Advertisement
How to add spoiler tags, edit posts, add images etc. How to - a user's guide to the new version of Boards
Mods please check the Moderators Group for an important update on Mod tools. If you do not have access to the group, please PM Niamh. Thanks!

Renato Canova's training ideas.

  • #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,307 T runner


    His training has been widely lauded but not much literature exists on it.

    I found the below which is a PDF from a natural English speaker summarising his posts on letsrun.com.

    FULL TEXT

    I have summarized the sessions below.

    His training philosophy; namely, that the most important training is that which is conducted at the speed of the race you want to run. That is, your “specific training” matters most. All other training exists
    solely to support the specific training.


    If you look at the specific training below you will see teh amount of other training to support this. Thats what i like about this. Its full commitment training at each stage to facilitate the specific training to facilitate a fast time.

    The sessions are for elite (2:05) PR marathoners but it suggests using similar duration times (rather than distances) for slower runners.

    Im looking for a discussion on these training principles and also any more online (or offline) info people might be aware of regarding him. As this type of training seems to ahve been influential in the improvement to some of the Kenyan marathon times it should be explored. Ive put my own interpretations for arguments sake.


    Summary:


    Regeneration is easy running that is designed to expedite recovery from hard training sessions. According to Canova, blood lactate levels can remain elevated for 2-3 days after a hard effort if a
    regeneration run is not used to ‘flush out’ the body. Regeneration is a pace approximately 60-70% of
    the anaerobic threshold (AnT).


    (After an intro period of 3 weeks) Fundamental training is comprised of long, continuous runs at roughly the aerobic threshold (AeT) or a bit slower. Canova illustrates this pace with a 15:00 5k runner (presumably female). Her
    pace for “fundamental” workouts would be in the range of 5:33 to 6:00 per mile.

    E.G. Marathon 105-150 min 1.10-1.20x slower than RP

    T Runner: Im guessing 1-3 medium long/long runs per week at this pace.

    Fundamental training lasts 2 months.


    Special training focuses on extending endurance at about 90% of the speed of your primary
    event, as well as improving mechanics at faster than race pace—105% or more of the speed of your
    primary event. So, a 13:00 5k runner might do 2000m repeats at 14:10 pace, but at a high volume, or he
    might run fast 300m repeats with long recovery. Longer competitions (cross country and 10,000m for a
    5k runner) are also classified as “special training.” For marathoners, however, special training is
    exclusively faster and shorter than marathon pace.

    The long-distance (10km and up) specialists work at speeds of 102-105% of race pace for their reps: Covering distances of 20-30k

    T Runner: Reps at HM-25k pace.

    eg 10 by 2k..........5 by 5k

    Marathon

    45-50km (150-166min) at 87.5% RP


    T Runner: Slower runners running tehse by time but possibly covering that marathon distance once at this pace????

    Special training lasts 2 months.



    Specific training is focused on the speeds most pertinent to your specific event. In short, specific
    training occurs at 95% to 105% of the speed of your event.

    Marathon (2:05 PR)
    - 6 x 4000m at 102% RP, 1000m recovery at 89% RP
    - 5 x 5000m at 101% RP, 1000m recovery at 89% RP
    - 4 x 6000m at 101% RP, 1000m recovery at 89% RP
    - 4 x 7000m at 99% RP, 1000m recovery at 91% RP
    - 5 x 2000m at 105% RP during a 35km (22mi) long run at 91% RP
    - 25 km (15.5mi) long run at 102% RP
    - 30 km (18.5mi) long run at RP
    - 35 km (22mi) long run at 97% RP
    - 40 km (25mi) long run at 92% RP


    T Runner: 2 of these per week????


«134

Comments



  • Agreed, some of his atheletes are racing amazing times at the moment.

    A lot of authors and coaches have advocated long slow runs to be slow, easy miles to be very easy and tempo miles a fair bit faster than marathon race pace. The possible problem with this is that there are very few sessions were there are consistent marathon race pace miles. Canova would seem to advocate a lot of training at or within 30 seconds of race pace.

    Looking back over my logs for my most recent marathon, I had some quality tempo work with plenty of miles 40-60 seconds than planned marathon pace. I had a good few sessions of intervals that would have been about 100-120 seconds per mile faster than PMP. I had plenty of recovery runs at about 80 seconds slower than marathon race pace. However, the only consistent miles at PMP were coming in my weekend long runs, and even at that there was only 5 sessions that had 10 miles or more of consecutive race pace miles. The result in the marathon was poor compared to a previous schedule where I had a mid-week run of 10+ miles at race pace instead of tempo.

    Looking at Canova's runners and my own experiences, I would guess that a lot of his principles worked for me in one marathon and as I sort of regressed to more mixed sessions, times went backwards.




  • Agreed, some of his atheletes are racing amazing times at the moment.

    A lot of authors and coaches have advocated long slow runs to be slow, easy miles to be very easy and tempo miles a fair bit faster than marathon race pace. The possible problem with this is that there are very few sessions were there are consistent marathon race pace miles. Canova would seem to advocate a lot of training at or within 30 seconds of race pace.

    Looking back over my logs for my most recent marathon, I had some quality tempo work with plenty of miles 40-60 seconds than planned marathon pace. I had a good few sessions of intervals that would have been about 100-120 seconds per mile faster than PMP. I had plenty of recovery runs at about 80 seconds slower than marathon race pace. However, the only consistent miles at PMP were coming in my weekend long runs, and even at that there was only 5 sessions that had 10 miles or more of consecutive race pace miles. The result in the marathon was poor compared to a previous schedule where I had a mid-week run of 10+ miles at race pace instead of tempo.

    Looking at Canova's runners and my own experiences, I would guess that a lot of his principles worked for me in one marathon and as I sort of regressed to more mixed sessions, times went backwards.

    I had one good marathon myself but it was off the back of P and D training and mainly as a result of a good few fast paced long runs very similar to whats suggested as the long tempos in Canovas fundamental period.

    They were mainly run at between 1 min of Predicted Marathon Pace with the last 5 miles at 30s slower than PMP.

    Using this phase to support a "special phase" of paces closer to PMP which in turn supports a "specific phase" at or very close to PMP sounds like it might work very well.




  • Heres the last 10 weeks of Lydia Cheromeis marathon programme for Rotterdam (she won in 2:26).

    https://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddpx5gb6_19g2nx2rnp&hl=en

    Shows more clearly how the special and specific periods are structured. Good examples also of his "special intensive blocks". ( two hard sessions in one day to promote specific event endurance).




  • His book can be ordered from IAAF website. Only about 80 pages but well worth he read. About 6 euro.

    Alternatively he's posted a lot on letsrun. After Boston he posted up the training that Mosop did every day in the build up. Paces are given but knowing his marathon time % of race pace could we worked out and applied to other goal times. Canova does say though that less elite would do less of the hard sessions as due to years of building their aerobic base the people he trains can run somewhat hard most days.

    An interesting key session he has is 20k in the am with last 10k pretty hard (marathon pace?) and the same in the afternoon. In between sessions he doesn't advocate eating too much to stimulate running hard on low glycogen.

    The sessions of 4 x 5k etc. at race pace are classic, but he likes the recovery to be not too slow - 1k in maybe only 30s or so slower than the hard bit per km. I think these are called specific extensive.

    Specific intensive sessions consist of perhaps 16k continuous with every 2nd km at 97% and 103% marathon pace.

    He recommends to improve fat burning as opposed to using glycogen running at 90-100% marathon pace needs to be used.

    Lastly he also recommends a % pace zone for improving ability to reuse produced lactic acid for energy. I think this may be 97-103% mp but would have to check.




  • Canova does say though that less elite would do less of the hard sessions as due to years of building their aerobic base the people he trains can run somewhat hard most days.


    I think this is a crucial factor when looking at training and training philosophies. Many of the athletes he works with have huge aerobic bases built over years to get to the point where this training is applied to them. In terms of amount of hard days/ intensity of runs etc these are all to be taken into account when applying the philosophies to your own training you must take into account your running history

    In terms of special block training he wrote a great thread on the build up to worlds of many of his athletes

    One other aspect of his training which is of interest is his lactate removal sessions


  • Advertisement


  • He recommends to improve fat burning as opposed to using glycogen running at 90-100% marathon pace needs to be used.


    I think McMillan advocates similar in terms of Long runs on empty stomach IIRC?

    Also in terms of fueling this is only applicable when the target is the marathon. If you are aiming for 10k/half (this Quality double days also recommended for these types of runners) then the fueling strategy does not play as big a role in non marathon specific training




  • ecoli wrote: »
    Canova does say though that less elite would do less of the hard sessions as due to years of building their aerobic base the people he trains can run somewhat hard most days.


    I think this is a crucial factor when looking at training and training philosophies. Many of the athletes he works with have huge aerobic bases built over years to get to the point where this training is applied to them. In terms of amount of hard days/ intensity of runs etc these are all to be taken into account when applying the philosophies to your own training you must take into account your running history

    In terms of special block training he wrote a great thread on the build up to worlds of many of his athletes

    One other aspect of his training which is of interest is his lactate removal sessions

    In a recent interview on marathontalk, Rob Di Castela said it took him 5 years to slowly build up to the weekly training load which lead him to break marathon world record.




  • ecoli wrote: »
    I think this is a crucial factor when looking at training and training philosophies. Many of the athletes he works with have huge aerobic bases built over years to get to the point where this training is applied to them. In terms of amount of hard days/ intensity of runs etc these are all to be taken into account when applying the philosophies to your own training you must take into account your running history

    That is true and partly the reason why i started the thread. To see how his training might be applied to people aspiring to improve marathon times here. I believe his training could benefit most runners, not just elites.

    In my summary i described the type of key sessions that were carried out in each phase. These type of sessions in suitable duration and frequency should work for any runner.




  • ecoli wrote: »
    I think McMillan advocates similar in terms of Long runs on empty stomach IIRC?

    Also in terms of fueling this is only applicable when the target is the marathon. If you are aiming for 10k/half (this Quality double days also recommended for these types of runners) then the fueling strategy does not play as big a role in non marathon specific training


    Thanks for the link.

    The first 4 weeks of that schedule would correspond to the special phase of his traing: intervals at faster than race pace (T pace) and fast long runs.

    The last 8 weeks are the specific phase. Canova adds sessions to existing ones so the T pace session remains on consecutive weeks and the progression run is alternated with the existing Steady runs. The steady runs are actually a part of the fundamental phase which should build the mileage up to max before the special phase starts.




  • Thanks T_Runner, a very informative read. My only disagreement with the author is one of the final lines "clearly Canova takes a significantly different approach to training than any other well-known coach". The system is essentially a very slight modification of Lydiard training with a few specific elements spelled out more clearly than Arthur did in his own books (but elements that are readily understandable when you talk to his former athletes and read their programmes).

    I will put it on my list to dedicate an article to showcasing the similarities and, very few, differences that exist between the two systems.


  • Advertisement


  • Raighne wrote: »
    Thanks T_Runner, a very informative read.

    +1
    Raighne wrote: »
    I will put it on my list to dedicate an article to showcasing the similarities and, very few, differences that exist between the two systems.

    It would be great to see you doing a similar thread for Lydiard.




  • I bought the book on Larry Brent's recommendations, and it has a great chapter (4) on different types of hill runs, progressive runs, etc and their physiological benefits for marathon programs. Well worth the €5.50 buying price (even if you do have to jump through a few hoops to order the book).

    You do have to translate some of the tables/examples to more realistic numbers, as they are often based on a 2:08 (male)/2:28(female) marathon performances!




  • Raighne wrote: »
    Thanks T_Runner, a very informative read. My only disagreement with the author is one of the final lines "clearly Canova takes a significantly different approach to training than any other well-known coach". The system is essentially a very slight modification of Lydiard training with a few specific elements spelled out more clearly than Arthur did in his own books (but elements that are readily understandable when you talk to his former athletes and read their programmes).

    I will put it on my list to dedicate an article to showcasing the similarities and, very few, differences that exist between the two systems.

    Raighne - I'd be really interested to see an analysis of the differences between Lydiard and Canova. I've read a couple of the monster threads on letsrun about Lydiard and the PDF of a presentation he gave that Nobby (IIRC) pulled together and feel like I have a reasonable grasp of what Lydiard was trying to do from at least a macro perspective. I struggle to get the big picture from Canova though (I should probably buy that book) even though (or perhaps because) I've read quite a few of the things that he has written on letsrun.




  • Raighne wrote: »
    Thanks T_Runner, a very informative read. My only disagreement with the author is one of the final lines "clearly Canova takes a significantly different approach to training than any other well-known coach". The system is essentially a very slight modification of Lydiard training with a few specific elements spelled out more clearly than Arthur did in his own books (but elements that are readily understandable when you talk to his former athletes and read their programmes).

    I will put it on my list to dedicate an article to showcasing the similarities and, very few, differences that exist between the two systems.

    Fair enough Raighne, that will be very interesting and should help us greatly undertsanding both systems. I believe Canovas Philosophy might tie a little closer to Lydiards than an actual study of their respective elite schedules though.

    Canovas fundamental period has similarities to Lydiards Marathon conditioning phase: The goals may be similar but the methodology is different.

    Canova concentrating on long tempo runs while the pacier runs in Lydiards build up are usually shorter although long runs were included and at brisk paces. Aerobic power reps are included at this stage which was anathema to Lydiard. That may have been because he viewed any anaerobic work as destructive to the aerobic base. If these reps are shown not to be destructive: they fit with Lydiards general philosophy.

    The main difference as id see it is the emphasis on specifity early in the schedules of Canova. This ties in with Canovas "race pace is best" defining outlook.

    Canovas sessions are based with the event in mind after the fundamental phase: In the special phase interval and tempo paces are influenced by race pace and the defined threshold for that athlete.

    Lydiards hill and LT reps although helping the runner lack the specifity of the equivalent Canova timeline phases.

    Lydiards coordination phase does embrace some specifity, but not as much as Canovas and the reason being that Canovas earlier phases prepare for substantial specifity which prepares the athlete better for completing the distance at race pace in the particular event.

    Their philosphies are similar: but Canovas coordination phase (specific phase) has better training results on the athlete than Lydiards due to what transpired.

    It could be argued that elements are there in both coaching systems (and many others) : Aerobic capacity, lactic buffering, speed, coordination. How they are put together differs, the sessions that achieve them differ and that is how you must compare them in my opinion.

    Just thought id play devils advocate (although i believe everything i wrote) and through this in before the comparison.




  • I bought the book on Larry Brent's recommendations, and it has a great chapter (4) on different types of hill runs, progressive runs, etc and their physiological benefits for marathon programs. Well worth the €5.50 buying price (even if you do have to jump through a few hoops to order the book).

    You do have to translate some of the tables/examples to more realistic numbers, as they are often based on a 2:08 (male)/2:28(female) marathon performances!

    Thanks Krusty and Larry. Ill order a copy. The PDF in the OP has some percentages for paces which should serve as a reference to compare to the actual paces in the book.




  • T runner wrote: »
    Fair enough Raighne, that will be very interesting and should help us greatly undertsanding both systems. I believe Canovas Philosophy might tie a little closer to Lydiards than an actual study of their respective elite schedules though.

    Canovas fundamental period has similarities to Lydiards Marathon conditioning phase: The goals may be similar but the methodology is different.

    Canova concentrating on long tempo runs while the pacier runs in Lydiards build up are usually shorter although long runs were included and at brisk paces. Aerobic power reps are included at this stage which was anathema to Lydiard. That may have been because he viewed any anaerobic work as destructive to the aerobic base. If these reps are shown not to be destructive: they fit with Lydiards general philosophy.

    The main difference as id see it is the emphasis on specifity early in the schedules of Canova. This ties in with Canovas "race pace is best" defining outlook.

    Canovas sessions are based with the event in mind after the fundamental phase: In the special phase interval and tempo paces are influenced by race pace and the defined threshold for that athlete.

    Lydiards hill and LT reps although helping the runner lack the specifity of the equivalent Canova timeline phases.

    Lydiards coordination phase does embrace some specifity, but not as much as Canovas and the reason being that Canovas earlier phases prepare for substantial specifity which prepares the athlete better for completing the distance at race pace in the particular event.

    Their philosphies are similar: but Canovas coordination phase (specific phase) has better training results on the athlete than Lydiards due to what transpired.

    It could be argued that elements are there in both coaching systems (and many others) : Aerobic capacity, lactic buffering, speed, coordination. How they are put together differs, the sessions that achieve them differ and that is how you must compare them in my opinion.

    Just thought id play devils advocate (although i believe everything i wrote) and through this in before the comparison.

    A good summary of the two systems. I believe some of the points are less different than is outlined but that is because there is unfortunately a difference between the schedules published in his books, public perception of the Lydiard system and what he actually had his athletes do. Some of these nuances only became apparent to me once I had talked to Peter Snell, Lorraine Moller and Nobby. Incidentally, Ron Daws' book "Running Your Best" probably describes the Lydiard system more precisely than any of his own books (although Lydiard's prose is more inspirational).

    I would need some time and thought to reply properly to the above so let me hold it for the article but for now I'll mention that I will be using the comparison with the Lydiard training programmes as they are produced by the Lydiard Foundation today. At the seminar, one section also covered some differences to training that can be made to marathoners who run faster than 2:05 (but that shouldn't be adopted by runners running slower). This also included an interesting discussion around the Rosa versus Lydiard pyramid. Hopefully, we will be able to release some of the 25 hours of footage we have, including this, but it is the property of the Lydiard Foundation so they have final say on the release of the video and we are holding off until then.

    Various coaches have adapted the Lydiard system, some declaring it and some not, but made significant changes without breaking the underlying principles. A quick example is Mark Wetmore, coach of the Colorado Buffaloes, he removed the hill phase between aerobic and anaerobic because he had found from experience that the plyometric drills were incomplete and for time reasons (the high school season does not make proper peaking easy). But they still ensure that the correct muscular flexibility and tendon strength is created by doing ten plyometric drills (including Lydiard's original three) on a regular basis, side-by-side with the regular training. Unfortunately, he did not feel obliged to share the details of these ten at the seminar!

    In my article, I would not attempt to compare the merits of the system by the success they have had. At first sight its unfair on Canova because he's had a lot less time to get it but the era and the athletes coached are so different as to make that a difficult assessment to make. It would have been interesting to see what Lydiard could have made of a group of Kenyans given what he made of a bunch of lads from his neighbourhood. Snell's 1:44 800m remains the fastest 800m ever run on grass. There is a list of some of the champions who used it: http://www.go2lydiard.com/whouseslydiard.htm




  • I think something worth pointing out to anyone totally new to the Canova approach might be his lack of long runs done at easy pace in marathon training. The long runs typically have a significant proportion at or about marathon pace, often broken up interval style as in some of the examples in preceding posts.

    As an extreme example of this in the build up to Chicago, Mosop ran 40k in 2:06 or something (2:14 marathon pace) at altitude. To put this in perspective it's probably equivalent to someone training for a 3hour marathon here running for 2:55 at 3:05 pace (considering the altitude effect). I'm not advocating people should try that, just giving an example!




  • it has a great chapter (4) on different types of hill runs, progressive runs, etc and their physiological benefits for marathon programs.

    He claims that to improve stroke volume and thus cardiac output (so you can get more oxygenated blood to exercising muscles per minute) you need to raise HR as high as possible as quickly as possible. So full on, short, steep hill sprints are recommended - i.e. go up a steep hill, hard, for about 8 seconds.

    I like the way in the book he goes through in basic terms the physiology of running - need to get air into the lungs, get that transported to the muscles, get the oxygen into the muscle fibres and so on and then details specific training required to improve the bodies ability to do each of these things.

    Something that appeals to me about the Canova approach is the use of percentages as these can be applied to all levels/paces.

    A word of warning about the pdf, when the author initially released this certain aspects were criticised on letsrun as not been an accurate interpretation. Perhaps it has been amended since then, in any case criticism on letsrun might not necessarily count for much! Also in the book, one of the tables of recommended paces is incorrect, but based on the text you can amend tis yourself.




  • Ordered the book. You need to send a form (attached) to IAAF headquarters (also on form).
    $8...good value.




  • He often responds on letsrun.com when people be raving about the monster sessions that the likes of Bekele or El G be doing. Paraphrasing 'you have to look at what the athlete was doing for years prior to these sessions'.


  • Advertisement


  • YFlyer wrote: »
    He often responds on letsrun.com when people be raving about the monster sessions that the likes of Bekele or El G be doing. Paraphrasing 'you have to look at what the athlete was doing for years prior to these sessions'.

    Thats right. Im doing a Spring marathon. A difficulty will be tailoring a Canovian schedule to suit based on my own background. I suppose a method is to workout sessions of a maximal frequency and size relative to the elite ones that are also sustaineable and suitable for the athlete.

    The big sessions also give you an incentive to put in a big initial fundamental phase. The more you put into this phase: the more you can get out of the race specific sessions and the marathon itself.




  • Some fantastic food for thought in this tread. Many thanks to T Runner, Raighne, Larry Brent, etc. for their obviously highly knowledgeable thoughts on the methods.

    I'd definitely nominate this for the "Best Of" thread.




  • Some fantastic food for thought in this tread. Many thanks to T Runner, Raighne, Larry Brent, etc. for their obviously highly knowledgeable thoughts on the methods.

    I'd definitely nominate this for the "Best Of" thread.

    Too early for that yet. With till after Raighne faces the firing squad with his comparison of the running coaches, resplendant in Ned Kelly outfit!!!!!



    The fundamental phase of Canovas training is described as an attack on all the systems. Intervals dont exceed 110% of M pace in general but they can take a variety of interesting forms.

    One of the reps that exceed this pace is the all out uphill sprints. As well as stimulating cardiac output they have the effect of utilizing 100% of muscle fibres. The short progression runs (30-45m) in this phase from marathon pace to 108% of marathon pace are also designed to utilize new fibres as the pace increses. This is important because even in a steady long run only 20% of fibres may be utilized. During a marathon the slower twitch fibres are depleted first. As the second half progresses more and more fast twitch fibres are recruited.

    Training that regularly recruits these fibres means that they can be more easily recruited during specific training later and therefore will also adapt to using less glycogen at race pace...aparently an essential adaption for an even or negative split marathon for a runner running to race day poteantial.

    If these fast fibres only burn glycogen and cannot lipidly function (trained to use fat and carb mix) the runner will slow when these fibres take over the running and burn the stores out around 30k.

    (all this according to Canova obviously)




  • T runner wrote: »
    Too early for that yet. With till after Raighne faces the firing squad with his comparison of the running coaches, resplendant in Ned Kelly outfit!!!!!



    The fundamental phase of Canovas training is described as an attack on all the systems. Intervals dont exceed 110% of M pace in general but they can take a variety of interesting forms.

    One of the reps that exceed this pace is the all out uphill sprints. As well as stimulating cardiac output they have the effect of utilizing 100% of muscle fibres. The short progression runs (30-45m) in this phase from marathon pace to 108% of marathon pace are also designed to utilize new fibres as the pace increses. This is important because even in a steady long run only 20% of fibres may be utilized. During a marathon the slower twitch fibres are depleted first. As the second half progresses more and more fast twitch fibres are recruited.

    Training that regularly recruits these fibres means that they can be more easily recruited during specific training later and therefore will also adapt to using less glycogen at race pace...aparently an essential adaption for an even or negative split marathon for a runner running to race day poteantial.

    If these fast fibres only burn glycogen and cannot lipidly function (trained to use fat and carb mix) the runner will slow when these fibres take over the running and burn the stores out around 30k.

    (all this according to Canova obviously)

    Haha, fair enough. With the launch of ChampionsEverywhere my article backlog is up to somewhat like thirty but I will do my best to shift this to the top of the pile, although with a few coaching sessions to run this weekend, I imagine it will likely be after my holidays so early December some time.

    In the meantime, I will order the book. It seems unbalanced to have all the Lydiard literature on one side of the comparison and only an internet article on the other.

    As an act of laziness, I have popped the question past Nobby and the Foundation as well. They have been evaluating the training against other methods for past 30 years and with scientists such as Dave Martin, Peter Snell, Greg McMillan, Nic Bideau and Dick Browne on the advisory board they must have had some intense discussions over the last few years. They are very busy with their own launch of the new software but thought I'd chance it.




  • Ive attached a spreadsheet where you can put in a marathon time and it will compute the paces for teh sessions during the different phases (robbed from Cool running Australia).

    As far as i know 10k pace interrval sessions can be added in to the fundamental phase evntually lenghtening and increasing in volume and slowing in pace to the HM sessions in the Special stage.




  • [email protected] MP+12% ? That's a tough run. But the hero award goes to the 30k @MP. Ouch. There are some real killer sessions in there. You'd really want to be a serious high mileage runner to take some of them on.




  • [email protected] MP+12% ? That's a tough run. But the hero award goes to the 30k @MP. Ouch. There are some real killer sessions in there. You'd really want to be a serious high mileage runner to take some of them on.

    Thats true. If forces you start working early i guess. A long buildup is necessary and youd need to be in very decent aerobic form starting even the fundamental stage. Apparently in the specific stage the 2 big sessions account for as much as 30-40 % of total mileage. All other runs are regeneration runs.

    I reckon that the sessions should be reduced in some proportion to finishing time and mileage (speed and/or distance).
    Canova suggests that it shouldnt matter as everyone must run 42. However he is referring to differences between elites. As Canovas basis is a 2:05 marathon i reckon i will calculate teh times for these elites and use it as a basis for teh duration of my sessions. I will update with these.

    The pace given opposite 20k in the special phase seems to be marathon pace.
    Im guessing that this is the target of the average pace between the workbout and the recovery. The speed of the workbout is improved earlier in teh specific phase, and the speed of the reoveries is worked at later. This brings marathon pace closer to HM pace and maked the athlete better able to endure the long and hard sessions to follow in teh Specific period. (I hope)




  • Really liking the look of those 30k long interval runs during the specific phase. Are they progressive? i.e. do you start with:
    4k x 6
    and move onto:
    5k x 5
    etc.
    Would you aim to do the every week or every other week? Could you alternate them with the continuous runs (which would give you about 9 weeks of long runs).

    I know the spreadsheet isn't exhaustive (i.e. doesn't contain every type of session in the Canova booklet), but there's nothing that would be considered 5k pace in there. In fact, there's barely any 10k pace running, so quite different to the likes of P&D.




  • Really liking the look of those 30k long interval runs during the specific phase. Are they progressive? i.e. do you start with:
    4k x 6
    and move onto:
    5k x 5
    etc.
    Would you aim to do the every week or every other week? Could you alternate them with the continuous runs (which would give you about 9 weeks of long runs).

    I know the spreadsheet isn't exhaustive (i.e. doesn't contain every type of session in the Canova booklet), but there's nothing that would be considered 5k pace in there. In fact, there's barely any 10k pace running, so quite different to the likes of P&D.

    His athletes do 10ks, XCs and HMs in special period.

    These are the specific sessions from a female marathoners specific block. I plugged 2:26 into the spreadsheet and mcmillan.

    Lydia Cheromei last 10 weeks 2:26 marathon

    Looks like 8 of these rep sessions. He has 3 special blocks where the athlete does a double session: AM and PM. A couple of rep sessions are in these blocks. When a Block is scheduled for a week, there is no second hard session that week. There may be a moderate progressive run on hills or flat scheduled instead.
    He has only 4 long runs down. 2 fast ones and two slow ones although the special blocks obviously provide the extension with one block in particular being over 50k.
    There are some medium runs (14k) at 1.1 times race pace which are a maintenance of the fundamental long run paces i guess.
    I am taking this to mean that there are several; building blocks that should be arreanged to suit the particular runner, but become more marathon specific as D Day nears.

    Week1: One big session (A Canova special BLOCK session)

    AM: 8 km briskish (3’44” pace) +

    10 km (3’24” pace) (Pace is 20 mile race pace)

    (18 km)


    PM: 8 km briskish” (3’42” pace) +

    10 x 1000m (track) in (15kpace increasing to-10k) ave 3:10 rec. 200m (average 1’18”)

    Week2

    Session 1:

    20’ warm-up 7 x 2000 in (25k pace increasing to 10 mile pace ave HM pace) rec. 600m in 2’44“ >< 3’02“ (22 km)


    Session 2: 35k inc speed variations, 10k at PMP, 3k max uphill to finish OMG

    Week 3: (another block)
    S1
    AM: 10k at PMP + 10k at HMP
    PM: 10k @2-3% slower than PMP. + 10 x 1000m in 3’11”3 >< 3’03”4 (av. 3’08”8) (10k race pace is 3:06 for her) recovery 200m in 1’45” (track)

    S2: 20’ warm-up 25k hilly progressive running (average PMP (3’34”))

    2:15 easy by feel

    Week 4:
    S1: 6 by 3k at HM pace rec (600 in 3')
    S2: Half marathon race.

    Week5: Recovery week
    Near week end.....20’ warm-up 25k hilly progressive running (average PMP (3’34”))

    2hrs 30 easy by feel.

    Week 6:

    More recovery:

    20’ warm-up 5 x 4k increasing pace every time MP---->HM pace (24 km) rec 4' ave

    Week 7
    (Special extensive block)
    AM 1 hr 30’ moderate-progressive pace (3’45” > 3’30”) for 24.5 km
    PM 1 hr 30’ moderate-fast progressive pace (3’40” > 3’26”) for 25.5 km


    S2: 30’ warm-up 20 km alternating 1 km fast (10mile race pace) and 1 km moderate (PMP * 102%)
    S3: 20 km progressive running (110%MP--->MP)

    Week 8:
    S1: 10’ warm-up + 34 km progressive running
    (10 km at 105% MP + 10 km at 102% MP + 10 km MP + 4 km at 99% MP) in 2 hr 01’10“

    S2: (4 x 5k at MP) + (1 x 3k at 10 mile Pace) rec. 1 km in 4’15” ave

    Week 9
    (Special mixed block)
    AM 10k @ 103% PMP + 12k @ 20mile race pace.
    PM 10k @ 103% PMP + 6k @ just over 10k pace.


    S2: 1 hour easy + 15k PMP

    Week 10: Race week


  • Advertisement


  • Really liking the look of those 30k long interval runs during the specific phase. Are they progressive? i.e. do you start with:
    4k x 6
    and move onto:
    5k x 5
    etc.

    Just to answer this one: I think they are progressive, getting longer and more specific.

    Would you aim to do the every week or every other week? Could you alternate them with the continuous runs (which would give you about 9 weeks of long runs).

    You could and maybe do one of the supplemental sessions: Progressive hilly run of around 20k as a second session. Im also keeping the P+D run as a backup for weeks when im too tired or cant do second session for another reason.
    I know the spreadsheet isn't exhaustive (i.e. doesn't contain every type of session in the Canova booklet), but there's nothing that would be considered 5k pace in there. In fact, there's barely any 10k pace running, so quite different to the likes of P&D.

    From what ive read elsewhere Canova lets his athletes run races from 5k to cross country to Half Marathon during second half of findamental/early part of special. He describes this as building aerobic power i.e elevating AT. He has stated that 10k races are perfect for developing aerobic power.

    As the volume of the intervals get longer the emphasis is on maintaining Aerobic Power but increasing aerobic resistance. Resistance would be stamina at AT or slower.

    With this in mind im going to do some 5k sessions, races, 10k sessions, races, all the time having slighly more emphasis on volume until i reach the sessions of the special phase and the specific phase. All teh way though i will be doing the P+D style long run @120-110% MP. I might go up to 40k with it.

    2nd half of special and specific will be sessions only.
    This is a big divergence with P+D. Canova believes any training that is too fast will taech the body to burn too much glycogen and bring the wall into play.


Advertisement