Verheul method

When you were doing, say, 1000m repeats, do you recall how fast you would typically run the recoveries - -4:00/km, 5:00km?

I am really enjoying the new training stimulus...

I got Klass' book just a couple of months ago and started incorporating some 'easy' training immediately. I have been running on and off for years.... but I still wanted to ease into the new daily interval scheme. I kept my 2 standard interval sessions and LR, but then made my other 3 training days easy intervals... though I started with more of like 30 sec on/ 90 sec easy off.... or 400 on/ 1200 easy off... etc.... worked up to his recommendations without much trouble in about 2 months. I did a 3200 meter time trial and got a huge PR (not 800-1500) but I think the results would translate to these shorter distances. I was amazed that my old 1.5 mile-best fitness test time was 8:03 (from 2013) and I cruised through 1.5 miles in 7:49 en route to my PR. Not blazing, but great for me!

I have a PhD in Exercise Physiology, so I can appreciate the idea behind a submaximal, but daily, stimulus. The overall load isn't too bad since the interval number is manageable and the efforts controlled. I'm still trying to wrap my head around what Klass calls 'reactivity'. I get what he relates it to, but I'm not sure how it could be measured/quantified in a laboratory setting.

Anyway, I recommend giving it a try if your disciplined enough to keep the paces under control.

*you're

Dr Pepper wrote:

I'm still trying to wrap my head around what Klass calls 'reactivity'. I get what he relates it to, but I'm not sure how it could be measured/quantified in a laboratory setting.

Maybe reactivity is proportional to 1/ground_contact_time at some given pace.

old and ... wrote:

Dr Pepper wrote:

I'm still trying to wrap my head around what Klass calls 'reactivity'. I get what he relates it to, but I'm not sure how it could be measured/quantified in a laboratory setting.

Maybe reactivity is proportional to 1/ground_contact_time at some given pace.

It is to do with kinetic energy and tendon/muscle tension I think. This should be measurable/studiable. It is indeed well-known that this is important for running performance, and there have been studies. See Magness' 'Science of Running' for a practical summary and some references, for instance.

Here is an early study for example. There are more recent ones specific to humans and performance.

https://academic.oup.com/icb/article-pdf/24/1/85/244880/24-1-85.pdf

old and ... wrote:

Dr Pepper wrote:

I'm still trying to wrap my head around what Klass calls 'reactivity'. I get what he relates it to, but I'm not sure how it could be measured/quantified in a laboratory setting.

Maybe reactivity is proportional to 1/ground_contact_time at some given pace.

Or perhaps pace/ground_contact_time

Or pace^2/ground_contact_time

Or pace/ground_contact_time^2

Might try collecting data from a few people, including a plodder and an elite-ish miler, each running a range of paces. Then see if any of the ideas give a fairly constant value for each person.

In a very limited number of tests, it looks like pace/ground_contact_time^3 might be interesting.

Using Garmin Connect, I looked at a number of workouts where I was running 200s, 400s, and 1000s.

Then collected "average pace" in seconds and "ground contact time" in seconds.

Popped in spreadsheet and had it compute various combinations.

Idea was to look for a formula that yielded about the same result for all three distances.

Since I had several of each workout, I looked for same result over 3 workouts in the same week.

Better would be to enter results for all the repeats in a workout (say, 10 x 400), then compute average and standard deviation.

Then compare across workouts, with the std deviation to help you see if the difference is significant.

Of course, more data from a range of runners would be more fun.

Maybe I can get some from friends who are notably quicker.

The title of the book in Dutch is the Souplessmethode - souplesse is a word that you often hear in cycling circles that I think directly translates to 'suppleness' but actually means a lot more than that. It's kind of the smoothness of the pedal stroke and the ability to generate power with grace, and create accelerations without huge outward displays of effort.

There's a page about it the velominati site. This is what they say about Jacques Anquetil:

His fluidity on the bike exemplified Souplesse:

--A Magnificent Stroke is more than pushing or pulling on the pedals. The stroke flows from the core and hips, driving the pedals round and belying the effort to do so.

--Feet sweep the pedals around in perfect revolutions, one leg cannot be distinguished from the other – they work as one to counter and balance the forces to drive the machine ever faster forward.

--The legs can not do their work without the arms, the lungs, the chest, the heart, the mind. Each unit functions independently to do its work, yet feeds seamlessly into the other. In a phrase: Fluidly Harmonic Articulation.

--Move to the V-Locus; the body is folded such that legs, arms, and chest overlap but do not intersect. Knees tucked in, shoulders hunched, wrists rolled inwards, elbows angled such that the knees only just slip inside them with each revolution of the cranks.

--Face calm, eyes cooly focussed up the road; a grimace is energy that is better spent on turning the pedals.

So I think the whole concept of 'reactivity' is basically a translation of souplesse, and it's a bit more ethereal than ground contact time at a certain pace etc, but more about the ability to generate speed and acceleration without too much outward effort

Bump. I'm also curious about the recovery paces people use or recommend.

AndySmith wrote:

I think the whole concept of 'reactivity' is basically a translation of souplesse, and it's a bit more ethereal than ground contact time at a certain pace etc, but more about the ability to generate speed and acceleration without too much outward effort

I expect you're right. Indeed, it's what I hope for, training this way.

I just gett curious about the "how to measure" aspect.

What champions have used or are currently using this method ..? WC 2019 any of the finalist in the 1500 through the 10,000 using this ‘method’..?!

Faith Kipyegon & Geoffrey Kirui were both world champs.

Mercy Chebwogan & Gilbert Kirui were both world junior champs.

Silke Schmidt, a masters runner, 55-59.

4-time world champ and 7 world records in 2015.

I like this description of the suppleness form synergy overall but I'd add something else to the concept of reactivity.

Unlike cycling, In running you get the impact forces of your legs hitting the ground on each stride. Reactivity is also about how you store this energy and how much can you use "for free" to propel you forward without expending more energy. I recall reading that Kangaroos have such great elastic mechanisms that they actually use less oxygen bounding at faster speeds than at slower speeds. The impact is doing more of the work for them.

Lok points out that the elasticity of your muscles and tendons get deadened by lots of long slow mileage. You don't get as much bounce or spring. Some people are naturally more reactive--there's variation in tendon length/density etc--this is one reason why some people at the same vo2 max differ in their economy. But some of this can be trained and improved. The big importance about reactivity and the easy interval method compared to other programs is that training isn't only about aerobic development. If you can train your reactivity to it's full potential you can go faster for "free" at any given aerobic level before you start building up lactate. Lok pointed out that through constant easy repetition at faster paces he had trained his reactivity so much that he had lower levels of lactate than many other runners at a given pace. This allowed him to run a 52.5 last lap in a fast 10k despite the fact that he had slower relative footspeed than other elites (through work he got it down to 12.5 100m which is still not that fast comparatively) he also ran a 3:38 1500m and sub 4 mile. I don't have the book in front of me now so this is from memory but I think the times are pretty close.

so when "old and..." is trying to measure reactivity he needs to bring in the aerobic component. It isn't just about reducing ground contact time or stride length. It's how much impact energy is being reused for "free" without additional stress on the aerobic system.

I bought the book Easy Interval Method by Klaas Lok a couple months ago. As a masters runner I was already thinking along these lines. It was harder to keep up high mileage and it was deadening my legs more. I thought I needed to do faster work more often. I think this system and the schedules in Loks book accomplishes this quite well. Up to half the mileage is somewhat faster work but most of it is not that stressful--under lactate threshold. It's really fascinating that after a 10k total of easy intervals and recovery jogs, my legs feel much fresher the next day than after just a 10k steady state slog.

I forgot to add that it's the impact combined with way they can prestretch their muscle/tendons to store energy and snap back that causes kangaroos to use less oxygen at faster speeds.

People can train these mechanisms through plyometrics such as box jumps etc but Lok points out these are pretty stressful and can't be done so often in the week as easy intervals, strides etc.

running rebuild wrote:

I bought the book Easy Interval Method by Klaas Lok a couple months ago. As a masters runner I was already thinking along these lines. It was harder to keep up high mileage and it was deadening my legs more. I thought I needed to do faster work more often. I think this system and the schedules in Loks book accomplishes this quite well. Up to half the mileage is somewhat faster work but most of it is not that stressful--under lactate threshold. It's really fascinating that after a 10k total of easy intervals and recovery jogs, my legs feel much fresher the next day than after just a 10k steady state slog.

That sounds interesting. As a Masters runner who still cares about performance I'm always interested in training methods that don't beat me up.

I look at the training plans of some Masters athletes and I am blown away. Their performances are great, but they are pretty much doing conventional training of any college runner, doubles, big miles, a couple of hard bouts+ a LR. If you can do all that during the week, there's no way you aren't running well come race day. The challenge for most of us older guys isn't that we don't know what to do or that we couldn't do all that; it's that we'd blow up after a few weeks. No point of training if you can't reach the starting line, right?

This sounds interesting.

Quite a few Masters athletes have had tremendous success using the Easy Interval idea. It is quite well known that our aerobic capabilities do not dwindle too much as we age and the slow down is generally caused from muscles weakening and losing their elastic return. This is where Klaas' ideas on 'reactivity' can be very interesting as a runner can accumulate quite a lot of faster running without running hard or breaking down which can be very beneficial for the older athlete who has to monitor recovery a lot more than a young pup.

I suggest you check out John van der Wansem & Silke Schmidt. Both have run numerous Masters World Records following these principles.

Hi guys,

I made the Easy Interval Method Group on Facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/316406889663700/

Feel free to join!

Kind regards,

Klaas Lok

Geoffrey Kirui and Faith Kipyegon you say? Can you verify that? I have seen the program of Kirui and Kipyegon and nothing like the easy interval method?