Running Science

by Owen Anderson

  Speed Training at 5K Pace

  While adhering to the speed-training rules regarding work-interval length and recovery duration, an excellent speed-training session at 5K pace would incorporate 1,200-meter (.75 mi) work intervals at 5K speed with recoveries lasting for about 75 to 80 percent of the work-interval time duration.

  The 5K-paced workout creation is straightforward. Take the case of a runner who is completing 5K races in about 19 minutes. Since there are 12.5 400-meter segments within a 5K, this runner’s average time per 400 meters is 19/12.5 = 1.52 minutes, or 91 seconds. There are three 400-meter segments in a 1,200-meter work interval, so goal time for each 1,200-meter interval would be 3 × 91 = 273 seconds, or 4:33.

  In the case of 5K-paced speed training with recovery-interval duration initially set at about 75 to 80 percent of work-interval length, recovery would be about 3:30. The workout can be toughened by gradually paring time from each recovery—first to 3:00, then to 2:30, and so on—with about 90 seconds being the ultimate goal duration for recovery.

  Like 10K pace, 5K tempo can be easily estimated from other race distances. For mortal runners, 5K pace is about 4 seconds per 400 faster than 10K speed, 8 seconds per 400 faster than half-marathon speed, and 12 seconds per 400 quicker than marathon speed.1 This time correspondence is closer to 2.5 to 3 seconds per 400 for elite runners.

  The 5K-paced speed workout is thus easy to implement. For the hypothetical 19-minute 5K runner described earlier, the workout would consist of the SWU, three to four 1,200-meter work intervals in about 4:33, with easy-paced recoveries of about 3:30 after each 1,200 meters, a cool-down at the end, and then stretching. This kind of session improves running economy and performance variables at current 5K speed, and thus represents a solid platform for moving up to faster 5Ks.

  Speed Training at 3K Pace

  Although the 3K distance is less commonly raced, training at 3K pace offers a number of advantages for distance runners. Compared with training at a 10K or 5K pace, 3K work heightens workout intensity and thus provokes greater positive physiological adaptations. For the runner accustomed to working at 5K and 10K intensities, 3K training is also a powerful prelude to maximal-speed training.

  The 3K pace is easy to estimate from 5K race times since 3K speed will be about 3 seconds per 400 meters faster than 5K speed for most athletes. If a runner is averaging 18 minutes for his or her 5Ks, the 400-meter tempo for the 5K is 18/12.5 = 1.44 minutes, or 86 seconds. The resulting 3K pace would then be 86 − 3 = 83 seconds per 400 meters.

  Continuing to employ the speed-training principles of work-interval length and recovery duration leads to a 3K-based session incorporating 800-meter work intervals with recoveries of equal duration. For our hypothetical runner with 18-minute 5Ks, this means that each 800-meter interval would be completed in about 2 × 83 = 166 seconds, or 2:46.

  The 3K-paced workout could be constructed as follows: SWU, about four 800s in 2:46 each, 2:46 easy-paced recoveries, a cool-down, and then stretching. The workout can be increased in difficulty over time by adding additional 800-meter work intervals or decreasing the durations of the recovery periods.

  Speed Training at 1,500-Meter Pace

  Because of its high intensity, speed training at a 1,500-meter pace is a great bridge to maximal-speed training. Thus, endurance runners should avoid the common tendency to ignore training at a 1,500-meter pace in favor of intervals at a 5K pace. A great plan is to employ 400-meter work intervals with recovery intervals as long in duration as the work intervals or slightly longer. Intervals at a 1,500-meter pace are about 7 seconds per 400 meters faster than 5K-paced work intervals and competitions.

  Take the case of a runner completing 5Ks in about 21 minutes, which is a tempo of 21/12.5 = 1.68 minutes, or 100 seconds per 400 meters. The 1,500-meter pace would be 7 seconds faster, or 93 seconds per 400.

  The basic workout at a 1,500-meter pace would then be SWU, eight 400s in 93 seconds each, 93- to 120-second jog recoveries, cool-down, and stretching. The session can be upgraded in difficulty by adding more 400s or shortening the recovery durations.

  Speed Training at 800-Meter Pace

  Endurance runners should include highly intense intervals at an 800-meter pace in their training programs even if they simply want to run marathons. The high quality of this training means that it is a powerful producer of overall fitness, creating marked improvements in running economy and vO2max. Compared with the other speed workouts, 800-meter sessions represent the best door opener to maximal-speed training. Heightened maximal speed improves paces at all race distances, including the marathon.

  As is the case with the other types of speed training, the actual workouts are easy to create. An 800-meter pace is about 10 to 11 seconds faster per 400 than a 5K pace. If a runner completes 5Ks in about 17 minutes, that is a tempo of 17/12.5 = 1.36 minutes, or 82 seconds per 400. The resulting 800-meter pace would thus be around 72 seconds per 400.

  By following the speed-training principles of work-interval length and recovery duration, the workout would be SWU, 12 × 200-meter intervals in 36 seconds (half of 72) each, about 1-minute recoveries, cool-down, and stretching. As always, the session can be toughened by increasing the number of work intervals or shortening the recovery periods.

  Putting It All Together

  Tables 16.1 to 16.3 summarize speed training based on race paces for runners of three ability levels. Table 16.1 is for the 50-minute 10K runner (~24:10 for 5K), table 16.2 is for the 40-minute 10K runner (~ 19:10 for 5K), and table 16.3 is for the 30-minute 10K competitor (~14:10 for 5K).

  Fartlek Training

  Fartlek means speed play in Swedish, and fartlek training was developed by Swedish coach Gosta Holmer in the 1930s in an attempt to wrestle world cross-country running supremacy away from Finland, Sweden’s chief rival. Holmer was well aware that Swedish distance runners needed greater speed to succeed in endurance competition, and his fartlek workouts featured running at speeds faster than race pace.

  Classic fartlek sessions have four key features. First, they last about 45 minutes, not counting warm-up and cool-down. The number 45 is interesting because many elite Kenyans structure their quality workouts to take exactly this amount of time, not including warm-up and cool-down.

  Second, during the approximately 45 minutes of fartlek, quick yet relaxed running is spontaneously alternated with easy recoveries. There is no set duration for the quality segments; an athlete adjusts the durations of quality running according to how he or she feels. Practically, the quality components usually last from 1 to 5 minutes but vary within the workout; an athlete usually does not know how long a quality segment will last and simply continues until a break is needed. Easy-running recoveries are often 1 to 2 minutes in duration, continuing only until a runner is ready to run powerfully again.3

  Third, the quick segments of a fartlek session are often completed at faster than race pace in order to enhance speed development. No specific speed is targeted—after all, the workout involves speed play. The intense segments should simply feel faster than race tempo. Fourth, within the quality sections, there are spontaneously created superfast runs at close to maximal speed. Often, these spiked bursts last for 10 to 100 meters or so, after which the fast-pace effort is resumed. This spiking enhances the development of speed and increases the capacity to surge within competitions.

  Fartlek training has not been rigorously studied in scientific research, but it’s easy to see that the fartlek scheme is beneficial psychologically for the mentally stale endurance runner who has been locked into a rigid program of timed intervals and strictly specified running paces. Fartlek work involves top velocities, high rates of oxygen consumption, high lactate levels—and improved coordination because the sessions are often completed over somewhat uneven terrain. Thus, fartlek training should advance O2max, vO2max, lactate-threshold velocity, running economy, and maximal speed.

  Holmer’s fartlek training has been credited with the development of two great Swedish r
unners who dominated international 1,500-meter and mile racing in the early 1940s: Arne Andersson and Gunder Häagg. Each athlete set three world records in the mile, and Hägg’s excellent 4:01.4 remained the world mark from 1945 until 1954.

  Kenyan-Style Fartlek Training

  The type of fartlek training commonly carried out by elite Kenyan runners has several things in common with traditional fartlek work: a 45- to 50-minute duration, the frequent use of fast training speeds, and variation in pace within a session. However, work- and recovery-interval lengths in Kenyan fartlek workouts are highly structured. Although called fartlek training by elite runners throughout western Kenya, the workout is more like a classic interval session with well-defined work intervals and recoveries. However, physiological and performance gains associated with Kenyan fartlek training should be similar to those achieved through traditional fartlek work.

  Kenyan fartlek training is usually carried out by a group of runners working together, and it operates as follows: After a warm-up, group members run fast for 1 minute, after which there is 1 minute of easier-paced running. This pattern is often continued until 25 challenging 1-minute work intervals and 25 recoveries have been completed, followed by a brief cool-down plus stretching and drills. Occasionally, elite Kenyans will use a 2:1 pattern, with two minutes at a faster pace and one minute at a slower pace. In this case there are 15 to 16 two-minute work intervals per session instead of 25.

  The pace for the one-minute work intervals can vary dramatically between sessions depending on desired goals and prior training. Sometimes, a 10K-like pace is emphasized, but on other occasions considerably higher speeds may be used. For recovery fartlek sessions, which may be held after a couple of days of hard training, the pace may even be as slow as half-marathon tempo. Pace also varies within workouts: In fartlek fashion, individual members of the group may suddenly and unexpectedly surge ahead during a work interval and then be closely followed by the other runners. The 1-minute work and recovery intervals are usually monitored by a coach or helper on a motorcycle or in an accompanying car—with the sound of the horn blowing every 60 seconds calling for the change from fast to slow, or vice-versa.

  Variable-Pace Speed Training

  Variable-pace (VP) speed training involves the use of two important quality speeds within a training session’s work intervals, not the usual one speed per interval, with no break or recovery between the different tempos. VP workouts can take many forms. A marathon runner, for example, might use 800-meter work intervals, with the first 400 at 5K pace and the second 400—launched with no recovery from the 5K running—at marathon tempo. A goal of this kind of VP session would be to enhance the ability to run at marathon intensity after within-race surges and in spite of mounting fatigue.

  A 5K runner can set up a VP workout to include 800s: the first 400 at 3K pace and the second 400 at 5K tempo with no break between 400s. This not only spikes the overall intensity of the workout but also augments a runner’s capacity to sustain 5K velocity and hit short blasts of high-speed running within 5K races.

  Longer VP intervals can be very productive. For example, a 10K runner might employ 1,600-meter (1 mi) work intervals, with the first 400 to 600 meters (.25-.37 mi) at 5K pace and the subsequent 1,000 to 1,200 meters (.63-.75 mi) at 10K intensity. A marathon runner could productively use 2,400-meter (1.5 mi) VP intervals, with the first 800 at 10K race pace and the following 1,600 meters at marathon tempo.

  Recovery periods between the VP work intervals are usually kept relatively short—never greater than the duration of the VP interval—as part of the overall effort to heighten fatigue resistance. For example, if a 10K runner set up a VP workout with 800-meter intervals, with the first 400 of the 800 at 5K pace (assume 80 seconds) and the second 400 of the 800 at 10K tempo (assume 84 seconds), the recovery running between the VP work intervals would never last longer than 80 + 84 = 164 seconds (2:44).

  VP speed training tends to be intense: Up to half of each work interval may be at faster than race speed. Thus, VP training promotes strong fatigue resistance at race pace and improves O2max, vO2max, lactate-threshold velocity, and running economy.

  vO2max Speed Training

  vO2max work is specifically designed to produce significant improvements in vO2max, a key predictor of running performance. It also has a strong impact on lactate-threshold velocity and running economy. See chapter 26 for a complete discussion of vO2max training.

  Incorporating Speed Work Into a Training Program

  Science does not provide applicable studies regarding the arrangement of speed workouts over time. Horwill suggests simply moving through the list, starting with the 10K-pace session, proceeding on to the 5K-pace session on the next quality-training day, then on to 3K-pace work, and so on.1 Once the five different speed-workout types are completed, the runner then goes back to the beginning session and repeats the sequence once more. This is the five-tiered system of training developed by Horwill and used by such great athletes as Sebastian Coe, Säid Aouita, and Noah Ngeny.

  A problem with Horwill’s system is that it leaves out other valuable forms of speed training, including fartlek sessions, VP efforts, and vO2max training. However, Horwill’s training system can be inserted into an overall program at any appropriate point; it is not necessary to relentlessly follow the 10K through 800-meter scheme. A key goal in any training program is variation. With variation as a guiding factor, a great balance for a 10K-paced session with 2K work intervals would be intervals at 800-meter race pace, traditional fartlek running, Kenyan fartlek training, or vO2max work on a subsequent quality training day.

  Naturally, the specifics of each workout type would change as running capacity improves. For example, achieving a personal record in the 5K would produce upswings in tempo for all other speed sessions since all of the velocities are related. One would not have to wait for a 10K personal record to adjust 10K-tempo training; the 10K workout pace would be adjusted based on the 5K personal record to 4 seconds per 400 slower, even if that is faster than current 10K time. Using the principle of variation is quite logical and attractive. For example, conducting workouts at 800-meter pace, either in an 800-meter workout or a fartlek session, fosters faster running and heightened physiological adaptations per minute of quality training; completing sessions at 10K speed focuses on a slower pace but nonetheless enhances the runner’s ability to sustain quality running, not to mention the capacity to compete well in 10Ks. The in-between sessions (i.e., paced for 1,500-meters, 3K, and 5K) provide valuable benefits that are intermediate between these two ends of the spectrum with less speed but longer durations of work intervals as the runner moves up the scale.

  Conclusion

  Speed training is an essential component of a runner’s overall training program. Speed work produces advances in O2max, vO2max, running economy, lactate-threshold velocity, and fatigue resistance. It provides an excellent platform from which a runner can progress to large gains in maximal running velocity. When carrying out speed training, variation is extremely important; a runner should not carry out speed sessions at one velocity, week after week. Rather, an array of intensities, covering the range of velocities from 800-meter to 10-K race pace, will produce the greatest advancements in fitness and performance.

  Chapter 17

  Cross-Training

  Anecdotal evidence and logic suggest that cross-training is not beneficial for endurance runners. The movements involved in cross-training are seldom specific to the kinematics of running and thus should have little impact on the production of propulsive force during gait. Nonetheless, cross-training remains a popular practice among endurance runners. Should runners engage in regular cross training, or do they gain the most by focusing solely on running?

  Scientific research suggests that certain forms of cross-training can be highly beneficial to runners. Strength training, cycling, and playing soccer appear to be particularly advantageous, with aqua running and stair climbing also offering some benefits. Other forms o
f cardio workouts can also benefit runners. This chapter examines all these ways to cross-train.

  Intense cross-training sessions produce extremely high rates of oxygen consumption and high lactate levels in the blood, physiological responses that can ultimately lead to improvements in maximal aerobic capacity (O2max) and lactate-threshold velocity. Cross-training may decrease the risk of running-related injury by strengthening the leg muscles and core and by diverting a runner away from a relentless diet of daily leg pounding on the roads.

  Cross-training could also improve leanness by expanding the number of calories burned during exercise per week and heightening average workout intensity because fitting a demanding bicycle workout into an already-full running program is easier than adding another tough running session. A running session produces more muscle damage and thus creates a greater need for recovery. Furthermore, the strengthening that results from running-specific resistance work with movements that mimic the mechanics of running should enhance running economy and promote resistance to fatigue.