I recently began working with a HS middle distance ( 800-1000 ) girl. She’s an athlete that’s had to deal will consistent injuries, the majority of which have been minor and stem from a blend of postural, structural, and mechanical issues. Needless to say, it’s a been a challenge at times due to the fact that I’ve suggested backing off running a bit while the issues are addressed. It’s been more of a process than anticipated, one which has lead to several questions:
Can the “improve general fitness first” approach, as advocated by CF, have as much success in the middle distance events as it does the sprints? The assumption here is that there would be a reduction in the volume of running to allow time to be devoted to general fitness and strength routines.
How far up does the concept of speed reserve go? I think it’s a mistake for young athletes to pound the pavement at the expense of improving all speed related abilities during critical years.
Just how much LSD do young athletes really need? When talking about events that last 3 minutes or less, I can’t understand how a 40 minute run helps? I know what the textbooks say about energy contribution, but has the mid-distance community borrowed a bit too much from the distance/marathon community?
Can’t help but think “quality vs quantity” here. KitKat has posted often about cutting to the chase and addressing event specific demands. I’m thinking a limit of 15-20’ on any run would suffice and a decent aerobic component can be picked up from Extensive Tempo?
High School Distance programs and distance programs and coaches teaching distance have been known to tell athletes to lose weight and eat differently and females in particular have gravitated to distance events to manage weight.
If you have young athletes with constant injuries it’s tricky because how exactly are you supposed to fully grasp what is going on unless you have info about the home life.
Pool and bike come to mind right away.
You won’t ever go wrong putting fitness as your primary goal and primary driver behind your annual plan. What would be the argument against including fitness as the first aspect to build from?
Proper development of all athletes includes fitness as an important aspect of a sport but many people are able to participate without having a background in appropriate training. This does not make it the correct way to train someone.
Physical preparation needs to be an aspect of all training but it becomes less noticeable with high level athletes as the bulk of what they did years ago is not necessarily visible.
How far would you get doing any amount of speed if a person isn’t fit enough to consistently show up and perform and master variables of any given session?
I would not yet concern myself with speed reserve just yet.
Not sure what you are asking but you may have missed the part where Coach Charlie Francis thought 40 min runs were an efficient use of his athletes time and energy. I’d do tempo in form of 10 x 100 meters and or push up / sit up workouts and get whom ever in the pool to get fit and or on the bike and inch your way into getting your athlete healthier.
I am trying to think of any aspect of my training where by quality never mattered and I can’t think of one area. First you see how a person runs. Then you look at how many reps they are able to sustain while running the same for each rep. You start with what you first see as a persons best quality and grow the progression of running from that point on.
What’s your time frame? My thought would be to fix the mechanical issues as soon as possible, and hopefully the others can be resolved as well. General fitness is important, and cross-training to maintain and develop aerobic capacity and power while running use injuries heal is important.
Speed reserve is less important that lactate threshold IMO, but will be related.
It depends a lot on the athlete, the time frame you’re planning for, and the athlete’s plans/goals. Long term, the mileage becomes increasingly important as they get older (say, past 18 or so). While athletes are young, I prefer to keep the quality high but be very aware of injury from overtraining. Example - I coached a high school girl who averaged 25km/week for a season and ran 2:11/4:33/9:50 that year.
They need runs longer than 20min for a mid dist runner. How old is she? I think 45min is a good middle ground.
What sort of speed does she have, and what’s her training background? That would help a lot.
General fitness gets pretty broad, but I’m a pretty big advocate of making sure distance types are trained as athletes and not just pure runners. It does mean you have to accept a little lower volume but the pay off is in durability and better postures.
“Billet, et al, identified that the best 800m runners were those who demonstrated the highest anaerobic capacity at the end of the race (1). Whereas the best 1500m runners were those who possessed the highest time limits at anaerobic power in the first two-thirds of the race, based upon lower start velocity (1).”
I think HS level mid-distance athletes do need the aerobic work from LSD, though I’m not a fan of sending them out if they just shuffle for X minutes - I program at least 1 session every 2 weeks, at the very least its a good break from the norm.
I think its athlete dependent but if you’re only chasing event specific demands in the mid-distance realm you’re going to grind a lot of athletes down - mid-distance and more so female mid-distance athletes need a large aerobic base and I think to depend mostly on extensive tempo for it would be messy.
Can the “improve general fitness first” approach, as advocated by CF, have as much success in the middle distance events as it does the sprints?
The assumption here is that there would be a reduction in the volume of running to allow time to be devoted to general fitness and strength routines.
> Building a fitnesss base by running (all/mostly) is a standard part of all middle/long distance running programmes. Typically followed by reduced volume and increased speed work. This is a typical periodicised model pre dating CF. The question is does the athlete achive this via a mileage approach, steady state runs of say 30 - 60 mins or a more interval based approach or a mix of the 2 ?
The CF model encourages more non-running training such as bike/pool tempo, med ball, weights - which provides greater variation in fitness and is often beneficial for runners that suffer from running related injuries. I strongly believe in this.
The CF cross training approach (for want of a better desciption) has been used by athletes like Seb Coe of course.
How far up does the concept of speed reserve go? I think it’s a mistake for young athletes to pound the pavement at the expense of improving all speed related abilities during critical years.
> Speed reserve is not a commonly used term in middle distance, as it is in sprinting. However the concept of training at or slightly faster than target race pace is widely used and in my opinion best described in the Frank Horwill type of multi pace training, used most clearly by Seb Coe for example.
This model tends to be a basis of interval based programmes rather than mileage based programmes.
Pounding the pavement - it worked for Arthur Lyddiard tranined athletes but not for Seb Coe types, the Kenyan programmes I have seen tend to mix the 2.
You need to see if your athlete responds to volume or speed best. My view is that if young and sensitive to injury then volume based is not the best model.
BTW - get any volume running done off road, and that includes longer intervals pre season.
BTW2 - speed reserve, as a concept of being able to run at faster than race pace, is relevant to anyone trying to get faster. I am going to disagree here with
Pinky about a 3.30 800m runner and say that the slower someone`s time the more they need to work on speed, since they have probably settled into too much running at a slow plod.
Just how much LSD do young athletes really need? When talking about events that last 3 minutes or less, I can’t understand how a 40 minute run helps?
I know what the textbooks say about energy contribution, but has the mid-distance community borrowed a bit too much from the distance/marathon community?
Text books note that cardio and circulatory developments are helped by longer duration steady state runs. So should not be discarded for all mid distance runners. Nevertheless many studies have identified increased mileage as being the greatest single contributor to injury in endurance runners. Although the studies focussed more on longer distance runners and the point of risk seemed to cut in somewhere around 40mpweek.
Jack Daniels recommends 3 minute cruise intervals (brisk runs at lactate threshold) as a way to develop endurance in younger athletes that struggle with mileage.
Too much hard interval running (esp on track), say efforts in 200-800m, range are very stressful so low volume/interval does not mean v high volumes of efforts.
Can’t help but think “quality vs quantity” here. KitKat has posted often about cutting to the chase and addressing event specific demands.
I’m thinking a limit of 15-20’ on any run would suffice and a decent aerobic component can be picked up from Extensive Tempo?
I would go up to 30 mins (steady pace) and add brisk runs of 3-6 mins for the aerobic component. And use a session such as 8x200 not as tempo but as race pace training - the race pace specific run rather than aerobic developer.
My components would be
a) Efforts of 200-600m at 400/800/1500m race pace - see multi pace / 5 pace training theories.
b) Efforts of 2-4 mins at VO2 max pace. Follow Pinkys comments on Veronique Billat and see how she recommends VO2 max sessions.
c) Cruise intervals of 3-6 mins.
d) steady state runs not exceeding 30 mins.
Yes pick some components from CF. But logic suggests training like Coe, Ovett, Rudisha etc or at least understanding their models first for a 800m runner.
Thanks for the replies. The athlete discussed is 16 years old and is a 2:17-2:19 800m runner. She is presently healthy and in relatively good shape. By no means is she overweight, out of shape or unable to complete a workout.
I understand that improvements in general fitness gained by a variety of routines will benefit most, if not all, athletes. Basically, sprint, throw, jump, lift, push, pull, etc…My question was not regarding the value of but more about the possibilities of supplementing and perhaps on occasion replacing a running session. If the cardiovascular system responds to a muscular demand, doesn’t that imply that a variety of modes could be used to illicit a particular response? If healthy, how many days per week does a 16 year old really need to run? I don’t have an answer but I’m starting to think that “that’s how we’ve always done it” holds less weight each year.
I know that speed reserve doesn’t have as much application to a middle distance runner ( limit 1000m for this discussion ) but isn’t the race distribution model, in part, determined by 400 meter abilities? Doesn’t that then imply 200 meter abilities play some kind of role? I’m not saying that 800 meter athletes need to do 10 meter flys, but all things being equal, I’ll take the 55 girl over the 59 girl every day of the week. I’m sure there are exceptions to the rule.
I’m not advocating a complete removal of LSD type steady state work, I’m just questioning the value of additional time. What adaptations, cardiac or otherwise, can be gained from a 30-40 minute run that can’t be gained from a 20 minute run? And how do these adaptations assist in a race that lasts 2-3 minutes? I’m thinking along the lines of Weyland’s Demand Driven not Supply Limited paper. Can’t it be said that many events are demand driven in some way, shape, or form?
Sometimes I can’t understand the difference in the training of a 400 meter athlete and an 800 meter athlete. The difference in the duration of the events is 60-90." Why does an 800m runner have to do so many different types of running workouts? Isn’t there some overlap in the adaptations? Sometimes I think the 2x days done by elites are more for the mental/emotional side than the physiological side.
Charlie Francis was decades ahead of his time. Might there be something revolutionarily similar coming down the road for middle distance athletes? These are just the things I ponder as I go throughout my day…
Bike and pool running are accepted methods to replace (some) runs. IMHO bike provides better cardio benefits and is less dependant on water skills, pool tempo is better for those inclined to injury.
2 400m work - see my comment about multi pace training. This includes work at 400m pace.
3.LSD of 30-45 mins : You can read the research on mitochondrial development, heart size etc … These runs are pretty common practise amongst many MD athletes.
See my comment about whether the athlete responds best to speed or endurance work and what their background is. Are they a fast 400m type who needs to add endurance. Or slower endurance type who has an aerobic base but needs to develop speed.
Is there something revolutionary - i doubt it since volume versus speed models and mixes of the two have been iteraterd upon for 50 years +. Certainly not in the short term training life of your athlete.
At the most elite level Coe ran I think 46 secs 400m for a 1.41 and Rudisha about 45 secs 400m for 1.40. So 2x400m time + about 9secs (4-5 secs per lap). I dont have female examples to hand. Whilst 400m speed is essential as per a form of MD speed reserve, most 800 runners are either specialist or double at 1500m.
I believe 400m pace is a more critical determinant of performance than longer distances - unless runner is a muscular fast twitch monster/someone who hates running anything more than a sprint.
For what its worth my 800PR was 2.21 off a 400 of 64 secs. From an endurance background, at age 37 never having raced on a track before. At the time my 1500 time was 5.01. I was running everything from 800 - 10miles at this time.
2.21 is pretty close to your athlete so interesting to see what her longer/shorter times are.
That can be hard to manage based on how the race is run by others, but most females that age tend to go out too fast in the first lap. Individual traits should be used to guide the race plan.
I’m coaching a girl who ran 2:17 last year whose 800m race plan was usually something to the effect of:
Come off initial curve aiming for around 4th place while aggressively trying to get to the curb before the 2nd curve. (This was because the opening lap ALWAYS feels slow to her, and she would naturally take the lead and run a 62sec first lap and feel comfortable doing it.)
Sit there through the curve and 400m, as long as no moves are made by leaders. Possibly move up a position from 300-400 depending on other people in race.
Move up, if possibly, from 500-600. At this point cover/match any moves made by others.
Consider the splits of Rudisha’s 1:40.91 world record and assimilate those percentages towards the target time for your girl and that gives you the model of distribution according to the male world record holder.
Rudisha’s world record splits:
200m- 23.4
400m- 49.28
600m- 1:14.30
800m- 1:40.91
200m @23.2%
400m @48.8%
600m @73.6%
800m @100%
So, for sake of example, say you target 2:10 for your girl’s next PB because she’s young enough to expect a substantial improvement from season to season:
200m in 30.16
400m in 1:03.44
600m in 1:35.68
800m in 2:10.00
Was hoping you might chime in here. The section on tempo training in your book was one source of my wondering if there may be slightly different ways to train middle distance runners with respect to specific demands and average velocities. Based on your proposed race model, can you speculate on what PRs might need to be for 400 and 600 to support such a model? I figured a 2:15-2:16 athlete ( 66. / 69. ) would need to go 58-59 for an open 400 so 2:10 would require 56-58 and 1:33-1:34?
Oldbloke,
Think her 400 PR is 63. which, based on 800 time, is a soft PR. Prob more like 60. Not sure how you arrived at the 60 / 210 scenario?
Oldbloke, Ollie, I advise you to be cautious with the “in order to run X you must be able to run a certain split in Y”. The reason is because even David Rudisha ran faster 400m splits than the one he ran in his world record, however, never for runs below 1:41. And remember that Rudisha’s PB in the 400m is 45.13. So he had a 3sec speed reserve on his 400m split, and his PR in the open 600m is 73.10, 1.20 faster than his 600m split in the WR
By association, Wayde Van Niekerk did not run world record splits for every 100m segment of his world record 400m, however, he ran enough to break the world record.
All I would propose for a goal for 2:10 (given the fact that it is a balanced performance) would be that the 400m split should be around the mark I listed based upon the percents because remember that all splits include a flying start. 65 + 65 equals 2:10, therefor a 400m PB of 60, and a 400m split of around 62-63 coupled with sufficient aerobic power is enough to go 2:10 in the 800m
Ollie, the thing about tempo, as we define it relative to Charlie’s system, is that it is much more a stimulus for aerobic capacity versus power and the 800m is certainly a endeavor of aerobic power. For that reason, I would not rely upon tempo as any sort of primary training means for an 800m runner.
My approximation of 2.10 from a 60 sec 400PR is based on the estimate of 2x400PR + 10 secs = 800m time.
You will note that both Coe and Rudisha both ran approx 2x400PR + 9 secs. At the non athlete level I ran 2x400PR +13 secs.
You have just confirmed that her 400PR is 63 secs, therefore her current time of 2.17 represents 2x400PR 11 secs.
I suggest therefore that 2x400PR + 10 secs is a reasonable model of basic ability. Which of course needs all other fitness and race experience components added.
If that is the case her 400PR versus 800PR are not soft. They are reasonably aligned.
A soft 400PR could be indicated by a relatively faster 200m. But I dont want to digress too much here from 800 training.
James - I did not mention the 400 split within an 800, only the 400 PR itself as a determiner of 800 capability. Splits are more of a race modelling matter.
Ollie,
Have you studied the training approaches of any MD coaches ? Harry Wilson, Lyddiard approach, Peter Coe, Brother Colm etc ? You need to do this to understand the models that have been successful and decide how to apply them (or not) to your athlete. You will find the model used by Brother Colm for his school age african runners. You will be surprised by the volumes of continous running in many of these. I watched Harrry Wilson coaching sessions and it was scary.
Also note that intensive in the sprinting sense is not the same in an MD context. If you look at a Seb Coe programme or ask one of Harry Wilsons athletes what it was like to run 10x400m each in 60 secs you will see what I mean.
I’m simply elucidating upon the context of tempo as it differs between the sprint and middle/long distance paradigms.
Regarding the 800m event, I’m certainly a proponent of speed reserve as it is clearly still a profound factor in the 800m (given Coe’s and Rudisha’s splits as examples). Further, it’s always as factor, it’s just that the context shifts to speed at various bioenergetic thresholds.
Consider the men’s world record marathoner Dennis Kimetto who averaged a 4:42 mile pace for 26.2 miles. Understand that this equates to a 70.5sec 400m split for 26.2miles.
Bolt’s speed reserve is nearly the only explanation for his 30.97sec in the 300m, second only to Michael Johnson’s 300m world record.
All said, as the event distance/duration becomes longer there is irrefutably a greater aerobic contribution. The key factor, however, remains how fast the athlete gets from point a to point b, thus, a derivative of speed is always the determinant.
It is my understanding that the Kenyans follow what could be interpreted as a high/low split in so far as the bulk of their runs are either fast or slow.
I haven’t studied MD training a lot, hence my questions. I’m not comfortable with using the greatest 800 runner in history as a model for race distribution. Obviously his 400 PR would be a bit lower if he trained for it but not sure it changes things dramatically. The 400PR x 2 plus 10 means a 56 girl has 2:02 potential and somehow that doesn’t add up to me.
Be cautious with ruling out a world class performance model Ollie. For the same reason, it is a liability for a coach who works with developing sprinters or runners to dismiss the mechanics demonstrated by world class sprinters or distance runners just because their youth/junior sprinters/runners are no where near as fast.
The reality in all cases is that the model for race distribution just like the model of mechanical efficiency are universal truths and serve as guiding lights for all. Alternatively, for to guide a youngster towards inefficient distribution of effort or inefficient mechanics can in no way be justified in any objective sense, regardless of the disparity between their speed and their elite counterparts.
You are right that 56 will not result in 2:02, because the conversion of plus 10sec works within a small starting range of 400m PR, then gets further and further away as the 400m time gets slower. Your ballpark figures for 400/800 numbers are pretty good. One thing to keep in mind for your own conversions is what type of athlete you have. 400/800 types will have faster 400m times compared to 800/1500 types, if they both run the same 800m.