As written by Physiotherapist, Harry Carter.
What is run programming?
Run programming is an extremely important tool for runners of all capabilities. Here at the clinic, we will often address a variety of injuries that may be associated with possible errors in run programming, or a lack of specific run planning.
Run programming is a systematic process with the objective of improving a runner’s fitness in their event or race distance. When programmed appropriately, run programming may guide runners in progressively improving their tissue capacity whilst mitigating the risk of injury. The purpose of run programming is to successfully balance loading and recovery, with the aim to improve a runner’s overall fitness without compromising tissue integrity. That being said, each specific running program needs to be individualised and cater to a runner’s goals.
- Example 1: planning out a 20 week training block in lead up to a Melbourne Marathon – goal to complete within 4.5hrs
- Example 2: planning a 12 week training block over an AFL preseason – goal to improve speed.
- Example 3: planning a 16 week half marathon training period – goal to complete under 90min.
Further, it is extremely important to individually tailor running programs to the specific runner. Essentially, not one program fits all. But why? Because generic running programs do not account for factors such as:
- How often an individual can train.
- Previous running load.
- History of injuries.
- Specific running goals (ie: distance, pace, timeframes for events).
Key training principles to consider when run programming:
Overload:
Overload is the “process by which the neuromuscular system adapts to unaccustomed loads or stressors” (Rhea et al., 2002). Initially, the body will respond to a running stimulus with fatigue. However, when loading stops (i.e. immediately after a long run), there is a process of recovery and cellular adaptation. Throughout this process of overload, the body will adapt to new training loads and overcompensate in recovery. Essentially this means, the tissues will grow back bigger and stronger. It is these adaptations that result in overall improved aerobic fitness, increased tissue capacity and enhanced running economy (Rhea et al., 2002).
Reversibility:
Reversibility refers to the effect of losing tissue physical attributes when a runner stops training or substantially reduces their training load. Put simply, when we initially train, our tissues will get fitter and stronger. But, if we do not train for a period of time, we will lose part of these adaptations. This is important when considering the frequency of training, as too big or small of a gap between runs will hinder overall adaptation. There are a variety of contributing factors that may increase the rate at which reversibility may occur, including age and level of fitness.
- For example: a marathon runner hurts their knee and does not run for 3 months. They then complete a 5km run and find this difficult secondary to a decrease in their aerobic capacity and muscular endurance.
Progression:
Progression, or progressive overload, is the concept of periodically increasing levels of loading in response to tissue adaptation. When considering progression, it is important to understand how both overload and reversibility interact. This means that a runner can optimally balance tissue loading and recovery, and thus, improve overall fitness.
However, when planning progressive overload, it is vital to understand that a too quick spike in load will significantly increase the risk of injury. This is because, if we increase the stresses placed through our tissues and do not allow sufficient time for healing processes, the muscles are increasingly fatigued and more prone to acute or subacute strains.
Deload:
Deload is the intentional periodic reduction in training volume, allowing the body sufficient time for recovery to optimise tissue adaptations. When run programming, a deload period ensures that the stressed tissues have an opportunity to best recover and adapt, with the goal to then continue to progressively overload. A deload period in running may also act as a great way of mentally refreshing whilst training!
So how do we implement principles overload, reversibility and progression?
To effectively adopt these training principles, runner’s of all capabilities must look to appropriately plan a designated running block with a set goal in mind. For example, if planning to run a marathon, it may look like periodically increasing overall weekly distance and weekly long run, whilst also including components of deload timeframes.
Some factors of training that we need to recognise when planning a run or training block:
- Volume: total distance achieved in a single run or over a weekly timeframe.
- Frequency: how often someone is running per week (ie 5 times per week)
- Intensity: how hard someone is running, often recorded as a rating of perceived exertion (ie 7/10 difficulty) or as a measure of max heart rate (ie 70% of max heart rate).
Summary:
- Run programming is an effective tool in improving overall fitness without significantly compromising tissue integrity.
- By appropriately programming a running block, runners are able to optimally adopt training principles of progressive overload and reversibility.
- When considering run programming, it is important to understand what running goals an individual may have. This will significantly influence the way that a runner will train in regards to components of volume, frequency, intensity.
References:
Desai, P., Jungmalm, J., Börjesson, M., Karlsson, J., & Grau, S. (2023). Effectiveness of an 18‐week general strength and foam‐rolling intervention on running‐related injuries in recreational runners. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports. https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.14313
Karsten, B., Stevens, L., Colpus, M., Larumbe-Zabala, E., & Naclerio, F. (2016). The Effects of Sport-Specific Maximal Strength and Conditioning Training on Critical Velocity, Anaerobic Running Distance, and 5-km Race Performance. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 11(1), 80–85. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2014-0559
