DopeyBadger
Imagathoner
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2015
- Messages
- 10,345
And depending on who you listen to the exact same term (like Tempo run) can mean wildly different things. Some define Tempo as a specific pace in the pace spectrum, whereas others use "Tempo" as a means to describe the pace at which you would run certain distances in a race (like Marathon Tempo is the pace at which you would run a marathon).
I think the easiest way to think about it is as a "pace spectrum". From, as fast as you can go, to as slow as you can go. The slower you go, the bigger the "zones" of the pace spectrum. As you get faster, the "paces" narrow.
When training, you want to diversify your weekly schedule across the pace spectrum with specification towards the event you're working towards. The large majority of that diversification should skew towards easy pacing. A commonly quoted percentage of easy for the whole week is 80%. Where easy pacing can be defined by a certain HR%, or a pace like "12-20% slower than Marathon Tempo", or a simple mechanism like Galloway uses which is "Marathon Tempo + 2 minutes". Ideally easy pace is defined by effort, but in my experience (and based on research as well) most people gravitate towards paces that physiologically aren't easy. So it takes some time to learn what easy effort actually feels like. Once you learn what easy feels like, then you can rely on effort to guide easy pacing. So for me, some days my easy pace is in the 7:40s, and some days it's in the 10:20s. It's all about what "feels" right on that day based on a myriad of factors.
The remaining 20% is your specification. So you're working towards a 10k PR in February. So as you get closer to the 10k in February (let's say the last 8-12 weeks), you would be working on paces in and around 10k pace (like HM Tempo, 10k Tempo, or 5k Tempo). Whereas let's say you were working towards a marathon. The paces in and around that would be the long run, M Tempo, and HM Tempo. The specificity of your training is the nuts and bolts.
So my mantra is "train where you are, and not where you want to be". Using the same "pacing spectrum" graphic above, I can explain why (a re-post):
Most runners set goals for themselves. Whether that is a new distance or a faster time. But often I see runners extend themselves with the pacing too far. What was once marathon tempo pace becomes their 10k pace. But it's my belief that training where you are (with current fitness physiological pacing) is the best long term strategy. You'll make gains, and potentially can stay injury free for longer. You're working at appropriate paces, rather than paces of where you want to be. I made this image to illustrate this concept (see above).
Let's say "current" is what we believe to be your current fitness pacing spectrum. Let's say that you have a new goal of lowering your half marathon time by 5 minutes. Some may say, well let's type in your new goal half marathon pace and come up with a new pacing scheme. This is where I'd argue you've chosen a "too fast" pacing spectrum. So what happens? Well potentially what was suppose to be "easy" is now a mixture of "easy" and "long". That's not a huge deal. You've made the "easy" just slightly harder, but things are still falling into those large zones of pacing at the slower end of the spectrum. But as you move further down the pacing spectrum you start to see issues. What was once your "10k" pace is now your "HM pace" for the purpose of workouts. So while you limited the 10k workouts to 20 min a single bout and having recovery intervals of 1 min for every 5 min of running, suddenly you're choosing to follow the HM rules for a workout at that same intensity. So instead of a 5:1, now suddenly you're looking at a duration cap of 60 minutes with no required rest breaks. That's a huge difference between how your body will perceive these workouts. In one case, you're making sure you don't do more than 20 min, but in the other case, you're suddenly allowing yourself to go all the way to 60 min. Could you complete the workout? It's certainly possible. But how your body reacts, adapts, and recovers from that workout is likely going to be completely different than was intended when following a training plan. You'll start to fall into a pattern where you'll always be trying to recover from the workout instead of reaping the benefits of it. It's what I call, "Don't Survive the Training, Thrive because of it". Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
On the opposite end, you can see that little harm will be done if you train just slightly too slow. So I always try to impress upon my runners, train where you are and not necessarily where you want to be. With consistent training, you'll get where you want to be. A runner who can put in lots of good efforts without getting injured can become consistent and make consistent gains. But a runner who is striving beyond their current fitness and consistently ends up injured is likely to stunt their improvement over time.
So using the above, let's reverse engineer what a 9 min/mile 10k runner can do at other distances.
A 9 min/mile 10k runner can do the mile in about 7:47 and a 5k in about 26:49 (8:38 min/mile). So you'd want to be able to hit those benchmarks, or get close to them to be able to hit the 55:55 10k time (9:00 min/mile). So is that the case for your current fitness level at the mile or 5k? Or is this still something you are striving towards? What was a recent mile time trial or 5k, say within the last 4 months? We'd want to base the pacing off of that and then build towards that goal.
This part tells me it is highly likely that you aren't training slow enough if every run sucks. That's because truly easy pacing by definition almost feels effortless. You almost feel as if you did nothing when you're done with an easy day. That's how you know you're doing it right.
As for the feeling of "running slower seems even harder", it's actually quite common when attempting to learn to go slow enough. I'd say in my experience of helping others, that 99% of runners tell me the same thing when starting out. It's extremely rare for someone to say to me, "oh great that's a super easy pace and I can do that with no problem." But I'd say after say 3 weeks or so, about 90% of runners report back that the truly easy pace has now become truly easy. It just takes some getting used to. Another chunk (let's say 9%) take about 2-3 months to get used to the slower pacing. There is a very very small sliver, say 1%, of runners that just can't ever go as slow as I recommend in the pacing. But that happens most often when those runner's easy pace is in the 18-20 min/mile range and is so darn close to their walking pace. Then, for that 1%, we get creative. So I'd say give the easy pacing an honest try for a few weeks and see if you can adjust. Just let me know what a recent race time is, and I can give you a good idea where that easy pace should end up.
I too was one of those runners who said, "If I can go faster, why shouldn't I?" A "PR the day" type mindset. But it's when I accepted the "train slow to race fast" mantra that my PRs dropped dramatically. Now these days, I can run a 5:42 mile solo time trial. An easy day is commonly in the 8-10 min/mile range. But even when I run with my daughter and wife, I can still manage to run/walk a 14-15 min/mile pace. So I'm confident that if I can run a pace that's nearly 10 min/mile slower than my mile PR, that others can run a few min/mile slower than theirs with proper practice.
I'm running a 5k in about 33min right now.
