Aerobic system in the 800

yeah i know what i said wasn't technically right, I just don't know all the chemistry behind it so I didn't bother with it. The point I was trying to make though is that it's not the aerobic system that just happens to kick in at the end of an 800. Your only evidence is that most people go out hard so they are running slower at the end of an 800. I think you said in a previous post that it is the exact opposite for a 1500m, and you base that just on the fact that people close faster in a 1500m compared to the rest of the race. That makes no sense, in a 1500m racers should be using up their anaerobic capacity just the same as in an 800m, just the same as they should in any race if they want to run their fastest time. Same thing for a marathon, at the end you wanna be using up everything you got, which means going anaerobic and timing it perfectly so that when you cross the finish line you are depleted.

I was trying to point out that it is because of muscle fatigue, whatever causes muscle fatigue, that makes them slow down. Symmonds doesn't close faster than other people because he has a superior aerobic system, he does this because he goes out slower and so he is contributing slightly less to his muscle fatigue the first 600m. So he is able to pick it up the last 200m. Whether he wins or not obviously has to do with his timing: how much slower can he go the first lap and how much advantage does that give him in the second lap and what balance of those two things adds up to the fastest overall time.

800dude wrote:

As a somewhat elite 800 meter runner with not much of a biology background, this greatly interests me. Assuming I am adequately trained, how does one take the systems used during a race and apply it to their race strategy to maximize performance? I am uneducated in this aspect of racing, but eager to learn.

Try this article:

gonena wrote:

I think you said in a previous post that it is the exact opposite for a 1500m, and you base that just on the fact that people close faster in a 1500m compared to the rest of the race. That makes no sense, in a 1500m racers should be using up their anaerobic capacity just the same as in an 800m, just the same as they should in any race if they want to run their fastest time. Same thing for a marathon, at the end you wanna be using up everything you got, which means going anaerobic and timing it perfectly so that when you cross the finish line you are depleted.

Except that races 1500 and longer are predominately aerobic. You use anaerobic at the beginning, but then settle into aerobic, and anaerobic recharges, so you go anaerobic again at the end. The 800 is too short (and too fast) for that. There's a CP kick at the end of a 1500, but not at the end of an 800, because CP doesn't have time to recharge (unless you're running your 800 REALLY slow).

I would say that you need to look at two things: race strategy and training methods.In terms of race strategy, you want to run as even as possible. A rough kinetic energy calculation reveals that you need four times as much energy to go twice as fast. In an 800m race that is determined by fractions of a second, you want to keep your running velocity as even as possible.Now, your two main systems that help you run the 800m will be aerobic and anaerobic metabolism. But how do you know which to focus on? (I.e. which one needs more improvement).A simple (and very accurate) rule of thumb is to add 4 seconds to your best 400m time, multiply by two, and see how that compares to your best 800m. If it's 2 or more seconds off, then your aerobic system is weak and you're fatiguing too rapidly in your race.For example, I know a runner who can run 46.5 in the open 400m, but only 1:46 in the 800m. That means he's FIVE seconds off his predicted 800m potential at optimal training. Also, unsurprisingly, he struggles mightily at any distance greater than 800m. As another example, a few years ago I was doing 5000m training and had a best of 52.5 in the 400m and 1:53 in the 800m. This would suggest that I had maximized my aerobic conditioning for the 800m at my given 400m speed. Were I to target a faster time, I would focus more on speed, whereas the 46.5 runner I know would be better suited focusing on endurance.In terms of training, this would mean a greater emphasis on VO2max work (among other things).I hope this helps a bit.-MS3 Runner

800dude wrote:

As a somewhat elite 800 meter runner with not much of a biology background, this greatly interests me. Assuming I am adequately trained, how does one take the systems used during a race and apply it to their race strategy to maximize performance? I am uneducated in this aspect of racing, but eager to learn.

MS3 Runner wrote:

In terms of race strategy, you want to run as even as possible.

Disagree (although it is close to that). Basically all the fastest times in history are slight deceleration throughout the race. The most significant drop is from the first 200m to the second: take full advantage of your CP system in the first 200m. Last 600: run as even as possible, with the expectation that you might decelerate slightly and especially fall off near the end.

If the goal is 2:00, then think like this:

1) 28.5-29

2) ~30

3) ~30

4) ~30 (but probably slightly slower)

Los Soles wrote:

Umm...I don't think so. I think you're the one confusing matters here (although admittedly there is a lot of disagreement over the terms and over these specifics). Lactate is the anion of lactic acid: both are very much a part of the "whatever-you-want-to-call-it-system-that-is-anaerobic-and-involves-lactate/lactic-acid." It would be ridiculous to call that system "anaerobic ATP," because both ATP and CP are part of anaerobic fuel that come BEFORE lactate/lactic acid enter the picture in an 800.

There is no 'lactic' as the biochemist explained, it is an outdated concept.

ATP from glycolysis (from blood glucose) and from glyogenolysis (muscle glycogen) accompanies lactate production, so that ATP is used only a fraction of a second before some of the accompanying lactate is metabolize within that cell, depending on the intensity of exercize and the type of muscle cell.

lactate + H+ = lactic acid in solution. Lactate and H+ are both clearly present in the body in the 800 meters. While lactate/lactic acid does not play the role that much of the running community thinks it plays (which was ultimately Biochemist by education's point), it is not ridiculous to refer to the "lactic" system, and it definitely makes sense to emphasize "lactate" in this process.

So we have three systems:

1) CP

2) ???

3) aerobic

You don't like "lactate." You don't like "lactic." "Anaerobic" by itself doesn't make sense because CP is also anaerobic. So what the heck do you want to call it?

And finally, what is your point anyway??

I agree with what biochemist said. There is no such molecule in our bodies as lactic acid. Lactate and H+ are two separate issues, although there is obviously a correlation.

And the H+ accumulation or acidosis doesn't cause fatigue, it is a product of a rapidly depleted muscle cell's anaerobic use of glucose and glycogen.

CP in an 800 is only effective for the first few seconds, we get perhaps 40 or so meters worth of the stuff.

The systems are:

ANAEROBIC

1,CP

2,Glycogenolysis which is by far the biggest anaerobic contributer to energy production

3,Glycolysis about only one sixth of the ATP produced by glycogenolysis

4,Adenylate kinase reaction, ADP+ADP -> ATP+AMP This reaction supplies slightly less ATP than glycolysis.

AEROBIC

Mitochonrial Lactate oxidation, which is the true end point of Glycogenolysis/Glycolysis, not pyruvate as most of the textbooks state. This is the aerobic use of carbohydrates.

Mitochondrial fatty acid oxidation. The aerobic use of fats.

Protein breakdown into glucose for energy, and emergency/survival mechanism, during extreme endurance when the body is starved of carbohyrates and. Not reccomended, but the staple diet of anorexics, who effectively eat their own muscles.

And finally, what is my point anyway??

My point is that you can't rely on most of the textbook or internet information on aerobic and anaerobic metabolism because the people who write that sfuff just copy each others mistakes.

This is only really relevant to any discussion on training methods, when coaches athletes and physiologists start dictating how we should train based on such information, which is invariably misguided.

Wow. Talk about missing the forest for the trees. You have knowledge. You make no attempt to logically filter that knowledge. This is a forum for athletes and coaches and people into running. Scientific knowledge is useless here unless it contributes to the ability to understand training and/or racing. Glycogenolysis creates glucose which leads to...glycolysis. Do you distinguish between glycogenolysis and glycolysis in how you train and/or race? Do you have specific interval sessions for developing your adenylate kinase reactions? No?? Then cut the arrogant bs.

The systems for an 800 are still:

1) CP

2) ???

3) aerobic (from carbs--fat is irrelevant in an 800)

#2 is the set of reactions that are closely tied together and overlapping that are distinguished from CP and are taking place too rapidly for oxygen to keep up. Hence anaerobic, but anaerobic isn't unique because of CP. So...lactic/lactate/anaerobic lactic/anaerobic lactate/glycolysis/glycogenolysis/adenylate kinase. All of these terms are imperfect for accurately, completely, and distinctively describing this system. Lactate is a major player in these reactions and a clear marker for how the body is responding to the workload, despite the fact that it doesn't play the role many think it plays. I still think "lactate system" is as good a name as any for describing this non-CP anaerobic system.

Why so defensive?

I disagree with your analysis.

But you're right about one thing, who cares anyway?

None of this helps the training, so why don't you try to be a little less pretentious?

systems wrote:

who cares anyway? None of this helps the training

See, this is what I don't understand. My distinctions make a HUGE difference in training and racing. Yours don't.

Factoring in CP at the beginning? Matters A LOT

Understanding the crossover between anaerobic and aerobic? Matters A LOT

Distinguishing between glycogenolysis and glycolysis? Totally irrelevant

What I think matters a lot, is that coaches don't try to impress people with their knowledge of energy systems. Not just because they always get it wrong, but because it's really not important, it just makes more confusion.

What really matters is pace judgement in training and applying that to racing. A lot of learning of how it feels builds speed endurance and confidence.