Do tempo runs achieve anything?

a) No

b) Yes

I meant to add something else. When I ran that 19:45 5k, I was doing some tough tempo runs at the time (for me), like 6 miles @ 6:30-6:40 pace. It felt like they achieved nothing.

It's good to mix it up. Maybe do a tempo or cruise intervals every other week, and do intervals every week. I like a two-week cycle.

Week One:

Q1: 20 minute tempo Or 4x5 minutes threshold w/1 minute rec

Q2: 4x4 minutes @5k effort w/2 min rec

Week Two:

Q1: 15x30 seconds @mile effort

Q2: 6x3 minutes @3k-5k effort w/2 min rec

This is a peaking plan, which should be employed in the final 4-6 weeks leading up to your peak race. If you have access to a track, use that for the intervals.

The tempo runs are not supposed to be like super hard/ all-out. They should be MP-HMP-Treshold and develop your fast pace endurance. So it is possible to go too hard in tempo and thereby not be able to run necessary mileage (due to tiredness).

In my humble opinion and experience.

run9run wrote:

I meant to add something else. When I ran that 19:45 5k, I was doing some tough tempo runs at the time (for me), like 6 miles @ 6:30-6:40 pace. It felt like they achieved nothing.

They made you tired. You were training too hard.

I love tempo runs. I think they help a lot, but I do them mostly because I enjoy doing them and the way they make me feel.

They work by running at a speed where your body produces lactate and uses that as fuel for your tempo. Too intense, it turns into race effort, and you crumble.

If you stay right at that 8/10 difficulty you should cruise along and feel full of running.

The proper tempo pace is one you can hold for a 60 min race. Basically 1/2 Mary pace for most of us here.

8/10- Tempo

9/10- Race Effort

10/10- All out sprinting

Tempo runs were the first organized workouts I did when started getting personal coaching. I responded tremendously. I think the key thing is what others here have already addressed--doing the correct pace/effort

run9run wrote:

I've been running for around 2 years and have only recently started doing intervals. I've noticed that my pace has improved quite a lot (5k improving from 18:40 to 17:55). This is on 45 mpw. Before this I was doing a tempo every so often and I never improved. In fact on 45 mpw with an occasional tempo, my 5k was 19:45. Question - should I drop the tempo and focus on doing intervals each week? Thanks

At the moment i believe that a continuous tempo run (lets say at HM race pace) is not as good as an interrupted tempo run, with short interval duration, and short rest 1-2minutes.

Kipchoge does no tempo run (!) as well as some Norwege athletes.

So your improvement is in line with my line.

However, as mentioned, pace control is very important and therefore i do my LT-runs or better close below LT-runs on treadmill, spon-on at the right pace.

Continuous tempo runs

The benefit is mentally training yourself to run fast, relaxed, and controlled for extended time equal to or longer than race distance/time.

Doing interval workouts will increase fitness BUT there are no breaks/rest periods during a distance race.

One must be mentally ready to focus on racing and keeping pace for 15-30 minutes when you toe the line.

run9run wrote:

I meant to add something else. When I ran that 19:45 5k, I was doing some tough tempo runs at the time (for me), like 6 miles @ 6:30-6:40 pace. It felt like they achieved nothing.

You were doing 6 mile tempo runs where you were coming through 5k in low 20 minutes, but your 5k PR was 19:45? Either you were in much better 5k shape or you were doing 10k races, not tempos.

lexel wrote:

At the moment i believe that a continuous tempo run (lets say at HM race pace) is not as good as an interrupted tempo run, with short interval duration, and short rest 1-2minutes.

Kipchoge does no tempo run (!)

Not true.

'Interrupted tempo run with short rests' can mean same total workout stress, same distance run, but at a slightly faster pace. Closer to a race pace. Closer to the pace which you want to become efficient at running. Mechanically efficient.

If you are a marathon runner, then a continuous tempo is great because it IS pace specific to your race distance.

If you race track or xc, then tempo intervals are closer to pace specific to your race distance.

Intervals at or around vo2 max are the key to being good at any distance from 3k to HM. the intensity of these workouts makes them impossible to hammer year round but certainly should be the main focus from 10ish to 2 or three weeks out from a target race

If training was all about specificity, then we would be racing our event distance as much as possible.

That’s not the case however. You’re having this idea in your head that one session is “better” than another. Each type of session has a purpose to support the athlete in a race.

A tempo run, whatever you define that as, has a different purpose than cruise intervals. They aren’t simply interchangeable.

Tempora wrote:

They work by running at a speed where your body produces lactate and uses that as fuel for your tempo. Too intense, it turns into race effort, and you crumble.

If you stay right at that 8/10 difficulty you should cruise along and feel full of running.

The proper tempo pace is one you can hold for a 60 min race. Basically 1/2 Mary pace for most of us here.

8/10- Tempo

9/10- Race Effort

10/10- All out sprinting

lmao!

not a duck wrote:

If training was all about specificity, then we would be racing our event distance as much as possible.

That’s not the case however. You’re having this idea in your head that one session is “better” than another. Each type of session has a purpose to support the athlete in a race.

A tempo run, whatever you define that as, has a different purpose than cruise intervals. They aren’t simply interchangeable.

Who said "racing our event as much as possible"? Not me. But mechanical efficiency at a specific pace is important. I believe it can be year round, and done with little stress. That's also why we do strides.

...or at least, one reason why we do strides.