Paavo Nurmi’s (lead runner) intense training schedule prepared him to set 22 official work records.
DPA/Action Plus/Icon SMI
Each evening, Nurmi bolted 4,000 to 7,000 meters (2.49-4.35 mi) across the hilly countryside, punishing himself at the end of each effort by running at close to maximal speed. His training day ended with four to five lightning-quick sprints. Three weeks before the Paris Olympics in 1924, Nurmi set a 1,500-meter world record of 3:52.6 but was angry at himself for not running at least 2 seconds faster. Forty minutes later on the same evening, Nurmi rolled through 3 miles (4.83 km) in 14:02 and 5K in 14:28.2, both world bests at the time. The amazing Finn had broken three world records in one evening of running!
Gunder Hägg
Swedish runners dominated the world of distance running in the late 1930s and early 1940s, and a Swedish runner named Gunder Hägg became the best competitor in the world at both the mile and 1,500 meters. He employed a new form of training that has retained its popularity even today. Instead of running at a relatively even velocity, Hägg constantly varied his training pace, alternating blasts of speedy running with easy coasting along the forest trails of central Sweden. Coached by the inventor of fartlek training, Gosta Holmer, Hägg also scrambled up hills at full speed, running easily on the descents. During the day, Hägg worked as a tree trimmer, but he usually found time to fartlek his way through two daily 5K rambles, each requiring about 20 total minutes.
The steady diet of fartlek running permitted Hägg to enhance his natural speed and economize his running form, so much so that the Swede blazed his way to 10 new world records over seven distances (the mile, 2 miles, 3 miles, 2K, 3K, 4K, and 5K) during 1942 alone, one of the most amazing competitive-running accomplishments of all time. The world records included a 4:04.6 mile and a 3:45.8 clocking for 1,500 meters. Hägg’s success meant that fartlek training had arrived as a performance-enhancing workout for middle-distance competitions.
A Workout From Herb Elliott’s Training Plan
A workout employed by the great miler and 1,500-meter runner Herb Elliott can also be productive for middle-distance runners. In this session, high-speed 1-minute bursts at close to top speed are alternated with 3 minutes of steady but moderate pacing for a total of about 44 minutes. This workout will develop greater speed and should also produce a heightened ability to run fast while tired—important for mile and 1,500-meter racing—without overly traumatizing the legs. The session promotes the development of a higher lactate-threshold velocity since sizable quantities of lactate are generated during the 1-minute accelerations and then taken up and used by the leg muscles during the corresponding 3-minute floats. This workout is similar to the lactate-stacker session (chapter 32) except that the slightly longer recoveries (3 minutes instead of 2) permit a faster running pace.
Roger Bannister
In between the eras of Hägg and Elliott, another form of training arrived: the hard-repeat workouts favored by famed Hungarian runner Emil Zatopek. This kind of speed-building interval training was adopted by the British miler Roger Bannister, who used it to finish fourth in the 1,500-meter competition at the 1952 Olympics in Helsinki in spite of a low-volume training schedule. A typical Bannister workout would not look out of place in any modern miler’s log book: Sir Roger liked to run 10 quarter-mile (.4 km) intervals per workout at close to race pace, with about 2 minutes of recovery between each interval.
Early in 1954, Bannister was running each quarter in about 61 seconds, a pace that left him very disappointed. He knew that he would have to figure out some way to get a little faster if he wanted to break through the coveted 4-minute-mile barrier. Frustrated by his inability to improve, Bannister took a complete 3-day respite from running. When he returned to the track after this furlough, he found that he was suddenly able to run the same 10 quarters in 59 seconds each. Thus, the two cornerstones of Bannister’s training had been put in place: (1) 400-meter interval training at close to race speed and (2) periodic total rests to produce freshness, improve speed, and permit the body to adapt and recover. These two principles, race-specific training and enhancement of recovery, remain relevant today.
Roger Bannister is best known for breaking the 4-minute mile barrier.
PA Archive/Press Association Images
On May 6, 1954, after a complete 5-day break from running, Bannister spent his usual morning working at St. Mary’s Hospital, took the train to Oxford, and despite a gusting wind at 15 miles per hour, decided he was ready for the assault on the sub-4-minute mile. With two hares, or rabbit runners, helping him, Bannister passed through the first three quarters in 57.5, 1:58.2, and 3:00.5. Before 1,200 spectators, the outstanding English runner finished the race in 3:59.4 to become the first human to run a mile in under 4 minutes. Later that year, Bannister convincingly trounced Australia’s John Landy in what was called a “miracle mile” at Vancouver, British Columbia, a sweet victory since Landy had permitted Bannister’s world record to stand for only 6 weeks before running a 3:57.9 in Paavo Nurmi’s home town of Turku.
Landy was also interval trained, but he preferred to run 600-yard (.55 km) intervals in about 88 to 89 seconds each, a pace of about 59 seconds per quarter mile (.4 km). The Australian typically carried out 8 to 12 of these 600-yard runs per workout, with 4 minutes of slow jogging between each hard run. Landy was a true midnight rambler, doing most of his training around midnight after a hard day of studying. In addition to five interval workouts per week, Landy found time to hit about three weekly 7-mile (11 km) jaunts.
Bill Bowerman
A sound training scheme for the mile was developed by running coach Bill Bowerman at the University of Oregon. Bowerman experimented with the longer distances advocated by another famous coach, Arthur Lydiard, but eventually became a firm advocate of quality rather than quantity training. “My runners tended to get flat when they ran 90- to 100-mile weeks,” said Bowerman in an interview with the author of this book.4 During his tenure as the dean of collegiate coaches, the Oregon great guided 17 sub-4-minute milers, and a list of his runners reads like a true American Running Hall of Fame, with Steve Prefontaine, Kenny Moore, Jim Grelle, Jim Bailey, Wade Bell, Henry Marsh, Bob Williams, and Dyrol Burleson being just a few of the notable names on the listing.
Bowerman sculpted his athletes’ interval-training programs like a master craftsman, gradually increasing the intensity of interval workouts as a training season progressed. The Bowerman interval system revolved around the concepts of “date pace, goal pace, and three-quarters effort.” Goal pace was simply the tempo an athlete hoped to run for the mile before the season ended; date pace was the runner’s current speed for the mile. For example, if an athlete hoped to run a 4:04 mile but had recently been running 4:20 miles, the goal pace was 61 seconds per quarter mile (.4 km), and the date pace was 65 seconds per quarter.
Of course, date pace tended to change over the course of a training season. In order to properly determine date pace, Bowerman would have his runners participate in time trials every 14 days or so, during which the athletes would course through a mile using three-quarters effort. This worked as follows: If a runner had most recently completed a mile in 4:20, the date pace was 65 seconds per quarter, and Bowerman required the runner to scoot through the first three quarters of the new time trial by running at just 67 to 68 seconds per quarter, 2 to 3 seconds per quarter slower than actual date pace.
For the final 300 yards of the time trial, however, the runner would run as hard as possible (this overall time trial happens to be an excellent workout for the mile in its own right). If this final burst of speed permitted the runner to finish the time trial in less than 4:20, the runner had a new date pace that would be used for subsequent interval training. Bob Williams, who was an All-American steeplechaser under Bowerman’s tutelage, explained to the author of this book in a personal communication what he believes to be the key advantage of the time trials: “You learned to run really hard during the last 300 yards of the mile, where a
key part of the race takes place. Plus, your emotional perception of the time trial was of racing, even though the trial was actually slower (for the first three quarters) than race pace. As a result, you stayed really sharp mentally, and, since you were running slower than race pace and not overdoing it, you never ‘left it on the track’—you stayed fresh.”5
Bowerman believed that the basic interval distance for any runner should be about one-fourth of actual race distance, so his milers became well acquainted with quarter-mile intervals. Total interval distance per workout was usually 2.5 miles (10 quarters; 4 km). The classic Bowerman interval workout during the training season would be four quarter-mile intervals at date pace, four quarter-mile intervals at goal pace, and then four 200-meter (.12 mi) intervals at 800-meter goal pace. Closer to the most important competition of the season, the workout would change to only two quarter-mile intervals at date pace, six quarters at goal pace, and four 200s at 800-meter speed (note that the amount of time spent running at goal pace increased over the course of the season). Recovery times between work intervals also tended to diminish later in the season as the runners became more fit.
The Bowerman system has several positive things to offer the mile and 1,500-meter racer. Science indicates that running at date pace, goal pace, and 800-meter velocity all tend to enhance vO2max. In addition, such training increases both lactate-threshold velocity and maximal running speed. Date-pace running improves economy at current race speed, making it easier to move up to higher speeds during competitive situations. Finally, goal-pace effort makes a runner more economical at goal velocity, which makes it easier to step into and sustain goal speed during races. From a practical standpoint, the gradual increase in goal-pace running over the course of a season is a potent progression.
What advice did Bowerman have for the modern miler? “At the end of a workout, you should feel exhilarated, not exhausted,” said the man whose knowledge of running was inexhaustible. “Too many individuals simply run themselves into the ground and aren’t fresh enough to perform properly on race day. [Recall the experience of Roger Bannister, who optimized freshness in order to break the world record.] If you overwork, you won’t be excited about racing, and you may well be worse off than if you had underworked.”4
Frank Horwill
British coach Frank Horwill, who tutored five sub-4-minute milers, developed a series of excellent workouts for mile and 1,500-meter competitors.3 Among these are the following:
Run 2 × (1 × 400 + 1 × 800 + 1 × 400) at current mile pace with 30 seconds of rest after the 400, 60 seconds of recovery after the 800, and then 5 minutes of rest after the second 400 before the start of the second set. After the second set is completed, take another 5-minute rest and then run four 200-meter (.12 mi) intervals full out with adequate recovery in between (adequate recovery is defined as just enough time to allow a runner to produce maximal effort in the ensuing 200). The rest and recovery can consist of either walking or easy jogging. This workout will improve vO2max, lactate threshold, and economy at race pace. With the inclusion of the four 200-meter (.12 mi) intervals at the end, it also works to enhance maximal running speed.
Complete 1 × 500 meters (.31 mi) at current-best 800-meter pace and then 1 × 300 meters at the same speed with 2 minutes of rest between and 5 minutes of recovery following the 300. Immediately after the 5 minutes of recovery, do 2 × 400 meters at best 800-meter pace, with 1 minute of rest after the first 400 and 5 minutes of recovery after the second. Next, complete 3 × 200 meters (.12 mi) at 800-meter pace with 45-second recoveries. After yet another 5-minute break, complete 6 × 80 meters (262 ft) at top speed with enough recovery to permit all-out running during the next 80-meter (262 ft) interval. Science suggests that this session upgrades vO2max and lactate threshold and enhances economy at speeds faster than current mile pace, making it easier to move up to faster velocities in races. It also should improve maximal running speed.
Improving Running Economy
Science indicates that improving running economy at high speeds is crucial for upgrading mile and 1,500-meter performances.6 As outlined in Chapter 8, if runner A is more economical than runner B, A can move along a road or track with a lower rate of oxygen consumption and thus a reduced perceived effort compared with B when A and B are running at the same speed. Being economical also means that when A and B are using oxygen at the same rate during a race, A will be running faster than B.
The notion that economy is critical for mile and 1,500-meter success may be surprising to those who believe that economy is much more important for longer races like the marathon. The conventional argument is that great economy allows marathon runners to conserve intramuscular glycogen during the 26.2-mile event, giving them a huge advantage over less economical competitors. Such economy is not needed during a 4- to 5-minute mile, it is argued; what’s important during such a short exertion is actually the ability to maximize power—not the ability to be parsimonious with oxygen.
Some research has suggested that marathon-type runners, not milers, seem to have a stranglehold on running economy. The trouble with this research is that running economy has usually been measured at slow running speeds, sometimes even slower than marathon velocity, not at mile or even at 5K paces.7 Since an individual runner’s economy can vary greatly as a function of running speed (e.g., the runner can be very economical at slow speed and very uneconomical at high speed), it is fairly meaningless to determine a runner’s economy at less than race speed and imply that it would be similarly good or bad at faster tempos.
Coach and exercise physiologist Jack Daniels has measured the running economies of hundreds of runners and has unearthed the following fascination information:7
At marathon race pace, there is no difference in running economy between marathoners and 1,500-meter runners. So much for the argument that the marathon attracts the most economical runners!
At paces slower than marathon race pace, marathon runners are indeed more economical than 1,500-meter runners.
At 5K race pace and faster, 1,500-meter runners are significantly more economical than competitors specializing in longer distances. Thus, the development of enhanced economy at high speeds would appear to be an important factor for middle-distance success, that is, unless 1,500-meter runners are somehow born with great economy at 1,500-meter pace.
Improving running economy at fast speed is to a large extent a matter of improving running-specific strength and upgrading neuromuscular control and coordination at high velocities. Advancements in running-specific strength can be achieved through running-specific strength training (chapter 14). Augmenting neuromuscular control and coordination at high velocities can be attained through using high-quality training paces and explosive drills (chapters 11, 16, and 28).
Additional Training Strategies
Forms of training that are beneficial for 800-meter racing are also excellent for 1,500-meter and mile preparations. For example, super sets, lactate stackers, and greyhound sessions are valuable components of mile and 1,500-meter programs. Long intervals, hill repetitions, and short races also bolster one-mile and 1,500-meter competitiveness.
Superset Training
The superset training philosophy should be of benefit to mile and 1,500-meter runners. As mentioned in the discussion of 800-meter preparations (chapter 32), super sets are two or more work intervals with no intervening recovery—and with running speed decreasing from interval to interval. Super sets enhance a runner’s ability to sustain the desired pace when in a state of nearly insurmountable fatigue. A decent superset workout for a miler could proceed as follows:
After a thorough warm-up, run powerfully for 400 meters at 4 seconds per 400 faster than current mile or 1,500-meter race pace. Then, without any rest, settle into current mile race pace for 400 meters, concluding the first super set. Complete about three more of these super sets with 3- to 5-minute breaks in between. Over time, gradually increase the length of the second interval within the super set from 400 met
ers to 600 meters (.37 mi) and then 800 meters. A session like this will make current mile race pace much more tolerable and will upgrade vO2max, lactate threshold, and economy.
Longer Intervals
Long intervals—even as lengthy as 1,600 meters (.99 mi)—also have a place in preparations for the mile. A good long-interval session would involve covering 1,200 meters (.75 mi) at a pace about 4 to 6 seconds per 400 meters slower than current mile pace and then—without a break—taking off for 400 meters at goal race speed (i.e., about 3 to 4 seconds per 400 meters faster than current 1,500-meter or mile race tempo). Just two of these 1,600-meter intervals are satisfactory for a first workout with the eventual goal of doing three; 4- to 5-minute recoveries between the intervals seem to be optimal. This session should have a positive impact on vO2max, lactate threshold, and economy, and it will improve a middle-distance runner’s ability to blaze through the last lap of his or her race.
Hill Training
What about hill training for the mile? A somewhat sarcastic, highly accomplished miler once said, “When they put hills on the track, that’s when I will start doing some hill workouts.” While this is certainly a clever and humorous comment, it represents a very shortsighted view! The problem with this thinking is that hill training does a great job of improving running-specific strength, which can be the first step in improving running economy. It is also important to note that hill workouts tend to be high-intensity sessions, with lots of lactate produced and high rates of oxygen consumption attained. Thus, it is reasonable to think that hill training is good for vO2max and lactate-threshold velocity—and thus for 1,500-meter and mile racing.
Running Science Page 47