My coach said he expects me to put in 55 mpw for base training. Is that to much distance for a 800m runner to be focusing on? Likewise should I give more attention to speed then distance?
My coach said he expects me to put in 55 mpw for base training. Is that to much distance for a 800m runner to be focusing on? Likewise should I give more attention to speed then distance?
That depends greatly on the 800m runner and the rest of the training. That is on the high end for high school 800m runners, but I wouldn't put my foot down and say it is too much, especially if it is just during the off season that you run that many miles and cut it down during the season as you run more speed endurance workouts, etc.
Sounds reasonable if most of those miles are easy pace.
Good 'ol Lydiard base.
You should focus on speed. 55 mpw is way too much for a high school 800 meter runner.
Why are you on a message board questioning your coach? If you know better then coach yourself?
Yes. Sure you will need speed, but first you need the platform on which you will build, and lots of conversational level running is the ticket. Periodization. Read up on Lydiard and you will understand. Anyone telling you to do speed without a base phase is an idiot. Trust your coach.
It really depends if you tilt more towards the 400 or mike. As a sprinter type, that's bad. As a distance type of 800 runner, it's necessary
The 800m, to me, is the most interesting event. From an ATP standpoint, at the elite level it is as close to 50/50 aerobic/anaerobic as we get in a normally contested event. (Even at the WR pace it is still slightly aerobic and at slower pace it is even more aerobic.)
It also seems like there is a ton of variety in training for that distance.
It is base training which I infer as easy miles. I can see it being viable.
Here is a tip: ask your coach about it. Do not approach it as you knowing more than he (she?) but that you are interested in training and are curious about his philosophy.
Obvious Guy wrote:
You should focus on speed. 55 mpw is way too much for a high school 800 meter runner.
Worked pretty well for Alan Webb
Obvious Guy wrote:
You should focus on speed. 55 mpw is way too much for a high school 800 meter runner.
Worked pretty well for Alan Webb
Obvious Guy wrote:
You should focus on speed. 55 mpw is way too much for a high school 800 meter runner.
No it isn't.
I was an 800 meter runner in high school, trained with low mileage and lots of speedwork. I was never very good and got my butt handed to me by guys that ran more miles than I did.
Two Americans have won gold medals in the 800 indoors from 35mpw. One of them also ran 3:31. Rudisha also runs mileage in that range, and Colm O'Connell hired a gymnast (yes, a gymnast) to help coach him about relaxation in the year before his WR. Alan Webb also ran less than 55 in high school. Lagat also ran a little less than that (50 is what he said) when he ran 3:26.
The 800 to me is the most fascinating event in track and the hardest one to coach.
You can ruin a bigger fast-twitch guy with 2 years of aerobic long intervals and mileage but in the long term it might pay off. I tried that too fast and the runners I coached didn't match their HS prs as college freshman.
I would think the best approach would be a gradual increase of aerobic load in a three year period.
Do you take a guy who can run 52 easily and keep going to the next level by 9 mile tempo runs?
South dakota wrote:
It really depends if you tilt more towards the 400 or mike. As a sprinter type, that's bad. As a distance type of 800 runner, it's necessary
^
Want evidence? Look at the article on the front page. He runs 20-25 mpw and just ran under 1:46 indoors. He is a 400m/800m type.
Peter Snelll ran a crap more than that, and he did okay.
jamescantore wrote:
Peter Snelll ran a crap more than that, and he did okay.
Start an 800m training thread and the obligatory Peter Snell comments pops up. Snell also did hill bounding 6 times/week during the hill phase and daily track sessions during the track training phase. Should we do that too?
If you do all those miles and no speed you may end up with no speed. Everybody is different but I personally ran better track seasons (I ran in the 400-1500 range) after sitting on the couch and doing nothing for all of January than times when I ran just base mileage all winter. A winter of long runs literally made me slower. I was in my late teens and early twenties when I really discovered this trend over the course of a few years.