| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR
|
 Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2002 1:38 pm Post subject: Frank Shorter = Speed! |
 |
|
From today's Runner's World online interview with Frank Shorter, here's another illustration of what Conway and I mean when we talk about "speed" being an absolute necessity in distance running. It's also surprisingly similar to my line, "the object of a race is to run the specified distance the fastest, not to see who can hold a pace the longest."
| Quote: | The other thing I had done, which made me feel confident, was I ran the 10,000, not so much because I thought I could medal (he was fifth in 27:51.4), but because it would send a signal to the other marathon runners just how fast I was on the track. I knew I could surge at a faster pace than anyone else in the marathon, and run at a speed in the middle of the race that most of these guys hadn't even run in an all-out mile.
I was naive enough, because I'd had success running from the front in Fukuoka by surging away, to realize the marathon wasn't a race of attrition. And I think up until that point, it really had been. Everybody started, everybody fell off, last person standing is the winner. They viewed the marathon more like an ultra than a marathon. And I viewed it more like a track race. |
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Conway
Olympic Medalist
Joined: 25 Aug 2001
Posts: 3570
Location: Northen California
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2002 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
On a similar note, there was a comment made during the televising of the Berlin meet ... During the men's 1500 ElG simply took off prior to the bell ... As he gracefullly pulled away down the back straight Larry Rawson stated that "ElG just has faster leg speed than any other miler in the world .. Until Lagat or someone else gets faster they simply will not beat him" ...
When you can accelerate faster than your opponents you always have the advantage .. No matter what the distance is ... Speed is almost always teh "X" factor in any given race ...
Conway |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2002 2:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, I noticed that during the coverage. It truly was an impressive gap he put on the field in short order.
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul
Olympic Medalist
Joined: 28 Apr 2002
Posts: 1610
Location: Oregon
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2002 3:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think one of the keys of all top runners is the ablity to pick up the pace without incurring a major expenditure of energy. When you watch El G you see efficiency in motion. Same with Shorter. Maybe Krummenacker and Teter will get there. In contrast, when Suzy goes into her acceleration, especially with over 300m left, you just say to yourself "Oh, my, thats gonna cost!!"
Paul |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2002 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Very good point. You always get the feeling Suzy went too early and she knows it, but guys like Geb, ElG, and Kipketer seem to keep accelerating through the line no matter what they did up till that point. Poetry in motion...
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul
Olympic Medalist
Joined: 28 Apr 2002
Posts: 1610
Location: Oregon
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 10, 2002 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have never been to Frank Shorter's site. There are some good articles there worth reading. One can get there from Dan's link that started this thread.
Paul |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2002 8:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here's another related quote, again from a RW interview of Eric Mack:
| Quote: | | The athletes I talk to who are running the fast marathons, from 2:07 down to 2:05, aren't putting in the high mileage, but a lot of high intensity stuff, at 5:00 pace and lower. |
http://www.runnersworld.com/home/0,1300,1-0-0-ZNEWS----10-11-2002,00.html
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Conway
Olympic Medalist
Joined: 25 Aug 2001
Posts: 3570
Location: Northen California
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2002 8:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
My colege sprint coach had a similar philosophy ... We started out short and intense ... Worked ot the point of fatigue ... Once we could handle that the distance was increased - say from 60 meters to 100 meters ... Same process all over intense high reps to the point of fatigue ... Adapt then move the distance up again - to say 150 meters ... Now i know that is not DISTANCE but a similar philosophy - create endurance through intensity of workout ... Depending on what events you ran we went up to repeat 400's - at 50/51 pace ... Makes for strong sprinter/quarter milers ...
Conway |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2002 9:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
That's exactly the approach I've taken.  It isn't a very popular idea with distance-oriented coaches, though...
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Conway
Olympic Medalist
Joined: 25 Aug 2001
Posts: 3570
Location: Northen California
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2002 9:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm sure it isn't ... What is the general rationale given ...
Conway |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2002 10:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
I believe the thinking is that speed cannot be handled without a proper endurance base. I lean toward the opposing view -- a regular endurance base makes speed development near impossible to accomplish. That is, unless the endurance comes as a result of an accumulation of speedwork...
This is a lot to type, but here's a good piece from Charlie Francis' Training For Speed, pg. 93:
| Quote: | Traditional periodization methods called for an emphasis during the general preparation phase of low intensity aerobic work such as cross-country runs and 60-minute runs to build up an endurance base. According to this theory of training the athlete would then progress to a short period of high intensity speed development work during the pre-season and early competitive seasons. This was the accepted method of training sprinters until the late 1950's. During the transition to speed work however, a pattern of hamstring injuries would emerge. The hamstrings were improperly prepared for the new high intensity demands.
...
Over time it became clear that with the traditional planning approach to sprint training the athlete could maintain peak form for only a very short time. The training volume had to be dropped so the athlete could tolerate the sudden move to high intensity speed work (i.e. central nervous system (CNS) related work.).
Another drawback with the traditional approach to sprint training was that during the general preparation/aerobic phase of training the athlete was in fact detraining the speed capabilities that had already been developed the previous year. |
There are some good accompanying graphs of how the traditional system requires volume to drop as intensity increases (this applies equally well to any distance, I believe), while the speed-based system keeps the speed in place throughout and actually increases volume as it goes. Not only does this provide a better balance between the two, but I've got a side theory that it also allows much more finely tuned tapering and peaking. The problem with the traditional approach is that you've already cut out much of the volume in order to work in the speed, so there isn't much more you can cut out in order to taper.
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Distance_Guru
World Class
Joined: 09 Mar 2002
Posts: 1280
Location: Nebraska
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2002 12:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I love the fact that people think that 5:00 mile pace is speed 
If you do the math that's marathon race pace or slower for a 2:05 marathoner. And at least in my book running at a pace you can maintain for 26 miles isn't speed. I've said this before of distance running in general there are no secrets, you run a lot, you run hard, and you'll get faster. This is even more true of marathon training. I've seen workout programs for world class marathoners, the trick isn't creating a good training plan. They really aren't that difficult to come up with. The trick is to be able to go out there day in and day out and do it. People always want to beleive there is some secret to these great athletes running as well as they do. Here it is, they are more talented, dedicated, durable and mentally tough than any other runners on the planet. The plan is important but good marathon training plans aren't that hard to come by, athletes that can be good marathoners are.
_________________
Time is the fire in which we burn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan
Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999
Posts: 9334
Location: Salem, OR
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2002 1:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I would normally agree that that is pace work, not speed work, but the quote is referring to long runs for a marathoner, so it comes pretty close to your stated definition of speed. It also means Mack believes world class marathoners are training faster than Americans race, and over similar distances!
| Quote: | | I've said this before of distance running in general there are no secrets, you run a lot, you run hard, and you'll get faster. |
For the most part, yes. But the gist of Mack's quote is that running more is not the key, rather running faster. There's obviously a balance point there, and I think you are well aware of that. A lot of people apparently are not, however, and would interpret your statement the same as, say, "if 100 miles a week will make you a good marathoner, then 150 will make you great!" If it were that simple, you'd see a lot more mileage obsessed Americans breaking into the top-100...
Dan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Distance_Guru
World Class
Joined: 09 Mar 2002
Posts: 1280
Location: Nebraska
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2002 1:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think you're right about most of that. I should mention that the marathon is uniquie in that most of your long runs are actually shorter than the distance you race. And therefore almost all of the runs a marathoner does are underdistance training and that actually makes it easier for them to run race pace or faster for the duration of their runs. I'm not so sure about the last part though, it's been years sense the top American marathoners were running 150+ miles a week. Most now run in the 110-120 mile range. Which from what I remember reading is a little under what the best African marathoners were running. Although the marathoners I read about were of the Cosmos Ndeti (sp?) generation. I haven't read much on the current training of the top three marathoners now (Tergat, Geb, and Khalid). I have read that KK averages in the 120-130 MPW range and I've read a little on Tergats 10k training but beyond that I haven't found much. But the princepals that govern the race itself haven't changed much in the last 5 years or so. I think lately we've just had better athletes running the marathon.
_________________
Time is the fire in which we burn |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
