Announcement

Collapse

New Combat Side Stroke Guide

Improve your swim. Use the Naval Special Warfare Combat Side Stroke Guide.

Visit: http://www.sealswcc.com/navy-seal-co...oke-guide.html
See more
See less

Help with running workout comparison and translation

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Help with running workout comparison and translation

    I have scanned through the running threads and haven't seen anything on this so I'm assuming ether everyone gets it or not too many guys are actually following the workout. I hope its the former so you guys can help me out on this one.

    From the homepage, click on the "HOW TO TRANSFORM YOUR RUNNING WORKOUTS WITH INTERVALS AND LONG SLOW DISTANCES" banner. From there look at the ".SAMPLE SCHEDULE - WEEKLY WORKOUTS FOR AN ADVANCED RUNNER" and compare those listed workouts to the workout examples listed under each type of interval. For example lets look at Long Intervals (LI).

    Under ".SAMPLE SCHEDULE - WEEKLY WOURLOUT FOR AN ADVANCED RUNNER" the "Long Intervals (LI) - Total = 10Miles" workout is as follows:

    1. Warm-up 3 miles
    2. 3 x 1.5 miles for 4.5 miles
    3. Active Recovery 1 mile
    4. Cool-down 1.5 mile

    Now, I understand there are 2 ways to look at/accomplish this workout. The workout can be accomplished via measuring distance or via measuring time. My issue/confusion is with the latter.

    Scroll down the page and look under the ".LONG INTERVALS (LI)" workout description/narrative. Under "Long Interval Workout Example" posted just below the ".LONG INTERVALS (LI)" header the workout is as follows:
    1. 15-20 minutes continuous (one long interval)
    2. 5K continuous (one long interval)
    3. 2-3 x 10-15 minutes (30 minutes max)
    4. 2-3 x 1.5-2 miles (4.5 miles max)
    5. 3-4 x 6-7 minutes
    6. 3-4 x 1 miles
    From what I understand via reading the article, these two workouts are supposed to be the same'ish (the timed one follows a different format but should equal the same distance at the end). The only difference being that one is measured by time ("Long Intervals (LI) - Total = 10Miles") and the other by distance (".LONG INTERVALS (LI)"). However, if you do the math they are not even remotely similar.

    Lets take a closer look. For simplicity sake I am going to round to whole numbers and assume a conservative pace.

    The first LI workout ("Long Intervals (LI) - Total = 10Miles") at the top of the page is easy enough to interpret. Just as it says, at the end of it you should have covered about 10miles. Also, the pace one should shoot for is described in the article. However, that's not what I'm worried about here.

    Lets take a look at the second workout ( ".LONG INTERVALS (LI)") that is supposed to be the same as the first ("Long Intervals (LI) - Total = 10Miles") just formatted differently and measured via time instead of distance.

    The math:
    1. 15-20 minutes continuous (one long interval) ... Lets say 15-20 min = 2miles
    2. 5K continuous (one long interval) ... Lets round a 5K to = 3 miles
    3. 2-3 x 10-15 minutes (30 minutes max) ... Lets say 3 x 10 min = 3miles
    4. 2-3 x 1.5-2 miles (4.5 miles max) ... 2 x 2 miles = 4 miles
    5. 3-4 x 6-7 minutes ... 4 x 7 minutes = 4 miles
    6. 3-4 x 1 miles ... 3 x 1 miles = 3 miles
    I think we can all agree on that math, right? Well, if you add it up you get a grand total of 19 miles. Whereas, in the version of this workout that is measured by distance ("Long Intervals (LI) - Total = 10Miles") adds up to, you guessed it, 10 miles.

    This translation, or lack thereof, holds true for the other workouts (SI, LSD, LSD) as well. I used LI because it is the easiest to follow.

    In the article it says these workouts are designed to provide you with a method of improving times that will ultimately amount to ~40miles/week. That holds true for the workouts if you follow them via the distance schema. However, if you follow them via the timing schema you end up with a value much greater than ~40 miles.

    All of this being said, I am struggling to see how the distance vs time workouts compare. Much less, come out to equal the same amount of ground covered in a workout.

    Can anyone enlighten me as to how this is supposed to work, how these workouts are supposed the be the same, if that is even true, or if I am the only one interpreting it this way and am completely off?

    Thanks ahead of time for the response and apologies for the novel. I wanted to be as detailed as possible as to avoid confusion.

    Many Thanks,
    - KR

  • #2
    Ok when I read it on the site it mentioned the other formats were "Long Interval Workout Examples" which I take to mean these were alternate workouts that you could complete in place of the first listed example, which was;

    1. Warm-up 3 miles
    2. 3 x 1.5 miles for 4.5 miles
    3. Active Recovery 1 mile
    4. Cool-down 1.5 mile

    But the key was that only item #2 is considered the Long Interval portion of the workout. The rest is W/U, C/D, or recovery jogging. Using your estimates of mileage based on time, any of the alternate workouts listed could be substituted in place of the given #2 workout item for nearly equivalent mileage with some active recovery added between sets.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by CBEE View Post
      Ok when I read it on the site it mentioned the other formats were "Long Interval Workout Examples" which I take to mean these were alternate workouts that you could complete in place of the first listed example, which was;

      1. Warm-up 3 miles
      2. 3 x 1.5 miles for 4.5 miles
      3. Active Recovery 1 mile
      4. Cool-down 1.5 mile

      But the key was that only item #2 is considered the Long Interval portion of the workout. The rest is W/U, C/D, or recovery jogging. Using your estimates of mileage based on time, any of the alternate workouts listed could be substituted in place of the given #2 workout item for nearly equivalent mileage with some active recovery added between sets.
      Gotcha. Makes sense. Thanks for the second set of eyes on that one.

      Comment

      Working...
      X