all posts post new thread

Other/Mixed Running Periodization

  • Thread starter Deleted member 5559
  • Start date
Other strength modalities (e.g., Clubs), mixed strength modalities (e.g., combined kettlebell and barbell), other goals (flexibility)
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)

Deleted member 5559

Guest
I have been curious about periodization and progressions for running. I have mostly been shown previously to keep pace the same and increase distance over time (i.e., more mileage or more intervals). However, I don't know what the volume increases should be week to week as a rule of thumb; I assume something like 5-10%. Alternatively, keeping time the same and increasing pace over time seems to align more to heart rate based tempo runs. Why don't I see more regarding increasing pace week to week more similar to strength training?
 
I have been curious about periodization and progressions for running. I have mostly been shown previously to keep pace the same and increase distance over time (i.e., more mileage or more intervals). However, I don't know what the volume increases should be week to week as a rule of thumb; I assume something like 5-10%. Alternatively, keeping time the same and increasing pace over time seems to align more to heart rate based tempo runs. Why don't I see more regarding increasing pace week to week more similar to strength training?
Well.... it depends a bit upon what you are running for (from:))
Running for health, recovery from other activity, training for running based races, training for other aerobic activities, enjoyment...?
And if training for races it depends on distance.
Lots of variables in the equation.
 
Not being a runner, I don't have any specific advice about running.

But isn't there a huge established knowledge base and a plethora of proven training programs and principles for running (for all different purposes and levels)?

You just have to go where the runners go (wherever that is).
 
Last edited:
Run training has been well established for many years. Like strength training, it’s based on manipulating volume and intensity. Also depends on goals, or what distance you’re training for. Compared to strength training, endurance training happens with higher frequency, higher volume, and more variety. There are long, easy days, harder interval days, tempo days, and short easy days. Most run training comes from the track, so training is based on pace. Runners that come from a multi sport background typically train like cyclists, using time and HR. Not much has changed, but when power meters get dialed in and available, run training will change a lot, again following cycling’s lead.

Jack Daniels’ Running Formula is a great resource for traditional run training.

No, not THAT Jack Daniels.:D
 
The reason I ask is because after reading Reload and then comparing it to 5/3/1, it occurred to me that none of my running books are as systematic of approaches. All the books I have about running are pretty vague about periodization and progression. To summarize them:
  1. do lots of slow base miles increasing mileage each week
  2. start adding tempo and intervals to the mix increasing mileage a little each week
Specifically, the tempo and interval work is what I want to program a little better. I have some good books but they focus a lot on the methods and not so much on progression.

What they do have is always pretty generic and doesn't account for individualization. For the 800m for example, it might say to do 5x200m, 3x300m, 2x200m which might be way too much volume or adding a third 200m the next week might be too much too soon depending on the individual.

Is Jack Daniels Running Formula more detailed?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I ordered Running Formula after a little google-fu. I think that is more of what I'm looking for. Based on some surface exploration of the calculators online, I took a stab at a progression calculator for myself that I can hopefully improve after I receive the book.

Running Progression Calculator
 
I’ve never trained that way. I come from a cycling and triathlon background, mostly off road. So I think exclusively in terms of heart rate and time. You establish the intensity you want to work at, and use either pace, HR, or power while training to ensure you’re on target. Progression is adding volume at the desired intensity over time. A classic cycling workout is to work on long intervals at lactate threshold. Using a field test to determine LT HR and or power, one then gradually increases the amount of time spent in that zone. So a workout of 3x8 min might over weeks become 3x15 min.

Daniels is a track coach, so everything is pace based. You use race times to find your VDOT, then use the calculator to find the correct paces for intervals.

But I’ve trained almost exclusively Maffetone style for years. Whenever I try to to do intensity and intervals I blow up. This summer I will try again using Sweet Spot training. Maybe this time . . .
 
I’ve never trained that way. I come from a cycling and triathlon background, mostly off road. So I think exclusively in terms of heart rate and time. You establish the intensity you want to work at, and use either pace, HR, or power while training to ensure you’re on target. Progression is adding volume at the desired intensity over time.
Me too; I have track and triathlon background. I have historically done what you said, increase time at HR/zone/watts or increase number of intervals. I'm seeing that I'm able to outwork myself (go faster than I should for longer than I should) without any noticeable indicators (fatigue, DOMS, etc.). I want something to throttle me back a bit for a more sustainable trajectory.
 
@Bro Mo, Jack Daniels gets a lot of what we did at Strong Endurance as it relates to running, at least in my opinion, and he's understood it for decades. I set a lifetime PR at 5k at age 45 because I took the advice from his book and ran with it (pun intended). He's very specific, e.g., train in this format at this pace. There is no continuum of paces as such - he hits what we now call zones, and he understands where, based on race performances, those zones lie for each person.

Most running programs, like most competitive lifting programs, work backwards from an event. Since the events vary quite widely in their distances, the programs vary quite a bit, too.

10% per week in overall increase is a solid number, but keep in mind that's not 10% in both distance and intensity.

-S-
 
I usually follow a simple template:

- One moderate run, between 45-60 minutes.

- One hard run, between 15-30 minutes. This may be hills, intervals, tempo run...

- One easy run, between 75-90 minutes. This is supposed to be really, really, really easy.
 
Jack Daniels gets a lot of what we did at Strong Endurance as it relates to running, at least in my opinion, and he's understood it for decades.
That's good to hear...I can't believe Amazon takes 2 whole days...why can't it be here in 5min...why do I have to wait...#firstworldproblems
Most running programs, like most competitive lifting programs, work backwards from an event.
This is what I'm trying to align to better. Even most running programs I've seen are generic and something like LED 20min this week, 25 next week, 20min tempo run this week, 25min in three weeks. Run 4x400m intervals with 90sec rest this week, run 5x400m intervals next week, then reduce the rest to 60sec in 4 weeks. Do this for the length of the program and you'll find out where you'll be at the end.

What if you're running too hard on those intervals, what if you're not running hard enough on them. What if you're ready for more than a 5min extension from week to week, what if you shouldn't jump more than 5min every couple weeks. What if 4 intervals is too many or not enough, etc., etc.

I don't want to just run and see what it results in X weeks from now or much worse, go too hard and get slower or injured. I want to start with the end goal, work backward, do the work and achieve the goal. If I want a 5k time of X, I'd like to work backward and progress at a sustainable rate and then go back however far it takes to make that progression happen. Just like landing a plane, I don't want to come in too steep or too shallow.
 
@Bro Mo, this is where professor Daniels comes to your aid. He will give you the specifics, e.g., I recall that tempo runs were once per week, not to last longer than 20 minutes regardless of your pace, and you were given a very specific, narrow range of pacing, e.g. When I was chasing a 20 minute 5k, which is about 6:30/mile, my tempo runs were 6:55 to 7:05 per mile, not faster, not slower, and not longer than 20 minutes. Certain track sessions would feature equal parts faster running and recovery, while others would - think S&S/SE/A+A here - require 3-4 times the work interval for rest. And the difference was small but precise, e.g., if I took 5 seconds off my 1/4 mile, I was then into the long-recovery kind of interval.

@vegpedlr mentioned VDOT - that's Daniels "thing" - he takes a recent race performance and uses it to calculate a VDOT for you, which lets you find the correct row of the chart, and all your different paces are laid out for you there.

You need some sort of metric so, if you don't have one organize something for yourself. The idea is that your train according to your VDOT and, if you manage a faster race time, then your VDOT changes and you'll train according to the new value moving forward.

-S-
 
This is what I'm trying to align to better. Even most running programs I've seen are generic and something like LED 20min this week, 25 next week, 20min tempo run this week, 25min in three weeks. Run 4x400m intervals with 90sec rest this week, run 5x400m intervals next week, then reduce the rest to 60sec in 4 weeks. Do this for the length of the program and you'll find out where you'll be at the end.

What if you're running too hard on those intervals, what if you're not running hard enough on them. What if you're ready for more than a 5min extension from week to week, what if you shouldn't jump more than 5min every couple weeks. What if 4 intervals is too many or not enough, etc., etc.

I don't want to just run and see what it results in X weeks from now or much worse, go too hard and get slower or injured. I want to start with the end goal, work backward, do the work and achieve the goal. If I want a 5k time of X, I'd like to work backward and progress at a sustainable rate and then go back however far it takes to make that progression happen. Just like landing a plane, I don't want to come in too steep or too shallow.
Coaching is what you're asking for. If you're self coached, well, that's makes things more difficult.

As I understand it, you choose interval workouts based on what your goals are. A 5K runner will do different workouts than a marathoner, but both will do intervals.

Get the intensity right. This will be based on interval length, measured by either time or distance. So, 400m repeats are faster than 1 mile repeats. Intensity can be measured by either pace or heart rate.

When you can no longer hold the pace, or recover in between repeats, you're done, regardless of what the plan says. A generic plan is a starting point, from there it's coaching that evaluates the response to training, which is art and science.

Backwards planning is dangerous. Very easy to pick an unrealistic goal, then plan backwards over the weeks and months what workouts must be accomplished. People do this all the time with pace calculators like the VDOT chart. But that chart is meant to show what you should be doing now, based on current performance.

Also, my reading suggests that training with intensity over MAF produces quick results that also plateau quickly, so timing is also an issue,
 
Backwards planning is dangerous. Very easy to pick an unrealistic goal, then plan backwards over the weeks and months what workouts must be accomplished.
Yes, the goal cannot be higher than 1-2% faster every 6 weeks from what I'm finding - much slower progression than I was initially thinking. Additionally, that 1-2% is conditional on successful achievement of goal times which is similar to how I've been training. This seems philosophically similar to strength progressions in that if your max doesn't go up, repeat the cycle rather than increase it.

If you're self coached, well, that's makes things more difficult.
Self coaching without a structured template has been going well but I can't help but think a more systematic approach using some newly aquired coaching principles will be better. I've found similarities between Jack Daniels' and Bill Bowerman's approaches but for different reasons than I had originally thought.
 
Backwards planning is dangerous. Very easy to pick an unrealistic goal, then plan backwards over the weeks and months what workouts must be accomplished. People do this all the time with pace calculators like the VDOT chart. But that chart is meant to show what you should be doing now, based on current performance.
I don't agree that backwards planning from an event is dangerous; it's only dangerous if you place an unrealistic performance expectation upon yourself. VDOT is a solid way to plan backwards from an event for the reasons you cite - it's based on current performance. It seems as if you're suggesting people misuse VDOT and train based on an expected performance rather than an actual one, and I agree with that - it would certainly be a mistake to misuse the system in that way.

-S-
 
I train backwards from events all of time. Have done so, and successfully, for many decades now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jef
Perhaps "danger" is overstating a bit, but there are definite risks. The problem comes from how objective and specific the goal is, and how the timing works out.

If the goal has a set date, like a race, is the performance objective reasonable? I might be able to backwards plan a great schedule, but how do I know I will make enough progress along the way? If there are intermediate benchmarks, what happens if I fail them?

Can I adjust my goal, or modify my plan, or both?

I've seen plenty of times people backwards map a plan, marry it, and crush themselves trying to carry it out. The physical adaptations that must occur might not happen on the desired schedule.
 
I've seen plenty of times people backwards map a plan, marry it, and crush themselves trying to carry it out
True, but we don't want to throw out the baby with the bath water. Poorly chosen goals, time frames, etc., are a problem, period.

-S-
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom