My quest for sub 1:50 in the 800m

The fact that you called tinman's CV pace a pseudo science pace is really just about all the information I need from you and how you think training works.

1) So you believe steady state runs have no purpose? Why? I very much so disagree. They are a staple of building my base. Random runs where I run the last few miles a low 6 pace are not uncommon in base phase. You say I'm training too hard but if you actually looked at my logs, I'm really not training very hard at all in the grand scheme of things.

2) I will agree that 10/21 workout is out of place. I ran it with the high school team a volunteer coach at.

3) Are you really dense enough to think I am lying?

Here are the results from that 3k/1k double, which obviously isn't impressive.

http://athletics.mountunion.edu/sports/mtrack/2017-18/files/Results.htm

I'm guessing you haven't even looked at the previous thread that got me to 1:52.

4)Why is it hard to believe that by doing over-distance training for a speed based runner would yield a faster 5k time even though they haven't run that pace much? Blasphemy, you say. Yet, it happened.

5) Over the years, as I went from a bad runner, to an average runner, to slightly above average (depending on how you view 1:52), I figured out what training has worked for me and what hasn't. Sure, I'd love to do a little more quality on the track like I did when I was in school, but I don't have nearly as easy access to a track and no one to run with. Additionally, I am slowly adding in the faster stuff.

I think the biggest thing we disagree about is our training philosophies. I've proven you wrong a few times in the above reply, let me know what else you would like to know and I'd be glad to help.

Thanks.

I'll respond in-line so you won't get confused~

1) So you believe steady state runs have no purpose? Why? I very much so disagree. They are a staple of building my base. Random runs where I run the last few miles a low 6 pace are not uncommon in base phase. You say I'm training too hard but if you actually looked at my logs, I'm really not training very hard at all in the grand scheme of things.

*I didn't say they didn't have purpose, I just don't think you are doing them right. Please show me examples of someone trying to hit similar times who is doing that. Because with the exception of the odds and ends steady state run that is early in the season...yes, it is uncommon for an 800m runner to be doing multiple progression steady state runs over tempo efforts. Especially when your steady state runs seem to start as easy runs that devolve into steady state effort. I'm worried you're confusing your body.

2) I will agree that 10/21 workout is out of place. I ran it with the high school team a volunteer coach at.

*Okay? But why haven't you done literally anything near the pace of the shape you are working towards? Surely 2:40 800s isn't taxing, right? It just seems like your training at stalled at interval paces throughout this entire thread.

3) Are you really dense enough to think I am lying?

*Are you really dense enough to think people on letsrun don't lie? 90% of the messageboard is a long troll, bud.

4)Why is it hard to believe that by doing over-distance training for a speed based runner would yield a faster 5k time even though they haven't run that pace much? Blasphemy, you say. Yet, it happened.

*It's not far fetched to question the idea. Any 5K runner would do reps or repeats that would mimic a 5K effort at some point. You yourself admitted you weren't a distance guy and since you have really done nothing that is really speed (unless you count a couple 150s at 20, 200s at 30, and strength hills) so far, it isn't a ridiculous conclusion.

5) Over the years, as I went from a bad runner, to an average runner, to slightly above average (depending on how you view 1:52), I figured out what training has worked for me and what hasn't. Sure, I'd love to do a little more quality on the track like I did when I was in school, but I don't have nearly as easy access to a track and no one to run with. Additionally, I am slowly adding in the faster stuff.

*:)

I think the biggest thing we disagree about is our training philosophies. I've proven you wrong a few times in the above reply, let me know what else you would like to know and I'd be glad to help.

*I'd wager it's more a confusion about what your training philosophy really is. The only thing you proved is via the race evidence which is what I asked for. I really hope you do hit whatever goal you are trying to hit and don't burn out.

Someone's gotta pay that toll. I agree that a lot of your training seems a bit all over the place and much slower (interval wise) than what I did in college, but do you bro! You're either gonna see results like you say or be a really reliable 6min mile pacer.

godspeed

1) I'm not in 1:50 shape, so I'm not going to be training like I'm a 1:50 800m runner yet. Confusing my body? lol It's called building a base. Why would I hammer vo2 and 800m paces 5-6 months out from when I want to run fast?

2) Not every workout has to be taxing...

3) Proved you wrong on this one

4) I'm not a 5k runner and don't care about maximizing my 5k time too much at the moment. Why would I worry about 5k pace reps? And I'm not a distance guy physiologically, but I'm trying to correct some natural weaknesses and work on endurance since the weather is crap and I can't do much speed anyways.

5) Not everyone trains exactly the same.

I still don't understand how you think I'm simultaneously not training fast enough, but am worried about burning out. That is the biggest area of confusion in your points, for me.

I will respectfully disagree. My best season my coach threw a lot of "sub-tempo" runs at me. Basically when my tempo pace was 5:40 he had me doing runs at 6:00-6:10. And then eventually this built up to 10 miles at 6:00 pace, which eventually because a 10 mile tempo close to 5:50. This was over the winter and the focus changed in the spring so not sure how much faster it would have been.

For context when we started these late November I was a 16-flat 5k guy. By March I was a 15:25 guy. Two weeks after that 15:25 I opened my outdoor season with a 1:55 800. So...at least for me running at 6:00 pace and long tempos was exactly what I needed over the winter. Individual results will vary.

I should also clarify that winter training included more traditional tempos, intervals, and long runs too. But just saying that my training had a place for longer hard efforts and ~30 seconds per mile slower than my 4 tempo pace.

I've been trying to read all of this quickly to see what all the fuss is about, but without analyzing everything I'd understand how your training could come across somewhat haphazard at this point. I mean, do whatever works man, but I would've thought you would do some higher quality interval stuff by now too. I don't think the other poster was suggesting that you hammer vo2/800m paces (unless you consider 2:40 800s hammering...you don't, right? RIGHT?!), but rather that at a certain point you should be doing something in line with getting into actual 800m pace. It's pretty commonplace to be doing those kinds of reps which I'm sure you can do on the road too. You also mention the taxing thing again which I guess is responding to something about doing higher quality workouts? I'd say if anything, your long build up runs seem like they're more taxing in the long term because you have higher distance+harder efforts. Again, 800s,mile repeats, 1ks etc are normally "taxing" as they are goal specific which I think was the other poster's point. Last thing is that I think you missed the mark on the 5K comment. It seems like it was meant to point out that you still don't do mile repeats etc. (which are typically done at 5K paces and help determine tempo efforts) despite the fact that you are going out on 14 mile runs and coming home in 5:30 for the last mile which would be much more of a distance workout than moderate mile repeats or something like that (which almost every single miler and 800m runner under the sun) does. No idea about the success of the middle middle guy, but to each their own. Obviously steady runs have their place as do progressions, but its strange to see a log so long without goal or race specific workouts yet (again, I'm not personally saying hammer).

To address everyone:

I will be doing more quality. It is in the plan. I raced sunday so I didn't do anything super taxing last week. My home treadmill only gets down to 6min pace, which is why I've had to opt for a lot of the longer steady runs, because there is nothing else i can do when there's ice on the roads and its 0 degrees. I would not say my plan is haphazard, it is simply delayed, mostly due to weather.

Alas, I believe I am setting myself up well for outdoor season and setting myself up for getting in some quality efforts. Will I break 1:50 this spring? Very unlikely, but that is because of a struggle with overall consistency and health the past 1.5 years. But if I break 1:55 or even 1:56 then I believe I will be on a very good path for the next year now that my outside of running life is more stable.

Fair enough!

I would include more details then about conditions etc. if you can so that anyone following your plan doesn't make the same interpretation. I looked you up based on some result link you posted above and you clearly have a more detailed training log. Just specifying the exact point of the workout (what you are trying to achieve/conditions as to why you did that over something else) would help people follow along/give advice.

RandoCalrissian wrote:

Fair enough!

I would include more details then about conditions etc. if you can so that anyone following your plan doesn't make the same interpretation. I looked you up based on some result link you posted above and you clearly have a more detailed training log. Just specifying the exact point of the workout (what you are trying to achieve/conditions as to why you did that over something else) would help people follow along/give advice.

Thanks for the advice, you're right. I usually post conditions when I do run outside but sometimes I type this up real quick when I could be more detailed. I'll do better about keeping this log more detailed overall when I continue to log in the future.

TrollToll wrote:

yes, it is uncommon for an 800m runner to be doing multiple progression steady state runs over tempo efforts. Especially when your steady state runs seem to start as easy runs that devolve into steady state effort. I'm worried you're confusing your body.

Any 5K runner would do reps or repeats that would mimic a 5K effort at some point. You yourself admitted you weren't a distance guy and since you have really done nothing that is really speed (unless you count a couple 150s at 20, 200s at 30, and strength hills) so far, it isn't a ridiculous conclusion.

Never heard of Peter Snell? Personally, I once did months of high mileage, never going above the LT (unless when was sprinting), and I was capable to do a 5x1k @ 5k pace (3:08) with only 2min rec in my first 5k / MaxVO2-type workout in that spring. Was a 800m runner too (did 5k lifetime PB 15:43 in that summer, and a 53.01 @ 400, 1.58 @ 800m, both PR's in that time).

"I'm worried you're confusing your body"... Stop worrying about what the OP does, it seems to work and he has so much room left to increase the intensity closer the season. It's common that you start from the top and you then struggle to keep the progression going. The training of the OP has clearly improved his basic aerobic endurance and lactate threshold. It's very important for a speed based guy to not do too fast tempo runs, too early. The slower progression runs and pick-ups at the end of the runs has increased the aerobic endurance of the type I and IIa muscle fibers (which is crucial behind his recent 5k fitness, without real 5k pace work). And he has frequently done workouts around "CV-pace" (sorry about the "pseudo-science"), that isn't too far away from the 5k pace. His 1k fitness is also good enough for him to do well at the 5k too.

Considering your PB in the 800m, this clearly didn't work out well. You were far too good in the 5k compared to the 800m. This training was not anywhere near the best way for you to improve in the 800. [/quote]

A month or two of this type of training is OK, depending on what kind of runner you are. As a speed base runner it is not at all optimal. The criticism is right, but as OP now told us, he doesn't have much options because of the slow treadmill. Considering that its understandable how he trains. "Doing well at the 5k" should never be a goal for an 800m runner.

Barakus Obama wrote:

Considering your PB in the 800m, this clearly didn't work out well. You were far too good in the 5k compared to the 800m. This training was not anywhere near the best way for you to improve in the 800.

[/quote]

I agree, because I was even training for the 5k that winter. But I wouldn't say that that training "didn't work out well" for my 800m too, because I shaved almost a full second off from my PR (from 1.59,33 to 1.58,40, from where I improved 0.97 seconds in the next summer). It did work SURPRISINGLY WELL, although it was not optimal training for the 800. And I was surprised that I also improved at 400m (from 53.78 to 53.01), 1000m (from 2.36,6 to 2.34,12), but I did a weekly top speed workout throughout the winter.

So, I agree that training for the 800m isn't about getting as fast as possible at 5k or so, of course, but it doesn't harm you if you lack some endurance, and can improve your 5k as well as a byproduct. In the case of the OP I would like to see more top speed and anaerobic capacity work too, but like he has said the conditions outside hasn't been good enough etc.

I'd have to agree with Barakus here too. I do agree with you (U.N.O) that fast tempo runs too early is detrimental to overall fitness, but that can be said of training for any distance. I think the point here was not doing tempos too fast, rather, to do faster tempos that are in line with OP's abilities/previous times etc. I'm also not a fan of just throwing out names like "Peter Snell" to prove a point. There are obvious exceptions to every rule and using an all time great as an example of how something worked isn't really evidence of a workable trend unless every single person did that. Now, I think what the OP is doing could be working for him, but the whole point of this thread is to view his progression and give feedback, no? FWIW, I do think his CV pace is pretty far from his 5K fitness unless you consider 5:20ish pace close to 5:06 pace. Regardless, clearly the conditions and availability of the track has played a role too.

You seem arrogantly defensive and unwilling to take genuine feedback. Troll brought up good points about your haphazard training and lack of specific efforts. You can attempt to rationalize what you’re doing all you want, but you are neither a physiologist nor an expert. Learn to take feedback without trying to call other people names.

I agree with your there! I have been enjoying reading this thread and had to give you props for saying that. The mistake that most of these guys do is take in too much information and apply what they hear like a buffet...a little here from this and a little here from that. I ran sub 1.50, quite a bit faster and see what he's doing as a base as decent but not developing what it takes to actually reach his goal. I wish him the best and if he does break 1.50 he'd be at 1.48 if he actually listened a little better.

100m wrote:

You seem arrogantly defensive and unwilling to take genuine feedback. Troll brought up good points about your haphazard training and lack of specific efforts. You can attempt to rationalize what you’re doing all you want, but you are neither a physiologist nor an expert. Learn to take feedback without trying to call other people names.

I may not be an expert but why should I assume every poster here is an expert, too? I am taking in the criticisms, even though they were already things I planned on doing.

As I said many many times, I’m not going to break 1:50 this year. I’m too far removed from my 1:52 fitness. I’m working my way back. Training like I’m a 1:50 runner right now would just get me injured.

Additionally, much of the training I did to get to 1:52 involved tempos around 5:50-6:00 pace. Sure, I did some faster shorter tempos and progression runs that finished with a few miles in the 5:20’s, but they were mixed in, not forced every week.

I do appreciate the criticisms, and I’m sorry if it seemed I was being defensive, (I was with the one guy that called me a troll for some reason), but everyone lost it because I did a few longer tempos at 6min pace because the weather was bad instead of shorter faster tempos and honestly, it’s not the end of the world.

But whether you think I’m dumb or you’re rooting for me, I appreciate people following along. I just finished up a decent workout and I’m heading to the gym to lift before work right now. I will post a training update at the end of the week like usual, but I’ll try to be more detailed for you guys.

Thanks everyone.

RandoCalrissian wrote:

I'm also not a fan of just throwing out names like "Peter Snell" to prove a point. There are obvious exceptions to every rule and using an all time great as an example of how something worked isn't really evidence of a workable trend unless every single person did that.

Whatever, but I couldn't resist (why should I) to " just throw out" the name of Peter Snell, to just reply to the comment "it is uncommon for an 800m runner to be doing multiple progression steady state runs over tempo efforts". Just an example, that training like that might work for even 800m runner. The idea of that every single person should do the same training, to prove is some method right or wrong is ridiculous. We are all individuals. But at the same time, the NR of New Zealand, done by Snell on a grass track, is still the same, almost 56 years after.

RandoCalrissian wrote:

I do think his CV pace is pretty far from his 5K fitness unless you consider 5:20ish pace close to 5:06 pace. Regardless, clearly the conditions and availability of the track has played a role too.

Yes, I consider still that 5.20ish pace in the winter, while being far away from peak fitness, and like you said, done at sub-optimal conditions is not too far away from his 5k race pace, to create an effect to 5k fitness. This is base training. Renato Canova would call this "aerobic support pace" for the 5k, I believe.

To the OP, you're clearly a thoughtful person and I believe that you understand how to put the pieces together in the right time. You already know what worked for you when you went to 1.52. You seem to be realistic too about your current fitness and goals, which is good.