SUPERIOR COACH JS wrote:
Okey Klaas! :) Here comes my experienced analysis over your "easy interval method" , original by Verhuel.
It seem to be a method as I guessed very similar to Gerschler, Stampfl and Igloi. The difference mostly less reps in the intervals at often slower paces . According to the example weeks of your own weekly schedules I see it was not only a question of running intervals but also steady runs sometimes.It`s a strong system on relatively low mileage but it lack optimal development of mitochondria, both quantitatively and in terms of quality/effect.
Genuinely curious. Why do you say it lacks 'optimal development of mitochondria, both quantitatively and in terms of quality/effect'?
I have just read the book last week and am trying to implement a few workouts and seeing how it goes. I am a hobby-jogger by LRC standards.
Workout: 1 mile w/u + 6 x 1K with 800 recovery + c/d
My execution:
- The warmup was at my regular easy pace. HR: Middle of Zone 2
- The 1 K repeats were at just slower than MP because that felt aerobic enough to me. 4 ish minutes of high-end aerobic running repeated for 6 times. HR: Lower end of zone 3 at the beginning of repeat to higher end of zone 3 by end of repeat.
- The 800m recovery also took me about 4 minutes. Easy pace. HR: Middle of Zone 2
- The cooldown was at my regular easy pace. HR: Middle of Zone 2
Maybe, I could have gotten more mitochondria development by doing the whole run as easy/zone 2. But, from my typical marathon shuffler's POV, I liked this because it forced me to run with proper form for 24 minutes as part of the 1K repeats.
This workout also did not beat me up in any way, as I did my regular 10x400 workout today without any ill-effects from yesterday.
Key, IMO, is to run the aerobic intervals from Klaas' book in a manner that it does not leave you tired for the next day.