Run-Down Forums Forum Index Run-Down Forums

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch
 
Run-Down Forums Forum Index
Training Talk
Bowerman (coachd) intervals vs. Standard Intervals
Post new topic   Reply to topic

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Run-Down Forums Forum Index -> Training Talk
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


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

PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2003 12:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok, so now you just contradicted two of your previous statements:

1) "You'd have to duplicat your PR to beat me anyway." Seems to me you just said your current time is in the 2:12 to 2:16 range (proof that I was insulting you). If your goal was to hurl an insult back at me, then you obviously don't know me well enough. Just when I thought your posting maturity had made significant improvements, it is placed deeply into question again. :t-:

2) "I've probably NEVER broken 27 sec in a 200." I guess that means 34 isn't quite speedwork for you... I could be wrong, but I believe you just made my point for 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
Hammer
Varsity
Varsity


Joined: 17 Jan 2002
Posts: 385
Location: New Mexico

PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2003 1:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Just when I thought your posting maturity had made significant improvements, it is placed deeply into question again.

You are the one who opened with the sloth/cripple comment. Untill that point I was talking about training.

Quote:
." I guess that means 34 isn't quite speedwork for you...

That would be true if 27 was my current 200m speed. Well it is not. 34 or just under (32,33sec) would be my pace for the 800m (the distance of our upcoming race???) The discussion we were having refered to 800m pace not all out 200s.
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: Mon Feb 10, 2003 1:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
You are the one who opened with the sloth/cripple comment.

Yes, but only in general terms. Anyone who has spent time around me or read more than a few dozen of my posts knows my writing/speaking style... What's more, the pacing point that accompanied that statement has yet to be refuted, so the comment still stands.

Quote:
That would be true if 27 was my current 200m speed. Well it is not. 34 or just under (32,33sec) would be my pace for the 800m

I didn't think I would have to ask this, but I do so now in all seriousness. You do understand the difference between speed and pace, right? You keep talking about what can be run for 800m as speed, which is utter nonsense.

Quote:
(the distance of our upcoming race???)

You know perfectly well that I don't consider myself to be in training shape, let alone racing shape. If we want to settle things, I think it would be more productive to lace up boxing gloves instead of spikes... I guarantee you my point would be made then.

Quote:
The discussion we were having refered to 800m pace not all out 200s.

Yes, but the discussion was about speed; a concept you seem unable or unwilling to grasp.

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
Distance_Guru
World Class
World Class


Joined: 09 Mar 2002
Posts: 1280
Location: Nebraska

PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2003 1:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Okay now this thread has become just silly. I'll see if I can inject a little more sense into this debate.

wrote:
If two athletes hit the final turn of a 1500m dead even, both having raced the whole way (not one having gone out way too fast and trying to hold on), and one having a 23-24 sec. 200m best vs. the other being at 26-28 sec., I know which one I'll be placing my money on...


So do I and it's the athlete that ran the greatest percentage of the race inside of there aerobic capacity. Who's faster at the open 200 doesn't have a heck of a lot to do with who's faster in the final 100 meters of a 1500. In my day I've out kicked plenty of people who were speedier than I was, the key is that I always had a good enough aerobic capacity that at the end of a race I was usually more able to go to the well and find something still there.

And just for the record I really dislike the "all else being equal" senario's. Because if all else is equal then any advantage at all will obviously result in that person winning. Also, all else is never equal. Even athletes that are identical twins and train in the same system have enough differences with their desire and the training that they did (as opposed to what was planned for them to do) that all else is never really equal and those type of senario's are really pretty useless in advancing any intellegent debate.
_________________
Time is the fire in which we burn
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: Mon Feb 10, 2003 1:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
And just for the record I really dislike the "all else being equal" senario's. Because if all else is equal then any advantage at all will obviously result in that person winning.

That's exactly the point, though. Build on those advantages, because they just may become the deciding factor. At the end of big races (the bigger the stage the more important it becomes), closing speed is almost always the difference between winning and losing. That seems very relevant 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
Hammer
Varsity
Varsity


Joined: 17 Jan 2002
Posts: 385
Location: New Mexico

PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2003 1:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
You do understand the difference between speed and pace, right? You keep talking about what can be run for 800m as speed, which is utter nonsense.


Then you NEED to clarify some things you wrote about earlier. @ what pace and with what amount of rest, would a runner run 20X200m to develop speed and endurance. When you are clear on that point we can discuss that topic further.

Quote:
I think it would be more productive to lace up boxing gloves instead of spikes... I guarantee you my point would be made then.

Where I come from the boxing gloves whould not be necessary.
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: Mon Feb 10, 2003 2:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
@ what pace and with what amount of rest, would a runner run 20X200m to develop speed and endurance.

I believe I've already explained that... Speed is speed -- that part doesn't change, so the question of at what pace is irrelevant. Ditto for volume, as my point was you start with the speed and build up to the quantity of it. As such, it begins with however many of X-distance repeats you can maintain speed for, building up to something like the theoretical 20x200 workout. Rest depends on what you are trying to accomplish with the session.

No need to complicate 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
coachd
Water Boy
Water Boy


Joined: 09 Sep 2002
Posts: 72
Location: Out west

PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2003 2:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whoa...are we talking Marquis of Queensbury or Vatos of Pecos rules here?

Seriously, I think everyone needs to relax a little. Nobody needs to get hurt over differences in training philosophy.

But Dan..you have a tendency to think you are an expert on everything under the sun and then you nitpick at what people post when it doesn't jive exactly with your thinking. You seem to think YOU can make contradictory statements or give a differing slant to an earlier opinion for the sake of advancing an argument (I've seen you do this numerous times)...maybe as moderator this is an important skill...but you jump on the smallest technicality or unclarity in any other post that you want to attack or disagree with.

Some of the questions you asked Hammer were insulting--I know you've read his posts and know that he has a good base of knowledge about training...so, I conclude you purposely made insulting insuations just to get at Hammer and frankly piss him off.
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: Mon Feb 10, 2003 5:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, I respect your right to feel that way, but I don't agree with it. I always say in these sorts of debates, show me where I said something intentionally insulting and I'll comment on it. Since I don't agree with the assessment, generalities don't do much good if you want me to change...

Quote:
you have a tendency to think you are an expert on everything under the sun

Hardly. I'm the first to admit when there's something I don't believe I'm an expert on or even qualified to comment on. When there's an area I feel competent in, I don't hold back my opinions, though.

When I nitpick, it's over lapses in logic. If not being able to explain one's position makes them angry when questioned about it, that's their problem, not mine. Again, if you have examples to the contrary, I'm all ears.

I'm sure I have changed my view on various things throughout the course of a conversation. That's only natural. It's also the reason for discussing things!

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
Hammer
Varsity
Varsity


Joined: 17 Jan 2002
Posts: 385
Location: New Mexico

PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2003 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OK Dan- Kipketer's 200s were run @25sec which is @ his goal 800m pace. From that post I believed you were talking about 800m pace. In that case Kipketer's 25s are the same as my 34s except that Kipketer is a much better runner than I am.

From that we are now at
Quote:
Speed is speed -- that part doesn't change, so the question of at what pace is irrelevant.


I am assuming that Kipketer had a plan or PACE when he started the workout. He probably didn't go out and say that he was going to run 20X200 FAST.
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: Mon Feb 10, 2003 6:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, but that was his goal pace, not his current pace, so even from a race pace standpoint, it was still rather different (he hadn't broken 1:42 at the time). More importantly, if that workout was to be believed, those were done with a 30 second rest (try that on 200's and you'll realize it's closer to 10 seconds by the time you get back to the line), which vastly changes things with respect to speed vs. pace. That's why I said recovery time depends on what you are looking to get out of the particular workout.

Quote:
I am assuming that Kipketer had a plan or PACE when he started the workout. He probably didn't go out and say that he was going to run 20X200 FAST.

Hmm. After criticizing me for attempting to instigate, you're going to come back with that? Of course he knew what he was going for in the workout. That doesn't really relate to what I was saying, though. The point was that speed is maximum intensity (never the same as pace work, no matter how you cut it), so the actual pace is an irrelevant question, because it's whatever that athlete can do. That's where you have to begin from if you want to increase basic speed... Once that point is established, you can begin filling in the gaps with volume and recovery.

And lest anyone think I'm commenting on that which I'm not an expert or qualified to do so, my statements are only directed at the sprints and mid-distances, as is always the case with 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
Hammer
Varsity
Varsity


Joined: 17 Jan 2002
Posts: 385
Location: New Mexico

PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2003 6:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Yes, but that was his goal pace, not his current pace, so even from a race pace standpoint, it was still rather different (he hadn't broken 1:42 at the time). More importantly, if that workout was to be believed, those were done with a 30 second rest (try that on 200's and you'll realize it's closer to 10 seconds by the time you get back to the line),


Now that is what I was looking for. But of course that is Kipketer's workout, How would you modify it to fit your needs???


I would not advise anyone that I coach (800m runners) to attempt 200m repeats @ all out speed. If they did they would not be able to recover in any reasonable time frame. This of course is different from my 50/50 sprint float workout or my 100m exceleration workout where athletes can fly @ maximum effort and recover in a reasonable amount of time.

Now Kipketer was running @ goal pace and recovering in 30sec. I was running @ date pace and taking 90sec to recover (float recovery 200) That is the difference between the 2 workouts. Kipketer's max 200 would be around 21.XX?? So even he is not runnning all out intervals. So how did that workout relate to your philosophy of building speed???
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: Mon Feb 10, 2003 7:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If I were to try and adapt that to someone like myself who is a 26 second 200m runner, I would basically figure the percentage of top speed. I figure Kipketer to be high 21, so he's got a 3+ second differential. Call it mid to high 29's at my level. Not true speed development, but certainly not pace work or even realistic goal pace work, either. I could probably run 6-8 at that level with short recovery (when in shape), with the volume steadily increasing while holding everything else constant. That is actually very similar to the system I was following when I injured my hamstring, and it really does work well.

The key point in the Kipketer example is the recovery amount. He used that as an early season indicator of conditioning, so there's a little bit of grey area as to how it fits what I was saying. More of an example of how potent of a workout can result from a great background of raw speed. Anyone else in the world would have been maxed after just a few repeats and unable to finish, let alone hold pace. That's the difference between Kipketer being able to run well off just about any pace and still finish incredibly strong regardless -- speed reserve. You can't run comfortably at 25's if 24 is your max...

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
Hammer
Varsity
Varsity


Joined: 17 Jan 2002
Posts: 385
Location: New Mexico

PostPosted: Tue Feb 11, 2003 9:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dan- From your post I would conclude that 200m intervals would not be good for Speed Development. The main reason being that the interval distance is too long. If an athlete would run @ a speed that would be optimal for speed development that athlete would not be able to complete many intervals and thus not benifit to any significant degree from the workout. (exe. Kipketer would have to run 200s @ 23sec./ to develop speed and would probably need 5min. recovery to complete another rep. and only be able to complete 4 or 5 reps.)


Quote:
I would basically figure the percentage of top speed. I figure Kipketer to be high 21, so he's got a 3+ second differential. Call it mid to high 29's at my level. Not true speed development, but certainly not pace work or even realistic goal pace work, either. I could probably run 6-8 at that level with short recovery (when in shape), with the volume steadily increasing while holding everything else constant.


If it is a percentage of top 200m speed then your time would be different (3.5-4sec slower then top speed) either way more than 10@ slower. What is the rest interval????? You stated that you would only change the volume so the rest interval would be very important to anyone attempting this workout.
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 Feb 11, 2003 9:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

200's are about the longest for true speed development, but once the ability is in place, it can be carried over to 400's (very beneficial to mid-distance and distance ranges) with a moderate speed component still in place. I guess a better term for something like Kipketer's workout would be speed endurance. It wouldn't be possible without the underlying speed, so viewing it as a separate entity misses the boat... The speed endurance is a result of already having the speed, which is why I believe that has to be the starting point for the best result.

In my own example for the workout, I was assuming the same 30 second rest (I've managed 7 with that rest, but I believe the pace was closer to 32 per), otherwise it would be a different workout...

Quote:
You stated that you would only change the volume so the rest interval would be very important to anyone attempting this workout.

Only if you're looking to change the intent of the workout. If you wanted to veer more toward speed development than speed endurance, you would increase the rest (and likely cut the quantity, but that depends on the athlete).

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
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 4 of 6

 
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