Why can't you run VO2 Max and race pace intervals year round?

You end up burned out like Jim Ryun, who dropped out of the Olympic Trials 800 meters (despite being the world record holder), the NCAA three mile championship (when his team needed a few more points to win the overall title), and the AAU mile; who retired at 23 in 1970; and whose performances were bizarrely inconsistent in 1971 and 1972. Bottom line: You peak at age 20 and go downhill from there.

physiologically why is this true?

I think it is actually very important to maintain the previous qualities one has built up. As the saying goes; "if you don't use it, you lose it". Why not maintain or even try to improve on aerobic capacity and economy at race pace in the so-called "base phase". These sessions don't have to be hard, but you should be touching on all aspects of training during all phases of training. An example for a 800/1500 runner in the base phase:

Mon: mileage

Tue: fartlek @ 5-10k effort

Wed: mileage

Thu: 200's or hills @ 800/1500 effort

Fri: mileage

Sat: 20-30min threshold run

Sun: long run

It has to do with blood pH...the lower you are, the better you can deal with lactic acid. However, you can only stay at your lowest pH for a short amount of time (your "peak")before you go back to normal.

Hopefully one of our resident physiologists will come on here and give a more scientific explanation.

you can,

Vigil used to have his runners do mile repeats at a park once a week, nearly every week of the year...according to the book "Running Tough"

The thing is you should have some weeks set aside for recovery...ie after a long season you need 2-3 weeks of easy running.

Then during a "base phase" the idea is to get yourself in shape by developing aerobic enzymes....enzymes that are destroyed when significant amounts of lactic acid build-up..

So, yes, you can and should do race pace work year around (I think)....but you can't be doing gutsy, full-on V02max repeats year around or you you will destroy those enzymes.

doing a lot of 400 repeats a goal 3k-5k pace with enough recovery (ie 1:30) should be fine. Doing repeat 1000s or miles at 8k-10k race pace should be fine. Doing strides of 150m at mile race pace is fine.

During a "base phase" you want to work on your lactate threshold more- because that is what is going to develop you aerobically to be a better runner in the long run. Rush in with V02max work before the LT work and you end up "peaking" too early and the "peak" doesn't last as long.

You just can't be going red-line in workouts every week of the year...just like you can't be in peak racing shape every week of the year. So do race-pace stuff, just don't cross LT effort early on while you are forming those all-important aerobic adaptations.

http://www.geocities.com/sagecanaday/index.html

There is a presumption with periodization that an athlete wants to run at a slightly higher level for a short period of time like an important championship race or qualifier.

But for many runners a peak performance is not necessary because they want to say fit all year long and race every weekend.

Such may frequently be the case with runners who are past setting personal bests but still have fun racing.

So you can run race pace intervals and at MAX year around as long as you don't try to sharpen. (run in oxygen debt repeatedly in the same workout.)

But if you want to go boldly where you have never raced before then you periodize and peak, suffer, and take a risk.

Tom

I would say that the problem is that you would stagnate. After a period of time there just would not be any improvement.

Also, in Vigil's book does it say they are VO2max? One can run mile repeats at different paces, different recoveries, etc and change the nature of the workout.

Living in the Past wrote:

You end up burned out like Jim Ryun, who dropped out of the Olympic Trials 800 meters (despite being the world record holder), the NCAA three mile championship (when his team needed a few more points to win the overall title), and the AAU mile; who retired at 23 in 1970; and whose performances were bizarrely inconsistent in 1971 and 1972. Bottom line: You peak at age 20 and go downhill from there.

Eh, no. He finished fourth in the 800 trials in '72, being rusty and having run an insanely fast third 200. We could point out more, but sense your intentions were good. Ryun might have suffered from endocrine or even adrenal burnout, might have had lingering problems from mono as some do or might just have been a head case.

[quote]luv2run wrote:

I would say that the problem is that you would stagnate. After a period of time there just would not be any improvement.

[quote]

You stagnate whenever you don't mix up your training. You don't improve much running 100 miles a week for 26 weeks during the 26 week. I haven't seen a ton of research on long term vo2 research. Long term heavy anaerobic work has been shown to have some negative effects. A good vo2 max workout shouldn't build the same LA levels.

Tinman (although he's not coaching world-class athletes he's a good coach and his programme works) recommends CV-reps all year round. CV stands for Critical Velocity and is between vVO2MAX and LT, thus improving both aspects. An estimation of CV-pace is to add 10 secs/km to your current 5k pace. Do something like 8x3min @ CV, with 1 to 1.30 min rec.

John Kellogg (from the book 'Run Strong') uses the term Isocapnic Buffering Zone and it seems to be very close to what Tinman call CV. He recommends sessions like 10-15x3min with 30 to 60 secs rest.

The reason why smart coaches do not advocate true VO2max paced workouts year round is a consensus that it only takes a few weeks to reach peak after this type of training. I think Tinman mentioned that V02max values will reach a plateau after 4-6 sessions. So why do more than nessicarily to reach your best? It's a mistake to think that only VO2max workouts will improve your VO2max. Mileage and slower quality work will do more for your VO2max but it takes time for the improvement to occur, therefore it makes sense to spend more time building mileage.

Some interesting facts about mileage and VO2max:

Deena Kastor:

70 MPW : 70,2 mls

90 MPW : 77,5 mls

100/110 MPW : 81,3 mls

Some or a big deal of improvement from VO2max workouts isn't actually improvements in VO2max. It's rather neuromuscular adaptions that makes the pace feel easier. Doing 5x1000m @ 3k-pace with 3 min rest is a waste of time if you're only looking for the neuromusclar adaption to race-pace. I would rather do a couple of strides to reap the same benefits.

Sorry for my english.

Not a sub four wrote:

Eh, no. He finished fourth in the 800 trials in '72, being rusty and having run an insanely fast third 200. We could point out more...

Eh, yes. Ryun dropped out of the 800 meters in the 1968 Olympic Trials.

Ryun overdid the anaerobic work and was overtrained very early on in his career. In 1969 as a college senior, he should have been completely indomitable and lowering his own world records. That would have been good for KU, since they would have beaten San Jose State that year for the NCAA outdoor title. But Ryun was burned out by the time he was a college senior, and he was showing signs of it as early as 1968. You have to put the blame on the coach, who coached Ryun every year except Ryun's senior year in high school.

Living in the Past wrote:

Not a sub four wrote:

Eh, no. He finished fourth in the 800 trials in '72, being rusty and having run an insanely fast third 200. We could point out more...

Eh, yes. Ryun dropped out of the 800 meters in the 1968 Olympic Trials.

Ryun overdid the anaerobic work and was overtrained very early on in his career. In 1969 as a college senior, he should have been completely indomitable and lowering his own world records. That would have been good for KU, since they would have beaten San Jose State that year for the NCAA outdoor title. But Ryun was burned out by the time he was a college senior, and he was showing signs of it as early as 1968. You have to put the blame on the coach, who coached Ryun every year except Ryun's senior year in high school.

What's wrong with being burned out if you set world records? Take a look at Frank Shorter, the guy basically ran 140 miles a week for 10 years running two speed workouts a week. Year round.

Alan

Runningart2004 wrote:

What's wrong with being burned out if you set world records? Alan

You don't break your own world records.

Shorter did higher mileage than Ryun, which gave him the aerobic base to run intervals twice a week. Ryun did far more anaerobic work than Shorter.

no one can compete with the druggies....sad.

Training is the process of breaking down your body and letting it rebuild. Stress-recover-adapt-repeat.

To improve you need to stress your body, repeated stress will force adaptation. Continuous stress without recovery cuts off the rebuild process, and thus the improvement process.

The whole purpose of periodization is to stress-adapt to a basic level (base training) setting you up to put the hammer down during your build phase. If you kept the build phase up you'd be continually tired, so you time it to end towards the last few weeks of a "season" or goal event. Your body starts rebuilding and consolidating it's gains, giving you improvement. You race, recover, then start the next base cycle from a higher platform. Continually pushing the envelope each cycle (hopefully).

If you try to keep it up all year round you'll end up doing what a few coaches call "medium training". You're not recovering, and you can't really push the envelope either. Since there's no envelope pushing, there's no improvement, and you stagnate. This isn't just a physical stagnation either, since most people will mentally stagnate as well without some goals and some organized structure to their training. Since anything past about 200 meters requires a good head as well as good legs, stagnation can be a double whammy.

You can. Lot's of people do it. To each his/her own.

bump.... How can these theories be applied to Masters runners, where at 45 it takes me FOREVER to recover from a hard workout?

Thanks.

meltdown wrote:

bump.... How can these theories be applied to Masters runners, where at 45 it takes me FOREVER to recover from a hard workout?

Thanks.

Your post is irrelevant. What thories are you talking about? The fact that you recover more slowly, or anything else due to advancing age, has nothing to do with the topic.

That's "theories", not "thories".