Mixing aerobic and anaerobic trainign in all sessions? Noob question

N00bRun wrote:

Hey all,

Noob question here.

I was reading lydiard and read that a balance between aerobic and anaerobic is the best.

I am doing around 11k a day i start aerobic then have like 2 or 3 boost of anaerobic effor sprints the first 3k then aerobic 4th 5th k then aerobic till 10 then anaerobic the last k.

What is wrong with this approach? why not mix aerobic and anaerobic effort?

I run a lot at hills btw if that makes any difference.

Thank you!

First off - define what you mean by anaerobic. Do you mean above your Maximum Aerobic Threshold (180-Age or 80% of 220-Age depending on what formula you use), or do you mean all-out red line anaerobic?

If you're referring to the latter (above MATh), the answer is definitely "NO". This is referred to as the black hole of endurance training. You're neither strengthening (red line activities), and the fact that you're above MATh means you're not improving your body's ability to metabolize fat for energy.

If you're referring to the latter (sprinting or hill repeats), I'd do those no more than once a week and only when you're feeling good. CERTAINLY not on consecutive days as you need time to recover and heal. You wouldn't do bench presses 2 days in a row would you? For example, I just did sprints yesterday (6 x all out speed for ~15 seconds), and my quads are aching today. If you're truly going all out it will feel like a heavy weight lifting session.

My 2 cents, but I have been at this a long time and have tried most every approach.

Thank you very much good sir!

So its much preferable to have entire aerobic sessions, then entire anaeobic (like sprints) speed sessions if I understood correctly.

Isn't 15 seconds all-out on the borderline between alactic(analactic) and anaerobic?

sounds a bit crazy. i don't think you're taking the right approach.

bruh wrote:

sounds a bit crazy. i don't think you're taking the right approach.

I can only tell you what works for me. Almost everything I do is based on the research of Dr. Phil Maffetone.

Back to the OP - to clarify: on my sprint days there's a couple of miles of warmup before the sprints and about a minute of walking / slow jogging in between the sprints. This is followed by a couple of miles cool down.

What Lydiard meant was: don't get out of breath. If you stay below this level you get more from your training. It's ok to be slightly out of breath after your finishing effort.

duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh wrote:So its much preferable to have entire aerobic sessions, then entire anaeobic (like sprints) speed sessions if I understood correctly.

Yes, more is not better. Your aerobic workouts should have planned paces too. Each workout should be very specific, very purposeful. That includes recovery.

Um, ever heard of fartlek?

But fartlek is is supposed to be all aerobic.. right? right?? O.o

pops for pope wrote:

Um, ever heard of fartlek?

Using terms like aerobic and anaerobic are misleading.

At the end of every run you could do a few 50s or 100s at an all-out effort and they would most definitely be anaerobic but there is nothing wrong with this.

Even if you run on/off 1ks those on 1ks are not likely to be more than 50% anaerobic in terms of energy system usage.

Alan

Pops182 wrote:

But fartlek is is supposed to be all aerobic.. right? right?? O.o

pops for pope wrote:

Um, ever heard of fartlek?

No.

10 x 15 second hill sprints twice a week.

Also incorporate 1 minute on 1 minute off at the middle-end of runs, maybe twice a week.

150m accelerations on the track as well (50m 85%, 50m 90%, 50m, 95%), maybe once a week.

Runningart2004 wrote:

Even if you run on/off 1ks those on 1ks are not likely to be more than 50% anaerobic in terms of energy system usage.

Alan

Unless you run those 1000s faster than 800 race pace.

Can anyone explain what is "the black hole of endurance training" and how mixing aerobic and anaerobic or fartlek is not that?

Huh?

Lydiard said something about a black hole where very little imrprovement is made when sessions are not fully aerobic nor fully anaerobic..

realistic wrote:

Huh?

There is no black hole.

There is a specific adaptation to an applied stimulus. There is progressive overload. There is skill training. All training has the possibility of being beneficial if done correctly at the right time.

Alan

Runningart2004 wrote:

There is no black hole.

There is a specific adaptation to an applied stimulus. There is progressive overload. There is skill training. All training has the possibility of being beneficial if done correctly at the right time.

Alan

I could quote a bunch of articles. Here's the 1st that came up:

I just tried it. Google "Black Hole Training Zone". Let me know when you get done reading.