And if there is, why does running as close to the threshold but not going over it cause the threshold to increase? Why wouldn't VO2 Max runs do the same thing? Or runs that are slower than lactate threshold? It's not like your body knows you are training for a marathon or whatever. Why would it react specifically to one pace but not another? Seems fishy to me.
fasfasdfsdf wrote:
And if there is, why does running as close to the threshold but not going over it cause the threshold to increase? Why wouldn't VO2 Max runs do the same thing? Or runs that are slower than lactate threshold? It's not like your body knows you are training for a marathon or whatever. Why would it react specifically to one pace but not another? Seems fishy to me.
Homework, you have done not.
-- Yoda.
The body adapts to a stimulus. I guess science is not your strong point.
Sure but why is this one stimulus so important? There are thousands of chemical reactions that occur when running. Why focus on one?
Just focus on gas exchanges instead of lactate threshold.
Start from here:
Anything you do is a stimulus.
ffffff wrote:
Sure but why is this one stimulus so important? There are thousands of chemical reactions that occur when running. Why focus on one?
Because it's the most important one.
Exactly. Hydrogen ions will eventually build up enough to shut down muscle activity if they are not buffered. Lactate threshold runs stimulate the body to improve its buffering capabilities. This allows one to run faster for longer.
When you run faster, the body switches to using anaerobic systems. You are no longer training muscles to use their aerobic systems.
When you train at the threshold, you are training the body to gradually extend the time it can run at AT and/or training it to run slightly faster at AT.
When you train slower than AT, you still get a benefit. You're building muscle fibers, strengthening ligaments, building endurance, but you aren't optimizing your ability to run faster for a number of reasons... limited range of motion, mental training to hold an uncomfortable pace, etc.
Lots of inaccurate science in this thread.
You are almost always creating ATP from both aerobic and anaerobic energy pathways. There is no magical "switch". That's media pseudo-science because people can understand it better.
Lactate Threshold is one physiological marker that is relatively easy to measure so it gets a lot of hype like Vo2max before it.
Give me 100 runners who do nothing but LT. Give me 100 runners who do nothing but work at 5k pace. Have then race a 5k. Guess who wins the majority of the time?
The body will adapt specifically to an applied stress. Remember that and wrap your head around the big picture.
All training is important. The level of importance of a specific training type is based on an individual's needs analysis.
Alan
Runningart2004 wrote:
Lots of inaccurate science in this thread.
You are almost always creating ATP from both aerobic and anaerobic energy pathways. There is no magical "switch". That's media pseudo-science because people can understand it better.
Lactate Threshold is one physiological marker that is relatively easy to measure so it gets a lot of hype like Vo2max before it.
Give me 100 runners who do nothing but LT. Give me 100 runners who do nothing but work at 5k pace. Have then race a 5k. Guess who wins the majority of the time?
The body will adapt specifically to an applied stress. Remember that and wrap your head around the big picture.
All training is important. The level of importance of a specific training type is based on an individual's needs analysis.
Alan
The LT guys win. If you did nothing but 5km pace work you would have no continuous runs longer than your PR. The volume you could do at 5km pace even if broken up would be minuscule.
Yes, there is science behind this lactate threshold nonsense.Running over the threshold can cause it to increase.VO2max runs can cause it to increase.Runs slower than lactate threshold can cause it to increase.Science tells it's a question of stimulus/response. Your body will adapt to the stimulus you provide it. Fast, medium, and slow runs provide different kinds of stimulus. Faster pace generally means less volume, or longer recovery, again, impacting accumulated stimulus.
fasfasdfsdf wrote:
And if there is, why does running as close to the threshold but not going over it cause the threshold to increase? Why wouldn't VO2 Max runs do the same thing? Or runs that are slower than lactate threshold? It's not like your body knows you are training for a marathon or whatever. Why would it react specifically to one pace but not another? Seems fishy to me.
Pretty sure somebody else already wrote that.
fisky wrote:
When you run faster, the body switches to using anaerobic systems. You are no longer training muscles to use their aerobic systems.
When you train at the threshold, you are training the body to gradually extend the time it can run at AT and/or training it to run slightly faster at AT.
When you train slower than AT, you still get a benefit. You're building muscle fibers, strengthening ligaments, building endurance, but you aren't optimizing your ability to run faster for a number of reasons... limited range of motion, mental training to hold an uncomfortable pace, etc.
This is the folk wisdom, not the science behind it. Where is the scientific evidence for an "aerobic system"? I have a PhD in Biology and have never heard of such a system.
Why would (your body) react specifically to one pace but not another?
Bodies do show specific responses to running at specific speeds. But general conditioning can take place at almost any speed. The reason running within a few seconds per mile (pacewise) of the ventilatory threshold* is cost effective is because most physiological systems (respiration, cardiac output, processing of lactate, and dozens more systems which work together) are invoked at a moderately high level but relaxation is preserved so that a large amount of time can be accumulated working these energy systems.
Not only that, but the nervous system is being trained to orchestrate motor recruitment in a steady and repetitive fashion while all the aforementioned energy systems are experiencing this fairly high but steady state of demand. When the respiratory compensation point is exceeded and hyperventilation ensues, that's when the magic spell of steady effort is broken. Muscle pH decreases and soon the motor units are no longer being recruited in concert. Movements become less efficient.
While it is necessary at times to run at much higher effort levels to race well at faster speeds (basically at every distance from the half marathon down), training in a state of inefficiency can become counterproductive; hence, running at or near the ventilatory threshold (below the state of hyperventilation and struggling) is simply a cost-effective way of amassing the most quality training time. A lot of the adaptations created by running at this effort level could probably be accomplished by running very slowly all the time, too, but it would take much, much longer to get fit and there would be plenty of aspects of fitness that would remain untrained. And of course, it's important to have those slower days and not run at the ventilatory threshold all the time. Those systems do require recovery in order for the body to best adapt, and the impact stress at that pace is usually not repeatable day after day.
One rationale behind interval training follows the same concept - to have a sensible seasonal progression toward workouts which accumulate as much time as possible at fast race paces without sacrificing efficiency to the point of muscular or metabolic breakdown, thereby improving running economy (ability to use the least necessary energy) at those specific race speeds.
* Ventilatory threshold is more precisely defined and is a more reliable marker than lactate threshold, which is nigh impossible to pinpoint.
fisky wrote:
When you run faster, the body switches to using anaerobic systems. You are no longer training muscles to use their aerobic systems.
Not only is this false, it's the opposite of what really happens. When you run faster, you start burning fuel anaerobically, but you burn more fuel aerobically too. Low muscular pH accelerates gas exchange between muscle and blood.
Forget physiology. If your goal is performance, then "science" is not finding fizzyological ideas to justify sessions. "Science" would be keeping a diary, seeing what worked last season, tweaking one variable and seeing if it worked better.
Here is a concept for you far more powerful than any physiological interpretation
- train at race pace sometimes
- train a bit slower and longer than race pace sometimes
- train a bit faster and shorter than race pace sometimes
- recover properly after each hard session and before the next
Ideas like this will beat the pants of all the sciencey, fizzyology stuff.
Sweet Nell Fenwick wrote:
Why would (your body) react specifically to one pace but not another?Bodies do show specific responses to running at specific speeds. But general conditioning can take place at almost any speed. The reason running within a few seconds per mile (pacewise) of the ventilatory threshold* is cost effective is because most physiological systems (respiration, cardiac output, processing of lactate, and dozens more systems which work together) are invoked at a moderately high level but relaxation is preserved so that a large amount of time can be accumulated working these energy systems.
Not only that, but the nervous system is being trained to orchestrate motor recruitment in a steady and repetitive fashion while all the aforementioned energy systems are experiencing this fairly high but steady state of demand. When the respiratory compensation point is exceeded and hyperventilation ensues, that's when the magic spell of steady effort is broken. Muscle pH decreases and soon the motor units are no longer being recruited in concert. Movements become less efficient.
While it is necessary at times to run at much higher effort levels to race well at faster speeds (basically at every distance from the half marathon down), training in a state of inefficiency can become counterproductive; hence, running at or near the ventilatory threshold (below the state of hyperventilation and struggling) is simply a cost-effective way of amassing the most quality training time. A lot of the adaptations created by running at this effort level could probably be accomplished by running very slowly all the time, too, but it would take much, much longer to get fit and there would be plenty of aspects of fitness that would remain untrained. And of course, it's important to have those slower days and not run at the ventilatory threshold all the time. Those systems do require recovery in order for the body to best adapt, and the impact stress at that pace is usually not repeatable day after day.
One rationale behind interval training follows the same concept - to have a sensible seasonal progression toward workouts which accumulate as much time as possible at fast race paces without sacrificing efficiency to the point of muscular or metabolic breakdown, thereby improving running economy (ability to use the least necessary energy) at those specific race speeds.
* Ventilatory threshold is more precisely defined and is a more reliable marker than lactate threshold, which is nigh impossible to pinpoint.
Interesting stuff. Site your sources.
eurodonkey wrote:
Forget physiology. If your goal is performance, then "science" is not finding fizzyological ideas to justify sessions. "Science" would be keeping a diary, seeing what worked last season, tweaking one variable and seeing if it worked better.
Here is a concept for you far more powerful than any physiological interpretation
- train at race pace sometimes
- train a bit slower and longer than race pace sometimes
- train a bit faster and shorter than race pace sometimes
- recover properly after each hard session and before the next
Ideas like this will beat the pants of all the sciencey, fizzyology stuff.
This. Science explains why things work, but the work always comes first.
If you look at Lydiard's Time Trails, Tempo Runs, runs 'to the barn', and various other uptempo but not all out efforts you find a commonality.....running at a faster than normal pace for an extended time. The end result should point toward your key race or races.
By putting the science in front of your goal race requirements you are putting the cart in front of the horse. Develop your training plan only using science to confirm what you already know. That has always been the backbone of Exercise Physiology....confirming what coaches have already been practicing
Alan
Cade Flatt with yet another DNF, this time in the SEC Championships
Caitlin Clark thinks she can beat Eagles draft pick Cooper Dejean in 1 on 1
What is the threshold that separates a "hobbyjogger" from a "sub-elite" runner?
NCAA D1 Conference Outdoor Championships Live Results and Discussion Thread
Do "running influencers" harm the competitive nature of the sport?