Verheul method

Sounds like you nailed it, Alex! That is the sensation you should be going for. The overall effort is relaxed and easy but, due to the changes of pace, you stretch your legs and break the monotonous cycle that comes with sustained, slower running. You may even find that your tempo tomorrow feels better because of it.

Hello Bazzy, I appreciate your enthusiasm... but publishing parts of my book here... hmmmm, I can't applaud for that.

When everybody posts a page..., Please do me a favor and shorten this post drastically

Regards, Klaas

While it's never cool to post entire sections of copyrighted material verbatim. That is especially true when the author is actively contributing to the thread.

Klaas, this is an interesting way to train and one I have not encountered before. I'm curious about where you would do these types of runs. I suppose an obvious answer is the track or an otherwise marked loop where you know the distances; however, that seems like it would grow stale rather quickly. With the advent of GPS watches, would you advocate moving some sessions to the road? If so and for the sake of simplicity, would you ever modify the workout to something like 80 seconds uptempo, 100 seconds recovery (ie, 400 on 400 off), or would that be getting too far away from what you intend? Thanks for your input and for the book. I'll most likely pick up a copy on Amazon.

Kennekuk Jack wrote:

Klaas, this is an interesting way to train and one I have not encountered before. I'm curious about where you would do these types of runs. I suppose an obvious answer is the track or an otherwise marked loop where you know the distances; however, that seems like it would grow stale rather quickly. With the advent of GPS watches, would you advocate moving some sessions to the road? If so and for the sake of simplicity, would you ever modify the workout to something like 80 seconds uptempo, 100 seconds recovery (ie, 400 on 400 off), or would that be getting too far away from what you intend? Thanks for your input and for the book. I'll most likely pick up a copy on Amazon.

I've only just received my copy in the last hour or so and have only been able to skim a few sections but I think I did come across a part where he mentions going by time instead of distance but don't really recall what it said specifically.

While I'm interested to see what Klaas' reply will be regarding not having access to a track my feeling is that GPS distance on the road would be just as good. The track might be preferable if you're preparing for track events, the way I see it if you're preparing for road or cross country races doing this work over varying terrain would work to your benefit. And whether GPS is a few feet short or long won't matter in the big scheme of things.

Raggedman wrote:

While it's never cool to post entire sections of copyrighted material verbatim. That is especially true when the author is actively contributing to the thread.

I quoted a passage from the book and credited it to Klaas (although not in the APA style of referencing).

The example of training is not verbatim, I adapted it. Check your copy of the book vs my post.

If someone else had written my post, and I read it, I would be intrigued and would buy the book (FYI I have purchased a copy).

Klaas - do you do any lectures/talks regarding your book/training method?

You can train anywhere using this method. I'd recommend using a track or a measured loop to begin with to lock-in to the feeling and effort you need but after that you can go anywhere. I use my watch and just set up workouts, eg 2km warmup, 6x1km (800m jog) 2km warm down and happily do this along a nice trail or my usual road loops. Whilst GPS may no be 100% accurate if you are out by 50m it's not the end of the world.

You can also use time but just remember that equal distance recoveries are not the same as equal time so if doing 10x400m I would, for example, do 10x90 seconds with a 2 minute jog. Alternatively, just run the efforts slower.

My response to Kennekuk Jack: please read the post of REM86.

I ran anywhere: track, forest, park, road. Once you got the right feeling of the speed, the intensity, no need to do it on the track, just run 6x4 mins instead of 6x1000, as example.

Too often running on the track might - after many years - even cause your right leg getting stronger than your left....Sometimes on the track I ran the other way around.

My copy arrived yesterday and I was able to read through chapters 5 and 6 and have to say that I very intrigued. I'll be making another pass through this weekend with highlighters in hand.

I really like the emphasis on relaxation and running by effort. The idea of running intervals and hill repeats by effort is something I've pushed many times when asked for advice by friends. I'm in the DC area and most people are very Type A personalities, which goes for most competitive athletes too I guess, and they can get very wrapped in the idea of hitting specific paces every repeat of every workout.

Anyway, thanks for publishing this book in English Klass. I look forward to incorporating this into my training.

Awesome, thanks everyone! That is more or less what I figured. Believe me, I am not one to get bogged down in the "I ran X pace for Y meters" minutiae. I have inadvertently done some early-season fartleks like this, and I can confirm that they left me feeling very fresh. Ok, off to go purchase a copy of the book. Thanks again!

What are the relative paces people are suppose to be running for these "easy" intervals?

For example for the 400, if we use Daniels' VDOT values that tells me that my 400 should be 73 repetition pace, 79 for my interval pace, and 85 for threshold pace. What would be the correct "easy" pace for me to do the 400s for this "method"?

I understand it's suppose to be by feel, but just as a frame of reference.

VDOT reference wrote:

What are the relative paces people are suppose to be running for these "easy" intervals?

For example for the 400, if we use Daniels' VDOT values that tells me that my 400 should be 73 repetition pace, 79 for my interval pace, and 85 for threshold pace. What would be the correct "easy" pace for me to do the 400s for this "method"?

I understand it's suppose to be by feel, but just as a frame of reference.

5k-ish pace.

Raggedman wrote:

5k-ish pace.

For 400's.... and then the 1000's would be like half marathon pace?

Not necessarily correct: it depends on your performance level. It can be different for slower runners compared to elite runners. And it is very obvious that in perfect conditions (short, track, spikes, good weather) times will be faster than in the forest, heavier training shoes, etc).

Anyway, I explained this all in my book. ;)

Hi Bazzy, You asked if I do any lectures/talks: I haven't done, but a former club mate (Lex van Eck van der Sluijs - whom I mention in my book) is doing this now and then in the Netherlands. He is the coach of Silke Schmidt, word class master 55+ and 60+ (she ran many WR's).

Anyway, all I have to say is already in the book...

Klaas, thanks for chiming in. Received the book, reading it. Thanks for putting this out there, great information and approach. I may not follow strictly by the book, but will certainly be drawing on the general model and premises extensively (in my own running and youth coaching).

A general point for the audience here who might be wondering about the overall approach:

- The approach is mostly aerobic, the book does a great job in explaining anaerobic threshold and why this method is not threshold oriented (which I thought at first, and like are other training methods out there). In fact, the suggestion seems to be to use threshold sparingly and wisely.

Klaas,just ordered your book today.

I am wondering if one can combine this training with Van Aaken for half marathons?!

Like:

AM 10km runs starting zone 1 high,and progressing to middle zone 2

PM one of each -> 15 x 200m ; 10 x 400m ; 6 x 1000m ; fartlek (2k @M pace 1k jog) ; 30km long easy with surges ; 10-12km high zone 2 - low zone 3 + one day OFF

I am not a morning person,so easy runs are ok,but 10x400m or 6x1k out of question (200s so-so).

Even the 10x400m and 6x1000m should be an easy overall effort. You should finish feeling energised and invigorated. A great way to start the day! :)

effort maybe easy,but these old legs in the morning (before work) are not as bouncy as before ;)

PM ok,not a problem