Hadd's Approach To Distance Running

168 watchers

glucotab Jan 2017 4:35pm, 24 Jan 2017 99 posts	0 glucotab I think I mistaked. In `a committed relationship with` Mary Hanson - apologies Mary and any others offended by my poor research. Still a neat interview imho.
Daz Love Jan 2017 6:03pm, 24 Jan 2017 499 posts	0 Daz Love I did flock through gluco. Will revisit. I'm actually having second thoughts re the surgery! The surgeon called last night and we had a decent discussion. Not sure I'm doing the right thing! Waiting to speak with him again as have more questions! It's more the impact on home/work life(could be in a cast for ages!)
Julii Jan 2017 3:47pm, 27 Jan 2017 15 posts	0 Julii May I ask a question... Hadd's idea seems to be that performance improves by increasing the LTHR. Can anyone say their numbers to show how they increased their LTHR using the Hadd's approach? How long did the change take, and what was their maxHR during this period? Just scientifically curious. Thanks.
glucotab Jan 2017 4:48pm, 27 Jan 2017 100 posts	0 glucotab Julii - I am no scientist and not a fully fledged Haddite yet, but I don`t see how runners who train at subLT are supposed to check their LTHR numbers on a regular basis unless they run at LTHR, in which case they are not doing subLT? If you take away the flask of the poison and the radioactive source, then you`re just left with Schrodinger and his cat? en.wikipedia.org
Julii Jan 2017 7:23pm, 27 Jan 2017 16 posts	0 Julii I thought eventually a person is supposed to not just train at subLTR, they are allowed to go harder. No? Once you do Hadd's you can never go above LTHR again? Odd to have a theory seemingly based on science that can't be evidenced
Teknik Jan 2017 7:47pm, 27 Jan 2017 1,369 posts	0 Teknik No, the subLT stuff is the mainstay of Phase 1. Phase 2a and 2b have (much) faster intervals in them.
paul the builder Jan 2017 8:52pm, 27 Jan 2017 5,921 posts	0 paul the builder Even if someone did have great numbers of their own to share - it would be anecdotal, not evidence. Julii - do you think any training programme does have a solid evidence behind it?
teapothouse Jan 2017 7:53am, 28 Jan 2017 3 posts	0 teapothouse This is an interesting point. The numbers that you do see from hadd tests from hadd trainers etc show principally that the pace you achieve at a given heart rate increases. If all those heart rates are sub-LT then you don't necessarily increase the heart rate point at which too much lactate is created, just you can go faster before that point. However there is a point in late phase 1 where you push the sub LT run towards higher heart rates to sustain that over longer distances and I guess these are the ones that are designed to push the LTHR up based on sustained pace at that heart rate which is at or just below LTHR. Clearly pace increases as a result of hadd training (and I have just begun to see this in my training). But what is the proven effect in terms of the heart rate at which lactate increases exponentially? Should we simply say that Hadd training simply increases the LTP (lactate threshold pace)?
glucotab Jan 2017 3:58pm, 28 Jan 2017 101 posts	0 glucotab I don`t know if these quotes from Peteq2 are relevant. I like them though... <<<<<After having progressed through the Phase I training, a distance runner aiming to race well at a variety of distances will train to be able to complete the following sessions: 6 x 800m at 104% of 5k pace with everything from equal time recovery (down to) 1:15-1:30 recovery. 5-6 x 1k at 5k pace with 200m jog recovery in 90 secs 3 x 3k at 95-96% of 5k pace with 800m jog recovery 2 x 5k at 93-94% of 5k pace with 800m jog recovery 8k at 92% of 5k pace 16-20k at 88-90% of 5k pace" (quote extracted from John's words at www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?board=1&id=238....) Once you've built the kind of fitness where you can run each of these sessions, you will be in good shape to run well across a reasonable range of distance events.>>>>>>> <<<<<Marathon training, on the other hand, is easily supported by this training, but not in the same way as 1500-HM. I won't go on at length about marathon training except with the following few general comments: * for FT runners, the Phase I training already described is 95% of proper marathon training, and arguably all that is required. Of course, one might ask the fair question "why would an FT runner WANT to race the marathon???" I've asked myself that very question, and I don't have the answer. An FT runner will never run a great marathon in spite of best efforts, but one can always try (my last five marathons were 2:44, 2:44, 2:42, 2:42 and 2:44; my last two halfs were 73:29 and 73:39... you do the math, haha) * for ST runners, the final phase of marathon training should look a lot like the Phase I training already described, but with a sprinkling of faster work at HM and even 10k pace. An ST runner should be at pretty close to 5k/10k peak fitness not too far out from race day if they hope to run well * if the FT runner is in strong 5k/10k fitness 3-4 weeks ahead of the marathon, he'd be best advised to sleep in on race day, it won't go well. The FT runner's marathon training should NOT see efforts faster than M-pace * Prior to the final (Phase I-esque) polishing phase of marathon prep for the ST-runner (of perhaps 2-3 months), there should be a good period of faster training and racing. This is less important for the FT runner, but won't do any harm * the objective in marathon training is to teach the legs proper fuel efficiency at M-pace. The marathon is ALL about fuel management. He who preserves glycogen stores longest arrives at the finish line strongest, less likely to have "hit the wall." Training needs to focus on improving fat burning and (consequently) reducing glycogen consumption at M-pace. The Phase I work already described does precisely this>>>>>
SPR Jan 2017 4:11pm, 28 Jan 2017 23,477 posts	0 SPR Can you post links to where you saw that and this link as well... "(quote extracted from John's words at www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?board=1&id=238....)"