Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
>OK, enough with drummond. Did you notice that the Ethiopians run the last 5000 of the >10,000 in 12:57? Yes!, and that alone would be a 5000 national record for what, 98% of the countries in the world? The disparity in performances among elite distance runners these days is more and more profound. One would think that maybe the rest of the world has given up and stopped chasing (and trying to improve), other than a few scattered individuals, or that the Ethiopian and Kenyan athletes "have something" that everybody else is unlikely to ever have. Whatever that may be. RT
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Given that the Kenyan athletes could not hand and that Geb ran 12:56 aboiut 10 years ago for a world record... I really believe its just an issue of the Ethiopians stepping it up and never meing content. I just don't think they understand the word "limits" so are able to push them constantly. In a flat out 5k, Geb runs 10-15 seconds faster. No more. Now, which Amiercan would dare run a 10k race where they "plan" to run the second half at 10 seconds slower than their 5k pr? It would also help to have guys like Goucher, who have good speed, move up to the 10k. One distinct advantage these guys have over us is that the 5k and 10k are permier events in their country whereas the mile is the marque event here. So, they often have guys with 3:50 speed running the 10k whereas guys with 3:55 speed here are trying to be milers. That's why Culpepper's international record is surprising to me. He (at leat at one time) had 3:55 speed. I would think he could hang in a 27:10-20 race. Perhaps our 10k guys (and 5k guys) go about training too much like they would for a marathon and don't focus enough on speed. Geb constantly talks about improving his speed. How many of our 10k guys can run 24.5 flat out let alone at the end of a 10k? M From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 22:23:21 -0700 >OK, enough with drummond. Did you notice that the Ethiopians run the last 5000 of the 10,000 in 12:57? Yes!, and that alone would be a 5000 national record for what, 98% of the countries in the world? The disparity in performances among elite distance runners these days is more and more profound. One would think that maybe the rest of the world has given up and stopped chasing (and trying to improve), other than a few scattered individuals, or that the Ethiopian and Kenyan athletes "have something" that everybody else is unlikely to ever have. Whatever that may be. RT _ Help protect your PC: Get a free online virus scan at McAfee.com. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
> Perhaps our 10k guys (and 5k guys) go about training too much like they > would for a marathon and don't focus enough on speed. Geb constantly talks > about improving his speed. How many of our 10k guys can run 24.5 flat out > let alone at the end of a 10k? Jeez, I'm sure at least 8 of our top 10 10K guys could run 24.5 all out, if not all of them. They may never actually have done so, but I bet nearly all of them could. Having watched Culpepper accelerate in distance races, I am 100% sure that he could run well under 24. Personally, though, I don't consider differences in all out speed to be a big factor in differentiating people in the 10K. Sure, if one guy can run 22 and another guy can run 25, that will mean something, but Lydiard had it right - the problem with distances is not to get more speed but to get the stamina to hold the speed for longer (both through LFD and targeted speedwork). Think how many people can run 53 secs for a 400m (thousands in the U.S. for certain) and how few can hold it for 800m and make nationals. The problem is not speed. For years we gave Americans a hard time for not doing enough miles like the Africans. Now we're wondering if they aren't doing enough speed. The fact is that you have to do high mileage AND speedwork. Some Americans do and some don't. But we're not getting beaten because the top Americans aren't training well. We're getting beaten for a whole myriad of reasons, some of which we have control over and some of which we don't. It's a tough competitive world out there, and there are no easy answers such as adding more speed. - Ed Parrot
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
But the argument made in favor of the Africans is that you see better speed at longer distances than in the rest of the world. If you are a 50s guy you'd better move up to the marathon because at 5 and 10k 48 and 49 second guys are going to be there. If you are a 48 or 49 second guy you might have got out of the 1500 because of the 47 second guys. The faster guys can do just as much mileage and stamina training as the 52 second guys so it still--in part--boils down to what guys who are naturally distance runners have the most leg speed. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of edndana Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 11:01 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > Perhaps our 10k guys (and 5k guys) go about training too much like they > would for a marathon and don't focus enough on speed. Geb constantly talks > about improving his speed. How many of our 10k guys can run 24.5 flat out > let alone at the end of a 10k? Jeez, I'm sure at least 8 of our top 10 10K guys could run 24.5 all out, if not all of them. They may never actually have done so, but I bet nearly all of them could. Having watched Culpepper accelerate in distance races, I am 100% sure that he could run well under 24. Personally, though, I don't consider differences in all out speed to be a big factor in differentiating people in the 10K. Sure, if one guy can run 22 and another guy can run 25, that will mean something, but Lydiard had it right - the problem with distances is not to get more speed but to get the stamina to hold the speed for longer (both through LFD and targeted speedwork). Think how many people can run 53 secs for a 400m (thousands in the U.S. for certain) and how few can hold it for 800m and make nationals. The problem is not speed. For years we gave Americans a hard time for not doing enough miles like the Africans. Now we're wondering if they aren't doing enough speed. The fact is that you have to do high mileage AND speedwork. Some Americans do and some don't. But we're not getting beaten because the top Americans aren't training well. We're getting beaten for a whole myriad of reasons, some of which we have control over and some of which we don't. It's a tough competitive world out there, and there are no easy answers such as adding more speed. - Ed Parrot
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
I'd be a big seller on that claim. malmoo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of edndana Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 1:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > Perhaps our 10k guys (and 5k guys) go about training too much like > they would for a marathon and don't focus enough on speed. Geb > constantly talks > about improving his speed. How many of our 10k guys can run 24.5 flat > out let alone at the end of a 10k? Jeez, I'm sure at least 8 of our top 10 10K guys could run 24.5 all out, if not all of them. They may never actually have done so, but I bet nearly all of them could. - Ed Parrot
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Malmo - I can't tell if you agree or disagree with me from your comment. I may be wrong, as I am largely basing my observations on the people I ran against in high school and college. Most of the people that knew around my ability (9:50 2-mile in HS, 32:00 10K after college) could do between 24.5 and 25.5 seconds. I've done 25.1 in a race and I am not particularly fast (My best 100m is 12.5 wind aided). So, I can only conclude that guys who are 3-5 minutes faster than me at 10K could beat me by a few tenths for the 200m. Most of these guys were a lot faster than me in high school as well. It just doesn't seem reasomable that the group of guys running 9:00 in high school is not any faster over 200m than the group of guys running 9:45 - as a group. Now maybe the distance runners slow down over 200m between high school and their mid-20's - I certainly didn't, but I also wasn't doing 100+ miles per week of distance training like I should have been. - Ed Parrot - Original Message - From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'edndana'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 3:10 PM Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > I'd be a big seller on that claim. > > malmoo > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of edndana > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 1:01 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > Perhaps our 10k guys (and 5k guys) go about training too much like > > they would for a marathon and don't focus enough on speed. Geb > > constantly > talks > > about improving his speed. How many of our 10k guys can run 24.5 flat > > > out let alone at the end of a 10k? > > Jeez, I'm sure at least 8 of our top 10 10K guys could run 24.5 all out, > if not all of them. They may never actually have done so, but I bet > nearly all of them could. > - Ed Parrot > > > >
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
>OK, enough with drummond. Did you notice that the Ethiopians run the last 5000 of the 10,000 in 12:57? The final half in the women's 10K was almost as impressive. I think Adere did 14:57 and Werknesh did 15:00. Damn, I wish I could have seen both of those. Funny -- so many track fans (especially the casual, once-every-four-years ones), especially here in the US, can't imagine that watching people run around a track 25 times can be interesting, and think it's all about the sprints. But if you look at the major championships, going back at least to the 1964 Olympics, the 10K is consistently one of the wildest races. Remember that Helsinki 10K? I think the first 4 were only about 0.3 seconds apart, and fifth about 0.5 behind that? -- Lee Nichols Assistant News Editor The Austin Chronicle 512/454-5766, ext. 138 fax 512/458-6910 http://austinchronicle.com
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
I'm basing my wager on this crowd: My guess is that Culpepper is the only one who could run sub-25, with Bickford and Kennedy close. 27:13.98 . Meb Keflezighi (Nik) 01 27:20.56 . Mark Nenow (Pum) 86 27:25.61 . Alberto Salazar (AW) 82 27:29.16 .. Craig Virgin (FRRT) 80 27:31.34 .. Todd Williams (adi) 95 27:33.93 . Alan Culpepper (adi) 01 27:37.17 Bruce Bickford (NBal) 85 27:38.37 Bob Kennedy (Nik) 99 27:41.05 Ed Eyestone (BYU) 85 27:42.83 Abdi Abdirahman (Nik) 02 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of edndana Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 3:43 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Malmo - I can't tell if you agree or disagree with me from your comment. I may be wrong, as I am largely basing my observations on the people I ran against in high school and college. Most of the people that knew around my ability (9:50 2-mile in HS, 32:00 10K after college) could do between 24.5 and 25.5 seconds. I've done 25.1 in a race and I am not particularly fast (My best 100m is 12.5 wind aided). So, I can only conclude that guys who are 3-5 minutes faster than me at 10K could beat me by a few tenths for the 200m. Most of these guys were a lot faster than me in high school as well. It just doesn't seem reasomable that the group of guys running 9:00 in high school is not any faster over 200m than the group of guys running 9:45 - as a group. Now maybe the distance runners slow down over 200m between high school and their mid-20's - I certainly didn't, but I also wasn't doing 100+ miles per week of distance training like I should have been. - Ed Parrot - Original Message - From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'edndana'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 3:10 PM Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > I'd be a big seller on that claim. > > malmoo > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of edndana > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 1:01 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > Perhaps our 10k guys (and 5k guys) go about training too much like > > they would for a marathon and don't focus enough on speed. Geb > > constantly > talks > > about improving his speed. How many of our 10k guys can run 24.5 > > flat > > > out let alone at the end of a 10k? > > Jeez, I'm sure at least 8 of our top 10 10K guys could run 24.5 all > out, if not all of them. They may never actually have done so, but I > bet nearly all of them could. > - Ed Parrot > > > >
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Can I join the betting pool? When someone closes in :25 or 12:57 it has little to do with pure speed. It's all about slowing down the least. Let's say a normal elite runner can run a 10k race going through the 5k mark 5% slower than his/her all out 5k. How would you train in order to drop that % to say 3%? What if your all out best 200 is in the :24-:25 range? How would you train in order to drop a :25 second last 200 at the end of a 10k? Lots of fast hardcore speedwork? Or, would you improve your endurance by running a lot of hard miles? If you improve your endurance you'll slow down less as you go up in distance. These guys went through the 5k about a minute off their best 5k times. Relatively speaking, they were jogging the first 5k Alan From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'edndana'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 15:10:16 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc5-f38.law1.hotmail.com ([65.54.252.45]) by mc5-s9.law1.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Mon, 25 Aug 2003 13:02:07 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc5-f38.law1.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Mon, 25 Aug 2003 13:01:56 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7PJ9nLR019866for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 25 Aug 2003 12:09:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h7PJ9naH019865for t-and-f-outgoing; Mon, 25 Aug 2003 12:09:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pop018.verizon.net (pop018pub.verizon.net [206.46.170.212])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7PJ9lLR019801for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 25 Aug 2003 12:09:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from george ([68.161.207.30]) by pop018.verizon.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.33 201-253-122-126-133-20030313) with ESMTP id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Mon, 25 Aug 2003 14:09:42 -0500 X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFNDyediwFombNRNnTDhbG88537d1YJa0Tw= Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Importance: Normal X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH at pop018.verizon.net from [68.161.207.30] at Mon, 25 Aug 2003 14:09:33 -0500 Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 25 Aug 2003 20:01:56.0464 (UTC) FILETIME=[BC6B5F00:01C36B43] I'd be a big seller on that claim. malmoo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of edndana Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 1:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > Perhaps our 10k guys (and 5k guys) go about training too much like > they would for a marathon and don't focus enough on speed. Geb > constantly talks > about improving his speed. How many of our 10k guys can run 24.5 flat > out let alone at the end of a 10k? Jeez, I'm sure at least 8 of our top 10 10K guys could run 24.5 all out, if not all of them. They may never actually have done so, but I bet nearly all of them could. - Ed Parrot _ Get MSN 8 and help protect your children with advanced parental controls. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/parental
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
If Kennedy - who has run mid-50's at the end of a 5K - could not easily run 24.5, I'd be shocked. Same with Bickford and Virgin. The only one of that group who I would agree couldn't break 25 in a 200m race might be Salazar (maybe Williams and Abdi as well)), and even him I'm not sure about. I can't help wondering if we're giving too much respect to 25 seconds here - it's NOTHING! Any high school distance runner who's under 10:00 for two and been in a reasonable number of close races has had to finish in 28 seconds at some point in a tactical mile or 2-mile, and most of them can certainly go a couple seconds faster if they are fresh. But, let's assume for a second that you are correct - certainly you know more about what these elite athletes are capable of than I am. I do know for a fact of plenty of high school distance guys around 4:30 and 9:50 - guys who's strength is distance - can break 25 seconds for a 200m. I also know that most of the top 10K guys were pretty fast in high school - at least 9:00 range kind of guys. If it turns out that these guys don't have the speed but the slower two-milers do, then maybe college coaches should be looking for guys with the worst 200m to 2-mile ratio. - Ed Parrot - Original Message - From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'edndana'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 5:18 PM Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > I'm basing my wager on this crowd: > > My guess is that Culpepper is the only one who could run sub-25, with > Bickford and Kennedy close. > > 27:13.98 . Meb Keflezighi (Nik) 01 > 27:20.56 . Mark Nenow (Pum) 86 > 27:25.61 . Alberto Salazar (AW) 82 > 27:29.16 .. Craig Virgin (FRRT) 80 > 27:31.34 .. Todd Williams (adi) 95 > 27:33.93 . Alan Culpepper (adi) 01 > 27:37.17 Bruce Bickford (NBal) 85 > 27:38.37 Bob Kennedy (Nik) 99 > 27:41.05 Ed Eyestone (BYU) 85 > 27:42.83 Abdi Abdirahman (Nik) 02 > > > > -Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of edndana > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 3:43 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > Malmo - > > I can't tell if you agree or disagree with me from your comment. I > may be wrong, as I am largely basing my observations on the people I ran > against in high school and college. Most of the people that knew > around my ability (9:50 2-mile in HS, 32:00 10K after college) could do > between 24.5 and 25.5 seconds. I've done 25.1 in a race and I am not > particularly fast (My best 100m is 12.5 wind aided). > > So, I can only conclude that guys who are 3-5 minutes faster than me > at 10K could beat me by a few tenths for the 200m. Most of these guys > were a lot faster than me in high school as well. It just doesn't seem > reasomable that the group of guys running 9:00 in high school is not any > faster over 200m than the group of guys running 9:45 - as a group. Now > maybe the distance runners slow down over 200m between high school and > their mid-20's - I certainly didn't, but I also wasn't doing 100+ miles > per week of distance training like I should have been. > > - Ed Parrot > > > - Original Message - > From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'edndana'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 3:10 PM > Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > I'd be a big seller on that claim. > > > > malmoo > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of edndana > > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 1:01 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > > > > Perhaps our 10k guys (and 5k guys) go about training too much like > > > they would for a marathon and don't focus enough on speed. Geb > > > constantly > > talks > > > about improving his speed. How many of our 10k guys can run 24.5 > > > flat > > > > > out let alone at the end of a 10k? > > > > Jeez, I'm sure at least 8 of our top 10 10K guys could run 24.5 all > > out, if not all of them. They may never actually have done so, but I > > bet nearly all of them could. > > - Ed Parrot > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Ed, you state the following: "Sure, if one guy can run 22 and another guy can run 25, that will mean something, but Lydiard had it right - the problem with distances is not to get more speed but to get the stamina to hold the speed for longer (both through LFD and targeted speedwork). Think how many people can run 53 secs for a 400m (thousands in the U.S. for certain) and how few can hold it for 800m and make nationals. The problem is not speed." - I agree 100% with this at the top level, but you have to realize that some of our top American 10,000m guys simply can't break 24 sec. for 200m. As I mentioned in my previous email, it's a different level altogether. Not only can these Ethiopians run 24-25 to close off a 10k, they can do it while running the last 5,000m in under 13:00m. I'd bet you that there are some of our top 10,000m and marathoners who couldn't break 26 sec for 200m. Schiefer __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
from a standing start... I agree. Malmo, on Letsrun you noted that what Geb does is pretty standard training. I disagree. The guy does 4 days of workouts in a row (not including the in betwen easy hour runs) ON TOP of his 3 hour long run followed by a 1 hour run. hard 15-30km run 1 hour easy sprint workout 1 hour easy hills 1 hours easy 3x1200 to 8x2000 w hour easy You tell me that Meb, Pepper, Abdi, Browne, Johnson are doing 4 workouts in consecutive days (with a "sprint" session in there... which of those guys does a "sprint" session?)...on top of a 3 hour run followed by a one hour run once a week... well... round of drinks is on me. geb trains much harder than our guys. And he's supremely confident. And he's supremely talented. That's pretty darn near impossible to beat. From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'edndana'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 17:18:03 -0400 I'm basing my wager on this crowd: My guess is that Culpepper is the only one who could run sub-25, with Bickford and Kennedy close. 27:13.98 . Meb Keflezighi (Nik) 01 27:20.56 . Mark Nenow (Pum) 86 27:25.61 . Alberto Salazar (AW) 82 27:29.16 .. Craig Virgin (FRRT) 80 27:31.34 .. Todd Williams (adi) 95 27:33.93 . Alan Culpepper (adi) 01 27:37.17 Bruce Bickford (NBal) 85 27:38.37 Bob Kennedy (Nik) 99 27:41.05 Ed Eyestone (BYU) 85 27:42.83 Abdi Abdirahman (Nik) 02 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of edndana Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 3:43 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Malmo - I can't tell if you agree or disagree with me from your comment. I may be wrong, as I am largely basing my observations on the people I ran against in high school and college. Most of the people that knew around my ability (9:50 2-mile in HS, 32:00 10K after college) could do between 24.5 and 25.5 seconds. I've done 25.1 in a race and I am not particularly fast (My best 100m is 12.5 wind aided). So, I can only conclude that guys who are 3-5 minutes faster than me at 10K could beat me by a few tenths for the 200m. Most of these guys were a lot faster than me in high school as well. It just doesn't seem reasomable that the group of guys running 9:00 in high school is not any faster over 200m than the group of guys running 9:45 - as a group. Now maybe the distance runners slow down over 200m between high school and their mid-20's - I certainly didn't, but I also wasn't doing 100+ miles per week of distance training like I should have been. - Ed Parrot - Original Message - From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'edndana'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 3:10 PM Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > I'd be a big seller on that claim. > > malmoo > > -----Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of edndana > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 1:01 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > Perhaps our 10k guys (and 5k guys) go about training too much like > > they would for a marathon and don't focus enough on speed. Geb > > constantly > talks > > about improving his speed. How many of our 10k guys can run 24.5 > > flat > > > out let alone at the end of a 10k? > > Jeez, I'm sure at least 8 of our top 10 10K guys could run 24.5 all > out, if not all of them. They may never actually have done so, but I > bet nearly all of them could. > - Ed Parrot > > > > _ Get MSN 8 and help protect your children with advanced parental controls. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/parental
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Ed, Just so you know, I'm speaking about the current crop of 10,000 meter runners, not the American All Time list. Plus, I can tell you that in my three years at Arkansas, I never ran a 200m in a workout faster than 26 seconds, never. On that note, I never ran a 400m faster than 54 seconds (and that was only one workout in 3 years). And I was a miler. Our average 200m workouts were 27.5 seconds and our average 400m workouts were 59 sec. That being said, it's not that 25 seconds is really all that fast, but that's not where people spend time practicing, certainly not the top 10 10,000m guys now. Could some of those guys run sub 25, absolutely. Meb and Culpepper could do it in their sleep. The point is that the majority of those guys won't see a 25 second 200m in an entire year, at least not in a workout. Schiefer --- edndana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > If Kennedy - who has run mid-50's at the end of a 5K > - could not easily run > 24.5, I'd be shocked. Same with Bickford and > Virgin. The only one of that > group who I would agree couldn't break 25 in a 200m > race might be Salazar > (maybe Williams and Abdi as well)), and even him I'm > not sure about. I > can't help wondering if we're giving too much > respect to 25 seconds here - > it's NOTHING! Any high school distance runner who's > under 10:00 for two and > been in a reasonable number of close races has had > to finish in 28 seconds > at some point in a tactical mile or 2-mile, and most > of them can certainly > go a couple seconds faster if they are fresh. > > But, let's assume for a second that you are correct > - certainly you know > more about what these elite athletes are capable of > than I am. I do know > for a fact of plenty of high school distance guys > around 4:30 and 9:50 - > guys who's strength is distance - can break 25 > seconds for a 200m. I also > know that most of the top 10K guys were pretty fast > in high school - at > least 9:00 range kind of guys. If it turns out that > these guys don't have > the speed but the slower two-milers do, then maybe > college coaches should be > looking for guys with the worst 200m to 2-mile > ratio. > > - Ed Parrot > > > ----- Original Message - > From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'edndana'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 5:18 PM > Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > I'm basing my wager on this crowd: > > > > My guess is that Culpepper is the only one who > could run sub-25, with > > Bickford and Kennedy close. > > > > 27:13.98 . Meb Keflezighi (Nik) 01 > > 27:20.56 . Mark Nenow (Pum) 86 > > 27:25.61 . Alberto Salazar (AW) 82 > > 27:29.16 .. Craig Virgin (FRRT) 80 > > 27:31.34 .. Todd Williams (adi) 95 > > 27:33.93 . Alan Culpepper (adi) 01 > > 27:37.17 Bruce Bickford (NBal) 85 > > 27:38.37 Bob Kennedy (Nik) 99 > > 27:41.05 Ed Eyestone (BYU) 85 > > 27:42.83 Abdi Abdirahman (Nik) 02 > > > > > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of edndana > > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 3:43 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > > > Malmo - > > > > I can't tell if you agree or disagree with me > from your comment. I > > may be wrong, as I am largely basing my > observations on the people I ran > > against in high school and college. Most of the > people that knew > > around my ability (9:50 2-mile in HS, 32:00 10K > after college) could do > > between 24.5 and 25.5 seconds. I've done 25.1 in > a race and I am not > > particularly fast (My best 100m is 12.5 wind > aided). > > > > So, I can only conclude that guys who are 3-5 > minutes faster than me > > at 10K could beat me by a few tenths for the 200m. > Most of these guys > > were a lot faster than me in high school as well. > It just doesn't seem > > reasomable that the group of guys running 9:00 in > high school is not any > > faster over 200m than the group of guys running > 9:45 - as a group. Now > > maybe the distance runners slow down over 200m > between high school and > > their mid-20's - I certainly didn't, but I also > wasn't doing 100+ miles > > per week of distance training like I should have > been. > > > > - Ed Parrot > > > > > > - Original Message - >
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Hopefully, smelling salts will be close by? malmo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of edndana Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 6:15 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 If Kennedy - who has run mid-50's at the end of a 5K - could not easily run 24.5, I'd be shocked. Same with Bickford and Virgin.
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Yup Mike, the Letsrun mentality has infected you. Find one -Original Message- From: Michael Contopoulos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 7:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Malmo, on Letsrun you noted that what Geb does is pretty standard training. I disagree. The guy does 4 days of workouts in a row (not including the in betwen easy hour runs) ON TOP of his 3 hour long run followed by a 1 hour run. hard 15-30km run 1 hour easy sprint workout 1 hour easy hills 1 hours easy 3x1200 to 8x2000 w hour easy You tell me that Meb, Pepper, Abdi, Browne, Johnson are doing 4 workouts in consecutive days (with a "sprint" session in there... which of those guys does a "sprint" session?)...on top of a 3 hour run followed by a one hour run once a week... well... round of drinks is on me. geb trains much harder than our guys. And he's supremely confident. And he's supremely talented. That's pretty darn near impossible to beat. >From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "'edndana'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 >Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 17:18:03 -0400 > >I'm basing my wager on this crowd: > >My guess is that Culpepper is the only one who could run sub-25, with >Bickford and Kennedy close. > >27:13.98 . Meb Keflezighi (Nik) 01 >27:20.56 . Mark Nenow (Pum) 86 >27:25.61 . Alberto Salazar (AW) 82 >27:29.16 .. Craig Virgin (FRRT) 80 >27:31.34 .. Todd Williams (adi) 95 >27:33.93 . Alan Culpepper (adi) 01 >27:37.17 Bruce Bickford (NBal) 85 >27:38.37 Bob Kennedy (Nik) 99 >27:41.05 Ed Eyestone (BYU) 85 >27:42.83 Abdi Abdirahman (Nik) 02 > > > >-----Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of edndana >Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 3:43 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > >Malmo - > > I can't tell if you agree or disagree with me from your comment. >I may be wrong, as I am largely basing my observations on the people I >ran against in high school and college. Most of the people that knew >around my ability (9:50 2-mile in HS, 32:00 10K after college) could do >between 24.5 and 25.5 seconds. I've done 25.1 in a race and I am not >particularly fast (My best 100m is 12.5 wind aided). > > So, I can only conclude that guys who are 3-5 minutes faster than me >at 10K could beat me by a few tenths for the 200m. Most of these guys >were a lot faster than me in high school as well. It just doesn't seem >reasomable that the group of guys running 9:00 in high school is not >any faster over 200m than the group of guys running 9:45 - as a group. >Now maybe the distance runners slow down over 200m between high school >and their mid-20's - I certainly didn't, but I also wasn't doing 100+ >miles per week of distance training like I should have been. > >- Ed Parrot > > >- Original Message - >From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "'edndana'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 3:10 PM >Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > I'd be a big seller on that claim. > > > > malmoo > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of edndana > > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 1:01 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > > > > Perhaps our 10k guys (and 5k guys) go about training too much like > > > they would for a marathon and don't focus enough on speed. Geb > > > constantly > > talks > > > about improving his speed. How many of our 10k guys can run 24.5 > > > flat > > > > > out let alone at the end of a 10k? > > > > Jeez, I'm sure at least 8 of our top 10 10K guys could run 24.5 all > > out, if not all of them. They may never actually have done so, but > > I bet nearly all of them could. > > - Ed Parrot > > > > > > > > > > > > _ Get MSN 8 and help protect your children with advanced parental controls. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/parental
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
This whole argument might be a moot point because it seems Bekele's closing 200 in 24.x is one of those urban Internet legends. I haven't seen the race but here are Bekele's final splits from Track & Field News: 12.9, 26.1, 55.0, 1:56.6, 2:59.4, 4:02.8 Very impressive indeed but not close to the 24.x as originally reported. --- John Schiefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ed, you state the following: > > "Sure, if one guy can run 22 and another guy can run > > 25, > that will mean something, but Lydiard had it right > - > the problem with > distances is not to get more speed but to get the > stamina to hold the > speed > for longer (both through LFD and targeted > speedwork). > Think how many > people > can run 53 secs for a 400m (thousands in the U.S. > for > certain) and how > few > can hold it for 800m and make nationals. The > problem > is not speed." > > - > I agree 100% with this at the top level, but you > have > to realize that some of our top American 10,000m > guys > simply can't break 24 sec. for 200m. > > As I mentioned in my previous email, it's a > different > level altogether. > > Not only can these Ethiopians run 24-25 to close off > a > 10k, they can do it while running the last 5,000m in > under 13:00m. > > I'd bet you that there are some of our top 10,000m > and > marathoners who couldn't break 26 sec for 200m. > > Schiefer > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site > design software > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
You see, Malmo, I wish that is all it is! I truly believe our guys don't work out as much as Geb. Maybe put in the same mileage, but not as many w/o. I don't think its some magic formula, or one specific regimen like a lot of people think. But at the same time, find me one athlete save Kennedy or Goucher who works out as intense as often, and I will be surprised. My point is that I agree with you. There is no secret workout or training program. Just train, and train ridiculously hard and the racing will take care of itself (once the mental aspect side is prepared). M From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Michael Contopoulos'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 19:18:47 -0400 Yup Mike, the Letsrun mentality has infected you. Find one -Original Message- From: Michael Contopoulos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 7:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Malmo, on Letsrun you noted that what Geb does is pretty standard training. I disagree. The guy does 4 days of workouts in a row (not including the in betwen easy hour runs) ON TOP of his 3 hour long run followed by a 1 hour run. hard 15-30km run 1 hour easy sprint workout 1 hour easy hills 1 hours easy 3x1200 to 8x2000 w hour easy You tell me that Meb, Pepper, Abdi, Browne, Johnson are doing 4 workouts in consecutive days (with a "sprint" session in there... which of those guys does a "sprint" session?)...on top of a 3 hour run followed by a one hour run once a week... well... round of drinks is on me. geb trains much harder than our guys. And he's supremely confident. And he's supremely talented. That's pretty darn near impossible to beat. >From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "'edndana'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 >Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 17:18:03 -0400 > >I'm basing my wager on this crowd: > >My guess is that Culpepper is the only one who could run sub-25, with >Bickford and Kennedy close. > >27:13.98 . Meb Keflezighi (Nik) 01 >27:20.56 . Mark Nenow (Pum) 86 >27:25.61 . Alberto Salazar (AW) 82 >27:29.16 .. Craig Virgin (FRRT) 80 >27:31.34 .. Todd Williams (adi) 95 >27:33.93 . Alan Culpepper (adi) 01 >27:37.17 Bruce Bickford (NBal) 85 >27:38.37 Bob Kennedy (Nik) 99 >27:41.05 .... Ed Eyestone (BYU) 85 >27:42.83 Abdi Abdirahman (Nik) 02 > > > >-Original Message- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of edndana >Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 3:43 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > >Malmo - > > I can't tell if you agree or disagree with me from your comment. >I may be wrong, as I am largely basing my observations on the people I >ran against in high school and college. Most of the people that knew >around my ability (9:50 2-mile in HS, 32:00 10K after college) could do >between 24.5 and 25.5 seconds. I've done 25.1 in a race and I am not >particularly fast (My best 100m is 12.5 wind aided). > > So, I can only conclude that guys who are 3-5 minutes faster than me >at 10K could beat me by a few tenths for the 200m. Most of these guys >were a lot faster than me in high school as well. It just doesn't seem >reasomable that the group of guys running 9:00 in high school is not >any faster over 200m than the group of guys running 9:45 - as a group. >Now maybe the distance runners slow down over 200m between high school >and their mid-20's - I certainly didn't, but I also wasn't doing 100+ >miles per week of distance training like I should have been. > >- Ed Parrot > > >- Original Message - >From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "'edndana'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 3:10 PM >Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > I'd be a big seller on that claim. > > > > malmoo > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of edndana > > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 1:01 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > > > > Perhaps our 10k guys (and 5k guys) go about training too much like > > > they would for a marathon and don't focus eno
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
John - You'll get no arguments from me on this point - I do agree that most of the 'top" Americans at 10K probably can't break 24 seconds. And I agree that this puts them at a disadvantage. But it was 24.5 and 25 seconds that were being tossed around and I think there's a world of difference between 24 and 25 seconds. I can't think of any 10K runner under 28:15 who couldn't break 26 seconds, but maybe there are one or two. I"m talking in theory - not whether they actually have done so. In reference to your other post about the workouts you did, keep in mind that I am not talking about workouts. I am talking about what is essentially "theoretical" 200m ability since these guys don't ever race a 200m. A distance runner would never do an all out 200m in a workout. Of course, this all relates to two questions - do we have guys with fast enough basic speed racing the 10K and are they training correctly? The answer to the first one clearly is no for the most part, because some of the best guys in the world can probably run 23 or maybe faster. The second one is harder - I don't know the specifics of what these guys are doing, so I can't answer it. But. . .I tend to think many of them do have good training programs with the proper balance of different stresses. As I said earlier, it's a brutally competitive world, and we can't simply expect to have a stable of guys breaking 27:20 just because 2or 3 other countries do. - Ed parrot - Original Message - From: "John Schiefer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 6:52 PM Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > Ed, you state the following: > > "Sure, if one guy can run 22 and another guy can run > 25, > that will mean something, but Lydiard had it right - > the problem with > distances is not to get more speed but to get the > stamina to hold the > speed > for longer (both through LFD and targeted speedwork). > Think how many > people > can run 53 secs for a 400m (thousands in the U.S. for > certain) and how > few > can hold it for 800m and make nationals. The problem > is not speed." > > - > I agree 100% with this at the top level, but you have > to realize that some of our top American 10,000m guys > simply can't break 24 sec. for 200m. > > As I mentioned in my previous email, it's a different > level altogether. > > Not only can these Ethiopians run 24-25 to close off a > 10k, they can do it while running the last 5,000m in > under 13:00m. > > I'd bet you that there are some of our top 10,000m and > marathoners who couldn't break 26 sec for 200m. > > Schiefer > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com >
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Speaking of 1964 and wild 10,000s, the other night on digital cable I stumbled on the movie, "Running Brave." And, the tape I used for the Zurich meet Saturday happened to have the 1992 (?) MobilOne Indoor meet on it. It was in Fairfax, Va., the first year with the Martin surface. Noureddine Morceli won the mile. Eamonn Coghlan ran 4:07 in a master's mile (was he 40 yet in early 1992???) with Ken Popejoy second. Two of the announcers were? Frank Shorter and Craig Masback. As a bonus, the last hour of the tape had the 1996 Ill. H.S. state XC meet with Jorge Torres winning as a sophomore, the first of his three state XC titles. There was a pretty good freshman in 24th place named Don Sage. Signed, Track-on-TV starved American Lee Nichols wrote: > But if you look at the major championships, going back at least to > the 1964 Olympics, the 10K is consistently one of the wildest races. > > Lee Nichols > Assistant News Editor > The Austin Chronicle > 512/454-5766, ext. 138 > fax 512/458-6910 > http://austinchronicle.com
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
14:57 for 5000m among the women is not nearly as impressive as 12:57 for men. Also, the nature of the races was completely different, that of the women being executed in fairly equally pace (albeit incomparably more demanding tahn prevuious runs with the exception of Wang's and Radcliffe's near-solo efforts). In contrast, the pace among the men was lifted abruptly as the Ethiopians suddenly injected a 2:34.5 minute Km. UG == Quoting Lee Nichols <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > >OK, enough with drummond. Did you notice that the Ethiopians run > >the last 5000 of the 10,000 in 12:57? > > > The final half in the women's 10K was almost as impressive. I think > Adere did 14:57 and Werknesh did 15:00. > > Damn, I wish I could have seen both of those. Funny -- so many track > fans (especially the casual, once-every-four-years ones), especially > here in the US, can't imagine that watching people run around a track > 25 times can be interesting, and think it's all about the sprints. > But if you look at the major championships, going back at least to > the 1964 Olympics, the 10K is consistently one of the wildest races. > Remember that Helsinki 10K? I think the first 4 were only about 0.3 > seconds apart, and fifth about 0.5 behind that? > -- > Lee Nichols > Assistant News Editor > The Austin Chronicle > 512/454-5766, ext. 138 > fax 512/458-6910 > http://austinchronicle.com > - This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
was able to view running brave again myself recently. watching the tokyo scenes, i thought to myself how much it looked like the stadium in edmonton (was there for the worlds)sure enough, credits say that's where it was filmed... From: Mike Prizy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: Mike Prizy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Lee Nichols <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 13:35:34 -0500 Speaking of 1964 and wild 10,000s, the other night on digital cable I stumbled on the movie, "Running Brave." And, the tape I used for the Zurich meet Saturday happened to have the 1992 (?) MobilOne Indoor meet on it. It was in Fairfax, Va., the first year with the Martin surface. Noureddine Morceli won the mile. Eamonn Coghlan ran 4:07 in a master's mile (was he 40 yet in early 1992???) with Ken Popejoy second. Two of the announcers were? Frank Shorter and Craig Masback. As a bonus, the last hour of the tape had the 1996 Ill. H.S. state XC meet with Jorge Torres winning as a sophomore, the first of his three state XC titles. There was a pretty good freshman in 24th place named Don Sage. Signed, Track-on-TV starved American Lee Nichols wrote: > But if you look at the major championships, going back at least to > the 1964 Olympics, the 10K is consistently one of the wildest races. > > Lee Nichols > Assistant News Editor > The Austin Chronicle > 512/454-5766, ext. 138 > fax 512/458-6910 > http://austinchronicle.com _ Get MSN 8 and help protect your children with advanced parental controls. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/parental
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
was able to view running brave again myself recently. watching the tokyo scenes, i thought to myself how much it looked like the stadium in edmonton (was there for the worlds)sure enough, credits say that's where it was filmed... I'm surprised -- you can see football field markings on the infield, so I assumed it was somewhere in the U.S. Maybe that's where the CFL's Edmonton Eskimos play. -- Lee Nichols Assistant News Editor The Austin Chronicle 512/454-5766, ext. 138 fax 512/458-6910 http://austinchronicle.com
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
true enoughone of the reasons i looked closely at the credits because if you look into the crowds during the race scenes, you'll notice a lot of green and gold AND streams of people filing up and out of the stadiummy guess is they were allowed to shoot during halftime or just after an Eskimo game. From: Lee Nichols <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: Lee Nichols <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 15:00:19 -0500 was able to view running brave again myself recently. watching the tokyo scenes, i thought to myself how much it looked like the stadium in edmonton (was there for the worlds)sure enough, credits say that's where it was filmed... I'm surprised -- you can see football field markings on the infield, so I assumed it was somewhere in the U.S. Maybe that's where the CFL's Edmonton Eskimos play. -- Lee Nichols Assistant News Editor The Austin Chronicle 512/454-5766, ext. 138 fax 512/458-6910 http://austinchronicle.com _ Get MSN 8 and enjoy automatic e-mail virus protection. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
True enough! John --- edndana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > John - > > You'll get no arguments from me on this point - > I do agree that most of > the 'top" Americans at 10K probably can't break 24 > seconds. And I agree > that this puts them at a disadvantage. But it was > 24.5 and 25 seconds that > were being tossed around and I think there's a world > of difference between > 24 and 25 seconds. I can't think of any 10K runner > under 28:15 who couldn't > break 26 seconds, but maybe there are one or two. > I"m talking in theory - > not whether they actually have done so. > > In reference to your other post about the workouts > you did, keep in mind > that I am not talking about workouts. I am talking > about what is > essentially "theoretical" 200m ability since these > guys don't ever race a > 200m. A distance runner would never do an all out > 200m in a workout. Of > course, this all relates to two questions - do we > have guys with fast enough > basic speed racing the 10K and are they training > correctly? The answer to > the first one clearly is no for the most part, > because some of the best guys > in the world can probably run 23 or maybe faster. > The second one is > harder - I don't know the specifics of what these > guys are doing, so I can't > answer it. But. . .I tend to think many of them do > have good training > programs with the proper balance of different > stresses. As I said earlier, > it's a brutally competitive world, and we can't > simply expect to have a > stable of guys breaking 27:20 just because 2or 3 > other countries do. > > - Ed parrot > > > - Original Message - > From: "John Schiefer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 6:52 PM > Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > Ed, you state the following: > > > > "Sure, if one guy can run 22 and another guy can > run > > 25, > > that will mean something, but Lydiard had it right > - > > the problem with > > distances is not to get more speed but to get the > > stamina to hold the > > speed > > for longer (both through LFD and targeted > speedwork). > > Think how many > > people > > can run 53 secs for a 400m (thousands in the U.S. > for > > certain) and how > > few > > can hold it for 800m and make nationals. The > problem > > is not speed." > > > > - > > I agree 100% with this at the top level, but you > have > > to realize that some of our top American 10,000m > guys > > simply can't break 24 sec. for 200m. > > > > As I mentioned in my previous email, it's a > different > > level altogether. > > > > Not only can these Ethiopians run 24-25 to close > off a > > 10k, they can do it while running the last 5,000m > in > > under 13:00m. > > > > I'd bet you that there are some of our top 10,000m > and > > marathoners who couldn't break 26 sec for 200m. > > > > Schiefer > > > > __ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site > design software > > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com > > > > __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
The real question is how does Geb define "easy" on his training runs. I'm sure easy for Geb is about 5:45 pace. Schiefer --- malmo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yup Mike, the Letsrun mentality has infected you. > Find one > > > > -Original Message- > From: Michael Contopoulos > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 7:02 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > Malmo, on Letsrun you noted that what Geb does is > pretty standard > training. > I disagree. The guy does 4 days of workouts in a > row (not including the > in > betwen easy hour runs) ON TOP of his 3 hour long run > followed by a 1 > hour > run. > > hard 15-30km run > 1 hour easy > > sprint workout > 1 hour easy > > hills > 1 hours easy > > 3x1200 to 8x2000 > w hour easy > > You tell me that Meb, Pepper, Abdi, Browne, Johnson > are doing 4 workouts > in > consecutive days (with a "sprint" session in > there... which of those > guys > does a "sprint" session?)...on top of a 3 hour run > followed by a one > hour > run once a week... well... round of drinks is on me. > geb trains much > harder > than our guys. And he's supremely confident. And > he's supremely > talented. > That's pretty darn near impossible to beat. > > > >From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: "'edndana'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > >Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 17:18:03 -0400 > > > >I'm basing my wager on this crowd: > > > >My guess is that Culpepper is the only one who > could run sub-25, with > >Bickford and Kennedy close. > > > >27:13.98 . Meb Keflezighi (Nik) 01 > >27:20.56 . Mark Nenow (Pum) 86 > >27:25.61 . Alberto Salazar (AW) 82 > >27:29.16 .. Craig Virgin (FRRT) 80 > >27:31.34 .. Todd Williams (adi) 95 > >27:33.93 ..... Alan Culpepper (adi) 01 > >27:37.17 Bruce Bickford (NBal) 85 > >27:38.37 Bob Kennedy (Nik) 99 > >27:41.05 Ed Eyestone (BYU) 85 > >27:42.83 Abdi Abdirahman (Nik) 02 > > > > > > > >-Original Message- > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of edndana > >Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 3:43 PM > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > > >Malmo - > > > > I can't tell if you agree or disagree with me > from your comment. > >I may be wrong, as I am largely basing my > observations on the people I > >ran against in high school and college. Most of > the people that knew > >around my ability (9:50 2-mile in HS, 32:00 10K > after college) could do > > >between 24.5 and 25.5 seconds. I've done 25.1 in a > race and I am not > >particularly fast (My best 100m is 12.5 wind > aided). > > > > So, I can only conclude that guys who are 3-5 > minutes faster than me > > >at 10K could beat me by a few tenths for the 200m. > Most of these guys > >were a lot faster than me in high school as well. > It just doesn't seem > > >reasomable that the group of guys running 9:00 in > high school is not > >any faster over 200m than the group of guys running > 9:45 - as a group. > > >Now maybe the distance runners slow down over 200m > between high school > >and their mid-20's - I certainly didn't, but I also > wasn't doing 100+ > >miles per week of distance training like I should > have been. > > > >- Ed Parrot > > > > > >- Original Message - > >From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: "'edndana'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 3:10 PM > >Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > > > > I'd be a big seller on that claim. > > > > > > malmoo > > > > > > -Original Message- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of edndana > > > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 1:01 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > > > > > > > Perhaps our 10k guys (and 5k guys) go about > training too much like > > > > > they would for a marathon and don't focus > enough on speed. Geb > > > > constantly > > > talks > > > > about improving his speed. How many of our > 10k guys can run 24.5 > > > > flat > > > > > > > out let alone at the end of a 10k? > > > > > > Jeez, I'm sure at least 8 of our top 10 10K guys > could run 24.5 all > > > out, if not all of them. They may never > actually have done so, but > > > I bet nearly all of them could. > > > - Ed Parrot > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _ > Get MSN 8 and help protect your children with > advanced parental > controls. > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/parental > > > __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
John, From his 5k, 10k and marathon times I'd guess he's running at 5:20 pace for an easier recovery run, 5:00-5:20 for your everyday - garden variety long run, maybe even dropping it down to 4:48 pace near the end. Something I read from Dellinger a number of years back sticks out in my mind. Now I'm paraphrasing here using a badly damaged brain this AM of too much coffee but I believe he said something to the effect that the next generation of dominant distance runner will not focus on the weekly mileage so much as they will be running a moderate volume of weekly mileage at much faster paces all around. In his estimation, almost everything such as long runs and "recovery" days would be done at approx 5 minute pace, while still maintaining an appropriate (for them) volume of work at 1500, 5k and 10k paces. I can dig up the actual quote from his book in the early 80's called "Training for Competitive Distance Runners" or something close, published by Runner's World Press in 1984 (?). Looks like Bill saw the writing on the wall back 20 years ago. Seems similar to the wall Coe saw in the early 80's as well. Joe John Schiefer wrote: The real question is how does Geb define "easy" on his training runs. I'm sure easy for Geb is about 5:45 pace. Schiefer --- malmo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yup Mike, the Letsrun mentality has infected you. Find one -Original Message- From: Michael Contopoulos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 7:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Malmo, on Letsrun you noted that what Geb does is pretty standard training. I disagree. The guy does 4 days of workouts in a row (not including the in betwen easy hour runs) ON TOP of his 3 hour long run followed by a 1 hour run. hard 15-30km run 1 hour easy sprint workout 1 hour easy hills 1 hours easy 3x1200 to 8x2000 w hour easy You tell me that Meb, Pepper, Abdi, Browne, Johnson are doing 4 workouts in consecutive days (with a "sprint" session in there... which of those guys does a "sprint" session?)...on top of a 3 hour run followed by a one hour run once a week... well... round of drinks is on me. geb trains much harder than our guys. And he's supremely confident. And he's supremely talented. That's pretty darn near impossible to beat. From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'edndana'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 17:18:03 -0400 I'm basing my wager on this crowd: My guess is that Culpepper is the only one who could run sub-25, with Bickford and Kennedy close. 27:13.98 . Meb Keflezighi (Nik) 01 27:20.56 . Mark Nenow (Pum) 86 27:25.61 . Alberto Salazar (AW) 82 27:29.16 .. Craig Virgin (FRRT) 80 27:31.34 .. Todd Williams (adi) 95 27:33.93 . Alan Culpepper (adi) 01 27:37.17 Bruce Bickford (NBal) 85 27:38.37 Bob Kennedy (Nik) 99 27:41.05 Ed Eyestone (BYU) 85 27:42.83 Abdi Abdirahman (Nik) 02 -----Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of edndana Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 3:43 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Malmo - I can't tell if you agree or disagree with me from your comment. I may be wrong, as I am largely basing my observations on the people I ran against in high school and college. Most of the people that knew around my ability (9:50 2-mile in HS, 32:00 10K after college) could do between 24.5 and 25.5 seconds. I've done 25.1 in a race and I am not particularly fast (My best 100m is 12.5 wind aided). So, I can only conclude that guys who are 3-5 minutes faster than me at 10K could beat me by a few tenths for the 200m. Most of these guys were a lot faster than me in high school as well. It just doesn't seem reasomable that the group of guys running 9:00 in high school is not any faster over 200m than the group of guys running 9:45 - as a group. Now maybe the distance runners slow down over 200m between high school and their mid-20's - I certainly didn't, but I also wasn't doing 100+ miles per week of distance training like I should have been. - Ed Parrot - Original Message - From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'edndana'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 3:10 PM Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 I'd be a big seller on that claim. malmoo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of edndana Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 1:01 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Maybe the Americans(and Can men) should take a page out of the books of the 2 best distance runners in North America right now-Emilie Mondor and Courtney Babcock. Mondor broke a 15 year old national record today and Babcock missed by .18. Joe Rubio wrote: > John, > > From his 5k, 10k and marathon times I'd guess he's running at 5:20 pace > for an easier recovery run, 5:00-5:20 for your everyday - garden variety > long run, maybe even dropping it down to 4:48 pace near the end. > > Something I read from Dellinger a number of years back sticks out in my > mind. Now I'm paraphrasing here using a badly damaged brain this AM of > too much coffee but I believe he said something to the effect that the > next generation of dominant distance runner will not focus on the weekly > mileage so much as they will be running a moderate volume of weekly > mileage at much faster paces all around. In his estimation, almost > everything such as long runs and "recovery" days would be done at approx > 5 minute pace, while still maintaining an appropriate (for them) volume > of work at 1500, 5k and 10k paces. I can dig up the actual quote from > his book in the early 80's called "Training for Competitive Distance > Runners" or something close, published by Runner's World Press in 1984 (?). > > Looks like Bill saw the writing on the wall back 20 years ago. Seems > similar to the wall Coe saw in the early 80's as well. > > Joe > > John Schiefer wrote: > > The real question is how does Geb define "easy" on his > > training runs. > > > > I'm sure easy for Geb is about 5:45 pace. > > > > Schiefer > > --- malmo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>Yup Mike, the Letsrun mentality has infected you. > >>Find one > >> > >> > >> > >>-Original Message- > >>From: Michael Contopoulos > >>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 7:02 PM > >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > >> > >> > >>Malmo, on Letsrun you noted that what Geb does is > >>pretty standard > >>training. > >>I disagree. The guy does 4 days of workouts in a > >>row (not including the > >>in > >>betwen easy hour runs) ON TOP of his 3 hour long run > >>followed by a 1 > >>hour > >>run. > >> > >>hard 15-30km run > >>1 hour easy > >> > >>sprint workout > >>1 hour easy > >> > >>hills > >>1 hours easy > >> > >>3x1200 to 8x2000 > >>w hour easy > >> > >>You tell me that Meb, Pepper, Abdi, Browne, Johnson > >>are doing 4 workouts > >>in > >>consecutive days (with a "sprint" session in > >>there... which of those > >>guys > >>does a "sprint" session?)...on top of a 3 hour run > >>followed by a one > >>hour > >>run once a week... well... round of drinks is on me. > >> geb trains much > >>harder > >>than our guys. And he's supremely confident. And > >>he's supremely > >>talented. > >>That's pretty darn near impossible to beat. > >> > >> > >> > >>>From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>Reply-To: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>To: "'edndana'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > >> > >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> > >>>Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > >>>Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 17:18:03 -0400 > >>> > >>>I'm basing my wager on this crowd: > >>> > >>>My guess is that Culpepper is the only one who > >> > >>could run sub-25, with > >> > >>>Bickford and Kennedy close. > >>> > >>>27:13.98 . Meb Keflezighi (Nik) 01 > >>>27:20.56 . Mark Nenow (Pum) 86 > >>>27:25.61 . Alberto Salazar (AW) 82 > >>>27:29.16 .. Craig Virgin (FRRT) 80 > >>>27:31.34 .. Todd Williams (adi) 95 > >>>27:33.93 . Alan Culpepper (adi) 01 > >>>27:37.17 Bruce Bickford (NBal) 85 > >>>27:38.37 Bob Kennedy (Nik) 99 > >>>27:41.05 Ed Eyestone (BYU) 85 > >>>27:42.83 Abdi Abdirahman (Nik) 02 > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>-Original Message- > >>
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
I tend to think that Khalid Khannouchi and Deena Drossin would have something to say about who the 2 best distance runners in Norh America are if you include marathoners as distance runners. I'm not so sure Regina couldn't still break 14:59, either. As for the moderate volume at faster paces, it's certainly not true of today's world class marathoners or cross country runners. And if the training schedule for Geb below is accurate, he's doing somewhere between 120 and 150 mpw, not exactly "moderate" mileage by most standards. Many of today's runners are actually doing as much or more mileage and doing it faster. - Ed Parrot - Original Message - From: "Martin J. Dixon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 2:01 PM Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > Maybe the Americans(and Can men) should take a page out of the books of the 2 > best distance runners in North America right now-Emilie Mondor and Courtney > Babcock. Mondor broke a 15 year old national record today and Babcock missed by > .18. > > Joe Rubio wrote: > > > John, > > > > From his 5k, 10k and marathon times I'd guess he's running at 5:20 pace > > for an easier recovery run, 5:00-5:20 for your everyday - garden variety > > long run, maybe even dropping it down to 4:48 pace near the end. > > > > Something I read from Dellinger a number of years back sticks out in my > > mind. Now I'm paraphrasing here using a badly damaged brain this AM of > > too much coffee but I believe he said something to the effect that the > > next generation of dominant distance runner will not focus on the weekly > > mileage so much as they will be running a moderate volume of weekly > > mileage at much faster paces all around. In his estimation, almost > > everything such as long runs and "recovery" days would be done at approx > > 5 minute pace, while still maintaining an appropriate (for them) volume > > of work at 1500, 5k and 10k paces. I can dig up the actual quote from > > his book in the early 80's called "Training for Competitive Distance > > Runners" or something close, published by Runner's World Press in 1984 (?). > > > > Looks like Bill saw the writing on the wall back 20 years ago. Seems > > similar to the wall Coe saw in the early 80's as well. > > > > Joe > > > > John Schiefer wrote: > > > The real question is how does Geb define "easy" on his > > > training runs. > > > > > > I'm sure easy for Geb is about 5:45 pace. > > > > > > Schiefer > > > --- malmo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >>Yup Mike, the Letsrun mentality has infected you. > > >>Find one > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>-Original Message- > > >>From: Michael Contopoulos > > >>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 7:02 PM > > >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >>Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > >> > > >> > > >>Malmo, on Letsrun you noted that what Geb does is > > >>pretty standard > > >>training. > > >>I disagree. The guy does 4 days of workouts in a > > >>row (not including the > > >>in > > >>betwen easy hour runs) ON TOP of his 3 hour long run > > >>followed by a 1 > > >>hour > > >>run. > > >> > > >>hard 15-30km run > > >>1 hour easy > > >> > > >>sprint workout > > >>1 hour easy > > >> > > >>hills > > >>1 hours easy > > >> > > >>3x1200 to 8x2000 > > >>w hour easy > > >> > > >>You tell me that Meb, Pepper, Abdi, Browne, Johnson > > >>are doing 4 workouts > > >>in > > >>consecutive days (with a "sprint" session in > > >>there... which of those > > >>guys > > >>does a "sprint" session?)...on top of a 3 hour run > > >>followed by a one > > >>hour > > >>run once a week... well... round of drinks is on me. > > >> geb trains much > > >>harder > > >>than our guys. And he's supremely confident. And > > >>he's supremely > > >>talented. > > >>That's pretty darn near impossible to beat. > > >> > > >> > > >&
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
A young man I coach trained in Ethiopia for a month or so and was able to run with and observe Haile's training patterns (not too long after Haile ran a decent marathon debut of 2 hours 6 minutes). His reflections were: HAILE AND THE ETHIOPIAN TRAINING APPROACH Hard workouts three times per week and maybe a long run as well. They run 13 times per week. No 3 x per day training. For example, the hard days for Haile and the National Squad guys were Monday, Wednesday and Friday. As he is now in a marathon programme, he would typically run a 20km hard tempo run one day, a track workout another day, and then hills or another long hard run (he did 2hrs10mins one workout) for the third workout of the week. All their hard running is done in the morning, usually very early, starting at 6.30am, and all the hard work is done with a group. The second run of the day is solo training, i.e unstructured and whatever they feel like. Even then, guys will often meet up together and run informally. It seems the Ethiopians are generally very relaxed about their training. When they do a hard workout they run very, very hard. On their other recovery days, if they feel good/are having a nice chat theyll run further. If they feel tired theyll run short. The easy runs in the afternoons and the recovery days can bevery, very easy, especially the afternoon runs on workout days. Once we did a 32 minute pm run which I doubt was even 4miles long. Haile said beforehand. Today, we are walking. He was not wrong! Joe Rubio wrote: > John, > > From his 5k, 10k and marathon times I'd guess he's running at 5:20 pace > for an easier recovery run, 5:00-5:20 for your everyday - garden variety > long run, maybe even dropping it down to 4:48 pace near the end. > > Something I read from Dellinger a number of years back sticks out in my > mind. Now I'm paraphrasing here using a badly damaged brain this AM of > too much coffee but I believe he said something to the effect that the > next generation of dominant distance runner will not focus on the weekly > mileage so much as they will be running a moderate volume of weekly > mileage at much faster paces all around. In his estimation, almost > everything such as long runs and "recovery" days would be done at approx > 5 minute pace, while still maintaining an appropriate (for them) volume > of work at 1500, 5k and 10k paces. I can dig up the actual quote from > his book in the early 80's called "Training for Competitive Distance > Runners" or something close, published by Runner's World Press in 1984 (?). > > Looks like Bill saw the writing on the wall back 20 years ago. Seems > similar to the wall Coe saw in the early 80's as well. > > Joe > > John Schiefer wrote: > > The real question is how does Geb define "easy" on his > > training runs. > > > > I'm sure easy for Geb is about 5:45 pace. > > > > Schiefer > > --- malmo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>Yup Mike, the Letsrun mentality has infected you. > >>Find one > >> > >> > >> > >>-Original Message- > >>From: Michael Contopoulos > >>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 7:02 PM > >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > >> > >> > >>Malmo, on Letsrun you noted that what Geb does is > >>pretty standard > >>training. > >>I disagree. The guy does 4 days of workouts in a > >>row (not including the > >>in > >>betwen easy hour runs) ON TOP of his 3 hour long run > >>followed by a 1 > >>hour > >>run. > >> > >>hard 15-30km run > >>1 hour easy > >> > >>sprint workout > >>1 hour easy > >> > >>hills > >>1 hours easy > >> > >>3x1200 to 8x2000 > >>w hour easy > >> > >>You tell me that Meb, Pepper, Abdi, Browne, Johnson > >>are doing 4 workouts > >>in > >>consecutive days (with a "sprint" session in > >>there... which of those > >>guys > >>does a "sprint" session?)...on top of a 3 hour run > >>followed by a one > >>hour > >>run once a week... well... round of drinks is on me. > >> geb trains much > >>harder > >>than our guys. And he's supremely confident. And > >>he's supremely > >>talented. > >>That's pretty darn near impossible to beat. > >> > >> > >> > >>>From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
I'm biased obviously but, yeah, as soon as I hit send I realized that I forgot about KK. I don't even think the yanks really compare themselves to him though. Immigrant and all that. Point taken about Drossin though. No Jacobs in Paris so who knows. Keep in mind that Mondor was running 15:42 last year and is just moving up to the 5000. She could be just scratching the surface. The point being that these 2 have been pushing each other all year and look what happened. 1 and 3 all time on the Canuck list. edndana wrote: > I tend to think that Khalid Khannouchi and Deena Drossin would have > something to say about who the 2 best distance runners in Norh America are > if you include marathoners as distance runners. I'm not so sure Regina > couldn't still break 14:59, either. > > As for the moderate volume at faster paces, it's certainly not true of > today's world class marathoners or cross country runners. And if the > training schedule for Geb below is accurate, he's doing somewhere between > 120 and 150 mpw, not exactly "moderate" mileage by most standards. Many of > today's runners are actually doing as much or more mileage and doing it > faster. > > - Ed Parrot > > - Original Message -
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Joe - Well. ..you and I are arguing over semantics, and I don't think our argument has anything to do with whatever "problem" there is. Five years ago, I sensed more of the "excuse" mentality from American runners - I don't so much any more. Maybe they aren't training hard enough - I really am not sure - but I don't think we have the same mentality problem we used to have. As for Geb's hard days in a row, Bruce Lehane's subsequent post would seem to contradict it. But the world's best marathoners (including Americans) have been doing a variation on that for at least 30 years. Derek Clayon may have been the first to really push that particular envelope, although I can't help wondering if Lydiard also did during his experimentation in the 1950's and din't have the same success. I don't know what kind of training Khannouchi does, but plenty of the Africans do numerous medium to hard days in a row. For the 5K/10K, true Lydiard disciples did the same thing. Lydiard's hill phase was five days per week of hills/speed and his speed phase was 4-5 days of speed. As I'm sure you'll agree, this is nothing new. We are unfortunately victims of the hard-easy philosophy in this country. That sometimes works, even at the elite level, but I don't believe it is the surest way to success. - Ed - Original Message - From: "Joe Rubio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <"Athletics" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"@mtac2.prodigy.net> Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 6:43 PM Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > Ed, > > > You think maybe this is part of our "problem" as a distance running > nation is the fact that we are arguing over a few miles each way whereas > athletes in other countries are thinking 120-150 or whatever they > actually do at whatever pace they actually do it is just plain old > average weekly training if you want to be competitive? > > Joe > > > > edndana wrote: > > I don't know, I can't classify 150 mpw, which is no less than probably > > 80-90% of the world's elite have ever done, as moderate. 120 mpw, sure, > > that's the very upper end of moderate for an elite male, but what Geb does > > does not look like that much less than the top guys have been doing for 30 > > years. Look at the Olympic 5/10/Mar medalists and they have mostly been > > doing 120-160 since at least 1972, so we can't call Geb moderate unless we > > compare him to guys who were in the small minority. > > > > I doubt the median of the top 10 guys in the 5K/10K/Mar has changed all that > > much over the past 30 years, and we can't call that moderate. Knowing to > > run 140-160 instead of 200 is old news, and was old news even back when > > Bowerman made his observation in the early 1970's. > > > > - Ed Parrot > > - Original Message - > > From: "Joe Rubio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: "Martin J. Dixon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 5:02 PM > > Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > > > > >>Ed, > >> > >>"High" mileage by my definition are what a guy like Scobey did in the > >>early 70's in response to Bedford. 210 a week with a hard track workout > >>each day at lunch. 12 in the AM, 6 at lunch with interval work, 12 > >>before dinner every day except Sunday when it was 30 as hard as he could > >>make it for a month straight. THAT's high mileage and high intensity. > >>I'm pretty sure Bill set an AR a few weeks after completing that month. > >> In my mind, 60-100 a week less than this volume would classify as > >>moderate. > >> > >>Joe > >> > >>edndana wrote: > >> > >>>I tend to think that Khalid Khannouchi and Deena Drossin would have > >>>something to say about who the 2 best distance runners in Norh America > >> > > are > > > >>>if you include marathoners as distance runners. I'm not so sure Regina > >>>couldn't still break 14:59, either. > >>> > >>>As for the moderate volume at faster paces, it's certainly not true of > >>>today's world class marathoners or cross country runners. And if the > >>>training schedule for Geb below is accurate, he's doing somewhere > >> > > between > > > >>>120 and 150 mpw, not exactly
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Mike, clealy you've never read my logs then! Secondly, you read a sample of one week of Gebrselassie's training, posted somewhere in cyberspace,, then extrapolate and profess that every week of Gebs training must be similar. Thirdly, I don't see anything at all out of the ordinary about Geb's training. In spite of what you want to convince yourself, you have an entirely different perspective when it come to training or racing backgrounds. Finally, you simply do not understand distance running at all if you are convinced that our 10k guys could run under 25 seconds for a 200m - running start included - by an 8:2 ratio. They can't. malmo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Contopoulos Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 5:47 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 You guys are missing the point! The point is not 120-150 miles a week... its 4 days of working out in a row. Every coach I've spoken to or read from, every American log I have EVER read (including Hodge's Malmos, McArdles and the rest of the college crew... etc) and out of ALL the guys I have ever run with or talked to about training (the Colorado team, some people from Arkansas, Iona, Stanford, etc)... NO ONE does 4 workouts back to back to back to back and then a 3 hour long run followed by an hour run later in the day. NO ONE. Its not the volume alone, people. I can run 20 miles a day with a year buildup without getting injured. Especially if it were my job. What I and most people can't or maybe I should say are AFRAID to do is throw in consistent INTENSITY within that mileage... including a sprint workout. Maybe its cause Americans are more "realists" and think that they will get injured doing that when in fact they may very well not. And perhaps an Ehoipian or Kenyan just doesn't think that they will get hurt because they don't put limits on their bodies... while racing or training. M >From: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "\"Athletics\"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 >Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 17:19:05 -0400 > >I don't know, I can't classify 150 mpw, which is no less than probably >80-90% of the world's elite have ever done, as moderate. 120 mpw, >sure, that's the very upper end of moderate for an elite male, but what >Geb does does not look like that much less than the top guys have been >doing for 30 years. Look at the Olympic 5/10/Mar medalists and they >have mostly been doing 120-160 since at least 1972, so we can't call >Geb moderate unless we compare him to guys who were in the small >minority. > >I doubt the median of the top 10 guys in the 5K/10K/Mar has changed all >that >much over the past 30 years, and we can't call that moderate. Knowing to >run 140-160 instead of 200 is old news, and was old news even back when >Bowerman made his observation in the early 1970's. > >- Ed Parrot >----- Original Message - >From: "Joe Rubio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Cc: "Martin J. Dixon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 5:02 PM >Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > Ed, > > > > "High" mileage by my definition are what a guy like Scobey did in > > the early 70's in response to Bedford. 210 a week with a hard track > > workout each day at lunch. 12 in the AM, 6 at lunch with interval > > work, 12 before dinner every day except Sunday when it was 30 as > > hard as he could make it for a month straight. THAT's high mileage > > and high intensity. I'm pretty sure Bill set an AR a few weeks after completing that month. > >In my mind, 60-100 a week less than this volume would classify as > > moderate. > > > > Joe > > > > edndana wrote: > > > I tend to think that Khalid Khannouchi and Deena Drossin would > > > have something to say about who the 2 best distance runners in > > > Norh America >are > > > if you include marathoners as distance runners. I'm not so sure >Regina > > > couldn't still break 14:59, either. > > > > > > As for the moderate volume at faster paces, it's certainly not > > > true of today's world class marathoners or cross country runners. > > > And if the training schedule for Geb below is accurate, he's doing > > > somewhere >between > > > 120 and 150 mpw, not exactly "moderate" mil
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
I wasn't addressing anyone specifically. I was addressing those who think they are getting the inside scoop by reading the message boards. Even Track and Field News has been duped by printing in their magazine a bogus post on the LetsRun message board as fact a year ago. malmo -Original Message- From: John Sun [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 5:43 PM To: malmo; 'John Schiefer'; 'edndana'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Malmo, Don't know which John you were addressing, but if you read my email I was the one who called BS on the 24.5 rumor by posting the actual splits. If I used the wrong terminology by saying reported instead of claimed then many apologies. If you remember, this whole thread (which I didn't start) was based on the premise that Bekele finished his last 200 in 24.5. John --- malmo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > John, > > When was 24.5 ever reported? Maybe you've been > spending too much time > lurking at Letsrun? John Schieffer's Track&Field > Media.com used to say, > "Don't believe everything you read" Take notes. > > Every race this year is said to "close" (whoever > came up with that > idiom?) in :24 by kids on the message boards. The > etiology of these > message board viruses goes like this: Posted on > Dyestat, then posted on > Letsrun, then recycled verbatim on track Listserve > as "reported fact" > until some grown-up finally steps in and says > "bullshit." > > malmo > > > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Sun > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 8:05 PM > To: John Schiefer; edndana; > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > This whole argument might be a moot point because it > seems Bekele's closing 200 in 24.x is one of those > urban Internet legends. I haven't seen the race but > here are Bekele's final splits from Track & Field > News: > > 12.9, 26.1, 55.0, 1:56.6, 2:59.4, 4:02.8 > > Very impressive indeed but not close to the 24.x as originally > reported. > > --- John Schiefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ed, you state the following: > > > > "Sure, if one guy can run 22 and another guy can > run > > > > 25, > > that will mean something, but Lydiard had it right > > - > > the problem with > > distances is not to get more speed but to get the > > stamina to hold the > > speed > > for longer (both through LFD and targeted > > speedwork). > > Think how many > > people > > can run 53 secs for a 400m (thousands in the U.S. > > for > > certain) and how > > few > > can hold it for 800m and make nationals. The > > problem > > is not speed." > > > > - > > I agree 100% with this at the top level, but you > > have > > to realize that some of our top American 10,000m > > guys > > simply can't break 24 sec. for 200m. > > > > As I mentioned in my previous email, it's a > > different > > level altogether. > > > > Not only can these Ethiopians run 24-25 to close > off > > a > > 10k, they can do it while running the last 5,000m > in > > under 13:00m. > > > > I'd bet you that there are some of our top 10,000m > > and > > marathoners who couldn't break 26 sec for 200m. > > > > Schiefer > > > > __ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site > > design software > > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com > > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site > design software > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com > > __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
John, When was 24.5 ever reported? Maybe you've been spending too much time lurking at Letsrun? John Schieffer's Track&Field Media.com used to say, "Don't believe everything you read" Take notes. Every race this year is said to "close" (whoever came up with that idiom?) in :24 by kids on the message boards. The etiology of these message board viruses goes like this: Posted on Dyestat, then posted on Letsrun, then recycled verbatim on track Listserve as "reported fact" until some grown-up finally steps in and says "bullshit." malmo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Sun Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 8:05 PM To: John Schiefer; edndana; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 This whole argument might be a moot point because it seems Bekele's closing 200 in 24.x is one of those urban Internet legends. I haven't seen the race but here are Bekele's final splits from Track & Field News: 12.9, 26.1, 55.0, 1:56.6, 2:59.4, 4:02.8 Very impressive indeed but not close to the 24.x as originally reported. --- John Schiefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ed, you state the following: > > "Sure, if one guy can run 22 and another guy can run > > 25, > that will mean something, but Lydiard had it right > - > the problem with > distances is not to get more speed but to get the > stamina to hold the > speed > for longer (both through LFD and targeted > speedwork). > Think how many > people > can run 53 secs for a 400m (thousands in the U.S. > for > certain) and how > few > can hold it for 800m and make nationals. The > problem > is not speed." > > - > I agree 100% with this at the top level, but you > have > to realize that some of our top American 10,000m > guys > simply can't break 24 sec. for 200m. > > As I mentioned in my previous email, it's a > different > level altogether. > > Not only can these Ethiopians run 24-25 to close off > a > 10k, they can do it while running the last 5,000m in > under 13:00m. > > I'd bet you that there are some of our top 10,000m > and > marathoners who couldn't break 26 sec for 200m. > > Schiefer > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site > design software > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Malmo, Don't know which John you were addressing, but if you read my email I was the one who called BS on the 24.5 rumor by posting the actual splits. If I used the wrong terminology by saying reported instead of claimed then many apologies. If you remember, this whole thread (which I didn't start) was based on the premise that Bekele finished his last 200 in 24.5. John --- malmo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > John, > > When was 24.5 ever reported? Maybe you've been > spending too much time > lurking at Letsrun? John Schieffer's Track&Field > Media.com used to say, > "Don't believe everything you read" Take notes. > > Every race this year is said to "close" (whoever > came up with that > idiom?) in :24 by kids on the message boards. The > etiology of these > message board viruses goes like this: Posted on > Dyestat, then posted on > Letsrun, then recycled verbatim on track Listserve > as "reported fact" > until some grown-up finally steps in and says > "bullshit." > > malmo > > > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of John Sun > Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 8:05 PM > To: John Schiefer; edndana; > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > This whole argument might be a moot point because it > seems Bekele's closing 200 in 24.x is one of those > urban Internet legends. I haven't seen the race but > here are Bekele's final splits from Track & Field > News: > > 12.9, 26.1, 55.0, 1:56.6, 2:59.4, 4:02.8 > > Very impressive indeed but not close to the 24.x as > originally reported. > > --- John Schiefer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Ed, you state the following: > > > > "Sure, if one guy can run 22 and another guy can > run > > > > 25, > > that will mean something, but Lydiard had it right > > - > > the problem with > > distances is not to get more speed but to get the > > stamina to hold the > > speed > > for longer (both through LFD and targeted > > speedwork). > > Think how many > > people > > can run 53 secs for a 400m (thousands in the U.S. > > for > > certain) and how > > few > > can hold it for 800m and make nationals. The > > problem > > is not speed." > > > > - > > I agree 100% with this at the top level, but you > > have > > to realize that some of our top American 10,000m > > guys > > simply can't break 24 sec. for 200m. > > > > As I mentioned in my previous email, it's a > > different > > level altogether. > > > > Not only can these Ethiopians run 24-25 to close > off > > a > > 10k, they can do it while running the last 5,000m > in > > under 13:00m. > > > > I'd bet you that there are some of our top 10,000m > > and > > marathoners who couldn't break 26 sec for 200m. > > > > Schiefer > > > > __ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site > > design software > > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com > > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site > design software > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com > > __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Ed, "High" mileage by my definition are what a guy like Scobey did in the early 70's in response to Bedford. 210 a week with a hard track workout each day at lunch. 12 in the AM, 6 at lunch with interval work, 12 before dinner every day except Sunday when it was 30 as hard as he could make it for a month straight. THAT's high mileage and high intensity. I'm pretty sure Bill set an AR a few weeks after completing that month. In my mind, 60-100 a week less than this volume would classify as moderate. Joe edndana wrote: I tend to think that Khalid Khannouchi and Deena Drossin would have something to say about who the 2 best distance runners in Norh America are if you include marathoners as distance runners. I'm not so sure Regina couldn't still break 14:59, either. As for the moderate volume at faster paces, it's certainly not true of today's world class marathoners or cross country runners. And if the training schedule for Geb below is accurate, he's doing somewhere between 120 and 150 mpw, not exactly "moderate" mileage by most standards. Many of today's runners are actually doing as much or more mileage and doing it faster. - Ed Parrot - Original Message - From: "Martin J. Dixon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 2:01 PM Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Maybe the Americans(and Can men) should take a page out of the books of the 2 best distance runners in North America right now-Emilie Mondor and Courtney Babcock. Mondor broke a 15 year old national record today and Babcock missed by .18. Joe Rubio wrote: John, From his 5k, 10k and marathon times I'd guess he's running at 5:20 pace for an easier recovery run, 5:00-5:20 for your everyday - garden variety long run, maybe even dropping it down to 4:48 pace near the end. Something I read from Dellinger a number of years back sticks out in my mind. Now I'm paraphrasing here using a badly damaged brain this AM of too much coffee but I believe he said something to the effect that the next generation of dominant distance runner will not focus on the weekly mileage so much as they will be running a moderate volume of weekly mileage at much faster paces all around. In his estimation, almost everything such as long runs and "recovery" days would be done at approx 5 minute pace, while still maintaining an appropriate (for them) volume of work at 1500, 5k and 10k paces. I can dig up the actual quote from his book in the early 80's called "Training for Competitive Distance Runners" or something close, published by Runner's World Press in 1984 (?). Looks like Bill saw the writing on the wall back 20 years ago. Seems similar to the wall Coe saw in the early 80's as well. Joe John Schiefer wrote: The real question is how does Geb define "easy" on his training runs. I'm sure easy for Geb is about 5:45 pace. Schiefer --- malmo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yup Mike, the Letsrun mentality has infected you. Find one -Original Message- From: Michael Contopoulos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2003 7:02 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Malmo, on Letsrun you noted that what Geb does is pretty standard training. I disagree. The guy does 4 days of workouts in a row (not including the in betwen easy hour runs) ON TOP of his 3 hour long run followed by a 1 hour run. hard 15-30km run 1 hour easy sprint workout 1 hour easy hills 1 hours easy 3x1200 to 8x2000 w hour easy You tell me that Meb, Pepper, Abdi, Browne, Johnson are doing 4 workouts in consecutive days (with a "sprint" session in there... which of those guys does a "sprint" session?)...on top of a 3 hour run followed by a one hour run once a week... well... round of drinks is on me. geb trains much harder than our guys. And he's supremely confident. And he's supremely talented. That's pretty darn near impossible to beat. From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'edndana'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 17:18:03 -0400 I'm basing my wager on this crowd: My guess is that Culpepper is the only one who could run sub-25, with Bickford and Kennedy close. 27:13.98 . Meb Keflezighi (Nik) 01 27:20.56 . Mark Nenow (Pum) 86 27:25.61 . Alberto Salazar (AW) 82 27:29.16 .. Craig Virgin (FRRT) 80 27:31.34 .. Todd Williams (adi) 95 27:33.93 . Alan Culpepper (adi) 01 27:37.17 Bruce Bickford (NBal) 85 27:38.37 Bob Kennedy (Nik) 99 27:41.05 .... Ed Eyestone (BYU) 85 27:42.83 Abdi Abdirahman (Nik) 02 -Original Message- From: [EM
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
I don't know, I can't classify 150 mpw, which is no less than probably 80-90% of the world's elite have ever done, as moderate. 120 mpw, sure, that's the very upper end of moderate for an elite male, but what Geb does does not look like that much less than the top guys have been doing for 30 years. Look at the Olympic 5/10/Mar medalists and they have mostly been doing 120-160 since at least 1972, so we can't call Geb moderate unless we compare him to guys who were in the small minority. I doubt the median of the top 10 guys in the 5K/10K/Mar has changed all that much over the past 30 years, and we can't call that moderate. Knowing to run 140-160 instead of 200 is old news, and was old news even back when Bowerman made his observation in the early 1970's. - Ed Parrot - Original Message - From: "Joe Rubio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Martin J. Dixon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 5:02 PM Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > Ed, > > "High" mileage by my definition are what a guy like Scobey did in the > early 70's in response to Bedford. 210 a week with a hard track workout > each day at lunch. 12 in the AM, 6 at lunch with interval work, 12 > before dinner every day except Sunday when it was 30 as hard as he could > make it for a month straight. THAT's high mileage and high intensity. > I'm pretty sure Bill set an AR a few weeks after completing that month. >In my mind, 60-100 a week less than this volume would classify as > moderate. > > Joe > > edndana wrote: > > I tend to think that Khalid Khannouchi and Deena Drossin would have > > something to say about who the 2 best distance runners in Norh America are > > if you include marathoners as distance runners. I'm not so sure Regina > > couldn't still break 14:59, either. > > > > As for the moderate volume at faster paces, it's certainly not true of > > today's world class marathoners or cross country runners. And if the > > training schedule for Geb below is accurate, he's doing somewhere between > > 120 and 150 mpw, not exactly "moderate" mileage by most standards. Many of > > today's runners are actually doing as much or more mileage and doing it > > faster. > > > > - Ed Parrot > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Martin J. Dixon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 2:01 PM > > Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > > > > >>Maybe the Americans(and Can men) should take a page out of the books of > > > > the 2 > > > >>best distance runners in North America right now-Emilie Mondor and > > > > Courtney > > > >>Babcock. Mondor broke a 15 year old national record today and Babcock > > > > missed by > > > >>.18. > >> > >>Joe Rubio wrote: > >> > >> > >>>John, > >>> > >>> From his 5k, 10k and marathon times I'd guess he's running at 5:20 pace > >>>for an easier recovery run, 5:00-5:20 for your everyday - garden variety > >>>long run, maybe even dropping it down to 4:48 pace near the end. > >>> > >>>Something I read from Dellinger a number of years back sticks out in my > >>>mind. Now I'm paraphrasing here using a badly damaged brain this AM of > >>>too much coffee but I believe he said something to the effect that the > >>>next generation of dominant distance runner will not focus on the weekly > >>>mileage so much as they will be running a moderate volume of weekly > >>>mileage at much faster paces all around. In his estimation, almost > >>>everything such as long runs and "recovery" days would be done at approx > >>>5 minute pace, while still maintaining an appropriate (for them) volume > >>>of work at 1500, 5k and 10k paces. I can dig up the actual quote from > >>>his book in the early 80's called "Training for Competitive Distance > >>>Runners" or something close, published by Runner's World Press in 1984 > >> > > (?). > > > >>>Looks like Bill saw the writing on the wall back 20 years ago. Seems > >>>similar to the wall Coe saw in the early 80's as well. > >>> > >>>Joe > >>> > >>>John Schiefer wrote: > >>> > >>>>The real question is how does
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
You guys are missing the point! The point is not 120-150 miles a week... its 4 days of working out in a row. Every coach I've spoken to or read from, every American log I have EVER read (including Hodge's Malmos, McArdles and the rest of the college crew... etc) and out of ALL the guys I have ever run with or talked to about training (the Colorado team, some people from Arkansas, Iona, Stanford, etc)... NO ONE does 4 workouts back to back to back to back and then a 3 hour long run followed by an hour run later in the day. NO ONE. Its not the volume alone, people. I can run 20 miles a day with a year buildup without getting injured. Especially if it were my job. What I and most people can't or maybe I should say are AFRAID to do is throw in consistent INTENSITY within that mileage... including a sprint workout. Maybe its cause Americans are more "realists" and think that they will get injured doing that when in fact they may very well not. And perhaps an Ehoipian or Kenyan just doesn't think that they will get hurt because they don't put limits on their bodies... while racing or training. M From: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "\"Athletics\"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 17:19:05 -0400 I don't know, I can't classify 150 mpw, which is no less than probably 80-90% of the world's elite have ever done, as moderate. 120 mpw, sure, that's the very upper end of moderate for an elite male, but what Geb does does not look like that much less than the top guys have been doing for 30 years. Look at the Olympic 5/10/Mar medalists and they have mostly been doing 120-160 since at least 1972, so we can't call Geb moderate unless we compare him to guys who were in the small minority. I doubt the median of the top 10 guys in the 5K/10K/Mar has changed all that much over the past 30 years, and we can't call that moderate. Knowing to run 140-160 instead of 200 is old news, and was old news even back when Bowerman made his observation in the early 1970's. - Ed Parrot - Original Message - From: "Joe Rubio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Martin J. Dixon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 5:02 PM Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > Ed, > > "High" mileage by my definition are what a guy like Scobey did in the > early 70's in response to Bedford. 210 a week with a hard track workout > each day at lunch. 12 in the AM, 6 at lunch with interval work, 12 > before dinner every day except Sunday when it was 30 as hard as he could > make it for a month straight. THAT's high mileage and high intensity. > I'm pretty sure Bill set an AR a few weeks after completing that month. >In my mind, 60-100 a week less than this volume would classify as > moderate. > > Joe > > edndana wrote: > > I tend to think that Khalid Khannouchi and Deena Drossin would have > > something to say about who the 2 best distance runners in Norh America are > > if you include marathoners as distance runners. I'm not so sure Regina > > couldn't still break 14:59, either. > > > > As for the moderate volume at faster paces, it's certainly not true of > > today's world class marathoners or cross country runners. And if the > > training schedule for Geb below is accurate, he's doing somewhere between > > 120 and 150 mpw, not exactly "moderate" mileage by most standards. Many of > > today's runners are actually doing as much or more mileage and doing it > > faster. > > > > - Ed Parrot > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Martin J. Dixon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 2:01 PM > > Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > > > > >>Maybe the Americans(and Can men) should take a page out of the books of > > > > the 2 > > > >>best distance runners in North America right now-Emilie Mondor and > > > > Courtney > > > >>Babcock. Mondor broke a 15 year old national record today and Babcock > > > > missed by > > > >>.18. > >> > >>Joe Rubio wrote: > >> > >> > >>>John, > >>> > >>> From his 5k, 10k and marathon times I'd guess he's running at 5:20 pace > >>>for an easier recovery run, 5:00-5:20 for your everyday - garden variety > >>>long run, maybe even dropping it down
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Malmo, Read your logs but I'm getting old now so bare with my not remembering every detail True about reading one sample in cyberspace... yet, it would be my guess that Geb has many more weeks like this than the typical "elite" American With respect to his training being typical... maybe it was typical for you an other guys "back in the day" and maybe that's what we need to get back to. I can tell you that I'm probably more in touch with what today's top Americans are doing seeing as I have trained with many of them (including finalists in every even from 1500-10k at USATFs) and talk to them about their training often, They don't train like that. They probably should. I'm the one who said our guys COULD NOT break 25 sec in the 200 from a standing start save maybe one. M From: "malmo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Michael Contopoulos'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 21:59:16 -0400 Mike, clealy you've never read my logs then! Secondly, you read a sample of one week of Gebrselassie's training, posted somewhere in cyberspace,, then extrapolate and profess that every week of Gebs training must be similar. Thirdly, I don't see anything at all out of the ordinary about Geb's training. In spite of what you want to convince yourself, you have an entirely different perspective when it come to training or racing backgrounds. Finally, you simply do not understand distance running at all if you are convinced that our 10k guys could run under 25 seconds for a 200m - running start included - by an 8:2 ratio. They can't. malmo -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Contopoulos Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 5:47 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 You guys are missing the point! The point is not 120-150 miles a week... its 4 days of working out in a row. Every coach I've spoken to or read from, every American log I have EVER read (including Hodge's Malmos, McArdles and the rest of the college crew... etc) and out of ALL the guys I have ever run with or talked to about training (the Colorado team, some people from Arkansas, Iona, Stanford, etc)... NO ONE does 4 workouts back to back to back to back and then a 3 hour long run followed by an hour run later in the day. NO ONE. Its not the volume alone, people. I can run 20 miles a day with a year buildup without getting injured. Especially if it were my job. What I and most people can't or maybe I should say are AFRAID to do is throw in consistent INTENSITY within that mileage... including a sprint workout. Maybe its cause Americans are more "realists" and think that they will get injured doing that when in fact they may very well not. And perhaps an Ehoipian or Kenyan just doesn't think that they will get hurt because they don't put limits on their bodies... while racing or training. M >From: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "\"Athletics\"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 >Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 17:19:05 -0400 > >I don't know, I can't classify 150 mpw, which is no less than probably >80-90% of the world's elite have ever done, as moderate. 120 mpw, >sure, that's the very upper end of moderate for an elite male, but what >Geb does does not look like that much less than the top guys have been >doing for 30 years. Look at the Olympic 5/10/Mar medalists and they >have mostly been doing 120-160 since at least 1972, so we can't call >Geb moderate unless we compare him to guys who were in the small >minority. > >I doubt the median of the top 10 guys in the 5K/10K/Mar has changed all >that >much over the past 30 years, and we can't call that moderate. Knowing to >run 140-160 instead of 200 is old news, and was old news even back when >Bowerman made his observation in the early 1970's. > >- Ed Parrot >- Original Message - >From: "Joe Rubio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Cc: "Martin J. Dixon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 5:02 PM >Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > Ed, > > > > "High" mileage by my definition are what a guy like Scobey did in > > the early 70's in response to Bedford. 210 a week with a hard track > > workout each day at lunch. 12 in the AM, 6 at lunch with interval > > work, 12 before dinner every day except Sunday when it was 30 as > >
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
On hard training. People seem to forget that Pirie, Zatopek and Igloi's runners would run 100+ mile weeks of intervals. People trained "harder" in that era than in any other. Obviously it didn't produce sub 27:00 10k's. I seriously doubt that it's a matter of western runners not training hard enough. If there is a mental block my guess it would be more on the lines of, "they're on drugs so we can't beat them." To which I say, go do drugs, but that's another matter entirely. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of edndana Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 5:22 PM To: "Athletics" Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Joe - Well. ..you and I are arguing over semantics, and I don't think our argument has anything to do with whatever "problem" there is. Five years ago, I sensed more of the "excuse" mentality from American runners - I don't so much any more. Maybe they aren't training hard enough - I really am not sure - but I don't think we have the same mentality problem we used to have. As for Geb's hard days in a row, Bruce Lehane's subsequent post would seem to contradict it. But the world's best marathoners (including Americans) have been doing a variation on that for at least 30 years. Derek Clayon may have been the first to really push that particular envelope, although I can't help wondering if Lydiard also did during his experimentation in the 1950's and din't have the same success. I don't know what kind of training Khannouchi does, but plenty of the Africans do numerous medium to hard days in a row. For the 5K/10K, true Lydiard disciples did the same thing. Lydiard's hill phase was five days per week of hills/speed and his speed phase was 4-5 days of speed. As I'm sure you'll agree, this is nothing new. We are unfortunately victims of the hard-easy philosophy in this country. That sometimes works, even at the elite level, but I don't believe it is the surest way to success. - Ed - Original Message - From: "Joe Rubio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <"Athletics" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"@mtac2.prodigy.net> Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 6:43 PM Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > Ed, > > > You think maybe this is part of our "problem" as a distance running > nation is the fact that we are arguing over a few miles each way whereas > athletes in other countries are thinking 120-150 or whatever they > actually do at whatever pace they actually do it is just plain old > average weekly training if you want to be competitive? > > Joe > > > > edndana wrote: > > I don't know, I can't classify 150 mpw, which is no less than probably > > 80-90% of the world's elite have ever done, as moderate. 120 mpw, sure, > > that's the very upper end of moderate for an elite male, but what Geb does > > does not look like that much less than the top guys have been doing for 30 > > years. Look at the Olympic 5/10/Mar medalists and they have mostly been > > doing 120-160 since at least 1972, so we can't call Geb moderate unless we > > compare him to guys who were in the small minority. > > > > I doubt the median of the top 10 guys in the 5K/10K/Mar has changed all that > > much over the past 30 years, and we can't call that moderate. Knowing to > > run 140-160 instead of 200 is old news, and was old news even back when > > Bowerman made his observation in the early 1970's. > > > > - Ed Parrot > > - Original Message - > > From: "Joe Rubio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: "Martin J. Dixon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 5:02 PM > > Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > > > > >>Ed, > >> > >>"High" mileage by my definition are what a guy like Scobey did in the > >>early 70's in response to Bedford. 210 a week with a hard track workout > >>each day at lunch. 12 in the AM, 6 at lunch with interval work, 12 > >>before dinner every day except Sunday when it was 30 as hard as he could > >>make it for a month straight. THAT's high mileage and high intensity. > >>I'm pretty sure Bill set an AR a few weeks after completing that month. > >> In my mind, 60-100 a week less than this volume would classify as > >>moderate. > >> > >>Joe > >> > >>edndana wrote: > >> > >>>I tend
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
I find it interesting that when all of you post you throw names out like Pirie, Zatopek and Igloi's. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY'S AMERICANS. Listen, being 25 and having run at least at one time with guys in pretty much every distance final at USATF's at one point or another... and because discussing training brings great joy to my life, I can tell you that TODAY'S AMERICANS do NOT train as much quality as I would imagine it would take to run as fast as the E. Africans. In the US we have two mode's of thinking... "easy" mileage or lots of shorter faster runs. People don't undertstand... you need to be doing mileage, fast and often, with workouts 3-5 times a week where you focus on ALL aspects of running including sprinting! Its not one or the other. Its not 150 miles easy or 80 miles hard. Its 150 miles hard with workouts. M From: "P.F.Talbot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "P.F.Talbot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "\"Athletics\"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 09:39:12 -0600 On hard training. People seem to forget that Pirie, Zatopek and Igloi's runners would run 100+ mile weeks of intervals. People trained "harder" in that era than in any other. Obviously it didn't produce sub 27:00 10k's. I seriously doubt that it's a matter of western runners not training hard enough. If there is a mental block my guess it would be more on the lines of, "they're on drugs so we can't beat them." To which I say, go do drugs, but that's another matter entirely. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of edndana Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 5:22 PM To: "Athletics" Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Joe - Well. ..you and I are arguing over semantics, and I don't think our argument has anything to do with whatever "problem" there is. Five years ago, I sensed more of the "excuse" mentality from American runners - I don't so much any more. Maybe they aren't training hard enough - I really am not sure - but I don't think we have the same mentality problem we used to have. As for Geb's hard days in a row, Bruce Lehane's subsequent post would seem to contradict it. But the world's best marathoners (including Americans) have been doing a variation on that for at least 30 years. Derek Clayon may have been the first to really push that particular envelope, although I can't help wondering if Lydiard also did during his experimentation in the 1950's and din't have the same success. I don't know what kind of training Khannouchi does, but plenty of the Africans do numerous medium to hard days in a row. For the 5K/10K, true Lydiard disciples did the same thing. Lydiard's hill phase was five days per week of hills/speed and his speed phase was 4-5 days of speed. As I'm sure you'll agree, this is nothing new. We are unfortunately victims of the hard-easy philosophy in this country. That sometimes works, even at the elite level, but I don't believe it is the surest way to success. - Ed - Original Message - From: "Joe Rubio" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <"Athletics" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>"@mtac2.prodigy.net> Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 6:43 PM Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > Ed, > > > You think maybe this is part of our "problem" as a distance running > nation is the fact that we are arguing over a few miles each way whereas > athletes in other countries are thinking 120-150 or whatever they > actually do at whatever pace they actually do it is just plain old > average weekly training if you want to be competitive? > > Joe > > > > edndana wrote: > > I don't know, I can't classify 150 mpw, which is no less than probably > > 80-90% of the world's elite have ever done, as moderate. 120 mpw, sure, > > that's the very upper end of moderate for an elite male, but what Geb does > > does not look like that much less than the top guys have been doing for 30 > > years. Look at the Olympic 5/10/Mar medalists and they have mostly been > > doing 120-160 since at least 1972, so we can't call Geb moderate unless we > > compare him to guys who were in the small minority. > > > > I doubt the median of the top 10 guys in the 5K/10K/Mar has changed all that > > much over the past 30 years, and we can't call that moderate. Knowing to > > run 140-160 instead of 200 is old news, and was old news even back when > > Bowerman made his observation in the early 1970's. > > > > - Ed Parrot &g
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Mike, a lot of Americans are doing this. Check out Rod Dehaven's log: www.allsportrunning.com/rodscorner. Check out the Hanson's Runners and their training: http://www.hansons-running.com/ecom/sp/cat=Training+Log I don't think it has been shown anywhere that the top US runners are running a lot of miles really slow. What I see is a tried and true process that has been successful for 20-30 years: 100-150 miles a week, a long run that is usually run pretty fast or at least with fast segments, a long workout be it either "threshold" or just long intervals, and a short workout consisting of your basic Vo2max type intervals. Some may add a hill workout here and there or a short sprint workout here and there but the basics are still the same: Lots of miles at a moderate or sometimes fast pace, a long moderate run, two workouts. Alan From: "Michael Contopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "Michael Contopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 13:03:50 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [198.240.130.75] X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from mc3-f2.law16.hotmail.com ([65.54.236.137]) by mc3-s10.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:16:41 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc3-f2.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:15:49 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7RH3xHD003414for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:03:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h7RH3x2l003413for t-and-f-outgoing; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:03:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hotmail.com (law12-f24.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.19.24])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7RH3uHD003339for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:03:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:03:51 -0700 Received: from 198.240.130.75 by lw12fd.law12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;Wed, 27 Aug 2003 17:03:50 GMT X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFMHuWZVPb0dcXowdMfwAnNuh9L5WiG3lYE= Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Aug 2003 17:03:51.0397 (UTC) FILETIME=[30730950:01C36CBD] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I find it interesting that when all of you post you throw names out like Pirie, Zatopek and Igloi's. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY'S AMERICANS. Listen, being 25 and having run at least at one time with guys in pretty much every distance final at USATF's at one point or another... and because discussing training brings great joy to my life, I can tell you that TODAY'S AMERICANS do NOT train as much quality as I would imagine it would take to run as fast as the E. Africans. In the US we have two mode's of thinking... "easy" mileage or lots of shorter faster runs. People don't undertstand... you need to be doing mileage, fast and often, with workouts 3-5 times a week where you focus on ALL aspects of running including sprinting! Its not one or the other. Its not 150 miles easy or 80 miles hard. Its 150 miles hard with workouts. M From: "P.F.Talbot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "P.F.Talbot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "\"Athletics\"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 09:39:12 -0600 On hard training. People seem to forget that Pirie, Zatopek and Igloi's runners would run 100+ mile weeks of intervals. People trained "harder" in that era than in any other. Obviously it didn't produce sub 27:00 10k's. I seriously doubt that it's a matter of western runners not training hard enough. If there is a mental block my guess it would be more on the lines of, "they're on drugs so we can't beat them." To which I say, go do drugs, but that's another matter entirely. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of edndana Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 5:22 PM To: "Athletics" Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Joe - Well. ..you and I are arguing over semantics, and I don't think our argument has anything to do with whatever "problem" there is. Five years ago, I sensed more of the "excuse" mentality from American runners - I don't so much any more. Maybe they aren't training hard enough - I really am not sure - but I don't think we have the same mentality problem we used to have. As for Geb's hard days in a row, Bruce Lehane's subsequent post would seem to co
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Alan, just read them. Sorry, I don't see the number of intense workouts that would ever suggest to me that any of these guys will be near 2:08 or 27:20 let alone 2:05 and 26:22. Im talking ablout 4 workouts in a row, 30 miles on Sunday (not 20), etc. There are so many AM: 10, PM: 10 in these logs I am giving myself a headache. If they were doing hill followeed by tempo, followed by interval, followed by sprint, all in the midst of 2-a days, 30 miles of running on Sunday and 2 "easy days" then I will agree. You haven't shown me that yet. I had a coach in college who I probably did not respect as much as I should have (Coach Hadsell... if you're out there... here's a shout-out). He would have us do a hill workout one day followed by a tempo the next and fartleks on the 3rd. I thought I was being over-trained. Turns out I was just a wimp. M From: "alan tobin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 18:36:05 + Mike, a lot of Americans are doing this. Check out Rod Dehaven's log: www.allsportrunning.com/rodscorner. Check out the Hanson's Runners and their training: http://www.hansons-running.com/ecom/sp/cat=Training+Log I don't think it has been shown anywhere that the top US runners are running a lot of miles really slow. What I see is a tried and true process that has been successful for 20-30 years: 100-150 miles a week, a long run that is usually run pretty fast or at least with fast segments, a long workout be it either "threshold" or just long intervals, and a short workout consisting of your basic Vo2max type intervals. Some may add a hill workout here and there or a short sprint workout here and there but the basics are still the same: Lots of miles at a moderate or sometimes fast pace, a long moderate run, two workouts. Alan From: "Michael Contopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "Michael Contopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 13:03:50 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [198.240.130.75] X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from mc3-f2.law16.hotmail.com ([65.54.236.137]) by mc3-s10.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:16:41 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc3-f2.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:15:49 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7RH3xHD003414for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:03:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h7RH3x2l003413for t-and-f-outgoing; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:03:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hotmail.com (law12-f24.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.19.24])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7RH3uHD003339for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:03:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:03:51 -0700 Received: from 198.240.130.75 by lw12fd.law12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;Wed, 27 Aug 2003 17:03:50 GMT X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFMHuWZVPb0dcXowdMfwAnNuh9L5WiG3lYE= Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 27 Aug 2003 17:03:51.0397 (UTC) FILETIME=[30730950:01C36CBD] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I find it interesting that when all of you post you throw names out like Pirie, Zatopek and Igloi's. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY'S AMERICANS. Listen, being 25 and having run at least at one time with guys in pretty much every distance final at USATF's at one point or another... and because discussing training brings great joy to my life, I can tell you that TODAY'S AMERICANS do NOT train as much quality as I would imagine it would take to run as fast as the E. Africans. In the US we have two mode's of thinking... "easy" mileage or lots of shorter faster runs. People don't undertstand... you need to be doing mileage, fast and often, with workouts 3-5 times a week where you focus on ALL aspects of running including sprinting! Its not one or the other. Its not 150 miles easy or 80 miles hard. Its 150 miles hard with workouts. M From: "P.F.Talbot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "P.F.Talbot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "\"Athletics\"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 09:39:12 -0600 On hard training. People seem to forget that Pirie, Zatopek and Igloi's runners would run 100+ mile weeks of intervals. People trained "harder" i
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Sorry to pile on at the end of a discussion many are surely tired of (and for the sake of those of us on digest mode: PLEASE delete any portions of old messages that aren't directly relevant to your reply). But there are several things along this thread that I wanted to comment on: 1) First - I have said for the last seven years that I saw the greatest 10k ever run, the final in Atlanta, with a 13:11 last 5k in tough conditions to run 27:07 and win Olympic gold in a race that was contested until the end. Paris was surely cooler, and they didn't have to run heats, but 12:57 to cap a 26:49 World Champs victory in a race that closely contested and unrabbitted (or was Geb the rabbit?) is probably better. What holds the previous claim for fastest race ever without a pacemaker? For that matter, has there ever been a faster 5000 without a pacemaker? 2) On the issue of speed, I would grant that Malmo is somewhat better informed than me on the habits of world class American runners, but I am skeptical about many of the extreme claims about the lack of speed on the part of top Americans. As noted, the issue was how fast CAN someone run for 200, not what do they do in a workout. I haven't done a flat out 400 in my life other than on a 4x4 in high school. That does not mean I would claim 60 to be my capability because that was the fastest I did in workouts when I was running my best. Someone said that many of the top American distance runners could not run 26 for 200. That could only be true if you extend the definition of "top" so far down as to include me five years ago, when I was 20th on the US list in the 1 (29:23) and probably in 2:18 or so marathon shape. I don't consider those national class times, even if in a given year they might rank reasonably well. But I was an extreme outlier in terms of speed. With apologies to Joseph Heller, some men are born slow, some achieve slowness, and some have slowness thrust upon them; with me it was all three. I had relatively bad speed compared to my other abilities, spent years not working on it, and didn't get mentally into the fastest speedwork when I did do it. I've got PR's of 29:04 for 10k and 2:06 for 800, and if you think the 800 time is the result of not running it since I was 19, my 1500 PR from the same month as the 10k is 3:59. It is possible that there is not a single American with a fas! ter PR than mine in the 10k who is slower for 1500. And even I could run 28's for 200s (that is plural) in a workout with relative ease when I was fit. It is inconceivable to me that are people who truly deserve the lable national-class, say sub-28:30 runners, who could not run under 26 for a single all-out 200 during the peak of their track season. And if that is true, it seems also likely to be true that the sub-27:45 guys could mostly go 24.5-25.0 or better. 3) The discussion about training is in part one of semantics - differing definitions of hard, high mileage, etc. I would say that the only people who would refer to 150 mpw as "moderate" for their own training would be considered extremely high mileage runners by most - especially since this discussion started exclusively in the domain of 5k/10k, and it has been fairly well documented that the big increase in people running sub-2:09 in the marathon has coincided with the move away from 5k/10k type training by marathoners. The description of the DeHaven and Hanson team workouts (I haven't looked at the websites so I'm judging from what I read here) are NOT multiple hard workouts in a row. I would only apply that description to training in a very intense fashion 3-4 times a week IN ADDITION to the long run. This does seem to be a component of both the big 5k/10k breakthroughs in the mid-90's and the marathon improvements a few years later, with different emphasis in the workouts. The key in both cases seems to be alternating the direction of emphasis (different types of hard workouts on consecutive days) so that you are not always stressing the same systems. But even if that system is now the state-of-the-art for world class runners, it does not follow that everyone should be doing it or that Michael Contopoulos was wrong about being overtrained in college and right now to belated salute his coach. It is important to remember, especially for those of us who are coaches, that most people are not world-class athletes. Even 10 years ago, before I had read about any of the training plans discussed here, I was convinced that the greatest talent that set Todd Williams apart from the rest of the Americans was a greater than average ability to tolerate a very intense workload. This is a critical talent in succeeding at the highest level, as much as leg speed or a naturally high oxygen uptake ability. If you are working with a group of 100 or more people and care only about how fast the best of them run (a la the national program, formal or oth
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Four quality workouts in a row week after week WILL destroy your body and WILL overtrain you. In the ONE Geb week no mention is made of what kind of "sprint work" he is doing on that day. Hell, anyone can do 10x200 near all out with 200 meter recoveries at the end of an easy run everyday but I wouldn't call that a very hard workout. Sprint work isn't made to be tiresome. So in his ONE week we have a long run, a hard tempo-type run, track intervals, and "sprint work". If his sprint work isn't that demanding then I don't see how the week is so much different than what has been successful for years. If he truly is running 4 very hard days back to back then we have to look and see that is again only ONE week. Now, if he's doing this week in and week out then we've have to look and see what he's using to be able to recover so quickly. I think it's foolish to look at this ONE week and conclude that this is how he trains week in and week out. Even if he does do this week in and week out then I think it's foolish to think he's doing this without some sort of recovery "enhancement" (growth hormone, synthetic steroid, etc). PS-I too know the effects of running back to back to back to back hard days as I did it quite often in high school. 4 hard days a week was the norm with some weeks 5 or 6 hard days. I improved for two years then remained pretty static. My former college coach used the same system and improvement came little by little. When I tried to adapt the same 4 hard day a week schedule to a marathon I ended up with an achilles injury. Alan From: "Michael Contopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 16:22:44 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [198.240.130.75] X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from 198.240.130.75 by lw12fd.law12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;Wed, 27 Aug 2003 20:22:44 GMT Alan, just read them. Sorry, I don't see the number of intense workouts that would ever suggest to me that any of these guys will be near 2:08 or 27:20 let alone 2:05 and 26:22. Im talking ablout 4 workouts in a row, 30 miles on Sunday (not 20), etc. There are so many AM: 10, PM: 10 in these logs I am giving myself a headache. If they were doing hill followeed by tempo, followed by interval, followed by sprint, all in the midst of 2-a days, 30 miles of running on Sunday and 2 "easy days" then I will agree. You haven't shown me that yet. I had a coach in college who I probably did not respect as much as I should have (Coach Hadsell... if you're out there... here's a shout-out). He would have us do a hill workout one day followed by a tempo the next and fartleks on the 3rd. I thought I was being over-trained. Turns out I was just a wimp. M From: "alan tobin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 18:36:05 + Mike, a lot of Americans are doing this. Check out Rod Dehaven's log: www.allsportrunning.com/rodscorner. Check out the Hanson's Runners and their training: http://www.hansons-running.com/ecom/sp/cat=Training+Log I don't think it has been shown anywhere that the top US runners are running a lot of miles really slow. What I see is a tried and true process that has been successful for 20-30 years: 100-150 miles a week, a long run that is usually run pretty fast or at least with fast segments, a long workout be it either "threshold" or just long intervals, and a short workout consisting of your basic Vo2max type intervals. Some may add a hill workout here and there or a short sprint workout here and there but the basics are still the same: Lots of miles at a moderate or sometimes fast pace, a long moderate run, two workouts. Alan From: "Michael Contopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "Michael Contopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 13:03:50 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [198.240.130.75] X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from mc3-f2.law16.hotmail.com ([65.54.236.137]) by mc3-s10.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:16:41 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc3-f2.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:15:49 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7RH3xHD003414for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 10:03:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9/Subm
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
The easiest workouts I have ever done have been longer intervals (most of the time those are done near LT) The hardest workouts I have ever done are hill repeats and sprint workouts (150s, 200s, 300s). The latter leave me sore, with an oxygen debt headache, and wiped out for 2 days. If you can do 10x200 every day, you're not doing 10x200 correctly. I'll never forget the 12x200 in 25 I did on the indoor track at Columbia. Damn thing nearly killed me. M From: "alan tobin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 14:31:37 + Four quality workouts in a row week after week WILL destroy your body and WILL overtrain you. In the ONE Geb week no mention is made of what kind of "sprint work" he is doing on that day. Hell, anyone can do 10x200 near all out with 200 meter recoveries at the end of an easy run everyday but I wouldn't call that a very hard workout. Sprint work isn't made to be tiresome. So in his ONE week we have a long run, a hard tempo-type run, track intervals, and "sprint work". If his sprint work isn't that demanding then I don't see how the week is so much different than what has been successful for years. If he truly is running 4 very hard days back to back then we have to look and see that is again only ONE week. Now, if he's doing this week in and week out then we've have to look and see what he's using to be able to recover so quickly. I think it's foolish to look at this ONE week and conclude that this is how he trains week in and week out. Even if he does do this week in and week out then I think it's foolish to think he's doing this without some sort of recovery "enhancement" (growth hormone, synthetic steroid, etc). PS-I too know the effects of running back to back to back to back hard days as I did it quite often in high school. 4 hard days a week was the norm with some weeks 5 or 6 hard days. I improved for two years then remained pretty static. My former college coach used the same system and improvement came little by little. When I tried to adapt the same 4 hard day a week schedule to a marathon I ended up with an achilles injury. Alan From: "Michael Contopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 16:22:44 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [198.240.130.75] X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from 198.240.130.75 by lw12fd.law12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;Wed, 27 Aug 2003 20:22:44 GMT Alan, just read them. Sorry, I don't see the number of intense workouts that would ever suggest to me that any of these guys will be near 2:08 or 27:20 let alone 2:05 and 26:22. Im talking ablout 4 workouts in a row, 30 miles on Sunday (not 20), etc. There are so many AM: 10, PM: 10 in these logs I am giving myself a headache. If they were doing hill followeed by tempo, followed by interval, followed by sprint, all in the midst of 2-a days, 30 miles of running on Sunday and 2 "easy days" then I will agree. You haven't shown me that yet. I had a coach in college who I probably did not respect as much as I should have (Coach Hadsell... if you're out there... here's a shout-out). He would have us do a hill workout one day followed by a tempo the next and fartleks on the 3rd. I thought I was being over-trained. Turns out I was just a wimp. M From: "alan tobin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 18:36:05 + Mike, a lot of Americans are doing this. Check out Rod Dehaven's log: www.allsportrunning.com/rodscorner. Check out the Hanson's Runners and their training: http://www.hansons-running.com/ecom/sp/cat=Training+Log I don't think it has been shown anywhere that the top US runners are running a lot of miles really slow. What I see is a tried and true process that has been successful for 20-30 years: 100-150 miles a week, a long run that is usually run pretty fast or at least with fast segments, a long workout be it either "threshold" or just long intervals, and a short workout consisting of your basic Vo2max type intervals. Some may add a hill workout here and there or a short sprint workout here and there but the basics are still the same: Lots of miles at a moderate or sometimes fast pace, a long moderate run, two workouts. Alan From: "Michael Contopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "Michael Contopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 13:03:50 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Origin
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
My take is that it's not the back to back to back quality days that do people in. What does people in is skipping the phases prior to that which would the endurance and strength phases which prepare you to reap the benefits of quality. At some point, you have to do the quality work. Another problem in the American prep and collegiate systems is too many races during what should be quality prep type of phase. Many coaches in the two systems are very adept and adapting the race schedule to meet the needs of the athlete, but unfortunately too many try to adapt the athlete to the system continually. Four quality workouts in a row week after week WILL destroy your body and WILL overtrain you. In the ONE Geb week no mention is made of what kind of "sprint work" he is doing on that day. Hell, anyone can do 10x200 near all out with 200 meter recoveries at the end of an easy run everyday but I wouldn't call that a very hard workout. Sprint work isn't made to be tiresome. So in his ONE week we have a long run, a hard tempo-type run, track intervals, and "sprint work". If his sprint work isn't that demanding then I don't see how the week is so much different than what has been successful for years. If he truly is running 4 very hard days back to back then we have to look and see that is again only ONE week. Now, if he's doing this week in and week out then we've have to look and see what he's using to be able to recover so quickly. I think it's foolish to look at this ONE week and conclude that this is how he trains week in and week out. Even if he does do this week in and week out then I think it's foolish to think he's doing this without some sort of recovery "enhancement" (growth hormone, synthetic steroid, etc). Keith Whitman Head Coach Cross Country/Track & Field Muskingum College New Concord, Ohio http://www.muskingum.edu (740) 826-8018-Office (330) 677-4631-Home (740) 826-8300-Fax John 14:6
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Perhaps it's how one defines quality workouts, but I know the group at the FILA center was doing this a couple years ago: -1 day with 25-40x1:00 on/1:00 off, with the "on" minutes at 3K-5K race pace and the off minutes a notch or two faster thaneasy distance. -1 day with 10-15km of long intervals (1000m-5000m) at 10 km-10 mile race pace. -1 day of a long uphill run - 50-90 minutes - with a gradual increase in pace so the end was very very hard -1 day of 30-35k starting a bit slower than maathon pace and finishing a bit faster. They had one additional workout in there I believe as well. After the five days hard, they'd take 1-2 days easy and then start again. They did this for 10 weeks or so and several people got huge marathon PR's. - Ed - Original Message - From: "alan tobin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 10:31 AM Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > Four quality workouts in a row week after week WILL destroy your body and > WILL overtrain you. In the ONE Geb week no mention is made of what kind of > "sprint work" he is doing on that day. Hell, anyone can do 10x200 near all > out with 200 meter recoveries at the end of an easy run everyday but I > wouldn't call that a very hard workout. Sprint work isn't made to be > tiresome. So in his ONE week we have a long run, a hard tempo-type run, > track intervals, and "sprint work". If his sprint work isn't that demanding > then I don't see how the week is so much different than what has been > successful for years. If he truly is running 4 very hard days back to back > then we have to look and see that is again only ONE week. Now, if he's doing > this week in and week out then we've have to look and see what he's using to > be able to recover so quickly. I think it's foolish to look at this ONE week > and conclude that this is how he trains week in and week out. Even if he > does do this week in and week out then I think it's foolish to think he's > doing this without some sort of recovery "enhancement" (growth hormone, > synthetic steroid, etc). > > PS-I too know the effects of running back to back to back to back hard days > as I did it quite often in high school. 4 hard days a week was the norm with > some weeks 5 or 6 hard days. I improved for two years then remained pretty > static. My former college coach used the same system and improvement came > little by little. When I tried to adapt the same 4 hard day a week schedule > to a marathon I ended up with an achilles injury. > > Alan > > > >From: "Michael Contopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > >Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 16:22:44 -0400 > >MIME-Version: 1.0 > >X-Originating-IP: [198.240.130.75] > >X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Received: from 198.240.130.75 by lw12fd.law12.hotmail.msn.com with > >HTTP;Wed, 27 Aug 2003 20:22:44 GMT > > > >Alan, just read them. Sorry, I don't see the number of intense workouts > >that would ever suggest to me that any of these guys will be near 2:08 or > >27:20 let alone 2:05 and 26:22. > > > >Im talking ablout 4 workouts in a row, 30 miles on Sunday (not 20), etc. > >There are so many AM: 10, PM: 10 in these logs I am giving myself a > >headache. If they were doing hill followeed by tempo, followed by > >interval, followed by sprint, all in the midst of 2-a days, 30 miles of > >running on Sunday and 2 "easy days" then I will agree. You haven't shown > >me that yet. > > > >I had a coach in college who I probably did not respect as much as I should > >have (Coach Hadsell... if you're out there... here's a shout-out). He > >would have us do a hill workout one day followed by a tempo the next and > >fartleks on the 3rd. I thought I was being over-trained. Turns out I was > >just a wimp. > > > >M > > > > > >>From: "alan tobin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > >>Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 18:36:05 + > >> > >>Mike, a lot of Americans are doing this. Check out Rod Dehaven's log: > >>www.allsportrunning.com/rodscorner. Check out the Hanson's Runners and > >>their training: http://www.hansons-running.com/ecom/sp/cat=Training+Log > >>I don't think it has been shown anywhere that the top US runners are
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Mike, your last paragraph raises some good points. The other day, one of my "keg party" buddies from High School asked me: "Schiefer, how in the hell did you go from 4:20 in the mile to 3:41 for 1500m just 4 years later?" I explained to him that it's all in raising the bar to another level. I would have never been able to train like I did at the University of Utah if there weren't experienced guys on the team who had the base and experience to train much harder. My easy days at Utah were like my hardest runs in High School. Now, fast forward to Arkansas. Same thing. The bar was simply raised again! My hard days at Utah were simply "easy" runs at Arkansas. The take home message for me was that to be at the top, you have to push your limits and you have to be able to believe that you can train and run at a level that you don't feel currently possible. Schiefer --- Michael Contopoulos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alan, just read them. Sorry, I don't see the number > of intense workouts > that would ever suggest to me that any of these guys > will be near 2:08 or > 27:20 let alone 2:05 and 26:22. > > Im talking ablout 4 workouts in a row, 30 miles on > Sunday (not 20), etc. > There are so many AM: 10, PM: 10 in these logs I am > giving myself a > headache. If they were doing hill followeed by > tempo, followed by interval, > followed by sprint, all in the midst of 2-a days, 30 > miles of running on > Sunday and 2 "easy days" then I will agree. You > haven't shown me that yet. > > I had a coach in college who I probably did not > respect as much as I should > have (Coach Hadsell... if you're out there... here's > a shout-out). He would > have us do a hill workout one day followed by a > tempo the next and fartleks > on the 3rd. I thought I was being over-trained. > Turns out I was just a > wimp. > > M > > > >From: "alan tobin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > >Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 18:36:05 + > > > >Mike, a lot of Americans are doing this. Check out > Rod Dehaven's log: > >www.allsportrunning.com/rodscorner. Check out the > Hanson's Runners and > >their training: > http://www.hansons-running.com/ecom/sp/cat=Training+Log > I > >don't think it has been shown anywhere that the top > US runners are running > >a lot of miles really slow. What I see is a tried > and true process that has > >been successful for 20-30 years: 100-150 miles a > week, a long run that is > >usually run pretty fast or at least with fast > segments, a long workout be > >it either "threshold" or just long intervals, and a > short workout > >consisting of your basic Vo2max type intervals. > Some may add a hill workout > >here and there or a short sprint workout here and > there but the basics are > >still the same: Lots of miles at a moderate or > sometimes fast pace, a long > >moderate run, two workouts. > > > >Alan > > > >>From: "Michael Contopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>Reply-To: "Michael Contopoulos" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > >>Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 13:03:50 -0400 > >>MIME-Version: 1.0 > >>X-Originating-IP: [198.240.130.75] > >>X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Received: from mc3-f2.law16.hotmail.com > ([65.54.236.137]) by > >>mc3-s10.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft > SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 27 > >>Aug 2003 10:16:41 -0700 > >>Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu > ([128.223.142.13]) by > >>mc3-f2.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft > SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Wed, 27 > >>Aug 2003 10:15:49 -0700 > >>Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu > ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by > >>darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id > h7RH3xHD003414for > >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 27 > Aug 2003 10:03:59 -0700 > >>(PDT) > >>Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by > darkwing.uoregon.edu > >>(8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h7RH3x2l003413for > t-and-f-outgoing; Wed, 27 Aug > >>2003 10:03:59 -0700 (PDT) > >>Received: from hotmail.com > (law12-f24.law12.hotmail.com [64.4.19.24])by > >>darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id > h7RH3uHD003339for > >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 > 10:03:56 -0700 (PDT) > >>Recei
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
i'm just as stupid as the next guy out there, so i figure why not throw in my 2 cents. whatever happened to long term planning? is this done in the u.s. with distance athletes anymore? i'm sure that within micros and mesos, distance coaches of these athletes assign primary themes, but do they sit down and look at a 3-4-5-6 year annual plans of an athlete and put primary thematic consideration into those full training years for development? or is it the same workouts and focus year after year? if is done, is it done in a planned manner or just haphazardly based upon one good or bad race? todd
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
I think we are missing what I'm saying: "Hell, anyone can do 10x200 near all out with 200 meter recoveries at the end of an easy run everyday but I wouldn't call that a very hard workout." As I said above: 10x200 with 200 recovery is not a hard workout. It's not supposed to be. If you are doing sprint work correctly you shouldn't be dead for days on end because you are giving yourself enough rest between efforts so that you are able to give a near all-out effort each time. It's basically strides and I'd call strides at the end of a run sprint work. I've done 20x200 with 200 recovery and 20x200 with 100 recovery. The latter is worlds ahead much harder than the former because of recovery. I would call the first workout a sprint workout and the second workout a lactate tolerance workout. In the first workout you are able to go near full speed on each 200 because you have two times as much recovery time. In the second you can't go near full speed because the recovery is short. Because the recovery is short you build up a high level of blood lactate so through most of the workout (especially the second half) you are running with a high level of blood lactate, thus it improves your ability to run hard under a high level of blood lactate. We have no specifics on Geb's "sprint work". It could very well be nothing more than organized strides and plyometrics. Alan From: "Michael Contopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 10:40:27 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [198.240.130.75] X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from 198.240.130.75 by lw12fd.law12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;Thu, 28 Aug 2003 14:40:27 GMT The easiest workouts I have ever done have been longer intervals (most of the time those are done near LT) The hardest workouts I have ever done are hill repeats and sprint workouts (150s, 200s, 300s). The latter leave me sore, with an oxygen debt headache, and wiped out for 2 days. If you can do 10x200 every day, you're not doing 10x200 correctly. I'll never forget the 12x200 in 25 I did on the indoor track at Columbia. Damn thing nearly killed me. M From: "alan tobin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 14:31:37 + Four quality workouts in a row week after week WILL destroy your body and WILL overtrain you. In the ONE Geb week no mention is made of what kind of "sprint work" he is doing on that day. Hell, anyone can do 10x200 near all out with 200 meter recoveries at the end of an easy run everyday but I wouldn't call that a very hard workout. Sprint work isn't made to be tiresome. So in his ONE week we have a long run, a hard tempo-type run, track intervals, and "sprint work". If his sprint work isn't that demanding then I don't see how the week is so much different than what has been successful for years. If he truly is running 4 very hard days back to back then we have to look and see that is again only ONE week. Now, if he's doing this week in and week out then we've have to look and see what he's using to be able to recover so quickly. I think it's foolish to look at this ONE week and conclude that this is how he trains week in and week out. Even if he does do this week in and week out then I think it's foolish to think he's doing this without some sort of recovery "enhancement" (growth hormone, synthetic steroid, etc). PS-I too know the effects of running back to back to back to back hard days as I did it quite often in high school. 4 hard days a week was the norm with some weeks 5 or 6 hard days. I improved for two years then remained pretty static. My former college coach used the same system and improvement came little by little. When I tried to adapt the same 4 hard day a week schedule to a marathon I ended up with an achilles injury. Alan From: "Michael Contopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 16:22:44 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [198.240.130.75] X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from 198.240.130.75 by lw12fd.law12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;Wed, 27 Aug 2003 20:22:44 GMT Alan, just read them. Sorry, I don't see the number of intense workouts that would ever suggest to me that any of these guys will be near 2:08 or 27:20 let alone 2:05 and 26:22. Im talking ablout 4 workouts in a row, 30 miles on Sunday (not 20), etc. There are so many AM: 10, PM: 10 in these logs I am giving myself a headache. If they were doing hill followeed by tempo, followed b
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
You are correct Ed, but it was only those 4 and they weren't back to back to back to back. Josh Cox did similar workouts when he (is he still?) was under Fila/Rosa's care. A long progression run of 30-42k, up to 25 x 1:00/1:00 fartlek, and long intervals. The famed Flouspar Hill 13 mile hill run was also thrown in there ocassionally and was also a sort of progression run. The FILA USA program seemed to have flopped with a number of injuries and "political" problems. The fact that the US program was plagued with injuries and the Rosa Kenyan program has done well gives even more light to the rumor that Rosa is a druglord. Alan From: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 11:43:24 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mc3-f34.law16.hotmail.com ([65.54.236.169]) by mc3-s11.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Thu, 28 Aug 2003 08:45:26 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by mc3-f34.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Thu, 28 Aug 2003 08:42:44 -0700 Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7SFOoHD024359for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 08:24:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h7SFOoXg024358for t-and-f-outgoing; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 08:24:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp018.mail.yahoo.com (smtp018.mail.yahoo.com [216.136.174.115])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with SMTP id h7SFOlHD024334for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 08:24:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from host45-235.nu.com (HELO EDWARDPARROT2) ([EMAIL PROTECTED]@159.108.45.235 with login) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Aug 2003 15:24:35 - X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFN52P2gnVLzuO7XYZAg57x0wGeh/pxoSfQ= Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Precedence: bulk Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Aug 2003 15:42:45.0929 (UTC) FILETIME=[06D14990:01C36D7B] Perhaps it's how one defines quality workouts, but I know the group at the FILA center was doing this a couple years ago: -1 day with 25-40x1:00 on/1:00 off, with the "on" minutes at 3K-5K race pace and the off minutes a notch or two faster thaneasy distance. -1 day with 10-15km of long intervals (1000m-5000m) at 10 km-10 mile race pace. -1 day of a long uphill run - 50-90 minutes - with a gradual increase in pace so the end was very very hard -1 day of 30-35k starting a bit slower than maathon pace and finishing a bit faster. They had one additional workout in there I believe as well. After the five days hard, they'd take 1-2 days easy and then start again. They did this for 10 weeks or so and several people got huge marathon PR's. - Ed - Original Message - From: "alan tobin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 10:31 AM Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > Four quality workouts in a row week after week WILL destroy your body and > WILL overtrain you. In the ONE Geb week no mention is made of what kind of > "sprint work" he is doing on that day. Hell, anyone can do 10x200 near all > out with 200 meter recoveries at the end of an easy run everyday but I > wouldn't call that a very hard workout. Sprint work isn't made to be > tiresome. So in his ONE week we have a long run, a hard tempo-type run, > track intervals, and "sprint work". If his sprint work isn't that demanding > then I don't see how the week is so much different than what has been > successful for years. If he truly is running 4 very hard days back to back > then we have to look and see that is again only ONE week. Now, if he's doing > this week in and week out then we've have to look and see what he's using to > be able to recover so quickly. I think it's foolish to look at this ONE week > and conclude that this is how he trains week in and week out. Even if he > does do this week in and week out then I think it's foolish to think he's > doing this without some sort of recovery "enhancement" (growth hormone, > synthetic steroid, etc). > > PS-I too know the effects of running back to back to back to back hard days > as I did it quite often in high school. 4 hard days a week was the norm with > some weeks 5 or 6 hard days. I improved for two years then remained pretty >
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Alan - My understanding was that they did those four workouts in five days, they called it "survive the five" - Ed Parrot - Original Message - From: "alan tobin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 2:34 PM Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > You are correct Ed, but it was only those 4 and they weren't back to back to > back to back. Josh Cox did similar workouts when he (is he still?) was under > Fila/Rosa's care. A long progression run of 30-42k, up to 25 x 1:00/1:00 > fartlek, and long intervals. The famed Flouspar Hill 13 mile hill run was > also thrown in there ocassionally and was also a sort of progression run. > The FILA USA program seemed to have flopped with a number of injuries and > "political" problems. The fact that the US program was plagued with injuries > and the Rosa Kenyan program has done well gives even more light to the rumor > that Rosa is a druglord. > > Alan > > > >From: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > >Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 11:43:24 -0400 > >MIME-Version: 1.0 > >Received: from mc3-f34.law16.hotmail.com ([65.54.236.169]) by > >mc3-s11.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Thu, 28 > >Aug 2003 08:45:26 -0700 > >Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by > >mc3-f34.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Thu, 28 > >Aug 2003 08:42:44 -0700 > >Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by > >darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7SFOoHD024359for > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 08:24:50 -0700 > >(PDT) > >Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu > >(8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h7SFOoXg024358for t-and-f-outgoing; Thu, 28 Aug > >2003 08:24:50 -0700 (PDT) > >Received: from smtp018.mail.yahoo.com (smtp018.mail.yahoo.com > >[216.136.174.115])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with SMTP id > >h7SFOlHD024334for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 08:24:47 > >-0700 (PDT) > >Received: from host45-235.nu.com (HELO EDWARDPARROT2) > >([EMAIL PROTECTED]@159.108.45.235 with login) by > >smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Aug 2003 15:24:35 - > >X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFN52P2gnVLzuO7XYZAg57x0wGeh/pxoSfQ= > >Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >X-Priority: 3 > >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal > >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 > >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 > >Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Precedence: bulk > >Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Aug 2003 15:42:45.0929 (UTC) > >FILETIME=[06D14990:01C36D7B] > > > >Perhaps it's how one defines quality workouts, but I know the group at the > >FILA center was doing this a couple years ago: > > > >-1 day with 25-40x1:00 on/1:00 off, with the "on" minutes at 3K-5K race > >pace and the off minutes a notch or two faster thaneasy distance. > >-1 day with 10-15km of long intervals (1000m-5000m) at 10 km-10 mile race > >pace. > >-1 day of a long uphill run - 50-90 minutes - with a gradual increase in > >pace so the end was very very hard > >-1 day of 30-35k starting a bit slower than maathon pace and finishing a > >bit > >faster. > > > >They had one additional workout in there I believe as well. After the five > >days hard, they'd take 1-2 days easy and then start again. They did this > >for 10 weeks or so and several people got huge marathon PR's. > > > >- Ed > >- Original Message - > >From: "alan tobin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 10:31 AM > >Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > > > > Four quality workouts in a row week after week WILL destroy your body > >and > > > WILL overtrain you. In the ONE Geb week no mention is made of what kind > >of > > > "sprint work" he is doing on that day. Hell, anyone can do 10x200 near > >all > > > out with 200 meter recoveries at the end of an easy run everyday but I > > > wouldn't call that a very hard workout. Sprint work isn't made to be > > > tiresome. So in his ONE week we have a long run, a hard tempo-type ru
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Ed, That sonds a little more like it, though notice how you say a couple years ago. Now its non-existent. Also, that looks like a good marathon schedule... and probably one very similar to what the top guys in the world are doing. However, there definitley would need to be more speed for a 10k/5k guy. From: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 11:43:24 -0400 Perhaps it's how one defines quality workouts, but I know the group at the FILA center was doing this a couple years ago: -1 day with 25-40x1:00 on/1:00 off, with the "on" minutes at 3K-5K race pace and the off minutes a notch or two faster thaneasy distance. -1 day with 10-15km of long intervals (1000m-5000m) at 10 km-10 mile race pace. -1 day of a long uphill run - 50-90 minutes - with a gradual increase in pace so the end was very very hard -1 day of 30-35k starting a bit slower than maathon pace and finishing a bit faster. They had one additional workout in there I believe as well. After the five days hard, they'd take 1-2 days easy and then start again. They did this for 10 weeks or so and several people got huge marathon PR's. - Ed - Original Message - From: "alan tobin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 10:31 AM Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > Four quality workouts in a row week after week WILL destroy your body and > WILL overtrain you. In the ONE Geb week no mention is made of what kind of > "sprint work" he is doing on that day. Hell, anyone can do 10x200 near all > out with 200 meter recoveries at the end of an easy run everyday but I > wouldn't call that a very hard workout. Sprint work isn't made to be > tiresome. So in his ONE week we have a long run, a hard tempo-type run, > track intervals, and "sprint work". If his sprint work isn't that demanding > then I don't see how the week is so much different than what has been > successful for years. If he truly is running 4 very hard days back to back > then we have to look and see that is again only ONE week. Now, if he's doing > this week in and week out then we've have to look and see what he's using to > be able to recover so quickly. I think it's foolish to look at this ONE week > and conclude that this is how he trains week in and week out. Even if he > does do this week in and week out then I think it's foolish to think he's > doing this without some sort of recovery "enhancement" (growth hormone, > synthetic steroid, etc). > > PS-I too know the effects of running back to back to back to back hard days > as I did it quite often in high school. 4 hard days a week was the norm with > some weeks 5 or 6 hard days. I improved for two years then remained pretty > static. My former college coach used the same system and improvement came > little by little. When I tried to adapt the same 4 hard day a week schedule > to a marathon I ended up with an achilles injury. > > Alan > > > >From: "Michael Contopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > >Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 16:22:44 -0400 > >MIME-Version: 1.0 > >X-Originating-IP: [198.240.130.75] > >X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Received: from 198.240.130.75 by lw12fd.law12.hotmail.msn.com with > >HTTP;Wed, 27 Aug 2003 20:22:44 GMT > > > >Alan, just read them. Sorry, I don't see the number of intense workouts > >that would ever suggest to me that any of these guys will be near 2:08 or > >27:20 let alone 2:05 and 26:22. > > > >Im talking ablout 4 workouts in a row, 30 miles on Sunday (not 20), etc. > >There are so many AM: 10, PM: 10 in these logs I am giving myself a > >headache. If they were doing hill followeed by tempo, followed by > >interval, followed by sprint, all in the midst of 2-a days, 30 miles of > >running on Sunday and 2 "easy days" then I will agree. You haven't shown > >me that yet. > > > >I had a coach in college who I probably did not respect as much as I should > >have (Coach Hadsell... if you're out there... here's a shout-out). He > >would have us do a hill workout one day followed by a tempo the next and > >fartleks on the 3rd. I thought I was being over-trained. Turns out I was > >just a wimp. > > > >M > > > > > >>From: "alan tobin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
You could be right. 35k, 25x1:00/1:00, rest, Flouspar Hill, Intervals. That seems doable, but still hard as hell. All depends on how hard they really ran the long run and the hill run. Hell, I wish I had a 90 minute hill around here to run. Alan From: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "alan tobin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 15:04:43 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from smtp101.mail.sc5.yahoo.com ([216.136.174.139]) by mc1-f37.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Thu, 28 Aug 2003 11:45:40 -0700 Received: from host45-235.nu.com (HELO EDWARDPARROT2) ([EMAIL PROTECTED]@159.108.45.235 with login) by smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Aug 2003 18:45:31 - X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jHpCt36iioMjhye5cloKwDC Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Aug 2003 18:45:41.0296 (UTC) FILETIME=[94A56300:01C36D94] Alan - My understanding was that they did those four workouts in five days, they called it "survive the five" - Ed Parrot - Original Message - From: "alan tobin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 2:34 PM Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > You are correct Ed, but it was only those 4 and they weren't back to back to > back to back. Josh Cox did similar workouts when he (is he still?) was under > Fila/Rosa's care. A long progression run of 30-42k, up to 25 x 1:00/1:00 > fartlek, and long intervals. The famed Flouspar Hill 13 mile hill run was > also thrown in there ocassionally and was also a sort of progression run. > The FILA USA program seemed to have flopped with a number of injuries and > "political" problems. The fact that the US program was plagued with injuries > and the Rosa Kenyan program has done well gives even more light to the rumor > that Rosa is a druglord. > > Alan > > > >From: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > >Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 11:43:24 -0400 > >MIME-Version: 1.0 > >Received: from mc3-f34.law16.hotmail.com ([65.54.236.169]) by > >mc3-s11.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Thu, 28 > >Aug 2003 08:45:26 -0700 > >Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([128.223.142.13]) by > >mc3-f34.law16.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5600); Thu, 28 > >Aug 2003 08:42:44 -0700 > >Received: from darkwing.uoregon.edu ([EMAIL PROTECTED] [127.0.0.1])by > >darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h7SFOoHD024359for > ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 08:24:50 -0700 > >(PDT) > >Received: (from [EMAIL PROTECTED])by darkwing.uoregon.edu > >(8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h7SFOoXg024358for t-and-f-outgoing; Thu, 28 Aug > >2003 08:24:50 -0700 (PDT) > >Received: from smtp018.mail.yahoo.com (smtp018.mail.yahoo.com > >[216.136.174.115])by darkwing.uoregon.edu (8.12.9/8.12.9) with SMTP id > >h7SFOlHD024334for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 28 Aug 2003 08:24:47 > >-0700 (PDT) > >Received: from host45-235.nu.com (HELO EDWARDPARROT2) > >([EMAIL PROTECTED]@159.108.45.235 with login) by > >smtp.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 28 Aug 2003 15:24:35 - > >X-Message-Info: QY4hSA9XRFN52P2gnVLzuO7XYZAg57x0wGeh/pxoSfQ= > >Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >X-Priority: 3 > >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal > >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 > >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 > >Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Precedence: bulk > >Return-Path: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Aug 2003 15:42:45.0929 (UTC) > >FILETIME=[06D14990:01C36D7B] > > > >Perhaps it's how one defines quality workouts, but I know the group at the > >FILA center was doing this a couple years ago: > > > >-1 day with 25-40x1:00 on/1:00 off, with the "on" minutes at 3K-5K race > >pace and the off minutes a notch or two faster thaneasy distance. > >-1 day with 10-15km of long intervals (1000m-5000m) at 10 km-10 mile race > >pace. > >-1 day of a long uphill run - 50-90 minutes - with a gradual increase in > >pace so the end was very very hard > >-1 day of 30-35k starting a bit slower than maathon pace and
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Alan, I can't disagree with you're sentiments on "sprint" work more. 200 meter strides are meant to work on your form. That is not sprint work. The one with 100 meter recovery is harder? Are you kidding me? The one with 100 meter recovery is basically a fartlek (I run my recovery jogs relatively quickly). The one with 200 recovery will kick anyone's ass 100x moreso. Off to France. Enjoy the weekend everyone. Michael _ MSN 8: Get 6 months for $9.95/month. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Explain the logic of that statement. bob >The fact that the US program was plagued with injuries and the Rosa >Kenyan program has done well gives even more light to the rumor that >Rosa is a druglord. > >Alan Get MSN 8 and help protect your children with advanced parental controls.
RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Mike. I've done both. Less recovery is MUCH harder. You might run it like a fartlek, but the way I ran it was 200 meters in around :32 100 meters slow slow jog. The workout with 200 meter recover was 200 meters in about :28-30 with 200 meters slow slow jog. My best 200 is a flying start high :26.x and :27.x standing start. The one with less recovery was MUCH harder. The faster 200s were hard simply because of the number of them. 10x200 with 200 recovery is my usual sprint/form/stride/acceleration work and isn't hard at all. I don't want to hear about "well, :25 is much much harder, you're just too slow to appreciate how hard, blah blah blah", everything is relative. Alan From: "Michael Contopoulos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 15:58:12 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [198.240.130.75] X-Originating-Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: from 198.240.130.75 by lw12fd.law12.hotmail.msn.com with HTTP;Thu, 28 Aug 2003 19:58:12 GMT Alan, I can't disagree with you're sentiments on "sprint" work more. 200 meter strides are meant to work on your form. That is not sprint work. The one with 100 meter recovery is harder? Are you kidding me? The one with 100 meter recovery is basically a fartlek (I run my recovery jogs relatively quickly). The one with 200 recovery will kick anyone's ass 100x moreso. Off to France. Enjoy the weekend everyone. Michael _ MSN 8: Get 6 months for $9.95/month. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Could the dots also be connected another way? Using results drawn from several Swedish studies, it seems that for some reason, Kenyan (and possibly other African athletes) seem to have less muscle breakdown and hence faster recoveries with repeated stress. Couldn't this be a reason why methods that might have worked for him in Kenya ( without the use of steriods) might not be possible here? >Dr. Rosa's system worked great for his Kenyan athletes. The training >program has been seen on the internet before: Long progression run >ending at or below marathon pace, up to 25x1:00/1:00, 13 mile >straight uphill run finishing very very hard, long repeats at >10k-10mile race pace, all for weeks on end. To me everything looks >pretty normal except for the added 13 mile straight uphill workout. >One week of the above won't kill anyone, but it's the "weeks on end" >part that gets me. So FILA/Rosa start up a US program using the >above and the athletes procede to get injured or slide down the >slippery slope of chronic fatigue. So, the question is asked "Why?". >My answer is hGH or a synthetic steroid, something that enhances >protein synthesis so recovery is quickened so that Rosa's Kenyan >athletes can handle such intense workloads week after week after >week. I wouldn't have drawn my conclusion if it weren't for Rosa's >shady past. I simply connected the dots. > >Alan MSN 8: Get 6 months for $9.95/month.
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
ART, That was a foolish post, don't you think? Key words: anyone, can do, near all out, ... Foolish thoughts. "Hell, anyone can do 10x200 near all out with 200 meter recoveries at the end of an easy run everyday but I wouldn't call that a very hard workout. Sprint work isn't made to be tiresome. So in his ONE week we have a long run, a hard tempo-type run, "
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
It's no problem for those math majors who can figure out how to "give 200%" every time they set their foot on the track. I tried giving 150% once, and produced a divide-by-zero error. My theory is, for anybody whose coach says "they gave a 200% effort today!", in reality they gave 85%, and they'd never before given more than 60%, which is all the coach thought they had in them. Idiot football coaches trying to coach track. RT On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 23:39:54 EDT, you wrote: >ART, >That was a foolish post, don't you think? >Key words: anyone, can do, near all out, ... Foolish thoughts. > > >"Hell, anyone can do 10x200 near all >out with 200 meter recoveries at the end of an easy run everyday but I >wouldn't call that a very hard workout. Sprint work isn't made to be >tiresome. So in his ONE week we have a long run, a hard tempo-type run, " > >
Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
This reminds me of a certain track coach that will remain unnamed (AND IT WASN'T anyone at Arkansas). Here's the conversation: Schiefer: "Coach, you know, I, for some reason, just can't seem to stay with the top guys for 10,000m." Coach's response: "Well, I think you just need to try harder!" How awesome is that. A college coach telling someone that they just need to try harder. Schiefer --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > It's no problem for those math majors who can figure > out how to "give 200%" every time they set their > foot > on the track. > > I tried giving 150% once, and produced a > divide-by-zero error. > > My theory is, for anybody whose coach says "they > gave a 200% > effort today!", in reality they gave 85%, and they'd > never before > given more than 60%, which is all the coach thought > they had in > them. > > Idiot football coaches trying to coach track. > > RT > > > On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 23:39:54 EDT, you wrote: > > >ART, > >That was a foolish post, don't you think? > >Key words: anyone, can do, near all out, ... > Foolish thoughts. > > > > > >"Hell, anyone can do 10x200 near all > >out with 200 meter recoveries at the end of an easy > run everyday but I > >wouldn't call that a very hard workout. Sprint work > isn't made to be > >tiresome. So in his ONE week we have a long run, a > hard tempo-type run, " > > > > > > __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Re: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
>> Another thing, I'm still lacking any understanding at all for the train-don't race mentality. When did this take hold? Maybe the long-term effects of Viren? I don't really understand it, either, although I think probably has something to do with all the accusations of overracing on the roads that were thrown around in the 1980's - for a few years there, it was the "in" thing for coaches to say that what our athletes needed was not to race as much on the roads. Ironically, this started at a time when we were actually more competitive than we are now. - Ed Parrot
Re: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
But didn't he race less the other Olympic year and a lot less during several years before and after 1972? - Ed Parrot - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 10:48 AM Subject: Re: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > Why Viren? Viren raced 43 times one Olympic year. He seemed to have it figured out? > > malmo > > > > > From: "edndana" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: 2003/08/27 Wed AM 09:28:14 CDT > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > > > >> Another thing, I'm still lacking any understanding at all for the > > train-don't race mentality. When did this take hold? > > > > Maybe the long-term effects of Viren? > > > > I don't really understand it, either, although I think probably has > > something to do with all the accusations of overracing on the roads that > > were thrown around in the 1980's - for a few years there, it was the "in" > > thing for coaches to say that what our athletes needed was not to race as > > much on the roads. Ironically, this started at a time when we were actually > > more competitive than we are now. > > > > - Ed Parrot > > > > > > >
Re: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
At 08:24 AM 8/28/2003 -0700, t-and-f-digest wrote.. Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 10:16:18 -0400 (EDT) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 1) First - I have said for the last seven years that I saw the greatest 10k ever run, the final in Atlanta, with a 13:11 last 5k in tough conditions to run 27:07 and win Olympic gold in a race that was contested until the end. Paris was surely cooler, and they didn't have to run heats, but 12:57 to cap a 26:49 World Champs victory in a race that closely contested and unrabbitted (or was Geb the rabbit?) is probably better. What holds the previous claim for fastest race ever without a pacemaker? For that matter, has there ever been a faster 5000 without a pacemaker? I felt the same way about the Atlanta 10k. It probably helped I was sitting next to the Ethiopian contingent! Your question about an unrabbited 10k and 5k is a great one! Can the folks at TFN or Ken Nakamura answer our question? Richard McCann
Fwd: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 22:25:12 +0200 Subject: Re: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 From: Sieg Lindstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: rich mccann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> The '99 World Champs 5K, won in 12:58.13 by Hissou, comes to mind as a candidate. I'm guessing the Atlanta 10K was the best at that distance. Just guesses. > From: Richard McCann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 11:15:24 -0700 > To: (T&FMail List) [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: (Garry Hill) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, (Sieg Lindstrom) > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dan Lilot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: RE: t-and-f: 12:57 last 5000 > > Your question about an > unrabbited 10k and 5k is a great one! Can the folks at TFN or Ken > Nakamura answer our question?
