Interval pace. Confused.
9 watchers
Jun 2022
11:39am, 23 Jun 2022
17,366 posts
|
rf_fozzy
"would have thought that the pace should be the same " Yes. Should be. Ideally. I never could match the pace I could do for 400 & 600m and hold that for 800, 1km and 1.2km intervals. But I was still aiming for what I should have been targeting. But if I was ~5s behind on a 1km interval, I'd not worry too much about it. |
Jun 2022
11:46am, 23 Jun 2022
18,197 posts
|
Autumnleaves
I'd agree fozzy that 24 mins effort overall is a good session - broadly that's what mine add up to, occasionally a bit more. I am sometimes more generous with recoveries as the 80/20 training plans often suggest longer recoveries for sharper paced intervals (which I quite like doing). I would also not attempt to run longer intervals at the same pace as a 400m one - unless I was deliberately keeping the pace down a bit.
|
Jun 2022
11:52am, 23 Jun 2022
18,119 posts
|
larkim
Just as a basic observation though I'd always expect that the "hard bits" in distance should / could be run at a pace which you can in theory run continuously for that same distance. So 5x800m for the Joker stuff feels very slow as it's saying you can't hold a pace of 4000m that you should be able to hold over 5000m in a single block. Accepting that a) you're only training and b) the rest / recovery period needs to be adequate too. In practice *for me* I can (whether I should) always run long-ish intervals (up to 1 mile) at a pace faster than I can run for the combined effort. I may be running too hard if the physiology / science is the only guiding factor (and there's a strong argument that it should be) but I enjoy it for some perverse reasons. My suspicion is that, providing we're all happy to accept that not every session is perfectly optimised, that if you're in the ballpark for paces (which could be a 20-30s per mile pace window faster or slower than optimal) that the runner gets 80%+ of the benefit of the session compared to a perfectly idealised pace taking account of the individuals physiology and training state. I have no scientific basis for my suspicions though so maybe someone will put me right 
|
|
Jun 2022
12:03pm, 23 Jun 2022
17,368 posts
|
rf_fozzy
"I'd always expect that the "hard bits" in distance should / could be run at a pace which you can in theory run continuously for that same distance." I'd have to go back and re-read Daniels, but no, I don't think this is right. You should run intervals *faster* than you'd run the distance - you're working your vo2max, not training your legs to run at a specific pace. "20-30s per mile pace window faster or slower than optimal" I think that's too big an error (scientific error). Has to be <10s for me. Or you're not running to the right training pace (i.e. you're either targeting paces too fast or slow). The first few intervals should always feel easy if you're training to the right pace, because the benefits always come at the back end of a session, so if doing 16x400m, then the first 4 intervals don't do much, 5-8 do a little, 9-12 are starting to work and then 13-16 is where the majority of benefits come in. That's why 8x400m seems a v short session - it's a non-linear progression, so you're not even getting 50% of the benefit you'd get from the classic Daniels 16x400m session - maybe 20%? (a guess) |
|
Jun 2022
12:58pm, 23 Jun 2022
18,120 posts
|
larkim
"I'd always expect that the "hard bits" in distance should / could be run at a pace which you can in theory run continuously for that same distance." I'd have to go back and re-read Daniels, but no, I don't think this is right. I should have added "at least" - I agree, faster than is the right approach. I'd say "at least" to account for bad days In terms of the 20-30s window, I'm on the lookout for any science which really has that level of precision in pure pace terms to it and I've not seen anything. If we were talking HR, then perhaps a higher degree of precision in the HR achieved in the final few intervals would be a better indication of working at the right level, but even then I'd still expect there to be some flex if we're accepting that the runner is trying to ensure they get at least 80% of the expected benefits from the session. e.g. at the moment I suspect I'm in 19:30 5k shape. I might wake up on Saturday morning feeling spritely and energetic, the weather be cool and calm and I'll go out and run 5x1000m at 5:55min/mile which is sub 18:30 pace. But I might also get home a bit tired on Friday after a day at work and I do the same intervals at the same location at 6:15min/mile pace which is just sub 19:25 pace. I don't think the output from those two sessions as a measurable impact would be measurable, and I shouldn't be disappointed that I could only hold a pace 20s per mile slower. Somewhere in that range is a decent enough workout that will bring some benefits. I don't think we should kid ourselves that a narrow window of performance is the only acceptable level of activity; even if we recognise that too fast (evidenced by being unable to close out the session with even pacing) or too slow (bracketed maybe by saying slower than the race pace for a continuous effort of the same volume) pushes things out of that acceptable window. |
Jun 2022
1:12pm, 23 Jun 2022
1,873 posts
|
RooA
And here was me thinking I was asking a simple question.
|
Jun 2022
1:13pm, 23 Jun 2022
189 posts
|
Neal
For Daniels, intervals are about improving your VO2 max, not about (directly) running faster. The pace for intervals is the minimum pace that fully exercises your cardiovascular system: if you want to improve that, and your VO2 max, running any faster is no help (but will mean you get tired out quicker - and maybe not manage as many intervals / time at VO2 max). It just so happens that this pace is about ones 3k / 5k pace. The being able to run faster bit comes from doing shorter, faster repetitions with really big rests - so you are exercising your legs and how you move them but without putting much strain on your cardiovascular system. For me, with a 26 minute 5k, Daniels suggests a pace equivalent to a 23:05 5k for these repetitions to get a good improvement in running faster. |
|
Jun 2022
1:23pm, 23 Jun 2022
190 posts
|
Neal
larkim If we were talking HR, then perhaps a higher degree of precision in the HR achieved in the final few intervals would be a better indication of working at the right level I was reading Hal Higdon's "Run Fast" last night and was struck by this in relation to lactate threshold. There are no references to where he got the numbers from - but it made me wonder about the target training paces / heart rates etc we see and how much they could differ between people. |
|
Jun 2022
1:27pm, 23 Jun 2022
18,199 posts
|
Autumnleaves
And here was me thinking I was asking a simple question. It's an interesting discussion so thanks for starting it! Given many on here who tackle Joker are new to interval training, I think 8 x 400m is quite a lot for a first session. |
|
Jun 2022
1:39pm, 23 Jun 2022
18,122 posts
|
larkim
Neal the more I think about physiology, the more I'm convinced that if we measure and judge anything we do as runners as training inputs it should be HR almost to the exclusion of all else - it's the best objective measure for an individual, though it needs to be understood and evaluated on an individual by individual basis. I suppose though for intervals it is quite difficult to do this given the brief period of time intervals are run for, so making adjustments are much harder to do whilst in the process of doing them compared to say a 20-30 min tempo or a longer run. Maybe in hindsight it is possible to review them and say "I ran that too easy" or "I ran that too hard", but even then what measure do you use? The average for a rep? The max? The last 30s? I suppose that's where pace comes in as a handy proxy if you're well enough informed to understand what your real race paces are at any moment in time. |
Related Threads
-
Intervals at 5k pace - why 5k pace?
Aug 2019
-
Project Joker
Jun 2025
-
How would you time an internal session?
Feb 2020
-
Intervals during aerobic base training
Apr 2018
-
Interval Training - WTF
Jun 2015
-
Intervals to prepare for a Fetch Mile
Apr 2015
-
Marathon speed session ideas
Jan 2015
-
Formula for calculating interval pace
Oct 2014
-
Garmin 910XT - Intervals, Can I See Pace ?
Feb 2014
-
Intervals as part of marathon training? Plus plan selection advice pls
Nov 2013
Report This Content
You can report any content you believe to be unsafe. Please let me know why you believe this content is unsafe by choosing a category below.
Thank you for your report. The content will be assessed as soon as possible.