The problem I see with these sets,if I am reading it right ,is that it really doesn't train the anaerobic system,focusing rather on aerobic and CP systems.
I think looking at the resources, the author would say that the energy systems aren't really what you should be looking at.
From my perspective I don't think it's really possible to construct a set that works the cp and aerobic but but not anaerobic system. Over the course of the set the early repeats will work the cp system hard, then the anaerobic system through the middle repeats and the aerobic system will get tasked harder toward the end. Realizing of course that it is a sliding scale and they are all tasked on every repeat.
My concern actually would have to do with training mix and staleness. I can accept the point that many of us do a LOT of work at speeds other than intended race pace. And simply in terms of specificity it is good to question how much of that type of work we should do.
On the other hand, in the tri world we see push back from coaches who have tried this sort of thing and have said that while it works quickly, the gains are short lived. Not published mind you, just talk around the proverbial water cooler. That would be my concern as well.
However, I must say that on our squad we are working toward a fast 1,650 in April and we are doing sets pretty similar to what is suggested for the 1,500 in these two resources.
In the end, I think these types of sets are a good tool to have in the arsenal but the author is overstating their place and also under-representing how much of this type of work is already happening. If you read this, you might think that no one ever does race pace intervals, while it is pretty obvious just looking at published coaching books and other resources that this type of set is common in training - just maybe not to the extent that the author thinks it should be.
The problem I see with these sets,if I am reading it right ,is that it really doesn't train the anaerobic system,focusing rather on aerobic and CP systems.
I think looking at the resources, the author would say that the energy systems aren't really what you should be looking at.
From my perspective I don't think it's really possible to construct a set that works the cp and aerobic but but not anaerobic system. Over the course of the set the early repeats will work the cp system hard, then the anaerobic system through the middle repeats and the aerobic system will get tasked harder toward the end. Realizing of course that it is a sliding scale and they are all tasked on every repeat.
My concern actually would have to do with training mix and staleness. I can accept the point that many of us do a LOT of work at speeds other than intended race pace. And simply in terms of specificity it is good to question how much of that type of work we should do.
On the other hand, in the tri world we see push back from coaches who have tried this sort of thing and have said that while it works quickly, the gains are short lived. Not published mind you, just talk around the proverbial water cooler. That would be my concern as well.
However, I must say that on our squad we are working toward a fast 1,650 in April and we are doing sets pretty similar to what is suggested for the 1,500 in these two resources.
In the end, I think these types of sets are a good tool to have in the arsenal but the author is overstating their place and also under-representing how much of this type of work is already happening. If you read this, you might think that no one ever does race pace intervals, while it is pretty obvious just looking at published coaching books and other resources that this type of set is common in training - just maybe not to the extent that the author thinks it should be.
