Double "Threshold" workouts, in Depth

How is it that you know how much talent Bekele has?

In addition to what Marius discovered, recovering faster when doing threshold efforts in parallel the same day rather than in series on successive days, more volume can also be sustained. I realize that is obvious to most, but some on this thread like Phil are comparing two 10K workouts to one 20K workout. I don't think that is accurate, as it would likely be two 10K workouts versus one 16K workout.

Anyway, the second threshold workout usually feels even better than the first, you could also say greater speed at same lactate in the AM, so there is an intuitive feel to it being a very effective method.

This is not something only elites will benefit from. Anyone with the time and motivation to two workouts that day instead of one can just break it up. Figure you can handle about 62% each workout compared to what you'd do for a single workout. It's that simple.

Exactly! This isn't reserved for just elites, but anyone with the motivation and wherewithal to adjust it to their training. When it comes to threshold training, usually more is better up to a certain point. This enables you to do more with less fatigue which is like a double whammy. It isn't magic training but it allows you to sustain higher volumes, which is the "magic" in this approach.

I suspect Phil is either disingenuous or ignorant of the differences, that's why he thinks he knows everything.

I like the idea of the double threshold session. These guys are mostly running sub-threshold broken up into shorter intervals than we typically expect. A relatively easy workout on paper. This allows them to do it twice in one day getting in huge volume. Clearly this is important for events as short as 1500m. Probably not many milers on planet Earth putting in 20 kilometers of tempo work in one day.

It is important to note, however, as a previous poster pointed out, most humans can't run a 1:46 800 as the Swedish runner did (and based on that I imagine he'll be a 3:30 guy soon). Speed development has to be considered a high priority for all milers who aren't 1:44 runners.

Oh, definitely. Speed development and particularly pure speed is very important from an early age. Sprints and frequent strides should be a part of any ambitious mid-distance runner.

I think people mistake the Ingebrigtsens training a little bit, they think they do the base phase stuff year round. That notion is obviously silly, you can't do away with periodisation. They definitely do harder track work leading up to the track season. You can see them doing fast 400s, 300s and 200s on the tv show.

Horizon wrote:

Shameless bump of my own post with a presentation Kalle Berglund's coach gave at some point.

HR intensity scale:

1: 62-82%

2: 82-92%

3: 92-97%

4: 97%<

5: Speed

Zone 1 upper bound at 82% seems a bit high. Other scales usually have zone 1 up to 72%.

What's the advantage of raising the lowest intensity zone which is where the majority of the mileage takes place?

You can't talk about HR zones in those terms - there's many ways of dividing it up.

In terms of maxHR zones, Karvonen classic division (eg, Garmin's default. 50/60/70.. %) doesn't make much sense. It however works well with %HRR zones, so that <60% is recovery, 70% is aerobic threshold, 90% is anaerobic threshold. Usually, at least. %Max HR is not individualised as much but still, we know aerobic threshold is around 80-85%, while anaerobic is closer to 90%. See also Pfizinger and Daniels HR tables. So z2's upper bound is aerobic threshold, Z4 upper bound is anaerobic. The other 3 zones are more arbitrary.

Seiler uses those 3 physiological zones, and in a way it's more similar to Kalle's than the classic 5 zones model. Let's see how.

Z1 for Kalle is what, in the 5zones model, we divide into Z1 (recovery) and Z2 (aerobic); same as Seiler Z1. Z2 for Kalle is the area between the aerobic threshold and the anaerobic; it's Z3+Z4 in the 5zone, and Z2 for Seiler. Z3 for Seiler and Z5 in the 5zonesmodel is usually unreliable, one should use pace or power to get more granularity there. But Kalle divides it into a submaximal (for his 4.5-7 mmol/L workouts) and supramaximal. Which is OK to analyse workouts, since they'll be using lactate and pace on the field anyway.

Mike Smith has implemented double threshold days with his team at NAU in the last two years. I think it's pretty dangerous to do this with college kids because, as another poster pointed out, most people run their threshold and tempo runs way too fast. If you do these days too fast it is a recipe for disaster. You can find videos or other information out there on what the NAU guys are doing and they seem to be running these days pretty fast. Close to 3 min k pace at 7,000 feet. That seems too fast to me, even for the guys that are running the 13:20's for 5,000m. Obviously it is working well but maybe it won't last. I do think it's very easy to over train if you are doing double threshold days too fast.

I'm not the biggest fan of Steve Magness but I remember reading one of his blogs (I believe the blog was about mileage) where he discussed the concept of doing only what is necessary in training. A double threshold day is increasing the amount of threshold volume that somebody is doing. If you have only do 4 or 5 miles of threshold volume previously why not start by doing 6 miles for a while. Then 7, and 8 etc. That build-up can take years but it always leaves the athlete with something to improve on.

As another poster said, there is no magic training (except for J.S. ;) ). If double threshold days were the best way to train everybody would be doing that. But they aren't Geordie Beamish was doing double threshold days in his last year at NAU. He's now moved to OAC where he is not doing double threshold. He's doing less threshold volume and considerably less at that. His last 6 months has been the best of his career.

LateRunnerPhil wrote:

Yep, very good post. Mike Smith from NAZ Elite has been using these workouts for ages. Wouldn't be surprised if Gjert was inspired by Smith.

Here is it in action by one of his coached athletes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2vdCjJZ1uQ

AM Workout:

6xMile w/ 90 sec rest

Splits: 5:18/5:18/5:19/5:19/5:18/5:16

PM Workout: (Not Filmed)

4xMile w/ 90 sec rest

Splits: 5:19/5:18/5:18/5:15

Workout done by 4:20 miler and 15:06 5k'er Rachel Schneider. Pace was faster than the Tinman range for threshold since it was on altitude on a warm day, it was between threshold (4 mmol) and CV (5.5 mmol), the effort was probably around 4.0-4.5 mmol during both sessions. So she gets 10 miles at threshold in a single day, no wonder she was able to transform from a 800/1500 specialist to a successful 5k runner. Mike Smith is a coaching genius, even Tinman himself could learn a thing or two from him.

You mean Jack Daniels is a genius, that is who Smith worked for before he got into coaching. He learned his trade from Daniel's.

"......He's doing less threshold volume and considerably less at that. His last 6 months has been the best of his career."

Good taper for little bit overtrained body in a new system.....?

samulih wrote:

"......He's doing less threshold volume and considerably less at that. His last 6 months has been the best of his career."

Good taper for little bit overtrained body in a new system.....?

That is what I'm thinking. The double threshold workouts were likely done too fast and he was over trained (no surprised that he was also very injury prone). Goes back to what i said in my previous post that the workouts can easily be done too fast and then you don't see the benefits of them. Not to say you gain nothing from that, as many of the NAU guys are running very well, but the way the Ingebrigtsens do it seems to be more beneficial and sustainable.

So Jealous wrote:

As another poster said, there is no magic training (except for J.S. ;) ). If double threshold days were the best way to train everybody would be doing that. But they aren't Geordie Beamish was doing double threshold days in his last year at NAU. He's now moved to OAC where he is not doing double threshold. He's doing less threshold volume and considerably less at that. His last 6 months has been the best of his career.

Well, you mentioned me when it comes to magic training.Of course we all know there is no real magic when it comes to any training system, but the fast results when any runner takes on my DANCAN system makes it look magical.But what makes it so effective? Well, it's of course not a result of just one main factor as lactate thresholds , it's a total concept of the Art of coaching when it's a matter of mixing the right ingrediens individually correct to get optimum results.As I have pointed out before there are a vast majority of world top runners using singel LT:s vs double LT:s.

And one thing I came to think about is that probably a single LT interval of 10 miles gives more effective LT training than split it up in two 5 miles with a couple of hours rest between , just a qualificated guess that sounds logical to me.

Train, don't strain. Don't limp/hop through workouts.

Get your booty on the dance floor.

Make my day.

Make my day.

COACH WIZARD 1 wrote:

.As I have pointed out before there are a vast majority of world top runners using singel LT:s vs double LT:s.

And one thing I came to think about is that probably a single LT interval of 10 miles gives more effective LT training than split it up in two 5 miles with a couple of hours rest between , just a qualificated guess that sounds logical to me.

magic@coachjs.se

I am not so sure about this. Malmo has posted numerous times on the boards about how doubles are better than singles. With the super shoes I would think 10 miles of LT would be achievable in one session but I still think it's pretty hard on the body. The double session would provide similar benefits and be easier. The NAU guys were doing 12 miles in two sessions in the fall (6/6 or 7/5). I think 12 miles in two sessions is better than in one session. Definitely less risk of injury with 6/6 vs. 12 at once.

In the recent Gjert interview he made a point that not everyone is doing their exact training. Actually there’s very pros that are. They like to do lots of threshold intervals because it has a competition type feel. Meanwhile in East Africa they’re doing 25k tempo runs instead.

The point is that the volume of tempo training is the difference between what world class runners are doing and what Americans are doing. Gjert is having them do 20-25 miles a week in the “tempo” range. East Africans are doing similar amounts but aren’t breaking them into intervals as much. Instead they’re doing their long runs hard to get the same stimulus.

Here’s a new rule of thumb. Do 25% of your weekly mileage in the “tempo” range (80-90%). The method to the madness is how you do it not why you do it. If you like intervals then follow the Gjert method. If you like hard long runs then do that instead. Just notice that all have East’s days between all the tempo running.

If we look at Kipchoge he does mostly a total of 40 mpw at threshold/tempo pace, just done in singles.

High mileage can be bad for heart

lvrhs1992 wrote:

High mileage can be bad for heart

Maybe, maybe not. If it takes that long to finish a marathon, maybe better move to 10k. Move your feet to the beat and keep on.

...I'm talking like anything over 3 hours is too long.

So you go on and on, all night long.