I agree on the last part…still I believe that 2,5 seconds is a world behind.
Slow runs are lot less damaging than high volume /short rest/ medium high speed interval training sessions…I do believe that they are also more “neutral” on endocrine/hormonal profile…remember some datas with OW also suggesting this.
Of course 2.5 seconds is a world behind at that distance but that’s not the point I think TSCM is trying to make here.
You have folks arguing nonsensical “Distance training will make you slow as paste, don’t ever do it. Do nothing but high intensity efforts and hard intervals or you’ll be slow and weak and…” and all that garbage (note: not here, talking about the internet brain trust with guys like Cosgrove, Boyle, etc. who are ‘all intervals all the time’ nonsense)
And it is clearly factually untrue in terms of real world sports performance. The top 800m guys are moving. Are they 200-400m sprinter moving? Of course not, specificity still holds.
But clearly the volume they are doing at ‘slow speeds’ isn’t having nearly the damage (esp. if it’s done in conjunction with proper speed work, etc) that some are suggesting.
Lyle
I think this is clear enough…everything has a place…important not come back to old milieaus, like…6 am 6 miles for football players, or 1 hour morning run everyday to get in shape for boxing…
Being easier than certain interval training protocol, does not mean ideal for speed power athletes, just less deleterious maybe.
Resurrecting an old thread…Is Lashawn merritt still training with the same coach while waiting to be re-enstated by Iaaf?