General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Approaches to training

Started by Tarfhead · · Last activity · 21 posts · 1,531 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
11 May 2004
Last activity
23 May 2004
Original author
Tarfhead
Posts
21
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,531
Views / 30 days
0
Topics

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 21
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. One 10K under my belt but still consider myself a newbie.
    The next challenge I have set for myself is to complete a 10
    mile race in 3 months time. My assumption is that I should
    continue as I have done, gradually increasing duration of my
    thrice-weekly runs, up to the 10 miles in August.

    Looking for other approaches a common feature of structured
    training plans is the occasional speed session, or short
    bursts of higher intensity, e.g. fartlek.

    My question is, for someone like me whose sole goal is
    to complete the course at as steady a pace as I can
    sustain, does such a variation in pace and preparation
    yield any benefit ?

  2. In article said:

    One 10K under my belt but still consider myself a
    newbie. The next challenge I have set for myself is to
    complete a 10 mile race in 3 months time. My assumption
    is that I should continue as I have done, gradually
    increasing duration of my thrice-weekly runs, up to the
    10 miles in August.

    Not necessary to run this long with every run. One long run
    a week is enough. You'd be better off doing a combination of
    increasing the length of one of your runs (if you can do 8
    miles in training you're good to go for the race) and add
    additional training runs during the week.

    Quoted message said:

    Looking for other approaches a common feature of
    structured training plans is the occasional speed session,
    or short bursts of higher intensity, e.g. fartlek.

    My question is, for someone like me whose sole goal is to
    complete the course at as steady a pace as I can sustain,
    does such a variation in pace and preparation yield any
    benefit ?

    Not really. Better to just build up your weekly long run and
    add milage for now. Where speed work comes in is if you want
    to run a race faster. For example, you could add gradually
    introduce speed work after the 10 mile race then try another
    10k race. The combination of the endurance you've built up
    during 10 mile training and the newly added speed work
    should greatly improve your 10k times.

    Cheers,
    --
    Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflord

  3. [email hidden] (TarfHead) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    One 10K under my belt but still consider myself a
    newbie. The next challenge I have set for myself is to
    complete a 10 mile race in 3 months time. My assumption
    is that I should continue as I have done, gradually
    increasing duration of my thrice-weekly runs, up to the
    10 miles in August.

    Looking for other approaches a common feature of
    structured training plans is the occasional speed session,
    or short bursts of higher intensity, e.g. fartlek.

    My question is, for someone like me whose sole goal is to
    complete the course at as steady a pace as I can sustain,
    does such a variation in pace and preparation yield any
    benefit ?

    Take in mind, I am not a cerified trainer. Just someone who
    has been running for several years. I generally try to
    encourage new runners to build slowly to a 3 to 5 mile
    regular run, and then just hang out for a little while at
    current pace and length to allow your body to adjust. I feel
    it takes a good 6 months to year for the bones, tendons and
    various other things to really adapt to this new lifestyle.
    After, you have the first year under you belt, then you are
    really prepare for some serious training.

    If you normally run 5-6 miles run on a average - completing
    a 10 miler will be no problem. Throwing in a long slow run 8
    - 10 miler once a week is about normal for the first year.

    Again, this is just my opinion. The main thing is to prevent
    injurys and approach running as a life long habit.

    Take care -Rob

  4. You are all a bunch of total turkeys who know absolutely
    nothing about running and in a way that is really good
    because it means I will always lower the boom on you all and
    whip your asses.

    You can run all the speed work in the world and it won't
    lower your 10K or 10 mile times to the level that it could
    be lowered.

    What you all need is someone to take you through a few
    weeks of appropriate training to show you how rapidly
    your times could come down. Someone to set you on the
    right pattern because you are all on the completely
    wrong pattern and are doing nothing but spinning your
    wheels and plodding and just wasting your time doing the
    wrong things.

    What you all hope to achieve in a year could easily be
    achieved in a few weeks but if you are too dumb and
    inexperienced then your progress will only move at the
    snails pace that you run.

    And if I look at you and see that you're overweight, I
    won't even bother. I'll insist you have liposuction
    because nothing will work right if you are an average
    height and 180 or more pounds. If you can't lose the
    weight, don't even bother, go into swimming then because
    you will not be able to run long distance.

    [email hidden] (TarfHead) wrote in message
    news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    One 10K under my belt but still consider myself a
    newbie. The next challenge I have set for myself is to
    complete a 10 mile race in 3 months time. My assumption
    is that I should continue as I have done, gradually
    increasing duration of my thrice-weekly runs, up to the
    10 miles in August.

    Looking for other approaches a common feature of
    structured training plans is the occasional speed session,
    or short bursts of higher intensity, e.g. fartlek.

    My question is, for someone like me whose sole goal is to
    complete the course at as steady a pace as I can sustain,
    does such a variation in pace and preparation yield any
    benefit ?

  5. I would suggest looking at the various half marathon
    training programs on the web, pick one and follow it. You
    might shorten the longest run a bit, but otherwise a half
    marathon program would work well.

    A weekly "speed" session is a great way to improve fitness.

    If you are only running 3x per week, I would recommend more
    frequent runs.

    "TarfHead" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    One 10K under my belt but still consider myself a
    newbie. The next challenge I have set for myself is to
    complete a 10 mile race in 3 months time. My assumption
    is that I should continue as I have done, gradually
    increasing duration of my thrice-weekly runs, up to the
    10 miles in August.

    Looking for other approaches a common feature of
    structured training plans is the occasional speed session,
    or short bursts of higher intensity, e.g. fartlek.

    My question is, for someone like me whose sole goal is to
    complete the course at as steady a pace as I can sustain,
    does such a variation in pace and preparation yield any
    benefit ?

  6. TarfHead said:

    One 10K under my belt but still consider myself a
    newbie. The next challenge I have set for myself is to
    complete a 10 mile race in 3 months time. My assumption
    is that I should continue as I have done, gradually
    increasing duration of my thrice-weekly runs, up to the
    10 miles in August.

    That will work.

    Quoted message said:


    Looking for other approaches a common feature of
    structured training plans is the occasional speed session,
    or short bursts of higher intensity, e.g. fartlek.

    My question is, for someone like me whose sole goal is to
    complete the course at as steady a pace as I can sustain,
    does such a variation in pace and preparation yield any
    benefit ?

    This will work too, as would some other "comfortably
    hard" or "hard"

    sess-
    ions.
    Some
    ways
    of
    doing
    them
    have
    diff-
    erent
    bene-
    fits
    than
    othe-
    rs.
    When
    you
    incr-
    ease
    effo-
    rt in
    a fa-
    rtlek
    (at
    least
    if
    you
    do
    them
    enou-
    gh to
    have
    an
    fect-
    numb-
    er of
    times
    depe-
    nds
    on
    how
    athl-
    ete
    resp-
    onds
    to
    that
    type
    trai-
    ning,
    etc),
    you
    are
    incr-
    easi-
    ng
    heart
    rate,
    and I
    beli-
    eve
    the
    bene-
    fits
    are
    incr-
    ease
    in
    blood
    plas-
    ma
    volu-
    me,
    numb-
    er of
    capi-
    llar-
    ies,
    mito-
    chon-
    dria
    in
    order
    to
    proc-
    ess
    more
    O2 at
    one
    time.
    You
    may
    not
    race
    at
    that
    high-
    er
    inte-
    nsit-
    y,
    but
    the
    card-
    io
    bene-
    fits
    will
    help.

    Any higher effort will provide those benefits more so than
    lower efforts (at least that's my understanding) - running
    or biking on hills, snowshoe running, etc. May not be going
    faster but still get raised effort. Neuromuscular effects
    may be different with these different activities.

    Not sure how the training plans you're looking at refer to
    fartleks. Some just suggest picking some landmark and
    running to it at harder effort, then backing off,
    alternating, etc. Others teach it by heart rate - hard up
    to a certain level, then back down. I preferred to hold it
    at the higher level (just below VT/LT where talking starts
    to degenerate) for a while before I backed off. A benefit
    of this is that you get to recognize effort level better.
    Then if you ever become addicted to running hilly trails,
    you've got a leg up on running hills at constant effort
    (variable pace).

    Fartleks could also be taken above VT/LT if you want to
    increase your LT, giving you more aerobic capacity (higher
    hr) in which to run your race. And they can also be used as
    VO2max sessions, just depending on how hard you make the
    hard part. The benefit is in the cardio improvement, whether
    you run at that effort in a race or not. But true fartleks
    are supposed to be "speed play", so the intention is to keep
    it unstructured.

    Dot

    --
    "Success is different things to different people" -Bernd
    Heinrich in Racing the Antelope

  7. Donovan Rebbechi wrote in message ...

    Quoted message said:

    In article
    <[email hidden]>, TarfHead


    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    One 10K under my belt but still consider myself a newbie.
    The next challenge I have set for myself is to complete a
    10 mile race in 3 months time. My assumption is that I
    should continue as I have done, gradually increasing
    duration of my thrice-weekly runs, up to the 10 miles in
    August.

    Not necessary to run this long with every run. One long run
    a week is


    enough.

    Quoted message said:

    You'd be better off doing a combination of increasing the
    length of one of your runs (if you can do 8 miles in
    training you're good to go for the


    race)

    Quoted message said:

    and add additional training runs during the week.

    Quoted message said:

    Looking for other approaches a common feature of
    structured training plans is the occasional speed
    session, or short bursts of higher intensity, e.g.
    fartlek.

    My question is, for someone like me whose sole goal is to
    complete the course at as steady a pace as I can sustain,
    does such a variation in pace and preparation yield any
    benefit ?

    Not really. Better to just build up your weekly long run
    and add milage for now. Where speed work comes in is if you
    want to run a race faster. For example, you could add
    gradually introduce speed work after the 10 mile


    race

    Quoted message said:

    then try another 10k race. The combination of the endurance
    you've built up during 10 mile training and the newly added
    speed work should greatly


    improve

    Quoted message said:

    your 10k times.

    Donovan gives great advice here. I would only add that some
    people prefer adding a fartlek run into their week rather
    than doing a formal speedwork session. More formal speedwork
    will probably make you faster than just doing fartlek, but I
    find running a farlek much more enjoyable. Fartlek works
    well in rolling or hilly terrain.

    - Tony

    Quoted message said:


    Cheers,
    --
    Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflord

  8. lol

  9. "macelroy" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    You are all a bunch of total turkeys who know
    absolutely nothing


    about

    Quoted message said:

    running and in a way that is really good because it
    means I will always lower the boom on you all and whip
    your asses.

    You should be doing stand-up comedy and getting paid for
    your Humor. Your handle could be MacLipoSucks and use
    titillating words like "fartlek." The third and fourth
    graders will giggle with delight.

    --
    Doug Freese "Training is not scientifically tested, It's
    just trial and error."
    Dr. David Costill [email hidden] (remove the NOBS)

  10. In article said:
    Quoted message said:

    Donovan gives great advice here. I would only add that
    some people prefer adding a fartlek run into their week
    rather than doing a formal speedwork session. More formal
    speedwork will probably make you faster than just doing
    fartlek, but I find running a farlek much more enjoyable.
    Fartlek works well in rolling or hilly terrain.

    I agree with this -- fartlek (and also strides) are
    enjoyable, low stress ways to introduce speed work. One of
    the earlier errors in the way I thought about training was
    that I believed that beginners should never do speed work.
    I still believe that pure base building makes sense
    physiologically, but also recognise that it's important to
    make training enjoyable. The low stress approach to speed
    work keeps workouts interesting, provides many of the
    benefits of speed work, and creates a good entry point to
    more serious training (if that is desired). As a beginner,
    one will improve quite rapidly even with fairly limited
    stress, so this tilts the balance in favour of easier
    speed work.

    On a related note, sometimes when I'm at the local track,
    there are a lot of kids playing there. When they see me
    running past, they try to "race" me -- usually for about 50m
    or so. After all, running much longer than that is mentally
    and physically very tiring/stressful, so they stop. Then
    they go back to walking for a little while, then run a round
    a little. I think these kids are on to something with their
    approach to training -- I suppose I inspire them, but they
    do return the favour. Maybe they understand something that
    many of us older folks have forgotten.

    Cheers,
    --
    Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflord

  11. Donovan Rebbechi <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

    Quoted message said:

    In article <[email hidden]>,

    qTrader said:
    Quoted message said:

    Donovan gives great advice here. I would only add that
    some people prefer adding a fartlek

    Donovan doesn't even know what fartlek is, he just
    likes saying

  12. Donovan Rebbechi <[email hidden]> wrote in
    :"]news:[email hidden]:

    Quoted message said:

    On a related note, sometimes when I'm at the local track,
    there are a lot of kids playing there. When they see me
    running past, they try to "race" me -- usually for about
    50m or so. After all, running much longer than that is
    mentally and physically very tiring/stressful, so they
    stop. Then they go back to walking for a little while,
    then run a round a little. I think these kids are on to
    something with their approach to training -- I suppose I
    inspire them, but they do return the favour. Maybe they
    understand something that many of us older folks have
    forgotten.

    How true. Frequently when I'm finishing a long run and
    heading up my own street, a few of the neighbor kids will
    spot me and race me to my home as I go by. Of course I'm
    all too happy to let them win. Little do the know that
    I've just finished running 15 miles. But they don't need
    to know that. ;-)

    Phil M.

    --
    "Pain is temporary: the success it brings can be
    everlasting." -fortune cookie

  13. "Donovan Rebbechi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    In article <[email hidden]>,

    qTrader said:
    Quoted message said:

    Donovan gives great advice here. I would only add that
    some people


    prefer

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    adding a fartlek run into their week rather than doing a
    formal


    speedwork

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    session. More formal speedwork will probably make you
    faster than just doing fartlek, but I find running a
    farlek much more enjoyable. Fartlek works well in
    rolling or hilly terrain.

    I agree with this -- fartlek (and also strides) are
    enjoyable, low stress


    ways

    Quoted message said:

    to introduce speed work. One of the earlier errors in the
    way I thought


    about

    Quoted message said:

    training was that I believed that beginners should never
    do speed work. I


    still

    Quoted message said:

    believe that pure base building makes sense
    physiologically, but also


    recognise

    Quoted message said:

    that it's important to make training enjoyable. The low
    stress approach to


    speed

    Quoted message said:

    work keeps workouts interesting, provides many of the
    benefits of speed


    work,

    Quoted message said:

    and creates a good entry point to more serious training
    (if that is


    desired). As

    Quoted message said:

    a beginner, one will improve quite rapidly even with
    fairly limited


    stress, so

    Quoted message said:

    this tilts the balance in favour of easier speed work.

    On a related note, sometimes when I'm at the local track,
    there are a lot


    of

    Quoted message said:

    kids playing there. When they see me running past, they
    try to "race"


    me --

    Quoted message said:

    usually for about 50m or so. After all, running much
    longer than that is mentally and physically very
    tiring/stressful, so they stop. Then they go


    back

    Quoted message said:

    to walking for a little while, then run a round a little.
    I think these


    kids

    Quoted message said:

    are on to something with their approach to training -- I
    suppose I inspire


    them,

    Quoted message said:

    but they do return the favour. Maybe they understand
    something that many


    of us

    Quoted message said:

    older folks have forgotten.

    Depending on the age of the kids, they may be low on a
    specific enzyme that aids in aerobic metabolism
    (phosphofructosekinase, PFK). Young kids are often good
    at running hard and then needing to recovery.

    Quoted message said:


    Cheers,
    --
    Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflord

  14. Quoted message said:

    And if I look at you and see that you're overweight, I
    won't even bother. I'll


    insist you have liposuction because nothing will work right
    if you are an average height and 180 or more pounds.

    Mac, your seemingly endless fascination with liposuction is
    odd. Is this your current idea of the training techniques of
    the elites? Is liposuction going to be the next "tip" we see
    on the cover of Runner's World? Perhaps you can freelance a
    submission -- they seem bound and determined to print
    absolute garbage over there -- and you seem just the bloke
    to provide it.

  15. Well, if you can't stop stuffing your mouth then the fat has
    to be removed surgically because you are never going to burn
    more calories than you eat. I see way too many fat runners
    out there.

    [email hidden] (TopCounsel) wrote in message news:<20040510203037.23031.00000704@mb-
    m25.aol.com>...

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    And if I look at you and see that you're overweight, I
    won't even bother. I'll


    insist you have liposuction because nothing will work
    right if you are an average height and 180 or more pounds.

    Mac, your seemingly endless fascination with liposuction
    is odd. Is this your current idea of the training
    techniques of the elites? Is liposuction going to be the
    next "tip" we see on the cover of Runner's World? Perhaps
    you can freelance a submission -- they seem bound and
    determined to print absolute garbage over there -- and you
    seem just the bloke to provide it.

  16. Dot,

    That's not the right approach. It's fine to know and talk
    about the scientific benefits but it has nothing to do
    with running faster. Running faster is all about the
    statistics of getting from point A to point B faster.
    It's more about mathematics and statistics and the clock.
    If you know and analyze the scientific benefits so what.
    That doesn't necesarily mean you are going to run faster.

    And by the way, you quoted Bernd Heinrich. I ran with
    Bernd Heinrich when I lived in Maine. I also ran with
    numerous other national and world class runners in my day
    including Shorter, Bachelor, Prefontaine, Quax and even
    the Powerbar founder who died of heart damage not heart
    attack blocked arteries as everyone incorrectly reports.
    I got around the country a lot in my day competing
    everywhere.

    I also ran with numerous other potential class runners
    who never made it big because they never understood
    running and training. They had the potential to run world
    class times but when you train incorrectly all the time
    then all you will get are poor results and injuries. Just
    because a person is talented doesn't mean they will run
    well. Often the only way they can get to the top is
    through a world class coach or through the experience of
    a world class runner. It's a real shame to see so many
    talented runners not reach their potential when they
    easily could with the right direction.

    And then I have to come here and read about the lowest
    form of training systems that I ever saw that people are
    having trouble with that I used to think were inferior to
    me in junior high school. That's all on top of which
    people gleefully talk these training systems like God
    himself gave it to them. It's unbelievable.

    Dot <dot.h@#att.net> wrote in message news:<Hg%nc.41947$Ut1.1205344@bgtnsc05-
    news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...

    Quoted message said:
    TarfHead said:

    One 10K under my belt but still consider myself a
    newbie. The next challenge I have set for myself is to
    complete a 10 mile race in 3 months time. My assumption
    is that I should continue as I have done, gradually
    increasing duration of my thrice-weekly runs, up to the
    10 miles in August.

    That will work.

    Quoted message said:


    Looking for other approaches a common feature of
    structured training plans is the occasional speed
    session, or short bursts of higher intensity, e.g.
    fartlek.

    My question is, for someone like me whose sole goal is
    to complete the course at as steady a pace as I can
    sustain, does such a variation in pace and preparation
    yield any benefit ?

    This will work too, as would some other "comfortably hard"
    or "hard"

    se-
    ss-
    io-
    ns.
    So-
    me
    wa-
    ys
    of
    do-
    ing
    th-
    em
    ha-
    ve
    di-
    ff-
    er-
    ent
    be-
    ne-
    fi-
    ts
    th-
    an
    ot-
    he-
    rs.
    Wh-
    en
    you
    in-
    cr-
    ea-
    se
    ef-
    fo-
    rt
    in
    a
    fa-
    rt-
    lek
    (at
    le-
    ast
    if
    you
    do
    th-
    em
    en-
    ou-
    gh
    to
    ha-
    ve
    an
    ct-
    nu-
    mb-
    er
    of
    ti-
    mes
    de-
    pe-
    nds
    on
    how
    at-
    hl-
    ete
    re-
    sp-
    on-
    ds
    to
    th-
    at
    ty-
    pe
    tr-
    ai-
    ni-
    ng,
    et-
    c),
    you
    are
    in-
    cr-
    ea-
    si-
    ng
    he-
    art
    ra-
    te,
    and
    I
    be-
    li-
    eve
    the
    be-
    ne-
    fi-
    ts
    are
    in-
    cr-
    ea-
    se
    in
    bl-
    ood
    pl-
    as-
    ma
    vo-
    lu-
    me,
    nu-
    mb-
    er
    of
    ca-
    pi-
    ll-
    ar-
    ie-
    s,
    mi-
    to-
    ch-
    on-
    dr-
    ia
    in
    or-
    der
    to
    pr-
    oc-
    ess
    mo-
    re
    O2
    at
    one
    ti-
    me.
    You
    may
    not
    ra-
    ce
    at
    th-
    at
    hi-
    gh-
    er
    in-
    te-
    ns-
    it-
    y,
    but
    the
    ca-
    rd-
    io
    be-
    ne-
    fi-
    ts
    wi-
    ll
    he-
    lp.

    Any higher effort will provide those benefits more so than
    lower efforts (at least that's my understanding) - running
    or biking on hills, snowshoe running, etc. May not be
    going faster but still get raised effort. Neuromuscular
    effects may be different with these different activities.

    Not sure how the training plans you're looking at refer to
    fartleks. Some just suggest picking some landmark and
    running to it at harder effort, then backing off,
    alternating, etc. Others teach it by heart rate - hard up
    to a certain level, then back down. I preferred to hold it
    at the higher level (just below VT/LT where talking starts
    to degenerate) for a while before I backed off. A benefit
    of this is that you get to recognize effort level better.
    Then if you ever become addicted to running hilly trails,
    you've got a leg up on running hills at constant effort
    (variable pace).

    Fartleks could also be taken above VT/LT if you want to
    increase your LT, giving you more aerobic capacity (higher
    hr) in which to run your race. And they can also be used
    as VO2max sessions, just depending on how hard you make
    the hard part. The benefit is in the cardio improvement,
    whether you run at that effort in a race or not. But true
    fartleks are supposed to be "speed play", so the intention
    is to keep it unstructured.

    Dot

  17. "Dot" <dot.h@#att.net> wrote in message
    "]news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:
    TarfHead said:

    One 10K under my belt but still consider myself a
    newbie. The next challenge I have set for myself is to
    complete a 10 mile race in 3 months time. My assumption
    is that I should continue as I have done, gradually
    increasing duration of my thrice-weekly runs, up to the
    10 miles in August.

    That will work.

    Quoted message said:


    Looking for other approaches a common feature of
    structured training plans is the occasional speed
    session, or short bursts of higher intensity, e.g.
    fartlek.

    My question is, for someone like me whose sole goal is
    to complete the course at as steady a pace as I can
    sustain, does such a variation in pace and preparation
    yield any benefit ?

    This will work too, as would some other "comfortably hard"
    or "hard"

    se-
    ss-
    io-
    ns.
    So-
    me
    wa-
    ys
    of
    do-
    ing
    th-
    em
    ha-
    ve
    di-
    ff-
    er-
    ent
    be-
    ne-
    fi-
    ts
    th-
    an
    ot-
    he-
    rs.
    Wh-
    en
    you
    in-
    cr-
    ea-
    se
    ef-
    fo-
    rt
    in
    a
    fa-
    rt-
    lek
    (at
    le-
    ast
    if
    you
    do
    th-
    em
    en-
    ou-
    gh
    to
    ha-
    ve
    an
    ct-
    nu-
    mb-
    er
    of
    ti-
    mes
    de-
    pe-
    nds
    on
    how
    at-
    hl-
    ete
    re-
    sp-
    on-
    ds
    to
    th-
    at
    ty-
    pe
    tr-
    ai-
    ni-
    ng,
    et-
    c),
    you
    are
    in-
    cr-
    ea-
    si-
    ng
    he-
    art
    ra-
    te,
    and
    I
    be-
    li-
    eve
    the
    be-
    ne-
    fi-
    ts
    are
    in-
    cr-
    ea-
    se
    in
    bl-
    ood
    pl-
    as-
    ma
    vo-
    lu-
    me,
    nu-
    mb-
    er
    of
    ca-
    pi-
    ll-
    ar-
    ie-
    s,
    mi-
    to-
    ch-
    on-
    dr-
    ia
    in
    or-
    der
    to
    pr-
    oc-
    ess
    mo-
    re
    O2
    at
    one
    ti-
    me.
    You
    may
    not
    ra-
    ce
    at
    th-
    at
    hi-
    gh-
    er
    in-
    te-
    ns-
    it-
    y,
    but
    the
    ca-
    rd-
    io
    be-
    ne-
    fi-
    ts
    wi-
    ll
    he-
    lp.

    Any higher effort will provide those benefits more so than
    lower efforts (at least that's my understanding) - running
    or biking on hills, snowshoe running, etc. May not be
    going faster but still get raised effort. Neuromuscular
    effects may be different with these different activities.

    Not sure how the training plans you're looking at refer to
    fartleks. Some just suggest picking some landmark and
    running to it at harder effort, then backing off,
    alternating, etc. Others teach it by heart rate - hard up
    to a certain level, then back down. I preferred to hold it
    at the higher level (just below VT/LT where talking starts
    to degenerate) for a while before I backed off. A benefit
    of this is that you get to recognize effort level better.
    Then if you ever become addicted to running hilly trails,
    you've got a leg up on running hills at constant effort
    (variable pace).

    Fartleks could also be taken above VT/LT if you want to
    increase your LT, giving you more aerobic capacity (higher
    hr) in which to run your race. And they can also be used
    as VO2max sessions, just depending on how hard you make
    the hard part. The benefit is in the cardio improvement,
    whether you run at that effort in a race or not. But true
    fartleks are supposed to be "speed play", so the intention
    is to keep it unstructured.

    Also shortening the recovery duration can change the
    nature of a workout. A great VO2max workout is 30 sec
    all out, 30 sec rest. Go as long as you can.

    Quoted message said:

    Dot

    --
    "Success is different things to different people" -Bernd
    Heinrich in Racing the Antelope

  18. macelroy said:

    Dot,

    That's not the right approach. It's fine to know and
    talk about the scientific benefits but it has nothing
    to do with running faster. Running faster is all about
    the statistics of getting from point A to point B
    faster. It's more about mathematics and statistics and
    the clock. If you know and analyze the scientific
    benefits so what. That doesn't necesarily mean you are
    going to run faster.

    And by the way, you quoted Bernd Heinrich. I ran with
    Bernd Heinrich when I lived in Maine. I also ran with
    numerous other national and world class runners in my
    day including Shorter, Bachelor, Prefontaine, Quax and
    even the Powerbar founder who died of heart damage not
    heart attack blocked arteries as everyone incorrectly
    reports. I got around the country a lot in my day
    competing everywhere.

    Really? If you'd run with all those people seems we'd have
    heard of you in the running community. Who are you? Where
    can we find some verified information on your running and
    training activities?

    Just a link please?

  19. Quoted message said:

    Really? If you'd run with all those people seems we'd have
    heard of you in the running community. Who are you? Where
    can we find some verified information on your running and
    training activities?

    Just a link please?

    Don't hold your breath. He's just a troll, here for our
    amusement.

    Phil M.

    --
    "Get outta here. You're killin' me."

  20. Quoted message said:

    Really? If you'd run with all those people seems we'd have
    heard of you in the running community. Who are you? Where
    can we find some verified information on your running and
    training activities?

    Just a link please?

    Don't hold your breath. He's just a troll, here for our
    amusement.

    Phil M.

    --
    "Get outta here. You're killin' me."

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.