Important moments and concepts in the history and development of Intermittent training

Antonio,

I shall answer your questions but please bear in mind that the training I am showing is based on memory as Brendans training diaries were misplaced when he moved house some years ago.

1)First regarding the European Championship in 1974 as you correctly point out. The week before this race Brendan came to my house and we did a 6 mile run where we argued the whole way round regarding the tactics to be used in the race. He said that the strategy of a mid race burst was too risky I knew that he was only using me as a sounding board as he wanted to be a great runner, was in the shape to be so and this would be his most effective tactic. The idea was to make sure that the pace was solid then run a 60 second lap round about he 3k mark when people were starting to suffer. I recall doing a session with him where he ran 3 x 1200 with 4 mins recovery so the tactic had been practiced. I did the first 800 on each of them running first lap in 66/67 and the 2nd lap in 58/59: Brendan continued for the 3rd lap levelling off to 64/65 - 5k race pace. I think however that the ability to do this also came from his belief that he wanted to win more than anyone in the race. This confidence was what he still sees as what seperates the exceptional runners from the good ones.

Regarding the 3 times a day training. This was not done every week but sometimes he ran 3 times on a Tuesday and Thursday. It varied but on Tuesday he used to run on a morning before work 6 miles then he would run back home from work at 4pm or so 4 or 5 miles. He would then run with Gateshead Harriers in the evening -10 miles quite hard or when the summer season started - do a track session. 3 runs on Thurdays would be steady ones 4-8 miles.

2) Regarding Road relays. These would start in February and the distances were 2 miles to 6 miles. They were a very good indicator of how things were going. One relay in particular - Elswick was one used for many many years . The distance was around 2 miles with a very difficult hill after about 3/4 mile. Many great runners raced over it including , Mike McCloud , Charlie Spedding , Jim Alder and later Steve Cram so you knew what constituted a good run. Unfortunately due to the increased traffic problems the race has had to be moved elsewhere - a common problem nowadays. The National championships are still he at Sutton Colfield in April however so the oportunity to test times against such as Brendan is still there. Dave Moorcroft has the record and the best times are a whos who of British distance running. Moorcroft ran 24-27 I think and is very rare from anyone to get under 25 minutes nowadays.

I feel that these races played a significant part in Brendans running as they were hard tests without the pressure of direct competition against his main rivals which he did not require until fully ready for track races.

3) Regarding the mixed pace sessions. John Walker stayed with Brendan at one time and kindly allowed me to look at his training diary. He used to do a session of 8 laps consisting of running hard for 50 metres and floating 50 metres ie the float was a steady run and not a jog. We started to use this session occasionally and it was very tough. Eventually later on when he moved up to 10k Brendan ran 5k on windy day doing this in 13-39 but this was a very occasional session whereas the main session was the 3 x 1 mile. Interestingly Brendans best session of the mile reps was when he had been injured and was not in the best of shape . The following week he had a very high profile race at Gateshead - a 5k against Rod Dixon. He averaged under 4-7 for the miles but he ran poorly the following week. This was a good lesson to us in the value of running controlled at race pace rather than trying to see how quick you can run. It was giving a false confidence as it were. When he moved up to 10k the mileage was over 100 in the winter. Before Montreal in the spring averaging 120 miles per week going over 130 one week. Mainly 10 mile runs but a major difference was a 15 mile run was included on the Thursday as well as the 20 mile run on Sundays.

5) Montreal - Brendan had a stomach upset which greatly affected him and he was rushing to the toilet many times before the race. He never made excuses and merely passed this off as perhaps relating to nerves. I know he told me about it and a rates this as a race he could not have run one fraction harder and he therefore can feel proud of it. After 6 laps his stomach was bad enough for him to think he would have problems finishing - not how how you would want to feel in an Olympic final. He spent the rest of the race telling himself - one lap more - 1 lap more. As I say he did not use this as an excuse and has never said he would have beaten Lopes or Viren otherwise.

As regards the 5k I think the 10k had taken its toll as had the stomach upset.

5) Brendan always had a weight problem but this was kept in check by the mileage. At the end of each season he would take a total rest of 3 weeks or so - no running and the weight would pile on - over a stone in this time but it would soon be lost again when he resumed mileage.

Always remember a quote of Bren's, "You can always recognize a distance runner, he's always looking for somewhere to sit down!"

A pleasure to read this thread, and see that it has expanded the way it has. Keep up the good work, António and others.

Mr. Lindsay

Many thanks for your quickly reply. It clarifies a lot some doubts I have in my mind for decades.

For me this your insights in Brendan training and profile this is more interesting than every Brendan´s physiology information that you may send me.

Since long ago that I follow with interest UK running scene as well as Irish.

About your answers to my questions, if you permit me, I want to do some comments along our discussion.

>

Lindsay. For those like me that have seen Brendan 1974 win over all that top 5000m European runner´s at that time, I have no doubt that determination and also confidence did play a role in that Brendan big win. Effectively, I think that when people get the 3000m/2miles wall that it occurs in the 5000m runs, we saw Brendan faster the pace. Despite his characteristic facial image while running – he seems to be tired all the time – he did seem to smile in that fast lap.

That´s curious the strategy he used. It seems to be chirurgical planned, but I see that also comes from the runner nature. I remember you that Carlos Lopes did win using a similar tactic in the track as well as in cross and road runs. In the case of Lopes he did that mainly to his lack of speed and outquick – he did loose many races in the last lap – and of course by his immense potential to run under stress and his great strength endurance. What´s amazing is that in 10000m 1976 Olimpics, when people were waiting that Brendan did that move, that´s Lopes himself that did it close to the 7000m. There were running in 67-68sec and Lopes did a lap in 62sec and only Lasse Viren could resist. But Lopes did prepare that by the use of outdoor continuous hard tempo runs at a very intense pace to a point that no one was able to follow him, and also the use of anaerobic repetitions – like 20X200m/all out rec=2min. In the case of Lopes 200m/all out meant 200m in 27-28sec. Now you may understand how people are different and how we may follow different training directions for the same goal. Of course that being slow, Lopes wasn´t able to do that in 5000m runs – to fast for him.

I remember only a few that did some similar use of changing pace before the end. All did that a bit different. Filbert Bay, Nick Rose and actually the steeple WR steeple Cherono (Sheenan).

``<…2) Regarding Road relays. These would start in February and the distances were 2 miles to 6 miles. They were a very good indicator of how things were going. One relay in particular - Elswick was one used for many many years . The distance was around 2 miles with a very difficult hill after about 3/4 mile. Many great runners raced over it including , Mike McCloud , Charlie Spedding , Jim Alder and later Steve Cram so you knew what constituted a good run. Unfortunately due to the increased traffic problems the race has had to be moved elsewhere - a common problem nowadays. The National championships are still he at Sutton Colfield in April however so the oportunity to test times against such as Brendan is still there. Dave Moorcroft has the record and the best times are a whos who of British distance running. Moorcroft ran 24-27 I think and is very rare from anyone to get under 25 minutes nowadays.

I feel that these races played a significant part in Brendans running as they were hard tests without the pressure of direct competition against his main rivals which he did not require until fully ready for track races….%%>

This is another issue I want to comment. This is interesting. Everyone try to use the training method that fits better on him. Since long ago that I think that to pass all winter season without competing and pass all the time training and training, may have a negative impact in the track performances. In the past the best Portuguese runners, even track specialist, the used often cross AND ROAD runs as a way to the shape condition and preparing summer track runs. Even 1500m specialist like Rui Silva they do that. I´m glad that you confirm that Brendan did that as a part of the training process. Since I think that in America, most runner that have a track goaol they ignore road runs, and since that in UK people thinks very conservative in terms of race calendar schedule – the tradition plays a big role in UK – they don´t want to broke the rule: most runners and coaches they think that track is a priority and that cross is the only outdoor runs permitted.

``<…3) Interestingly Brendans best session of the mile reps was when he had been injured and was not in the best of shape . The following week he had a very high profile race at Gateshead - a 5k against Rod Dixon. He averaged under 4-7 for the miles but he ran poorly the following week. This was a good lesson to us in the value of running controlled at race pace rather than trying to see how quick you can run. It was giving a false confidence as it were….%%>

I guess that this your comment – this is gold. To think most people thinks that´s by “try faster and intense all the time that´s the way to good results this is a universal mistake.

>

When we know that a guy like Brendan, such a top talent runner did 1200m with 4 minutes recover, what to think about average or mediocre runners that they say that they do 1000m or miles with 1 minute recover?

One last comment. When we know that the training direction along the Brendan career that´s mileage, change some workouts designs to a great specificity, but reduce the workout frequency also indeed, may be that this may justify and answer to Lance-a-Lot some of his questions about the use of hard/specific workouts with recover in between and versus less specificity and more frequency and high up the intensity of the consider easy days.

Thank you very much. Keep on posting.

NAME:ALBERTO CHAIÇA 2004/JULY

July 01 – AM:70min=18kilos – more treatment to foot injury now

July 02 – AM:45min=11kilos

July 03 – AM:45min=11kilos

July 04 – AM:60min=16kilos // PM - goes to Altitude stay in Tenerife, Spain

WEEK MILEAGE:113kilos

July 05 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM:60min+6 strides=16kilos

June 06 – AM:70min=18kilos // 20m w/upoutdoor hilly 15X60sec/fast rec=60sec /easy run + 20min c/down=16kilos

July 07 – AM:80min=20kilos // PM:60min =16kilos

July 08 – AM:80min=20kilos // PM:60min =16kilos

July 09 – AM:1h40min=24kilos // PM 20min w/upoutdoor hilly 3X15min/fast rec=5min /easy run (HR 160-115/164-120/165-120) + 20min c/down=16kilos

July 10 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM:60min =16kilos

July 11 – AM:2h00m=32kilos // PM:50min =10kilos

WEEK MILEAGE:259kilos

July 12 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM:70min =18kilos

July 13 – AM:1h50min=28kilos // PM: 20min w/upoutdoor hilly 8X6min/fast rec=3min /easy run (HR 161-109/162-111/168-120/167-119/171-121/171-124-174-124/178-117) + 20min c/down=16kilos

July 14 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM:70min =18kilos

July 15 – AM:80min=20kilos // PM:70min =18kilos

June 16 – AM:90min=22kilos // 20m w/upoutdoor hilly 15X60sec/fast rec=50sec /easy run + 20min c/down=16kilos

July 17 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM:70min =18kilos

June 18 – AM: special session 2h30min=41kilos in neg. split ending in RP comment: almost the marathon distance done in the heat and in altitude in a hilly course in 2h30min

WEEK MILEAGE:269kilos

come back to Portugal

July 19 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM:60min =15kilos

July 20 – AM:90min=22kilos // PM 20min w/upoutdoor hilly 10X3min/fast rec=2:30 min /easy run (HR 152-110/157-113/160-113/164-120/161-120/158-119/164-122/165-118/169-122/170-120/) + 20min c/down=16kilos

July 21 – AM:80min=21kilos // PM:60min =16kilos

July 22 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM:60min =16kilos

July 23 – AM:45min=18kilos // PM: travel to France to compete

July 24 – AM:45min=11kilos

July 25 – AM: 20min w/up + road competition in France – a 22.4Kilos (!) in 1h13m - 4th place + 20min c/down=30kilos

WEEK MILEAGE:193kilos

July 26 – AM:60min=16kilos // PM: travel to altitude once again to France. Font Romeo once again

July 27 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM:60min =16kilos

July 28 – AM:80min=20kilos // PM:60min =16kilos

June 29 – AM:80min=18kilos // 20m w/upoutdoor hilly 15X60sec/fast rec=50sec /easy run + 20min c/down=15kilos

July 30 – AM:80min=20kilos

July 31 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM:60min =16kilos

Month MILEAGE:976 KILOS

[quote]Antonio Cabral wrote:

When we know that a guy like Brendan, such a top talent runner did 1200m with 4 minutes recover, what to think about average or mediocre runners that they say that they do 1000m or miles with 1 minute recover?

quote]

Yes 1 minute is way too short if you running at race-pace (3k or 5k). But sessions like 5x1mile and 10x1000m at 10k/15k pace with 1 min recovery is very good LT-work-outs.

Your question is a good one. We have discussed this other times and concluded that few people do it such a way. In my coaching, I have always prescribed 75-100% of the time of the rep for recovery when doing longer reps at a strong pace (3k-5k pace). So, a 15:00 5k runner might run 6 x 1 km at 2:56-54 with a 600m jog which often takes nearly 3 minutes. Another common workout I have used for 5k-10k runners about 4-10 weeks prior to a big race is 2 x 1600m at 15k pace, jog 1:30, 2 x 1600 at minus 6 seconds from 5k pace (faster, that is), jog 4:00, 1 x 1600m at 3k pace, jog 4:00, then conclude with 4 x 150-200m at 1500-800m pace, jog same distance between. The 15k pace recoveries are shorter because there is practically no anaerobic component at such a pace. At 5k pace or a little faster, using a good recovery length ensures that a runner is not raceing in the training session and ensures that they run the correct pace without straining. The results are really good over the weeks. Injuries are avoided and good health and fitness are preserved.

[quote]Henok wrote:

[quote]Antonio Cabral wrote:

Henok. One of both, or the workout goal is long reps in race pace and the target that´s to run the longer distance/period and extensively (mote total mileage) close to 5000m or 10000m race pace - in this case - and to allow that target that´s good that you use the needed recover - longer as needed, in Brendan case that´s 4 minutes OR the workout goal that´s a LT workout. If that´s a LT workout, that´s for sure that if you try that close to race pace with just 1 min recover you will end with much more lactic acid concentration and more tired than correct. Thinking that you are able to complete that workout in 5000m race pace, you will end with the same or more lactic acid than in a real race. Besides in a real run the runner motivation is suposed to be high, which is not the case of a workout. And as you imagine this is not a LT run.

When some foreign runner´s they say to me that they gonna do 5X1000m/5000m race pace with 1 minute recover near a peak/goal competition - and this is posible only forf the runners giants, may be for top runner´s in super shape, but not for avarage runner´s. Even top class runner´s, if they do that, the way i said, they don´t do it regularly (once a week)as a routine workout.

NAME:ALBERTO CHAIÇA 2004/AUGUST

August 01 – AM:60min=22kilos // PM: 20min w/upoutdoor hilly 3X10min/fast rec=3:00 min /easy run (HR 158-118/159-121/163-118) + 20min c/down=20kilos

WEEK MILEAGE:209kilos

August 02 – stop training – little allergic crisis that need tests in Portugal. No pills nothing, just tests, Doctor said he may continue because he changed from environment from Font Romeo to Portugal in the sea level

August 03 – AM:1h45min=29kilos // PM:45min =11kilos

August 04 – AM:60min=16kilos // PM:60min + 6Xstrides =16kilos

August 05 – AM:60min=16kilos // PM:50min + 6Xstrides =13kilos

August 06 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM:45min + 6Xstrides =13kilos

August 07 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM: 10m w/upoutdoor flat 20X60sec/fast rec=50sec /easy run + 10min c/down=13kilos

August 08 – AM: long one 2h00min=33kilos

WEEK MILEAGE:194kilos

August 09 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM:60min=16kilos

August 10 – AM: long one 2h10min=36kilos // PM:20m w/up +outdoor flat 10X6min/fast rec=3min/easy run (HRM 162-124/169-122/166-129/165-122/169-122/173-121/172-131/171-129/168-131/176-141) + 5min c/down=11kilos

August 11 – AM:60min=16kilos // PM:60min=16kilos

August 12 – AM:70min=17kilos // PM:50min=11kilos

August 13 – AM:60min=16kilos // PM: 20m w/upoutdoor flat 10X60sec/fast rec=45sec /easy run + 20min c/down=12kilos

August 14 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM:70min=16kilos

August 15 – AM: 1h45min =27kilos // PM:50min=13kilos

WEEK MILEAGE:243kilos

August 16 – AM:60min=16kilos // PM:60min=16kilos

August 17 – AM:80min=18kilos // PM 20min w/upoutdoor hilly 8X3min/fast rec=2:00 min /easy run (HR HRM156-124/156-125/165-133/163-127/162-125/163-123/159-123/163-104) + 20min c/down=12kilos

August 18 – AM:70min=18kilos // PM:45min=11kilos

August 19 – AM:60min=16kilos // PM:50min=13kilos

August 20 – AM:60min=16kilos // PM: 20m w/upoutdoor flat 15X45sec/fast rec=45sec /easy run + 20min c/down=11kilos

August 21 – no train – little Gemini muscular rupture, but next day he is ok to continue

August 22 – AM:70min=16kilos // PM:50min=12kilos

WEEK MILEAGE:175kilos

August 23 – AM:60min=15kilos // PM:45min=11kilos

August 24 – AM:45min=11kilos // PM;20m w/uptrack non-stop workout: 12X400m/64avg rec=100m ahead on track in 45sec45sec + 20min c/down=16kilos

August 25 – AM:50min=13kilos // PM: travel flight to Athens

August 26 – AM:45min=11kilos

August 27 – AM:45min=11kilos

August 28 – AM:40min=10kilos

August 29 –10m w/up Olympic Athens marathon - 8th place =45kilos

WEEK MILEAGE:143kilos

Month MILEAGE:791 KILOS

He passes Tergat (World Record) and Gharib (World Champ) after the 40kilos mark. Well done Alberto (LOL)

Goes on for an entire month holydays – complete rest

Antonio,

I agree with what you say regarding recoveries however there are always exceptions. A few years ago I went to Germany and stayed for a week observing training of Tegla Laroupe and Joyce Chepchumba under Volker Wagner. If I hadnt seen one of the sessions they did I would not have believed it. In an indoor 200 metre track they ran 20 x 1k with 20 seconds recovery at 10k pace. Tegla went from 3--09 s early to 3-05/7 at the end. They also ran session which I did not see 25 x 400 with 20 secs recovery in 72s -69s. They told me that they had started with long recoveries which they had cut down over a long period of time and that the session was easier with 20 seconds recovery than when it had been a minute. My thoughts were that this type of training would not be practicable for my own runners however I thought one of them might benefit. She was a runner I started to coach at age 26 who had trained up to then at a reasonable level but with very poor times.She had not broken 40 mins for 10k ;She had improved 2 years later quite considerably running 36 mins before I introduced the very short recoveries. I started her off with 8 x 400 with 20 second recoveries at 81/82 pace and eventually she was able to run 12 reps in 77 with 12 secs turnaround recovery . She now runs 6 x 1k with same 12 second recovery turnaraund in 3-17 ; 5 years further on she has now ran for England and GB at road, track and cross country and recently won the Inter Counties 5k. I shall increase the number of reps but not to the 20 mark ! I think much depends on the physioligy and psychology of the individual and it is the coaches job to decipher this. I think that group training is all very well but must take into account the requirements of each runner. Following straight on from Brendan the next 2 British 10k Champions were Charlie Spedding who won Olympic Marathon bronze and Barry Smith who was maybe the best 5k runner in the world in 1981 but there were no championships that year . I was involved in training both of these and their training was totally different but with similar results. I can post these trainings if required. Charlie still holds English record for the marathon.

Lindsay Dunn wrote:I can post these trainings if required. Charlie still holds English record for the marathon.

Wow this thread is already better than the long Renato thread, the quality of these posts are incredible!

I say it's much better to get training info from this forum rather than read a book, where all the info is coming from one point of view, and there is no interaction between the author and reader.

Of course that i agree with 100% that all depends of the individual, bt people like Tecla are the exceptions not the rule.

But let me express my opinion about Tecla. That´s perfect to justify my pint of view. Ok she did very good seasons some eyars ago, WR, HM world champs, goopd crosses, win lots of marathons in a short period. I did read something about her and also i did get some oral info because she do frequent stays in Algarve-Portugal during the winter months and she comepetes here frequently also - last time it was in last November. Now, you confirm that she did that kind of workouts. But what she did after some seasons ago ? Injuries, anemia, incapacity to get to the same top level she used to be, frequent gives up, poor marathgon results. She hardly will get the same category and the same top results and performances she did in the past. Running distance this is a sport real but also a profession and a industry, then she took risks - By pushing her to the limit - ther´s no return - may be she is rich, of course that she is rich, but i wouldn´t advise a beginner or no one that i didn´t know him deeply in his physical and phychologic characteristics to do such an heard workout frequently - or he or she may collapse in the middle of their career. Do you see my point? All extremes are for running talents and running genius, but i bet that most of Let´s Run Com readers and posters aren´t top class runners. I also know Carlos Lopes training, but i don´t advise that to no one. Even Lopes tried to coach some portuguese promises in his own training style and they all give up soon from running sport - they couldn´t resist to such tremendous training stuff intensity.

Lance

One of the rules of the training periodisation as well as the training frequency is the OVERCOMPENSATION - peak efforts/stimulus followed by sweet efforts/recover stimulus. The other rule that´s SPECIFICITY – the more you are able to run into the specifics the best. Both rules together acts is a contradistinction – that means each plays an opposite role in the training contest. The third rule that´s DIVERSITY since human body also need to train in a large spectrum of intensities independently of the efforts relate with event specificity (generic shape condition).

In a scale from 0 (zero) to be interpret zero as the lower intensity to 4 - the highest intensity, being 1 - easy intensity, 2 the medium intensity and 3 specific intensity a good formula will be 1-0-1-0 than 0-0-0-0. Do you agree Lance? But 2-1-2-1 that´s best than 2-0-2-0, or 1-0-1-0. As you see all that involves a Zero (inactivity) is no good. But now what´s best 2-2-2-2 or 2-1-2-1. May be we don´t agree one ach other. But about 3-1-3-1-versus 2-1-2-1 or 2-2-2-2

I have no doubt that the same that too much presence of a zero (inactivity) is no good, the presence of 3(relate to specific intensity is good).

Now what´s the best? 3-3-3-3 or 3-2-3-2 or 2-3-2-2 or 2-2-2-2 ? According the rule of specificity the 2 first ones are in the best condition, but according the rule of overcompensation the best formats are the 2 last ones.

Now if you ask me that if the presence of too much 2 can enable the use of the 3, as also the presence of 4 enables the use of 3 i will say that´s no good.

And about 1-2-3-4 versus 2-3-2-3. One have more diversity, but the second one format have more specificity. May be you use the fist one.

And now about OVERTRAING. May be you enter in overtraining if you try 3-3-3-3 or 3-4-3-4 or 4-4-4-4 to be simplistic because there are several formats in between as 4-3-4-4 or 3-4-3-4 or even 4-4-3-3 that´s different than 3-3-4-4 and that´s different than 3-4-4-3 or 4-3-3-4

Now we did enter in a field of subjectivity. No one can say decisively in a TIME AND SPACE perspective what´s the best training solution.

But wait Lance… We just touch the surface of the problem ! Now you need to consider what the event. You need to consider hat are the need of the event distance to know if that needs more 4 (or any other in the scale) than other event. This is a serious deal you have to face.

But in the meantime we have in front of us the individual. May be for the same event one runner needs more 4 and other needs really a zero somewhere. And the same runner, as we did see in the case of Brendan, along their career, and suppose that you don´t change from your distance event – since the same a intensity/stimulus produces different impacts in distinct occasions, that´s why ther´s the need of change. The training for the ssame runner may not be equal from day to day, from micro-cycle to micro-cycle from season to season.

That´s why training is so complex, and when I hear some folks say – why do you worry ? – go out and train, that´s so simple – they are really idiots or ignorant. Train options, being simple in his origin may turn to a great complexity.

But don´t worry, soon the physiologists will explain all our doubts. The will get a final conclusion, an universal formula. This is a my own irony joke.

Of course I can´t say this is a conference. That´s very danger, to contest as they are teaching people (LOL). I can´t say that “Thanks God that i´m an empiric” ! (LOL)

Lance-a-lot, in my opinion based in my knowledge, experience and observation the formula that fits best in most of the cases is that one of 2 to 3 hard sessions a week or in 10 days with easy days in between. Of course that i´m open to other formats, and since I see that´s the case I use a different one microcycle. But you are also right about the fact that if a runner can hold the easy days a bit intense, that´s a good training direction, may be yiu introduce that your 45min in/out runs.

Resuming i don´t think that you are right or wrong

Later I will analyse and answer to your posts questions by a different perspective.

Thanks for you questions and your help.

Antonio;

This is a great thread.

I have one question about Alberto Chaica and peaking for a marathon. I don't know a lot about him, but I think his PB in the marathon is 2:09? I think you mentioned in another thread that he had the 29th or 32nd fastest PB of the runners who competed in the Athens marathon. Yet he finished 8th, beating many faster runners in the most important race of the year. What part of his preparation allowed him to run his best on the day while so many others failed to match their best performances?

And now about OVERTRAING. May be you enter in overtraining if you try 3-3-3-3 or 3-4-3-4 or 4-4-4-4 to be simplistic because there are several formats in between as 4-3-4-4 or 3-4-3-4 or even 4-4-3-3 that´s different than 3-3-4-4 and that´s different than 3-4-4-3 or 4-3-3-4

Antonio

This is an interesting subject. Using your examples, a 3-3-3-3 or a 2-2-2-2 format is more likely to lead to overtraining and lack of progress than a 4-1-4-1 or 3-1-3-1 etc schedule. However, intensity alone does not tell the complete story - what is more important is LOAD. The problem is quantifying how difficult any training session actually is. For example, one day you could run 10x100 at max intensity, and the next day you could run for 90 minutes slowly. Obviously one session is high intensity and the other is low, but this does not automatically meant that the higher intensity session is more difficult.

There is a way you can try to quantfiy the load, a method developed by Carl Foster. For every training session you ask the runner to say how intense it felt using the 1-10 Borg category ratio scale (RPE). The runner needs to give an average rating for the entire session. You then multiply this number by the duration of the session in minutes. Therefore a steady 1 hour run at an average RPE of 5 will produce a training load of 60x5 = 300 training 'units'. By using this method every day you can track variation in day to day load. What Foster found is that the greater the variation, the greater the rate of improvement and the less likely the runner is to become overtrained.

A training schedule with little day-to-day variation is termed a monotonous schedule. It is possible to quantify the degree of monotony present within the scedule by calculating the dtandard deviation of the average daily load. You can also calculate a 'strain' value for the training by multiplying monotony by average load. It seems as though each athlete has their own individual threshold for load, monotony and strain, which if exceeded leads to the development of illness / injury or overtraining symptoms.

This has obvious implications for scedule design. For example, 2 weekly training schedules can have identical weekly loads but very different degrees of monotony. Therefore the goal would be to make the hard days hard in terms of LOAD and the same for the easy days. The danger lies in going too far or too fast on the so called easier days which means that you are too tired to do the hard sessions effectively while the 'easy' days are too 'hard' to allow recovery.

I have some trouble understanding the Borg category ratio scale. What exactly do you count into one session? Also warm ups and warm downs, striders, or only the main session?

For example: one day an athlete may run a session of 6x800m in 2:15 avg and be quite tired of it. On the Borg scale it would be 13.5 minutes x 9 = around 120 points, then lets say he did morning session of 50 easy minutes = 50x2= 100 points, so he gets 220 points for the day (not counting warm up and warm down). On the next day he runs 80minutes at easy pace in hilly area (effort of 3), so he gets 240 points for the next day, more than on hard day....

Does it mean that he stressed his body even more, or did he really recovered by doing an easy run?

Dan

In aspect of motivation i may say that 11 years ago, when we did discover Alberto Chaiça in local road runs, and that Americo did invite him to train in our orientation, when we did ask Alberto what´s the run he loves to run - he said witgh no doubt: one day i want to specialize in the marathon. But then a long way to go waited Chaiça - 98 years of imporve all his talent - we made Chaiça run track, cross and short road runs, and train accordingly. He did gain strength.

In the aspect of determination/mentality is is very strong as a marathon runner shall be. he never feel tired.

He is also very humble.

Finnaly ther´s another aspect to consider. Chaiça confidence in the training plan and obviously in his coach ideas.

And why not to say that life gives him the chance to have the running talent, and that luck alo plays a lot of influence in his classifications and sucess.

Antonio,

First I just want to say that I am glad that this thread that you have created is FINALLY getting the attention/responses that it deserves. It has turned into a great thread (many nice contributions by everybody). But YOU have done the lion’s share of work here! How do you find the time to write so much on running? Do you sleep?? J

I have a couple questions for you. Could try and explain to me better what you mean by your below comment?

--------------

"When we know that the training direction along the Brendan career that´s mileage, change some workouts designs to a great specificity, but reduce the workout frequency also indeed, may be that this may justify and answer to Lance-a-Lot some of his questions about the use of hard/specific workouts with recover in between and versus less specificity and more frequency and high up the intensity of the consider easy days."

----------

I don’t know if understand you at all there. When you say that Foster changed his training strategy to make it more about "workouts designs to a great specificity, but reduce the workout frequency", does that mean that: he reduced his # of hard workouts, but made them more specific?? And if so, how does that relate to my comments? Are you saying that Foster’s training changes further justifies the use of the "a couple hard workout sessions a week, the rest are easy/recovery steady runs" program that many use? Please clarify if I understand you correctly.

But lets say I DO understand you correctly. OK, and lets say I ALSO agree that such a concept/program is good. OK, that answers my question about why "medium-hard" sessions might interfere with the recovery and the success of the hard sessions, and therefore "medium-hard" sessions are to be avoided. OK, fine.

But I STILL do not think my MAIN question has been answered, which has always been: why is a "recovery/easy" session of STEADY 10 miles run at 5:45 per mile pace (for someone with the ability of a Chaica. You said he would often run that pace) HARDER than 60 minutes of 100m repeats run at (let’s say) 4:45 pace with EASY jog/walk rest interval breaks. (now lets not, at this point, get into "which is more useful", because if training for a marathon, yes, breaks should mostly be eliminated. But he could be training for 10k in my example. Anyway, lets focus on WHICH IS HARDER/EASIER). 71 second 400 pace is NOT hard for someone like Chaica, and he is ONLY doing this pace for 100-150m and immediately taking a break. I would think these repeat 100’s at a relaxed faster pace with such easy (jog/walk) breaks would be a quite easy workout for Chaica. Would it?

Again, it still appears that you are assuming (as most do) that an intermittent workout with faster parts (but not FAST) and breaks is harder than a slower steady effort WITHOUT breaks. Maybe it is, but I still feel there is a bias towards "steady & slower" vs "intermittent and faster" for a "daily run." And I think this bias springs from two opposite concerns:

1) One extreme part of the bias goes like this: ‘intermittent training is only used for INTENSE sessions.’ People can’t break from the traditional concept that ‘intermittent training can’t be used for a fairly easy/moderate session.’ But of course it can. Just don’t run the repeats TOO FAST, and take lots of breaks. Voila…..it is not that hard.

2) And, from the other extreme is the bias that comes from the school of thought that says: ‘when running, STOPPING (or super-slow jog/walking) is BAD! It is like "gallow-walking." The whole point of running is to NOT STOP." OK, that makes sense. One is preparing for races, and in races, you DON’T STOP/walk. But in interval/repetition workouts people stop/walk. Are such workouts useless? No. AND……isn’t the OTHER point of racing is that one needs to go "fast", to "move at a certain speed." Yes, of course. So what does "steady SLOW" running have to with THAT? On ONE level, not a lot. Now before anyone jumps on me, I have already said several times that I fully understand that VOLUME OF AEROBIC CONDITIONING WORK is essential to a distance runners’ training, and so too is recovery. So of course I see where the volume of slower running is useful. But as I have demonstrated, I believe an easy-ish INTERMITTENT session could also be carried out for a good volume of time, where the HR never goes to high or low, and thus the same aerobic conditioning is achieved as the steady slow run.

So it seems to me that we all agree that:

First and foremost, one needs a good volume of aerobic training in order to be successful distance runner. Additionally, one needs a couple hard/harder sessions each week to work on speed/specific race-pace adaptive training. THEREFORE, one can’t train hard every day, and must keep most training sessions (except for the HARD sessions) quite manageable so that recovery can occur ALONG WITH the added aerobic development that is being reaped from this good volume of easy/moderate minutes run each day.

OK, we agree ( I assume) on the basics. But then one must ask the question:

"how does one achieve a good volume of aerobic training without making those DAILY sessions too difficult?" To do so, one must sacrifice something.

Most people sacrifice "speed/pace" to make the sessions manageable/repeatable and able to produce a good volume (time, miles) of running.

But why not sacrifice "steadiness/continuity" instead of speed, in order to make them just as manageable?? Doesn’t taking breaks(or REAL easy parts) make the run "easy", doable, manageable, repeatable, and able to produce a good amount of minutes also? I would think so. But, by sacrificing continuity, one is able to RUN FASTER MORE OFTEN ( only for short periods in this type of workout, but the short periods add up, and even during the breaks the heart is receiving some stimulus since the breaks are not complete). Isn’t that SPEED FACTOR as important to a runner as the "steadiness/continuity" factor everyone seems to cherish so much and so afraid to abandon???

To repeat one last time: To make a workout relatively easily managed and repeatable, and able to contain a good volume of aerobic running, something must be sacrificed . Since it will not be volume(on that we agree), it must be pace or steadiness/continuity. Why does almost everyone (except Igloi disciples) choose to sacrifice pace to make the run easy, as opposed to sacrificing continuity?

Since I have not seen a great answer yet to that question, that is why I agree with Antonio wholeheartedly on this quote:

"That´s why training is so complex, and when I hear some folks say – why do you worry ? – go out and train, that´s so simple – they are really idiots or ignorant. Train options, being simple in his origin may turn to a great complexity."

AMEN!!! If it were simple, we would not be here.

Antonio, can you still post information on Pascual and the training of his Spanish 1500m runners?