Duathlon.com - Leading the duathlon revolution with news, results, and community devoted to duathlons and triathlons.
  Home  |  My Profile   Welcome Anonymous    Become a member! or Login!     


Talk
Photos
Survey
My Profile
Results
News
Interviews
Calendar
Classifieds
Links
Reviews
Need a Coach?
Books
Support this Site
Contact
Support FAQ




Links Search


[Articles Home]  [Add Article]  

Bob Kennedy On Tackling The Tempo Run

Eric Schwartz (duathlon) on January 7, 2004
View comments about this article!


Bob Kennedy has been at the top of US distance running for over a decade, competing in the 1992 and 1996 Olympics in the 5,000 meter run, with a best finish of 6th place in 1996. He is the American record holder on the track for 3,000 meters (7:30), and 5,000 meters (12:58). He is currently focusing on the 10,000 meter run and the 2004 Olympics. Bob is 33, he lives in Indianapolis, and he is co-owner of The Running Company (www.erunningcompany.com), a specialty running store. The following article, written by Bob, is from The Running Company's newsletter, Momentum.

One of the questions most frequently asked of me is some version of, “what is the one workout you would do if you couldn't do any other?”  Before I answer the question I first try to explain that there are many equally important pieces of the puzzle that make up a properly prepared distance runner.  When the body runs as fast as it can over a long distance it uses three or four different physiological systems (aerobic capacity, aerobic efficiency and aerobic/anaerobic power), which are all doing different things simultaneously yet relying on each other to accomplish the end goal of finishing the race in the shortest amount of time possible.  Each time we run or workout we are improving the efficiency of one or two of these physiological systems.  In general, easy running improves aerobic capacity, tempo running improves aerobic efficiency and fast interval running improves aerobic and/or anaerobic power.  Missing just one of those pieces will leave a hole in your performance.  But after going through all of that, my answer to the original question is definitely the tempo run!  For race distances at or above 10K the tempo run, if done properly, is by far the biggest bang for your buck.    

In order to understand how to do tempo runs properly, I think it is important to first understand what you are trying to accomplish by doing tempo runs.  Think of aerobic efficiency as using the fuel provided by your body in the most efficient way possible so that it lasts as long as possible at the pace you want to run.  I love the automobile analogy for this.  In the simplest form, it takes two things to make a car go:  An engine and fuel.  If you have a Ferrari engine under your hood and you put your foot on the gas pedal you are going to go pretty fast but it will be a relatively short ride because that engine, although fast, is not very efficient and will use the fuel up quickly.  On the other hand, if you have one of the diesel Volkswagen Rabbit's from the 80's and you put your foot on the gas you won't feel any sensation of speed but (once you finally get to speed) the ride will seem almost never ending.  The Volkswagen engine is built for efficiency, which is what you are trying to accomplish with your body's engine by doing tempo runs.

Tempo runs should be done at a pace that is the fastest you can go with your muscles using only aerobic energy for fuel.  The simplest way to determine this pace is to think of it as the fastest pace you can evenly sustain for one hour of running.  It should feel comfortably hard.  Running at a pace faster than this causes your muscles to utilize anaerobic energy for fuel, which is very limited in supply and lasts for a very short period of time (remember the Ferrari engine?).  Once you go anaerobic there is no going back.  The duration of tempo runs should be between 20 minutes and 50 minutes, which, of course, are preceded by a warm up and followed by a cool down.  If you have never done a tempo run, start with 10 minutes and work your way up from there.  The more running you do at this pace, the more efficient your body's engine will become at using fuel and the longer you will be able to sustain your goal race pace.


Member Comments: Add A Comment
Bob Kennedy On Tackling The Tempo Run Reply
by triguy200 on January 7, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
Interjecting some physiology lessons into this article would be helpful to most athletes. I'm not saying that Bob Kennedy is not an incredible runner, or doesn't have the right idea, it's the specifics where he goes a little wrong. For specific instances, see below.

"Tempo runs should be done at a pace that is the fastest you can go with your muscles using only aerobic energy for fuel." - In fact, that would actually be a quite slow pace for any runner...Bob Kennedy included. There will be anaerobic metabolism occuring even as you read this article. Effectively, there is no "only" when talking about aerobic metabolism at any effort - sitting through sprinting. And, by the way, when sprinting you have a very considerable contribution of energy from aerobic metabolism.

"Running at a pace faster than this causes your muscles to utilize anaerobic energy for fuel, which is very limited in supply and lasts for a very short period of time (remember the Ferrari engine?). Once you go anaerobic there is no going back." - First, see above...you will always have some contribution from anaerobic sources even at easy paces - that's why there is lactate present in the blood at all times. He is correct, though, in stating that there is a limited amount of anaerobic fuels - though there are several different types: immediate ATP (used up within seconds), creatine phosphate (CP) (used to phosphorylate ADP back into ATP), and then stored carbohydrates (the fuel used during fast glycoloysis - AKA anaerobic or non-oxidative metabolism). Second, you can always go back and forth between these metabolic systems. There is absolutely no on/off switch for aerobic/anaerobic (or more accurately, non-oxidative) metabolism. You always have some contribution from each. I will agree that once you exceed the point where more lactic acid is being produced than can be cleared, you will have a problem. How far above that balance point (lactate steady state, or lactate threshold) effects how long you can go. However, if you decrease your pace enough, you will be able to clear the excess lactate and then ramp back up to the appropriate tempo pace without any consequences.

Just my .02 as a physiologist.
 
Bob Kennedy On Tackling The Tempo Run Reply
Anonymous post on January 7, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
I think Bob's "layman" approach is appropriate for the majority of us! Although I do think the reason I didn't PR last year was because I wasn't sure which anaerobic fuel source I was using during my tempo runs- immediate ATP or creatine phosphate. Can you tell from what was in my puke?
 
RE: Bob Kennedy On Tackling The Tempo Run Reply
by bizarro on January 8, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
triguy, I hear you hummin' but for many folks Bob's explanation will be a good one. You're prepared for more in-depth descpitions but in my experiences most of ouur colleagues in this sport aren't.
 
On Bob Kennedy's Advice Reply
by drghs on January 9, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
I will split the difference. I think Bob's advice was pretty good, but also think it could have used a little physiological detail (although not details about mechanisms per our physiologist).

Bob is right in saying that the tempo run pace is the pace you can hold for a race of about an hour. But the problem is that many runners don't know what pace they can run for a race that lasts an hour (there are not all that many 10 mile - 20k races around at any given point in time). Bob might have added that the pulse rate which one should run tempo runs at is somewhere in the neighborhood of (88-90% MHR). These are the pulse ranges that people run in races between 10 miles and 20k.

Owen Anderson, in Runner's World, argued that tempo intervals could actually be done at a slightly faster pace to gain the same result - say 10K pace.

I like to mix the two speeds or pulses, since I find doing a 4 mile straight tempo run each week at 88-90% pulse is a little boring.

So, each month, I progress like this -

4 reps of 1500 meters at 10k pace or 92% pulse with 1 minute rest

3 reps of 2000 meters, same pace or pulse, same rest

2 reps of 3000 meters, same pace or pulse, same rest

6k at 10 mile or 20k pace (or 88-90% pulse)

Then the next month, when I start the cycle again, the 1500s seem kinda easy (because I just did almost the same pace with no rest) and they tend to be faster than the previous month, same with the 2ks the next week, and the 3ks the next, etc. So over a course of 6 months your tempo runs or tempo intervals keep getting faster and faster, but you keep the pulses under control

Why keep the pulse under control? Because you don't want the tempo intervals or runs to be too slow (80-83%) and to degenerate into being what I would call "highest quality aerobic intervals" - because these don't teach your body to tolerate lactates. Nor do you want them to get too fast (95-100% MHR) because then they are excessively anaerobic and would be MaxVo2 intervals (5k pace or pulse) or efficiency intervals (3k pace or pulse).

Like Goldilocks, you want them in that middle zone, not too slow (aerobic) and not too fast (anaerobic).
Just right!

Dr. G
(not a physiologist)
 
RE: On Bob Kennedy's Advice Reply
by triguy200 on January 12, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
Unfortunately Dr. G, % HR Max has virtually no meaning for an individual. There are world champs who can only sustain 80% of their peak HR, and other who can sustain 95%+ at the same maximal level of tempo, or race-like effort. I'm not saying that HR is not important, but tying the heart rate response to other physiologic responses (like blood lactate, O2 consumption, VE, R, etc.) is the way to go. Also, if using a "predicted" max HR you might as well not even look at the HRM, since a single SD for 220-age to estimate max HR is +/- 12 beats/min, and that is only 1 standard deviation (only hitting 68% of the population, at 95% of the population(2 SDs) you're looking at +/- ~20 bpm). Best of luck.
 
RE: On Bob Kennedy's Advice Reply
by CeeMan on January 12, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
Easy you two. C'mon now... can't we all just be friends? I agree and disagree with both of you. There is a time and place for both quantitative (training by the numbers - HR, R, maximal oxygen uptake, etc.) and qualitative (how you perceive the level of difficulty) in a properly designed training program. Finding the balance of both is the 'art' of coaching. A good coach should never stay rigid to the training plan else the athlete may succumb to over-reaching. This is especially important since not ever single training day is going to be the same as the last. Weather, fatigue, nutrition, social / emotional stresses all influence an atheltes ability to train effectively. Flexibility in the plan in light of these factors is key to success.
 
RE: On Bob Kennedy's Advice Reply
by triguy200 on January 13, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
I will agree with you about using a combination of art and science in training. There are lots of people who believe that if you follow a plan ABC based on parameters XYZ then everything is perfect. In the real world, there's a whole lot more to it. Don't worry about over-reaching...that's the key to getting better. If you over-reach and recover, then there is adaptation. Without adding some training stress slightly beyond what you can currently tolerate and then - most importantly - recovering from that stress, you won't be improving at the fastest rate possible. No, you can't do it every session, and as I stated, recovery from the increased stress is key. Recovery is more than a lack of muscle soreness...there are psychological, hormonal, physical, biochemical, etc. factors involved in recovery. A simple definition for recovery would be that if you cannot exert a maximal effort with an improved performance, then you are not truly recovered. If you read any of the literature from the physiologists and coaches at the USOTC, you'll see that they advocate over-reaching. They also strongly advocate proper recovery stategies...and that's where many well-meaning athletes and coaches make mistakes.
 
RE: On Bob Kennedy's Advice Reply
by drghs on January 14, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
I don't mean to have this sound like the typical, lame pissing match you see in these forums, but I disagree with tri-guy.

First, if you read closely, I suggested using either 10m-20k pace OR heart rate values. A runner needs some guidance as what pace to run, and these are acceptable ranges (and alternatives). Second, heart rate and max heart rate DO have meaning. Many people train and race with monitors, many know their Max. And certainly it is more practical for the average individual to know heart rate max than blood lactate, O2 consumption, VE, R. How many people have access to the kind of equipment you need to know those values?
And you well know that if you are using predicted heart rates that there are better formula than 220-age (I never suggested that people use that method, so arguing against it is straw manning).

The simple fact is that using EITHER the pace you can run in a 10mile OR 20K race OR a heart rate value of 88-90% are practical and readily accessible means for calculating tempo training rates. Of course, some individuals can red line high or can't or have wierdly high heart rates or low ones. But even those individuals can begin with simple formula, and then, through trial and error, can find more acceptable paces or pulses.

For example, I have a friend who is 47 and who hits a max pulse of 200 consistently. If he used the standard or revised formula for Max HR, he would be using a pulse value that is too low and too slow. BUT, he can discover and did discover that through trial and error. Noone is saying that he should use the standard formulaic and then mindlessly adhere to it in the face of evidence from his training, that those formulas underpredict his max heart rate.

Cheap, easy to use heart monitors are a practical, albeit not perfect, way to tinker and find tempo pace.
A treadmill test is not.






Unfortunately Dr. G, % HR Max has virtually no meaning for an individual. There are world champs who can only sustain 80% of their peak HR, and other who can sustain 95%+ at the same maximal level of tempo, or race-like effort. I'm not saying that HR is not important, but tying the heart rate response to other physiologic responses (like blood lactate, O2 consumption, VE, R, etc.) is the way to go. Also, if using a "predicted" max HR you might as well not even look at the HRM, since a single SD for 220-age to estimate max HR is +/- 12 beats/min, and that is only 1 standard deviation (only hitting 68% of the population, at 95% of the population(2 SDs) you're looking at +/- ~20 bpm). Best of luck.
 
RE: On Bob Kennedy's Advice Reply
by CeeMan on January 14, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
My gosh! If you can run a 1/2 marathon at or just below your anaerobic threshold without popping you truly are a god! I don't know of very many, or any, athlete that can hold a pace equivalent to 88% MHR for 21.1 km. As for the over-reaching comment, hmmm, if this is the suggested training protocol from the USAT then I question the validity of the program. When would you ever place an athlete on the verge of overtraining (comes after over-reaching AND it's a fine line between the two) from which it may take a month, 6 months, or even years to totally recover from. Sounds like the sketch to me.
 
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.

Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

Related News & Articles
Bob Kennedy Interview Part I
Bob Kennedy Interview - Part II
Bob Kennedy Interview - Part III


Other Upcoming & News Articles
Miami International Triathlon
IM China and 70.3 Results
Ironman New Zealand
Desert Classic Duathlon Elite Results
Ironman Malaysia

Web design and content Copyright © 1998-2005 by Eric Schwartz and Duathlon.com
Unauthorized reproduction of any Duathlon.com material is strictly prohibited and is subject to legal action
World Headquarters - Boulder, Colorado 
Contact