race pace vs training pace (Page 2)

OK, I'll throw my hat into the ring...

I train primarily by pace and RPE.  And I have never used a calculator to determine my training paces.  Actually, I don't ever really look at McMillan except for the novelty.  Too many variables.  If anything, I'd use the VDot calculator mentioned above.

As for the question about your current pacing....

Your regular training pace is most likely too slow, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.  You could probably be comfortable at around the 8-9 minute mark.  That being said, run by what your body is telling you.  If the pace feels comfortable, then you've got it, and you could probably bump it up a notch.

Yup, especially by sports physiologists and burgeoning young coaches ........

Considering McMillan, Pfitzinger and Daniels all classify tempo as LT pace, I'll stick with their "arbitrary definition" for my workouts.

I don't have my TTB with me, but I believe Friel describes tempo runs as Zone 3 efforts. Not sure if his is the exception, or the rule.

Tempo runs

HR Training for Tempo Runs

 Daniels on T-pace

Intuitive Tempo Runs

Typical Pfitzinger Tempo Run 

Too much science.  Don't get hung up on HR zones or pace for Tempo Runs.  It's much better to learn how to feel it out.  Learn what that pace feels like in your legs and arms, and you'll be much better off. 

Direct quote from Pete P. -

Daremo - 2008-04-09 8:35 AM Yup, especially by sports physiologists and burgeoning young coaches ........

As I said, feel free to use any term you want, it is not your fault nor mine that there is such an ambiguity or misuse of terms like this, LT, Anaerobic Threshold, VO2, etc. Since I’ve been growing frustrated with the thousand different definitions used/invented by many, I made the personal choice to adhere to what sports physiologists, science defined and currently adheres to as an attempt to unify and use one language. I am following the example of guys I admire and respect with great coaching experience and knowledge on the field, that’s all… if you call LT sessions: tempo, super Rick sessions or whatever you want, that's cool.

Just.

Go.

Run.

Sometimes hard.

Mostly easy. 

I move that this be the new term here on BT from this point forward.  It makes much more sense to me than all the other crap you people go on about. 

I think that Tempo Run is the training session I denote with Medium Pace Training. It should be done at 90% of the LT or at 85% of the HRmax. Pace should be 25-30"/km above the 10k PB.

It is a session where quantity and quality should be seriously considered to avoid to make a different session than the one planned.

I consider this session the most difficult one since I always suffer during that. I do it once every 2-3 weeks.

Most of the runners consider it in a wrong way because they give more importance to the pace than to the session' length. It is a mental limit: run faster than planned make you thinking you are stronger and that you are in a better shape. But this translates in a quicker slow down than expected and probably you will do less km than planned.

To make a great Tempo Run session, you should fix in your mind the fact that you should finish all the planned km, starting in a slower pace than planned and increasing at the end, maybe in the second part. This will improve even your performance in long race where negative splitting is essential for a great performance.

Anyway, Tempo Run should not be done at a higher pace, maybe looking at the HR monitor would help.

The intensity of this session force your muscolar fibres to use, under the effort, an energy mix which is always richer in fatty acids and using less glycogen. This effect is essential for a runner for any racing distance but it is more important for runners partecipating in long event like marathons or HM.

The mistake of running a Tempo Run faster than planned can make the energy mix too rich in glycogen and fails to train the target.

Since I run, my Tempo Run HR reference is 160bpm and I run 10k race at 169 average. Tipically I refer to running pace and "feeling": I know pretty well if I am in the right pace and HR. If it is the wrong day I need to continously look at my HR monitor for this session. Again: very though!

In general than, volume as I said is the key for this session: I would say that

for 5k races: 8-10km volume

for 10k races: 12-14km

for HM: 13-18km

for Marathons: 15-20km volume 

At the moment, for example, my sessions are between 12 and 15 km. 

In all my post, I am assuming that Tempo Run = Medium Pace Session and I think it is.

I'm down with that .......

"What kind of run did you do today?"

"Oh man, I had the most killer 40 minute super Rick session!!  It rocked and confirmed my LT, VO2 Max, AeT, MAF and HRM numbers!!  It was epic!!"

This is what I would call a "Progression Run".  Start at an easy pace, and increase pace over a given time/distance. 

Oh, I agree with pretty much all that you're saying, Jorge.  And I think it's very important to learn what's going on, what the terms mean, how to conduct training, etc.

What gets me is your last paragraph.  I agree that it is a laudable goal.  However, the problem is that people are getting WAY too wrapped up in numbers about something that, ultimately, isn't really about numbers.

There's a reason why I try to keep the advice simple.  Because it is.  We use nebulous terms to describe something that's hard to really describe.  A Tempo Run is less about what HR zone you're in, and more about feel.  Now, how do we describe unquantifiable thing to someone?  We try to quantify it.  So we use pace, or HR, or RPE, to try to relate a specific training method.  And then we label it "Tempo Run".

I think it's better to say to someone here, "Go run at a pace that feels just under your ability to hold it for a long period of time."  The downside to this statement is that people, especially new people, are gonna be lost.  So, it's a catch-22.

Yeah, I know, I'm not scientific at all.  I take a much more philosophical approach to this stuff, and I know it drives many people insane.  "How can you NOT KNOW what pace or HR to run at?!?!"  It's easy.  I just go out.  I know what distance I want to run, I know about how hard it should be (usually by pace), and I see how things play out. 

The real problem here is that we're dissecting the problem, and separating the parts from the whole, and it just can't be done. 

You train by the definition of what approach/plan you are using.  I'm a firm believer in the Pfitzinger-Douglas school of training.  So I follow their plans for my marathon training.  And in their plans they prescribe "X" workout and they define what those workouts are.  So as long as I follow their methodology and definition then I am getting the correct type of workout in.

For Jorge's athletes, as long as he is specifically defining what each workout is and the athlete has an understanding of the way that he uses the terminology then it will work the way he intends.

But going back to the OP original question, which DOES tie into all this in that the pacing zones that are listed on the bottom of the calculator are designed to give the most effective result using those paces.  So in this case, the training methodolgy in question has very specific and delineated ranges of paces for each type of workout.

Here is the portion of the chart based on my race times:

So, perhaps it's really best to use the terms within the context of a given training plan/coach.

I would agree with that, so long as a person is diligent about explaining the context of the terminology used. 

Exactly.  With so much conflicting definitions across the board from even top level coaches in the different disciplines, if you follow a specific philosophy/training then you will know exactly where you stand in your workouts.  This thread was looking at McMillan's plan, which is extremely specific in pace ranges.

The problem comes in when someone is trying to establish their own plan trying to incoporate different definitions and philospohies.  Things get all muddled then.

Thanks!  Reasonable explanation.  From now on, I will let you guys make those distinctions and provide the advice. 

I will just stick to my little corner of the world, continue to train and get better and lose weight, etc.  Just like I have been.

Scout - I like your theory!  Run lots, sometimes hard, mostly easy.  Maybe quote worthy IMO. 

NM - point was clarified before I got to it.