Easy Interval Method

lexel wrote:

Thanks for sharing, I try to address a few things.

Monotony: A very important point. I read in a book that you should change your training methods every 6 weeks, to get new stimuli, because after 4-6 weeks the body stagnates. So i mix it up and i guess this is a good method to do so.

There's absolutely no evidence for this claim! It depends on how you perform your workouts and overall training.

Thanks for the response. As far as changing up the workouts or altering the plans laid out in the book, I want to fairly assess the program, and to do that I think I should follow the book as closely as possible. After some time, I will reassess, and maybe add social runs, tempos, etc. I do think your idea about walking only after the 200s/400s is a good one, as he says that is optional anyway, so I will incorporate that.

And to the post before that argued race pace will feel more natural because I'll be used to it from interval pace, they may be right. But again, we'll see once I've given the program a fair shake of a few months or longer.

We are doing every 2nd-3rd week a harder 2000m fast /1000m moderate session.We do not had races here in the last year,so that is a kind of mental training,race simulation for the future HM shape. 2000m fast is HM race pace /1000m moderate is M pace...4-5 sets continously without walking brake or slow jog. 12-15km.

There were times,when the 2000m fast dropped below HM pace by 2-3sec,and M pace dropped 5sec on good day,just by themselvs,without pushing too much.

There are three small groups (2-3 people/group) with similar speeds,so we are kind of doing the sessions together,but different speeds. Warm up,drills,strides before and the shake out after we are doing together.

Another stuff we are doing every sunday is a kind of mixed session. 10laps of easy jog with drills and progression strides,cautiously because the group is middle age runners 30-45. Then 4-5 sets of 2lap (800m) @HM pace 1lap HM+30sec continously without brake or slow jog (three groups here too). Then comes 10laps of strenght,speed,reactivity work. In every lap we are doing 2x 50-70m strides,and one dynamic plyometric excercise + 10x hurdle walks (switching sides every lap) after strides and before plyo/hurdle 10-20m walking. This part is for the whole group.

Master of running wrote:

lexel wrote:

Thanks for sharing, I try to address a few things.

Monotony: A very important point. I read in a book that you should change your training methods every 6 weeks, to get new stimuli, because after 4-6 weeks the body stagnates. So i mix it up and i guess this is a good method to do so.

There's absolutely no evidence for this claim! It depends on how you perform your workouts and overall training.

But there is also no evidence the other way arround. There is personal experience and every athlete is different and reacts different. But yes, if you do very different training units in e.g. 6 weeks, thats another kind of story.

In case of stagnation, every athlete has to ask the question 'how long do i want to proceed with that training' ?

How long someone wants to continue a training in case of stagnation? 1,2, 6 month, 1 year, .? When is the time to change something?

Maybe 6 weeks focussing on a methode but maintaining other stuff, next 6 weeks focussing on other stuff but maintaining the other stuff, thats sounds good to me.

I ask myself that stuff, because i have the feeling that i stagnate now ...

New PR:

1600m in 05:52, at 83kg, 5°C, 49yo on asphalt -> happy

lexel wrote:

New PR:

1600m in 05:52, at 83kg, 5°C, 49yo on asphalt -> happy

Congrats! What was the previous PR/ progression while doing EIM ?

Update: Turkey Trot 5K yesterday in 20:31. Course was about 80 meters short so probably 20:45ish? That's a more than 1 minute improvement after about 7 weeks of EIM training, and faster than any master's time I've run in 10 years (I ran this same course in 21:29 four years ago). So EIM seems to be working, keeping me healthy and getting me faster.

nebraska2020 wrote:

lexel wrote:

New PR:

1600m in 05:52, at 83kg, 5°C, 49yo on asphalt -> happy

Congrats! What was the previous PR/ progression while doing EIM ?

Thank you.

Thats a really good question, the answer is neither yes or no. I would say i have integrated the idea into my training.

As mentioned above, i had the feeling i was stagnating with my training so i tried short intervals 8-10 times at 2-3min length but @sub-treshold pace (below lactate threshold but relatively close to it) with short rest (2-3min). I got that idea from Kipchoges training as well as from Norwege athletes (i.e.Marius Bakken).

And it seems to bite ... (for me).

So i will continue that short intervals, as quality sessions, for sure ...

nebraska2020 wrote:

What was the previous PR/ progression while doing EIM ?

I improved from 06:14 to 06:02 with EIM, i guess it was in around 6 weeks.

After that i had the feeling to stagnate.

My last post before was addressing EIM.

I’ve got a 1:23:40 for halfMth @ 58yo ; turning 60 in two weeks… I’ll be trying this EIM for the next few months (15w) and reevaluate after that ..

Cool, and congrats to your good performance.

You need a new time trial, as your HM time is 2 years old. With that new reference time you can better judge if EIM was helpful for you or not.

lexel wrote:

[quote]

As mentioned above, i had the feeling i was stagnating with my training so i tried short intervals 8-10 times at 2-3min length but @sub-treshold pace (below lactate threshold but relatively close to it) with short rest (2-3min). I got that idea from Kipchoges training as well as from Norwege athletes (i.e.Marius Bakken).

And it seems to bite ... (for me).

So i will continue that short intervals, as quality sessions, for sure ...

This seems to me more consistent with the how I understand the fundamental concept underlying EIM compared to running the longer reps/recoveries that you were running before for the following reason:

if the method were successfully developed/ practiced by elites, then the distance of the intervals at intensities specified to work the different systems imply a duration at an intensity level that is non-taxing and a very generous recovery interval

for a recreational runner, so say where you are running a 6min mile relative to the 4 min mile of an elite, then either

a. the duration of the intervals for a specified distance at the specified intensity is going to be a far greater training load (intensity at time) for the less conditioned recreational athlete than that being practice by an elite, or,

b. the intensity has to be reduced resulting in even greater duration over a set distance which entirely changes the training stimulus

The tentative conclusion that I arrived at while trying this for the last few months, which seems to be supported by your note above, is that EIM seems to be an effective method when the concept is correctly applied and as such this would necessitate providing the correct training stimuli in working the different systems, but setting intervals by duration (or equivalent distance) for less advanced athletes while keeping the target intensity the same as for the elite to provide the same stimuli, with volume being a function of level, overall conditioning and capacity to recover as per EIM.

I haven't read the book, and this may very well be covered/ suggested, so my apologies if I am telling granny to suck eggs, but it was the point that I had arrived in trying it which seems to reflect your own experience above as I shortened the distances at the various intensities to provide the same duration work interval at each intensity as an elite would be subject to using the specified distances.

lexel wrote:

Monotony: A very important point. I read in a book that you should change your training methods every 6 weeks, to get new stimuli, because after 4-6 weeks the body stagnates. So i mix it up and i guess this is a good method to do so.

lex, you read this in Daniels Running Formula. You have this weird habit of reading actual valid information and then extrapolating or misinterpreting. He didn't mean to mix it up because different things are better. He meant that if you apply a constant training load, you will adapt over time until your performance plateaus, and then you can continue improving with additional stress. Your interpretation is like Daniels Running Formula fan fiction

You write very exact predictions about paces and lactate levels and all this stuff, but I'm not sure you have a solid grasp on any of it...

also super weird to be so into the minutiae of your training when all you need to do is run your extra weight off! Lactate levels??? smh

I'm very intrigued by this EIM to adapt for my improvement. I haven't bought the book yet but most likely will be ordering. My current fitness is poor in terms of aerobic capacity and started to do some easy runs after injury. I'm 36 male, 10lbs. Recent Half Marathon is 2hr 25mins. My easy pace is currently around 16-17mins/mile. Previous mile best from 2 years ago is 7:21.

Just wondering if i can adapt this EIM for my current fitness with 5 days running. For example the intervals may look like this:

1. 10×200m at 15k pace @ 6:30mins/km with recovery until 120bpm which will be walking

2. 6×400m at HM pace @ 7mins/km recovery same as above.

3. 3-4×800m at M pace @ 7:15 mins/km recovery same as above.

All with 2kms warmup and cooldown.

Please suggest if this approach with times is suitable or is it more helpful to get the book and anything is suggested for my fitness.

Many thanks

sceptic wrote:

lex, you read this in Daniels Running Formula. You have this weird habit of reading actual valid information and then extrapolating or misinterpreting. He didn't mean to mix it up because different things are better. He meant that if you apply a constant training load, you will adapt over time until your performance plateaus, and then you can continue improving with additional stress. Your interpretation is like Daniels Running Formula fan fiction

You write very exact predictions about paces and lactate levels and all this stuff, but I'm not sure you have a solid grasp on any of it...

Wrong, its not Daniels. It is Brad Hudson in his book 'Run Faster'. You should read that :)

My predictions and lactate levels are spot on, that makes you nervous, i understand that :)

sceptic wrote:

... when all you need to do is run your extra weight off! ...

yes that would help a lot .... But the competition needs to have a small chance :)

Thanks for your good feedback.

Yes indeed, i guess i did 2 (smaller)mistakes:

1) I did not adjust my ON interval pace correctly, based on better performance, for the standard 6*1000m interval

2) Maybe 1km was too long, as you mentioned. Laak (book author) mentioned only distance in his book, but better would be to provide a time duration instead and even better is to provide different duration times for different levels of performance.

But nevertheless the EIM idea stays there ...

lexel wrote:

[quote]

Thanks for your good feedback.

Yes indeed, i guess i did 2 (smaller)mistakes:

1) I did not adjust my ON interval pace correctly, based on better performance, for the standard 6*1000m interval

2) Maybe 1km was too long, as you mentioned. Laak (book author) mentioned only distance in his book, but better would be to provide a time duration instead and even better is to provide different duration times for different levels of performance.

But nevertheless the EIM idea stays there ...

I think the idea is sound (as the testimonies show) and after working backwards, figured ON intervals at 30", 60"-75", 3 mins (and 6 mins for the longer 2k equivalent) made sense corresponding to paces related to vVO2 max, CV (.c 35minute pace) and the lower end of the LT band/ upper end of tempo band (using Tinman's calculator). Those would be approximately the durations at the intensities run by an elite using EIM. By using time rather than distance, in combination with the easy recovery periods, the overall effect remains no more than a moderate effort that way irrespective of level, while the correct intensities/ paces are hit, just as a less advanced elite one covers less ground. The once a week 'hard' running is then the primary stimuli without the interim 'easy' EIM days being draining. That is what I am trying now as of last week and it seems 'happier'.