Seb Coe’s Multi-Tier Training System: Part 1 – General Principles of

Periodisation
This is the first instalment of a six-part series which aims to summarise David
Martin & Peter Coe’s Multi-Tier Training System as described in Better Training for
Distance Runners.

What is periodisation?
Periodisation refers to the arrangement of specific training elements into a
unified plan with the aim of producing a single peak race performance at the end
of the season. Prior to the 1950s, the planning and sequencing of training sessions
were relatively crude; runners adopted common-sense training principles
involving a basic cycle featuring hard work (with stress and fatigue), then recovery
(with repair and regeneration), then an improvement in performance which leads
into another cycle all over again. In the 1950s, New Zealand coach Arthur Lydiard
pioneered the first major periodised training system which prescribed an
intentional separation of the training season (macrocycle) into distinct phases
(mesocycles) and outlining the order in which different training sessions are to be
performed.
Almost all periodised training plans feature a hierarchy of cycles:
 Macrocycle: A development period of considerable length directed toward
achievement of a peak of maximal fitness. For a marathoner, this may span 4 to 5
months. Track-oriented middle distance runners typically require a year, or a
‘season’.
 Mesocycles: Several mesocycles make up a macrocycle. This is a period of
anywhere from a few weeks to a few months, typically with a specific
developmental objective different from the mesocycle preceding and following it.
 Microcycle: Several microcycles make up a mesocycle. This is a period of a few
weeks whereby a meaningful and focused block of training can be completed.
Time trials or intermediate-level competitive events may be scheduled in
between microcycles to permit the assessment of developing fitness.

Why is it important to follow a periodised training plan?

The value of periodisation is that it permits long-term planning of an athlete’s
growth and development in a way that is methodical, logical, incremental and
documented. This is as opposed to simply selecting training sessions by whim.
It is also worth mentioning that elite athletes and coaches recognise that it is
impossible to maintain peak performance throughout the year. The most elite
marathoners will identify a maximum of 2 to 3 major events each year, and then
construct an individualised periodised “recipe” to synchronise the timing of
optimum fitness with the time of competition. In the authors’ words, “peaking at
the appropriate race is one of the most elusive quests in the art and science of
physical training”.

How should I exactly construct a periodised training plan?

This is the most searching question in the world of athletics. Since Lydiard,
coaches and exercise scientists throughout history have put forth numerous
hypotheses as to what constitutes the most optimal plan.
There are two dominant styles of periodisation: linear and non-linear. Lydiard’s
training plans adopt a linear approach; its four main training stimuli (aerobic,
strength, anaerobic, speed) are segregated respectively into four distinct phases
which follow each other in a certain order. This is different to a non-linear
approach which involves the integration of the various training stimuli throughout
the entire macrocycle but which the emphasis varies as time progresses.
In this article series, we will specifically focus on one such non-linear approach
called the Multi-Tier Training System. This was proposed by Dr David Martin
(Exercise Physiologist) and Peter Coe (Coach of Seb Coe) in the 1980s as outlined
in their famous classic ‘Better Training for Distance Runners’. Here, we will learn
how to precisely structure various training assignments into a unified periodised
training plan that (in the authors’ opinion) will best support an athlete’s
development.

Seb Coe’s Multi-Tier Training System: Part 2 – Overview of the Multi-

Tier Training System
This is the second instalment of a six-part series which aims to summarise David
Martin & Peter Coe’s Multi-Tier Training System as described in Better Training for
Distance Runners.
A summary of the ideas presented by Dr David Martin and Peter Coe in their
bestselling classic “Better Training For Distance Runners”.
Recall from the previous article that periodisation permits a balanced progression
of an appropriate mix of training elements in a time-bound manner. This allows
the athlete’s performance to peak at just the right time for an important race.
 There are two types of approaches, linear (such as Lydiard’s) and non-linear (such
as Martin and Coe’s Multi-Tier Training System).

But first, why not a linear approach to periodisation?

As briefly mentioned in the first article, a linear approach involves a macrocycle
consisting of several very distinct mesocycles to be undertaken in a certain order.
For example, Lydiard prescribed a large volume of solely longer distance running
in the first mesocycle (aerobic base phase), predominantly hill work in the second
mesocycle (strength phase), a concentrated series of high intensity speed sessions
in the third (anaerobic phase) and finally the tapering.

The authors highlight some major risks with this approach:

 A higher risk of injuries from overuse and maladaptation. This is due to the
prolonged time spent on one type of training assignment (e.g. hill work) before
suddenly transitioning to another type (e.g. speed work).
 Deconditioning of the fast-twitch (Type IIB) muscle fibres specifically during the
base phase. This occurs due to a lack of stimulation which is only possible via
speedwork. When progressing to the next phase, the sudden recruitment of such
deconditioned muscles can induce injury.

So what exactly is Martin and Coe’s Multi-Tier Training System?

In my opinion, the Multi-Tier Training System isn’t necessarily revolutionary, but
rather a logical refinement of what Lydiard introduced in the 1950s:
 It retains Lydiard’s view that each mesocycle (or tier) should have a specific and
different focus of development and that each tier should build on its predecessor.
They define this as multi-tier training.
 However, it further advocates the need for a “harmonious interdevelopment of
strength, speed, stamina and endurance all during the year” through “the
inclusion of training assignments at a variety of different paces over the year”,
and “never eliminating any of these entirely from the overall training plan”. The
explanation is simply that the musculoskeletal system needs time to adapt
gradually to changing stimuli. They define this as multi-pace training.
As the authors summarise, “multi-tier training continually exposes athletes to a
wide range of training stimuli [but] with varying emphasis” depending on the
specific mesocycle of concern. They establish that it is vital for the athlete to train
over a broad range of paces in order to achieve optimal performance for that
event. For example, a 1500m specialist is recommended to train at 800m, 1500m
and 5000m paces for peak performance.

To help illustrate this concept, the authors used the analogy of constructing a
multi-storey building:

There are six mesocycles (X1 to X6) which make up one macrocycle, each with their
own emphases (aerobic base, increasing intensity, consolidation, fine-tuning,
tapering). The order in which these mesocycles are to be completed starts from
the bottom (X1) and goes to the top (X6).
Within each mesocycle (aka ‘tier’ or ‘level’) there are seven domains (aka ‘rooms’)
representing broad categories that classify different training assignments. These
domains include aerobic conditioning, anaerobic conditioning, aerobic capacity
training, anaerobic capacity training, general mobility, circuits and weights, and
health maintenance.

The relative proportion of each domain (aka the size of each room) varies
depending on the floor. For example, the ‘aerobic conditioning’ room is largest on
floor X1, whereby the emphasis is on establishing an aerobic base.

Seb Coe’s Multi-Tier Training System: Part 3 – The Mesocycles of

Multi-Tier Training
This is the third instalment of a six-part series which aims to summarise David
Martin & Peter Coe’s Multi-Tier Training System as described in Better Training for
Distance Runners.

Recall from the previous article that the Multi-Tier Training System can
be likened to the construction of a building. As the authors write:
“During one macrocycle (or complete training period, typically
approximating one year) the building will be constructed (i.e. the
training will be completed). Each level of the building represents a
mesocycle (or tier), indicated by X. Thus, multi-tier training is a training
plan with several mesocycles, or tiers, each of which has a different
assigned goal for athletic development. The length of each mesocycle
may vary depending on event requirements, athlete fitness, and the
time available.”
In this article, we will delve into the specifics of each of the mesocycles
of the Multi-Tier Training System. As a refresher, the overall structure is
shown below:
Recovery mesocycle (X0) [recommended time 4 weeks]:
A restorative period of general physical activity (i.e. “active nonrunning
rest” such as swimming, cycling, sailing) whereby the athlete has
recovered from the previous macrocycle and is committed to beginning
a new one. The purpose is to maintain aerobic fitness while permitting
the rejuvenation of hunger to “train like a runner”.

Aerobic-dominant mesocycle (X1) [recommended time 12 weeks]

As the name suggests, the goal of this phase is to establish a substantial
aerobic base with good cardiovascular fitness. It is similar to Lydiard’s
aerobic base phase, but also includes some anaerobic work throughout
the 12 weeks.
 E.g.Concerning the X1 preparation of Keith Brantly, 1985 University
Games 10,000m Gold Medallist:
 Weeks 1-2: 80mi/wk, primarily aerobic conditioning, plus a single
weekly session of quick, short intervals
 Week 3: 49mi/wk, plus 10km road race
 Weeks 4-6: 80mi/wk
 Week 7: 46mi, plus 10km road race
 Weeks 8-12: slightly less aerobic conditioning, substituted by a weekly
session of long intervals (2-3km @ 5-10km race pace)

Increasing-intensity mesocycles (X2,X3) [recommended time 15 weeks]

Here, the emphasis is on faster aerobic work AND anerobic training.
Gradually reduce the volume of aerobic work to allow the total load to
increase in a manageable way. During these mesocycles, athletes are
more prone to maladaptation – take care in regulating training load to
ensure progress without fatigue.

Consolidation mesocycle (X4) [recommended time 6 weeks]

A mesocycle dedicated towards ‘catching-up’ or ’rounding out’ of
particular areas concerning an athlete’s performance. After carefully
assessing the athlete’s progress in each of the many kinds of training
modalities (whether it’s speed, stamina or endurance) in the previous
mesocycles, the athlete will undertake 1-2 consolidating microcycles of
additional training in the area of need.

Fine-tuning mesocycle (X5) [recommended time 3 weeks]

Here, the finishing touches are added. The construction of the building
(i.e. the development of the athlete) is almost complete. Efforts are
now directed towards honing particular skills e.g. a few additional
longer runs, interval sessions, or acceleration practice. Following this
mesocycle is a tapering period in preparation for competition.
 Competition mesocycle (X6) [any duration up to 12 weeks]
Training still continues throughout the competition phase, featuring
low-volume, moderate-to-high intensity runs. While a ‘true peak’ can
be held for only about 3 weeks with very little maintenance effort, the
authors write that such training will – to a fair extent – prolong the time
during which the athlete can remain successful competitively for the
rest of the season.

Other recommendations:
 Schedule benchmarks of progress during each mesocycle to verify that
the athlete is still on target for completing their goals. E.g. races, time
trials, laboratory physiological evaluations (blood chemistry profiling,
treadmill graded exercise tests).
 The athlete should not make elaborate attempts to actually peak for
these impending tests. He or she should not aim to elicit their absolute
best rested performance. It is expected that the performance should
indeed be slower than if complete recovery and the emotions
associated with a top-level competition were included. These tests are
simply timely indicators of an athlete’s progress, and nothing more.
Seb Coe’s Multi-Tier Training System: Part 4 – The Domains of Multi-
Tier Training
This is the fourth instalment of a six-part series which aims to summarise David
Martin & Peter Coe’s Multi-Tier Training System as described in Better Training for
Distance Runners.

In previous articles, we learnt that a macrocycle (aka ‘building’) consists

of six mesocycles (aka ‘tiers’ or ‘floors’). We now explore the seven
training domains (aka ‘rooms’) that exist within each mesocycle:
 Four involve various intensities of running: aerobic conditioning [1],
anerobic conditioning [2], aerobic capacity training [3] & anerobic
capacity training [4]. Collectively, they are referred to as ‘multipace
running’.
 Two include comprehensive conditioning: circuits/weights [5] & general
mobility [6].
 One involves various recuperative modalities and ongoing health care
delivery, termed as health maintenance [7]. This is analogous to a
maintenance service lift that is accessible from any floor.
(We will mostly focus on the first four domains in this article.)

The analogy of the rooms representing the seven domains are

illustrated in the figure below:

Any particular room (domain) may be larger or smaller depending on

the tier (mesocycle) of concern. (In the next article, we outline the
specific proportions of each domain as recommended by the authors).
The four multi-pace training domains provide different physiological
stimuli and subsequent adaptations that are necessary for a well-
rounded distance athlete:

1) Aerobic Conditioning (aka ‘base work’ or ‘conversational running’)

This comprises the bulk of a distance runner’s training, especially during
X1 to X3 mesocycles. It is characterised by large volumes of continuous,
longer-distance running. Recommended pace is 55-75% of VO 2 max
pace or 70-80% of maximum heart rate (to determine these
parameters, scroll to the bottom of this article).
 The goals are to improve cardiovascular performance, stimulate slow-
twitch muscle fibres, and promote tendon/ligamental adaptation. Note
that excessive aerobic conditioning may risk tendon or ligamental injury
because they are adapt to higher loads compared to muscles. Try not to
run on crowned road surfaces whereby the left and right foot strikes
are at slightly different elevations.

2) Anerobic Conditioning
This is typically characterised by 15-20min of medium-intensity steady
runs with walking recoveries between intervals. Tempo runs are a
prime example. The purpose is to run at (or slightly higher than) your
anerobic threshold pace – where blood lactic acid levels start to rise
more quickly. Having said that, your cardiovascular system should be
developed enough (from aerobic conditioning) such that it
prevents excessive lactic acid accumulation. As such there should only
be marginal anerobic accumulation, making this training load
reasonably well tolerated.
Run at 80% of VO2 max pace (or anywhere between 75-90%) or 80-90%
of max heart rate. Alternatively this approximates to your 15-21km race
pace. However, the best practical method for runners to detect their
anaerobic threshold pace is an awareness of increased breathing,
stopping of conversation, a shift of focus from simply passing time to
the actual work of running – a pace which they subjectively perceive as
‘comfortably hard’.

3) Aerobic Capacity Training

It is now appropriate to introduce challenges that are of vigorous (but
not maximal) intensity. This stimulates both slow and fast-twitch
muscle types, and increases oxidative and glycolytic enzymes.
Run at 90-100% of VO2 max pace, or 90-95% of max heart rate in men;
95-98% in women. This is similar to those found in racing events from
3km to 10km. Typical distances run include repetitions of anywhere
between 1-3km, with the entire working session being 6-8km. Ensure
adequate recovery (4-5 mins or the duration of one interval, i.e. 1xRT)
which can be either a jogging or walking recovery. These sessions can
be done on track or hills (however, the incline should not be very steep,
and make sure to reduce the pace to compensate for the ascent).
E.g. A 5-week mesocycle consists of one aerobic capacity workout each
week. The five sessions could be 2x3km, 3x2km, 4x1600m, 6x1km,
2x3km. The longer runs @ 10km RP, the shorter runs @ 3-5km RP. If
there is improvement, the 5th session should be more tolerable than
the 1st session (since they are identical, i.e. 2x3km). However, try not
to quicken the pace beyond 100% of VO 2 max pace. This increases the
anerobic component and does not fulfil the purpose of this training
domain. Instead, lengthen the distance of the running interval.

4) Anaerobic Capacity Training

Very intense training which aims to improve short-distance speed &
strength. The idea is to raise your blood lactate levels for a prolonged
duration throughout the entire session (even during recoveries) to
improve your body’s ability to neutralise the acid in the local muscles.
The middle distance events (800m, 1500m, 3000m) are all contested at
paces faster than 100% VO2 max pace. This training is also beneficial to
athletes competing in longer-distance events (5km-10km) should they
need to race a fellow competitor to the finish line.
Run at 100-130% of VO2 max pace, or 95% of maximal pace, or that
close to the maximal heart rate. Typical repetitions cover distances
between 200m-800m, with a total working distance of 2400m-4000m.
Recovery should be slow jogging for a duration of 2-3x of running time
(RT). A characteristic feature of a properly controlled session is that the
final rep should be manageable at a considerably faster pace than
previous reps. If the athlete is unable to do so, then they’re doing the
first part of the session too intensely. E.g. Seb Coe would run 28x200m
in 27-28s, and then 2x200m in 23-24s range (with 45s recovery).
 Here are some practical recommendations to determine your VO 2 max
pace & max heart rate:
1. VO2 max pace (the pace at which your muscles are maximally extracting
and using oxygen from your blood)
 A running watch or chest straps
 Treadmill testing – this may not be easily accessible
 A track time trial – the assumption is that 100% VO 2 max pace can be
maintained for no longer than 10 minutes.

1. Maximum heart rate

 A running watch or chest straps
 220 minus your age (there are variations of this equation, but we’ll stick
to this for simplicity)
Seb Coe’s Multi-Tier Training System: Part 5 – Getting the Right
Aerobic/Anaerobic Mix
This is the fifth instalment of a six-part series which is a summary of
David Martin & Peter Coe’s Multi-Tier Training System featured in their
bestselling classic Better Training for Distance Runners.

Last article we explored the various domains (rooms) that exist on each
mesocycle (floor) of the macrocycle (overall building). We’ll now discuss
the principles that should guide a sensible assignment of the
proportions of each domain (that is, how big or small each room should
be).
Here’s one suggested format for the distribution of the various training
modalities for middle (800m to 3k) and long (5k to marathon) distance
runners respectively:
 The authors highlight several caveats & assumptions to give this table
proper perspective:
1. A training unit is a specific assigned modality of work. Some workouts
may contain more than one unit (e.g. a 40min fartlek will feature both
aerobic and anerobic conditioning zones). This counts as two units of
training.
2. It assumes that a macrocycle lasts one year (52 weeks): 4 weeks of
recovery (X0), 33 weeks of work (X1 to X4), 3 weeks of fine-tuning (X5)
and 12 weeks of competition (X6). Depending on how frequently you
race during the year, you may need to shorten the
micro/meso/macrocycles.
3. Marathon runners have a somewhat unique necessity for specific
emphasis on high-volume aerobic conditioning each week. Thus, their
total training distance will often be higher than outlined above.
4. Training sessions that fit within a particular training zone for one
athlete may be more difficult or easier to tolerate for another athlete
such that they really belong in a different zone. E.g. 5x800m @ 2:16
with recovery times of 2:00, 1:50, 1:40, 1:30 and 1:20 may be aerobic
capacity training for an 800m runner, but in the zone of anaerobic
capacity training for a marathon runner.
5. Alternatively, these workloads may serve as anaerobic capacity training
for a runner early in a macrocycle but aerobic capacity training for that
same athlete after several months of fitness improvement.
6. If in doubt about optimal training intensity, overestimate your recovery
times and underestimate your running speeds to minimise the risks of
injury and overtraining.
You may also wonder how increasing bouts of anaerobic work can be
added each week to an already generous diet of aerobic long-distance
running! The authors acknowledge the need to take care in avoiding an
excessive diet of distance running due to risk of musculoskeletal injury.
They further argue that no measurable cardiorespiratory improvement
(measured in VO2 max) will occur beyond 96-145km/week of aerobic
conditioning in elite-level long-distance runners anyway.
The Aerobic vs. Anerobic Tug-Of-War
Generally, the shorter the race distance, the larger the proportion of
anerobic training needs to be included in the program. In the case of
Seb Coe, his aerobic/anerobic ratio was roughly 66%/33% which
enabled him to succeed in the middle distance events (800-1500m).
Total weekly aerobic distance running was kept to a minimum and
quality speed work was included. Details of his weekly anerobic/aerobic
breakdown at 16 & 18yrs of age can be found at the bottom of this
article.
A Word of Caution by the Authors
Often we yearn to mimic specific day-to-day training plans of other
athletes who have been successful; our reason being that if the training
brought success for that other athlete, then surely it must be good for
us as well. Studying what others have done can be useful, but
remember that such “A week in the training diary of…” articles are
often analysed out of context. For example, without a substantial
summary of previous training loads that have been endured to reach
the level of fitness that this athlete has developed over time, readers
cannot assess whether the training load reported matches what they
can manage. Instead, the authors recommend understanding
the general development of an elite athlete’s training strategy over
a longer period of time.
Seb Coe’s Multi-Tier Training System: Part 6 – Setting Equivalent Paces
for Different Race Distances
This is the sixth instalment of a six-part series which is a summary of
David Martin & Peter Coe’s Multi-Tier Training System featured in their
bestselling classic Better Training for Distance Runners.
It is well accepted that specialisation in a particular distance requires an
athlete to train at both faster and slower speeds in order to bring
proper consolidation of overall skill. (‘Multi-Pace Training’ is essentially
the fancy term coined by Martin & Coe to recognise this principle.) For
example, the training program for a 10000m specialist would likely
prescribe sessions involving repetitions at 5000m and half-marathon
race pace.
But on what basis should you determine these so-called equivalent
multiple-event paces for an athlete? The authors offer one such
mechanism that may serve as a useful starting point for determining
these speeds (at least initially). From there adjustments would of
course be made.
As you can see in the tables below, these equivalent race times are
calculated based on mathematical formulas. This is specific, simple and
objective, in contrast to simply ‘guestimating’ what we think our times
should be.
It is better to have three tables with slightly different formulas than one
general table simply to cater for individual and event specificity. The
grey shaded regions represent distances contested less frequently by
each group.
 As the authors explain:
 Use Table A if you’re a longer-distance specialist (e.g. 10km or 15km)
who might be interested in running marathons but who also actively
competes in the 5km event for speed development.
 Use Table B if you specialise in the 3km to 5km distances but also enjoy
racing the occasional 10km or the 1500m, and perhaps rarely in the
800m.
 Use Table C if you’re a middle distance runner (800m to 1500m) who
usually would not compete in distances over the 5km mark.

In Tables A, B & C, respectively, Y = the athlete’s 10000m, 5000m &

1500m best performance. To calculate the comparable times for longer
or shorter events, simply multiply Y by the indicated appropriate value.
For example, if you specialise in the 5000m and your PB is 15mins,
using Table B:
 Your ideal 10000m time would be 2.1 x 15mins = 31:30
 Your ideal 3000m time would be 0.58 x 15mins = 8:42, etc.