I like fartleks, if only to break up the monotony of my training. I don’t run races anymore, so I have no idea if they make me faster other than why I try to go a certain pace and see if I can keep it up.
I'm fine with this.. you admit you are not trying to maximize performance so do what makes you have fun.
The definition of fartlek is not "time based intervals".
Those would be intervals.
I don't think you understand what a sub set or superset is... Fartlek is a type of interval training typically based on time. Interval can means a time or a distance based repetitive or iterative run. The time/distance between those intervals can also be set.
A fartlek is an unstructured workout.
If you are running fast for set time periods, and then running easier for other set time periods, then it is structured - and therefore, not a fartlek.
All you've done is a form of interval training, wherein, the interval is a time period, rather than a set distance.
I once asked Peter Snell what value he thought there was in the kinds of precise, "sophisticated," interval sessions so many athletes do now. He said the value was that "it allows coaches to justify their own existence." There's a time and place for a lot of different things. People have succeeded with precisely timed and measured intervals, others have done well with time based ones, which is not true fartlek. I think true fartlek, which is completely unstructured, has never really caught on because coaches don't really like it because they have no real control over the session.
While romantic sounding I believe coaches need to have reason why for there athlete is doing X on y day. Like how demotivating would that be to have a coach that tells you you are doing this: because I don't want to have a clue about how fit you are right now but want you to do something other than run slow because that's what runners have done before. Zero science in that
Western running pretty much went into the crapper at about the same time it got fixated on science. Maybe that was just coincidence. But essentially the main reason we all do what we do is because it worked for people who did it.
While romantic sounding I believe coaches need to have reason why for there athlete is doing X on y day. Like how demotivating would that be to have a coach that tells you you are doing this: because I don't want to have a clue about how fit you are right now but want you to do something other than run slow because that's what runners have done before. Zero science in that
Western running pretty much went into the crapper at about the same time it got fixated on science. Maybe that was just coincidence. But essentially the main reason we all do what we do is because it worked for people who did it.
So we seem to agree with the title at least? For all the people defining what fartlek is or is not, I have yet to hear anyone challenge the notion that fartlek doesn't work some magical system? You can get a stimulus from all the workouts we all already do..threshold, intervals speed, hills, long run, easy run....
Fartlek is not wrong, it just isn't unique. I would agree it isn't needed. Maybe as some have suggested, when you don't have a lot of time or away on vacation or something I guess. I have noticed my kids coaches prescribe it on what should be an easy day? Like they cant just have an easy day. Also prescribed for really young kids (6th-8th), although my experience is the young kids like intervals way more.
I don't think you understand what a sub set or superset is... Fartlek is a type of interval training typically based on time. Interval can means a time or a distance based repetitive or iterative run. The time/distance between those intervals can also be set.
A fartlek is an unstructured workout.
If you are running fast for set time periods, and then running easier for other set time periods, then it is structured - and therefore, not a fartlek.
All you've done is a form of interval training, wherein, the interval is a time period, rather than a set distance.
Western running pretty much went into the crapper at about the same time it got fixated on science. Maybe that was just coincidence. But essentially the main reason we all do what we do is because it worked for people who did it.
So we seem to agree with the title at least? For all the people defining what fartlek is or is not, I have yet to hear anyone challenge the notion that fartlek doesn't work some magical system? You can get a stimulus from all the workouts we all already do..threshold, intervals speed, hills, long run, easy run....
Fartlek is not wrong, it just isn't unique. I would agree it isn't needed. Maybe as some have suggested, when you don't have a lot of time or away on vacation or something I guess. I have noticed my kids coaches prescribe it on what should be an easy day? Like they cant just have an easy day. Also prescribed for really young kids (6th-8th), although my experience is the young kids like intervals way more.
Thank you! Can fartleks work yes! Are they the key to success heck no!
I use fartleks in base building phase, just to bring some variety to the week of runs, and to keep the feel for change of gears and running fast.
In season as a coach, might throw in a fartlek instead of a regular workout, if team seems fatigued. A day off, an easy run, and a fartlek is a good way to bring sharpness back.
I also define fartlek as completely unscripted and not on a track. Kids just take turns being leader and vary pace randomly.
Watched many workout videos of many pro groups that do fartleks (time based) I honestly don't see the point for people at that level many do them on a track which I find even weirder. if you are running a time based work why do it in small loops instead of in larger loops or straight lines
Here is my view what on fartlek's are good at: 1. Good for a runner who would get upset with running slow workouts early in a build for a season or for a workout between seasons. 2. Good if you don't have access to a track or measure trail/loop hence my not understanding doing them on a track and finishing and starting on random places on that track. 3. Good for new runners for them to learn how to run easy and fast and progress slowly in workouts or at least not digress. 4. Good for lazy coaches - I admit this is me really easy to assign a fartlek instead of trusting gps or hoping your athlete has access to a track.
Basically tempos are far better at working on the aerobic side and intervals are great for the anerobic threshold fartleks fall in the worst of both worlds where it's not the benefits of a tempo/aerobic threshold workout with all the breaks of and none of the benefits of anerobic threshold either as the paces tend to be someone between the thresholds or closer to aerobic but with rest instead of no rest. They also give coaches zero gage as to what type of shape the runner is in since it's hard to estimate the shape an athlete is in because they ran 3 min hard 2 min easy or medium. the overall pace isn't very helpful and will be quiet a bit slower than a tempo.
So my point is a pro runner or "a mature runner" should be mature enough to do a tempo or progression run into a tempo and be ok with running "slow" compared to when they are further along in their build and not do any fartleks or just do intervals of measured distance with measured rest (distance) to give themselves and coach realistic expectations of what will happen on race day as they start doing more sub tempo work (track workouts).
One could argue me doing an alt mile workout is a fartlek but: 1. I rarely do those 2. That workout being distance based and longer gives me a better idea of what shape I am in (short reps on a GPS are very inaccurate distance wise)
I personally haven't done a fartlek in a decade and yet have improved consistently because I am totally ok with my tempo pace being 20-30 sec/per mile slower depending where I am in a marathon build or a track season build.
I like fartleks, if only to break up the monotony of my training. I don’t run races anymore, so I have no idea if they make me faster other than why I try to go a certain pace and see if I can keep it up.
I'm fine with this.. you admit you are not trying to maximize performance so do what makes you have fun.
The English translation of fartlek is 'speed play'. I think this defines what it is and why one does it. I had a Finnish coach as a kid in the '70's who introduced us to it and being a strong runner would lead us to a local golf course for a fartlek session and while it was hard work, it was a lot of fun to do with my teammates. It made me a stronger runner and is a very good reminder that running can actually be fun. We ran up and down hills, through streams (we always ended up swimming when it was warm). Obviously from a science oriented view it involved touching on different heart rates coupled with active recovery.
This post was edited 51 seconds after it was posted.
Agree on the title? Of the thread? I'm not really sure what the title means but I absolutely disagree with the idea that fartlek is pointless for anyone probably including "pros mature runners," whoever they might be. I do agree fartlek isn't magic but neither is anything else.
Agree on the title? Of the thread? I'm not really sure what the title means but I absolutely disagree with the idea that fartlek is pointless for anyone probably including "pros mature runners," whoever they might be. I do agree fartlek isn't magic but neither is anything else.
The title was about them being pointless, which I assume to mean not needed. You already work those systems and energy sources elsewhere. And that is correct. The thread ended up being the definition of what they are. I think fartlek is super helpful if you don't have a well rounded training plan already.
Agree on the title? Of the thread? I'm not really sure what the title means but I absolutely disagree with the idea that fartlek is pointless for anyone probably including "pros mature runners," whoever they might be. I do agree fartlek isn't magic but neither is anything else.
The title was about them being pointless, which I assume to mean not needed. You already work those systems and energy sources elsewhere. And that is correct. The thread ended up being the definition of what they are. I think fartlek is super helpful if you don't have a well rounded training plan already.
I suppose I'd agree that fartlek is not needed. I would say the same thing about lots of other things people do. I'd also say that fartlek certainly can be part of a well rounded training plan.
Western running pretty much went into the crapper at about the same time it got fixated on science. Maybe that was just coincidence. But essentially the main reason we all do what we do is because it worked for people who did it.
It's a shame that Ingebrigtsen's running has gone into the crapper for focusing on the science, isn't it? Marius Bakken must've been quite the fool...
For the sake of the thread let’s accept the pervasive modern definition of fartlek, which is typically structured intervals by time.
Doing intervals by time and effort (no distance) allows for variations in terrain, weather, fatigue etc. Sometimes it’s better for an athlete to run the proper effort based on internal factors than to try to hit each rep in a certain time, which is hard to avoid when doing intervals by distance.
It’s also satisfyingly simple: “8x2min. on/2min. off with the ‘on’ at 5k-8k effort and the ‘off’ at an easy pace that allows you to recover” applies to everyone, without having to work out specifics for each athlete.
They aren’t “necessary,” and of course every structured fartlek session could theoretically be converted to distance reps (hard to account for those wind gusts though), but they’re a perfectly valid workout with the same benefits as distance reps and reasons to prefer them at certain times.
That's a long way to say not a lot OP. For a pro, there's really no difference in doing 8 x 1k on the track or 8 x 3:00 on/2:00 off. The first might target a specific pace & have standing rest. The second is continuous & you're not tied to a pace. Better to do the latter at times just to take the pressure off of hitting certain splits. Pros are focused on the stopwatch & confidence can be tied to that. There are workout benefits to a fartlek but also mental benefits. Don't overthink it OP. It has a place.
Scientific analysis has added much to the training paradigm (Americans are still behind in that sphere). But there are many ways to "skin a cat", so some types of training benefit some types of athletes better than others - both physiologically and mentally.
Fartlek, as speed-play, is quite difficult to enact properly, at least in the context of the Swedish version. Especially when solo, although that might be when it is theoretically most beneficial. By touching on all training energy systems in one session (which is how I have understood its definition) is has potentially great value, but it is also imprecise. OCD types (who want/need feedback) might have less confidence in this type of training because it isn't easy to "control". Coaches too often use it as a throw away, or worse an easy day - since few (coaches and athletes) understand what it is about. While kids may enjoy the unstructured vibe, they often have less patience/concentration to get much out of it, and it is easy turn it into into an lighter day than hoped. Although that isn't necessarily a bad thing either if part of base phase training development.
What is isn't is timed versus distance "intervals", regardless of what some people want to call it. The benefit is the greater imagination it may engender but that can also be its flaw if managed poorly. I struggled to get much out of it as I am more on the OCD side, and like the feedback I get from more "interval" based training structures. Coaches (in HS) who can run with athletes to help them learn the value of fartlek, can get more from the athletes. That isn't likely the case with Pro's (even Ritzenhein), so athletes would need to already have experience with the methodology (and enjoy doing it), to get value beyond more "normal" methods of training.
Fartlek is a form of interval training. Any so called science that supports the idea of interval training having value supports the idea of fartlek having value. Lydiard said it was "all a lot of eyewash."
I'm not sure what universe you live in, but Fartlek's have lots of benefits that are widely accepted by coaches and across a wide variety of disciplines
1. Fartleks are great for *anyone* getting back into shape, dealing with sickness, etc. Instead of worrying about splits needlessly when coming back, fartleks allow you to begin building toward your targets
2. Fartleks are great for targetting specific HR/Pace zones I've used fartleks training for d1xc, track (racing from 800m-5km) at different points in time, and farleks are phenomenal for their flexibility in being able to run fast. In xc, we'd do some fartleks w/ faster recovery interval to have a bit of tempo value for the effort (keeping average HR/Pace relatively high). In track, we'd have longer, slower rest so we could get sharper (focusing on higher top end speed and fuller recoery).
3. Fartleks are great for different surfaces Fartlek's are great for running/comparing efforts across a number of different surfaces. A lot of times, we'd do fartleks on our cross country course in muddier conditions and the time-focus of fartleks keep you focused on running a certain effort OR we'd do fartleks in lots of hilly areas to normalize effort where the conditions are a bit abnormal.
4. The Fartlek paradigm is essentially how all cycling training programs are set up This is as a means of normalizing power efforts in different conditions (uphill/downhill, into the wind/with the wind, hard surface/slow surface/gravel/mud/etc). For example, a workout like over/unders will have riders at 1 hour of (1 min at XXX watts & 1 min at YYY watts) or an FTP workout might have something like 3 sets of (XXX watts for 10 min, YYY watts for 5 min).
