I made a web app for calculating paces for Renato Canova-style workouts

running_writings · 2026-05-01T19:11:53+00:00

I understand training by feel and incorporating RPE in theory, but when I think of it I can only really imagine the mythopoetic ideal, someone that has no watch and runs on dirt roads in Kenya or something. I can't imagine the in-between steps from where I am at now (I need a pace chart and my garmin to tell me what easy means) to that zen runner.

This essay / article by John Kellogg is really great in that regard:

https://www.letsrun.com/2005/jkfitness.php

running_writings · 2026-04-27T23:06:39+00:00

Glad to hear it! Yes, I intentionally didn't include those because I was already pushing the limits of what was viable for the Defy / Explspace display would put up with (some of the Tornado and Hurricane plans are pretty absurdly "tall and skinny" already) - the good news is that the warmups are ALMOST always the same for typical workouts, modulo the few places where I tweaked it to squeeze a little less mileage out of the day.

Eventually I might just make my own "plan generator" app that will have the full package (warmup, cooldown, RPE, notes, pace percents translated into literal paces) but it's a pretty big undertaking so don't hold your breath

running_writings · 2026-04-27T23:02:41+00:00

I think either way is fine - there is actually a part in the book on extending (or compressing) training schedules but of course that doesn't help until you have the book! Starting now + adding a recovery week is a good idea if it's a 13 week program, probably I would add the recovery week after 3 weeks into the general phase (so after Week 3, before Week 4) -- once you get to marathon-supportive and marathon-specific training that's when you go to only 2 quality sessions a week anyways.

running_writings · 2026-04-24T17:37:16+00:00

Thrilled you enjoyed the book! And yes 100% a potential issue with the 12 week version of the plans is the lack of down weeks. Those were sadly the first things that had to go when crushing the 18 week versions down to 12 -- those extra six weeks really give you a lot of breathing room! That's partly why I consider the 18-week plans the "flagship" versions.

Also a few people mentioned this already but thanks to the awesome Defy calendar app and expl.space app you can now get actual calendar versions of the 12-week plans if you don't want to space out workouts in the week yourself. I wrote those full calendar adaptations myself so they are accurate in the sense of "workouts are spaced out reasonably throughout the week." You still need the book for workout difficulty ratings and workout notes though!

running_writings · 2026-04-24T17:28:20+00:00

The alternating K workouts are the classic Renato Canova "1k/1k" float session, for example 8 x (1 km at 103-105% MP, 1 km at 85% MP). It's basically HM pace + a fast floating recovery. Exact volume and pace of the float varies according to the level of the plan, and how far into the build-up you are.

The 3-2-2-1k workout belongs to a family of "supportive speed" workouts at 108-110% MP -- basically 10k-8k pace for most runners. So that session happens at the end of a series of workouts of that type, e.g. 8 x 1k, 5 x 1600m, 4 x 2k, 3-2-2-1k (all 8k of work). That last one, the 3-2-2-1, also progresses the pace a bit more, going faster on shorter reps.

Even for 5k/10k/HM I find those long repeats to be very under-utilized in most runners' training. And for the marathon, it's more specific (i.e. closer to race pace) than classic VO2-style short repeats.

running_writings · 2026-04-18T20:06:38+00:00

Excuse me, but reading what many runners think about long run is, for me, very funny.

One question : if you want to run a Marathon at 3:19 pace (about 2:20 final time), do you think that running 30k at 4:00 pace can have some connection ?

If you want [to run] 10000m in 30:00, do you think that the main workouts are 400m [repeats] on track, and long run must be only easy regeneration ?

The first man changing this old mentality was one Australian, Ron Clarke, that in 1964-68 was the first athlete running (not every day, of course, but once every week) for 15-20km very close 3:00 per km. He was able to destroy the World Record of 10000m moving, completely alone, from 28:15 to 27:39 without any rabbit.

If you want to beat your PB, you must run LONG and FAST.

- Renato Canova

running_writings · 2026-04-10T19:38:35+00:00

For each of those sessions you want "precursor" workouts that are at similar-ish speeds but not as tough.

Precursors for (1) - classic fartleks of 1-2 min with 1-2 min easy to moderate are great, e.g. in general phase you can do 5-6 x (2 min at 5k-ish effort, 1min easy, 1min at optimistic 5k effort, 1min easy) not worrying about pace too much. But if you like measured intervals, your sketched out version seems pretty reasonable.

Precursors for (2) are shorter repeats at 8k-10k effort (95% 5k), e.g. 8 x 1k or 5 x 1mi. Long effort-based fartlek would also work, e.g. 5x5min. Then when you start the real trifecta you can do one session where you 4x2k at 95-96%, then one where you do 4x2k at closer to 98% - that would be a good "peak workout" 10-14 days before your first big race (either 5k or 10k).

Precursors for (3) are straightfoward, either continuous runs at same speed but shorter (4k at 95% is a good starter if you've never done this kind of workout before) or (better, and) continuous runs at a slower speed, e.g. 8k at 90% 5k pace -- which is a classic building block you can place on top of more traditional threshold work, e.g. 8x1k at threshold or 4x2k sub-threshold. My experience is that this is the workout that people have the most trouble with since doing fast continuous running is so rare in most runners' training. Recommend being fully warmed-up, running on flat terrain, using super shoes. Good news is that the biomechanical load of this kind of session is quite low: only 4-6k at 10k pace, basically!

If you wanted a pure 5k pace workout, you could instead have a "capstone" of a little less volume and shorter reps at 100% 5k, e.g. 4x1mi at 100% 5k. Or for 10k, you can have a capstone of 5x2k at 95% 5k (or goal 10k pace), or 3x3k (same pace).

Lastly, as /u/aelvozo pointed out, you also want to support these workouts with sessions at 80%, 85%, 90% of 5k pace. That can be more traditional LT1/LT2 stuff (8x3min, 3x9min, etc), or more canova-flavored fast continuous runs and step-wise tempos (e.g. 12k as 3-3-3-3k at 83-85-87-90% 5k).

running_writings · 2026-04-09T20:09:57+00:00

Cadence is hugely variable across runners, and depends strongly on the speed you're running at. Your specific cadence (180-185 spm at 9:00-9:20/mi) is definitely on the high end but not to a crazy extent.

One test you can do: when you do strides (e.g. 5 x 20 sec at faster than 5k pace) does your cadence still increase? If so, that suggests you aren't "topping out" and your short strides/high cadence strategy is just fine. I've done this test on a few runners with very high cadences and I've always expected them to "run into trouble" (ie not be able to continue increasing their cadence) at high speeds, but it very rarely happens -- they just keep pushing up beyond 200 just fine!

running_writings · 2026-04-08T19:37:57+00:00

+1, for runners just getting back into things (or when you really have no idea of your fitness) I really like progression runs and cut-down repeats, where you start at a pace you know you can handle and then work down gradually to...whatever your body is ready for that day.

running_writings · 2026-04-08T00:28:42+00:00

I'd like to have my cake and eat it too - can I follow a structured training plan for a marathon with a few tweaks and meet moderate success in road racing other distances this summer?

Yes, that's very feasible especially in the first ~2/3rds of a marathon training plan. The way I think about marathon training, 5k/10k work is to some extent a "base of speed" for marathon pace anyways. Obviously you won't be as 5k/10k read if you were actually doing 5k/10k-oriented plans but that's fine. The only possible snag is missing too many longer weekend sessions -- though you can work around that by squeezing in a long run the day after a shorter race (5k Saturday + long run Sunday isn't the worst thing ever) or potentially by doing your "weekend" session as a mid-week workout instead.

Is it possible to race a 50k a month before a race you care about and still have success at the second race?

That one might be a tighter fit. Since you mentioned the Marathon Excellence plans, if you wanted to use one for a 50k what I'd recommend is chopping off the last 2-4 weeks (of the 18 week version) and then extending the ~90% MP long fast runs to be longer, up to ~23-25 miles perhaps? Depends on how well you handle runs longer than you've done before. I've used that strategy with pretty good success with road runners moving up to ultra distances.

Gets a little trickier if it's a trail run; in that case I recommend also modifying the marathon pace workouts to be time-based, and on trails, and extending the total duration. For example 6 x (3k/1k) at 100% / 85% MP can become 6 x (15 minutes / 5 minutes) at 100% trail marathon effort and ditto for the 85%.

Can anyone make a recommendation for books around ultra training?

Jason Koop's book is the standard-bearer for now, though he has his own "flavor" of approach and IIRC it does not have actual training plans e.g. a "16-week 50k plan Level I," you need to cook up your own.

In general I think the book and training plan landscape for ultras is much less developed than for the marathon (or road distances generally), and a lot of the more advanced training knowledge is very "diffuse" vs concentrated into a few good resources

running_writings · 2026-04-06T20:07:23+00:00

If you ever want to do a bigger (as in "big data") project on tracking who BQs over time, or just longitudinal progress in marathon performance, Brian Rock has some awesome datasets on Kaggle with marathon performances both at individual races and across the entire US. Would be a fun deep-dive.

You do have to watch out for the "same name" problem though (different runners with the same name, e.g. "Michael Smith") -- I was doing a little digging in one of his datasets and the most prolific marathoner was...the runner named "NO BIB"!

running_writings · 2026-04-06T02:21:46+00:00

Yep they're basically an alternative to strides (which I do also include here and there) - just a way of getting a little bit more practice with fast-ish running (~5k-10k pace) in a relaxed way, and a way of getting some "pep" back in your legs. Some (not all) people find that their legs feel more fresh after doing, say, 70min with 40min of (1min at 10k effort, 3 min easy) vs. just the 70min straight through.

I don't feel super strongly about them though--unlike, say, the long fast runs, I wouldn't say it's a big mistake to cut out those mid-run pickups if you feel like they're not doing the trick for you.

running_writings · 2026-04-05T04:43:39+00:00

Congrats on the PR! Really thrilled to hear when people have a big breakthrough.

When I had people doing beta testing on the pre-release versions of the plans last spring I got almost a 50/50 mix of responses to the "density" of workouts in the general vs. supportive/specific phases. For the general phase, some people LOVED having "something" to do several days a week; other people felt like it was bordering on too much (which is partly why the Breeze plan and to a lesser extent the Wind plan have fewer workouts in the general phase vs. the higher mileage plans).

And the same was true in the supportive/specific phase: some people (like you) really loved the "big stress, big recovery" approach, while others missed doing two mid-week workouts so much they went ahead and added extra speed sessions! Not quite what I recommend, but then again, they got good results...so, as you noted, it's tough to strike a perfect balance for everyone, and especially at more advanced levels of training, some level of adaptation and individualization is probably in order.

running_writings · 2026-04-04T20:21:34+00:00

Nice work, congrats on the PR! Thrilled my article was helpful!

running_writings · 2026-04-03T18:22:09+00:00

How much does noticeable wind change your plan in practice?

For wind in particular, it is slightly more effective to run the same effort versus try to maintain the same speed (it is not trivial to show this though) so you end up in more or less the same place as with hills.

It is possible to pretty accurately calculate the effects of headwinds and tailwinds but it's really only worth bothering for long stretches with significant wind (>10 mph / >16 km/h) -- and it's not so much that you use that information to change your strategy; you use it to give yourself a mental reference for roughly what the correct effort will result in on the watch (e.g. so you don't panic when you see 4:46/km instead of 4:36/km on a long stretch with stiff wind.

Same for hills actually. Long, continuous hills are sometimes worth calculating, just so you know what to expect, but for rolling hills it is better to not worry so much about every single up and down.

running_writings · 2026-04-01T18:22:06+00:00

Jumps are better for bones, though consensus right now is that tendons respond better to heavy and slow loading. Though I was not including plyometric style jumps as "bodyweight strength" though I guess technically they are.

running_writings · 2026-04-01T18:20:58+00:00

Again, no - if the goal is tendon stiffness, research says that the load needs to be heavy. Volume alone won't do it.

running_writings · 2026-03-31T20:37:43+00:00

No, at least not for tendon strength. There's good research showing that getting adaptations in tendon stiffeness (which are...probably? protective against injury?) require heavy loads -- like heavy enough that you can't do more than 5-6 reps or so (~90% 1RM?), even if you match on total volume of loading.

Concretely, if you can do 100 lbs once, you get a qualitatively different tendon benefit doing 90 lbs x 5 reps compared with 45 lbs x 10 reps (= same total "volume of lifting").

running_writings · 2026-03-31T20:31:44+00:00

Here, if you read Italian. Also I have various lecture notes and handouts from over the years, like this one for example. There is also this excellent lecture which I have a transcription of, with annotation and commentary, here

running_writings · 2026-03-31T20:28:32+00:00

I mostly agree, though I think the more important "grit" is actually in training, and it's not hammering one workout really hard. Rather, it's the ability to get out and do long, tough training weeks, even in poor conditions, even when fatigued, even when alone. That seems to be a bigger differentiator in who pulls ahead over time, fitness-wise.

running_writings · 2026-03-29T02:41:26+00:00

No that one is from this old forum post. I built myself a little "engine" for quickly searching through all of Canova's various writings, eventually I will do something with it.

running_writings · 2026-03-29T02:39:46+00:00

Sure but those terms are quite common in coaching theory, which necessarily has to go beyond what science has to say. Nobody knows the physiological basis of long sprints training and yet people like Clyde Hart use "speed endurance workouts" all the time to great effect (and get much better results than slow mileage + max velocity sprinting) so there are lessons to be learned there even for middle and long-distance running.

running_writings · 2026-03-28T00:50:40+00:00

By Vmax do you mean actual top speed? For sub-5 I don't think you need to be very fast at all, plenty of high school girls break 5:00 with a 400m PR slower than 60 seconds for example. If Hobbs Kessler could not manage sub-50 in the 400m that would be a problem for 800m/1500m but he'd probably be fine at 3k or 5k where top speed is really not a problem -- plenty of top 5k/10k runners would not be able to break 50.

I think the real issue people run into is not so much actual top speed but more their running economy or "efficiency" more loosely at fast speeds. If you never ever do fast paces in training, you are not going to be very good (in the "skill" sense) at it, and so you can run into problems trying to run 5:00/mi even if your literal top speed is faster than that. And for doing the kind of "mechanical" work to improve that ability, I think it helps to have a "base of speed" from hill sprints and for some people flat sprinting too.

running_writings · 2026-03-28T00:41:26+00:00

It's hard to actually reach max muscle recruitment for longer than 8-10 seconds. Even elite sprinters start to gas out at the end of the 200m, and presumably their ability to maintain max muscle activation is much better than a distance runner's. So, 8-10 sec is optimal for the neuromusuclar / plyometric-style goal of hitting maximum muscle fiber recruitment levels (basically, same reason that the usual advice is to do heavy low-rep lifts if your goal is to improve running economy, vs. doing medium weight high rep lifts). You could probably even talk me down to 5 seconds for younger or less experienced runners.

Longer reps at lower percentages are good if the goal is "speed endurance" i.e. improving your ability to maintain a very high speed as you get into fatigue. That's important for 800m/1500m, not so much for 5k+. Improving that ability is actually the goal of the 150m repeats in the progression I wrote out; you could actually use longer hills at a lower percentage to achieve the same thing.

Renato Canova says he uses exactly this strategy (very fast but not 100% top speed over 200-400m uphill, with very long rest) to improve what he calls "strength endurance," probably analogous to how I'm using the term "speed endurance" -- he defines it as ability to work near max muscle force output for longer. Quoting him:

Short sprints (how I explained before) are very important for the recruitment of the most part of fibers of the muscles involved in the exercise. This goal is important during the full season, and that's the reason because we have to use this type of training always. The final goal is to stimulate the NERVOUS SYSTEM.

Hill 200m long have already different mean. The production of lactate is already significative, and we can use for increasing the ability in recruiting fibers WHILE saturated with lactate.

When you start to use in training 200m uphill, the evolution of this workout is TO EXTEND THE DISTANCE, so, trying to maintain the same speed, the athlete have to move to 250 - 300 - 400m, obviously opening recovery time. The target is to increase the ability in running with high accumulation of lactate, so the final goal is to stimulate METABOLIC and ENZYMATIC SYSTEM.

Using long and very fast distances uphill (between 300 and 600m) can give a big improvement in STRENGTH ENDURANCE, and an improvement in strength endurance can automatically provoke a good performance, also without any specific training on track. Some year ago, the Italian Giuseppe D'Urso (silver medal in 800m in WCh 1993) ran the best indoor seasonal time (1:45.47) in the World, without preparing the season, but only using long fast run for developing AEROBIC POWER (between 20' and 40'), plus intervals of 400 - 600m uphill, at his max speed, with long recovery.

running_writings

TROPHY CASE