The '20 minute tempo run'

Yeah like I said it depends on weekly mileage, experience and what your 10km PR is. Usually better to be on the more conservative side with this type of workout...esp early on in a training cycle and in taper phase. If it is over 40-min then Threshold/LT is closer to your 10km race pace than your half marathon. As we also brought up in this thread take the pace tables (from Daniels or wherever) with a grain of salt. Your fitness is a moving target anyway. Of course exact pace will be depend on Running Economy, how you feel on the day (ie. stress and environmental factors). So it could vary 5-10 sec per mile. My big thing is with the Running Economy factor though. The whole goal of distance running training is to improve efficiency so velocity-Pace at LT is closer to velocity-Pace at Vo2max. (And likewise for a marathoner, to get velocity-Pace that can be sustained in a marathon closer to velocity-Pace at LT). To to clarify my comment on Vo2max dropping after age 25: I'm talking about absolute Vo2max potential. Of course if someone has never run a step in their life and they start training at age 25 then they can increase their relative Vo2max - compared to when they weren't training at all. Whereas someone who ran in their teens, did structured workouts and ran high mileage in college..it is going to be hard to increase absolute Vo2max scores after age 25. The improvements come from better Running Economy.

Slow jogger wrote:

I did a 20 min tempo the other night, and it was probably closer to 10k race pace for me. Wasn't intended to be that 'hard' but I went with the idea of comfortably hard. My last mile of my tempo was probably harder than it should have been but it was definitely not a maxed effort to reach 20 minutes. I probably could have carried on at that effort for another 10 to 20 mins if I really wanted to, but I would have to suffer more than what I probably should to do so, HOWEVER I would have started off slower if I was going to go for a 30 or 40 min tempo run. I'm assuming I did this correct. Just went by what Daniel's says on page 53, first paragraph of his third edition. I'm wondering if I should order the second or first edition from Amazon.

well,, wrote:

The exercise physiology jerk off contest on this thread is just pathetic.

well,, you know what to do about it don't you?

To anyone who might be interested. For most of the last century people thought that 'lactic acid' was waste product. We don't produce lactic acid, we produce latate, which is one of the most wonderful molecules in all of nature, feeding every cell in our body.

If that's a jerk off comment... well,, I don't know what to say to you. But I know you can do a lot better than that.

pariah wrote:

well,, wrote:

The exercise physiology jerk off contest on this thread is just pathetic.

well,, you know what to do about it don't you?

To anyone who might be interested. For most of the last century people thought that 'lactic acid' was waste product. We don't produce lactic acid, we produce latate, which is one of the most wonderful molecules in all of nature, feeding every cell in our body.

If that's a jerk off comment... well,, I don't know what to say to you. But I know you can do a lot better than that.

But lactic acid causes soreness!!

Says every athlete and coach that hasn't read into exercise physiology.

Bump

I used to do a 20 minute tempo run at 6:40 pace, covering 3 miles exactly in 20 minutes. Pb was 19:45, so around 6:20 min/mile.

The tempo runs made zero difference to my 5k time, like, absolutely no difference at all.

I've found it better to do a 7 or 8 mile run and drop a few faster miles in the middle.

clarissa wrote:

I used to do a 20 minute tempo run at 6:40 pace, covering 3 miles exactly in 20 minutes. Pb was 19:45, so around 6:20 min/mile.

The tempo runs made zero difference to my 5k time, like, absolutely no difference at all.

I've found it better to do a 7 or 8 mile run and drop a few faster miles in the middle.

7or8 miles how?

sounder wrote:

clarissa wrote:

I used to do a 20 minute tempo run at 6:40 pace, covering 3 miles exactly in 20 minutes. Pb was 19:45, so around 6:20 min/mile.

The tempo runs made zero difference to my 5k time, like, absolutely no difference at all.

I've found it better to do a 7 or 8 mile run and drop a few faster miles in the middle.

7or8 miles how?

To get a better warm up? My tempo pace was always better after building up for a few miles and then doing a tempo run. Faster pace with easier breathing.

what to do? wrote:

Half marathon pace? Risky, because at the supposed lactate threshold/ventilatory threshold whatever, it can be quite tough to keep it together.

I am as sure as I can be that 'tempo runs' are best done over the last few miles of a long run, because if the idea is to be more efficient, that's where it is going to happen if you are running well. Trying to do this on fresh legs, well that's more like racing and racing in training usually leads to over training. There are only a few occasions when this actually works for me and I guess everyone else too?

I had today scheduled as an EZ day but the weather felt good and I ran to the barn the last few miles of my EZ run. For me, tempos work best when I'm warmed up and I've already ran a few miles.

Opened up steady and EZ at 8:23 pace for 3.5 miles, then came home in progressively faster speed, averaging 7:24 for the last 3.5 miles, including a 7:04 last mile! Cooler weather helped but it's still warm relative to what we'll get when we race marathons this fall.

I'm relatively new to running but I have yet to see an improvement in my 5k times from running tempo runs.

My 5k is 18:50, but I can do 10 miles at 6:40 or 6:50. I've sometimes done 5 mile tempos in times of 32:30 to 33:30 (6:30 to 6:40 pace) as 20 minutes feels too short.

I just don't get the hype. The only ways I ever saw improvements in my times were from increasing my overall mileage and running doubles - even when all of it is at 8-9 pace on every run.