Base training at slow pace v's quality workouts

dna_leri

I have been trying to plan my winter training schedule with the goal of improving my 5K to 10K times next year. From what I have read, there seems to be two possible approaches:
1. The Lydiard school which advocates an extended base period of aerobic only running, anything up to 6 months in the off season.

2. The alternative view “quality not quantity” which maintains a similar training program year round focused on improving vVO2 max and efficiency with weekly or less frequent Long Slow Runs, but then peaking for key races.

I know I have simplified the descriptions above and I know there are different versions of the non-Lydiard approach.

As someone who has come back to running after a long break, I see the logic of working on base aerobic training so that I can build on that for next year but also with limited time for long slow running, the alternative view is attractive

I also realise that there is not a one-size fits all training program but I’m interested to know what others think and do, and how you approach your winter training.

Racing Flat

dna_leri wrote: »

I have been trying to plan my winter training schedule with the goal of improving my 5K to 10K times next year. From what I have read, there seems to be two possible approaches:
1. The Lydiard school which advocates an extended base period of aerobic only running, anything up to 6 months in the off season.

2. The alternative view “quality not quantity” which maintains a similar training program year round focused on improving vVO2 max and efficiency with weekly or less frequent Long Slow Runs, but then peaking for key races.

I know I have simplified the descriptions above and I know there are different versions of the non-Lydiard approach.

As someone who has come back to running after a long break, I see the logic of working on base aerobic training so that I can build on that for next year but also with limited time for long slow running, the alternative view is attractive

I also realise that there is not a one-size fits all training program but I’m interested to know what others think and do, and how you approach your winter training.

I think the No. 1 approach is under-rated. I always fall into the trap of cutting short on this to get back to speed work, so not the best person to advise you! On a similar topic, I found this interesting

http://www.tricoachjill.coach-site.c...ge/4110957.htm

thanks to Richie-Rich from another thread.

dna_leri

Thanks RF,

Had a problem with the link, but a bit of googling found this pdf which I think is the same.

http://www.tricoachjill.coach-site.com/f/hadd.pdf

ss43

Lydiard doesn't advocate slow base training. according to him runs should be at the maximum steady state although that doesn't seem to be defined clearly.

Where did you see this quality vs quantity approach that keeps a similare programme year round? Most of what I've read suggests that everyone in serious training would incorporate periodization

Even if you're doing a big aerobic base it's important to do some faster work as a sudden jump into intense work would risk injury.

T runner

Lydiard describes the marathon training period as running at 1/4 1/2 and 3/4 aerobic paces. I read an article by one of Lydiards athletes. He describes the 3/4 pace as sub-tempo, roughly 30k race pace. The 1/2 pace would be marathon and the 1/4 would be "easy pace". During this pahase he also advocated easy hill springing to prepare for the second hill phase.
Lydiard also has training programmes for athletes for year round improvement and racing for both road and cross country in his book Running with Lydiard, I think. These are good and would be suitable for people interested in improving while racing.
Last year I had a Lydiardesque build up by accident with a lot of Aerobic running and cycling whicj got my legs very strong. I did strides/sprints 2/3 times a week also. I found that after 3-4 weeks of faster stuff I was in PB shape for road distances.
This year Im hoping to build the strenght through a hard winter of cross country and miles. Im hoping that this will set me up for improvement in the summer.
Id recommend doing cross country for the winter with its aerobic emphasis as a good way for you forward. It will give you fitness and stenght.

This isnt at odds with ss43 though that periodisation and a mixture present is important for good results and avoiding injury.

dna_leri

ss43 wrote: »

Where did you see this quality vs quantity approach that keeps a similare programme year round? Most of what I've read suggests that everyone in serious training would incorporate periodization
.

Here's one source, Dean Hebert references some other research but I have not verified them.
http://coachdeanhebert.wordpress.com/2008/03/25/do-long-miles-at-low-heart-rate-build-a-better-engine/

Here's a quote from the article that I'll take out of context: Slow training at distances shorter than the marathon teach you to run slow for less than the marathon.

Among Gordon Pirie's Laws of running were:
Quality beats quantity; the speed at which you practice the most will be your best speed
Speed kills endurance; endurance kills speed.

In my (perhaps limited) experience, many regular (non-elite) runners do not in practice incorporate an annual base training period, but go from track to road to XC to indoor, with multiple peaking but little or no aerobic-only base building.

T-Runner's comment about building up strength through a hard winter of cross country and miles and Racing Flat's comments above, seem to be on the same lines.

The opposite view is from Dr Philip Maffetone:
Building a good aerobic base means training only aerobically. During the base period, no anaerobic workouts (including racing) should be incorporated. Anaerobic activity will jeopardize the efficient development of your aerobic base, so every workout is aerobic.

As said above, I know I am simplifiying the view points and there is no one solution but I am interested in what others think and do.

ss43

dna_leri wrote: »

Here's one source, Dean Hebert references some other research but I have not verified them.
http://coachdeanhebert.wordpress.com/2008/03/25/do-long-miles-at-low-heart-rate-build-a-better-engine/

Here's a quote from the article that I'll take out of context: Slow training at distances shorter than the marathon teach you to run slow for less than the marathon.

In my (perhaps limited) experience, many regular (non-elite) runners do not in practice incorporate an annual base training period, but go from track to road to XC to indoor, with multiple peaking but little or no aerobic-only base building.

T-Runner's comment about building up strength through a hard winter of cross country and miles and Racing Flat's comments above, seem to be on the same lines.

The opposite view is from Dr Philip Maffetone:
Building a good aerobic base means training only aerobically. During the base period, no anaerobic workouts (including racing) should be incorporated. Anaerobic activity will jeopardize the efficient development of your aerobic base, so every workout is aerobic.

As said above, I know I am simplifiying the view points and there is no one solution but I am interested in what others think and do.

That article doesn't address periodization but it doesn't say to keep similar training year round. It's also related to marathon running which doesn't work along the same lines as 5 and 10k running. I wasn't saying that quality over quantity was a silly concept but even that approach would use periodization.

I know very few runners that do road, track, cross country and indoor and would be of the opinion that they could do a lot better by focusing more on one or two. Track runners can run cross country without much problems as their base phase would be finishing wen the important cross country races were on and they wouldn't take it that seriously.

It depends what your definition of serious is but I'd say there aren't many serious road runners in this country, but you'll get good track and cross country runners doing road races. They wouldn't be their focus however.

I don't agree with Dr Philip Maffetone's view. I think some work on speed must be done all year. Why let it go to waste. It's very easy to work on it by doing short strides/sprints/hills at near maximal effort. Keep them down to 10 seconds and the accumulation of lactate is almost non-existant but it's definitely anareobic.

Regarding Lydiard books, I read the earlier ones and recall him saying something like the athlete should be giving the maximum at each training. I presumed he meant a good hard run then. He advocated easy jogging but as a supplement to each day's hard effort. I've heard that he watered things down for the later books but I can't verify that as I haven't read them and I haven't any other source for what training they actually did.

thirtyfoot

ss43 wrote: »

. I think some work on speed must be done all year. Why let it go to waste. It's very easy to work on it by doing short strides/sprints/hills at near maximal effort. Keep them down to 10 seconds and the accumulation of lactate is almost non-existant but it's definitely anareobic.

I'd agree with this and it can apply in certain apsects to all running distances. Why run your fastest in July or August to return to slow slog in September and October and negate or lose much of the quality and speed you had in the summer. Many say the Africans are faster because of genetics, but another reason is they run a much larger % of their training at race pace or closer to race pace. Also, while it still works for certain athletes, the old school very segmented periodization is out of fashion these days with all aspects of training worked on at all stages of the year. But fashions change of course.

T runner

Im not convinced about the Dean Herberts articles correlation between fast running times and fast marathon/half marathon times.

The reason is that a 2 hr half marathoner is running a different race (a 2hr one) effectively to the 1 hr half marathoner and so the optimum schedule for a 1 hr athlete would require a higher percentage of fast running. Therefore the faster you are the more fast paced training you should do and not necessarily the other way round.

His suggestion that training slower and shorter for marathon trains you to run shorter and slower than marathon may be true. But the intention of this phase is not to train for marathon but to prepare your body to absorb successive training/loads which will enable the athlete to train for a fast marathon.

Apparntly (Noakes, I think) african endurance athletes have a higher endurance quality to their fast twitch muscles and thus their elite endurance athletes would have a higher percentage of fast fibres than their european equivalents. I dont know if this is a reason for their being able to absorb a higher percentage of fast pace running but it may be. I suppose this is one of the genetics arguements.

Dr Philip Maffetone's view on the aerobic phase seems similar to Lydiards
but Im sure, like Lydiard, he would also advocate some mild hill work or strides that would not affect the aerobic pathways.
(You can also gain speed by bumping up your mileage in a short time space which tires your slowtwitch and recruits fast twitch. If you up your mileage significantly say on aholiday you may notice a significant improvement in say a 5k race at holidays end, but you may also get injured.)


One of the reasons Lydiards methods were so successful at the time was that no other middle distance athletes were doing this huge aerobic phase. When it came to championships provided the heats were run at a fast pace the other Athletes could not match Lydiards for stamina and would not be able to beat them in the actual event finals. Lydiard always stressed that his other periods of Hills, anaerobic and race prep were necessary to bring his training to its logical conclusion.

Jack Daniels has a base phase including strides and then phases of Reps, I, Tempo and race prep. Each phase may have all the elements (R,I,T) involved but each phase would have one principle workout, a secondary and tertiary one. I think at the moment its geared towards periodisation but with all the elements. (there are more elements than these ofcourse)

I generally would have an aerobic oriented phase once or twice a year.
Ive had one up until the cross country phase now. But I do think you can take the cross country period as a whole as a preparation phase for the faster summer period of whatever racing youre into.

ss43

T runner wrote: »

Apparntly (Noakes, I think) african endurance athletes have a higher endurance quality to their fast twitch muscles and thus their elite endurance athletes would have a higher percentage of fast fibres than their european equivalents. I dont know if this is a reason for their being able to absorb a higher percentage of fast pace running but it may be. I suppose this is one of the genetics arguements.

Couldn't that higher endurance quality be a result of their training? Have similar results been found in sedentary populations?

Kids in Kenya often join in when a group of runners goes past and stop when they can't keep up anymore so a lot of their early (and very informal) running is done at a high intensity and progress is lasting for longer at whatever pace the adults are running at (usually a high intensity for the kids).

T runner

ss43 wrote: »

Couldn't that higher endurance quality be a result of their training? Have similar results been found in sedentary populations?

Kids in Kenya often join in when a group of runners goes past and stop when they can't keep up anymore so a lot of their early (and very informal) running is done at a high intensity and progress is lasting for longer at whatever pace the adults are running at (usually a high intensity for the kids).

Had a look. You may be right. The tests were comparing african with european endurance athletes and claimed that the genetic quality of the muscle was slightly different. But they are not in the current edition of Noakes!
In the current edition he says that african endurance have 40-60% fast twitch muscles.
He says that the tests showing slow fibre predominance for distance champions in previous decades may be incorrect as the marathon was a race for slower runners who couldnt compete in middle distances. As a result maybe the conclusion that africans had more endurance in their fast twitch fibres was used to explain the discrepency. (by Noakes ofcourse!)
He also mantains it will be a runner with highish fast twitch percentage who will eventually break 2 hrs for the marathon.

All this may also add weight to the all round speed in the training argument, but may also show why differnet training works better for different people (difference in proportion types of muscle type etc.).