full recovery

As I was doing my 3 x 5min VO2max intervals this morning, I realized something a little odd about the way I do speedwork: I always use full recovery in between the hard phases, regardless of intensity, duration, or specific workout purpose. As this sounds like it could be counterproductive in some situations I'm going to rationalize my approach here.

For short fast intervals -- JD's "R" training -- I think full recovery is the only sensible choice despite the notorious 60 x 400 workout portrayed in Parker's Once A Runner. In JD's own words, "you recover until you feel you can perform the next run as well as you did the previous one... if mechanics suffer because of a cut in recovery time, the purpose of the session is lost." Anything less is a bad idea.

For medium-length VO2 intervals -- "I" training -- I again think full recovery makes the most sense as long as the hard phase is at least five minutes long. Well, I don't go less than 5:00 anymore (or more than 5:00 for that matter). JD again: "When running at proper I pace, your body takes about 2 minutes to reach the point where it's operating at maximum oxygen consumption (the purpose of the workout)." Furthermore, you will still get three quality minutes, i.e., five minutes minus the two minutes of build-up, "even if you completely recover between each of the 5-minute runs." So why make it more difficult?

Finally, for longer cruise intervals -- "T" training -- I agree that full recovery would be a mistake. But I don't do cruise intervals; I do continuous tempo runs. And this really is just a matter of personal preference. I've tried cruise intervals and found the recommended one minute recovery duration to be more maddening than helpful. In other words, I prefer no recovery over very short recovery.

So there it is: Full recovery for R and I, no recovery for T. Which leaves hills...