This is all based on a completely unscientific experiment with a sample size of one (me), no control group, no separation of variables, no underpinning research. In other words, it is entirely anecdotal.
When I trained for a marathon over last winter, I became (like many folks training for a marathon) very good at running long distances slowly. During the last five months’ training, I ran a total of just over 1,100 km, and my average pace dropped from 6:57 min/km in December to 7:27 min/km in April. In the same period, my average heart rate dropped from low zone 3 to high zone 2. So in other words – the many long, slow runs made me slow down further, and my body became more efficient at running slowly.
A week before the marathon (i.e., in the last week of the taper where my body would have recovered from the long training runs), I ran my last gentle 5 km at an average 6:44 min/km with 25% of the time spent in zone 3 and 75% in zone 2.
After the marathon I adopted the 80/20 principle explained in Matt’s Fitzgerald’s book of the same name. I’ll save you the time reading it; it can be boiled down to:
- Many successful athletes spend 80 of their training time at a comfortable low heart rate (which can either be defined as lactate threshold 1 (LT1) or more pragmatically the effort level that still allows the athlete to have a conversation using full sentences without struggling for breath) and the remaining 20% training hard.
- The principle works because low effort levels facilitates mitochondria growth, and that boosts stamina. High effort levels facilitates increased speed and LT2 improvements.
- The middle ground (zone 3 in typical HR based training) is bad and should be avoided – it’s too fast to be gentle enough to recover quickly, and yet too slow for significant speed improvement.
- There are exceptions to every rule, and during periods of consistent volume increase (such as when training for a full or half marathon) it might be better to change the 80/20 to 90/10.
Over the last five months from June to October I have run just under 1,000 km. So not quite as much as during the pre-marathon training, but the difference is only about 10%. However, rather than focusing purely on long, slow steady runs, I have created a more varied weekly cycle, which includes
- one hard interval session each week. It started with 200 meter intervals, when that wasn’t too challenging I changed to 400 m, then to 600 m, and I hope to push it to 800 m and eventually 1,000 m intervals over the coming months;
- one long slow run every other weekend, and a “long slow with fast finish” the other weekends. Initially the “long slow with fast finish” was for instance 21 km with 3 km at 10 km-pace at the end, and currently it’s 24 km with the last 9-12 km at HM-pace;
- the rest being gentle shorter runs in zone 2.
I track how much time is spent on “hard” running and how much is spent on “gentle”, and try to ensure that the average over a rolling 4 weeks period remains as close to 80%/20% as I can.
The big question is obviously: Does it work? Has it been worth it? The answer is Without a doubt. Yes.
I have managed to improve both my 10 km PB (by 3 minutes) and HM PB (by 16 minutes) and ticked off a couple of long-desired milestones, and I don’t think that would have been possible without the speed focus every week. Despite the increased speed, I have been injury free (which, given my bad Achilles tendon that has haunted me for a few years, is a very welcome improvement).
However, more important than race pace (given that it’s long, slow runs I love) is the improvement at the other end of the scale on the slower runs. For instance, on yesterday’s 5 km run I averaged 5:46 min/km with heart rate firmly in zone 2. That’s a full minute per km quicker than six months ago with a more relaxed heart rate. What’s not to love?
So I have become a convert and a believer in the principle. And although there’s quite a bit of fluff and filler in Fitzgerald’s book, I highly recommend it and the 80/20 principle.
Written by
Tomas
Marathon
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
This is great stuff, Tomas, well done! I have been toying with the idea of trying this, basically borrowing your ideas, but for me in the end I decided that the MyAsics plan is close enough (although because of my hamstring problem I'm mostly avoiding speed work for the moment). It saves me time, and at least I can tweak it as I go. I try to run by feel, but I'd like to compare this with some heart rate data at some point soon.
Your timing of your post couldn't have been better. I have the above mentioned book sitting on my counter in addition to a few others of varying philosophies that I'm trying to work through to figure out what is my best strategy going forward with my training. A few years ago I had built up to 16k training with a friend who was using Galloway's method, before a bunch of life circumstances curtailed running. I restarted this year but decided I wanted to try continuous running instead of intervals for the entire distance. After struggling doing it on my own, I found and started the C25k plan here, graduated in August and I'm close to reaching my 10k goal . I am looking forward to building my distance up in hopes of running HM in the future and eventually our local 50k skyrun when I turn 50 (fortunately I have a few years before the deadline to that comes up). At this stage of my training would you adopt the 80/20 rule right off the bat or just look at building distance over the next 6 months without worrying about speed? I really enjoy variety in my runs so was thinking of probably still doing runs of varying lengths and intensities each week, just haven't figured it all out since I'm still 2-3 weeks off my 10k goal . I figure I'll stay at 10k long runs for a couple weeks before moving forward and every few weeks taking a rest week where the distance/intensity is reduced. Is the 80/20 book a good one for a newbie distance runner to adopt or best for someone who has a foundation already and knows what their different race paces and heart rate zones and all the terminology that is greek to me?
If you already have the book on your counter, I think you'd enjoy reading it. It's written in an easy-to-read manner, and it's not at all technical - Matt explains about the "ventilatory threshold" which basically is "the point at which it becomes harder to speak in full sentences" and recommends that the 80% of your running is below that.
There are a number of training plans in the book as well. I think they're just fillers. The key point I took away from reading it was the mindset and the structure. I like to think I'm a unique little snowflake, so I have an aversion against generic programmes that are supposedly covering everybody regardless of current fitness level.
If you're within 2-3 weeks of your 10 km goal, I think I would carry on as you are for the next 2-3 weeks and reach that milestone. Spend the time reading the book and thinking about how you'd like to spend structure your running over winter, and then start following the gospel once you've got your 10 km in the bag.
Just to add: Don't worry about your different race paces. That's the beauty of training based on heart rate feedback (either directly via a heart rate monitor or via just checking how hard your breathe): You run based on how comfortable it feels, and the pace is left to be whatever it happens to be (and it's likely to change over time as your fitness changes). I think that's far healthier than trying to hit a pre-determined pace and thinking you're a failure unless you hit it.
Excellent...thanks. I like using a rate of perceived exertion because otherwise I get WAY too focused on numbers. I run by myself so have been using the "can I sing to my tunes out loud?", much to the dismay of my neighbours. If I can, good job, if not slow down. I'm sometimes pretty "breathy" in my singing so I will likely need to slow down further as the distance climbs. I'll definitely give the book a read. I took a few out of the library to see if there were any worth buying for my library to refer to over time. I have one from John Stanton's Running Room but cannot run the number of days they have in their plans. I'm hoping for 3 good runs a week with a couple of days of cross training worked in. My schedule is unpredictable with call but since I don't have any races in my near future, I'm not too worried; it's all about building distance over winter.
Singing sounds like a great way to gauge your breathing! Plus it's also good for keeping the mood up
I too like the idea of perceived exertion. I just find it difficult to get the granularity beyond "hey this is almost too easy" / "ok, I could probably carry on with this for a while" / "oh shucks, I think I'm gonna die, they might as well start to dig a hole for me".
This is really helpful, Tomas , thank you. I have been muttering for the last year that I am one-paced but that pace has become slower. Since I began to increase my distance in preparation for the HM I had to become slower, but I suspect I am in that mid-zone which does no real good at all. I have spent the last couple of weeks trying to increase my short run pace in preparation for a virtual 5k and I am getting nowhere.
I have another HM in the spring so I think I will have a good look into this methodology. My concern is that my 80% will be so slow that I might as well just walk it and it will increase my HM time to somewhere around 4 hours, but then again, if I don't like it, I can revert to what I'm doing now for the next one in the autumn.
Off to work out how to work out my HR zones in a work out...
Anniemurph , your experience sounds very similar to what I found - long slow runs makes us very good at running slowly, and we tend to slow down even more (and get even better at it).
I hear you about the concern of running so slowly. What I found was that two things happened simultaneously for me:
1) At a fixed heart rate, I (slowly) got faster
2) The heart rate I can sustain for multi hour runs increased which caused the boundaries between heart rate zones 2 and 3 to change (this heart rate is often referred to as LT1 or 'aerobic threshold'. The rate people often talk about when mentioning lactate threshold is LT2 or 'anaerobic threshold' [or LTP on the graph in the link below] which says how hard an effort the body can sustain for about an hour)
I had expected 1) but hadn't realised that 2) would happen. And the combination is what gave the real boost.
The "problem" I had with heart rate zones previously is that I assumed they were static. They're not when seen over longer terms (which actually makes sense, because they're an indication of fitness, and we hope to get fitter as we train longer). For me it took a formal lactate threshold test to realise where the zone boundaries were and how they have moved.
Thanks again for the link. I admit that I was a bit nervous about trying to run as fast as I can for 30 minutes but then I realised that this simply isn't possible as I won't be able to maintain that pace - and then I realised again that of course I will still be running as fast as I can, it's just that that pace will be slower. So it's a bit tricky - set off at a slightly slower pace but one that I can probably maintain until the desperate, gasping end, or fling myself headlong at the start and creak slowly down the scale yard by yard? Both will require a lot of effort, but they may have different effects on my heart rate. [And what if I just die halfway down? Incomplete results!]
Ooh, interesting. I may have to do this a couple of times and see what happens. Research! Anecdotal only, obviously
Definitely set off at a pace you think you can just about maintain for the 30 minutes 😎 If you have to slow down a lot, then you started to fast. Good luck Flossie
Great post Tomas. I'm a great believer in the long slow run in order to build the base that is required for any distance. However, I believe you some speed in your training runs as otherwise your legs won't know what's happening when you approach a finish line!! I've also heard it said... if you want to run fast... then run fast!!
I'm also experimenting with my long runs by combining a slightly quicker pace with walk breaks (Galloway Running)... i had some good results with a recent 6k run doing this and my total time was very similar to my run only time.
There are so many variable to throw into the pot (pace, walk breaks, distance, cadence, heart rate) it never makes it dull planning your next run
That's a very good quote AndyD , and after my little experiment I definitely agree with it. However, it's easy to get injured with too much fast running, which is also one of the reasons I think this 80/20 guideline makes sense.
I seem to remember Galloway arguing that even for people who regularly run sub-3 hour marathons it's more efficient to run/walk than to run the whole time. How did you feel after that 6k - was it less demanding of the legs than running the full distance?
Yes, certainly felt pretty good... I'm going to try it again at the weekend going a bit further (HM) on the same route as I did a HM recently (badly!) so it will be interesting to make a comparison.
But I am certainly an advocate of the benefits of a mixed bag of runs and especially to the long slow run at the weekend.
Hi.. small update to this thread... Just back from doing a 3/1 Run Walk Half Marathon (same route as last Saturday) and my time was 10mins quicker! Last week I just walked when I felt I had to and thus no structure. This week the 3/1 structure certainly helped. Yes, I'm tired, but I really didn't start to hang until about 18k. So happy bunny!! Think I will continue to experiment with my run/walk intervals for anything about 10k. As I have an event next weekend I think I'll take it easy during the week with perhaps only a few "K" of faster runs.. Yes, 80/20 is the way to go
10 minutes is a lot, that's nearly 30 seconds faster per km. impressive result from a well structured run/walk. Please do let me know how the event goes as well 😊
Tomas, you amaze me with the way you look at running in such a technical way and something that I truly admire, not only with this but the spreadsheets and the logical way you go about your running and training. It must be that IT background 1's and 0's.
Someone said a quote to me once by some guy called Seb Coe not sure what he ever did but anyway, his quote was "I've always felt that long, slow distance produces long, slow runners." and I do see what he is saying if you do long slow long distance running then you will always be a long slow distance runner.
Makes me think that maybe I should start back at doing a 5-10k plan again, but this time instead of running slow run fast then I will be running fast at 10k, then build up from there.
But that's never going to happen, I am just going to always be a very unstructured runner!
hahaha, thank you benwill . Sometimes I think it can be a curse with all the thinking. And yes, you're probably right it's part of the IT background. I also always liked math and puzzles
Seb Coe? Hmmm... name rings a bell. The quote makes good sense. It's a bit like some marathon programmes that suggests running each and every training run at 1 min/mile slower than target time, and then magically go out and increase both time and distance on race day without every having tried either of them before.
Maybe a fresh focus on 5-10k would yield "improvement" (always a dangerous word). But on the other hand, I have the impression that you're quite enjoying what you're doing, and isn't that the main objective of this hobby of ours?
Your right Professor Tomas (your new name) I followed very loosely a plan that did the target time of slower during training but did have you sprint like mad during the week. I did ok in the marathon up until mile 20 when I hit the wall, but its life's lessons. So for next years Brighton Marathon & Beachy head (maybe) I will have to try a new approach.
For a start, I have to beat roseabi at Brighton! maybe that's what I need a bit of competition to actually think about training, not the slapdash way of doing it at the moment.
But your right it is about having fun and beating @Roseabi in Brighton 2018
Thanks for sharing so much data Tomas, this is fascinating. The heart rate approach is something I had not considered as I am still very new to any longer distances. In looking at my last three runs, my heart rate is sitting almost all in zone 4 and 5, but it goes faster than usual all the time too so I’m not sure if thats something to worry about :). The logic of this approach does make sense. I cant believe your 5k heart rate with 75% in zone 2. That is super efficient!
Oh, this is so interesting Tomas, as IannodaTruffe has just been referring to this idea on Bridge to 10k! Thank you so much for your very concise summary - I am so interested in this and although I will not be monitoring my HR, I certainly plan to adopt this principle in my running! 🙂
I read Tomas's post yesterday, after I had been reading similar info elsewhere. The example given by Tomas is excellent evidence of the success of the strategy and while we tell C25K runners to slow down, there is rarely the time to explain why and frankly many would not take it in.
Personally, I would have loved to have read this post when I was doing C25K. It would have stopped me going like a bull in a China shop.
I recognise the bull in a china shop syndrome durIng C25K, and agree the advice usually given about slowing down and then slowing down some more is spot on for the programme. I also agree many ( I would definitely been in that boat!) wouldn't take it in, and I think that for those crucial nine weeks of learning to run, it has to be as easy and straight forward as possible.
Concise... normally I get told off for my verbal diarrhoea. I like you very much Sandra 😊
I don't think it requires HR monitoring (but for a numbers geek like me the extra detail the HR gives is like the pepper sauce with a nice steak). Monitoring breathing carefully should give the same results.
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
marathon long run - pace?
