I have a theory that the purpose of the 80% easy/green rule is to rack up huge mileage with quick recovery so you’re able to run every day without fatigue/injury. But my twist on that theory is that if you only have time to run 3 days per week then you don’t need as much slow running because you get plenty of recovery from your rest days So your ratio should be much different if you’re not running 6-7 days per week.
You make a couple of good points. In theory, this will probably work out well in the short term. But the problem is that it’s very hard to get much better if you’re running only three days a week. You would slip into the running moderately hard all the time category, and then you lose a specificity of training. If you wanted to get better at a marathon, for example, it would be better to run a lot of miles easy, and then a select number of workouts that are very specific to the marathon, and they are very difficult. Running three days a week Doesn’t allow for this sort of structure And the problem with running three days a week is that it’s really difficult to get your volume meaningfully high. It would run long on all three days, and unless you’re used to high mileage in general, this may lead to injury. So a three day a week plan is appropriate for a casual Runner), but there’s a reason why you don’t see any elite runners doing this, or anything close to it Thank you for your insight, Ben
Looking at that Kichoge graph, it's not 80% easy...more like 55%. I eyeballed the others at 150-210-120-80 kilometers, which is 560. And it looks like his easy pace was 660 kilometers. 660 easy out of 1220 total kilometers = 55% easy. I always have a hard time doing 80% of my runs easy. I only run 30 miles per week (work on my feet, so hard to find the energy to do more), and I'm aiming to break 20min in the 5k by the end of the year after starting my running journey last October.
Hey Ryan. Most runners feel similarly and run medium hard much of the time. But if you were to hypothetically up your miles to 50-60mpw you’d likely want to slow down and you’d still be fatigued. Perhaps you’re just more fit than you think and can handle higher miles. But injury risk goes up when you increase mileage so slowing it down and going higher with miles is a good approach, while maintaining strides and hill sprints Good luck with breaking 20. Im sure you can
@@runelitecoachI think when weather gets better here in Dallas I'll be able to up my mileage to 40mpw and see how that goes. I had a steady increase every month until summer hit, and now my only time to run is in the morning before work...and it's still no fun even when it's 5:30am because it's 80*+ and kinda humid already, usually no wind either. I ran a 20:58 on July 4th, so I'm thinking I can get it done once weather permits. I'm going to start incorporating more strides into my runs so I can touch on speed more. I used to do 3-5 strides at the end of my easy runs just to get that good running feeling going, but I have shied away from that lately, for whatever reason. Thanks for your videos, I'm finding them very helpful.
Yes. Just came in to say Kpchoge's histogram was anything except 80/20. Fitzgerald distroyed the running community when he said 80-20 and then everyone kept repeating that without thinking about the graphs. Open LIETRALLY any running channel on TH-cam and they kept repeating 80/20 over and over and over like it's rocket science that was just yesterday invented. Say hello to any running coach and the first thing they say is you need to run easy on easy days without asking how you run... they immediately assume you're running moderate every time you go out.
@@RaoBlackWellizedArman Yep, it's crazy how much the 80/20 stuff was everywhere all of the sudden. Side note, I did finally break 20min in the 5k with a 19:53 almost exactly one year of running.
Base phase: I don’t do any sessions but just do strides 2-3 times a week. For my shorter sessions, I do 4-5 x 1 minute strides around 5k pace with 1 min. recovery. Long runs too, I do 1 x 1 min. stride @ 5k. w/ 1 minute recovery. Imagine a 12 mile run with 12 strides in that long run. It adds up over the months then when I enter a Marathon block, the long run workouts feel easier.
Just found your channel and it seems to be informative. As for polarized training, it is a relatively new concept introduced by Stephen Seiler. There is still a debate on that. In my humble opinion and experience, tempo or zone 2 training still is very important specially for half marathon to marathon training. I have been able to PR in my half marathon races by spending a good amount of time clise to my LT HR. Generally we should spend most of time in zone 1 out of 3 (3 zone model) say 80% or more. Most of us virtually do this by default. Intervals and VO2max workouts are certainly important too. Their priority goes with the distance of competition we train for. I myself have read opinions on polarized training from both schools of thoughts. So am no so confident in any but this was my take.
Hey saeeduofa. I hear you. - Spending a lot of time in zone 2 is a good idea. Simply because you CAN'T spend an equivalent time in a higher zone, by definition. So spending a lot of time in zone 2 is essentially the green part of the graph. But running is a MUSCULAR event. Meaning that your heart and lungs, lactate threshold, VO2max, etc aren't what limit your performance. They only support the neuromuscular system. So running in the "red" here, frequently, but not to exhaustion or anywhere near it. Is key. And in fact this is what you see in virtually all world class training programs. They run easy most of the time, and high volume of it. Then do a lot of short speed, but not turning it in to long workouts for most of the season. Then only during the final preparation do they do specific high intensity longer workouts. But over the course of a year, those are a small percentage of total running.
The original source for the chart on the effects of interval duration is a paper you can find here: onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1748-1716.1960.tb01879.x The image was created by Stephen Seiler.
i'm relatively new to running, having consistently enjoyed it for about 1.5 years now. Approximately a year ago, I encountered shin splints, but thankfully, I've been on the road to recovery, and they're almost gone. My goal is to run 20 km per week, but I'm struggling to structure an effective running program. I'm eager to build a strong foundation while also incorporating some faster runs into my routine. Any advice or tips would be greatly appreciated!
If building to 20km per week you want to focus for now on just running easy and staying injury free. Once you get to 20k for 3-4 consecutive weeks then add in a small amount of strides. Then another 3-4 weeks later you can up your mileage
Great video! 2 questions re interval workouts. 1) Does the whole workout count towards the 20% or just the mileage done fast? And 2) are recovery periods slow jogs, walks, standing, or any of the above? Thank you!
@coldriver10 1) Count only miles run at quality pace towards the 20% (so don't count warm up, cool down, or recovery jogs). 2) It depends on where you are in your training. If you're more than 12 weeks out from your race, your recoveries should be just whatever is needed in order to do another rep. They can be very long recoveries, jogging, walking, whatever. Once you get closer to your race, you want to take either shorter recoveries, OR speed up your recoveries so that there's less difference between your interval and your recovery. There are a million ways to organize this. That's the "art of training". But the short answer is above. Book a call with our coaches if you want to tailor this for yourself. andrewsnowcoaching.com/run and be sure to watch the free training on the Thank You page that breaks it down for you
Great video and I look forward to seeing more from your channel. I'm following the Hal Higdon Novice 2 marathon plan. It calls for a "pace" run every other week. Should I be doing intervals for those sessions instead of a steady race-pace?
Hal Higdon's plans work for many, because they are far better than not having a plan. But they are not tailored for any individual, and not very specific. So if you're new to running, you can likely just follow Hal's plan. But if you want to maximize your potential, than no cookie-cutter plan should be used. It's better to use a MODEL for how to train, and then fit your own needs in to that model. In that way, the answer to your question is "it depends on how much TIME you have until race day". If you have less than 6 weeks to go, then you should focus on race-pace workouts. If you have 6-12 weeks to go, you should focus on "supporting" workouts. if you have more than 12 weeks to go, you'd likely be better off just improving mileage at a slow pace, and doing 10-20% of your miles via STRIDES (check out our videos on strides on the channel).
Jack Daniels VDOT calculator gives a pace range for “easy pace” - paces on a slower end of that range can still feel hard… is it ok to go even easier than that?
Absolutely. Check out my video on "Junk Miles" that explains why going slow, even walking, is beneficial for your running here --> th-cam.com/video/gZ9dY65mnG0/w-d-xo.html Also, Kenenisa Bekele...I have a video of him training in Ethiopia and he's running a 10:00min mile as part of his long run with the women's team there. This guy can race a 4:40 mile pace for a marathon and is running slower than double that pace. So good enough for one of the fastest men alive, good enough for mortals! lol
In these two studies "yellow" was measured by heart rate as compared with HR at VO2max. The easiest way to think of this is how it "feels". It feels moderate. Which mostly be at paces slower than threshold. But that depends right? It depends on how LONG you're at threshold. If you run 1 mile at threshold, it's not that hard and your HR is "low". If you run 60 mins at threshold, it's basically all-out at the end and your HR is much higher. So there's no straight answer, other than, "if you're going to do threshold runs, make them count, and focus on them in the latter portion of your season, after you've built a HUGE base from easy running and LOTS of strides and short (very short) speed sessions).
Do you have an explanation how it is possible that there are so many studies which confirm that HIIT is more effective than continous training? Almost every study that compares the two forms of training comes to the conclusion HIIT is superior in improving VO2max, lowering blood pressure and other health markers. Are the charasterics of cardiovascular Fitness so different from the ones that make you an succesful endurance athlete?
The point is that you can’t do a high-level of HIIT training, if you don’t have a foundation of fitness. Therefore, the vast majority of your running is still easy.
@@runelitecoach Thanks! I think it's very misleading that often people talk about HIIT as a time efficient strategy to fitness when you can't really replace long steady state sessions with it but just add it on top.
@@benjaminkretz6063 I agree, it is very misleading. Carried out it would have a very high injury and or burnout rate. Nobody will do HIIT for years and years, so it can't do anybody any good, as they describe it at least.
Still most of their running is done at an easy pace. And in fact their training is unique because they run just SHY of threshold pace...but do it more than most in their category. So even their hard days are slower than what you may expect...just longer...and done more frequently. This video doesn't say not to run in the yellow, it says to not do anywhere near the majority of your running there. So with high volume, you can still do yellow running and not have it be a high percentage. That's really key to most elite training...is they have such a high volume that they can run a lot of speed and still have it be a low percetnage of volume...so that keeps injury risk low, and ease of recovery high.
@@runelitecoach so prioriteze the easy miles and the rest takes care of itself as a percentage right? thank you so much for responding love the work you put into this channel its pure gold.
I am a little confused as to what you were considering green zone running vs red. Which color are the multiple 30 second “strides” or 100 m sprints? Sounds red because of intensity, but could be green b/c of the quantity. Can you give a clear example of a 5k runners routine and what kind of runs fall into green and what is red? (Edit: looked at Bob Schul's workouts from blogs/threads and there is consensus that he had no long runs, so how do we put all this together? Lots of conflicting info over the decades on the best methods).
Hey Taco. One could talk about training zones in a number of ways, from HR levels, to perceived exertion, or just straight up pace. I'm referring to the product of muscle fiber type engagement and fatigue level. A simple way to view this would be that short strides are in the red (they are fast twitch development) and that an easy run in mostly in the green. But a slow run CAN drift to the yellow, or red, if done for long enough. So think of the zones as the amount of output you're. putting in. But the easies (although not complete) way to view this is that is is mostly referring to the TYPE OF MUSCLE FIBER you're using. So strides and hill springs are red. Slow runs are green. This graph shoes that most running should be done "slow", and then still a lot is done "fast" with not much in between. Keep in mind that you CAN run a LOT of strides and hill sprints...but because they're so short in length, they don't add up to nearly as many miles as your easy runs. Hence why you should be doing a "lot" of strides and hill sprints" but it only accounts for a small portion of the miles you've run.
@@runelitecoach Okay, thanks for explaining. Bob Schul's method really seems intriguing.Its very contrarian, but seems to align with overall output that you are talking about, despite the method. Lots of short strides, not too intense, miles of them, but kept in green. I might experiment with it. Thanks.
I have a theory that the purpose of the 80% easy/green rule is to rack up huge mileage with quick recovery so you’re able to run every day without fatigue/injury.
But my twist on that theory is that if you only have time to run 3 days per week then you don’t need as much slow running because you get plenty of recovery from your rest days
So your ratio should be much different if you’re not running 6-7 days per week.
You make a couple of good points. In theory, this will probably work out well in the short term. But the problem is that it’s very hard to get much better if you’re running only three days a week. You would slip into the running moderately hard all the time category, and then you lose a specificity of training. If you wanted to get better at a marathon, for example, it would be better to run a lot of miles easy, and then a select number of workouts that are very specific to the marathon, and they are very difficult. Running three days a week Doesn’t allow for this sort of structure
And the problem with running three days a week is that it’s really difficult to get your volume meaningfully high. It would run long on all three days, and unless you’re used to high mileage in general, this may lead to injury.
So a three day a week plan is appropriate for a casual Runner), but there’s a reason why you don’t see any elite runners doing this, or anything close to it
Thank you for your insight, Ben
I ran that experiment on myself and ended up overtrained at 3x week; so I went back to 6 days. Told myself I'd never do that again...months lost!
More specifically I lost my "base" almost completely and could not hold any respectable pace at my zone 2 hr zone.
Yeah keep on rollin
You got it. Thanks for the support
Perfectly explained. Short and to the point. Thank you
You're welcome!
Looking at that Kichoge graph, it's not 80% easy...more like 55%. I eyeballed the others at 150-210-120-80 kilometers, which is 560. And it looks like his easy pace was 660 kilometers. 660 easy out of 1220 total kilometers = 55% easy. I always have a hard time doing 80% of my runs easy. I only run 30 miles per week (work on my feet, so hard to find the energy to do more), and I'm aiming to break 20min in the 5k by the end of the year after starting my running journey last October.
Hey Ryan. Most runners feel similarly and run medium hard much of the time. But if you were to hypothetically up your miles to 50-60mpw you’d likely want to slow down and you’d still be fatigued. Perhaps you’re just more fit than you think and can handle higher miles. But injury risk goes up when you increase mileage so slowing it down and going higher with miles is a good approach, while maintaining strides and hill sprints
Good luck with breaking 20. Im sure you can
@@runelitecoachI think when weather gets better here in Dallas I'll be able to up my mileage to 40mpw and see how that goes. I had a steady increase every month until summer hit, and now my only time to run is in the morning before work...and it's still no fun even when it's 5:30am because it's 80*+ and kinda humid already, usually no wind either.
I ran a 20:58 on July 4th, so I'm thinking I can get it done once weather permits. I'm going to start incorporating more strides into my runs so I can touch on speed more. I used to do 3-5 strides at the end of my easy runs just to get that good running feeling going, but I have shied away from that lately, for whatever reason.
Thanks for your videos, I'm finding them very helpful.
Yes. Just came in to say Kpchoge's histogram was anything except 80/20. Fitzgerald distroyed the running community when he said 80-20 and then everyone kept repeating that without thinking about the graphs. Open LIETRALLY any running channel on TH-cam and they kept repeating 80/20 over and over and over like it's rocket science that was just yesterday invented.
Say hello to any running coach and the first thing they say is you need to run easy on easy days without asking how you run... they immediately assume you're running moderate every time you go out.
@@RaoBlackWellizedArman Yep, it's crazy how much the 80/20 stuff was everywhere all of the sudden.
Side note, I did finally break 20min in the 5k with a 19:53 almost exactly one year of running.
Yes I noted the same. Quite a lot of speed.
Love it! ❤ thank you!
Base phase: I don’t do any sessions but just do strides 2-3 times a week. For my shorter sessions, I do 4-5 x 1 minute strides around 5k pace with 1 min. recovery. Long runs too, I do 1 x 1 min. stride @ 5k. w/ 1 minute recovery. Imagine a 12 mile run with 12 strides in that long run. It adds up over the months then when I enter a Marathon block, the long run workouts feel easier.
1 minute strides are intervals...right?
Just found your channel and it seems to be informative. As for polarized training, it is a relatively new concept introduced by Stephen Seiler. There is still a debate on that. In my humble opinion and experience, tempo or zone 2 training still is very important specially for half marathon to marathon training. I have been able to PR in my half marathon races by spending a good amount of time clise to my LT HR. Generally we should spend most of time in zone 1 out of 3 (3 zone model) say 80% or more. Most of us virtually do this by default. Intervals and VO2max workouts are certainly important too. Their priority goes with the distance of competition we train for. I myself have read opinions on polarized training from both schools of thoughts. So am no so confident in any but this was my take.
Hey saeeduofa. I hear you. - Spending a lot of time in zone 2 is a good idea. Simply because you CAN'T spend an equivalent time in a higher zone, by definition. So spending a lot of time in zone 2 is essentially the green part of the graph. But running is a MUSCULAR event. Meaning that your heart and lungs, lactate threshold, VO2max, etc aren't what limit your performance. They only support the neuromuscular system. So running in the "red" here, frequently, but not to exhaustion or anywhere near it. Is key. And in fact this is what you see in virtually all world class training programs. They run easy most of the time, and high volume of it. Then do a lot of short speed, but not turning it in to long workouts for most of the season. Then only during the final preparation do they do specific high intensity longer workouts. But over the course of a year, those are a small percentage of total running.
@@runelitecoachlove the effort you give to the comment section.
I may be being thick, but the Zatopek intervals sound like they are predominantly in the yellow zone (for him)
They’re at 5-10k race pace which is pretty fast for a runner logging 150+ miles per week.
Thank you. This was well explained.
Great stuff!
Thanks!
Could you please link the white papers in this video?
I’d be interested to read the interval timing paper
The original source for the chart on the effects of interval duration is a paper you can find here: onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1748-1716.1960.tb01879.x The image was created by Stephen Seiler.
i'm relatively new to running, having consistently enjoyed it for about 1.5 years now. Approximately a year ago, I encountered shin splints, but thankfully, I've been on the road to recovery, and they're almost gone.
My goal is to run 20 km per week, but I'm struggling to structure an effective running program. I'm eager to build a strong foundation while also incorporating some faster runs into my routine. Any advice or tips would be greatly appreciated!
If building to 20km per week you want to focus for now on just running easy and staying injury free. Once you get to 20k for 3-4 consecutive weeks then add in a small amount of strides. Then another 3-4 weeks later you can up your mileage
Great video! 2 questions re interval workouts. 1) Does the whole workout count towards the 20% or just the mileage done fast? And 2) are recovery periods slow jogs, walks, standing, or any of the above? Thank you!
@coldriver10
1) Count only miles run at quality pace towards the 20% (so don't count warm up, cool down, or recovery jogs). 2) It depends on where you are in your training. If you're more than 12 weeks out from your race, your recoveries should be just whatever is needed in order to do another rep. They can be very long recoveries, jogging, walking, whatever. Once you get closer to your race, you want to take either shorter recoveries, OR speed up your recoveries so that there's less difference between your interval and your recovery.
There are a million ways to organize this. That's the "art of training". But the short answer is above. Book a call with our coaches if you want to tailor this for yourself. andrewsnowcoaching.com/run and be sure to watch the free training on the Thank You page that breaks it down for you
Great video and I look forward to seeing more from your channel.
I'm following the Hal Higdon Novice 2 marathon plan. It calls for a "pace" run every other week. Should I be doing intervals for those sessions instead of a steady race-pace?
Hal Higdon's plans work for many, because they are far better than not having a plan. But they are not tailored for any individual, and not very specific. So if you're new to running, you can likely just follow Hal's plan. But if you want to maximize your potential, than no cookie-cutter plan should be used. It's better to use a MODEL for how to train, and then fit your own needs in to that model. In that way, the answer to your question is "it depends on how much TIME you have until race day". If you have less than 6 weeks to go, then you should focus on race-pace workouts. If you have 6-12 weeks to go, you should focus on "supporting" workouts. if you have more than 12 weeks to go, you'd likely be better off just improving mileage at a slow pace, and doing 10-20% of your miles via STRIDES (check out our videos on strides on the channel).
Great content. Thank you!
My pleasure!
Jack Daniels VDOT calculator gives a pace range for “easy pace” - paces on a slower end of that range can still feel hard… is it ok to go even easier than that?
Absolutely. Check out my video on "Junk Miles" that explains why going slow, even walking, is beneficial for your running here -->
th-cam.com/video/gZ9dY65mnG0/w-d-xo.html
Also, Kenenisa Bekele...I have a video of him training in Ethiopia and he's running a 10:00min mile as part of his long run with the women's team there. This guy can race a 4:40 mile pace for a marathon and is running slower than double that pace. So good enough for one of the fastest men alive, good enough for mortals! lol
Does "yellow" mean tempo/threshold running or something between easy and threshold/tempo?
In these two studies "yellow" was measured by heart rate as compared with HR at VO2max. The easiest way to think of this is how it "feels". It feels moderate. Which mostly be at paces slower than threshold. But that depends right? It depends on how LONG you're at threshold. If you run 1 mile at threshold, it's not that hard and your HR is "low". If you run 60 mins at threshold, it's basically all-out at the end and your HR is much higher. So there's no straight answer, other than, "if you're going to do threshold runs, make them count, and focus on them in the latter portion of your season, after you've built a HUGE base from easy running and LOTS of strides and short (very short) speed sessions).
I ve been running zone 2 for 10 years, done 4 ironman sand my zone 2 HR pace has never gotten faster, Same HR is same speed
Nice job. Thanks for the report 🙏
But have you Seen other forms of progress? 😮
Do you have an explanation how it is possible that there are so many studies which confirm that HIIT is more effective than continous training? Almost every study that compares the two forms of training comes to the conclusion HIIT is superior in improving VO2max, lowering blood pressure and other health markers. Are the charasterics of cardiovascular Fitness so different from the ones that make you an succesful endurance athlete?
The point is that you can’t do a high-level of HIIT training, if you don’t have a foundation of fitness. Therefore, the vast majority of your running is still easy.
@@runelitecoach Thanks! I think it's very misleading that often people talk about HIIT as a time efficient strategy to fitness when you can't really replace long steady state sessions with it but just add it on top.
@@benjaminkretz6063 I agree, it is very misleading. Carried out it would have a very high injury and or burnout rate. Nobody will do HIIT for years and years, so it can't do anybody any good, as they describe it at least.
It’s not very clear to me why we shouldn’t train in yellow. So it’s easy in easy days in hard all out in workout days like track days?
What? I can’t read that …
what about athletes like the ingebrigtsens?
Still most of their running is done at an easy pace. And in fact their training is unique because they run just SHY of threshold pace...but do it more than most in their category. So even their hard days are slower than what you may expect...just longer...and done more frequently.
This video doesn't say not to run in the yellow, it says to not do anywhere near the majority of your running there. So with high volume, you can still do yellow running and not have it be a high percentage.
That's really key to most elite training...is they have such a high volume that they can run a lot of speed and still have it be a low percetnage of volume...so that keeps injury risk low, and ease of recovery high.
@@runelitecoach so prioriteze the easy miles and the rest takes care of itself as a percentage right? thank you so much for responding love the work you put into this channel its pure gold.
The graph you show from Kipchoge 6:40, that's like 60% easy, 40% rest, not 80% as you say...
My appologies. It’s 80% base training. Which is the sum of very easy and very fast.
I am a little confused as to what you were considering green zone running vs red. Which color are the multiple 30 second “strides” or 100 m sprints? Sounds red because of intensity, but could be green b/c of the quantity. Can you give a clear example of a 5k runners routine and what kind of runs fall into green and what is red? (Edit: looked at Bob Schul's workouts from blogs/threads and there is consensus that he had no long runs, so how do we put all this together? Lots of conflicting info over the decades on the best methods).
Hey Taco.
One could talk about training zones in a number of ways, from HR levels, to perceived exertion, or just straight up pace. I'm referring to the product of muscle fiber type engagement and fatigue level. A simple way to view this would be that short strides are in the red (they are fast twitch development) and that an easy run in mostly in the green. But a slow run CAN drift to the yellow, or red, if done for long enough. So think of the zones as the amount of output you're. putting in. But the easies (although not complete) way to view this is that is is mostly referring to the TYPE OF MUSCLE FIBER you're using.
So strides and hill springs are red. Slow runs are green. This graph shoes that most running should be done "slow", and then still a lot is done "fast" with not much in between. Keep in mind that you CAN run a LOT of strides and hill sprints...but because they're so short in length, they don't add up to nearly as many miles as your easy runs. Hence why you should be doing a "lot" of strides and hill sprints" but it only accounts for a small portion of the miles you've run.
@@runelitecoach Okay, thanks for explaining. Bob Schul's method really seems intriguing.Its very contrarian, but seems to align with overall output that you are talking about, despite the method. Lots of short strides, not too intense, miles of them, but kept in green. I might experiment with it. Thanks.