Long runs - fast?

[Mandovark]

I've been doing steady mileage exclusively all year because I'm trying to build a big base before doing speed/hill sessions as per Lydiard.

The LSR debate is a strange one because when you read Lydiard, who was supposedly responsible for this theory, he encourages runners to run at their best aerobic effort depending how they feel definitely not slowly.

I think the LSR idea probably comes from the ways in which Lydiard's methods were popularised for non-elite runners. When Lydiard was coaching international-quality athletes, he would have them running 100 miles per week or more. When you're running that kind of mileage, there's a natural moderation of speed - you can't go hard on every run and recover in time for the next day, so you fall into a steady aerobic pace.

When Lydiard's ideas were passed on to novice runners who were doing much lower mileages, they didn't have the natural regulation of speed that comes with heavy training. If you're doing, say, 3 miles 3 times per week, then you can get away with running hard every time. I think that most beginners tend to run too hard (I know I did). When I've run with novice runners, who I've been trying to help into the sport, I've often had to tell them to slow down, because they're running too hard relative to their own fitness level. Beginner runners need to learn that running "slowly" (as it feels to them) is ok. As experience and fitness increase, then you can learn to use different paces more effectively.

I guess what I'm saying is that "slow" running is a useful way of thinking for inexperienced runners. For the more experienced, "steady" is a better word.

Interestingly, Lydiard did recommend slow running to his elite athletes, but only as a supplement to their main diet of steady aerobic running. He believed that slow runs brought extra benefits in endurance and aerobic conditioning as well as helping the athlete to recover from the main training. For what it's worth, I think he got that about right.

[stumpy]

Alexandra

There is a sure fire way of increasing your speed for a half marathon, leaving out all the discussion of how fast your long runs should be!

My biggest improvement for half marathon came very soon after introducing just one tempo run a week into my training, By tempo run I mean a warmup of 1-2 miles followed by 3-6 miles of faster paced running. This should feel as hard as you feel you can comfortably maintain (forget the HRM) and should approach the pace you want to do your HM in. It's not the most pleasant session of the week, but a means to an end! At first, you may want to split this into 3 x 1mile with 90 sec recovery in between, but this can be a faff if you just want to run! Personally, I just built up from 2 to 5 miles, and saw my HM time drop hugely without changing anything else in my training, except adding a few mile to my long run for endurance!!

You will see a real improvement after just 3 of these weekly sessions, but obviosuly the longer you continue them the better.

Twister has given the best advice if you want the icing on the cake with your long run. By gradually increasing pace through this run you'll find you will be able to maintain a more consistent pace in the race without fading so much toward the end.

[Jimmy]

From what I've been reading recently about endurance training, it sounds like lots of the advice being given here is wrong.
It seems that "No Man's Land" medium-level (of lactate threshhold) training is pretty useless for your long runs.
The optimum type of training is apparently lots of VERY slow distance running, at a "conversational" pace, mixed with VERY hard, short (no more than an hour) maximal sessions (probably only once a week of this for mortals).
Tons of evidence that this really works, and all the elite athletes have known this for years.
I'm finding it really hard to adjust to the long sloooooow though, as it instinctively feels as though I'm slacking. This is apparently a common reaction & must be resisted! hence the usefulness of heart rate monitors. (not that I've got one yet...or a Garmin )

[Jimmy]

Quote from Fred Matheny (a well respected cycling coach): " No Man's Land" (NML) workouts provide a kinaesthetic sense of working hard but expose the rider to too much stress per unit gain. Instead most base training should be guilt-producingly easy, and the top-end, high intensity training (HIT) should be very mentally hard, not sort of hard".
I have spoken to a few elite fell-runners who follow exactly this programme. It's really hard to keep the slow pace though!

[Mandovark]

From what I've been reading recently about endurance training, it sounds like lots of the advice being given here is wrong.
It seems that "No Man's Land" medium-level (of lactate threshhold) training is pretty useless for your long runs.
The optimum type of training is apparently lots of VERY slow distance running, at a "conversational" pace, mixed with VERY hard, short (no more than an hour) maximal sessions (probably only once a week of this for mortals).
Tons of evidence that this really works, and all the elite athletes have known this for years.
I'm finding it really hard to adjust to the long sloooooow though, as it instinctively feels as though I'm slacking. This is apparently a common reaction & must be resisted! hence the usefulness of heart rate monitors. (not that I've got one yet...or a Garmin )

Jimmy - it would be useful to know what it is that you've been reading, as I'm not aware of any elite athletes or top-level coaches recommending slow (rather than steady) running for anything other than recovery runs. Most elite-level training plans that I've seen are very similar to Lydiard's method of periodised training, within large volumes of steady mileage and easy recovery runs in the early months, followed by lower volumes and higher intensity work during the sharpening phase. I'm very happy to be corrected on this, but as yet I haven't seen top-level athletes using slow runs as major components of their training.

I wonder whether you're misreading the advice that we're giving here - you mention conversation pace, but a well-trained athlete should be perfectly capable of holding a conversation while running at what we're calling steady pace. Slow running would be another level below that: the kind of easy jogging where your breathing is barely above normal.

[Jimmy]

Hi there Mandovark, sorry I'm not able to post any links yet as I'm (still) a Luddite numpty with these computer thingies! I'll try to get it sorted asap.
I think I'm actually agreeing with you, and "steady" is the slow I'm talking about i.e. nowhere near the medium, semi-hard level that lots of the other posters seem to be advocating for the majority of their long runs.

[ZootHornRollo]

yeah I think we're all just 'getting our zones mixed up' here ....

but Jimmy's point is interesting: in that most people probably do neither of those two extremes very much, most people most of the time do medium length runs at medium-level intensity (like, zone 3).

[john doe]

Article in AW on tempo runs.http://www.athleticsweekly.com/coach...ing-the-tempo/

[Mandovark]

Hi there Mandovark, sorry I'm not able to post any links yet as I'm (still) a Luddite numpty with these computer thingies! I'll try to get it sorted asap.
I think I'm actually agreeing with you, and "steady" is the slow I'm talking about i.e. nowhere near the medium, semi-hard level that lots of the other posters seem to be advocating for the majority of their long runs.

Right, I thought we might turn out to be having a heated agreement

I've always aimed to do long runs at a comfortable pace, especially when I'm in a base training phase (which is most of the time, these days!). Sometimes, I've found it useful to go a bit harder for the last few miles of a long run, to get the body used to running hard when tired. I'd only do this when I'm confident that I'm fit enough to handle it.

I've always tried to follow some advice that a friend on another forum posted a few years ago. He said that if you want to race a marathon, you should be able to run one - slowly - at any time during your training. I'm not really into running road marathons anymore, but I think the principle still holds: if you want to race over long distances, you need to build your endurance to the point where running the distance isn't a problem and you can concentrate on running it fast. I think that's what lots of steady mileage and steady long runs give you.

[Jimmy]

Sounds good to me Mandovark! I'm just really surprised to read this training stuff, and realize that all these years of medium-hard running (by my own mediocre standards) is actually, if not exactly "bad", then certainly not "optimising" at all, even though it makes you feel good! To use one of my un-favourite words...counterintuitive.