Paul passed on an excellent link after my post on CrossFit. It’s a post I have read previously, and in fact I read everything Steve Magness writes. I bring this post to your attention because not only is Steve pursuing a Masters in Exercise Science, is a running coach, and is someone who breaks down an athletic endeavor into the most simple of components. but he uses science to make his points. And I think it provides some interesting reading related to my post today. Hence, before delving into today’s post, I urge you to read Steve’s take on CrossFit here.
For those whose eyes glazed over, the key point (for my purposes today) of Steve’s post is adding improvement in the short-term when introducing intensity to a workout. And this should make sense to most runners. You build a base and then introduce speed work. After five or six weeks, you notice that overall you are faster and at certain distances you have much more of a kick at the end of a run. It’s all good. At least we think it is.
Now, I am not an exercise scientist and I do not stay at a Holiday Inn Express, but I do read plenty of research. Also I am not here today to bash a particular workout or training methodology. My purpose is to help runners understand the limits of change and to be wary of the next “best” thing.
A Change Will Do You Good?
It happens all the time. An athlete changes coaches or adopts a new training program and suddenly they are better than ever. But should we really be surprised? After a period of time our body adapts to a training routine and improvement falls to a crawl. It’s the old adage about diminishing returns. Our performance levels off and the next thing you know we think a new pair of shoes will solve the problem. The reality is it could just be a minor adjustment to your workout.
But…if you give me six weeks! That’s a guarantee touted by many an exercise program that tries to sell its “solution” on late night TV. Six weeks is key because typically during that period most improvement is realized because it takes that long for the body to begin adapting to a new routine. As Magness noted, “They take recreational runners who just do easy/base stuff and then throw 6 weeks of training hard on them and they improve.”
But in the long term, is the new routine challenging the body in the way it needs to be to continue to improve performance? That’s a good question. In some cases, yes – in other cases, maybe not so much. It likely depends on the person, the sport, and the goals.
Runners change coaches all the time looking for that last ounce of speed. And success may not necessarily be predicated by the choice of coach, but in fate matching the right runner with the right coach. Exercise, like motivation, can be a personal thing, and our investment can be based as much on the source (the coach) as the methodology (workout routine).
So how do we continually challenge ourselves so we can see improvements in our performance. Well, every six weeks we could try a new training routine. Or we can understand, as Magness puts it, “Training isn’t a random collection of hard exercises or workouts. There has to be some sort of logical sequence and progression. If there’s not, then you can expect to get exactly what you trained for, random results.” Granted, Magness was taking about CrossFit, but I believe this applies to training in general.
For runners, there is an interplay between building volume (mileage) and high intensity workouts (speed work). Those two components support each other for performance gains. Proper weight training and core workouts support them both by strengthening the structure of the body, enabling you to do more and reducing the chance of injury.
What Does This Mean?
What this means is someone should not blindly follow a workout because of the hype of a success story or two. I could do a thousand squats in the shower every day for six months and then go run a marathon. Just because I finished doesn’t mean everyone should start doing squats in the shower. Especially if you want to qualify for Boston.
Therefore, it’s important to start with a goal and understand how the components of volume, intensity and strength fit the goal and balance them accordingly. Your balance has to be in line with your goals and your expectations.
There is nothing wrong with looking at alternative training plans (just like there is nothing wrong with looking for a new coach), but the key is to look closely and understand what happens in the long term, not just the short term.
My Mistake
So with respect to a training plan, it is obvious balance is the key. This past training season my focus was more on volume than intensity. And this showed up not only on race days, but also certain training days, with respect to my performance. If I had focused on a better balance, I would have had better results.
At the conclusion of this season (Gasparilla, the first weekend of March) my aim is to take a little time off to let some nagging injuries heal and then focus on strength training with running being secondary. I will then shift to volume running to build up a mileage base, while moving into a weight training maintenance mode. Then, I will introduce intensity over a number of weeks before backing down and balancing the three components to be in line with my goals.


