As I have noted many times I have become an amateur historian of the sport of running/track and field over the years. As a result a combination of always trying to reach a synthesis of information, (isn’t that what most amateur historians do???) I’ve come across many variations of what one would term harder sessions. I’ve always viewed these as starting points on where training begins, but what how you analyze that training is where it ends.
All interpretations of training require critical analyzing a handful of information from 1) science 2) methodology and 3) personal experience. Having acted in a coaching manner at various times(with a variety of abilities and levels) in combination with observing personalities, physiology, strengths, weaknesses, etc…. I’ve come to various conclusions.
In this instance my conclusion would be if I could only do one workout and advise one workout what would it be…. The answer to the questions I often ask myself take time. I am always considering events specifics, mentality, reality, compatibility, etc…. But in this question the answer sticks out at me like the proverbial sore thumb, and that is the session I have determined one can 1) do all year round, 2) has variations and 3) is doable in any circumstance. I figured since my last post was on the Clohessy Creed that this post should pay homage to a component of the ‘complex system’ of training that Clohessy began. The workout should come as no surprise to anyone who knows me and that is the monafartlek.
Named after famed Australian Steve Moneghetti it originated when Mona’s coach Chris Wardlaw told him to do a 20min fartlek session. Mona apparently wanted to know more than a 20min session and Wardlaw told him 2 x 90, 4 x 60, 4 x 30 off equal med paced running. Mona worked that out to 18mins so Wardlaw added 4 x 15 sec and voila there was the 20mins.
The Monafartlek(sometimes spelled monofartlek) is one of those sessions Mona did/does all year around on each Tuesday. He did the fartlek around a 6km lake loop near his house. Of course success breeds imitation and many others who watched Mona’s success copied said workout. What Mona and everyone else who did the workout was that a 20min fartlek sounds easy but doing it properly is another different story. The information I’ve heard said that the hard parts were 4:30 mile pace or quicker pace, while the med parts were 5min/mile pace or quicker.
In my years of doing the monafartlek I’ve found it to be the single greatest workout, for the reasons that 1) anyone from a miler to a marathon runner can do it, 2) you can suit if to the time of the season (egs early in the season you can make the med paced the priority, while later in the season you can pay more attention to the harder sections and be more anaerobic) and 3) it can be suited to individual strengths and weaknesses while doing it ( egs a fast twitch athlete might pull away on the quicker paced, while the slow twitch athlete works the jogs, or even the opposite where the FT athlete makes the easier parts quicker and work on their weaknesses) .
The key to the monafartlek is simple and it’s what I call ‘focused variability’. If I am having a bad day I only need to get through 20mins…. If I am getting ready to race I might take it easy the for the first 10min and hammer the second half…if I am getting ready for a later season race I make the easier parts slower, but on the other side if I am training through I work the jogs…if I want more tempo I make the med paced sections hurt….I am sure you get the idea.
Even variations can be done like doing a ‘back half monafartlek’ if you are in taper mode (do 2 x 60, 40 x 30, 4 x 15). I’ve adder some sections to it when needing more speed (egs monafarltek-2min rest 6 x 30 sec hard-60 sec easy) or longer (egs 2 x 3mins off 2min and then a monafartlek for 30mins of running). Even my taper for 5-10km is based upon the monafartlek (a 9min fartlek of 3mins of 30sec hard-med, 3min of 20 sec hard med and 3min of 10 sec hard med). In the end you can get what you need out of it. Besides it may also be the most enjoyable hard workout out there….
Training:
Mon: 66mins
Tues: 5 x mile tempo (pick up a little over tempo the last 60 secs) plus 2 x 3 min 30 sec off 30 sec
Wed: 70mins
Thurs: 66mins
Fri: 68mins
Sat: AM 3 x 10mins tempo-5mins a little slower plus 4 x 60sec hard-60 sec easy-30 sec hard-30 sec easy PM 32mins
Sunday: 2hr 10 mins
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Monday, January 18, 2010
The Legend of the Clohessy Creed
In my last post I chatted about ‘the big workout’, but I also talked about the Clohessy Creed. Growing up as a little kid and teenager, I was fortunate to be around during a time of running craziness. By that I meant there seemed to be a lot more energy and focus on running when it was on the teevee. It was during that time I came across three runners who I ended up emulating. One was marathon record holder Steve Jones, another was Oly bronze medalist Rod Dixon and the last was Rob Decastella aka Deek.
Now Deek came into fruition due to winning the very first Wld championship marathon. I was able to see those championships on teevee, but knew little about him. As I’ve stated before getting a history degree meant I also approached the sport through a historical perspective viewpoint, which meant if I didn’t know something I went out of my way to research it. Deek became one of those projects. I was finally able to provide a full conclusion to Deek when I was able to obtain his autobiography. His autobio is okay, but if you pay attention there are snippets here and there which give you some insight into both his philosophy towards running, but in his case of his coach Pat Clohessy. The chapter that stuck out at me most was the ‘Clohessy Creed’.
Clohessy was Deek’s coach from beginning to end, but what one needs to know is that Clohessy was no slouch himself. I came into greater contact when I got my first Lydiard athlete autobios of Peter Snell and Muarry Halberg. Clohessy spent time travelling with the Kiwis in Europe after going to school at the Univ of Houston. It was Houston that Clohessy learned how over the top interval training could destroy a runner. It was after experimenting with some of Lydiard’s ideas he found that the buildup of mileage was kept to athlete development.
On his return to Australia Clohessy began working with young athletes and found that they didn’t need much anaerobic work to get fit or fast. His Clohessy creed was evolving.
What many don’t know is that it was Clohessy who was setting up the training for an unknown American native runner named Billy Mills. Mills of course would ironically go on to beat Clohessy’s countryman , the great Ron Clarke at the 64 Olys. The basis for Clohessy’s training was good constant aerobic conditioning mixed in with small aspects of anaerobic work (in Mill’s case a lot of Lydiard style 100 hard-100 float for 3-5km).
But Clohessy’s greatest pupil was still to come and that was of course Deek. In Deek’s autobio he goes into great detail how Clohessy helped him with progressive training from a teenager (50miles per week) and still had him progress as he became a Sr athlete. Of course deek wasn’t the only success story. The other one who has had a major impact was Chris ‘Rab’ Wardlaw, a 2:11 Oly marathoner training partner of Deeks.
Of course Rab would go on to many other successes as a coach that being Steve Moneghetti and a handful of other great Aussie distance runners (Shaun Creighton and now Craig Mottram). In the end the lineage of Lydiard lent itself to Clohessy’s interpretation,the shock of Billy Mills (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QaDQL0rMWw), the toughness of Deek, which turned into Wardlaw’s ‘complex’ system’ tweaking, and Mona’s championship pedigree, who also coached Lee Troop and on and on and on…..the ‘Clohessy Creed’ continues.
Now Deek came into fruition due to winning the very first Wld championship marathon. I was able to see those championships on teevee, but knew little about him. As I’ve stated before getting a history degree meant I also approached the sport through a historical perspective viewpoint, which meant if I didn’t know something I went out of my way to research it. Deek became one of those projects. I was finally able to provide a full conclusion to Deek when I was able to obtain his autobiography. His autobio is okay, but if you pay attention there are snippets here and there which give you some insight into both his philosophy towards running, but in his case of his coach Pat Clohessy. The chapter that stuck out at me most was the ‘Clohessy Creed’.
Clohessy was Deek’s coach from beginning to end, but what one needs to know is that Clohessy was no slouch himself. I came into greater contact when I got my first Lydiard athlete autobios of Peter Snell and Muarry Halberg. Clohessy spent time travelling with the Kiwis in Europe after going to school at the Univ of Houston. It was Houston that Clohessy learned how over the top interval training could destroy a runner. It was after experimenting with some of Lydiard’s ideas he found that the buildup of mileage was kept to athlete development.
On his return to Australia Clohessy began working with young athletes and found that they didn’t need much anaerobic work to get fit or fast. His Clohessy creed was evolving.
What many don’t know is that it was Clohessy who was setting up the training for an unknown American native runner named Billy Mills. Mills of course would ironically go on to beat Clohessy’s countryman , the great Ron Clarke at the 64 Olys. The basis for Clohessy’s training was good constant aerobic conditioning mixed in with small aspects of anaerobic work (in Mill’s case a lot of Lydiard style 100 hard-100 float for 3-5km).
But Clohessy’s greatest pupil was still to come and that was of course Deek. In Deek’s autobio he goes into great detail how Clohessy helped him with progressive training from a teenager (50miles per week) and still had him progress as he became a Sr athlete. Of course deek wasn’t the only success story. The other one who has had a major impact was Chris ‘Rab’ Wardlaw, a 2:11 Oly marathoner training partner of Deeks.
Of course Rab would go on to many other successes as a coach that being Steve Moneghetti and a handful of other great Aussie distance runners (Shaun Creighton and now Craig Mottram). In the end the lineage of Lydiard lent itself to Clohessy’s interpretation,the shock of Billy Mills (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QaDQL0rMWw), the toughness of Deek, which turned into Wardlaw’s ‘complex’ system’ tweaking, and Mona’s championship pedigree, who also coached Lee Troop and on and on and on…..the ‘Clohessy Creed’ continues.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
The Big Workout.....
Sometimes topics for this blog come in waves. Others sit on a shelf for a while, until I actually get around to taking the time to really go into details. Others come naturally, while others sometimes don’t come at all. This one is probably one that has been in the back of my mind for about 15 years. Yeah 15 years…
In a previous life when I was a pure track runner I felt as though I was ready to go to the next level. I had learned my lessons, but had unfortunately, ran out of races to make the 94 Commonwealth Games. But, I also felt that I was ready to take the next step into international style running. My how things can change quickly.
I was in my car when these two young guys hit me. I didn’t think much of it at the time, but in retrospect I wished I had taken the rest of the year off. I had some minor pains, but not much. Instead I continued to go out and train hard. But the part that almost killed me was that I was getting to a point in the season where I was so mentally tough, that I had the ability to hurt myself.
And hurt myself I did. Part of the reason was the compensation of the accident…the other was approaching each workout as though it was ‘the big workout’ (now referred to as TBW). The end result was that by the end of the season I could barely walk. I could actually run races, but once I stopped I was a mess. For the next 2-3 years I spent my running career trying to train more than 2 months without my back going into spasm. It was easily the most frustrating time of my running.
I realized then that the concept of the TBW had to be tempered. In that respects I came to realize that TBW had to be planned. Rather than every week being TBW…the TBW would instead be used sparingly.
Now TBW can be defined in many ways. As a middle dist guy TBW was our peak session of 600-400-300 full out off 10+ mins rest. It was the sort of session I loved and had the fear of god put into me all at once. But I had used it sparingly as a younger athlete.
During my preparations for the Wld ½ marathon in 2005 I was also preparing for a possible Commonwealth Games marathon race. It was then that I also approached my TBW in an overzealous manner that summer. Once again my back flared up to the point where not only did I not run a marathon, but I was a barely able to complete the ½ marathon and then had a disappointing season after that time.
The lessons I learned from paying too much attention to TBW was that I had to approach it sparingly. By that I meant that the physical and mental toll from trying to do TBW too often was the kiss of death. In the end it meant approaching my training from a more casual approach until it was time to really race. In that respects I guess it means picking and choosing when you need to get ready to race. For example in my 10km preparations I always approached TBW as 5 x 1600m off 2-2 1/2mins and 5 x 1000m of alternating hard and easy 200s, a 9min fartlek run I do, and a 20min tempo run. I had done these sessions earlier in the preparation, but it wasn’t until mid and later in the season when these became TBW.
In that respects they became mental and physical workouts all at once. They became special and provided with my final mental focus I needed to race. Until that time I typically raced mediocre at best. But then again that was always my plan…race well when it counted
Although the physical toll of TBW can be tough I also find that the mental toll is just as detrimental. It’s one thing to be having some good sessions, but it’s another to do TBW week in and week out. I found that if I did this that I lost some mental edge to my racing. I needed a race to do my best, not TBW. Trying for too many BW meant I was not only physically fired, but mentally tired to really compete at my best. I might run okay, but certainly not my best.
In Bill Squire’s training book (former coach to Bill Rodgers among many other great runners) he really stresses this point in his workouts. His intervals seem reasonable in both distance and intensity.
On the other side of the world I have always taken into account the ‘complex’ system of the Aussies (Clohessy and Wardlaw) that advocated short sessions that left the athlete ready to be both physically and mentally refreshed (only 20-25 mins of total work in hard workouts). It’s not that they didn’t do TBW. They did, but it was only used sparingly and even then it was not too extreme (either ran in a race to prepare along with some 10milers for the marathon). Clohessy's rationale came from coaching young kids who didn't need a lot of hard work to get fast. He then used that same model for adults and found it worked in a progressive manner.
Either way I have always considered TBW as something one doesn’t use often and when in doubt be conservative.
The week (a planned down week so meant to take Wed-Sat easier with a sandwich of long runs and tempo intervals as bookends):
Mon: off....remind me not to take Mons off ever again. I am trying to take one day off every 3 weeks and taking Mon off is way to easy when i really need the day off later in the week.
Tues: BBY Lake 10 x 3mins @ tempo HR off 30 sec. Consistent and solid. best part was my HR stayed the same and i got faster. I call this a tweener workout. I run at tempo pace so i can in more volume without tearing myself down.
Wed: 66mins
thurs: 70mins
Fri: 67min
Sat: 37min hills (on avge 50-70 sec). Knew I needed some 'form/strength' work and had this planned far far in advance. PM 32 mins
Sun: 2 hr 2 mins at SFU trails. Nice run and felt from from the hill session
In a previous life when I was a pure track runner I felt as though I was ready to go to the next level. I had learned my lessons, but had unfortunately, ran out of races to make the 94 Commonwealth Games. But, I also felt that I was ready to take the next step into international style running. My how things can change quickly.
I was in my car when these two young guys hit me. I didn’t think much of it at the time, but in retrospect I wished I had taken the rest of the year off. I had some minor pains, but not much. Instead I continued to go out and train hard. But the part that almost killed me was that I was getting to a point in the season where I was so mentally tough, that I had the ability to hurt myself.
And hurt myself I did. Part of the reason was the compensation of the accident…the other was approaching each workout as though it was ‘the big workout’ (now referred to as TBW). The end result was that by the end of the season I could barely walk. I could actually run races, but once I stopped I was a mess. For the next 2-3 years I spent my running career trying to train more than 2 months without my back going into spasm. It was easily the most frustrating time of my running.
I realized then that the concept of the TBW had to be tempered. In that respects I came to realize that TBW had to be planned. Rather than every week being TBW…the TBW would instead be used sparingly.
Now TBW can be defined in many ways. As a middle dist guy TBW was our peak session of 600-400-300 full out off 10+ mins rest. It was the sort of session I loved and had the fear of god put into me all at once. But I had used it sparingly as a younger athlete.
During my preparations for the Wld ½ marathon in 2005 I was also preparing for a possible Commonwealth Games marathon race. It was then that I also approached my TBW in an overzealous manner that summer. Once again my back flared up to the point where not only did I not run a marathon, but I was a barely able to complete the ½ marathon and then had a disappointing season after that time.
The lessons I learned from paying too much attention to TBW was that I had to approach it sparingly. By that I meant that the physical and mental toll from trying to do TBW too often was the kiss of death. In the end it meant approaching my training from a more casual approach until it was time to really race. In that respects I guess it means picking and choosing when you need to get ready to race. For example in my 10km preparations I always approached TBW as 5 x 1600m off 2-2 1/2mins and 5 x 1000m of alternating hard and easy 200s, a 9min fartlek run I do, and a 20min tempo run. I had done these sessions earlier in the preparation, but it wasn’t until mid and later in the season when these became TBW.
In that respects they became mental and physical workouts all at once. They became special and provided with my final mental focus I needed to race. Until that time I typically raced mediocre at best. But then again that was always my plan…race well when it counted
Although the physical toll of TBW can be tough I also find that the mental toll is just as detrimental. It’s one thing to be having some good sessions, but it’s another to do TBW week in and week out. I found that if I did this that I lost some mental edge to my racing. I needed a race to do my best, not TBW. Trying for too many BW meant I was not only physically fired, but mentally tired to really compete at my best. I might run okay, but certainly not my best.
In Bill Squire’s training book (former coach to Bill Rodgers among many other great runners) he really stresses this point in his workouts. His intervals seem reasonable in both distance and intensity.
On the other side of the world I have always taken into account the ‘complex’ system of the Aussies (Clohessy and Wardlaw) that advocated short sessions that left the athlete ready to be both physically and mentally refreshed (only 20-25 mins of total work in hard workouts). It’s not that they didn’t do TBW. They did, but it was only used sparingly and even then it was not too extreme (either ran in a race to prepare along with some 10milers for the marathon). Clohessy's rationale came from coaching young kids who didn't need a lot of hard work to get fast. He then used that same model for adults and found it worked in a progressive manner.
Either way I have always considered TBW as something one doesn’t use often and when in doubt be conservative.
The week (a planned down week so meant to take Wed-Sat easier with a sandwich of long runs and tempo intervals as bookends):
Mon: off....remind me not to take Mons off ever again. I am trying to take one day off every 3 weeks and taking Mon off is way to easy when i really need the day off later in the week.
Tues: BBY Lake 10 x 3mins @ tempo HR off 30 sec. Consistent and solid. best part was my HR stayed the same and i got faster. I call this a tweener workout. I run at tempo pace so i can in more volume without tearing myself down.
Wed: 66mins
thurs: 70mins
Fri: 67min
Sat: 37min hills (on avge 50-70 sec). Knew I needed some 'form/strength' work and had this planned far far in advance. PM 32 mins
Sun: 2 hr 2 mins at SFU trails. Nice run and felt from from the hill session
Friday, January 8, 2010
Throwing up all over oneself....
Discussions on why one runs always come up. There's always the typical fitness, it makes me feel good, I like to compete, etc....arguments made, but alas I seldom like to fit myself into some running category. Hell I hate wearing running shorts.
But when this subject of why one runs comes up I have found no better way to explain it then by a section from a golf book. John Feinstein is easily my favourite sports non fiction writer. He's best know for his classic "A Season on the Brink' in which he followed Bobby Knight and the Indiana Hoosiers around for an entire season (Knight was not a happy when the book came out). Feinstein has put out many more books over the years (my personal favourite is the 'The Last Amateurs', but his next most famous book is a golf book entitled ' A Good Walk Spoiled' in which he once again followed a handful of PGA tour players around for an entire season. In his introduction he mentioned a story about Curtis Strange (2 x US Open winner), who had been playing poorly for a while. Strange had somehow positioned himself into a situation where he was one stroke away at a US Open, but over the last hole he hit a poor shot and missed a playoff.
Rather than be angry or even disappointed Strange had IMHO the best description of what competing really means....and the one I've always used to explain why I still run:
They all want to be there because they know the work that goes into getting there. Shortly after Curtis Strange had come up one stroke of making a playoff at last year’s US Open , I ran into him in the empty locker room at Oakmont.
I asked him if he would sleep that night.
“Probably not,” he said. “I’ll probably go through every shot and every thought.”
He smiled . “But you know what? That’s okay. It’s disappointing, but goddamn it, I was there. I hadn’t had that feeling in a long time. This is what you play the game for – to get yourself in a position on Sunday at the US Open so you can throw up all over yourself.”
He was glowing. “My God,” he said, “it felt great.”
He hadn’t won. But he had had a chance right to the very end. All the work was worth it, just to have that feeling. That’s what they all search for: the chance to be there on Sunday afternoon. They live to have the chance to choke. At Q-school; at Hartford or Memphis; at Augusta or Oakmont.
....so if you ever hear me talking about 'throwing up all over myself' it was probably not due to a long night......
But when this subject of why one runs comes up I have found no better way to explain it then by a section from a golf book. John Feinstein is easily my favourite sports non fiction writer. He's best know for his classic "A Season on the Brink' in which he followed Bobby Knight and the Indiana Hoosiers around for an entire season (Knight was not a happy when the book came out). Feinstein has put out many more books over the years (my personal favourite is the 'The Last Amateurs', but his next most famous book is a golf book entitled ' A Good Walk Spoiled' in which he once again followed a handful of PGA tour players around for an entire season. In his introduction he mentioned a story about Curtis Strange (2 x US Open winner), who had been playing poorly for a while. Strange had somehow positioned himself into a situation where he was one stroke away at a US Open, but over the last hole he hit a poor shot and missed a playoff.
Rather than be angry or even disappointed Strange had IMHO the best description of what competing really means....and the one I've always used to explain why I still run:
They all want to be there because they know the work that goes into getting there. Shortly after Curtis Strange had come up one stroke of making a playoff at last year’s US Open , I ran into him in the empty locker room at Oakmont.
I asked him if he would sleep that night.
“Probably not,” he said. “I’ll probably go through every shot and every thought.”
He smiled . “But you know what? That’s okay. It’s disappointing, but goddamn it, I was there. I hadn’t had that feeling in a long time. This is what you play the game for – to get yourself in a position on Sunday at the US Open so you can throw up all over yourself.”
He was glowing. “My God,” he said, “it felt great.”
He hadn’t won. But he had had a chance right to the very end. All the work was worth it, just to have that feeling. That’s what they all search for: the chance to be there on Sunday afternoon. They live to have the chance to choke. At Q-school; at Hartford or Memphis; at Augusta or Oakmont.
....so if you ever hear me talking about 'throwing up all over myself' it was probably not due to a long night......
Monday, January 4, 2010
uh oh.....
...Carter has started crawling and that means load of fun.
One might assume (if they read this regularly) that training has been going poorly because I haven't been posting. Actually it is quite opposite. I was able to get back into some semblance of discipline after my November meltdown and even hit around 100 miles this week (having the week off was nice, but it really wasn't a week off). In fact I would even say I purposely backed off so that i wouldn't overdo things.
If anything I've gone back to my more traditional approach of 'secret training' (as Joseph Kibur used to put it when we didn't see him for a while). It's not any secret, but rather that I sometimes forget I need to struggle to get my behind in gear. If I have realized anything in my years of running it's that the athlete has to make the decision. Last year I made some poor decisons in rushing parts of my training that I have felt I always needed to race well. These things aren't always physical hence why I find I need more of the mental process. That's still one of the issues regarding group vs personalized training. You can caught up in the group atmosphere (where it can be much easier to train) and forget that sometimes (and some people) require different approaches tp get to where they need to go.
I used to say to my old coach Mike Lonergan that 'you can get me fit, but you can't make me fast'. By that I meant it was mine and mine only decison to make a choice on whether I was committed to the process of racing/training focus. There can always be legitimate reasons to not train (I've had a few over the past year or so), but most of the time one can work it out if they really want.
Topics for the future: 'why throwing up all over yourself and is a good thing' and 'the concept of the 'big workout'.
Last 4 weeks:
1) 77
2) 75
3) 85
and this week (4)
Mon: 68 mins
Tues: 30min plus 3min 20-30 sec hills fartlek PM 35 mins
Wed: 66 mins
thurs: AM just under 1 hr 40mins with Tina PM 30 mins plus drills
Fri: 51min
sat: 3 x 15 mins off 90sec easy jogs done in 5min pickups (5 below MP HR, 5 at MP HR and 5 at tmepo HR PM: 35mins
Sun: 2 hr 3mins at SFU. Good as felt decent from the start and got better as i went along
One might assume (if they read this regularly) that training has been going poorly because I haven't been posting. Actually it is quite opposite. I was able to get back into some semblance of discipline after my November meltdown and even hit around 100 miles this week (having the week off was nice, but it really wasn't a week off). In fact I would even say I purposely backed off so that i wouldn't overdo things.
If anything I've gone back to my more traditional approach of 'secret training' (as Joseph Kibur used to put it when we didn't see him for a while). It's not any secret, but rather that I sometimes forget I need to struggle to get my behind in gear. If I have realized anything in my years of running it's that the athlete has to make the decision. Last year I made some poor decisons in rushing parts of my training that I have felt I always needed to race well. These things aren't always physical hence why I find I need more of the mental process. That's still one of the issues regarding group vs personalized training. You can caught up in the group atmosphere (where it can be much easier to train) and forget that sometimes (and some people) require different approaches tp get to where they need to go.
I used to say to my old coach Mike Lonergan that 'you can get me fit, but you can't make me fast'. By that I meant it was mine and mine only decison to make a choice on whether I was committed to the process of racing/training focus. There can always be legitimate reasons to not train (I've had a few over the past year or so), but most of the time one can work it out if they really want.
Topics for the future: 'why throwing up all over yourself and is a good thing' and 'the concept of the 'big workout'.
Last 4 weeks:
1) 77
2) 75
3) 85
and this week (4)
Mon: 68 mins
Tues: 30min plus 3min 20-30 sec hills fartlek PM 35 mins
Wed: 66 mins
thurs: AM just under 1 hr 40mins with Tina PM 30 mins plus drills
Fri: 51min
sat: 3 x 15 mins off 90sec easy jogs done in 5min pickups (5 below MP HR, 5 at MP HR and 5 at tmepo HR PM: 35mins
Sun: 2 hr 3mins at SFU. Good as felt decent from the start and got better as i went along
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
If there's one thing this sport has taught me.....
....it's what people are now realizing about Tiger Woods and that is great athletes are not always what they seem to be. As a person one is always looking at having a role model/s or maybe more accurately someone they respect.
I fortunately/unfortunately realized early enough in my running experiences that great athletes could be the sort of people who, although you may respect their performances, you do not respect as people. But being a somewhat cynic and optimist all bound up in one I may complain about the ones who have disappointed me, but I've also come to appreciate those who are the 'good guys'.
So rather than focus on the negatives (the stories I could tell/have told) the post is on the positive people I've come across. This is not to say I put these people up on some pedestal (I am way to old, cynical and arrogant for that) I'd rather view these people as those who you know when the 'chips are down' they will be the ones still standing. In no particular order would be those I've come to respect as much for their athletic results as how they approach life and running....
Rob Lonergan...some people may even ask who is Rob ( I hope not), but being the inaugural winner of the Sun Run has to get you some bonus points. He was often the lesser known the great dist runners who came out of the Vancouver area, when the other great runners of the Kajaks dominated. Rob's ability to look beyond the sport (he's a lawyer now), yet still be able to give his all has always impressed on me. Knowing of Rob's career best results being destroyed by his elastic band achilles, yet his inability to also pack it in (I still say his 4th place at the 93 CWG trials as one of the most courageous races I've seen in person) and ability to run tough every time out are characteristics that any runner would be proud. Even now I say that any runner should be afraid if Rob Lonergan is right behind you with 200m to go. Ahhhhh..... if only the achilles had held out, but why do I think that Rob has no regrets.
Art Boileau...ahh the legend of Art. If I've learned anything about Art it's too always carry out the childlike attitude towards the sport. As a 2 x Olympian, Boston 2nd placer, and many other accomplishments, show that Arty has to go down as one of Canada's all time greats (he's still no 3 or 4 all time marathoner). The best Art stories have even come recently. Over the last two yrs Art has essentially been the first one my high school team has seen at BCHS XC champs. I always proceed to put Art on the spot with the younger athletes, as I introduce them to him and tell of his accomplishments. Art's response is typical of his attitude towards the sport as he deflects his standing in the sport, with his still evident American twang, and a response that is always to ask the kids questions about their races for the day (and then proceeds to help us setup our school tent and organize our gear).
Kevin Sullivan.....Kevin is more a peer than anything (actually I am older by a few yrs), but they way he has conducted himself, as a Junior and later as one of the wld's best, speaks volumes of his character. I had the pleasure of being on some teams with Kevin and he always handles himself with distinction and class (well okay except for some of the 'after' parties, but come on everyone needs to blow off a little steam after a big event). If I was a young athlete he'd be at the top of my list as someone you'd want to emulate.
Richard Lee will love this one but his wife Sue also falls into my list (of course he knows this story that was prefaced by my admission 'Dick, did I ever tell you the day I fell in love with our wife?') due to the singular reason that she knew who I was.... I should preface this by saying that Sue might go down as one of (if not the most) underrated runners of the great era of Can female dist runners (egs Lynn Williams/Kanuka, Brit McRoberts/Townsend, Angela Chalmers, etc...). She was a fantastic runner (18th in 85 WXC, the Can 10000m record and 2 x Olympian) and her results sometimes seem to get lost when great Canadian runners are mentioned. Being a student of the sport (even at a younger age) I knew who Sue (amongst many others of her time) was and what she had done, but I never expected she would know who I was... or at least know my name. As a young athlete I had one big breakthrough year, but then unfortunately had an injury (turned out it was stress fracture). As I was coming out of an appt with the Dr I bumped into Sue on her way in. Now recognize I had done nothing before that year, and when I saw Sue she actually knew my name. I was flabbergasted when she even took the time to ask me what I was doing there. Now I am no Sue Lee, but I also know that I have done enough in this sport that I at least some semblance of a positive (I hope) reputation in Canada. Forever, Sue knowing my name would have an indelible impact on how I approached young athletes and anyone who I ever came across....
All of the above have left an impression on me in some way. I doubt that any of the would see themselves in that way I may have mentioned, but to all of them I owe a debt of gratitude. There are many others who have impacted me (In fact those have inspired the most aren't even what one might call great athletes unless you call a 1:51 800m runner great....but that's for another post) in some way because of their athletics accomplishments, but mostly because of who they are as people.
I fortunately/unfortunately realized early enough in my running experiences that great athletes could be the sort of people who, although you may respect their performances, you do not respect as people. But being a somewhat cynic and optimist all bound up in one I may complain about the ones who have disappointed me, but I've also come to appreciate those who are the 'good guys'.
So rather than focus on the negatives (the stories I could tell/have told) the post is on the positive people I've come across. This is not to say I put these people up on some pedestal (I am way to old, cynical and arrogant for that) I'd rather view these people as those who you know when the 'chips are down' they will be the ones still standing. In no particular order would be those I've come to respect as much for their athletic results as how they approach life and running....
Rob Lonergan...some people may even ask who is Rob ( I hope not), but being the inaugural winner of the Sun Run has to get you some bonus points. He was often the lesser known the great dist runners who came out of the Vancouver area, when the other great runners of the Kajaks dominated. Rob's ability to look beyond the sport (he's a lawyer now), yet still be able to give his all has always impressed on me. Knowing of Rob's career best results being destroyed by his elastic band achilles, yet his inability to also pack it in (I still say his 4th place at the 93 CWG trials as one of the most courageous races I've seen in person) and ability to run tough every time out are characteristics that any runner would be proud. Even now I say that any runner should be afraid if Rob Lonergan is right behind you with 200m to go. Ahhhhh..... if only the achilles had held out, but why do I think that Rob has no regrets.
Art Boileau...ahh the legend of Art. If I've learned anything about Art it's too always carry out the childlike attitude towards the sport. As a 2 x Olympian, Boston 2nd placer, and many other accomplishments, show that Arty has to go down as one of Canada's all time greats (he's still no 3 or 4 all time marathoner). The best Art stories have even come recently. Over the last two yrs Art has essentially been the first one my high school team has seen at BCHS XC champs. I always proceed to put Art on the spot with the younger athletes, as I introduce them to him and tell of his accomplishments. Art's response is typical of his attitude towards the sport as he deflects his standing in the sport, with his still evident American twang, and a response that is always to ask the kids questions about their races for the day (and then proceeds to help us setup our school tent and organize our gear).
Kevin Sullivan.....Kevin is more a peer than anything (actually I am older by a few yrs), but they way he has conducted himself, as a Junior and later as one of the wld's best, speaks volumes of his character. I had the pleasure of being on some teams with Kevin and he always handles himself with distinction and class (well okay except for some of the 'after' parties, but come on everyone needs to blow off a little steam after a big event). If I was a young athlete he'd be at the top of my list as someone you'd want to emulate.
Richard Lee will love this one but his wife Sue also falls into my list (of course he knows this story that was prefaced by my admission 'Dick, did I ever tell you the day I fell in love with our wife?') due to the singular reason that she knew who I was.... I should preface this by saying that Sue might go down as one of (if not the most) underrated runners of the great era of Can female dist runners (egs Lynn Williams/Kanuka, Brit McRoberts/Townsend, Angela Chalmers, etc...). She was a fantastic runner (18th in 85 WXC, the Can 10000m record and 2 x Olympian) and her results sometimes seem to get lost when great Canadian runners are mentioned. Being a student of the sport (even at a younger age) I knew who Sue (amongst many others of her time) was and what she had done, but I never expected she would know who I was... or at least know my name. As a young athlete I had one big breakthrough year, but then unfortunately had an injury (turned out it was stress fracture). As I was coming out of an appt with the Dr I bumped into Sue on her way in. Now recognize I had done nothing before that year, and when I saw Sue she actually knew my name. I was flabbergasted when she even took the time to ask me what I was doing there. Now I am no Sue Lee, but I also know that I have done enough in this sport that I at least some semblance of a positive (I hope) reputation in Canada. Forever, Sue knowing my name would have an indelible impact on how I approached young athletes and anyone who I ever came across....
All of the above have left an impression on me in some way. I doubt that any of the would see themselves in that way I may have mentioned, but to all of them I owe a debt of gratitude. There are many others who have impacted me (In fact those have inspired the most aren't even what one might call great athletes unless you call a 1:51 800m runner great....but that's for another post) in some way because of their athletics accomplishments, but mostly because of who they are as people.
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Base Building....
As I begin the process again (in earnest this week) I find myself thinking more about what type of training to do. It's not that i don't know what to do, but more along the lines of since I am in that sort of mode, it's what dominates my running thoughts. In this case base building.
If there's one area of training that I am most concerned about in training it's a good aerobic buildup. This of course would be more so due to my training according to a more intensity oriented model as a younger athlete vs what I did as an older athlete.
As a younger athlete the trend of the time was the Seb Coe/Joaquim Cruz model of base building (or at least that was how things were interpreted by many coaches and athletics bodies of the time). it's also the one thing that I still find some coaches doing (or not doing) that frustrates me today. It's do hard workouts and get fit fast, as opposed to taking more patient approach. I find that athletes certainly get fit fast, but they also lose their sharpness just as quick and also fail to show long term development as athletes.
Base building is the one area of Arthur Lydiard's training concepts that I firmly believe in (although as I'll explain I don't follow him to a tee). Lydiard was accused of just doing long slow runs, but this is untrue and unfair. After living in New Zealand for almost a year I can tell you that his annual Sunday long run was in fact more a long run fartlek, and if you have read enough about Lydiard's athletes and his books you'll also see that he did other types of training besides easier aerobic runs. In fact Lydiard advocated things like 10km runs at 3/4 pace, or as is better termed 'tempo' pace. In fact when I lived there we did a lot of the stuff that Arch Jelley (John Walker's coach...since i was often training with a guy who had been trained under Jelley this shouldn't have come as a surprise) such as 4-6 mile tempos and a fartlek style 9-10 miler called the X Games (so called because you ran it during Auckland's rush hour and had to dodge cars, take chances thru red lights, etc...) to get a fast time. In fact the X games had a Sat morning record, when the traffic was light vs a 5 o'clock X games record when the traffic was heavy.
But as with all things Lydiard's ideas have also been tweaked over time. Although the original idea of taking a specific amount of time to get in easier levels of aerobic runs in it has still taken on a more efficient level of base building. So what then does a base building week look like....well IMHO it depends on the strengths and weaknesses of the athlete. But this is also the reason why I don't believe in one specific model. In fact I take a handful of approaches to create a system that still stays true to Lydiard (see this great article by Lorraine Moeller http://www.runningtimes.com/Article.aspx?ArticleID=18121) and works in a little bit of everything so that 1) you never just work on your weakness or strengths and 2) still make an aerobic security blanket.
Anyone who has been around me for long runs knows that I base much of my training beliefs on the methodology of running and personal experiences vs science. Not to say I don't consider science, but that I use science to explain my experiences and methodology as opposed to the other way around. In that respects I tend to focus on a handful of approaches and that being a handful of great coaches and athletes. Those of course, as anyone who runs with me, are well known such as Marty Liquori, Harry Wilson, Ron Daws, Lydiard, Joe Vigil, Chris Wardlaw, Pat Clohessy, Alan Storey/Nic Bideau, Vin Lananna, among others. What I've done over the years is simply take out the 'individual' ideas of these people and instead focus on the 'consistencies' (that is also how I approach my training in general). In that respects I think I have come to understand 'what it takes' as well as anyone. In the end it really isn't rocket science.
So what does it look like...well here would be some ideas... (and recognize that one has to work up to some of this over time...and by time I don't mean days, weeks or months):
1) some semblance of speed needs to be done, although this doesn't mean hard intervals...to the contrary stay away from hard intervals with lots of recovery
2) high end aerobic work is very effective
3) lower order aerobic activity is key, but no the end all to be all
4) aerobic development occurs quicker than muscular development so don't be surprise if your fitness allows you to go long, but not fast......don't worry it will happen, just not quickly......give it a few months
5) two peaks, therefore two buildups, have been shown to be the best way to reach optimal results....IMHO trying to train all yr round without a proper buildup is running suicide
Mon: 50-70mins
Tues: easy longer interval reps done a at high order tempo pace (egs 4-5 x 2kms or 6min off 1-2mins), or aerobic fartlek (see def'n on the next Tues)
Wed: 50-70mins
Thurs: 90mins but pick it up the last 20-30mins or do it on hilly terrain to make it more fartlek oriented.....in other words harder than an easy run, but not like a real workout
Fri" 40-50min really easy
Sat: tempo run 20-50mins
Sunday Long run 90+min
Mon: 50-70min
Tues: Aerobic fartlek 15 up to 45 mins, but make sure that the hardest stuff is below tempo pace…or in other words is aerobic. In general I use a handful of concepts from 3min harder-2min easier, 1-2-3-2-1 mins off 1min, hill fartleks or some sort of longer tempo/fartlek
Wed: 80- 90mins
Thurs: short fartlek or hills (egs monofartlek 20min or less)..the only thing i would say to do more intense than aerobic
Fri: 40mins really easy
Sat: tempo run
Sunday: long run 90+ mins
Throw in some short sprint/form work to keep up the mechanics and voila there it is....
Repeat twice, but on the second week of the second repeat cycle tone it down with no mid week long run or throw out the short fartlek.
Now this doesn't mean this is exactly how you should do it. Some people like to do two slightly harder workouts than I might do (egs long slow intervals/tempo/hills and tempo and a long run).....then so be it. The only reason I put in the shorter fartlek is because I am more a 'speed runner' and like the feel and motivation of doing some slightly shorter/speedier stuff. The key is simply to not do much in the way of harder sessions (egs 3-5km pace) and longer easier sessions.
There many other way to go (I've always liked the 'complex system' of Clohessy/Wardlaw...see more at http://www.sport.monash.edu.au/assets/docs/chris-wardlaws-training-program.pdf, and Bill Squires of long run fartlek style runs mixed in with some hills and tempo runs), but in all honesty it really doesn't matter as long as you mix up a few concepts, don't be in a rush and don't do anything super intense (egs I find I sometimes do variations of long reps like 3mins off 1min one week and 6mins off 2mins the next later in my buildups).
If there's one area of training that I am most concerned about in training it's a good aerobic buildup. This of course would be more so due to my training according to a more intensity oriented model as a younger athlete vs what I did as an older athlete.
As a younger athlete the trend of the time was the Seb Coe/Joaquim Cruz model of base building (or at least that was how things were interpreted by many coaches and athletics bodies of the time). it's also the one thing that I still find some coaches doing (or not doing) that frustrates me today. It's do hard workouts and get fit fast, as opposed to taking more patient approach. I find that athletes certainly get fit fast, but they also lose their sharpness just as quick and also fail to show long term development as athletes.
Base building is the one area of Arthur Lydiard's training concepts that I firmly believe in (although as I'll explain I don't follow him to a tee). Lydiard was accused of just doing long slow runs, but this is untrue and unfair. After living in New Zealand for almost a year I can tell you that his annual Sunday long run was in fact more a long run fartlek, and if you have read enough about Lydiard's athletes and his books you'll also see that he did other types of training besides easier aerobic runs. In fact Lydiard advocated things like 10km runs at 3/4 pace, or as is better termed 'tempo' pace. In fact when I lived there we did a lot of the stuff that Arch Jelley (John Walker's coach...since i was often training with a guy who had been trained under Jelley this shouldn't have come as a surprise) such as 4-6 mile tempos and a fartlek style 9-10 miler called the X Games (so called because you ran it during Auckland's rush hour and had to dodge cars, take chances thru red lights, etc...) to get a fast time. In fact the X games had a Sat morning record, when the traffic was light vs a 5 o'clock X games record when the traffic was heavy.
But as with all things Lydiard's ideas have also been tweaked over time. Although the original idea of taking a specific amount of time to get in easier levels of aerobic runs in it has still taken on a more efficient level of base building. So what then does a base building week look like....well IMHO it depends on the strengths and weaknesses of the athlete. But this is also the reason why I don't believe in one specific model. In fact I take a handful of approaches to create a system that still stays true to Lydiard (see this great article by Lorraine Moeller http://www.runningtimes.com/Article.aspx?ArticleID=18121) and works in a little bit of everything so that 1) you never just work on your weakness or strengths and 2) still make an aerobic security blanket.
Anyone who has been around me for long runs knows that I base much of my training beliefs on the methodology of running and personal experiences vs science. Not to say I don't consider science, but that I use science to explain my experiences and methodology as opposed to the other way around. In that respects I tend to focus on a handful of approaches and that being a handful of great coaches and athletes. Those of course, as anyone who runs with me, are well known such as Marty Liquori, Harry Wilson, Ron Daws, Lydiard, Joe Vigil, Chris Wardlaw, Pat Clohessy, Alan Storey/Nic Bideau, Vin Lananna, among others. What I've done over the years is simply take out the 'individual' ideas of these people and instead focus on the 'consistencies' (that is also how I approach my training in general). In that respects I think I have come to understand 'what it takes' as well as anyone. In the end it really isn't rocket science.
So what does it look like...well here would be some ideas... (and recognize that one has to work up to some of this over time...and by time I don't mean days, weeks or months):
1) some semblance of speed needs to be done, although this doesn't mean hard intervals...to the contrary stay away from hard intervals with lots of recovery
2) high end aerobic work is very effective
3) lower order aerobic activity is key, but no the end all to be all
4) aerobic development occurs quicker than muscular development so don't be surprise if your fitness allows you to go long, but not fast......don't worry it will happen, just not quickly......give it a few months
5) two peaks, therefore two buildups, have been shown to be the best way to reach optimal results....IMHO trying to train all yr round without a proper buildup is running suicide
Mon: 50-70mins
Tues: easy longer interval reps done a at high order tempo pace (egs 4-5 x 2kms or 6min off 1-2mins), or aerobic fartlek (see def'n on the next Tues)
Wed: 50-70mins
Thurs: 90mins but pick it up the last 20-30mins or do it on hilly terrain to make it more fartlek oriented.....in other words harder than an easy run, but not like a real workout
Fri" 40-50min really easy
Sat: tempo run 20-50mins
Sunday Long run 90+min
Mon: 50-70min
Tues: Aerobic fartlek 15 up to 45 mins, but make sure that the hardest stuff is below tempo pace…or in other words is aerobic. In general I use a handful of concepts from 3min harder-2min easier, 1-2-3-2-1 mins off 1min, hill fartleks or some sort of longer tempo/fartlek
Wed: 80- 90mins
Thurs: short fartlek or hills (egs monofartlek 20min or less)..the only thing i would say to do more intense than aerobic
Fri: 40mins really easy
Sat: tempo run
Sunday: long run 90+ mins
Throw in some short sprint/form work to keep up the mechanics and voila there it is....
Repeat twice, but on the second week of the second repeat cycle tone it down with no mid week long run or throw out the short fartlek.
Now this doesn't mean this is exactly how you should do it. Some people like to do two slightly harder workouts than I might do (egs long slow intervals/tempo/hills and tempo and a long run).....then so be it. The only reason I put in the shorter fartlek is because I am more a 'speed runner' and like the feel and motivation of doing some slightly shorter/speedier stuff. The key is simply to not do much in the way of harder sessions (egs 3-5km pace) and longer easier sessions.
There many other way to go (I've always liked the 'complex system' of Clohessy/Wardlaw...see more at http://www.sport.monash.edu.au/assets/docs/chris-wardlaws-training-program.pdf, and Bill Squires of long run fartlek style runs mixed in with some hills and tempo runs), but in all honesty it really doesn't matter as long as you mix up a few concepts, don't be in a rush and don't do anything super intense (egs I find I sometimes do variations of long reps like 3mins off 1min one week and 6mins off 2mins the next later in my buildups).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
