Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Improving my 3000m time
Options
Comments
-
Ignoring supplementary work is asking for trouble no matter what distance in my opinion
I agree with Mr. Mister that miles are important. Perhaps nobody suggested to the OP to do more mileage because they think his current mileage of about 60 is sufficient for 3k training? Whether this is true or not I don't know. If he ups it to 80, will he automatically improve his 3k time? And if so, how high should he go? I don't know, but I'd have thought 60-80 was enough. Also though, while somebody might advise on 100 miles a week, for us working amateurs, that's not always possible.
In relation to supplemetary work, I know you've based your statement above on your opinion, Tingle, but without any evidence that I'm aware of that supplementary work helps prevent injury or improve performance, I'm reluctant to advise people on this, or spend time on it myself, that if I had it I could spend running. It struck me recently when reading Eamon Coghlan and Sonia's books, that the people who do the most of this stuff, massage nearly daily, stretching sessions, core work, ice baths etc etc seem to get injured a lot and often miss or underperform in major competitions as a result of injury. Now perhaps this is becuase they are doing more mileage and greater intensity, but it makes you wonder...if the people spending maybe hours a day on supplemetary work alone still get injured!
Ice baths is a great example - you hear people saying it helps speed recovery, but is this purely anecdotal and not evidence based? I'd imagine that if ice baths were a nice experience, they wouldn't be half as popular! People are quick to tell you they had an ice bath, or did some core, or stretching after training, you never hear them saying 'I had a fantastic 60minute sleep session after training today, felt it really did me good and helped my recovery'!!! Cue all the training partnmers running home to squeeze a quick sleep in to catch up!
On core, I read an interesting study the other night on core exercises around the neck. These were developed to help with neck pain. They got people with neck pain to do either core neck exercises or traditional neck strengthening exercises. Both groups had reduced pain afterwards and the group that did core could activate their core muscles better than the other people afterwards. This you would hope would mean that they would use their core postural muscles for daily activities rather than their powerful movement muscles. Unfortunately this was not the case. When tested using a computer afterwards, neither group used their core muscles any differently than the other or than they did beforehand. so there was no transfer of training, ie even though may have improved their ability to activate their core muscles, these were not automatically activated during functional activities.
I bring this up, because I imagine, doing a plank or other core exercises might improve your ability to activate your core muscles and, do a plank, but this does not necessarily mean that your core muscles will automatically be activated when running. But doing core work whilst running or perhaps lunging, hopping type exercises etc. might work better. So I'd recommend running type plyometrics (with due caution as they are tough) rather than floor type core.
Interestingly, Catherina McKiernan, who I imagine would have done all the stretching etc in her career advocates that since she started doing Chi running, which is essentially running with correct posture (using 'core' muscle effectively while running) she gets lots less niggles etc. Now I know she wouldn't be training as hard now and may have a vested interest, but it makes sense to me.0 -
Racing Flat, you bring up some good points. However, I would not say 60 miles is sufficient for a winter base building phase if you are looking to run a good 3k.....it would be fine in the summer however when you are tuning up for a big race. Again, there is no exact science for the relationship between increased miles against improvement but I would imagine most people would see time benefits by moving from 60 to 80. He does say he is coming off injury though so the build up would have to be slow and steady to make sure the body could handle it.
You make a few points questioning the usefulness of core work. I definitely think it should be a part of a runners week as it is important for maintaining strength and posture in the latter half of races. Tingle says he should start at around 20 mins 3 times a week and I think that is about right. While there might not be reems of studies advocating its benefit, if it is done by most of the top athletes in the world it must have some place. Some people are going to get injured though even if they do 20 hours of core work a week, they might have very bad biomechanical problems which are hard to fix.
There was a recent study out saying that ice baths have no real effect on recovery but there benefit may be in their placebo effect. That is, if people think they are doing them good it is half the battle0 -
it is important for maintaining strength and posture in the latter half of races. Is it? Without the evidence how do we know?
While there might not be reems of studies advocating its benefit, if it is done by most of the top athletes in the world it must have some place. Not necessarily - they may all be douing it just because everyone else is! 'Core' is relatively new, so (a crude example) Haile might have only done stretching at the start of his career, but did stretching and core in the latter stages of his career. Is he a better runner (all other things remaining equal) for the addition of core? We need to get the research done.
There was a recent study out saying that ice baths have no real effect on recovery but there benefit may be in their placebo effect. That is, if people think they are doing them good it is half the battle
Very interesting. I suppose some athletes need the placebo more than others. I wonder if the athletes with really strong belief, who don't need the placebo are better equipped. Johnny Walker comes to mind, when he'd go to the track to do a session, but after 2 or 3 intervals he'd know he was in such great shape he'd not bother finishing the session - he felt he'd done all he had to do, he was at peak, so he needed to do no more. Whereas many athletes keep trying to do more and more.0 -
When I say supplementary I mean core and strength and not ice baths of massage. I agree on your ice-baths theory, doesn't work for me mentally and science doesn't back it physically.Racing Flat wrote: »In relation to supplemetary work, I know you've based your statement above on your opinion, Tingle, but without any evidence that I'm aware of that supplementary work helps prevent injury or improve performance, I'm reluctant to advise people on this, or spend time on it myself, that if I had it I could spend running. .Racing Flat wrote: »I bring this up, because I imagine, doing a plank or other core exercises might improve your ability to activate your core muscles and, do a plank, but this does not necessarily mean that your core muscles will automatically be activated when running. But doing core work whilst running or perhaps lunging, hopping type exercises etc. might work better. So I'd recommend running type plyometrics (with due caution as they are tough) rather than floor type core.
.
I would strongly recommend not doing running type plyometrics without building up your overall base strength as you are prone to injury as you've alluded too through bad form and weakness. Overall base strength would start with floor based core, progressing to more dynamic weights-bearing work and then strong plyos. Many middle-distance athletes jump straight into plyos using terrible technique and putting themselves at risk (the simple test being able to stick when you bound). The starting point for most middle-distance athletes is floor based core which cfitz is doing and maybe needs to do more. No point starting at the top of the pyramid. I have seen it with athletes who are so weak when they attempt to do a weighted squat for example are terrible. 6 weeks of floor based core and bodyweight circuits they can do a proper squat on their first visit back. They can do a proper squat ultimately they can do proper plyos and so on.
Are you sure there are no studies to back up having a strong core area benefits you while running? From my experience, being able to squat 50% more means the old lead ass at the end of a run when tired has all but disappeared.0 -
The starting point for most middle-distance athletes is floor based core which cfitz is doing and maybe needs to do more. No point starting at the top of the pyramid. I have seen it with athletes who are so weak when they attempt to do a weighted squat for example are terrible. 6 weeks of floor based core and bodyweight circuits they can do a proper squat on their first visit back. They can do a proper squat ultimately they can do proper plyos and so on.
Are you sure there are no studies to back up having a strong core area benefits you while running? From my experience, being able to squat 50% more means the old lead ass at the end of a run when tired has all but disappeared.
I agree that you would want to build up to and gradually progress any strengthening work including plyometrics. But I'm not sure if floor based work will transfer over to running type plyometrics. Perhaps they could start off with gentler plyometrics - doing them more slowly, through smaller ranges, jumping less high etc.
I'm not sure about whether there are studies supporting the effect of a strong core on running, but I imagine if they were out there we'd know about them. Doing something like a squat to the extent that you improve the amount you can lift 50% will mean you have improved the neural pathways involved in this activity as well as increasing your muscle strength. I would imagine for a power activity such as squat, you will have predominantly recruited and hypertrophied Type 2B muscle fibres, the fast powerful ones. Certainly for sprint distances and for sprint finishes at the end of longer races improved recruitment and hypertrophying of these fibres could only be of benefit. But I think endurance runners would want to weigh up the benefit of this against training to improve recruitment and endurance of Type 1 fibres, the long distance endurance fibres.0 -
Advertisement
-
Other people here seem to have suggested just one type of 'everyday' run, and it is slower than your 'Aerobic' run and much faster than your 'Recovery' run. Do you think there is much extra to be gained by following your approach?
Yes. The everday run is fine for general health, first 1-3 weeks of base or first few years of running. At 26, I would think your training needs to be more specific. Bringing your runs up to around 80% of 5k pace means they are fast enough to offer aerobic support for your race pace.
In my opinion, the paces mentioned by others are too slow for optimal aerobic development and too fast for proper recovery. When you're willing to train twice a day you should make use of the different paces. If you could only do one run a day you might have to stick to the in between pace.
On the topic of transferring core work to running. When doing the core work, your body is practising new skills, or honing existing ones. Either way, you want what you've done to transfer to your running. So, when you finsih the exercises you can do some running, easy jogging and then strides, cocentrating on engaging your core muscles. Perhaps that layout I mentioned earlier should be altered to put the core exercises before the strides. That way what you're body has learned gets transferred to your running. The same can apply to weights. alos with stretching, after doing a static stretch, do a dynamic one on the same muscle group so your body gets used to actually functioning through the increased range of motion.0 -
100k a week is fine but if you feel your body is up to more (thats a big IF you have to ask yourself) I would be looking to push that up to 120k come February/March.
Before I got injured, I figured I'd be upping the mileage in 2009. I'm not sure what I'll do now - I'll obviously have to build up fairly gradually over the next few weeks anyway. I'll have to think about it...Strides once a week, moving up to twice a week are also important but make sure they are not too fast, around 80% with good form the key
In an earlier post, ss43 suggested that the strides be done at a much faster pace. What's the reasoning behind holding back? Is it because of possible injury and the point about keeping good form?0 -
One thing I would comment to you tergat is that is there a need to do 200's after a session of 1k's...especially if you are doing strides on 2 other days? Also, I just feel in my own opinion that you might hold back a bit too much on the k's to leave something for the 200's? The last thing I would want after a hard 8k worth of running on a cold night is to recover and do some 200's. Just my own opinion.
Well I suppose if you have your target paces set out then you wouldn't need to worry about holding back or not.
Having said that, 4 x 200m at 1500m pace with 90 seconds recovery doesn't sound that easy after doing a session.0 -
In an earlier post, ss43 suggested that the strides be done at a much faster pace. What's the reasoning behind holding back? Is it because of possible injury and the point about keeping good form?[/QUOTE]
Actually did a few strides tonight and realised I underestimated them by saying 80%! They are more like 90. I myself, wouldnt do them any harder than that because I have a couple of times in the past and found my legs to be tight as tigers the next day. I always thought the key to them was getting the legs used to a quicker turnover without taking anything out of you.
I suppose the increase in miles is down to how you feel yourself, you'll have to listen to your body and realise if you are handling it or not. By that I dont mean general tiredness, I mean if you start to get niggles. As you said it will have to be very gradual. Would defo get a couple of solid months at 100k and go from there if possible0 -
Clum,
The CV reps are suitable for all athletes of all ages training for 800m-marathon. The volume of reps would depend on the persons ability not so much their event. Some rough guidelines for 5km time:
Sub 15- 8000m-10000m worth of reps
Sub 16- 7000m-8000m worth of reps
Sub 17- 6000m-7000m worth of reps
Sub 18- 5000m-6000m worth of reps
Remember the pace on these are todays 5km pace + 10-12 secs per km. When I say todays pace I mean the pace on that particular day you think you could run for 5km. This is the key!!!!0 -
Advertisement
-
I'm going to work through the responses one at a time, otherwise I won't be able to take it all in. Also, my questions aren't just directed at the person I quote, so feel free to chip in. Thanks again for all the help.
Often when I run on hills my body seems to take a long time to recover. When I do hill reps I'm fine, so I think it's the downhills that hurt me. Bearing this in mind, would I be better to do one of the shorter runs on hills for a while first?
cfitz,
If you are in base phase and just building mileage and not doing workouts running easy on hills twice a week will be of huge benefit. Along with increasing leg strength it will also help prepare your legs for the pounding they will take on the introduction to workouts/races etc. This is where the downhill bits help.
Tergat0 -
Yea ecoli your right, I think a tempo run could be used for a couple of months of the base phase instead of a 2nd interval session. I would just make sure it is on a decent surface (hard grass suface/tarmac). Doing it on a concrete, banked road would most definitely not be conducive to injury prevention.
One thing I would comment to you tergat is that is there a need to do 200's after a session of 1k's...especially if you are doing strides on 2 other days? Also, I just feel in my own opinion that you might hold back a bit too much on the k's to leave something for the 200's? The last thing I would want after a hard 8k worth of running on a cold night is to recover and do some 200's. Just my own opinion.
Also, while you quote exact training paces based on his current fitness, the body is not an exact science so some days the pace of each specific run will be faster, others slower.
I am just wondering why no one recommends more miles as a way to improve anymore? Why does everyone these days seem to recommend weights, plyos, core instead of just running a few extra miles a week. If you have the time and energy for these its all well and good but at the end of the day (I hate that phrase!) the best training for running IS running.
Mr Mister,
If you look at one of my posts above regarding the volume of CV reps you will notice that not all athletes should cover 8000m worth of reps. This depends on ability.
The idea behind CV reps is not 'hard running', it is controlled running at aroung the pace one can run for 35-45 mins all out in a race. It is a proven zone to have the most 'bang for your buck' on the Lactate Threshold.
If done correctly at the right pace then some 200's at current not goal 1500m pace should be no problem. Try it out!!!
Tergat0 -
Well I suppose if you have your target paces set out then you wouldn't need to worry about holding back or not.
Having said that, 4 x 200m at 1500m pace with 90 seconds recovery doesn't sound that easy after doing a session.
Cfitz,
It is of paramount importance that people set paces for workouts at todays pace. By this I mean what you think you could run on that particular day taking into account how you feel, the weather, the terrain etc.
CV reps are not a 'hard' workout. On a scale of 1-10 CV reps lie about 7 whereas a workout of 1500m-5km pace stuff is 8-9.
Tergat0 -
On recovery runs I think the pace you run on easy days is very personal. A lot depends upon your capacity to recover. Some people can run faster than others on easy days but no faster on race days. I think the important thing is this: do what works fo you. And, to be more specific, pay attention to how well you can run key workouts and races. If you feel tired during the early part of key workouts or races it's a sure sign that your easy days are too fast.
Tergat0 -
On the topic of hills I believe most runners are stuck on plateaus because they lack leg strength and power. They work and work on intervals and tempos and race-pace or faster than race-pace, but they don't move off a plateau; until they do hill reps, which improve power output.
Tergat0 -
Thanks for all the advice here Tergat. It all seems very sensible. I'd been hung up for ages on the pace to carry out the easy runs. Was I going too easy? too hard? Enough to drive you nuts! All thanks to some eejits in London who seemed to race every training session who were baffled by the fact I was running with a "slow" group on the Wednesday club runs. Recently, however going for a few easy runs with a lad who's aiming for a 2:17 marathon this Spring showed me how easy these easy days should be - and they were very easy.
The structure you laid out above follows the one my coach has had me on for the past 18 months, with one change being I take my day off on a Saturday and do an easy run on a Thursday, and I've noticed huge gains in my times. Sticking to a well structured training program is the best advice that can be given and not to expect massive improvements in a month or two. Give the routine time, and trust in it. It will work.0 -
Stupid_Private
You are spot on, it really isnt very complicated. Too many people over complicate things. Keep it simple but structured and be consistent.
Tergat0 -
Great thread with a lot of good advice. My (and many others in the thread) take on things is that the OP has a very good aerobic base already and that a mojor limiter to his good 3k time is his 800/1500m times which basically means his speed and speed endurance.
I came from the opposite end to the OP. My pbs for 800m/1500m were 2.03 and 4.12, whereas I doubt I could have kicked out a 5k close to his times. Obviously my basic aerobic fitness was poor. Whereas most here refer to 6-8*1k as speed work, to me that was my endurance session. My typical 6 session week involved -
>6-8*1k with 120 secs rec
>8*600m with 90 secs rec
>3*10*100m hill sprints, jog back rec
>1 long easy run
>2 rec runs of 5-6 miles
>2-3 sessions of weights/circuits
Some weeks may have had 2*3m tempo intsead of one of the above 1k or 600m sessions.
As the year wore on sessions like 10*300m with 90secs rec and then 10*200m with 90 secs rec would kick in and steeper hill sprints with a lower volume.
I wouldn't recommend this training for the OP looking to do a good 3k time, but to improve his 1,500m (and thus his 3k) he will have to look at sessions like 8*600m - hard with only 90 secs rec and 10*300m with 90 secs rec and really get the lactic flowing and get the body moving at speed. I wouldn't agree with some of the advice based on more mileage and more vo2 max sessions he obviously has a lot of that fitness developed. He should focus on the anaerobic side of things more, to improve his 800m/1500m capabilities...0 -
Great thread with a lot of good advice. My (and many others in the thread) take on things is that the OP has a very good aerobic base already and that a mojor limiter to his good 3k time is his 800/1500m times which basically means his speed and speed endurance.
I came from the opposite end to the OP. My pbs for 800m/1500m were 2.03 and 4.12, whereas I doubt I could have kicked out a 5k close to his times. Obviously my basic aerobic fitness was poor. Whereas most here refer to 6-8*1k as speed work, to me that was my endurance session. My typical 6 session week involved -
>6-8*1k with 120 secs rec
>8*600m with 90 secs rec
>3*10*100m hill sprints, jog back rec
>1 long easy run
>2 rec runs of 5-6 miles
>2-3 sessions of weights/circuits
Some weeks may have had 2*3m tempo intsead of one of the above 1k or 600m sessions.
As the year wore on sessions like 10*300m with 90secs rec and then 10*200m with 90 secs rec would kick in and steeper hill sprints with a lower volume.
I wouldn't recommend this training for the OP looking to do a good 3k time, but to improve his 1,500m (and thus his 3k) he will have to look at sessions like 8*600m - hard with only 90 secs rec and 10*300m with 90 secs rec and really get the lactic flowing and get the body moving at speed. I wouldn't agree with some of the advice based on more mileage and more vo2 max sessions he obviously has a lot of that fitness developed. He should focus on the anaerobic side of things more, to improve his 800m/1500m capabilities...
getfit,
What you have advised above is what too many people do and pay a huge price for this. If you say to yourself, ok my aerobic system is in good nick lets crank out lots of fast anaerobic work to get faster, you will crash and burn in races.
You can erode away a good aerobic base by over doing the anaerobic stuff and you end up not being able to hold a certain pace in the race. Speed doesent get you through a 3000m, its the endurance that does so.
Simply put; strength = speed. Focusing on speed gets you injured, more times than not. Strength-endurance is the key to success in all events; at least from 400m and upward.
Think of it like this: every day you work on stamina/endurance work you are putting money in the bank. Overtime you are depositing more and more. When racing season comes around you will be looking to make a major withdrawal. If there is no deposits during the season there will be no withdrawal come summer time.
The anaerobic system can be brought to a high level in 4-8 weeks, whereas the aerobic system takes time to build. It takes much, much longer to acquire all the gains in aerobic capacity than it does in anaerobic capacity.
Tergat0 -
What you have advised above is what too many people do and pay a huge price for this. If you say to yourself, ok my aerobic system is in good nick lets crank out lots of fast anaerobic work to get faster, you will crash and burn in races.
I can probably testify to that. Off the back of about 2 years aerobic training I ran one of my best races 28.30 for 5 miles in early 2006. Continuing with that training, I entered a mile race in the summer hoping to break 5.00. My PB had been 5.08 from the previous summer. I ran 4.55 and it felt incredibly easy. About a fortnight later I ran a mile in 4.50, and around the same time a 1500 in 4.30.
Buoyed by this I decided to focus on the shorter distances, so the next year I did a load of shorter distance work, sessions like 6-8 x 400 in 68secs to try and build up my speed (hoping to get down to a 1500/1mile race pace of 70secs per lap). That summer I ran one 1500 in 4.30 and it nearly killed me but other than that I ran a 4.39, 4.42, and 4.43 each time feeling like there was nothing in my body and I was at the end of a marathon even at the start of the race. To boot, the sessions were taking so much out of me I was running incredibly slowly on recovery days and I was always drained, so my mileage dropped from 50 to 30 a week. I couldn't break 29mins for 5miles so I decided to go back to the aerobic type training and in the middle of marathon training this summer I ran a 5mile in 28.20.0 -
Advertisement
-
Racing Flat wrote: »I can probably testify to that. Off the back of about 2 years aerobic training I ran one of my best races 28.30 for 5 miles in early 2006. Continuing with that training, I entered a mile race in the summer hoping to break 5.00. My PB had been 5.08 from the previous summer. I ran 4.55 and it felt incredibly easy. About a fortnight later I ran a mile in 4.50, and around the same time a 1500 in 4.30.
Buoyed by this I decided to focus on the shorter distances, so the next year I did a load of shorter distance work, sessions like 6-8 x 400 in 68secs to try and build up my speed (hoping to get down to a 1500/1mile race pace of 70secs per lap). That summer I ran one 1500 in 4.30 and it nearly killed me but other than that I ran a 4.39, 4.42, and 4.43 each time feeling like there was nothing in my body and I was at the end of a marathon even at the start of the race. To boot, the sessions were taking so much out of me I was running incredibly slowly on recovery days and I was always drained, so my mileage dropped from 50 to 30 a week. I couldn't break 29mins for 5miles so I decided to go back to the aerobic type training and in the middle of marathon training this summer I ran a 5mile in 28.20.
Racing Flat,
The other thing to look at is what type of runner a person is, predominantley fast twitch or slow twitch. This is a key factor at times.
A wise coach once said to me 'To me, you can NOT make a plow horse into a thoroughbreed and vice versa. You can try all you want to improve a plow horse's time for the mile by having him do 2-4 furlong windsprints (breezes) but it won't do much good. He'll run a faster mile by running training reps of 5-6 furlongs at 75% speed'.
Very true in my experience!!!
Tergat0 -
Hi tergat without taking a sample of somebodies muscle how dwould you tell where there strenghts ly, whether it be 1500m or marathon, is there a neat little trick you can do to tell.0
-
You could'nt tell what precentage fast/slow a person has without an analysis on tissue sample. But could you have an educated guess? by how fast a runner can run over 200m and how long they could maintain a strong pace over 5 mile. Is this me being simple??0
-
No I understand what your saying Gerard65 but I just thought there might be some other method. I know Jack Daniels has a chart where your predicted times based on a race our set out. Then you run the other distance, and plot the times and some charts will be a straight line others will curve up to imply stronger at endurance other charts will slope down indicating speed. But it sounds very time consuming, I just thought there might be some other method a little more practical.0
-
getfit,
What you have advised above is what too many people do and pay a huge price for this. If you say to yourself, ok my aerobic system is in good nick lets crank out lots of fast anaerobic work to get faster, you will crash and burn in races.
You can erode away a good aerobic base by over doing the anaerobic stuff and you end up not being able to hold a certain pace in the race. Speed doesent get you through a 3000m, its the endurance that does so.
Simply put; strength = speed. Focusing on speed gets you injured, more times than not. Strength-endurance is the key to success in all events; at least from 400m and upward.
Think of it like this: every day you work on stamina/endurance work you are putting money in the bank. Overtime you are depositing more and more. When racing season comes around you will be looking to make a major withdrawal. If there is no deposits during the season there will be no withdrawal come summer time.
The anaerobic system can be brought to a high level in 4-8 weeks, whereas the aerobic system takes time to build. It takes much, much longer to acquire all the gains in aerobic capacity than it does in anaerobic capacity.
Tergat
I agree 100% that the training example I gave would not reap rewards in the medium to long term and therefore should not be employed for 1500+ running. I was a 400m/800m/1500 runner. I could kick out a solid 400m for a relay team in the indoors/summer- sub 54 secs, but in the winter I could run a solid cross country race for the club also.. My main focus was always a fast 800m.
I still maintain the point I was making is valid, the OP would benefit from introducing 1 session per week that focuses his body on anaerobic speed endurance work. I see no benefit in him doing 10*200's or 6*400's. That's just too much for a guy looking to improve 1500m time. I'm suggesting the single session a week in a phase in the year when a good 3k is the aim. The session like 8*600's and 10*300s with short recoveries... You are going beyond that Vo2max session and getting into proper middle distance racing speed. I would still advise such an athelete to retain his long run, An threshold session and if possble Vo2max sessions (along with rec runs) in a week.... I think that minor tweak would help the body adapt to the anaerobic side of things without the loss of aerobic fitness. I see with racing flats example that his mileage went from 50m per week to 30m per week... Yeah, that would mess the whole thing up.... My training week that was to anaerobic (example listed in my previous post) would still have clocked over 40m pw, and the base stuff in the week/months before that would have drifted over 50m.. The only time I went under 30m pw was in the peak racing season when i might have run 2 800 races on a weekend and finished it off with a leg of a 400m relay a couple of hours after the 2nd 800 and knew I had another big race the next weekend.
Tergat - Spot on with the plogh horse and thoroughbred perspective... After a fitness assesment I had a while ago they guy doing my numbers was going through things with me and I explained how I was too anaerobic and speed orientated in the past as I was focused on fast 800's and I was now logging the miles and leaving my hill sprints and hard reps in the past. I also explained that I found the miles tough and draining at times... From the odd GAA training sessions I will still doing I could see that I still felt okay a day after hard sprints etc., but the miles drained me... He just said, once a speed freeak always a speed freak - your body is just made that way!
I will admit to one thing - to err on the side of miles as tergat put it is literally building up a little extra savings in the bank.... To err to much on the side of speed and high intensity can be a banking crisis;).0 -
Hi tergat without taking a sample of somebodies muscle how dwould you tell where there strenghts ly, whether it be 1500m or marathon, is there a neat little trick you can do to tell.
Woddle,
Give me some info on yourself including training years, experience and PB's for 400, 800, 1500, 3000, 5000, 10000 and longer if you have ventured into this teritory. I will tell you then.
Also if you don't know what type you are, do a full-blown 200m, after a very through 20 minute warm up (including several moderate 100m strides). Then, walk around for 3 minutes and run the 200m the opposite direction on the track. Record those times and tell me how you did. Tell me you age, gender, and experience in the sport.
Tergat0 -
Thanks everyone for the advice. I have been thinking about it and will think about it some more and then have a talk with my coach. Thanks again.0
-
This is what I'd suggest:
Structure:
Mon: Aerobic run 40-60 mins, progressing to a good pace. Strides/Hill sprints. Core work
Tue: Vo2 max session
Wed: am: recovery run pm: aerobic run like Monday. Strides. Core.
Thurs: am: Aerobic run pm: Circuits. Squats (progress to squat jumps), Lunges (progress to with weights, then to split lunges where you jump from one to the other), Press-up etc. Alternate each exercise with a sprint, stride or hill sprint.
Fri: rest/recovery run
Sat: am: AnT run. Pm: recovery run. Core
Sun: Long Run 70-90
When I'm starting back it might be a while before I'm able to add in the doubles. Which runs should I omit until I'm ready to do doubles?0 -
When I'm starting back it might be a while before I'm able to add in the doubles. Which runs should I omit until I'm ready to do doubles?
For the first few weeks, just concentrate on getting back into the rhythm of training. When you feel ready, start adding in the Tuesday session and double days. I left the Thursday double day as the second one isn't a running session.
Structure:
Mon: Aerobic run 40-60 mins, progressing to a good pace. Strides/Hill sprints. Core work
Tue: Easy (faster than recovery pace) run 40-60 mins, strides
Wed: aerobic run like Monday. Strides. Core.
Thurs: am: Aerobic run pm: Circuits. Squats (progress to squat jumps), Lunges (progress to with weights, then to split lunges where you jump from one to the other), Press-up etc. Alternate each exercise with a sprint, stride or hill sprint. (Leave out some of the sprints or exercises that might cause trouble until you're comfortable trying them)
Fri: rest
Sat: am: AnT run. Pm: recovery run. Core Edit: Forgot to remove the recovery run - should read "AnT Run. Core"
Sun: Long Run 70-900 -
Advertisement
-
Advertisement