This is part 2 of a 3 part response to a specific comment.
Part 1 - We Value What We Can Measure
Part 3 - Different Stimulus for Different Runners
As mentioned in a previous post, a comment a few months ago made me think quite a bit about different aspects of how I think about training. Part of the comment related to my view on specific training sessions.
I also see your point on moving from set distance to a time model for runners who are training at slower paces than the elites. However, I wonder if this is mostly in regards to threshold/tempo work where a very specific training stimulus is sought. When it comes to doing training for a set race distance where you want your athlete to be prepared to run a given pace for the given distance, I believe it is crucial to train at those paces & not adjust for the relative speed the athlete will run to cover that distance. 10 x 1K at 10K pace should be universal, no? If not, I would love to hear your argument for why it is not.
You say "There is a time for specific work, but not nearly as much as I once thought. Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should."
I would love to hear you give more examples of when the specific work is too much. It's not that I necessarily disagree with you.
I think some coaches tend to fall in the camp of doing no specific work at all - just training at certain paces which improve different physiological variables and then conjecture the athlete will run their best races accordingly. Other coaches are hyper specific doing sessions almost weekly at race pace and slowly building from very short intervals to longer intervals.
After years and years of using both models, where I stand now is somewhere in between. I think being very, very specific session oriented early on takes up a session where you could be instead working building more aerobic capacity or speed. Over time I believe training slower than race pace and faster than race offers more room for improvement than overemphasizing race pace in most cases.
In my mind, using race specific workouts are very much the icing on the cake. The correct amount at the right time is perfect.
With that being said - as your season goal race approaches a handful of specific sessions in the absence of racing allows athletes to learn the correct rhythm and see where they stand in reference to goals and expectations. My view for the marathon differs a bit, where running longer specific sessions around marathon pace are important to build muscular resilience for long efforts at marathon pace, which is very different than long, slow runs for most folks.
I think the biggest example of why I think support paces (faster and slower than race pace) lead to the biggest performance gains was the improvement I’ve seen in marathoners since incorporating fundamental tempo work in training. I first learned about this concept from Nate Jenkins and it truly has allowed many athletes I work with make huge breakthroughs.
Specific sessions do have their place, but I think for most races placing an emphasis on using workouts to get strong will allow for much stronger performances on fewer specific sessions.
