Run-Down Forums Forum Index Run-Down Forums

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch
 
Run-Down Forums Forum Index
Mid-Distance Depot
800m training
Post new topic   Reply to topic

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Run-Down Forums Forum Index -> Mid-Distance Depot
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
will
Water Boy
Water Boy


Joined: 24 Oct 2002
Posts: 70
Location: South

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2003 9:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Judging from the slight difference, I'd say tempo is a slightly higher intensity. He has a general breakdown on the site. For the most part, he adheres to Daniels' VDot formulas, so, the steady state might be a 20-minute tempo run or the MP pace while the tempo might indicate longer repeat intervals, like 3k runs with 1:00 recovery. I'm reading in between the lines though.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2003 10:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks for the performance calculator recommendation. Looks like a good one. Smile

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
will
Water Boy
Water Boy


Joined: 24 Oct 2002
Posts: 70
Location: South

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2003 11:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just saw fluffer the new mascot in the run down sign, that's great!!!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2003 11:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fluffer? Whoa, there's some connotations USATF doesn't want... His time is coming to an end...

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
will
Water Boy
Water Boy


Joined: 24 Oct 2002
Posts: 70
Location: South

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2003 11:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just so long as it's not my end.

To echo my younger posting counterparts, it's gay.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
will
Water Boy
Water Boy


Joined: 24 Oct 2002
Posts: 70
Location: South

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2003 11:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Look, he's humping the N on your RUN. Go YMCA Bear.

Okay, I'll stop now...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2003 12:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Actually, he's just shaking his hips in a groovy little swing thing.

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
Paul
Olympic Medalist
Olympic Medalist


Joined: 28 Apr 2002
Posts: 1610
Location: Oregon

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2003 12:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Greg McMillan site had a lot of great stuff on it. Thanks for that link, Will!!

Paul
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hammer
Varsity
Varsity


Joined: 17 Jan 2002
Posts: 385
Location: New Mexico

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2003 6:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Shouldn't the training for the 800m depend on the ability of the athlete???

For example Seb Coe ran aroun 1.41, a good HS boy will run around 2.00 and decent college girls will run around 2.20. As far as what percentage of the run is anaerobic or aerobic its almost like running 3 different races. If an athlete is running 2.20 that athlete's 800 has a higher percentage of aerobic type running, so should that runner run the same system as a runner trying to run in the low 1.40s???
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
will
Water Boy
Water Boy


Joined: 24 Oct 2002
Posts: 70
Location: South

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2003 6:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why do you suggest that a 2:20 guy is running more aerobically than a 1:41 guy? For each they are (theoretically) running at the same percentages if their efforts are the same.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2003 10:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't know at what points that holds true, but I've heard it argued that a sub-13 5k differs greatly in energy system requirements from a 15:30. The tricky thing is how does a 15:30 guy who is aiming to run sub-14 or sub-13 eventually train for that transition while still training properly for his current ability level?

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
will
Water Boy
Water Boy


Joined: 24 Oct 2002
Posts: 70
Location: South

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2003 10:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm still a little behind you guys. What sort of lit have you been reading to suggest these ideas?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Chief Pontificator


Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2003 10:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Word of mouth for me. Never judge a cover by its book. Smile

Dan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
coachd
Water Boy
Water Boy


Joined: 09 Sep 2002
Posts: 72
Location: Out west

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2003 10:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hammer...what I have done with some success (of course it has been a while since I trained a hs 800 runner) is to apply a kind of ratio in arriving at comparable times. For example, if I want to look at trying a similar workout to what Coe did when he was 18 and ran 3:45 (1500)...Coe did 10X400 @60...if I have an athlete that runs 4:10...then:

60:X as 230(secs.):250(secs)

60x250= 15000
15000/230 = 65.2

I would have the 4:10 runner try and run his 400's at 65-66. I think the energy systems being stressed are comparable based on the racing performance of the athlete.

This is not scientific, but it usually fits pretty well within parameters of other accepted methods of determing training times--Purdy, Daniels, other training "calculators". I've used this method for years in coming up with what I want people to run for specific workouts and found it works well. I'm usually pretty accurate on workout times and performance.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
will
Water Boy
Water Boy


Joined: 24 Oct 2002
Posts: 70
Location: South

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2003 11:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess there is a transition that occurs for a 5k guy that goes from one time/volume load to another as they climb through the ranks towards high-caliber times. Yet, I think that some of those variables are pretty well-established across the board. For instance, Dellinger used to have his 1500/5000 guys do a regular 10 mile tempo run whereas the 5000/10000 guys did a 12 mile run. All in all, the time generally turned out to be about 50 minutes or 60 minutes. Tony Benson says the same thing, except he has people build based on a fixed time towards longer and longer distances. I used to do a 50:00 tempo run twice a week, each time going a little further.

Now, theoretically, as I aged and my body became more accustomed to the amount of lactate my body produced, it would get fitter and I would be able to run further each year for the same workout at the same intensity. So, absolultely speaking, the distances I trained would get longer and longer, but the physiological effort would be the same.

The same sort of principle could be applied for high school runners who are doing the mile. Early in the season, the body often best adapts to 800/mile paces in intervals of about 35-45 seconds. So, for some high school guys that might be 200-250 meters. However, for elite guys that could much more easily be 300-350 meters. When elite guys do 12 x 300, it's roughly the same as a high schooler doing 12 x 200.

These aren't exact, but I believe the underlying physiological variables are going to be pretty similar in each case. Obviously though, 5k and 800 are going to be pretty different in terms of ultimate progressions simply due to the aerobic/lactic/anaerobic ratios needed for each event.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Run-Down Forums Forum Index -> Mid-Distance Depot All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group