Principles of a Daniels Approach to Distance Training

And this point goes to the crux of what I think could be the interesting part of the discussion. I have seen jewbacca's training first hand (well, via his weekly posts about his training), and I agree with him that it is a Daniels style approach. Yet it certainly violates one of the general principles that I and others would associate with Daniels - no "in-between" paces.

But when you look at it in context - carryover vo2max fitness from a training cycle, goal race not relying heavily on vo2max, a limited amount of time for a training cycle that requires some rearranging, it is a decision that makes sense.

And to me, in that context, and understanding that you are going to maybe only get 85-90 of the possible vo2max adaptation and maybe the same percentage of an LT adaptation than you would have gotten with more traditional Daniels workouts, I think it is consistent with a Daniels approach even though it is violative of what most people think of first when they think of Daniels.

So I think this kind of represents relatively off center wing of the range of training under a Daniels approach.

Now let's take it a step further, if jewbacca had subbed CV pace intervals in place of vo2max intervals in the main phase of a 5k training cycle, I don't know that I get there on it still being a Daniels style approach (although I have done just that for a woman who was having health issues and whose doctor did not want her at her max heart rate - so we went with CV pace for her figuring we'd try to get that 90% benefit).

Smoove wrote:

no "in-between" paces.

This is the principle that defines Jack Daniels training system: there are a small number of paces/efforts that are optimal for training different physiological systems and training at these paces (when added to a typical race schedule) is sufficient to train a distance runner for anything 1500m and up. Everything else in JD's books is pretty standard and very flexible.

Smoove wrote:

Now let's take it a step further, if jewbacca had subbed CV pace intervals in place of vo2max intervals in the main phase of a 5k training cycle, I don't know that I get there on it still being a Daniels style approach (although I have done just that for a woman who was having health issues and whose doctor did not want her at her max heart rate - so we went with CV pace for her figuring we'd try to get that 90% benefit).

I agree with this. This marathon cycle I have the luxury of a full 24-week block, and that will include the 6 weeks of VO2max focus.

I would also love to hear from someone who's familiar with Tinman. From what I've seen, he uses a lot of Daniels' research and principles, but expands the training paces considerably. I'm not sure there's a well-defined "Tinman system," as he appears to take the idea of individuality and flexibility further than Daniels' books discuss.

Tinman also discusses muscle fiber recruitment and how to train a runner based on their apparent fast/slow twitch. I think some of Tinman's research has focused on this. It's something I want to understand better.

One Tinman idea that's caught my eye for marathon training is Big Workouts. It's also discussed by Pfitz, though in perhaps a more limited sense. A Big Workout is one that lasts roughly 90-120 min including warmup and cooldown; the duration helps condition the muscles to the pounding of the marathon. A runner can build to 2 Big Workouts per week, and all running between needs to be easy enough to allow recovery for the next session. A Big Workout can be included in the long run. They are demanding, require a generous base, and make up a bulk of what would be Daniels' Phase III.

I think if you don't mind yourself what you are ding ,just think something you fell relaxed and happy,you will run a long time . Don't concentrate on your feet and legs,keep music which you very like ,you will gain a surprise .

sijielin wrote:

I think if you don't mind yourself what you are ding ,just think something you fell relaxed and happy,you will run a long time . Don't concentrate on your feet and legs,keep music which you very like ,you will gain a surprise .

While a very nice sentiment and undoubtedly true, that's not the point of this thread.

(While also not the point of this thread), I too would love to hear someone familiar with Tinman training explain exactly how it's adapted from Daniels. I'm hoping and looking forward to training myself after college next year. The Tinman system is the hot thing right now, with its success at the high school (Loudoun Valley) and professional (Drew Hunter, with Reed Fischer, Sam Parsons, and Tyler Mueller as evidence that it's not just the fact that Hunter is a supreme talent), so I've been leaning toward using that kind of training system. But the success that posters like Smooth have had while being intelligent Daniels disciples and the formulaic simplicity makes me think I maybe shouldn't abandon a Daniels approach just yet.

my 2c wrote:

I would add one more cornerstone principle for Daniels: Training each energy system is most efficiently done at the pace that optimally stresses each system. So v02max work is done at v02max pace, and LT work is done at LT pace. It sounds obvious, but it actually contrasts sharply with systems that stress race paces rather than energy systems.

That was my biggest take away when I first read it all those years ago. So often a track session would be done at a pace that was way too fast with a much too long rest period. Daniels is about doing the work at the proper effort given your current fitness. That's much different than working out at goal race pace.

EZ10Miler wrote:

my 2c wrote:

I would add one more cornerstone principle for Daniels: Training each energy system is most efficiently done at the pace that optimally stresses each system. So v02max work is done at v02max pace, and LT work is done at LT pace. It sounds obvious, but it actually contrasts sharply with systems that stress race paces rather than energy systems.

That was my biggest take away when I first read it all those years ago. So often a track session would be done at a pace that was way too fast with a much too long rest period. Daniels is about doing the work at the proper effort given your current fitness. That's much different than working out at goal race pace.

+ 1

my 2c wrote:

I would add one more cornerstone principle for Daniels: Training each energy system is most efficiently done at the pace that optimally stresses each system. So v02max work is done at v02max pace, and LT work is done at LT pace. It sounds obvious, but it actually contrasts sharply with systems that stress race paces rather than energy systems.

This made me curious about something.

In Pfitz's Faster Road Racing (2014), he says that although for the past 20 years the consensus has been that running LT pace is the best way to improve LT, new understanding of the physiology behind it has caused some coaches to evolve their approach.

Specifically, running a bit faster than LT pace is thought to be more effective at improving LT. If your LT pace is 5:00 for example, then you'd run tempos at 4:50-5:00.

He also mentions a different kind of workout that he calls Change-of-Pace Tempo, in which our 5:00 LT pace runner would alternate going 4:45-4:55 pace and 5:00-5:10 pace. You begin with at least 4 minutes at the faster pace, then do at least 4 minutes at the slower pace, and then subsequent bouts at the faster pace are 1-4 minutes long, and subsequent bouts at the slower pace remain 4+ minutes long, making sure you stay in the right intensity zone and don't overwork.

Any Daniels runners/coaches have any concern that their threshold work isn't optimal? Anyone have any sources on this other than Pfitz?

A couple things.

1) Lactate threshold or speed at lactate threshold as I've seen it described in a few papers is a function of v02max and running economy. It's not super surprising then that pace changes would be effective. In my mind these type of workouts force the runner to be economical at various paces.

2) Not new research, but I came across this paper awhile back. I don't have access to the full publication but based on the abstract, the group that was assigned more intense training than LT had better scores (v02max & v02LT) compared with the group assigned training at LT and control groups. This study used stationary bikes as the training. I do not think these were trained athletes either as evidenced by the changes in v02max after training. It could just be that the more intense group was also improving v02max in addition to LT. You'd expect a 12-week program working v02max in untrained athletes would be more effective in the short run than a less intense program at LT. So not great research, but it's all I could find because I've been wondering the same thing recently. Is LT pace truly the optimal way to train LT?

That was something interesting you point at I think. Absolutely It can be of value to improve lactate threshold. I remember Canova have told about his runners sometimes goes faster than LT and sometimes slower, depends on what phase they are in. Even a Norwegian coach I read about used this variation of LT training. I coach some very good Kenyans, and one of them use to train once per week with Eliud Kipchoge and a big group. They use to run LT - intervals once per week and the pace alternates a little. Last tuesday they ran 10 x 1600m at 4.45- 4.50 min but usually they will run faster f.ex 5 x 2000m at 5.40-5.45 + 5 x 1000m at 2.45-2.50 . The coach as most of us knows is the great Patrick Sang. So even in his coaching we see that the LT-pace will vary a little . Mostly the runners have a rest of 200m jog between the intervals. I myself don`t vary the LT-pace, but it seems to also function very well (my fastest marathoner so far 2.07.38 ).

Playing devil's advocate here, but I wonder if calling these workouts LT and VO2max workouts is a misrepresentation. While the primary goal of these workouts might be to improve the VO2max or LT, I don't think you can achieve adaption in one area to the exclusion of the other. A hard interval workout is still going to result in some amount of LT adaption and tempo run is going to result in some amount VO2max adaption. I'll argue that you can get some amount of VO2max and LT improvement just from easy running. It is just that the rate of improvement will be lower and you may plateau at a lower level than you would if you incorporated harder running/workouts. This is especially true for untrained athletes. On the other hand, well trained athletes require these workouts to maintain or achieve peak performance.

I'm not entirely clear how this is relevant to either the broader conversation or the current discussion of optimal LT paces. With regards to the broader conversation of principles, the Daniels Interval (I) workouts are particular flavor of Intervals, designed to maximize time at VO2max (3k-5k pace intervals lasting 3-5 minutes), hence VO2max workout. He doesn't refer to lactate threshold or LT, but rather Threshold (T). So LT is a misrepresentation in that regards, but a needless correction IMO.

With the regards to this specific conservation about optimizing LT adaptations with T paced or near-T paced running, no one is saying that the you can only achieve one adaption. I see how it could be misinterpreted if you were unfamiliar with Daniels, but its not meant to be a misrepresentation. Are you simply taking issue with Daniels terminology?

Werk wrote:

I always found Daniels guideline of improving only one component of running in one workout to be limiting. One could work on various components throughout a workout by using different paces as in a fartlek. Of course, that would be deviating from his principle. So my real question is that by altering the training plan itself, would it still help you gain benefits? Or should one strive to adhere to the plan as close as possible. I know this detracts from the discussion but I have always been curious about this.

At a clinic about 15 years ago Daniels said something to the effect that you focus/change one variable at a time. I guess the scientist in him, especially when writing a book will do this. If we tinker too much we might not truly know which stimulus was responsible for change in performance.

I agree however that you as the coach, just like an experienced chef, could deviate from the recipe to get good results. The best disciple of Daniels I know deviated a bit and had consistently great teams. But he knew his athletes and how and when to tinker with the different variables.

A few thoughts on some of the discussion points:

I agree with Still Improving - and I don't anyone disagrees - that there can be some benefit to your vo2max from LT workouts and vice versa. That doesn't change anything for me. I think it is analogous to the shorthand that different people use regarding the different phases of their training cycles. I might refer to the 6 week block of vo2max work that I do early in a marathon cycle as the "vo2max phase," but I still do threshold work during that phase. The issue is one of emphasis. The emphasis in vo2max workouts is to improve your vo2max, so even though there is an LT benefit, it is a vo2max workout. I think this is especially true for a Daniels approach since a primary goal of a Daniels approach is to obtain the desired adaptation with the least amount of stress on your body, so you would never do vo2max work for the primary purpose of attaining an LT adaptation.

I am not sure about the point of distinguishing between Daniels' use of T instead of LT. While he uses T as a shorthand for the pace for training for purposes of implementing an LT adaptation, he does indeed refer to lactate threshold - in fact, the very first section of his book in which he discusses T/LT has the subheading "Increasing Lactate Threshold." Not a big deal either way as the previous poster pointed out.

As to the variable paces for LT work, I have never felt like I have missed out on LT adaptations. I think some of that may be because of my particular fitness profile - LT work has always been hard for me, and I suspect it is an area of weakness for me in that I may not have a naturally high LT, but I do have a trainable LT, so LT work just hurts and I can get a good LT adaptation in any event.

But I do think that we can all admit that while Daniels developed his approach to training based on the best available science, our body of knowledge continues to evolve. If you have a concern that you are not getting the best bang for your buck, there are certainly ways to address that. First, you can use progression runs in place of straight tempo runs so that you get some time on either side of the 20:00 T pace. Daniels expressly advocates for progression runs as an alternative to straight tempo runs. You can also make sure that you do cruise intervals in place of some straight 20:00 tempo runs. While Daniels is very clear his purpose for suggesting cruise intervals is to allow for an increase in volume at T pace and not a faster pace during the workout, I think that as a practical matter, anyone who does cruise intervals regularly will tell you that they tend to end up just a bit faster than their 20:00 tempo run pace. Finally, we can all race just a bit more often. I am going to go full school old man here, but in my collegiate era, we raced close to 30 times per school year, whereas now most collegiate teams are probably closer to 20 times per year. I am not saying we should race every weekend, or that we should try to race ourselves into shape, but I am saying that racing brings incredible training benefits. For most conventional distances, you get full LT adaptation the entire race (after the first minute or two), and for most of those races, that comes at a pace faster than your LT pace, so if you think that Daniels might have it wrong, racing from the 5k through the 15k should probably assuage your concerns. Plus, racing has great LT adaptations (particularly at the 5k distance, but also at longer distances), and the mental edge that racing produces is worthwhile in and of itself.

Great stuff here, Smoove. I really enjoyed reading your post.

Smoove wrote:

Plus, racing has great LT adaptations (particularly at the 5k distance, but also at longer distances), and the mental edge that racing produces is worthwhile in and of itself.

Obvious typo here - I meant to say that racing has great vo2max adaptations, particularly at the 5k distance.

In addition to what you are here saying Smoove I would like to give a comment on this: I also think about the terminology T and LT workouts that Daniels refers to. And when I back in 1984 came in contact with his system I read it in Runner`s World and started to follow it out from the paces that was given there and just called to be T-pace or Threshold pace. I trained at paces that for me in training at least 20 min sustained should be around 3.15 min/ km to run 30 min at 10 k in a race( I ran later 29.51 on this training). Mostly my T- workouts then was running 10-12 km at the track at that pace 3.15min/km. Many years later when I found the figures in Daniels VDOT- tabell I saw he used the so called LT-pace , and that was quite faster than my previous T-pace to run 30 min at 10k in a race. If I then had known this difference I had been running 3.08 min/km instead at LT-paced intervals which gives a better stimulus. But my believe now is that the T- pace for runs 20 min or more still can be of advantage to use as a " pre- LT" workout or sometimes alternate the both paces. But so far all my runners just doing LT-pace intervals of 800-3000m . At last just a little extra ; a citat from Daniels " First I studied in Stockholm ( the capital of Sweden) with some of the great physiologists of our time. From them I learned the results of their pioneering studies in exercise physiology , and how to apply laboratory research to real life training and racing situations. "

Smoove - This is great stuff, thank you. As a follower and advocate of JD, I think you really hit the nail on the head with this entire approach. One question for you though and it's not something fully developed in his book (at least the third edition):

You talk about Work to Rest ratios. For T pace, you mention it's about 5 to 1, which is about right. The one area where I'm not certain on is his I pace work.

If you read that section, he gives various workouts with I pace that are at varying distances. This is also true in his plans, where he may start at 800 meter but build up to 1200. However, I didn't see anything about him changing the rest too much. He does lengthen the rest to 4 minutes for 1 mile I pace (and my lord you would need it if you're doing that kind of work)

Do you think that you would rest 50% more on 1200 meter repeats than 800 meters? The reason I ask is that I often alternate between something like 6x1K and 5x1200 just to mix it up a bit, but I always keep the rest at 3 minutes. Should the rest be different at I pace depending on the distance?

Great stuff here Coach JS! I have never thought about it like that before . I will try to vary LT intervals and that you told about the T tempo runs.Thanks a lot.