Renato Canova: Why is continuous fast running better than interval running?

I'm not sure if he's said that. He's general philosophy seems to be that you need everything, fast long runs, intervals, mechanics, etc, and doesnt claim that no piece is more effective (generally).

In terms of aerobic power (not sure what aerobic work is to you) in 2006 he said that at 95% (of 5k pace) you can do intervals up to 12k or a long continuous run up to 7k to increase aerobic power.

At 90% of 5k pace he describes the workouts as 10k increasing to 20k of continuous running. He doesn't specifically say that continuous is more effective than intervals, but at 90% of 5k pace, frankly it would just feel silly to do intervals/take breaks. I guess if you don't want to train hard you could break that up, but if you're at an honest 90% of current 5k pace, the intervals are really unnecessary and you wouldn't break if up for the same reason that you try to not to take breaks during regular runs. At anything slower than 90% of 5k pace, the idea of a break becomes even sillier and the same logic applies.

The above would be true for developing aerobic power. If you are in the specific phase of marathon training he does describe workouts that are at the above paces but are done with intervals.

The general development of aerobic fitness is going to come from more continuous fast running. I wouldn't have been able to argue your question as well had you not included that point. Furthermore, from the perspective of anyone basically running 5K and up, an event of which the majority (however slight) is aerobic, continuous fast running will be a better development.

For example, here's two lactate threshold sessions I would potentially do in the late part of my base phase and first part of faster aerobic work:

5 miles at 5:30 pace

5 x Mile at 5:30 pace w/ 200m jog in 60 seconds

Both sessions are effectively the same volume at the same pace, but my aerobic development is going to be far better from the straight tempo, primarily because the continuous nature of the effort means that it is progressively getting harder, and at a faster rate compared to the individual interval running. The intervals will get harder as they go, but the overall effort exertion will be less by the end of that session.

If anything, I consider intervals as a great transition workout to be continuous fast tempo style workouts. For example, I might do the intervals based workouts for a few weeks, building up from 3 miles to 6 miles over 5 weeks, and then I would start doing 4-6 mile tempos over the next few weeks. Using the intervals as a stepping stone makes the continuous fast running much easier. The continuous tempos are more beneficial to me aerobically, even at the end of th eprogressive system of workouts.

TLDR: at the aerobic level, any continuous effort will be more effective than the intervals if the volume and pace are slightly similar. This is because of the harder effort that inevitably comes with the continuous effort. Also, +1 to the above poster.

90% of 5k pace is so easy you should just do it as continuous running? So a runner with a 5k pace of 5 flat should never do intervals at 5:30 pace? People do tempo paced intervals all the time, for various reasons, and 5:30 pace would be a little faster than tempo pace for that runner.

Of course they would be longer intervals, maybe as long as 2k in length, but the break still can be beneficial. It can reduce the stress of the workout and allow you to recover faster for your next workout. That isnt the same as "not wanting to work hard." This sport is full of people who never reached their potential because they werent willing to take necessary rest and easy days.

I dont think you are representing what Canova suggests.

I am curious to how this thinking applies to his Marathon Specific workouts. He does a lot of intervals at MP with 1k moderate rest, but also the "fast long runs" at 90-97% of MP.

Are both necessary?

It's interesting going through Sondre Moen's training, in the months leading up to his 59:48 half marathon.

For his faster track workouts (with paces in the mile-10k range), he did a very high volume of short reps, with generous recoveries across the entire session. Here's an example:

Thursday 3 (Track in St. Moritz) :

4 x 1200m (recovery 2'50") in 3'17"0 - 3'17"2 - 3'17"6 - 3'18"2 (recovery 4'50") +

5 x 600m (recovery 1'50") in 1'36"0 - 1'35"6 - 1'36"5 - 1'35"4 - 1'35"6 (recovery 4'46") +

6 x 300m (recovery 1'25" >< 1'30") in 43" - 44"

Adjusted for the altitude, the 1200s were run at ~10k pace, the 600s at ~5k pace, and the 300s at a shade quicker than mile pace. These reps are shorter than we traditionally see. We're used to seeing mile-2k reps at 10k pace, 1k-mile reps at 5k pace, and 400-600-800 reps at mile pace.

The global volume is also high: 3 miles at 10k pace, 2 miles at 5k pace, and 1+ mile at 800-mile pace, all in the same session.

Finally, the total recovery across the entire session is ~33 minutes. And this workout is not unusual by any stretch. This is not your grandmother's 5 x 1200 at 5k pace with 2 minutes recovery, then jog home. This whole session takes close to an hour.

In Moen's training, I also see the 30-40k fast long runs, 50-60 minute fartleks (with 30-60" fast reps)... but I don't see any continuous running at HM or M pace. Here are two sessions:

Thursday 5 (Valle Argentera) : 30 km in 1:36'39" (average 3'13"4) with the last 5 km in 15'36" --> this is 13.7% slower than sea level half marathon pace, equivalent to a 5:20/mi HM runner hitting 6:00-6:05 pace.

Sunday 8 (Track) :

7 x 2000m (rec. 2'52" >< 2'56") in : 5'50"4 - 5'50"7 - 5'52"7 - 5'53"0 - 5'51"2 - 5'50"7 - 5'51"2 -- these reps are 70/lap vs. 68/lap for sea level HM race pace; and the recoveries are generally longer than you would expect.

This turned into a long winded post, but Canova's training is definitely unique compared to the traditional 8k tempo at half marathon pace, 5 x 1200 at 5k pace, 10x400 at mile pace, etc.

Do you have a link to that training?

It's all in this thread:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=8495930&page=4

Starting on page 5.

orthocs4life wrote:

Why do you feel that continuous fast running is more effective than intermittent running, or running in intervals? I understand that both have their place in a training year, but for aerobic work?

Canova has never told that continuous fast running is better than interval running. He mix the two things with equal importance.

Thanks. I think the track sessions in St. Moritz were prior to a few good 5000m races. His PB from this year is 13:20, thus

64 per lap pr 3:16 per 1200m. The 1200m at altitude must be at least his 5000m pace perhaps a bit quicker, no?

I think he had a much faster innate 5000 ability. Have a look at this workout:

Monday 14 (Track in Oslo) :

2000m in 5'31"8 (rec. 3'55") +

5 x 300m (rec. 30") in 46" >< 47" (rec. 3'54") +

1600m in 4'19"3 (rec. 3'55") +

5 x 300m (rec. 30") in 45" >< 46"5 (rec. 3'48") +

1200m in 3'12"6 (rec. 3'56") +

5 x 300m (rec. 30") in 44"8 >< 46"1 (rec. 7'52") +

800m in 1'57"2 (this is his unofficial PB !).

If we assume his true 800 ability to closer to 1:54, then the line of fit from 800 to HM would be his 5k/10k closer to 13:10 (63.2/lap) / 27:17 (65.5/lap). Perhaps the 1200s are closer to ~8k pace, but I suspect the 600s are still about ~5k pace.

he ran 13:20 once and 13:30 twice this summer so I don't think he is quite there yet. If he returns to the track next year (he is probably running the marathon in the Europeans in '18), he should be able to gp 13:10/27:30 at least.

His basic speed might not be good enough for a track career. I see 2.06 though.

Every schedule he posts is different and tailored to the athlete, but 90% of 5k pace intervals would be a departure from his general guidelines that I've seen him post. See here:

I'm most certainly not misrepresenting what he said at that point in time. Maybe he's changed his stance since then. Again like I said as well. For half marathon training maybe he'd recommend 90% of 5k pace intervals, because that would roughly be half marathon pace. There the goal would likely be achieving a specific volume at race pace, and not aerobic development though.

A 5:00 pace 5k runner could do intervals at 5:30 pace. I'm sure some people do, although most are probably running more like 90% of GOAL 5k pace and lying to themselves about their fitness. Either way a continuous 5:30 effort will be better for aerobic development than 5:30 pace with breaks. That seems like an obvious point. Are you arguing otherwise? Or are you arguing the unrelated point that Canova may have had an athlete to intervals at 90% of 5k pace at some point? That seems possible given the variation in his training schedules that he's posted.

Wow.

How many of Renato Canova's runners won medals at the 2017 World Championships in the 5000m and 10000m?

Here is a 10 x 800m workout from Coach Bart Yasso Simpson that I like to use before important 5000m and 10000m races.

Milton Friedman wrote:

with generous recoveries across the entire session.

i bet he's not jogging

To everyone:

I based my post on something he said in this post:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?board=1&id=222028&thread=222028

It's somewhere in there.

I'm not speaking about intervals at or over race pace, because continuous running then is impossible. But talking solely for aerobic development

See page 5

Bump

I think Renato coached in his career 9 or 10 athletes under 27' in 10000m, with the best at 26'30".

About this year, two athletes of his group became world champions, one woman in cross country (Irene Cheptai), and one man in marathon (Geoffrey Kirui). Another athlete closed the season in first position in the final world lists in Mile and 3000m (Ronald Kwemoi), injured during the DL of Monaco, and not able to run well in WCh.

It's difficult to follow and to understand his system, from what he writes, because the training is build on the individual characteristics, and adjusted according practical situations (I remember, years ago, he wrote the training of Abel Kirui before winning WCh in Daegu, where hw had 14 days off in the last 45 days, for a problem in one knee).

However, I think he never choose between long continuous run and intervals, but thinks one complementary of the other.

BobbyClarke wrote:

I am curious to how this thinking applies to his Marathon Specific workouts. He does a lot of intervals at MP with 1k moderate rest, but also the "fast long runs" at 90-97% of MP.

Are both necessary?

I know of a lot of people who have crashed and burned from doing "fast" long runs at just below their MP. It's becoming quite a phenomenon because I would say the majority of people I follow do stupidly fast long runs.

Better to run the whole thing easy or inject segments of tempo in (faster than MP).