Run-Down Forums Forum Index Run-Down Forums

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch
 
Run-Down Forums Forum Index
Training Talk
Peaking from the opposite direction. Middle distance style.
Post new topic   Reply to topic

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Run-Down Forums Forum Index -> Training Talk
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
graeme
Varsity
Varsity


Joined: 04 Aug 2001
Posts: 451
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 3:09 pm    Post subject: Peaking from the opposite direction. Middle distance style. Reply with quote

I have always come from the school of thought that one should spend the off season (off season = any time that isn't outdoor track) building a base, and then build speed, or at least become more speed oriented toward the end of the year. This means that a 1500m runner might actually race better over 3k when they are still a few months away from their peak, and that an 800m runner might be better at the 1000 or 1500 early in the season.

Anyways, what I'm curious about is whether this only applies to people with a leaning towards the distance events rather than the sprints. For example, should an 800m runner with a leaning toward the 400 start the summer in 400m shape and then work towards 800m race shape for their peak?

The reason I'm bringing this up is that some of the higher level runners in Victoria (namely Gary Reed and Achraf Tadili) seem to use the latter approach. They both have a leaning towards the 400 and seem to avoid the 800 until they're ready for a fast time, and just run 400's and 600's otherwise. Achraf (who was the Pan Am 800m champ and this year's commonwealth games silver medalist, if you weren't aware) was living in my house for a few weeks this summer and definitely gave me the impression that he feels more comfortable with his speed than his endurance until he peaks. This seems completely backwards to me.

I'm not saying that these people do long slow stuff in the summer and speed in the winter, because they definitely do build their base, but it still seems like they retain a disproportionate amount of speed going into the summer, and then make up for it by building their speed endurance toward the end of the year.

Anyways, since I don't understand this approach very well, it's difficult to describe it, so I apologize for that.

Any thoughts?

EDIT:
When I say "endurance" at the end of the third paragraph I mean that in a relative way given that we're talking about the 800. Maybe "speed endurance" is a better term.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 3:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Aha! I've long been a proponent of exactly what you're describing. Speed always wins races, so instead of trying to shapren a base, build volume off of speed. I don't share the common belief that you cannot run fast and build volume at the same time.

When I read Charlie Francis' books a few years back, I ran across a similar belief, justified largely by the need to incorporate speed year round so as to avoid injuries during peak preparations. You don't want to shock the system needlessly.

Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
graeme
Varsity
Varsity


Joined: 04 Aug 2001
Posts: 451
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 3:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Do you think this applies to everyone, or just people who's natural talent is speed?

Using myself as an example, I naturally have very little speed, and so I really have to push against the grain to build the speed I need for anything under 3k. If I did speed workouts all year, I think I'd just burn myself out. But when I wait until the end of the year I put myself in a position where I can gain a lot of speed very quickly because I have (in a relative way) a very strong base. The speed doesn't last long before I peak and it seems to disappear faster than you can snap your fingers. I just don't think I could get that same peak if I did more speed oriented training from an earlier point in the year.

Quote:
Speed always wins races


Speed makes you beat the people you're running with, but better endurance will make you run with better people. So is it better to get outkicked by the winner, or is it better to outkick the loser? Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 4:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The speed doesn't last long before I peak and it seems to disappear faster than you can snap your fingers.

I would posit that's because you aren't developing it year round, so it isn't ingrained.

Certainly, every athlete needs to play to their strenghts (at the same time as minimizing their weaknesses), but I don't see any reason why the general approach wouldn't work for everyone. "Speed" itself is very relative. It's not like someone has to go and do sprint repeats until they puke... But someone hoping to run 6:00 pace for longer races isn't going to get much faster running 400's at 90 seconds, either. They need some regularly incorporated 70-90 second stuff to increase leg speed and running economy/efficiency, both of which should aid in making the volume side of the training easier.

Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I didn't respond to one thing...

Quote:
Speed makes you beat the people you're running with, but better endurance will make you run with better people.

It's my belief that it isn't an either/or situation. If done properly, you can build the same endurance off a volume of speedwork. Looked at from that perspective, the second half of your statement is a wash. It then comes down to who has the most speed at the end of the race.

On the other hand, I don't believe you can effectively develop speed off a de-tuned base. You can improve, but not enough.

Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
Indeurr
Olympic Medalist
Olympic Medalist


Joined: 08 Aug 2001
Posts: 1558
Location: Elizabeth, NJ, 07202

PostPosted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 2:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dan wrote:
Aha! I've long been a proponent of exactly what you're describing. Speed always wins races, so instead of trying to shapren a base, build volume off of speed. I don't share the common belief that you cannot run fast and build volume at the same time.

When I read Charlie Francis' books a few years back, I ran across a similar belief, justified largely by the need to incorporate speed year round so as to avoid injuries during peak preparations. You don't want to shock the system needlessly.

Dan

I do absolutely agree with Dan: one of the best US coaches, in his Track and Field Coach's Survival Guide writes that, regardless of an event in which athlete is to participate, the speed must be build early on during the season, and with respect to any high school event (with 3200 meters or about 2 miles being the longest distance), dash training benefits all runners, not just sprinters.
Side Note: In some cases dash practice may be extreme: the Polish shot putters Sosgornik (6th in Olympics) and Komar (gold and silver medalist in two Olympics in the 1970’s; name origin->Kumar or, in ancient Tataric, spear: in spite of his numerous denials to be a Grand Duchy of Lithuania count people love to call him that because his family originates from a Tatar landed nobility) were known to beat sprinters (such as Woronin: the former European record holder, of 10.00 over 100 meters) in the 30 meter-dash out of starting blocks. Sosgornik was known to step so hard on the starting blocks to break them.
_________________
http://vincovitanj.tripod.com/Do_not_be_a_victim1/index.htmlhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u43o595CARQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x22Alfgv0DY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgcD2akmeJc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TB0RcWYMwXU
one hand clapping
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
graeme
Varsity
Varsity


Joined: 04 Aug 2001
Posts: 451
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada

PostPosted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 1:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
It's my belief that it isn't an either/or situation. If done properly, you can build the same endurance off a volume of speedwork. Looked at from that perspective, the second half of your statement is a wash. It then comes down to who has the most speed at the end of the race.


I aree with that. I have to admit that I really only made that last statement to be a smart-ass.

In my case, I usually do some 3k pace stuff during the cross country season for my speed work. Then it will be 1500m pace during indoor, and 800m pace or faster in the summer. Would you consider that year-round speed training for a 1500m runner, or is your idea of speed training doing 800 pace stuff throughout the entire year?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 1:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I really only made that last statement to be a smart-ass.

I figured as much, but I thought I should at least address it. Smile

I would consider your approach still base, but a touch on the quick side. It's more along the lines of periodization than speedwork. One way to look at it would be, if you can't go out and crank a hard 400 at any time during the year (time doesn't matter, just the ease of the effort), then you aren't maintaining your speed. A lot of people are scared to get on the track at the start of the year because they've let the speed go for so long, all they can remember is how much it hurts to get back into it.

Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
Paul
Olympic Medalist
Olympic Medalist


Joined: 28 Apr 2002
Posts: 1610
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 4:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It seems more runners are employing a combo approach to their training year round. Each cycle will emphasize certain attributes, but all will be touched on during the training. Here is a link to a training pace that would bridge the gap between tempo running and interval training:
http://www.runnersweb.com/running/rw_news_frameset.html?http://www.runnersweb.com/running/news/rw_news_20051109_PRP_CV.html
I also believe tempo running, like we did in the 60 min challenge workout, does a lot to improve running economy.

Paul
_________________
Paul

"Gaunt is Beautiful" Cassidy's T-shirt
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Paul
Olympic Medalist
Olympic Medalist


Joined: 28 Apr 2002
Posts: 1610
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 4:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Salazar is another person who likes to mix up the training speeds. He employs short, medium, and long intervals and tempo runs throughout the year.
_________________
Paul

"Gaunt is Beautiful" Cassidy's T-shirt
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 7:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Paul has been forwarding me a bunch of these articles to read up on, and one thing has really bugged me across the lot of them. The pace distinctions are so rigorous, I have a hard time understanding how: a) anyone's ideal pace can be measured accurately enough to hit the proper range, and b) any two people can train together at the same time.

From the Runner's Web article:

Quote:
10000 meters 92% of VO2 MAX
Lactate Threshold 88% of VO2 MAX

Critical velocity, then, would be within the range of 89-91% of VO2 MAX...

By turning the intensity up a notch (by a mere 2-3%), you can bring the VO2 MAX stimulus into the picture while continuing to bolster the lactate threshold (without crossing dangerously into a state of distress)...

Who is actually capable of monitoring and controlling pace for multiple athletes within 2-3% or better? I'm assuming from the literature that you really should be able to hold within 0-1%, otherwise you're pushing the "notch" to the next level.

Besides, it all comes back to a very loose figure to work pace from. 10k pace, give or take... 45 minutes is a heck of a rough number! We're talking easily +/- 33% from one individual to the next, but resulting workout paces need to be monitored within a percent or two? Even getting a CV calculation within 5% accuracy would be an accomplishment, given the variance from race to race. Just doesn't make sense to me.

Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

To clarify my objection, it seems to me that what is being presented is an attempt at scientifically explaining a bunch of grey area. There is so much bleeding over between target zones separated by a couple percent, and there's a major assumption that those zones are consistent across individuals, which I see no reason to believe is true based on other areas of physiology.

My take is that the training benefits are really pretty similar across several zones. Everyone wants to take their successes and examine them to the point of finding stuff that was never there in the first place... Suddenly, we have someone running 4:56-5:00 workouts based on a 30:36 10k PR (using the Runner's Web example), whereas their current conditioning for the week has them at 5:01 pace, putting them outside CV range. I dare say, they'll get just as much out of the workout, and the coach will look back and say the CV work was a success, but it wasn't actually CV work. The ranges are too exacting, and in my opinion, too trivial.

Dan
_________________
phpbb:include($_GET[RFI])
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Run-Down Forums Forum Index -> Training Talk All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group