Sprint Recovery - 600m vs. 300m

[spemma]

Question for you guys. I've been running 600m resets as prescribed in TBII, but I've also sprinkled in some 300m sprints for specific practice on the event I would be running on my PFT.

I put in max effort on both events, but I've found that I can recover quicker on the 600m sprint/run than I can on the 300m sprints. After about 3-4 minutes on the 600m, I feel pretty recovered, whereas it can be a full 5 minutes and I'm still a bit winded on the 300m sprints and my hammies are still a bit fatigued.

Any thoughts on why that might be? I can say for the 600m, I run max effort but then gas out at about the half way mark, and then trudge through the remaining half at a greatly reduced speed, but sucking wind like no tomorrow. For the 300m sprint, I run max effort the full way through.

Perhaps I'm putting in more max effort in the 300m than my perceived max effort on the 600m? Or is there a component of running the additional distance in the 600m after I gas out that actually helps with recovery?

[Tym87]

Maybe try walking it out for a lap or lightly jog a few more meters after the end of the 300.

[DocOctagon]

Apples and oranges. Resets are 600m to keep you pushing for a certain period of TIME with maximum output. If you read closely I believe its 1-2 minutes of activity at maximum effort.

300m sprints won't give you the same benefits. Resets aren't about the distance, they're meant to bring about cardiac adaptation that benefits ALL anaerobic activity...they're not meant to make you better at 600m specifically. The Reset increases cardiac contractile strength and lactate threshold tolerance. Doing that requires certain parameters, including maximal output for a minimal duration. 600m is a distance that guarantees that minimal duration. 300 is too short to cause the necessary changes to your heart/lactate system.

As to why you feel you recover more quickly doing 600 over 300, it really doesn't matter. You're trying to compare two types of training that bring about different results.

[spemma]

Maybe try walking it out for a lap or lightly jog a few more meters after the end of the 300.

yeah i was wondering if that would help. although usually on both i'm laying down on the ground at the completion lol.

[spemma]

Apples and oranges. Resets are 600m to keep you pushing for a certain period of TIME with maximum output. If you read closely I believe its 1-2 minutes of activity at maximum effort.

300m sprints won't give you the same benefits. Resets aren't about the distance, they're meant to bring about cardiac adaptation that benefits ALL anaerobic activity...they're not meant to make you better at 600m specifically. The Reset increases cardiac contractile strength and lactate threshold tolerance. Doing that requires certain parameters, including maximal output for a minimal duration. 600m is a distance that guarantees that minimal duration. 300 is too short to cause the necessary changes to your heart/lactate system.

As to why you feel you recover more quickly doing 600 over 300, it really doesn't matter. You're trying to compare two types of training that bring about different results.

okay, i hear you. so then i guess asked another way then....how do i improve my recovery on the 300m sprints? what HIC's would be best at doing so?

[J-Madd]

Apples and oranges. Resets are 600m to keep you pushing for a certain period of TIME with maximum output. If you read closely I believe its 1-2 minutes of activity at maximum effort.

300m sprints won't give you the same benefits. Resets aren't about the distance, they're meant to bring about cardiac adaptation that benefits ALL anaerobic activity...they're not meant to make you better at 600m specifically. The Reset increases cardiac contractile strength and lactate threshold tolerance. Doing that requires certain parameters, including maximal output for a minimal duration. 600m is a distance that guarantees that minimal duration. 300 is too short to cause the necessary changes to your heart/lactate system.

As to why you feel you recover more quickly doing 600 over 300, it really doesn't matter. You're trying to compare two types of training that bring about different results.

Doc this contribution is really helpful (as I've come to expect from your posts!). I've got a follow up question. I have some people I advise who are very slow, and very new to any kind of HIC. (That's not a criticism, it's just a fact.) 600m resets are definitely no-go. One rep will wipe them out for the day, and they will be running for about three minutes (or more). Instead, I've been having them do 300-400m or just setting a watch to 60-90 seconds are running at max effort for that duration. Does this seem like a reasonable solution?

[DocOctagon]

Apples and oranges. Resets are 600m to keep you pushing for a certain period of TIME with maximum output. If you read closely I believe its 1-2 minutes of activity at maximum effort.

300m sprints won't give you the same benefits. Resets aren't about the distance, they're meant to bring about cardiac adaptation that benefits ALL anaerobic activity...they're not meant to make you better at 600m specifically. The Reset increases cardiac contractile strength and lactate threshold tolerance. Doing that requires certain parameters, including maximal output for a minimal duration. 600m is a distance that guarantees that minimal duration. 300 is too short to cause the necessary changes to your heart/lactate system.

As to why you feel you recover more quickly doing 600 over 300, it really doesn't matter. You're trying to compare two types of training that bring about different results.

okay, i hear you. so then i guess asked another way then....how do i improve my recovery on the 300m sprints? what HIC's would be best at doing so?

Personally I would take a macro approach. Just get better overall in all facets of your cardio (particularly HIC) and it'll carry over. What you do in the short term isn't going to make much of a dent in anything. You're starting to slide into "tricks" over foundation. Specificity and slight adjustments have a much more significant impact in your training AFTER you build a strong foundation.

With that in mind; I would say the 200m repeats with restricted rest times is what you want for a little more specificity, which is Oxygen Debt 101 if I remember correctly. Don't have my TB2 in front of me. Same with SE Ladders, good for improving speed and recovery ability.

[DocOctagon]

Apples and oranges. Resets are 600m to keep you pushing for a certain period of TIME with maximum output. If you read closely I believe its 1-2 minutes of activity at maximum effort.

300m sprints won't give you the same benefits. Resets aren't about the distance, they're meant to bring about cardiac adaptation that benefits ALL anaerobic activity...they're not meant to make you better at 600m specifically. The Reset increases cardiac contractile strength and lactate threshold tolerance. Doing that requires certain parameters, including maximal output for a minimal duration. 600m is a distance that guarantees that minimal duration. 300 is too short to cause the necessary changes to your heart/lactate system.

As to why you feel you recover more quickly doing 600 over 300, it really doesn't matter. You're trying to compare two types of training that bring about different results.

Doc this contribution is really helpful (as I've come to expect from your posts!). I've got a follow up question. I have some people I advise who are very slow, and very new to any kind of HIC. (That's not a criticism, it's just a fact.) 600m resets are definitely no-go. One rep will wipe them out for the day, and they will be running for about three minutes (or more). Instead, I've been having them do 300-400m or just setting a watch to 60-90 seconds are running at max effort for that duration. Does this seem like a reasonable solution?

Thank you for the kind words! I learn an incredible amount from your work/posts, so it's nice to be able to reciprocate when the opportunity presents

I would have to check my copy of TB2, but I believe maximum output is required for either 60-120 seconds or 90-120 seconds. As long as those parameters are met I don't think the actual distance matters. 600 is a length that pretty much captures everyone in the sweet spot regardless of personal ability/individual variation.

Would your clients be able to handle an extra round or two with longer rest intervals...7-10 mins? 2-3 rounds with 5-10 mins of rest is still only half an hour or less.

[spemma]

Apples and oranges. Resets are 600m to keep you pushing for a certain period of TIME with maximum output. If you read closely I believe its 1-2 minutes of activity at maximum effort.

300m sprints won't give you the same benefits. Resets aren't about the distance, they're meant to bring about cardiac adaptation that benefits ALL anaerobic activity...they're not meant to make you better at 600m specifically. The Reset increases cardiac contractile strength and lactate threshold tolerance. Doing that requires certain parameters, including maximal output for a minimal duration. 600m is a distance that guarantees that minimal duration. 300 is too short to cause the necessary changes to your heart/lactate system.

As to why you feel you recover more quickly doing 600 over 300, it really doesn't matter. You're trying to compare two types of training that bring about different results.

okay, i hear you. so then i guess asked another way then....how do i improve my recovery on the 300m sprints? what HIC's would be best at doing so?

Personally I would take a macro approach. Just get better overall in all facets of your cardio (particularly HIC) and it'll carry over. What you do in the short term isn't going to make much of a dent in anything. You're starting to slide into "tricks" over foundation. Specificity and slight adjustments have a much more significant impact in your training AFTER you build a strong foundation.

With that in mind; I would say the 200m repeats with restricted rest times is what you want for a little more specificity, which is Oxygen Debt 101 if I remember correctly. Don't have my TB2 in front of me.

thanks, and i appreciate the suggestions.

it was just a curious result to me. i thought max effort 300m + an additional 300m of something loosely looking like running would result in more recovery time needed than 300m max effort on it's own. it's simple maths!

[DocOctagon]

thanks, and i appreciate the suggestions.

it was just a curious result to me. i thought max effort 300m + an additional 300m of something loosely looking like running would result in more recovery time needed than 300m max effort on it's own. it's simple maths!

Who knows, it could have been anything. A bad training day, a good training day, accumulated fatigue, more well-rested, more or less calories ---- anything.

Now if you conpared 300 & 600 sessions consistently over a period of 6 months, then your results could be taken a little more seriously. Comparing a couple 600s to a couple 300s in the span of a week or three is meaningless.