speedwork question

In article said:

i did my first ever speedwork session yesterday, and have
a few questions. i did 6 X 400 in 75s, 82, 82, 85, 84, 85.

It's a good idea to do the first rep cautiously. If it's way
too slow, you can always treat it as a warmup rep and do one
more. But don't worry about this too much -- pacing is
usually a bit off when you start interval training and
should get more even with practice.

Quoted message said:

a jogging break of 2:00 between each lap except before the
last two laps where it was 2:30.

i was expecting it to be a tough workout. but for some
reason, i did't feel it cardiovascularly.

Short repeats and long rests will give you more of an
anaerobic workout. If you want to push your cardiovascular
system, go with long repeats -- I think 800-1200m should
be about right for you. Start with 800 -- it's less
stressful mentaly. Once you're comfortable with that, move
up to 1000 or 1200.

Quoted message said:

didn't have to breathe *very* hard. i could feel it in my
legs though. not exactly a burn, but some vague tired
feeling.

Yep. Anaerobic repeats -- you will get some localised pain.

Quoted message said:

anyway, i thought i should expect soreness/stiffness in
the legs later that day or the next day.

Not necessarily. Soreness means you're sore. It's not a good
measure of productivity. Don't worry about this.

Quoted message said:

so, now i'm wondering if i didn't do it hard enough. as i
said, going by the feeling in my legs, it did feel hard.
but with my lungs it was relatively easy.

Since you mention my vdot page -- the way you've done this
sounds like a pretty good description of the right way to do
an "R" workout. These tend to improve strength, explosive
power and running economy. So what you did was fine.

Quoted message said:

should i be going faster? more repeats?

The number of repeats looks OK. I'd rarely do more than 10
with this sort of workout.

Quoted message said:

i checked donovan's vdot page and those lap times seemed
within the range of what i should be doing.

Is that the range for "I pace" or "R pace" ? If you want to
push your aerobic system, I'd suggest either long repeats
(an "I" workout in Daniels terms) or long tempo runs.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗

Quoted message said:

i did my first ever speedwork session yesterday, and have
a few questions.

Are you training for a particular race or distance?

Phil M.

What are you trying to accomplish?

What are your goals?

For marathon training, I would argue the workouts are
useless, for instance. <jobin@REMOVE-DEEZ-
WORDS.hotmail.com.edu> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

hi

i did my first ever speedwork session yesterday, and have
a few questions. i did 6 X 400 in 75s, 82, 82, 85, 84, 85.
a jogging break of 2:00 between each lap except before the
last two laps where it was 2:30.

i was expecting it to be a tough workout. but for some
reason, i did't feel it cardiovascularly. didn't have to
breathe *very* hard. i could feel it in my legs though.
not exactly a burn, but some vague tired feeling.

anyway, i thought i should expect soreness/stiffness in
the legs later that day or the next day. but nothing
happened. it just feels like i didn't do anything.

so, now i'm wondering if i didn't do it hard enough. as i
said, going by the feeling in my legs, it did feel hard.
but with my lungs it was relatively easy.

should i be going faster? more repeats?

i checked donovan's vdot page and those lap times seemed
within the range of what i should be doing.

i run about 20-25 miles/week. have been maintaining this
steady base since january 1 of this year. most of my runs
are between 8-12 min/mile pace with harder ones at around
7-7:30 pace.

i would appreciate any comments or other suggestions.

thanks jobs

Phil M. said:

Are you training for a particular race or distance?

Phil M.

yes, 5K. haven't picked a race yet.

jobs

Donovan Rebbechi said:

In article <[email hidden]>, jobin@REMOVE-DEEZ-

WORDS.hotmail.com.edu said:

i did 6 X 400 in 75s, 82, 82, 85, 84, 85.

It's a good idea to do the first rep cautiously. If it's
way too slow, you can always treat it as a warmup rep and
do one more.

yup, i was surprised when i saw that time for the 1st lap
considering 74s is my fastest ever for a 400m (a couple of
years ago.)

Quoted message said:

Short repeats and long rests will give you more of an
anaerobic workout. If you want to push your cardiovascular
system, go with long repeats -- I think 800-1200m should
be about right for you. Start with 800 -- it's less
stressful mentaly. Once you're comfortable with that, move
up to 1000 or 1200.

i guess i'm going to try the 800 pretty soon...

Quoted message said:

Is that the range for "I pace" or "R pace" ? If you
want to push your aerobic system, I'd suggest either
long repeats (an "I" workout in Daniels terms) or long
tempo runs.

i'm not sure now, but i think it was R. thing is i checked
after i came back from the workout.

anyway, i think i'll slowly ease into long repeats.

thanks for the input. jobs

Sam said:

What are you trying to accomplish?

What are your goals?

primarily, i am training for the 5K distance. i hope to do a
sub-19:30 before the end of may this year.

i also want to do a sub-5 mile before the end of the year.

jobs

Quoted message said:

i did my first ever speedwork session yesterday, and have a few questions.
i did 6 X 400 in 75s, 82, 82, 85, 84, 85.
a jogging break of 2:00 between each lap except
before the last two laps where it was 2:30.

I would jog until you really feel like going again, don't
worry about it being exactly x seconds. I used to just jog a
real slow lap between repeats, sometimes 2 if I was doing
mile repeats.

Quoted message said:

i was expecting it to be a tough workout. but for some
reason, i did't feel it cardiovascularly. didn't have to
breathe *very* hard. i could feel it in my legs though.
not exactly a burn, but some vague tired feeling.

It sounds like you did them exactly right. Go as fast as you
can without your legs tying up at the end.

You will magically improve from week to week if you do
them this way. BTW, when I was in 2:3x shape, my first
speedworkout would be 10 x 440 in 83 seconds... Six weeks
later, I'd be averaging 71 seconds, with no more effort.
(I did have a 90 mpw base, however) So your workout was
quite strong.

Quoted message said:

anyway, i thought i should expect soreness/stiffness in
the legs later that day or the next day. but nothing
happened. it just feels like i didn't do anything.

If you push too hard, you get injured, and won't improve.
You did it right. Now you'll be looking forward to your
next workout.

Quoted message said:

so, now i'm wondering if i didn't do it hard enough. as i
said, going by the feeling in my legs, it did feel hard.
but with my lungs it was relatively easy.

When you get into shape, 5 or 6 weeks from now, you'll be
able to run faster, and don't worry, you'll breathe harder.

Quoted message said:

should i be going faster? more repeats?

No, on your very small base, that is a good workout. FYI,
I did 10 x 440 or 5 x 880 or 3 x 1mile (alternating
workouts) on Tue & Thursday. On a 90 mpw base. Since
you're running much less, 6 x 440, or 3-4 x 880 or 2-3 x
1320 would be fine.

Quoted message said:

i checked donovan's vdot page and those lap times seemed
within the range of what i should be doing.

Seems to me that you're probably capable now of the 5k
you're pointing towards. I think you might surprise yourself
if you get 5 - 6 weeks of speedwork before your race.

I'd move up to longer distances, but start with the short
440 stuff for a couple of workouts. Then move up to 880 or
1320. Repeat miles are probably a bit much for a 5k.

Quoted message said:

i run about 20-25 miles/week. have been maintaining this
steady base since january 1 of this year. most of my runs
are between 8-12 min/mile pace with harder ones at around
7-7:30 pace.

Just remember to take a day off or go very easy the day
after a speed or hard workout.

Good luck,

Dan

Dan Stumpus said:

I would jog until you really feel like going again, don't
worry about it being exactly x seconds.

i guess i was trying to make it exactly x seconds. 🙂

Quoted message said:

It sounds like you did them exactly right. Go as fast as
you can without your legs tying up at the end.

thanks for the vote of confidence. i just wasn't sure...

Quoted message said:

If you push too hard, you get injured, and won't improve.
You did it right.

so far, i've been quite conservative in pushing hard.

Quoted message said:

Now you'll be looking forward to your next workout.

matter of fact, i am indeed.

Quoted message said:

Just remember to take a day off or go very easy the day
after a speed or hard workout.

yep. after reading all the injury reports here on r.r., one
does tend to get cautious and wiser. i try to take it easy
both before and after a hard day.

thanks for the input, dan.

jobs

It's not a question of that you didn't push yourself hard
enough. It's that your legs were not yet in condition to go
faster. Just because you jog does not mean you can run fast
intervals. It's a completely different ball game. Your first
speed workout should always be comfortable. Then you can
build from that. Your speed workout should be little faster
and so on.

However, I do want to mention that the pace you are
going at is not anaerobic as some people here have
suggested. It's more like being completely out of
condition type running and that is perfectly
understandable seeing how you jog so so little and so
slow. And don't call 20-25 miles per week a base. That
is abusing the lange. No real distance runner or coach
calls 20-25 miles per week a base.

On the whole, you are too out of condition to do speedwork
well. So I would strongly suggest that you do longer
intervals like 6 miles worth of intervals for strength
training and then before your race cut to shorter
intervals totalling approximately 2 to 2.5 miles.

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

Quoted message said:

hi

i did my first ever speedwork session yesterday, and have
a few questions. i did 6 X 400 in 75s, 82, 82, 85, 84, 85.
a jogging break of 2:00 between each lap except before the
last two laps where it was 2:30.

i was expecting it to be a tough workout. but for some
reason, i did't feel it cardiovascularly. didn't have to
breathe *very* hard. i could feel it in my legs though.
not exactly a burn, but some vague tired feeling.

anyway, i thought i should expect soreness/stiffness in
the legs later that day or the next day. but nothing
happened. it just feels like i didn't do anything.

so, now i'm wondering if i didn't do it hard enough. as i
said, going by the feeling in my legs, it did feel hard.
but with my lungs it was relatively easy.

should i be going faster? more repeats?

i checked donovan's vdot page and those lap times seemed
within the range of what i should be doing.

i run about 20-25 miles/week. have been maintaining this
steady base since january 1 of this year. most of my runs
are between 8-12 min/mile pace with harder ones at around
7-7:30 pace.

i would appreciate any comments or other suggestions.

thanks jobs

-------

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

i did my first ever speedwork session yesterday, and have a
few questions. i did 6 X 400 in 75s, 82, 82, 85, 84, 85. a
jogging break of 2:00 between each lap except before the
last two laps where it was 2:30.

i was expecting it to be a tough workout. but for some
reason, i did't feel it cardiovascularly. didn't have to
breathe *very* hard. i could feel it in my legs though. not
exactly a burn, but some vague tired feeling.

anyway, i thought i should expect soreness/stiffness in the
legs later that day or the next day. but nothing happened.
it just feels like i didn't do anything.

so, now i'm wondering if i didn't do it hard enough. as i
said, going by the feeling in my legs, it did feel hard.
but with my lungs it was relatively easy.

Why did you increase the recovery from 2:00 to 2:30 then?

It's a good thing to keep your first introductions to
speed work easy, on number, speed, and recovery time.
There's a lot of change involved in just getting used to
the paces, remembering that the heels do get to lift, and
the arms have to swing farther, etc.

In a different post, you mentioned the important part of
your goals -- sub 19:30 5k, and sub 5:00 mile. You do
realize that the mile goal is a _lot_ faster than the 5k?
The sub 5 milers on my track team were all under 18 for 5k
cross country. The
19:30 5k is more in tune with a 5:30 mile. Your 400's were
in the realm of a 5:40 mile, which is more or less
consistent with the 5k goal, so good news, especially for
a first time out.

Quoted message said:

should i be going faster? more repeats?

With your prime (current) goal being the 5k, 400's aren't
a prime focus for you, except for getting used to the
speed. You'll make much of your money at 800-1600 meter
repeats instead.

When you get more serious about speed and the mile, you'll
want to do more of the 400's (8-12, depending on your
mileage base), a touch faster (say 82 each -- the 5:30
mile), much more consistent pace (though that 75 was
probably a lot of fun), and consistent recovery period. It
isn't a bad thing to get used to mile type speed in
training for a 5k. The main question being whether you're
going to run the 5k as a long mile, or as a short 10k. If
it's a long mile, go for the 400's.

--
Robert Grumbine radix.net~bobgOpen ↗ Science faqs and
amateur activities notes and links. Sagredo (Galileo
Galilei) "You present these recondite matters with too much
evidence and ease; this great facility makes them less
appreciated than they would be had they been presented in a
more abstruse manner." Two New Sciences

macelroy said:

It's not a question of that you didn't push yourself hard
enough. It's that your legs were not yet in condition to
go faster.

Probably because he's over-weight. You forgot to tell him
that.

--
ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,-
,ø¤º eNo "If you can't go fast, go long." ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°-
`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º°`°º¤ø¤º°`°º¤ø,,,,ø¤º

Robert Grumbine said:

Quoted message said:

so, now i'm wondering if i didn't do it hard enough. as i
said, going by the feeling in my legs, it did feel hard.
but with my lungs it was relatively easy.

Why did you increase the recovery from 2:00 to 2:30 then?

two things - one, as i said, i could feel it in my legs;
two, by the time i got to the starting line after the
jog, it was 2:10 or so and i just wanted to make it a
round figure 🙂

Quoted message said:

When you get more serious about speed and the mile,
you'll want to do more of the 400's (8-12, depending on
your mileage base), a touch faster (say 82 each -- the
5:30 mile), much more consistent pace (though that 75 was
probably a lot of fun), and consistent recovery period.
It isn't a bad thing to get used to mile type speed in
training for a 5k. The main question being whether you're
going to run the 5k as a long mile, or as a short 10k. If
it's a long mile, go for the 400's.

thanks for all the information. i appreciate it. i've saved
it along with the other responses for future reference.

regards jobs

In article said:

In article <[email hidden]>, <jobin@REMOVE-DEEZ-

WORDS.hotmail.com.edu said:

i did my first ever speedwork session yesterday, and have
a few questions. i did 6 X 400 in 75s, 82, 82, 85, 84, 85.
a jogging break of 2:00 between each lap except before the
last two laps where it was 2:30.

i was expecting it to be a tough workout. but for some
reason, i did't feel it cardiovascularly. didn't have to
breathe *very* hard. i could feel it in my legs though.
not exactly a burn, but some vague tired feeling.

anyway, i thought i should expect soreness/stiffness in
the legs later that day or the next day. but nothing
happened. it just feels like i didn't do anything.

so, now i'm wondering if i didn't do it hard enough. as i
said, going by the feeling in my legs, it did feel hard.
but with my lungs it was relatively easy.

Why did you increase the recovery from 2:00 to
2:30 then?

When you get tired, you will jog more slowly between reps.
This results in a larger gap between reps. The recovery laps
tend to get very slow as one gets exhausted.

There are a couple of approaches one can use to
address this:

(1) Make the rests long enough that the increase in rest
time isn't a major factor. (I think a 2:00+ rest for an
80 second repeat qualifies) This approach works well for
fast reps (around 1 mile pace)

(2) Make the reps long enough that the end of the rep is
difficult regardless of rest time -- good for long
slower reps (3-5k pace)

(3) Constrain rest *time* but not distance -- run half a
lap then jog on the spot or something. Or simply do the
intervals by time. This approach works well on the
treadmill, or in unstructured outdoor workouts, but
when training on a measured track, it makes sense to
train by distance.

Quoted message said:

In a different post, you mentioned the important part of
your goals -- sub 19:30 5k, and sub 5:00 mile. You do
realize that the mile goal is a _lot_ faster than the
5k? The sub 5 milers

Absolutely.

Quoted message said:

With your prime (current) goal being the 5k, 400's
aren't a prime focus for you, except for getting used to
the speed. You'll make much of your money at 800-1600
meter repeats instead.

When you get more serious about speed and the mile,
you'll want to do more of the 400's (8-12, depending on
your mileage base), a touch faster (say 82 each -- the
5:30 mile), much more consistent pace (though that 75
was probably a lot of fun), and consistent recovery
period. It isn't a bad thing to get used to mile type
speed in training for a 5k. The main question being
whether you're going to run the 5k as a long mile, or as
a short 10k. If it's a long mile, go for the 400's.

One could even blend these two types of training in a
periodised manner, as favoured by many coaches: do the
longer intervals for endurance, and then the shorter
intervals for sharpening. The main difference is that if the
mile is important, one must be more attentive to correct
pacing on the short intervals (you don't want to be slower
than 1 mile race pace).

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗

Running 6 miles of intervals is way too much for this guy --
heck, Bill Rodgers' tough interval workout was 5 x 1 mile
when he was doing 140 mile weeks.

The rule of thumb I and other sub-elite guys I trained with
is that only 10 - 15 % of the miles are speed in a given
week. I learned this the hard way.

I never did more than 3 miles of actual speed in a single
workout, and my base was 90 miles/week. I ran in the 2:30's.
You want to be tanned, rested and ready for the next hard
workout in 2 - 3 days, and too many miles of hard speed will
mean you can't improve from workout to workout, in my
experience.

Therefore, I'd suggest keeping the speed in a given workout
to 2.5 miles at the max, given his tiny base.

By the way, don't pooh-pooh a small base. My dad raced in
southern CA in the the 60+ age group, and was ranked 5th in
the state at one point. He rarely ran more than 22
miles/week, with no speedwork other than races every couple
of weeks. Some people have the talent to race pretty well on
a small base, although they'd be faster and stronger with a
bigger base.

Regards,

Dan

----- Original Message ----- From: "macelroy"
<[email hidden]> Newsgroups: rec.running Sent:
Tuesday, March 30, 2004 12:36 AM Subject: Re:
speedwork question

Quoted message said:

It's not a question of that you didn't push yourself hard
enough. It's that your legs were not yet in condition to
go faster. Just because you jog does not mean you can run
fast intervals. It's a completely different ball game.
Your first speed workout should always be comfortable.
Then you can build from that. Your speed workout should be
little faster and so on.

However, I do want to mention that the pace you are
going at is not anaerobic as some people here have
suggested. It's more like being completely out of
condition type running and that is perfectly
understandable seeing how you jog so so little and so
slow. And don't call 20-25 miles per week a base. That
is abusing the lange. No real distance runner or coach
calls 20-25 miles per week a base.

On the whole, you are too out of condition to do
speedwork well. So I would strongly suggest that you do
longer intervals like 6 miles worth of intervals for
strength training and then before your race cut to
shorter intervals totalling approximately 2 to 2.5
miles.

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

Quoted message said:

Sam said:

What are you trying to accomplish?

What are your goals?

primarily, i am training for the 5K distance. i hope to do
a sub-19:30 before the end of may this year.

i also want to do a sub-5 mile before the end of the year.

jobs

I would suggest that you do lactate threshold work first.
Say 2x20min at ~10K pace with 5 min jog between.

Even with 5K training, I am not sure of the value of
running 400s.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

primarily, i am training for the 5K distance. i hope to do
a sub-19:30 before the end of may this year.

i also want to do a sub-5 mile before the end of the year.

I'm assuming you are much more talented at shorter
distances, because if you are anything like me, you have a
while before cracking that mile goal, even though you have
given yourself the rest of the year. I can *barely* run a
sub-5:00 mile, but a 5km time of 19:30 for me is completely
conversational; maybe even a 19:00 as well.

Of course, nothing is impossible and I am not saying you
won't succeed. However, I'd generally suggest the sub-5
mile goal should be first considered when you first dip
under 18:00 for 5km, and begun to be seriously addressed
once you can break
17:30.

cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton, ON) www.allfalldown.org "The most
insecure people are the ones you see, putting other people
down constantly."

SwStudio <[email hidden]> wrote: ....

Quoted message said:

Of course, nothing is impossible and I am not saying you
won't succeed. However, I'd generally suggest the sub-5
mile goal should be first considered when you first dip
under 18:00 for 5km, and begun to be seriously addressed
once you can break
17:30.

hi david

i see your point of view. that's why i'm not in a big hurry
to break that sub-5:00. first i'll deal with the 5K and then
take it from there...

regards jobs

p.s.: hope things are going well with your recovery.

Donovan said:

(1) What Robert Grumbine said.
(2) My understanding is that age impacts shorter distances
more than

longer

Quoted message said:

ones. This is supported by wava correction factors, where
the corrections

for

Quoted message said:

age grading are greater for short distances.
(3) The 1 mile race seems to be the longest distance for
which most

prediction

Quoted message said:

formulas really start breaking down badly. It's the
distance at which pure speed starts to really play a role.
Most of the club runners I know get

pretty

Quoted message said:

consistent WAVA scores across a fairly wide variety of
distances (5k to

half

Quoted message said:

marathon given similar terrain), but it falls apart pretty
badly in the

mile.

Quoted message said:

Of course someone who can run a half marathon in 1:14
(5:39 pace) is also

going

Quoted message said:

to be a pretty good miler, almost certainly better than
the guy who does

the

Quoted message said:

half in 1:30 (just under 7:00 pace), but not necessarily
better than the

guy

Quoted message said:

who does it in 1:16 (5:48). On the other hand, the 1:14
guy would almost certainly be the faster of the two
runners in a 5k race.

Donovan is right on with the predictability of
Gardiner/purdy or WAVA with the mile. I never trained
specifically for the mile, mainly marathons (I was wava
81%). My best half marathon was 1:14 and a *lot* of change,
and my mile was a shade under 4:40. Which is pretty much
what the Gardiner/Purdy tables predicted.

To me the mile was so painful, that was about the only all
out one I ran. 5k pain is about the most my gentle soul can
tolerate...

--Dan

Dan Stumpus said:

To me the mile was so painful, that was about the only all
out one I ran. 5k pain is about the most my gentle soul
can tolerate...

For me it's the 15k. 🙂
--
Doug Freese "Caveat Lector" [email hidden]