How To Interval Train For Sustainable Performance
Tell me if this sounds familiar: Every spring, you plan a big assault on your marathon PB.
Before laying out a solid winter of base miles, you hit up Amazon and find the newest training manual. After completing a few 20-milers to go along with some stellar 6-mile tempos, you stand on the starting line feeling fresh from your three-week taper. The first 10 miles of the marathon blow by in a delicious haze.
This story doesn't have a happy ending, of course. The middle part of the race it starts to get hard and the last 10K you hit the wall. You cross the line humbled and defeated. As your calves spasm the moment you cross the finish line, every step leaving you in agonising pain as you slowly make your way to get your kit bag. It makes you wonder what those 2:05 men and 2:20 women are doing that's so different.
The answer, according to world-renowned coach Renato Canova, is the elites now base their training around extending specific endurance -- in essence, high-volume goal-pace training.
Canova says:
“To fulfil your potential as a marathoner, you need to progressively extend the distance you can run your goal pace, over a period of months and yearsTo fulfil your potential as a marathoner, you need to progressively extend the distance you can run your goal pace, over a period of months and years. What we do is to increase the volume and the duration and the single length of every type of interval at this type of speed. We need to extend the ability to run at the speed you want, and you can produce.”
“A Kenyan runner’s mentality is to run at the right speed. The Western runner’s mentality is to run the right distance.”
So how can you and I run the last 10km of our marathon well, not have calf spasms or any other spasm for that matter and make it sustainable?
First, we need to accept ageing is a biological process which can be considerably speeded up or slowed down by multiple life-style related factors. So, what can we do in training to slow ageing while maintaining or improving fitness and performance?
The answer is not all that difficult.
What drives physiology of training for high performance when we are older is no different from what it was when we were 30 years younger. The principles of training don’t change.
What does change is your capacity – physical and psychological – to handle the stresses associated with focused and serious workouts. What we need to do is tweak our training routine in order to get more speed and power out of our ageing bodies and take race performances to a new higher level.
Regardless of your ability or experience, there are only three training variables which can be modified: duration, frequency and intensity.
The combination of duration and frequency is called volume. Most think the answer to higher performance lays in higher intensity, however the research around elite endurance athletes demonstrates if you want to get better you need to train more, not harder.
Last week we talked about sustainable endurance training following the Polarised Training Model of Stephen Seiler. Of course, in order to perform there has to be HIIT training too.
Even if you’re not an elite and don’t have access to one of the world’s best endurance coaches what we need to know is, what is the most effective and efficient use of our time and energy when it comes to including interval training?
Lucky for us, Dr Seiler has looked at this extensively too. Here’s what he found;
The research data available on HIIT training in already well-trained subjects is consistent with the finding elite endurance athletes tend to choose to accumulate more minutes at slightly lower (moderate) intensity when performing HIIT sessions.
The work-bout component is fundamental to the prescription because what’s important is we are moving into the zone we need to be to generate the stimulus we need?
For the marathon this is our ability to maintain a steady state effort and withstand the inevitable decoupling (hitting the wall) in the later stages (a combination of HR drifting up and a drop in pace).
This is why it’s important to understand training is never steady state, the goal is to delay fatigue. The effects of low-intensity and high-intensity exercise on the aerobic system are somewhat complimentary. This means we should do both types of training.
The question is not whether one is better than the other, rather it is how they should be balanced?
Accumulated work duration is an important part of training equation and not too much. High intensity running is different. While a small amount of high-intensity running is more beneficial to the aerobic system than a small amount of low-intensity running, larger amounts of faster running offer no additional benefit.
In fact, large amounts of high intensity running are so stressful to the body they suppress the parasympathetic nervous system, resulting in chronic fatigue and loss of performance. The optimal combination is one which is weighted heavily toward low intensity.
When we perform high intensity running, we need to make sure the session we plan will put us in the desired zone.
What’s the most efficient and effective type of HIIT session?
Stephen Seiler and his fellow researchers found when compared to other types of stimulus, 8min intervals give a very good response. A session of 4 x 8mins works well. Interestingly, no difference in training effect was found between 8min intervals and short intervals of 40secs.
It seems the best endurance athletes in the world spend more time in this 4 x 8min type of intervals.
And they spend very little time doing very hard HIIT intervals. And in case you’re wondering how much recovery you should allow, on average 2 mins seems to be enough to give sufficient partial recovery. Longer doesn’t make a difference the RPE same.
Remember, last week we said what elite athletes do scales down very well to the non-professional athlete who train 5+ hrs a week. In fact, the research shows between “trained vs well trained” there is no physiological difference in response. Well-trained just can produce more power.
The elites are aiming to accumulate more minutes at slightly lower (moderate) intensity when performing HIIT sessions because they are training to progressively extend the time they can sustain their goal pace.
The proper balance of moderate-intensity and high-intensity training also varies by circumstance. The key learning here is elite athletes get more out of moderate intensity training than they do out of high-intensity training when preparing for longer events.
I believe it’s best for runners to follow the current best practices of top coaches by balancing moderate-intensity and high-intensity training situationally.
For example, if you are training for a 5K, you should probably do more high-intensity training because 5K’s are typically raced hard. But if you’re training for a marathon, you should probably do more moderate intensity running because it is more specific to the actual demands of marathon racing.
As a continuance of this week’s discussion on interval training, I wanted to bring you a real life example of how this works at the elite level but in a different sport altogether!
During a 5-year period from 2010 – 2015 she won six Gold medals at the Olympics, 18 Gold medals at the World Championships and had 110 World Cup victories.
How did she do it.
See the above link to a study done which looked at her training characteristics over a 17-year period.
She and her coaches provided her day to day training diary. Her training was systemised by training form (endurance, strength and speed), Intensity (Low – LIT, Moderate – MIT, High – HIT) and mode (running, cycling and skiing/roller skiing)
In addition, the data included periodisation of training, altitude camps and tapering towards major championships. So, a no-holds barred look inside of what it took to make this great champion.
What’s interesting is that prior to the five-year period in which she dominated the sport in all forms, distance and sprint racing she very nearly quit altogether.
Frustrated with a lack of results and ability to be competitive in top level distance races and only performing at world class level in sprint training.
When the researchers analysed her data, they could see the relative distribution of endurance training into LIT/MIT/HIT was in fact polarised, but to a lesser extent during the latter part of her career. They noted the training distribution during the first part of her career was 88/2/10 (20-27yrs old) against 92/3/5 in the latter most successful part (28-35yrs).
They saw the LIT volume increased from 430h/yr at 20yrs old to 800h/yr at 35yrs old. The amount of MIT & HIT was 60h during both early (20-23yrs) and later (29-35yrs) – BUT it was markedly higher (80h) during the early period to 28yrs old which coincided with her almost walking away!
If you look to the training distribution chart under “results” note the change towards the more volume, not harder approach of Stephen Seiler, during the five consecutive seasons from May 2010 to April 2015 in which she dominated the sport.
MIT sessions consisted of 20% continuous sessions and 48% interval sessions with interval durations from 6-10mins and also 22% as interval sessions with durations 10-15mins.
The most common MIT session was an interval session of 5 x 7-8mins working periods with 1-2mins rest!
For strength training an important change during the 5yr period was an increase in the annual amount of time put towards strength work. The first two years the distribution was 43% core stabilisation + 57% heavy strength training, the following 3 years the distribution changed to 50:50.
The core stabilisation portion included various exercises targeting muscles involved in the force transfer during specific ski movements and exercises aiming to stabilise and move these segments functionally whilst skiing.
And herein lies an important lesson about core stabilisation, does what you’re doing target the specific muscles involved in force transfer during specific running movements and are they functional?
Heavy strength sessions consisted of one or two leg exercises (squats) and 3 or 4 upper body exercises, again she was being specific to the demands of her sport. The adage applies “it’s not the load that breaks you, it’s the load we’re not prepared for that breaks us down”
Plyometrics where also integrated during speed training to include jumps using ski specific movements. The lesson transfers to running, you want to perform plyometric exercises which are run specific.
What made the difference in the end were two major changes in “training philosophy” which saw rapid improvements be made.
The first of these came in the early stages of her senior career where extensive blocks of HIT were included, this led to a rapid performance improvement, but it didn’t last, and she stagnated after a few years.
The next improvement coincided with a change to a more even distribution of training volume/intensity, a reduction in the amount of HIT and the implementation of relatively large amounts of LIT.
This was combined with relatively high amounts of strength training and regular speed training which it seems was designed to maintain muscle mass and sprint ability.
During her most successful five years there was a gradual increase in aerobic capacity, her Vo2 max was 68ml.kg.min equivalent to top female champions in running.
Most interestingly, her Aerobic Threshold (AT) correspondingly increased and this she and her coaches noted was highlighted in her ability to train with relatively high speed and economy.
This the research suggests is most likely the result of her long-term progressive increase in endurance training load leading to enhanced peak oxygen uptake, fat utilisation and improved efficiency across all training modes.
As you can see this represents the importance of a high-training volume, using a polarised training pattern with a large amount of LIT and more time spent performing MIT sessions specific to her long-distance events.
I hope you found this useful and now understand the importance of getting the balance right if you want to be able to sustain training and racing into the future.