CoachBeisel

There's a reason why very few college and professional running coaches talk about zone 2 or HIIT. In those circles, I almost never hear those phrases. Not because easy running isn't important (it is!), or that we shouldn't do intense work (we should). It's that most coaches in the actual arena understand the nuance is more important than the very rough categorization. Meaning they understand that there's nothing magical about zone 2. That sometimes your regular runs are going to be much slower (to recover during intense periods) and sometimes a bit faster (to top off aerobic adaptations during based periods). They understand that doing 400s at mile pace is a different workout than 200s at 800 pace or 800s at 5k pace. They understand that the workouts impact changes if they do it with short recovery or long, and so many variables. They realize that you can make 200m repeats into a high end aerobic or threshold workout and into a tolerance or speed endurance workout just based on how you manipulate speed, recovery, sets, etc. In the social media world, we simplify. That's fine to a degree. But in that simplification, the important nuance is lost. It's why you see people online screaming Zone 2 doesn't work! HIIT gives you everything. And in the real world, in the actual arena, no one is screaming that you shouldn't do a type of workout or intensity. We're arguing over the nuance of how much, when, and how it's periodized. It's a rule of thumb, but if someone is telling you a broad range of exercise intenisities or zones is NOT helpful, you should ignore them. It sounds harsh. But it tells you that they haven't spent the time in the arena understanding the nuance of workouts. It's why you almost never hear these statements from someone coaching real people in the day to day.