Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
Options
John Parker/Base training
![[Deleted User]](https://w5.vanillicon.com/59af05f5a69e4257d0931cfa7b220e88_100.png)
In John Parker’s book (Heart Monitor Training for the Complete Idiot) he claims most runners run too fast on the easy days and that the body needs the aerobic training the easy days give it. He also gives examples of runners getting better times when they have taken his advice (still doing fast the runs). However we have been told (on this forum) if you want to improve your aerobic threshold you can’t run fast during the base building. Can someone explain why Parkers theory seems to works?
Over to you Pantman!
Over to you Pantman!
The materials in this website are in no way intended to replace the professional medical care, advice, diagnosis or treatment of a doctor, qualified personal trainer, therapist, dietitian or nutritionist Runners's World, Part of the Hearst UK well-being network © Copyright 2017
Comments
periodisation is used extensively by tour cyclists and ironman distance triathletes, etc, but less so by runners
this is because runners tend to race week in, week out whereas the endurance eventers tend to do a limited number of races (eg just Hawaii for some elite ironmen)
endurance eventers therefore train aerobic endurance at the stzrt of the season (base training) in a long and focussed period, then other things (anaerobic endurance, etc) in other periods [to the exclusion of aerobic endurance training]... they therefore finish the season wrecked, and have to start again
year round racers, however, tend to run all the different training runs in their 7 or 10 day schedule, so they can compete in 5ks, 10ks and 1/2ms all year round
there are lots of grey areas between these extremes
pantman's method of focussing entirely on aerobic work will take away top end speed for a trained runner, but this isn't an issue in the off season... also for beginners or born again runners, there is merit in excluding all but aerobic work until a decent base is built up
but SOME aerobic work is necessary, whether in blocks (a la cycling/tri methodology) or interspersed (running methodology/your book)
Base training requires running aerobically exclusively.
I recommend building to an hour a day at a steady aerobic pace (LT less 10-15bpm) to accustom the body to running miles and to teach it to efficiently meatbolise fat. This is a base for base building and a great time to lose excess weight and improve form (=Pose running).
Serious runners base building may well be doing LT runs (that's where aerobic meets anaerobic, for those new to this) up to 3 times a week. Those type of runs require recovery for most mortals - no more than the pre-base pace and perhaps a good bit slower. Any extra miles (such as "doubles" and teh long run would also be done at the slower pace.
To maximise time spent at or close to LT without production of Lactate, many athletes will do repetition work and do even do it on a track. This can also enable faster speeds while training at LT. Elite marathoners will do this type of work @sub 5min/mile pace. Not slow, but still (although barely) aerobic.
Also many faster runners may do alactic speed work. Running faster than anaerobic but so short and with such long recoveries so as not to produc any lactate. Not anaerobic but VERY fast. 50-200m x 6 with 5-10min recovery might be an example of this. This type of work is normally related to good, relaxed technique.
So aerobic and slow are NOT the same. But this "higher end" base building is beyond most of us - hence the "base for base building" I recommend.
Several people have taken offence/disagreed with my comments re. 10-12 min milers not doing speed work. I was referring to anaerobic speed work as that is unoubtedly what they would be doing in practice. Will it make them faster in the short term? Absolutely. Just as putting icing on the cake makes it bigger...
Aerobic training IS THE CAKE!! Put in the work, put in the miles, reap the rewards in the LONG term.
I am coaching a 12min/miler (or rather she was a few months ago) to run a 3:45 (GFA) marathon next autumn. I think she'll be closer to 3:30. She won't be doing "speed work" till early next summer, but she'll be running a damn sight faster even then than her fellow 12min/milers who take the speed work route.
"Speed work" (i.e. anaerobic training) is a quick fix solution that will only hinder long term progress for the beginner. Go aerobic - they may mean slow to start with, but not for long.
I am now running 6:40 at 145bpm - I have barely gone over that HR in training and I estimate my LT to be around 160bpm. And I am still just "building a base for base training". Am I running slowly..?
1) Anaerobic training when it comes should not be "to the exclusion of aerobic endurance training"
2) Aerobic training means you finish the season LESS "wrecked"
3) Snell and other have argued that base-building takes away minimal speed if alactic work is done. But agreed that there is some loss, and that it is more than restored at a later point.
I guess I am just the kind of guy who'd rather run a few races with a 10-20% better performance than race at a lower level week in week out. But then I don't see many runners saying, "Well my PB is a minute slower but I did three times in three months, so actually MY PB is better." Most would agree that the better runner is the one with the BEST performance on the days when it really counts. Athletics is littered with "consistent performers" who never got that medal...
[faints]
but...but...this is the book *I* keep recommending!
Do you mean really cool athletes do stuff like he does, too? Heh.
RD
I've done a couple of marathons recently in the 8 to 9 minute miling range. I overtook a hell of a lot of people walking in the last 6 miles of each. None of them were walking because they hadn't done enough speedwork ;o)
This training schedule runs counter to the 'train faster at shorter and faster at shorter' distances to your race distance.
WWWFR - it is not just about burning fat, base training has a number of other benefits:
Improves cardio-vascular efficiency
Opens up/increases capilliary beds in muscles to enable more efficient transportation of oxygen/nutrients
Increases muscle strength
Improves running economy
and probably many more that I haven't thought of.
I'm planning to start off using the "180 formula" - so 180-34=146. No need to add/subtract anything as although I now train 4 times a week I haven't been doing so consistently for over a year.
So: I work up to being able to run for an hour a day not exceeding 146 bpm at any point during each run. Once I can do that, what is the next step? Upping the bpm by 5 and going through the whole process again (if so, where do I stop?) or increasing the length of a couple of runs?
And how do I know what my LT is?
Ill build up my long slow runs until week prior NY mara then taper down! Wat u think?
RD
Again, 5 weeks is a short time to notice much improvement, but I don't think it will do any harm. If it goes OK, perhaps try a longer base-building period before your next marathon.
All the best
I would rather run for two hours steady than one hour speedwork anyday!
RD
re fruity's and treadmill's comments, i would agree. i've used base training periods for a number of years, but that's ironman training. my 10k, for example, would be consistently faster if i did more speedwork, but i don't care because consistently faster 10ks aren't my bag! if you have a good base and you are running shorter races, and all year round, then periodisation might not be for you
if you start running at say 130-135hr and then build it up slowly from there you should be OK
better to get tested though if there's a university near you with a sports science department
I am pretty well convinced of the need for specific base-building to improve.
I am planning twelve weeks from mid-October of only aerobic running mileage with HRM at 70%,BEFORE re-introducing any pace work. I incidentally worked out "true" max. HR on an inclined treadmill (gee, that was fun!). I confirmed that the 220 minus age calculation was inaccurate for me.
I am a Spring/Summer race competitor, only planning 6-7 races next year, so I dont worry about losing pace for a bit ( I dont do winter x-country). I can therefore "dedicate myself to the cause" of base-building. I plan to build from almost 30 to 40 miles per week, given family/work pressures.
The question I have is - I would like to incorporate some leg strength training, but this actually exposes the muscles to lactate - how and when can one do strength training as part of a periodised programme?
Do you wait for a later phase and also incorporate hill-sessions?
1) The initial base for base building is ideal for those without a background of aerobic miles. My suggestion to BR was to use this type of training as a RECOVERY period in preparation for the build up due to his higher level of background.
2) If the fundamental aerobic has not been done in the past then you will need to slow done and build those foundations so that the speed can go higher in the future.
Like a building, the deeper the foundations the higher you can go.
Alan, Jury's out on that one. Hills after base, pre anaerobic seems to be the standard approach and makes much sense. Still wondering how to adapt it to Pose running though...
Re strength training were you referring to weights rather than hill reps
if so i've wondered the same thing... my schedules continue showing gym sessions right through the base period, and yeah the primary energy source for this is the creatine/atp system - but there must be some lactic acid production too i'd guess
maybe its just too small to worry about? most sources seem to be quiet on this
In response to you here is what I am doing - it is split into four stages.
1) Stage 1 - Building a base for base building - Running an hour a day at FB pace (Allen/Maffetone Formula) or less, comfortably, easily and without injury. Three additions to this stage for me: a)Learn Pose running, b)Lose bulk of excess weight, c) Add 20-30min "doubles" - this is cos I want to run a fast marathon next year and will need them eventually and this is teh time to adapt. I do the doubles with my kids (10-11min miles).
This whole stage may just be a month of recovery for an experienced marathon runner before the next campaign or may take over a year for a total novice.
2) Stage 2 - Base building #1 - Adding the long run and making 3 runs faster paced, moving them from FB pace to LT pace - gradually. For me, those runs will be going from a Max of 145 to 155+ - one hilly fartlek (max HR on hills), one steady at 150 and one steady at 155. I hope to also increase two of the hour runs to 1.5hr, again as my aims are high.
I am planning on a gradual 3 months for this and would advise the same ideally for first-timers, but experienced base builders would do it in a couple of weeks.
3) Stage 3 - Base building #2 - Having got to desired level I will then build the base by holding it there. By now the 3 faster runs are LT sessions and I will probably being doing some alactic form/speed work in the middle of some steady runs.
Again I plan this stage to be around 3 months.
4) Stage 4 - 4 weeks of hills; 4 weeks of anaerobic speed work; 8 weeks of trials, co-ordination and preparation inc. taper and race.
A more experienced marathoner might cover stages 1 & 2 in a month as recovery and then do the base building for between 10-20 weeks.
A less experienced runner may choose to skip stage 3 altogether and shorten stage 4.
I am prepared to take the time out and do the work to get the results.
Re. LT threshold - don't worry about it till you get there...
As a Pose runner, that is drills and I will (probably) keep the 4 week hill phase post-base to work on leg speed and strength too.
WWWFR,
Re. shorter distances. Peter Snell won the 800m in 1960 Oly games and did teh 800/1500 double in 1964. He trained in a very similar way. He also now has a PhD in Exercise Physiology. His old WR for 800m has only just been equalled as a NZ national record (in the last month) 40yrs later. His 1:43 was done on a 300m grass track! I have read that he said that with the base training he could run close to his best and that the later work was the icing on the cake.
The difference in training is not so much in the base phase, but in the later stages after. I know less about this, as I am more interested in the longer distances, but Lydiard would be the place to start.
But certainly it didn;t seem to affect Snell's speed..!
friel and others recommend it for cyclists
also it looks good
That's brilliant - thanks. Makes a lot more sense now ... BUT re. LT threshold, how do you know what yours is? I don't want to get there and not know ;-)
I am also prepared to do the work to get the results so I will keep you posted on progress ... and probably plague you with more questions ...