Hadds Approach to Distance Training Part I Lets start from the very beginning.

A male (or female) approaches me for training. It could be you. (If I use he she in the follo!ing posts in this thread" please note that either of them apply e#ually !ell to both se$es. %hat I am saying !or&s for male and females.) 'o! I am not a college coach" only used to young studs aged () years and up. %hich is good" because I get to see a !ide spectrum of runners" many of them past*+, and !anting to get bac& into it again. This has allo!ed me to gain e$perience of coaching all ages and all fitness levels and gives me !ider &no!ledge of heart rates (H-) (and not find" as !ith teenagers" that everyones H-ma$ is simply" .over*/,,.). 'ote that many on Letsrun fall into this category" !anting to get bac& in the saddle and !or& to improve their times in their +,s and 0,s1 2et I do coach young &ids3 youngest boy and girl (4 years old" then (5*() and on up to early /,s1 6o some of this might in places apply to teenagers. (Having said that" if you are already getting coached" I !ould recommend that you do !hat your coach tells you" and don7t chop and change ideas !ith every boo& schedule you read. 2ou cannot beat consistency over time.) 6o" a male or female approaches me1 I generally !ant to &no! some bac&ground before agreeing to ta&e them on. 8sually I as& for recent race performances. 9ut I am not :ust loo&ing at the times here" more importantly I !ant to see the relationship bet!een the race times and distances. I may get numbers for events li&e this; <rom a young runner3 0,,m" ),,m" (4,,m" 4& (maybe) <rom an older (road) runner3 4& (maybe)" (,&" H= and marathon (maybe) -ight a!ay Im really loo&ing to see !hats !rong. (If there is nothing >!rong?" there !ill be a limited amount I can do for the guy). 'ot !hat is !rong !ith the times (eg; they7re slo!)" but !hat is !rong !ith the relationships bet!een the times a) there may not be a relationship" or b) the relationship might be too loose. Lets loo& at !hat I mean; Here are some times I might receive (all number are actual real*life e$amples) 2oung runner; 4@.$ (0,,)" /.,A (),,)" 0.+5 ((4,,)" +).+, ((,&) Blder runner; (5.,/ (4&)" +@.04 ((,&)" (./0 (H=)" +.(,C (marathon) =any of you !ill have seen e#uivalence tables some!here. Tables that give points per performance per distance and allo! comparisons bet!een (e.g.) ),,m and marathon. The Hungarian Tables are one such e$ample. =ercier tables are another. 9ut no*one suggests that a single person can be e#ually good at all distances across the board (apart from rarities li&e -od Di$on). 2our genetic strengths tend to !eigh you more in one

direction (speed) or the other (endurance). 6o" some peoples performances get better as the race gets longer (or shorter). And this is beyond in e$cess of a training effect" they are :ust more gifted aerobically (or anaerobically). 98T there should still be some form of relationship across distances" and this is !hat I loo& for !hen I hear someones D-s. <ran& Hor!ill once defined this sort of relationship by saying that if a runner slo!ed up by (@ secs mile at any distance (actually" I believe he said 0 secs per 0,,m lap)" that runner could then &eep going for t!ice the distance. ('ote that better trained runners slo! up LE66 than 0 secs per lap to go t!ice the distance1) 6o" according to Hor!ill" if you can run 4.,, for one mile" you can run at 4.(@m m for +& / miles and 4.+/m m for 4&" and 4.0) for (,&" and @.,0 for (, miles and @./, for marathon (plus or minus a second here or there). This is !hat I mean !hen there should be a >relationship? bet!een race performances (assuming good similar level of training for each event). <or better*trained runners" the relationship is even tighter. I have coached one runner li&e the e$ample :ust given3 has a 0.4A one mile D-. %ho can run 4& at 4./,m m (instead of Hor!ills 4.+(). And (,& at 4.+(" H= at 4.0, and marathon at 4.4Am m (instead of Hor!ills rule of thumb @./,m m). 9ut this runners one mile to 4& distances are seldom trained for" or raced" so there might be some secs still to come off of both of them. Thin& of it roughly li&e a cloc& face; 2our one mile D- should be at (/" your 4& D- pace should be at #uarter*past (C(4 secs)" your (,& D- should be at half*past (again" C(4 secs)" your H= Dshould be at #uarter*to (again C (4 secs)" and your marathon D- should be once again at the top of the hour. (This also fits in !ith the old rule of thumb that your marathon D- pace should be mile D- pace C @, secs mile) 6o !hat is !rong !ith our runners aboveF (remember" Hor!ill said slo! up by 0 secs lap to go t!ice the distance. %e7ll use his rule of thumb here.) 2oung runner; 4@.$ (0,,)" /.,A (),,)" 0.+5 ((4,,)" +).+, ((,&) 0,,m G 4@ secs ),,m G /.,A (should be /.,, from 0,, time) (4,,m G 0.+5 (should be 0.,, from 0,,m time or 0.(@ from ),,m time) (,& G +).+, <uggedabouddit1 6o" our young guy gets rapidly !orse as the race distance increases sho!ing he is poor aerobically. 'ote that he gets !orse even on the ne$t distance up" sho!ing ho! poor his aerobic conditioning capacity is. He has 'B relationship bet!een his race performances. Blder runner; (5.,/ (4&)" +@.04 ((,&)" (./0 (H=)" +.(,C (marathon) 4& G (5.,/ (4./)m m) (,& G +@.04 (4.44m m H should be 4.00m m from 4& time) H= G (./0 (@./0m m H should be @.,,m m from 4& time and @.(( from (,& time) =ar G +.(, (5.(4m m H should be @.0, from H= time and @./5 from (,& time)

Li&e our young guy" this runner is also poor aerobically. He too has 'B relationship bet!een his performances. %hat !e IB8LD have found is a relationship bet!een 4&*(,&*H= but 'B relationship bet!een H=*marathon (:ust meaning that he !as not as !ell prepared for the longer distance as he !as for the H=). 'o! these times are all plus minus a fe! seconds" not hard and fast. 6o !e do not need to #uibble on !hether it should be C(4 or C(5 secs mile. The point I !ant to stress is the e$istence of a relationship. I dont hold hard and fast to Hor!ills (@ secs mile (as I have sho!n" for better runners it might be (/*(4 secs mile or tighter still). 9ut I do agree !ith his concept of a relationship bet!een performances at all distances. I am al!ays !or&ing to!ards it !ith runners I coach (at least !ithin the range of events in !hich they !ish to be competitive). This relationship can tell a lot about ho! !ell prepared a particular runner is for a given event. 'ote that there can be t!o things >!rong? !ith your D-s. Bne" as sho!n" there can be no evidence of a relationship (usually meaning your aerobic ability is !ayyyyy poor). Br there can be a relationship" but it is too loose (instead of slo!ing up adding (@ secs mile to run double the distance" you slo! up add /,*/0 secs mile). In this second instance" your aerobic ability is less poor" but still needs !or&. To sum up3 if you are !ell trained aerobically" you do not fall apart (as in the earlier e$amples) !hen the race gets longer. And here some of you may li&e to do a #uic& chec& and see ho! your o!n performances compare1 6o" on seeing these" or similar" numbers" I e$pect to hear at least one (and maybe both) of t!o things from the athlete concerned; (. Lo! mileage bac&ground in training /. %hatever mileage being done is being run >too fast? (for performance level)

Part II 6o" if !e find that our runner has little or no evidence of a relationship bet!een his her race performances (especially if this is so as the distance gets longer)" !e can be very sure the problem is in his legs. If you !aded your !ay through the long thread I referred you to above" you !ill realiJe that this means the mitochondria" capillaries and aerobic enJymes your training should have created in your leg muscles" did not happen. %hatever trainin g you have done to this point has not been as effective as it could have been. 8sually" I have found" for t!o reasons (as given above); (. 2ou dont run enough mileage. /. 2ou train too fast. %ay bac& in (A5+" physiologist David Iostill and his co!or&ers introduced !hat they termed" the .fractional utiliJation. of KB/ma$. %hich really :ust means" ho! much of their KB/ma$ can each runner actually use in a distance event. The argument !as made that those !ho could use the greatest fraction (percent) of their KB/ma$ stood every chance of being among the faster runners. This .fractional utiliJation. !e no! &no! is basically made up of a runners lactate threshold (LT) and their particular economy. As the authors state" .At all running speeds above 5,L KB/ma$" the faster runners !ere found to accumulate less blood lactate than the slo!er runners at similar speeds and relative percentages of their aerobic capacities. The findings suggest that successful distance running is dependent on the economical utiliJation of a highly developed aerobic capacity and the ability to employ a large fraction of that capacity !ith minimal accumulation of lactic acid.. 6imply put" the more you can use of your ma$imum aerobic potential in a race" the better you !ill perform. As recently as (AA5" this paper by Iostill !as cited by M.A. Ha!ley et al in a paper aimed at enhancing endurance performance. As the authors state" .It !ould appear that the fraction of KB/pea& or po!er than an athlete can sustain for prolonged periods is inversely related to the accumulation of lactate in the !or&ing musculature.. (more lactate G lo!er L KB/ma$ that can be sustained G stop sooner3 less lactate G higher L KB/ma$ G maintain for longer). They go on" .<or e$ample" in !ell*trained endurance athletes" there is little or no increase in blood (and presumably muscle) lactate concentration until the !or& rate elicits close to )4L KB/pea&. Direct support for this comes from the data of IoetJer et al ((AA+) !ho reported that blac& African distance runners had lo!er blood lactate concentrations after subma$imal (/(&m hr) and ma$imal (/0&m hr) e$ercise compared !ith !hite runners" despite similar running economies. Elite Nenyan distance runners have also been found to have lo!er lactate levels than top 6candinavian distance runners during both subma$imal and ma$imal e$ercise..

6ooooo. Lets sum all this up" its very simple. (. 9etter trained runners can maintain a higher percentage of their KB/ma$ ()4L or higher) in a marathon than lesser trained runners. /. They can do so because their blood lactate AT A'2 DAIE or any percentage of KB/ma$ is lo!er than the blood lactate of less !ell*trained runners (ie; they are not .tougher. and :ust someho! putting up !ith more discomfort than the runners around them" they are actually more .comfortable." under less lactate .stress." than all other runners at the same pace intensity). This also agrees !ith a large amount of sport science studies !hich sho! a very high correlation bet!een the lactate threshold and performance in distance events. The higher (faster) the running pace at the LT" the faster the pace in distance races. 6:odin and 6vedenhag ((A)4) in a revie! on the physiology of marathon running agreed" .the Othreshold is the single best predictor of performance in long*distance running" including the marathon.. Bnce again" fast pace at LT G fast pace in a distance race. As I repeatedly stressed in my long earlier thread" the training to improve your KB/ma$ (essentially the stro&e volume of your heart) is 'BT the same training as that re#uired to raise your LT (increase capillaries" mitochondria and aerobic enJymes in your muscles). The speeds re#uired are totally different. LT training is one case in !hich faster is 'BT better. 6o. To go bac& to our hypothetical runner. After I find out the D-s of the runner !ho has approached me" (and assuming he she has no good relationship bet!een performances)" I lactate test him. 'o! dont be concerned" I only bring this in here to e$plain e$actly !hy our young runner (and possibly yourself) cannot maintain a positive relationship across performances. In short" his LT is !ea&. It !ill 'BT be necessary for you to undergo lactate testing to &no! ho! to proceed to improve your o!n training and your LT. 2ou see" I &no! from his poor race results that my ne! runner is building lactate long before he should (!hich is !hy" as I have tried to e$plain above" there is 'B relationship). -emember" high lactate G poor long distance race ability. 6o" some!here along the !ay as he increases his running pace" his blood lactate is climbing (earlier than it should and at slo!er paces than it should). I &no! this. His results are telling me this" even before I test him. If I can determine !hen that happens" at !hat pace effort that is happening" I !ill then &no! e$actly ho! to train him to ma&e the lactate at that pace begin to stay lo!" and not climb until he runs at a faster pace. And then a faster pace... and a faster pace... Thin& of it li&e this. If your LT is lo! (at slo! pace relative to KB/ma$)" you are .borro!ing. from your anaerobic ability to help your aerobic ability maintain the particular pace you are running at. Li&e having an overdraft at the ban& because you cannot live !ithin your monthly !age. 9ut as the race distance gets longer" you cannot borro! more and more" but can only borro! less and less. 8ntil at the marathon" !hich is AAL aerobic" you cannot borro! at all and

your poor aerobic ability is e$posed and you are left !ondering !hy the pace is so slo! compared to (eg) your (,&. 'o! here I !ould have li&ed to e$plain the mechanics of ho! to test" because although you !ill not need to be lactate tested" the &no!ledge of ho! to do so !ill be important further do!n the line. Ho!ever" for you to understand it fully" you !ould need to see some charts" !hich I am unable to post. <ortunately I am able to refer you to a !ebsite that does a very good :ob of e$plaining the rationale and the lactate testing procedure in a very clear manner. If you !ould genuinely li&e to improve your training (and race performances)" spend some time and go and read the information on the lin&ed site. It is only a single page of te$t and charts (although there are other lin&s that some of you might li&e to e$plore" although doing so is not necessary). I e$pect to have to refer to the &no!ledge the single page contains in later parts. http; !!!.lactate.com pitesbas.html <inal summation; if you cannot maintain a good relationship across race performances it is because your LT is not good enough (not a high enough percentage of your personal KB/ma$). 2our LT is dependent on adaptations in your leg muscles caused by training. If you have a poor LT" your adaptations have not occurred !ell enough (despite even years of training). As !ill be better e$plained later" these adaptations are intensity dependent (train too fast" they !ont happen). =y apologies if this appears long*!inded" but it is a long*held belief of mine that runners train better if they understand %H2 they are doing such*and*such training. Addendum To Part II Let7s loo& at some ma:or negative effects of .borro!ing. from your anaerobic ability in a distance event (anything from 4& up!ards). (<or those of you !ho do not thin& you are doing this" :ust note that if you have a poor(er) pace relationship as the distances increase" you are.) (. %hen the muscle cells in your legs build up too much acidity (caused by running anaerobically)" those cells shut do!n since the acidity inhibits enJymatic action and contractibility in the cell and energy brea&do!n can no longer continue. 6o" the more you are trying to sto&e the boilers" pour on the speed" and fire on all cylinders" the more some of those cylinders are shutting do!n. This is not so if you use those self*same cells fibres aerobically. /. 9rea&ing a molecule of glucose do!n into energy anaerobically is horrendously !asteful of fuel. It !ill result in fuel economy the e#uivalent of ./ miles per gallon.. 9rea&ing that e$act same glucose molecule do!n into fuel aerobically results in .+@ miles per gallon.. If you are going far enough (H= or marathon)" you better be as economical as possible and get as many miles as possible per gallon because other!ise you are going to run out of fuel and crash long before the finish line. 'ote that the muscle cells that are operating anaerobically !ill be unable to access your huge store of fat as a fuel (!hich !ould give you !ayyy better than even +@ mpg). <uel !hich !ould ensure you get to the /, mile mar& and still find you can pour it on.

Thin& of it li&e this. Dut the smallest compact car you can thin& of" and a <errari" side by side. Empty both fuel tan&s" give both of them one gallon of fuel and tell them to go as far as possible. %hich is gonna !inF 6ince your LT measures at !hat pace you change over from aerobic to (increasingly more) anaerobically*fueled running" it is also a measure of !hen you stop being economical and become more and more uneconomical. 6o" !e can also say that a lo! (poor) LT also means poor fuel economy. =any of you !ill be able to give e$amples of guys (I &no! at least t!o) !ho can cran& out /, mile long runs at @.,,m m and yet not finish a marathon at that pace. %hyF 9ecause" due to their precise fuel economy (or lac& thereof) they cannot store enough IHB to get them through the final @./ miles. Their fuel economy" and therefore their LT" is too lo!. This ne$t part !as not even planned to be included !hen I began this thread" but I had a thought that <lagpole7s ).,,m m run !as going to be harder for him than his 5.0,m m" and I &ne! I had a personal e$perience that should e$plain to him (and perhaps others) !hy this might have happened. I !ill start therefore !ith a personal anecdote and then e$plain !hy things occurred as they did after!ards. <or those !ho did not notice that Dart II !as numbered in the title of the post" I !ill also put the part number in the te$t. 6o...

Part III I have al!ays ridden motorcycles. I tend to ride them pretty hard. I live in a rural area" so this usually means thro!ing the bi&e li&e a maniac round the t!isty country roads. Preat fun. The part of me that loves doing this has not aged one !hit. All this :ust to e$plain that occasionally I come off the bi&e" sometimes spectacularly. Bne such time (and not the last)" almost ) years ago" involved some bro&en bones and a prolonged spell out of training. It !as si$ months before I felt li&e getting bac& into it" and !hen I did" it !as !inter and miserable. 6o I postponed it some more (!hich !as suprisingly easy to do). %hen I did go out for the first fe! runs" they !ere a ma:or struggle and I could not remember ever running so slo! in my !hole life. I had still been coaching all the !hile I !as out of running" and had recently started a couple of ne! young guys. Although I tell them I really don7t care !hat training they have done before they come to me (and that I !as going to test them myself and form my o!n opinion)" they (and others) are pleased to sho! me their old training schedules and often sho! up to first day of training !ith a printout. (It usually turns out they are mad &een to sho! me ho! fast they can run a session of 0,,s). Derhaps because I !as bro!sing some of these printouts" added to the depressing fact I seemed to have slipped bac& so far in !hat !as no! one !hole year off training" but I decided to try something a bit different. I am nothing if not a student of the sport" I &ne! ho! I coached" and !hat !or&ed for me" but I also &ne! there !ere many other !ays that claimed to get you fit. I had read all manners of training schedules over the years. 6o I decided to put myself on a lo! mileage high intensity schedule and hammer my old ass bac& into shape in the shortest time possible. %hat can I sayF It suited my temperament at the time. I formulated a !ee& that included3 a +*mile run as fast as possible (and trying to improve the time each !ee&)3 a 04*min hilly route run as intense as I could ma&e it3 and a A,*min run at best possible steady pace (!ithout struggling or crashing and having to bac& off at any point). Three other days !ere :ust +,*04 mins at a reasonable lic&. 'o slo! easy runs in the !hole !ee&. Bne day a !ee& off. I &ept this up for + months. Along the !ay I too& part in some shorter faster stuff !ith the younger &ids during training. I realised though that there !ere some days !hen I :ust could not &eep up the pace on the 04min or A, min runs in training" and !ould :ust bag those runs and turn for home. A year previously" I had been used to long runs !ith the /.+4*/.04 marathon group" but I !as no! acutely a!are that I could not yet go bac& out !ith them" but I did accept the good*natured ca:olling of the +.,,*+.(4 marathon group to :oin them for one of their /hrC long runs (Q).,,* ).(4m m). 'o!" as all runners do" I had already figured out that my +*milers !ere by no! at 4.+,*4.0, pace" the 04 min run !as @.,,m mQ and the A, min run !as some!here around @.0,m m or so.

Even the easy runs !ere rarely slo!er than 5.,,m m. 2ou !ould have thought ).,,m m !ould be a breeJe... It !as one of the !orst runs of my entire life. I can still recall it. All the !ay I !anted to either stop and !al&" or speed up to normal A,*min pace and get my ass out of there. The rest of the group !ere laughing and :o&ing and I !as gritting my teeth because it felt li&e my legs !ere made of !ood and someone had tied a piano to my bac&. Luc&ily" I !as not too suprised and I &ne! !hy I felt so bad... %ay bac& in the late (A@,s a professor called Mohn HollosJy got some rats to run on a treadmill for various lengths of time up to /hrs per day at around 4,*54L of the rats7 KB/ma$ (easy running" therefore). After (/ !ee&s" he found that the rats had increased the mitochondria (vital for aerobic energy production) in their running muscles (compared to control rats that did no training). This !as a seminal piece of !or&" because it e$plained !hy runners get better !ith training. The ne$t #uestion !as logical. Ho! long should people run for to optimally cause this effectF 9ac& to HollosJy and his fello! researchers !ho formed 0 groups of rats to train; one group running (,mins day" a second running +,mins day" a third running @,mins and a fourth running /hrs day. All at the same easy 4,*@,L KB/ma$" and for 4 days !ee& for (+ !ee&s. Derhaps logically" the /hr*group had the greatest increase in mitochondria at the end of the training period. In a tough endurance test at the end of the training" the (,*min rats managed // mins" the +,*min group 0( mins" the @,*min rats could run hard for 4, mins and the /hr*rats &ept going for ((( mins. It !as no! apparent that time to e$haustion (all rats running the same pace) !as directly related to mitochondria development (!hich itself !as directly related to time spent training). 9ut !hat about intensityF %ere mitochondria only created !hile running long and slo!F In (A)/" a guy called Pary Dudley decided to e$plore this #uestion. He had several groups of rats training five days !ee& (but only for ) !ee&s). Li&e HollosJy" he also used a range of different training durations" from 4*A, mins per day. Ho!ever 8'LINE HollosJy (!hose rats all trained at the same pace) he also used a range of training intensities. Dudley7s rats trained at either (,,L" )4L" 5,L" 4,L or 0,L KB/ma$. He also e$amined ho! different intensities and different durations affected different muscle types (fast t!itch !hite" fast t!itch red or .intermediate." and slo! t!itch). The results !ere interesting and each fibre type responded differently; Improvements in mitochondria in fast t!itch !hite fibres began !hile running at ),L KB/ma$ (but not slo!er" presumably because they !ere not recruited) and increased e$ponentially as the pace climbed to (,,L KB/ma$. Ho!ever improvements in fast t!itch red (intermediate) fibres ma$imised at sub*ma$ paces ()4L KB/ma$) and did not get better !ith increased speed. And the best !ay to cause improvements in slo!*t!itch fibres !as to run long and slo! at 5,L KB/ma$ (adaptation began from as lo! as 4,L KB/ma$ pace). <aster !as not better. Although Dudley found that A, mins !as not better than @, mins" HollosJy had sho!n that /hrs !as definitely better than one hour (!hich ties in nicely !ith Lydiard*type training recommendations

that one /hr run !as better than / $ @, mins R you have to admit that the guy had great intuition born of his e$perience trying out different training on himself). 6o" (some of you may be !ay ahead of me already). %hy !as my ).,,m m run so difficultF %ell" all my training in the + months leading up to it had been relatively hard. I had not trained slo! enough for my slo! t!itch fibres to become stimulated to build huge amounts of mitochondria. =y fast t!itch red !ere becoming o&ay (I !as reasonably good for +*@m fast)" but I could not access those fast po!erful fibres at ).,,m m. The intensity !as too lo!. I !as being forced to use my slo!*t!itch fibres... and they !ere not trained for any &ind of endurance" and certainly not /hrs. It seems parado$ical" that I can be o&ay at 5.,,m m" but not at ).(4m m" but here is one e$ample. I !as o&ay if I ran hard enough to force my body to recruit my fast t!itch red fibres (and as long as they had enough glycogen). Li&e most distance runners I have relatively fe! fast t!itch !hite fibres" so they !ere little help" and in all my + months of training my slo! t!itch !ere being by* passed on every training run. (Br rather" recruited" but s!amped over!or&ed). The intensity of each training run !as too high for them to be stimulated optimally to best create mitochondria in themselves (and thus improve). 6o !hen I ran at a pace that I !as forced to access B'L2 them" I !as sun&. <ollo!ing this run" I thre! out the intensity and !ent bac& to training sensibly. In (, !ee&s I !as more li&e my old (youngerF) self. 6o" to sum up; To improve your LT (!hich !ill have a direct impact on your race performances)" you must increase the motochondria in your running muscles (in a neat move" the optimal training to improve mitochondria is also the optimal training to improve capillary density). The more mitochondria" the less lactate at every running pace. 9ut mitochondrial adaptation in each fibre type is training*intensity dependent. If you !ant to ma$imise the number of mitochondria in each fibre type" you must train at the correct pace for that type. (remember3 the more mitochondria" the less lactate3 the less lactate" the faster the racing pace and the more economical you are at any pace" meaning you can &eep that pace up for longer.)

Part IV Lets move from the %hy to the Ho! To... And in contrast to the accepted method" lets start from the end. I have repeatedly stressed throughout this thread and the preceding one (see lin& to it from Dart I)" that there is a huge improvement in performance that can be made from purely aerobic training" if you get it right. A huge improvement !ayyy before any faster !or& is done. In the e$ample that follo!s I !ant to stress that !hat !as achieved !as done !ithout any of the sort of sessions that many of you might e$pect. 6o !hen you read !hat follo!s" :ust bear in mind that there !ere no sessions of repeat (",,,s" no repeat miles" no .tempo. runs (at least in the accepted sense of (,&*pace C(4 secs). Must lots of controlled aerobic training (detailed e$amples of the training !ill follo!) All the figures and timelines that I !ill #uote are genuine and I !ant to use the e$ample of my friend Piuseppe (!hom Ill refer to as Moe" for the purposes of this thread). A little over 4 years ago I coached Moe to t!o /./5 marathons. %e had e$pected the second race (some @ months after the first) to be sub*/./4" but raceday proved to be e$tremely !ild and !indy and Moe ran his heart out and yet :ust bro&e his earlier /./5 by a bare / seconds. %e !ould have duc&ed the race under normal conditions and found another" but it !as a fall marathon and !e did not have a fall*bac&. Life being !hat it is" there !as no guarantee ho! things !ould be if !e !aited till the follo!ing spring. %or&" in:ury" illness... anything could happen in four five months. Moe made the decision to race" and I admired him for doing so. 6ome months after the race I moved house" a!ay from the area and !e lost touch. Early last year my !ife raced near -ome and Moe came across her after the finish line and !e all met up that evening for a meal and a chat about old times. %e had all en:oyed many long runs together all those years ago" so !e had much to recall and tal&ed late into the night. Moe ruefully admitted that he had put on /, pounds and !as no! approaching +4 years of age. He !as also mired in !or&" since he !as the financial controller of his familys printing business and !as having to hassle many clients for lac& of payment on time. A rela$ed" easy*going guy" Moe admitted that the stress of having to constantly argue !ith clients !as getting to him and serious training had long been forgotten. It !as at least t!o years since he had had any &ind of fitness and no! he !as do!n to maybe /, miles per !ee&" if that. And slo!SFS (many of us could tell similar stories). Any!ay" !e parted after s!apping email addresses and telephone numbers. During the evening Moe had several times remar&ed that his best running days !ere behind him" but my !ife (older than him by a fe! years) had admonished him every time" repeatedly telling him he !as tal&ing nonsense. All he needed" she said" !as to ma&e the decision to begin" and !ith the right training it !ould all come bac&.

A fe! !ee&s after I got bac& home" I got an email from Moe saying that he !as going to go for one more serious marathon. %e had got him hyped and he had been able to thin& of little else. I told him before he began to loo& at his !or&ing life and figure out ho! he !as going to find A, mins to /hrs per day for training. I also told him to ease his !ay (ta&ing as long as he li&ed) to get to 4,mp! and then I !ould give him a !ritten schedule from there. (E$amples of the schedules !ill follo!). Bne thing that concerned him (and I) !as ho! !e !ould monitor his gro!ing fitness !ithout :umping into regular races. 6ince he had !or&ed !ith me in the past" he &ne! all about lactate testing and H- training. After some thin&ing" I told him !e !ould be able to do the same" only !ithout the blood tests. If !e !ere really careful" I said" and he &ept me informed of everything" it !ould !or&. He agreed to try. He argued !ith his brothers" telling them he !as going to alter his !or& hours to suit his training. Prudgingly" they agreed. Else!here" on another thread" I had e$plained !hy I li&ed the period in lactate tests to be a minimum of ) mins long. I have long used a protocol that consists of repeat runs over /0,,m at slo!ly increasing intensities (!ith pauses after each period to dra! blood). ('ote; you really should have follo!ed and read the lactate lin& I put up earlier to be able to fully understand the discussion from this point on. Dont !orry" its not difficult and it7s !ell !orth the read). Bnce Moe got to 4,mp!" I told him to perform the follo!ing mini*test (he &ne! the protocol). Po to a trac& on a !indless day" as rested as if for a race" and do the follo!ing; -un /0,,m at a steady (0, H- (6top A, secs and record time) -un /0,,m at a steady (4, H- (6top A, secs and record time) -un /0,,m at a steady (@, H- (6top A, secs and record time) -un /0,,m at a steady (5, H- (6top A, secs and record time) -un /0,,m at a steady (), H- (6top A, secs and record time) At all times" ad:ust the running pace to maintain a stable H-. Bn each ne! stage slo!ly edge the H- up (ie; it is o& if the H- ta&es the first @,,*),,m to reach target level)" then simply maintain H-. DB 'BT start fast and have to slo! to maintain target H-. Moe got bac& into things in mid*April" and ramped to 4,mp! of easy :ogging pretty #uic&. I got him to do the mini*test on (( =ay and periodically thereafter (bearing in mind the T@ !ee& period for mitochondrial gro!th). The numbers belo! detail his progression in running speed at each date and each H-. The times are in mins mile. Moes oganised training began immediately after the first test. In (/ !ee&s Q Moe improved his H- vs running pace at all intensities. A pace that re#uired (4, H- initially" only re#uired (0, H- a brief (/ !ee&s later. This !as true across the board. A pace that used to re#uire (), H- no! re#uired less than (5, H-... Dates R (0, R (4, R (@, R (5, R (), ((=ay H 5.4@ H 5.// H @.0/ H @.,4 H 4.0, ,@Mun H ).,+ H 5.(5 H @.+@ H @.,( H 4.++ /AMun H 5./+ H @.0A H @.(/ H 4.0/ H 4.() ,0Aug H 5.() H @.+@ H @.,, H 4.++ H 4.(,

6i$ !ee&s after this last test (and less than /, !ee&s after beginning organised training)" Moe entered a marathon !ith instructions :ust to sit #uiet !ith the /./,*lo! group and stop at half!ay. He ran 5(.$$. =anaging to finish less than / mins off his all*time half marathon D- after only /, !ee&s organised training" Moe began to see ho! his sub*/./4 dream could still happen. Discussion; 9efore I get into the e$act details of Moes training" let me pre*empt one #uestion you might have; ho! !as Moe able to run 4.++m m !ith (5, H- !hen it used to re#uire (), H- to run at 4.0,m mF If you have read and understood all that I have posted" you should have a good idea of !hy this occurs" but let me :ust revie! it #uic&ly. A prime function of your heart is to deliver o$ygen to your active muscles. 2our muscles then use this o$ygen combined !ith glycogen or fat to create energy to run. If your muscles are inefficient at doing this" you !ill not get as much running energy per unit of o$ygen as you could. Thin& of your heart as a pump that is told !hat to do by the muscles. .%e need more o$ygenS. say the muscles and the heart beats faster. .%e have enough." they say and the heart rate stays lo!. To brea& one unit of glucose do!n into energy anaerobically (%ITHB8T o$ygen) you get t!o units of energy (lets say that you get / paces strides up the road before you need more energy). If you brea& that self*same unit of glucose do!n into energy aerobically (%ITH o$ygen) you get +@ paces up the road before you need more energy. Bbviously this is much better. 6o if you can ma&e !hat used to be an anaerobic pace into an aerobic pace" you are a much superior runner and can &eep this pace up for much further. 9ut even better" if you !ere so efficient that you could brea& do!n one unit of fat into energy (instead of glucose) you !ould get 0@, paces up the road before needing more energy. And your H- !ould be !ayyyyy lo! at the same time. 'o! (,,L fat*burning isnt going to happen" but I hope you can understand that the higher a percentage of fat there is (along !ith a percentage of glucose glycogen) in the fuel mi$ you burn at marathon race pace" the more comfortable you !ill be" the longer you !ill &eep up the pace" and the faster you !ill run. The short ans!erF Moe :ust got more efficient at using o$ygen and brea&ing glucose fat do!n into energy for running. Addendum to Part IV %hen Moe ran his first mini*test on (( =ay" as !ell as emailing me the data" he also sent his opinions on the effort levels involved at each stage. At the lo!er end" he remar&ed that it !as some!hat difficult to &eep his H- lo! enough. This is often the case at first. As can be seen" Moe !as very slo! initially !hich sho!ed ho! much aerobic fitness he had lost. The running

pace at this very lo! effort level improved in time !ith the training. =ost runners !ould s&ip this effort level and so lose the valuable adaptations that ta&e place. At the higher end he found (5, to be a bit of !or&" and he said he !ould not li&e to have maintained the (), H- effort for much longer. %hen pressed" he stated that he !ould be luc&y to &eep the 4.0,m m pace up for 4&m. Definitely not further. This signifies" even !ithout testing" that Moe had passed his lactate threshold at this pace and !as no! building serious amounts of lactate in his running muscles. Less than /, !ee&s later" Moe !ould complete a H= (at /(&m" a distance that !as over four times longer than the first mini*test) at faster than this 4.0,m m pace he had found so tough (H= pace !as 4./)m m). He !ould be able to do this because" through training" his lactate at this pace !as no! significantly lo!er than it had been in his first test. 6ince this !as so" the >effort?" the degree of difficulty to him" the stress at this pace" !as greatly reduced and he had no problems maintaining this effort for 5(C mins. Second addendum to Part IV Ho! can !e all move our Lactate ThresholdsF Actually" the #uestion is not that simple" because for some of you it !ill be necessary to first establish a threshold. Thin& bac& to the lactate charts I lin&ed you to in Dart II (and here I !ish I could post some charts to ma&e this more clear). 2ouve got the $ and y a$es" and the lactate curve begins from the left and runs horiJontal for a short !ay and then climbs at 04 deg angle. <or some of you" that !ould be e$actly !hat !e !ould find if I lactate tested you3 your anaerobic energy &ic&s in !ayyy too early" and you have no good relationship bet!een your (4,,m time and your (,& H= time. 6lightly better !ould be the ne$t runner !hose lactate curve stays horiJontal for slightly longer (remember" the horiJontal a$is is running speed" so the further the curve goes to the right before climbing" the better). At a slightly better running pace" this athletes curve then climbs at ++ deg angle. And" of course" !e have the !ell trained athlete !hose curve stays flatter for much longer before curving up!ards. %e need to train to become li&e the third athlete. If you have not already read and fully understood the earlier lactate lin&" you might !ant to consider dra!ing these + curves on a graph paper. Dra! the $ and y a$es. 2ou can mar& the vertical a$is (*(,. 6tarting from about / on the vertical a$is" give the first athlete >A? about /cm of horiJontal line before curving slanting up!ards at 04 deg all the !ay to (,. 6tarting from about (.4" give the second athlete >9? about 0cm of horiJontal line before climbing at ++ deg again all the !ay to (,. <inally" give the third athlete >I? about @cmC of horiJontal line before his slope climbs at an even flatter angle to a ma$ of ). Having done this" note that if you dra! any vertical line that crosses the horiJontal a$is any!here on the graph you can see ho! much lactate each athlete has to build to run at the same

pace as the other t!o athletes. -unner As lactate can be craJy high" and runner 9s climbing" !hile runner Is lactate is still at calm levels. Ho! do !e ma&e runner A li&e runner 9 (and 9 li&e I)F To move the lactate curve to the right" !e need to go !ayyy bac& to :ust before the curve begins to turn" and train both at the point" and belo! (slo!er). 'ot faster. If !e do this right" in si$ !ee&s the curve !ill move and !e !ill be able to run faster" more easily (ie; aerobically and not by calling up some anaerobic energy). Bbviously" doing lactate tests" the effort levels at !hich to train are easy to find. Ho! can !e find them !ithout lactate testingF That is !hat I !ill try to e$plain in Dart K. Bf course" almost every running boo& since Lydiard has as&ed you to train this !ay" but they :ust say >run easy?" and it has been my e$perience that very many runners get the definition of .easy? !rong.

Part V "A" <irst up" be sure that you understand the above addendum. To move your LT (for all the reasons given earlier" reasons that sho! that a high LT is THE prime attribute for a good performance) you must !or& 9ELB% (slo!er than) the pace at !hich your LT currently turns. 'o pain" no gain" doesnt !or& !ith LT training. 'o!" ho! did I train MoeF If you can follo! this" you can do e$actly the same to yourself. I am trying to !rite this as carefully and simply as possible" but it7s going to be !ordy and full of numbers and data !hich you !ill have to sift through. Dlease ma&e sure that you read it :ust as carefully and don7t :ust :ump in !ith #uestions" because this part of all this thread is a ma:or &ey to improving your race performances. I !ill do my best to sum it all up at the end and put it into &ey points to apply to your o!n training. <irst off" !hat I did !ith Moe !as as& him to do a simple (but tough) test to determine his H-ma$. I as&ed him to go to a trac& and !arm up" stretch and do some strides as if preparing for a race. Then (!earing his H-=) he !as to run an all*out ),,m and note the highest H- recorded on his monitor. He !as to rest / mins and run an all*out 0,,m. The highest number he !ould see as he crossed the finish*line" !e !ould ta&e as his H-ma$. 6ince H-=s can sometimes be tric&y and go blan& or hay!ire at the !rong moment" he !as to have someone there to be ready to immediately manually ta&e his pulse for @ seconds (and multiply by (,). This proved not to be necessary" since his H-= read (A+. I have ta&en enough lactate measurements and had people !ear H-=s in marathons (even Moe himself" years earlier) that I !as able to tell him that based on this H-ma$ his best marathon H!ould be (54*(55. Higher than this !ould not be possible sustainable. ('ote3 I :ust got them to !ear them for my information purposes" not to use as a race*pace guide" a practice I do not agree !ith). A fe! days after this H-ma$ test" I got Moe to run his first /0,,m test on (( =ay. If you chec& bac& at Moes results" you !ill note that the speed at (5, !as only @.,4m m. <or reasons of cardiac drift" I had learned that the pace at (5, in the test !ould pretty accurately reflect the running pace he !ould maintain for a marathon (assuming he !as trained !ell) even though in the race his H- !ould climb to (54*(55. This because for /0,,m he is not having heat dispersal problems such as he !ill encounter if he &eeps up such a pace for /hrsC. 6o" assuming proper training" the pace at (5, H- (for Moe) in the /0,,m test e#uals pace in the marathon at (54*(55 H- (in other !ords" his best marathon pace effort). 6o" !ith an eventual target of sub*/./4 (4.+,m m) in the marathon" Moes current pace at (5, on (( =ay (@.,4m m) !as too slo!. I told Moe that to move improve the running pace at this H-" he had to train a lot of miles at H-s lo!er than (5, (and obviously" slo!er). He &ne! this any!ay. It !ould be some time before he

!ould even be allo!ed to run at (5, H- intensity. 'ot until he !as ready for it. And by the time he !as ready for it" it !ould be much easier than he !as finding it at present. As noted in an earlier addendum (to Dart IK)" Moe found this initial test effort at (5, H- to be o&ay for )*(,mins" but not something he !anted to &eep up for too long" maybe +,*0, mins. Indeed (), !as something he did not believe he could maintain at this early stage for even () mins. 9oth of these sub:ective perceptions (and Moe has a lot of running e$perience) !ere telling us that his lactate !as rising even at (5, H- and !as going very high at (),. If !e can loo& bac& at the A*9*I graph I described above (6econd addendum to part IK) !e can picture Moe as being runner A (or maybe 9). If you dra! this graph it !ill become clearer. <or an optimal marathon" !e needed Moe to be capable of the sort of lactate curve generated by runner I. To do this" !e needed to get Moe to !or& at paces before his lactate curve turned. It obviously !as turning 9E<B-E (5, for + reasons; (. The pace at (5, (@.,4m m) !as not the target marathon pace (4.+,m m as predicted by the relationship bet!een Moes other shorter distance performances" and as predicted by Moes earlier ability from 4 years previously. %e N'E% Moe !as capable of /./4 if !ell trained. The fact that he could not do it at present simply meant he !as not !ell*trained. A fact !e !ere a!are of.) /. If Moe !as !ell*trained" the lactate curve should not curve till :ust about :ust after Moe7s marathon pace H- (ie; 4.+,m m and (5,C). In fact" his marathon target pace and marathon Hshould pretty much coincide at (5,H-. The fact that they did not" sho!ed us his LT !as lo!. +. Moe did not !ant to run for too long at (5, H-. A significant pointer that he !as already above his LT. Let me go over that again. It loo& complicated" but it isnt. a) If you have a DBB- relationship across race performances (as already discussed at the very start of this thread) you have a lo! LT compared to !hat it possible for you. If you do the /0,,m test" you !ill either find that the pace at your best marathon H- is too slo! (li&e Moe at (5,) or that the effort re#uired at that ((5,) H- is too much and something you cannot hope to maintain for /@ miles. b) If you have a PBBD relationship" and your H-ma$ is li&e Moes ((A+C) then your best marathon race H- !ill be (54 Q. If you do the /0,,m test" you should find that your pace at (5, H- is very close to best marathon pace (although H- in the race might be (54C). A'D you should feel that running at (5, H- is no big deal. 2ou can maintain it comfortably for a long time !ithout even thin&ing. 6o" Moe7s marathon pace !as not !here !e e$pected it to be. And (5, H- !as .too tough. at present to maintain for /@ miles. He had to train slo!er easier and lift his LT !hich !as currently very lo!. Here !e needed to find / training paces for Moe. Bne" !e &ne! had to be lo! aerobic conditioning pace for every day" the second could be up closer to his current LT.

The lo! aerobic pace had to be T4, bpm lo!er than his H-ma$ (5,*54L of H-ma$). 6ince Moe7s H-ma$ !as (A+" this put his easy mileage at (04 H- (or lo!er). The second H- !as to be a bit higher" but still under LT. This one !as set at (44*(@,. ('ote here; the LT at this point !as still lo!" and occurring at a lo! H-. In time" Moe !ould be able to run at marathon H- (54 very very comfortably" because the lactate at that effort H- !ould be lo! by race time. 8ntil then" he had to !or& 9ELB% this effort and ease the comfort Jone up until it reached (54C). This second intensity !as set at =arathon H- minus (4*/, bpm (for no!" it !ould be allo!ed to rise as Moe7s fitness improved... as !ill be e$plained in the e$ample). As a general guide" and in my e$perience" this is !hat I have found !or&s best. =arathon H!ill be appro$ (4*/, beats lo!er than H-ma$ (no better). And aerobic conditioning H- needs to be another +, bpm belo! THAT (and hence T4,bpm belo! H-ma$) I !ill #ualify this in a more general statement at the end. %hen Moe7s LT moved" the pace H- at !hich he could train and still be under LT !ould also move rise. Although his upper limit at first !as (44*(@," in time he !ould be able to train at (5,H- and still be very comfortable. 9ut not yet. He had a lot of !or& to do first. (5, !as still too .uncomfortable. (ie; too close to" or slightly above LT). The totally %-B'P thing Moe could have done at this point !as to thin& .right" (54 is marathon H-" I7ll !or& at that pace until I can do more and more of it.. Br he could have thought" .right" 4.+,m m is target race pace" I7ll start !ith / miles at that pace and add on one per !ee& until I can do /@.... 'either of these !ould have !or&ed for him. %hat he had to do in effect !as find his aerobic upper limit and slo!ly ease it up" not by !or&ing harder" but by !or&ing :ust at the optimal pace effort to stimulate his muscles to become better at providing energy at this rate. This !ould cause the effort at that pace to drop" to become easier and the H- at that pace to fall (and usually the pace at that H- to improve drop). He !ould then slo!ly be ably to !or& at higher and higher H-7s !hile still remaining fully aerobic and !or&ing under his LT. In fact" for his H=" /, !ee&s after starting" Moe !ould average ()( H- at 4./)m m. This !as a H- he !as not able to maintain for longer than () mins at the start of training. The difference !ould be that by H= time" Moe7s lactate at (), H- !as LB%E- than his lactate at that same H/, !ee&s previously (and therefore less .stressful. and more .comfortable.). This" despite the fact that the pace at that H- !as no! faster. The follo!ing information is not going to be tidy. I cannot put it in chart form" so you may need to copy it out into E$cel and straighten it out a little. Br print it out and digest it slo!ly. Part V "B" 6tarting from (( =ay (!hen he had reached 4,mp! and conducted his first /0,,m test)" over the ne$t (@ !ee&s" Moe7s !ee&ly mileage !as as follo!s; !&( (@0mp!) !&/ (@5) !&+ ())) !&0 ()4) !&4 (@,) !&@ ((,+) !&5 ()@) !&) (((@) !&A (((,) !&(, (A)) !&(( (A@) !&(/ (((,) !&(+ (((@) !&(0 (@5) !&(4 ((,5) !&(@ (AA).

Moe !as given schedules to sho! him ho! to best get from 4, mp! to ), mp!. =on @, min easy Tue 54 min easy %ed 04 mins easy Thu @, mins easy <ri 54 mins easy 6at 04 mins easy 6un A, mins easy Appro$ @,mp! =on 54 min easy Tue @, min easy %ed @, mins easy Thu 54 mins easy <ri 54 mins easy 6at @, mins easy 6un A, mins easy Appro$ @Amp! (04 H(@, H(04 H(4, H(@, H(4, H(44 H(04 H(44*(@, Hup to (4, H(04*(4, H(@, H(0*(4, H(4, H(0,*(04 H- (or lo!er) (0,*(4, H- (or lo!er) (4,*(44 H(0,*(4, H- (or lo!er) (04*(44 H- (! @, min U (@,)

=on @, min easy Tue A, min incl. 5, U (@, H%ed 54 mins easy Thu 54 mins easy <ri A, min incl. 5, U (@, H6at 54 mins easy 6un + hrs easy Appro$ ),Cmp!

%e should note that Tue and <ri are preffered .!or&. days (although the pace !as al!ays easy aerobic). 6unday is obviously long*run day as it is for many. The remainder of the !ee& !as :ust increasing miles at easy running H-. <or the first ) !ee&s" Moe did not run higher than (@, H- at any time (even though he intended to race at (54 H- in the marathon). As can be seen from his /0,,m tests on /A Mun" his pace at all H-7s !as slo!ly improving. Even the paces at (5, and (), H- !ere improving despite the fact that Moe had not run at that intensity AT ALL in the previous / months. 9y !&@ he added some more easy (4,H-C running on three days per !ee& (to go to (,+mp!). Also on !&@" each 6un became simply /hrs*/hrs+, at (4,Q (no longer including @, mins U (@, H-)

6ample !ee&s are as follo!s (mileages are appro$" Moe notes times eg; (h04mins U (4,H-Q); !&0; =o ()m U (04) Tu ((,m U(@,) %e ((/mU(04) Th ((0mU(04*(4,) <r ()m U (@,) 6a ((/m U (4,) 6u (/hrs U (4, incl; @, mins U (@,) !&5; =o ((,mU (4,) Tu ((/m U (04) %e ((,m U (@,) Th ((0m U (44) <r ((,m U (04) 6a (@m U (0,) 6u (/hrs (4 U (04*(4,) Bver time" the running speed at each H- !as slo!ing improving (see /0,,m tests). Bn !& )" !e introduced a session simply designed to to get Moe used to moving faster biomechanically" !ithout incurring high lactate. I call this /,, /,, or /,,*fartle&. It is done on a trac& and involves /,,m U appro$ 4& pace follo!ed by /,,m easy and continues !ithout stopping for /4 laps ((,",,,m). The point is 'BT to do the overall (,& in the fastest possible time (by slo!ing up the fast bits and speeding up the slo! bits)" but to maintain a healthy differential of appro$ (4 secs or more bet!een the fast slo! /,,s. 6omething li&e 0,s and 44secs or 0+s @,s. Moe ran this on !ee&s A (+)s 44s H +).0, for the (,&)3 !&(, (+5s 4/s H +5.() for (,&) and !&(/ (+5s 4(s H +@.4+ for (,&). This session replaced one of the (@, H- runs on those !ee&s" the rest of the !ee& remained unchanged. 8p until !& (/" these /,, /,, runs had been the only time Moe had run at higher than (@, H(and even then" only for a short time). Bnly on !&(+ !as Moe allo!ed to run at (@4*(5, H- and this replaced his (@, sessions (because !e believed his LT had no! moved up from (@, H-). That !ee& (Tue) he ran a measured (,m U (@) av and managed 4)./) and found it .easy. (indicating therefore lo! lactate and a pace under slo!er than LT). This !as 'BT a race effort. He ran it again that !ee& (<ri) and managed 4).4@ ((@@ H-av) and found it again" .easy.. 6ince this intensity !as no! a regular part of the schedule" in !&(0 (Tue) Moe ran the same (,m at H-av (5( in 45.4) and found it .very easy" legs fresh" could have &ept going no problem.. Also that !ee& (6at) he too& part in a local road 4&m for .fun. (something to do !ith impressing a girl) and ran (4.4) (4.,Am m) !ith a H-av of ()@. He phoned me after!ards and e$plained he

could have &ept going" but could not get faster. This is a common feeling on this &ind of training !hich !as not (yet) aimed at 4&m racing. Must note here that Moe had never AT A'2 TI=E run this 4&m race pace (4.,A) in training. 6o far his fastest paced training had been (,m U 4.0) apart from + $ /,, /,,s !orth of (,&. This is the po!er of a strong LT. His third mile had been the same as his second. He had not been slo!ing do!n. I told him that after the marathon" if he !anted" he could train to &noc& another minute off of this time... and that got him thin&ing. Bn !& (4 (Tue) Moe ran his (,m in 45.+0 (4.04m m) at H-av (@A (remember his marathon target !as 4.+, at (54 H-" so he !as getting there) and later that !ee& (<ri) he ran + $ (4 mins at (5, H- !ith 4 mins :og. Bn !&(@ (/, Aug) Moe ran (+ miles (H-av (@)3 simply as part of his (@4*(5, run) in (.(@ (4.4,m m). This pace !as no! .comfortable. and something he could &eep up for much longer. And on !&(A" as already noted" Moe ran a H= (as part of a marathon) in 5(.0+ (4./)m m) !ith an H-av of ()( (due to some cardiac drift). %as his aerobic training finished at that pointF <ar from it. I figured !e !ere only half!ay there. %e needed to be able to see sub*4.+, at (5,H- (or lo!er) on the /0,,m test. 'ote that Moe !as only no! being introduced to (5, H- training intensity. And that this !as no! becoming comfortable for him (ie; because the lacate at this effort !as no! lo! ). Ionventional !isdom !ould have no! stated3 .based on his H= time" he needs to run tempo runs every !ee& at that pace for /, mins.... In truth" Moe !as not yet ready for such intensity. He !ould do much better to :ust &eep !or&ing a!ay as he !as. Iontinue for some !ee&s at (@,*(5," then slo!ly move that up to !or& at (54 H- !hen the time !as right. Al!ays slo!ly slo!ly raise the intensity of training" and only !hen you are very sure you have ma$imised your running pace at all the lo!er intensities. Do not be fooled into thin&ing that you only need to be fast at (54 (race) H-. 2ou also need to be pretty #uic& at (@," (4, and (0, H- too. Thin& of it li&e a tube of toothpaste. To ensure you get every last drop (of ability) you have to go to the very end of the tube and slo!ly s#ueeJe your !ay up. 'ever hurrying.

If you are not as aerobically strong as you should be (you have no pace relationship as race distances get longer" as e$plained !ay bac& at the beginning)" it can only be for one (or both) of t!o reasons; (. 2ou dont run enough miles. /. The miles you do run are being run too fast. <i$ either (or both) of those" and (aerobic) improvement !ill follo!. Part VI Let me try and s#ueeJe some more mileage from my toothpaste analogy; If you open a brand ne! tube" you can s#ueeJe any!here and e$pect to get some toothpaste. %ithout !anting to be too simplistic" see the tube as a ne! runner; pretty much any training you give him or her !ill result in improvement (toothpaste). It could even be possible that you are not a ne! runner" and have been running for some years but are no! failing to improve substantially and believe that you have tapped all of your >trainability?. Here it is very possible (especially if you have no pace relationship) that all you have merely achieved is to s#ueeJe all you can from half!ay up the tube. 2ou might have done a very good :ob of doing so" and seen siJeable improvement (toothpaste) for some time. Ho!ever you might no! (mista&enly) believe that is all there is in the tube. I thin& most people !ould agree that to get everything possible from a tube of toothpaste (to get every last drop)" !e need to go to the very end and s#ueeJe roll carefully all the !ay up. That" if you can e$cuse the analogy" is !hat this !hole thread has been about. =a$imising your trainability. 6o !e can all !al& a!ay from the sport as >old farts? secure in the &no!ledge that !e got out of ourselves every last bit of genetically limited potential. B&ay" the reasons !hy I suggest promote this method of training are already out there" and so is an e$ample of ho! effective it can be. %ithin that e$ample" I believe the .ho!. is #uite clearly discernable" but let me be more clear and give some general guidelines that almost all runners should be able to apply to themselves. I have already mentioned that in one of Lydiard7s boo&s (-unning %ith Lydiard" by Lydiard and Pilmour (A)+) he suggests the initial one*!ee& (mainly) aerobic training in his schedules is repeated .for as long as possible. before going on to the later parts of the programs. The advice contained in this (and the earlier) thread is my version of the training aimed to get every runner to an e$tremely high level of aerobic fitness. The first time it is underta&en (li&e .Moe.) it may ta&e some months to get to a very high level of aerobic fitness. 9ut if this is not lost after each competition period" each subse#uent .build*up. period !ill re#uire less time (you start each time from a higher level). And in time !ill become more li&e (,*(/ !ee&s instead of the (first time) /, !ee&s. I believe that if you get this first part right" then the ma:or proportion of your training for any distance event !ill already be complete. 2ou !ill be able to roc& and roll pretty much year round. (Here !e might consider such runners as -on Ilar&e" as an e$ample of this being possible). B&ay" you might not be al!ays in D- shape" but your season !ill not be characteriJed by odd pea&s and deep troughs either. All or any other (interval" speed" call it !hat you !ill) training underta&en !ill be done better" and achieve more" if it is added onto a correct implementation of this first stage. Bf course this is not all the training you !ill need if you are aiming for middle distance success. 9ut get this first

part right and you !ill be one mean >mutha? !hen you step onto the trac& for your first interval session. Indeed" I !ould refer you all to re*read and understand H-Es comment above by Deter 6nell and =c<ar#uhar that it is very possible to even race close to your (middle distance) best simply off of this base period. 'o! the guidelines I am about to offer have not been proven !ith the rigor of a scientific study" but have arisen as a general trend out of repeated testing and training of distance runners over the years. I have found these to be valid for runners of all ages from (5 years and over. I !ould not suggest applying them to runners younger than (5*() years old. (. Do an H-ma$ test on yourself (ho!*to e$ample is in the te$t) and ma&e every effort to ensure your complete and absolute confidence in the result (note that !ithin /*+ bpm of H-ma$ is accurate enough. %hether it is (A4 or (A5 !ill not affect ho! you train). /. Derform a /0,,m test on yourself (from easy training pace to a ma$ of 4bpm higher than your particular H-marathon* see belo!).. Bnce again ensuring you are fit" fresh" rested as if for an important race and all possible variables (!ind" etc) are controlled as much as possible. 6ince you are going to conduct this /0,,m test again and again" you must try and ensure that" as much as possible" all tests are done under near identical conditions (or else you start !ondering such thoughts as" .am I faster because it !as less !indy this timeF.). Do all you can to control against such doubts having to occur (ie; dont test in gale force !inds). As a general rule" the best possible H- pace effort you can maintain for a full marathon (!ithout crashing" hitting the !all" etc) !ill not be closer to H-ma$ than (4*/,bpm. Petting !ithin /,bpm of H-ma$ might be hard enough at first" but !ith proper training it is possible to get even !ithin (4*/,bpm of H-ma$. Iloser than this (as an average over the !hole race) I !ould not e$pect you to be capable of. 6o" H-marathon is T/,bpm belo! H-ma$" and easy running H- is another +,bpm (or more) belo! H-marathon (therefore 4,bpm or more belo! H-ma$). Li&e this; If your H-ma$ is (A+ B- HIPHE-" then the follo!ing applies; H-ma$; (A+C (even if over /,,) 9est possible H-marathon; (54*(55 H-av (note" this is the average ta&en from mile 4 to mile /4" not the pea&. 2our H- might pea& to ()( in the final miles as you thro! everything onto the fire). 6uggested training H-7s; Easy every day running; (04 H- or lo!er (If you begin really unused to this form of training" initially you might start at (4," but as soon as the pace at this Himproves" it is recommended that you reduce your easy running H- to (04 or lo!er). This can often feel very slo! to begin !ith" but should improve !ithin +*@ !ee&s and continue to improve for months. 2ou may do as much running as you !ish at this H- intensity (al!ays being careful to avoid overuse in:ury). Initial LTH- (initial lactate threshold heart rate); As !ith Moe in the e$ample" begin at (44*(@, and do not let the H- rise on the run. 9uild up the distance you can run for" over time" to (, miles. At first" you may have to slo! do!n !ithin the run to maintain H-" but over the !ee&s and months" you should note that the running speed begins to remain more stable and you do not have to slo! do!n (so much) to stop your H- rising. In time" the running pace at this H- (and all other H-s above it) !ill also improve. Bnly move this H- up !hen your running pace vs H-

is roc& steady and you (easily) are able to run (, miles at this H- !ithout loss of pace or rise in H-. At that point" only move the H- up by 4bpm and begin again. The slo!er you build up the first time" the better your pace at H-marathon !ill be. -emain at each H- as long as you are seeing improvement on the /0,,m test and definitely until your pace vs H- is stable. 2ou are trying to reach a state !here your predicted e$pected marathon pace and your (5, H- pretty much coincide in the /0,,m test. And that this pace per mile can be maintained in training for (,*(4 miles at (5,*(54 H- !ithout rising effort or rising H-. <or e$ample training !ee&s (@," 5," even ),C mp!)" go bac& to Dart K (9) and plug your numbers into the e$ample !ee&s given for Moe7s training. (%ant to run more mileageF Add in some e$tra miles at (0,*(4, H-. This can be as doubles on some days" up to )miles in the morning and (, miles at night. All easy aerobic running.) -id yourself of any sign of impatience and :ust &nuc&le do!n to the !or&. -emember" a constantly dripping source of !ater !ill eventually erode solid roc&. <or this to !or&" you need your muscles to change" and change ta&es time. =itochondrial gro!th ta&es T@ !ee&s. 6o loo& for small change every + !ee&s or so" and significant change every @ !ee&s or so. It is not suggested you /0,,m test more regularly than every @ !ee&s. =ore often is :ust frustrating" li&e someone !ho is trying to lose !eight" :umping on the scales every morning hoping to see the pounds drop off. Must do the !or& and give it time to have an effect. <armers dont pull up their potatoes every five minutes to see if they are gro!ing1 If your H-ma$ is ()+" read all of the above" but use the follo!ing numbers; 9est possible H-marathon; (@4*(@5av Easy running; (+4 H- or lo!er (This training H- !ill not change !ith time * it may drop" but the pace at this H- !ill definitely improve.) ILTH-; 9egin !ith (04*(4, and only move it up (only by 4bpm each time) !hen your pace vs H- is steady and you are able to run (, miles at the particular H- !ithout loss of pace or rise in H-. 2ou are eventually trying to reach a state (some !ee&s or months do!n the line) in !hich you can run (, miles at H-marathon !ith no rise in H- and finish confident that you could go round again at the same pace !ith no rise in H- or loss in pace at constant H-. If your H-ma$ is (5+" read all of the above" but use the follo!ing numbers; 9est possible H-marathon; (44*(45 H-av Easy running; (/4 H- or lo!er (This training H- !ill not change !ith time * it may drop" but the pace at this H- !ill definitely improve.) ILTH-; 9egin !ith (+4*(0, and only move it up (only by 4bpm each time) !hen your pace vs H- is steady and you are able to run (, miles at the particular H- !ithout loss of pace or rise in H-. 2ou are eventually trying to reach a state (some !ee&s or months do!n the line) in !hich you can run (, miles at H-marathon !ith no rise in H- and finish confident that you could go round again at the same pace !ith no rise in H- or loss in pace at constant H-. If your H-ma$ is (@+" read all of the above" but use the follo!ing numbers; 9est possible H-marathon; (04*(05 H-av Easy running; ((4 H- or lo!er (This training H- !ill not change !ith time * it may drop" but the pace at this H- !ill definitely improve.)

ILTH-; 9egin !ith (/4*(+, and only move it up (only by 4bpm each time) !hen your pace vs H- is steady and you are able to run (, miles at the particular H- !ithout loss of pace or rise in H-. 2ou are eventually trying to reach a state (some !ee&s or months do!n the line) in !hich you can run (, miles at H-marathon !ith no rise in H- and finish confident that you could go round again at the same pace !ith no rise in H- or loss in pace at constant H-. Bbviously if your H-ma$ is one or t!o beats either side of the e$amples given" ad:ust the training H-7s accordingly. 'ote that if you are not !ell*trained aerobically" you !ill very li&ely 'BT be able to maintain the >best possible H-marathon? as e$plained in the race. It is more li&ely you !ill crash at some point and be reduced to running at a much lo!er H- pace. In the final e$ample !ee&s of Moe" he !as able to run t!o times per !ee& for (, miles at (@4*(5, H- !ithout loss of pace (all other runs being (04*(4,). Bnce he no longer sa! improvement in his /0,,m tests" he !ould ta&e B'E of those days and slo!ly build up to being able to run (, miles at (54 H- (H-marathon). The other day !ould remain at H-marathon minus )*(,bpm. Bnce he could handle (, miles at H-marathon (!ithout loss of pace to maintain H-) once per !ee&" he !ould be very close to being race ready. Ho! !ill you &no! !hen you are readyF %hen you can run at H-marathon (or at least H-marathon less 4bpm) for (, milesC !ith no drop in pace vs H-" and you N'B% you could go round again !ith no rise in H- to maintain pace" you can be pretty sure that your aerobic system is providing (,,L of the energy being used. If you have never trained this !ay" you !ill be surprised ho! >comfortable? this !ill feel !hen you get it right. At that point" and not until then" you can decide !hether to aim for a marathon" or to build on top of this aerobic base to aim for some shorter race distances. It should ma&e sense that if you are a young runner the best time to begin this build up is soon after your main competition period of the year. Those !ho aim for t!o marathons per year might adopt it as the early part of their /,* !ee& build up to!ards their ne$t marathon. 'ote that it !as al!ays a Lydiard belief that even middle distance runners should be capable of a fine marathon before turning to speed. 9ut !hat about >tempo? runsF I !ould suggest that only !hen you are capable of (, miles at H-marathon (!ithout loss of pace) !ould you thin& about running at so*called >tempo? pace (marathon pace minus (/ secs mile). Indeed you might then find the follo!ing paces ideal and find a regular place for both of them in your training (li&e Hinderloppet); a (,*mile run at =arathon pace C 4*(, secs mile (a&a (,& pace C +4*0, secs)" and 0*4 miles at =arathon pace minus (/ secs mile (a&a (,& pace C ()*/, secs mile). 9e patient. Do good !or&. And improvements !ill come. <inito.