Three Plus Two

I like theoretical aspects of sports training (maybe even more than practical ones, judging by my own achievements in GS). There is a big difference in training when you are 18 years old and can push yourself with little consideration to recovery and when you hit forty. Restoration becomes slower with age, and with these come dangers of overreaching, overtraining and getting injured. On injuries I can testify myself. During my university years I did gymnastics. Nothing serious, and the main goal was to get big pecs for the beach season. I could train every day, as long as I could eat before training! Sleep was not under any consideration and sprains and strains healed in a day or two.

Now it is different. Sleeping less has not only become more frequent, thanks to night shifts, I also tolerate it much worse. I also have less energy, so that training after getting home at seven in the evening after ten hour work day is problematic, both for physical and family reasons. There are also more commitments as you get older, and the mind is often occupied with various junk: mortgage, private school, work report, tax return and what not. Some of us also start getting chronic illnesses, the symptoms of which may interfere with training.

The point of these musings is that for various reasons the ability to train in sports declines as you get over forty. That’s why I am very interested in structuring and planning of training in the most efficient way, so that you get best results with least expenditure of energy and time.
Is it possible?

The first post of this blog told the tale of Professor Sergeev and his experiments in the seventies. His rowers spent less – much less, in fact – time training while achieving results better than groups which was coached in traditional ways. Closer to home is the methodology of Mike Mentzer and Stuart McRobert who, among others, recommended reducing training time in order to improve progress. Mike Mentzer mentions bodybuilders who benefited from cutting their training frequency to less than once a week!

One of the Russian bodybuilding sites displays the book by Vadim Protasenko, “Brawn! Or Supertraining without Misconceptions” where he digs deep into the physiology of muscle growth in order to explain why training less may be beneficial.

Last week I had to wait for my daughter at a shopping center. I was sitting in the book shop and browsing through books in the sports section when I came across the title “Runner’s World Run Less Run Faster…” Doing less for something always appeals to me, and I flipped through its pages. As it often happens, the essence of the book was explained in five or so pages and the rest was filled with details and praises. The cornerstone of the book is the program developed by the Furman Institute of Running and Scientific Training (http://www.furman.edu/first/fmtp.htm). As it follows from the title, the program is for runners, from 5K to full marathon. The ideas in the book were previously published in the Runner’s World magazine, in the August 2004 issue, which is available at the website (http://www.runnersworld.com/article/0,7120,s6-238-244--8257-6-1X2X3X4X5X6-7,00.html). The first chapter of the book is available online at http://images.rodale.com/wcpe/USRodaleStore/pdf/120791/159486649X_chap.pdf This chapter covers the history and basic methodology of the system, and instead of me rehashing it here those interested can enjoy the original. There are also several interesting articles on Furman Institute website. In this post I want to briefly cover this training plan and, of course, draw parallels with girevoy sport.

The system is called 3plus2 and consists of three key runs and two cross training sessions a week. Key runs are as follows:

Key run 1.
Speed run. This is the variation of interval running: 8x400m, 4x1200m, 6x800m and so on. Rest is defined more precisely in the tables on Furman Institute site.

Key run 2.
Tempo run. Distance from 3 to 10 miles.

Key run 3.
Long slow run, 10 to 20 miles.

The real key is in the pace of the runs.
Long run: 10K pace + 60-75 seconds/mile
Tempo runs: 10K pace + 0 to 35 seconds per mile, depending on the distance – the longer the run the more time is added.
Intervals: 10K pace – 35 to 60 seconds per mile, depending on the distance – the shorter the interval the more is subtracted. The tempo is different depending on the distance you train for, from 5K to marathon.

It is suggested that the runs are done on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays, with cross-training on Wednesdays and Fridays. Cross-training is anything but running: swimming, games and so on. This apparently introduces variety and prevents burnout.

What I like in this system is that it mixes different ways of training, from long purely endurance aimed runs to intervals. The pace of running – the intensity - is somewhat higher than in conventional templates, but the volume is lower. The book – and the article in the link above – contains testimonials from happy customers (not that it actually means anything, but still).

There is a temptation to extrapolate this program to GS. Long runs are similar to long timed sets with light bells, and intervals are - well, intervals. Middle distance runs may be equivalent to 5-7 minute heavy paced sets, maybe. It’s not the point though. The lesson I take from this program is that mixing various modalities can be useful and time efficient. At the very least this program may be useful to those of us who go for runs in addition to GS.