowhere. I was in great shape for everything other than the marathon. Do not recommend.

investigating99 wrote:

The prevailing paradigm for marathon training is running as much volume as you can handle at intensities that keep you breathing easy, along with some sharpening with a smattering of intervals and tempos. Has anyone here bucked the system and trained just using intervals 2-3 times a week?

Let's say I was to use a benchmark run at an easy aerobic heart rate (e.g. 70% MHR), measuring speed at this heart rate at the beginning of training, and at the end of training. If I were to see the same improvement in this speed at an aerobic intensity from the intervals as I would have from running high volume of aerobic miles, would I not be just as prepared to run the same pace in the marathon?

Has anyone experimented with this, or know of anyone who has? Thank you.

From another era -- Bill Scobey.

I have. I ran 3 marathons in the 20 months I trained with Coach Igloi. I have moved the 15 page Mihaly Igloi thread to the first index page. It is all there.

Bob Schul posted on page 2, I think.

O. Atkins wrote:

I have. I ran 3 marathons in the 20 months I trained with Coach Igloi. I have moved the 15 page Mihaly Igloi thread to the first index page. It is all there.

Bob Schul posted on page 2, I think.

Anyone found the link?

not really wrote:

Well, except Zatopek did not just run 2-3 times per week and while he did a lot of intervals, he also did a lot of mileage in the process, at a fast pace. But sure, go ahead OP - do 80x400 3 times a week for 16 weeks. If you don't get hurt, you just might run a pretty good marathon. Let us know how it goes.

You wouldn't need to do 80x400.

maybe more like 50x400 with 2 min jog recovery. If the "on" 400s are between 75-90, you're looking at the total workout to be between 2:40-2:53 in duration. That's enough volume to replace a long run. That would be more of an early workout in your buildup, with longer intervals coming later.

As long as you are on your feet for between 90-180 minutes during those three interval workouts, I'd imagine you could run a decent marathon. Not your highest potential, but you'd beat a good number of lesser prepared people.

I think the biggest problem with the program would be the time it would take to build up. When you run more frequently, and add in long, slower runs, you gain general fitness quicker and are able to do more specific workouts earlier. It would probably take a couple years to really get the most out of an intervals only marathon method.

Why not just do normal marathon training?

Great example. But again in relation to my gaff, Mad Dog was running all seven days, not just three. And his profile in Fred WIlt's "How They Train" does have extended road runs, up to 20 miles, in the schedule.

Just because of time constraints, I only run about 3 times a week, so most of it is quality. It's okay for 5k's and 10k's, but I can assure you that anything over 10M is a death march if high intensity stuff is all you do (with no volume).

attempted wrote:

I tried this. I was working with a coach who loved the Igloi approach and we ran intervals/fartleks probably 4 times per week. He also hated the idea of the big long run so we did a hard track workout Saturday mornings, 1-hour moderate Saturday afternoons, fast finish long-ish run Sunday mornings. This generally totaled 30 miles so. He felt that this would prepare someone for any distance. I focused on 5k/10k generally. I set PRs in the 5k, 10k and half marathon so I decided on a whim to try the full marathon. I felt fantastic and fast through 19 miles and then a miserable death march out of nowhere. I was in great shape for everything other than the marathon. Do not recommend.

It reads like it worked great and you didn't pace the distance right.

The point being, it could work for some. But one needs to make adjustments for the distance which is kind of hard to do. Contrast that with distance methods where it's relatively easier to work out adjustments in pacing because one practices longer runs.

The OP (are you the OP?) asked how it worked out for those who tried it. So when one says they tried it, and they say it didn't work, you're going to discard it?

Are you that power running guy again, richard99 of whoever? Sounds like it.

lets reinvent the wheel wrote:

Why not just do normal marathon training?

I don't have tons of time these days and wonder if intervals is the key to a less is more approach. I know marathons are a pacing puzzle generally. You only have so much glycogen, and you have to run a pace that keeps you from hitting the wall. Just mining for information.

For example, I know through depletion that long runs can teach the body to store more glycogen. What's the science on how intervals affect glycogen storage?

If running intervals can improve the aerobic system then that means the body is also becoming a better fat-burner. Type 1 aerobic fibers burn mostly fat. Improve your speed using these fibers, then your endurance should improve. So, if I'm getting faster and faster at not only my intervals (if you measured heart rate), but also at the same aerobic heart rate, then what's the point of the long run and high mileage if you're getting the same results?

Do you get similar growth in numbers of capillaries using intervals as you would long runs?

There's a lot to talk about.

A section on Emil Zatopek and his training in the Lore OF Running:

https://books.google.com/books?id=wAa9qq9kbncC&pg=PA382&lpg=PA382&dq=%22Emil+Z

átopek%22+lore+of+running&source=bl&ots=cyl7HR2miD&sig=Z5Na7X9_zYyPsoxxSeQFOjLpxSY&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiFrqWt6q7KAhWE4CYKHYE-CkkQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=%22Emil%20Zátopek%22%20lore%20of%20running&f=false

From The Lore Of Running, Zapotek's training:

By 1948, Zatopek had refined his daily training to:

5x200m WI run in 34 seconds

20x400m between 56 and 75 seconds, starting at the faster speed and slowing down.

5x200m WI run in 34 seconds

All rest intervals were a 200m jog, lasting about 1 minute.

The total distance covered each day was 18km (11 miles). In October 1949, Zatopek increased his training to 28k (17 miles) a day

In the 1952 Olympics he won gold medals in the 5000m, 10000m, and the marathon.

From WIkipedia:

"Zátopek's final medal came when he decided at the last minute to compete in the marathon for the first time in his life, and won. His strategy for the marathon was simple: he raced alongside Jim Peters, the British world-record holder. After a punishing first fifteen kilometres in which Peters knew he had overtaxed himself, Zátopek asked the Englishman what he thought of the race thus far. The astonished Peters told the Czech that the pace was "too slow," in an attempt to slip up Zátopek, at which point Zátopek simply accelerated. Peters did not finish, while Zátopek won the race setting an Olympic record"

Nick Costes, first American under 2:20 in the marathon, wrote a fabulous booklet called Interval Training, published by RW in 1972 that included samples from his training.

I used the booklet as a guide when first training for marathons, it helped me quite a bit and I've continued to use the same type of training on occasion. I personally think it was as good as any other type of training from 2 miles through marathons.

There was a Canadian guy, quite fast at 50 miles who trained much the same way.

Typical workouts I did were 40x220 or 24x440, with 220 jogs in ~60 seconds, and plenty of miles. My high was 132 miles while doing this program, including three sessions of intervals each week.

The 200 meters were run at the equivalent of a little lower than his Olympic gold medal 5000m pace (4:29 per mile)

The 400 meters were run between 3:45 and 5:01 pace or the equivalent of faster than mile pace and approximately half marathon pace.