Why Runners Need a Multi-Pace Approach

Updated: 11 February 2026

Variety has long been described as the spice of life, but physiological analysis suggests it may also be one of the most effective ingredients in distance-running performance. By the time elite runners reach their early 30s, they often rely on training systems that have proven successful throughout their careers. However, when Keith Dowling was preparing for the 2002 Boston Marathon and analysing the training logs of other elite athletes, he began to recognise limitations in programs that heavily emphasised one physiological intensity.

After recording a strong performance at the Parkersburg Half Marathon (1:03:59), Dowling transitioned into a traditional marathon preparation phase focused primarily on threshold training in the final six weeks leading into the New York City Marathon. Despite being well-conditioned, the lack of training variety appeared to contribute to performance stagnation, resulting in a 2:19:09 finish.

Dowling later identified that earlier phases of his preparation, which incorporated repetitions, race-pace work, aerobic training and occasional shorter races, produced more consistent performance improvements. His experience reflects a principle now widely recognised in exercise physiology: adaptation occurs most effectively when multiple energy systems are stimulated across a training cycle rather than isolating a single metabolic intensity.

The training philosophy Dowling adopted is known by several terms, including multi-tier training, complex training and most commonly, multi-pace training (MPT). While the concept is not new, British coach Frank Horwill formally systematised it in the 1970s through his five-pace training model.

Horwill’s model, often referred to as the five-pace training system, was built around what became known as the “four-second rule.” Through observational analysis, Horwill noted that elite runners typically slowed by approximately four seconds per 400-metre lap when transitioning from one race distance to double that distance. From this observation, he proposed that athletes should regularly train not only at their goal race pace but also at two faster and two slower paces. This pacing approach allows runners to target multiple physiological systems, including neuromuscular coordination, VO₂ max, lactate threshold and aerobic endurance concurrently rather than isolating individual physiological systems into strict training blocks.

Peter Coe famously applied Horwill’s model while coaching his son Sebastian Coe, who won four Olympic medals and set 12 world records between 800 metres and the mile. Their success demonstrated that simultaneously developing speed and endurance capabilities could produce exceptional middle-distance performances.

Modern multi-pace approaches now extend beyond Horwill’s strict five-pace framework. Contemporary programs incorporate similar principles while adapting pacing distribution based on event distance, athlete profile and training phase.

Many discussions surrounding pacing variation inevitably reference New Zealand coaching pioneer Arthur Lydiard. Lydiard revolutionised endurance training by demonstrating the importance of high-volume aerobic conditioning as the foundation for performance. His periodised model emphasised base mileage, hill conditioning, anaerobic development and race-specific sharpening phases.

At the centre of Lydiard’s philosophy was the belief that aerobic conditioning underpins all distance running performance. High-volume mileage performed at controlled aerobic intensities to increase the body’s ability to deliver and utilise oxygen efficiently, forming the physiological platform required for higher-intensity training later in the season.

Although sometimes interpreted as strictly phase-based mileage, Lydiard’s writings reveal that he consistently incorporated speed elements throughout training cycles. His concepts of one-quarter effort, half effort and three-quarter effort workouts effectively introduced varied intensity distribution decades before the terminology of multi-pace training emerged.

Sports physiologist Greg McMillan has noted that Lydiard’s methodology already reflected multi-pace principles, with structured phases providing macro-level planning while varied pacing formed the micro-level training stimulus, stating, "I think the phase system creates the structure of the training cycle, while the multi-pace system provides the nuts and bolts of the workouts. Some paces will be emphasised more extensively in one phase than in others, but no pace is ever excluded." This integrated approach helps athletes maintain neuromuscular sharpness, reduce monotony and improve long-term adaptation.

American coach Joe Rubio has been a strong advocate for structured, multi-component training. Rubio identifies five essential elements present across successful distance running programs:

Each element targets a distinct physiological pathway, including aerobic capacity, lactate clearance, fuel efficiency, running economy and musculoskeletal resilience. Rubio’s framework aligns closely with contemporary evidence suggesting that optimal endurance development requires concurrent stimulation of multiple metabolic systems. Progressive tempo runs strengthen lactate clearance and metabolic efficiency, allowing runners to sustain faster speeds before fatigue accumulates. The weekly long run remains foundational, supporting mitochondrial density, fuel utilisation and cardiovascular durability. Race-specific sessions refine pacing control and biomechanical efficiency, while scheduled recovery allows adaptation to occur and reduces the likelihood of overtraining. Rubio emphasises that neglecting any one of these components can create performance limitations, reinforcing the importance of balanced training exposure.

More recently, the Norwegian method, popularised by coaches and athletes such as the Ingebrigtsen family, has further refined multi-pace concepts through highly structured lactate-guided training. This model often incorporates double threshold sessions, carefully monitored through blood lactate measurements to maintain intensities that maximise aerobic adaptation while limiting excessive fatigue. Research suggests that threshold training improves lactate transport capacity, enhances buffering systems and supports sustained race pace efficiency across distances ranging from 1500 metres to the marathon. Importantly, this system still incorporates faster interval work and neuromuscular speed development, reinforcing the multi-pace principle that no single training intensity can fully prepare an athlete for competition demands. The Norwegian approach highlights the increasing role of sports science in quantifying training load while preserving pacing diversity.

Australia has produced some of the most influential practitioners of balanced endurance training. Rob de Castella’s marathon success during the 1980s demonstrated the effectiveness of combining high-volume aerobic running with consistent quality sessions that targeted threshold and race-specific pacing. His training often emphasised durability and strength through sustained tempo efforts and long aerobic sessions, both essential elements of modern multi-pace programs.

Steve Moneghetti further refined these principles and remains one of Australia’s most respected distance running figures. A four-time Olympian and Commonwealth Games gold medallist, Moneghetti’s training philosophy emphasised consistency, aerobic strength and carefully layered intensity progression. Rather than relying solely on isolated high-intensity sessions, his programs integrated moderate-intensity aerobic runs, marathon-pace training and controlled speed development across training cycles.

A hallmark of his training was the well-known Mona Fartlek, a structured fartlek session alternating varied time-based efforts (commonly 2 x 90 seconds, 4 x 60 seconds, 4 x 30 seconds and 4 x 15 seconds with equal float recovery). This workout challenges multiple energy systems within a single session, improving aerobic capacity, speed endurance and running economy while maintaining a sustainable workload

Moneghetti frequently advocated for sustainable training that prioritised long-term progression and injury prevention. His approach mirrors current sports science findings showing that endurance athletes achieve optimal adaptation when approximately 70–80% of training volume occurs at low aerobic intensities, with remaining sessions distributed across threshold and higher-intensity speed work. This balanced intensity distribution is a defining feature of modern multi-pace training models.

Given Australia’s strong endurance running heritage, Moneghetti’s methodology continues to influence national coaching philosophies and recreational running programs alike.

A common misconception is that multi-pace training conflicts with aerobic base development. In practice, most multi-pace programs remain heavily aerobic, particularly during early preparation phases, where 'miles-in-legs' at a low intensity are crucial. Aerobic conditioning underpins nearly every physiological process relevant to distance running, including oxygen delivery, mitochondrial development, fuel efficiency and fatigue resistance. Without this foundation, runners often struggle to tolerate higher-intensity training or sustain performance over longer race distances.

Evidence suggests that incorporating short neuromuscular speed sessions during base training can improve running economy and muscular recruitment patterns without compromising aerobic development. McMillan has reported strong results when early training cycles emphasise two key paces: conversational aerobic running and very short, high-speed strides. Additional intensities are gradually introduced as training progresses, reducing injury risk and maintaining athlete engagement.

Ultimately, the base phase serves as the structural platform upon which all multi-pace training is built. When developed correctly, it allows runners to tolerate greater training loads, recover more efficiently and respond more positively to performance-focused sessions later in the training cycle. Rather than competing philosophies, aerobic base training and multi-pace exposure operate as complementary systems that together support optimal distance running performance.

The versatility of multi-pace training also allows runners to adapt more effectively to the unpredictable nature of racing. Changes in pace, tactical surges, terrain variation and environmental conditions all require athletes to transition smoothly between different effort levels. Regular exposure to varied intensities helps runners become more adaptable and resilient, improving their ability to respond to race dynamics while maintaining efficiency and composure under fatigue.

From a coaching perspective, multi-pace frameworks offer flexibility across different training stages, athlete experience levels and event specialisations. The same underlying principles can be adjusted to suit developing runners building foundational fitness, competitive athletes targeting performance gains or elite runners refining race-specific qualities. This adaptability makes multi-pace training applicable across a wide performance spectrum while still allowing programs to remain individualised and responsive to athlete needs.

This balanced approach reflects the complex demands of middle- and long-distance racing, where performance is rarely determined by one physiological factor alone.

Additionally, training variety can contribute to improved motivation and long-term engagement with the sport. Incorporating different session types, intensities and formats helps reduce monotony while maintaining structured progression. This variation not only supports physiological development but can also enhance psychological resilience, helping runners remain consistent and invested in their training over extended periods.

The following example demonstrates one possible multi-pace rotation. The schedule repeats itself every three weeks—a 21-day period allows for both adequate recuperation from workouts and the inclusion of a broad spectrum of paces. Days marked "recovery" imply anything from easy pace and distance to a day off, depending on an individual runner's needs.

While training philosophies continue to evolve, a consistent theme connects the methods of Lydiard, Horwill, Coe, Rubio, the Norwegian system and Australian greats like Rob de Castella and Steve Moneghetti: successful distance running requires exposure to multiple training intensities delivered in a structured and progressive manner.

Multi-pace training not only enhances physiological adaptation across energy systems but also promotes durability, motivation and long-term performance sustainability. For runners at every level, blending varied paces within a well-planned training cycle remains one of the most reliable strategies for reaching peak performance on race day.