Magico, I will answer that I do believe that the only differences in sprinter training, in my feeble mind, is to perform the higher tempo volumes described previously and take the special endurance out further as you have suggested like full recovery 400, 500, or 600’s at faster than race pace. It’s worked for the few 800 people I’ve trained and of course they were typically much faster than the majority of 800 runners since they had actually performed “real speed work”.
OHSTF,
Great Post!
RE: special endurance of 400,500,600
I agree with Pioneer on this because this type of training has worked very well for me. (I still need to get in more speed work though). I think one of the problems with tradition distance-style 800m programs is that most coaches assume that the 800 is a distance race. What type of speed work would a 800m guy do?
I think that we need to remember that the 800 can be approached from various paths. I totally agree with everyone about the speed and increased tempo, but if you indeed have an athlete that can post great times in the 400 up to the 3k, (like you see out of the Moroccan training system), you may need to add some longer volumes of work.
Devil’s Advocate is fun :baddevil::
With volume issue if your athlete warm up is around 20minutes of running + other(continuous) let say that is 3 k and you do similar for warm down (most 800+ guys I know do this-before track sessions) and you average 4 km on the track that is 10k (6 miles)
You have 4 track sessions a week (24 miles). I would include a longer run of around 12 km (7.5 miles)
Why? Partly because I think it helps the runner mental and because continuous runs do help with aerobic fitness.
The mileage may not be high, but you need to look at the intensity of the track sessions
This probably doesn’t help anyone. Mileage can help distance runners not sprints or 800m.
Charlie-I was trying to make the high/low connection with Coe’s training. After talking to Peter about it, I am not sure it exists. The high intensity is there. However, the low intensity days as listed above are labeled as fartlek in his book. When I asked him how intense this fartlek was, he replied, “It seems to me that you have found a new bogeyman in the dreaded Lactate Threshold.”
Then again, if we define low intensity as 75% of max effort over a particular distance then fartlek bursts at sub 5:00 mile pace with recovery in between isn’t going to be overly difficult for a sub 4:00 guy.
On Coe’s workouts- note the high/low division. Four sessions are very high intensity and the rest are low over the 12 days shown.
High days are: 5, 8, 10, and 12
true. that is not effort for someone at this level.
One thing I find interesting is that Peter decided to not follow traditional wisdom by moving Seb up to longer races when it appeared that Seb might be too slow for the 800/1500. He elected instead to develope Seb’s speed. Of course we now know the results of this decision. I came across an article that stated Seb front squatted 185x2 which is quite good for his light bodyweight. My question to the forum is–how to develop the requisite speed for elite 800m performance without sacrificing the necessary aerobic/anearobic capicity? Is this best done by training the 800 as an extended sprint event with 2 speed,3 tempo,1 special end? Or can one speed day be added to a more traditional approach? Your thoughts please.
That is the very question that I face. I know that Coe started out as a sprinter, so part of his success had to come from his exposure to this type of training early on. I do think the traditional 12-week volume loading program used for distance runners would kill the “twitch” of an 800 runner, since during this time there would be no real speed work involved. Also, if you are in a heavy volume loading phase, how much can you get out of the speed work? probably not much. I tend to like to follow a high-low program as Charlie mentioned and gradually build up special endurance work. Pioneer brings up a good point about increased tempo instead of slogging out mileage.
Spin65 brings up a good point…This is what I was trying to ask in a previous point.
If you are doing true speed work (ex. 30-50m @+95% with full recovery) where would you put that day in your cycle?
I think muscle tension issues are different for a distance runner than a sprinter…this affects how successful the workout can be completed.
For example, if I try to do speed work after a typical low intensity day of 6-7 miles easy then my legs feel sluggish. Not so much tired, just that going from 7:00 mile pace to sub 4:00 pace for speed work is too much of a shock to the system.
Lately I have been trying to divide my low intensity days to include some tempo running for part of the workload. This seems to better prepare the legs for the following speed session since the tempo runs are completed at close to 800/1500m race pace even though the distances are only 50-200m in length.
I would put the speed work closer to the front of the week. The longer of exposure to mileage, the less pop your legs will have later on in the week. Do you start your workouts with some builders? For example, 200’s at rhythm pace? I like how you state the sluggish feeling in your legs, but not as bad after tempo. Do you currently do a long run and if so, when is it placed in the cycle?
Brad-I agree that the speed component works better sooner in the training cycle rather than later. Most of Coe’s work will model having the speed at the end, but Peter will emphasize that it is the multiple paces that are of importance more so than the order.
As for the long run, I am not a huge fan. At one time, I subscribed to the belief that more was better. If that is the case, why stop at 10miles? Or 20miles for marathoners? Why not 30-40-50miles? I think everyone has their point of diminishing return on this matter.
What will the long run do that high end VO2 max work won’t?
Capillarization will be specific to the muscles involved. Maybe is would be a reason why tempo-styled low intensity days would be better since they utilize more FT muscles that would come into play with 800m races.
Volume is higher earlier in the year with long runs more likely. I do think long runs would have some effect on how will an athlete will be able to complete VO2 max type sessions, but once this is established long runs are maintaince.
What do you currently do?
Charlie-Coe’s approach is also a good example of vertical integration for distance running. All the paces, all year around verses the LSD phase, hills, then 6 weeks of speed.
What is with the 4x1500m @ 5k pace being low-intensity?
I was told by a coach (I do not know this for sure) that Coe did cross country racing & training when younger.
It was only later that Coe was training more for the 1500 than 800. What I saw in his training was the ability to race in a number of ways depending on the competition, type of race and athlete involved.
Frank Horwill who develop the similar approach to Coe said in an article that if an athlete hadn’t recovered to do another continuous run.
IE Session at 1500m pace, next day 45 minute run, next session may have been 800m pace - but instead do another 45 minute run.
I guess this means only do the intense session when recovered.
OHSTF
I think we are speaking the same. I do not believe in putting in long work, just to put it in. In fact, very rarely. What I have done, is instead, put the athlete in the pool for an extended tempo type workout. I slowly increase the tempo over time along with special endurance runs, or increase the number slightly. It really depends on the athlete when they show up.
Rebel-
Do a Google search for Frank Horwill. His Five Pace Theory (along w/ Peter Coe’s theories) is basically what Seb Coe did that gave him such incredible range.
It’s a good starting place. Bill Dellinger’s book “Winning Running” also has good info, and some sample workouts.
It’s real hard to look at what Coe did and think that it can work that way for everyone. He had very unique talents…
CJ
From what I understand, Horwill used a system of 3 week volume loading followed by 2 weeks of intensity at 70% volume average (of previous three weeks). This prevented staleness from setting in. Does anyone have any comments on this system? Seems to work well.
In Horwill’s plan of 3 weeks loading followed the 2 weeks of reduced loading, is there a different emphasis on quality sessions or just a reduction in overall volume?
the 2 week unloading focused on more intensity. Sometimes shorter distances to hit the speed side. From what I have seen, (or other people’s interpretations), the first week back into the volume loading was used as a recovery week, by reduced intensity.