Is it possible to maintain the benefits from running at altitude?

yes.

I think the RBC benefit peaks a few weeks after you return to altitude. I think the only way to extend the RBC peak is to altitude tent. But at only 2 weeks at alt based on what I've read the benefit will be real but muted. I'm far from expert just a guy who to altitude for 2weeks and read up a bit.

Mark. wrote:

yes.

How?

Akt wrote:

I think the RBC benefit peaks a few weeks after you return to altitude. I think the only way to extend the RBC peak is to altitude tent. But at only 2 weeks at alt based on what I've read the benefit will be real but muted. I'm far from expert just a guy who to altitude for 2weeks and read up a bit.

So the only way is with an altitude tent? Those are expensive. ?

LoneStarXC wrote:

Mark. wrote:

yes.

How?

Mexican pharmacies

Lydiard Cerutty wrote:

LoneStarXC wrote:

How?

Mexican pharmacies

?

LoneStarXC wrote:

I’m back in Texas after spending almost two weeks in Breckenridge. My run today went amazingly well, despite the heat. So I was wondering if there’s someway to maintain the benefits of having trained at altitude? Because I know that usually you readjust after a few days at close to sea level.

Sorry but you are unlikely to get the bennefits of altitude in just 2 weeks.

another runner wrote:

LoneStarXC wrote:

I’m back in Texas after spending almost two weeks in Breckenridge. My run today went amazingly well, despite the heat. So I was wondering if there’s someway to maintain the benefits of having trained at altitude? Because I know that usually you readjust after a few days at close to sea level.

Sorry but you are unlikely to get the benefits of altitude in just 2 weeks.

This.

And other than living at altitude... the answer is no.

not really. I'd see if I can get in a race at a cooler location in the next couple weeks. If you're in Texas that might not be possible. The good news is 2 weeks wasn't really enough time to see a boost from training at altitude anyways.

In typical LRC fashion the above posters don't know what they are talking about. EPO levels rise for the first three days at altitude before a leveling off at 3 weeks. RBCs can live for up to 120 days. You will absolutely get a benefit from simply being at high altitude for 2 weeks. Most people find it difficult to train effectively while at altitude the first three weeks through. In particular most people are overly tired the first 10 days.

As far as maintaining...

- return to altitude

- altitude tent

- epo

The idea of sleeping in an altitude tent and then going about your normal daily activities is pure nonsense. You're better off saving your money then investing in an overpriced tent. Remember, you're only in the tent for as many hours as you are sleeping. Once you are outside the tent you are at the elevation of wherever you live. So if you are sleeping for 8 hours the remaining 16 hours will be at your home altitude. If you want to get the training affect of altitude you need to move to a higher elevation and live there.

Make sure to read the posts from jtupper (Jack Daniels).

"It is often fair to assume that being at altitude raised your fitness to a new level and no reason to believe it will leave you as long as you keep training at SL. Runners are often led to believe thay have just so long at SL to run well before the bottom falls out so they believe in that and it becomes self-fulfilling."

At some point the benefits disappear. Once you return to sea level, your body starts to adapt to that environment.

Sesamoiditis wrote:

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=140248

Make sure to read the posts from jtupper (Jack Daniels).

"It is often fair to assume that being at altitude raised your fitness to a new level and no reason to believe it will leave you as long as you keep training at SL. Runners are often led to believe thay have just so long at SL to run well before the bottom falls out so they believe in that and it becomes self-fulfilling."

There are plenty of reasons to believe that the effects disappear.

Luv2Run wrote:

At some point the benefits disappear. Once you return to sea level, your body starts to adapt to that environment.

Great point - I don't claim to have all the answers, but it is interesting to note at least from runners in the USA, I can't find any examples of where altitude training had huge benefits - in fact the opposite could be true - my favorite example is Pat Porter vrs Craig Virgin - both of very close ability - Porter did most of his training at altitude yet Virgin did most of his training at 1000' (basically sea level) (Miami on a hot day can register a DENSITY altitude of 1500 feet) Although Porter was US XC champion 8 years in a row, he basicallyhadt one speed over 5K and that was 4:40 per mile - Virgin on the other hand ran 10 miles in 46:40 exactly 4:40 per mile but on the roads - so the one area you thought Porter would crush Virgin because of altitude training would perhaps be the track 10,000 - well Virgin ran 27:29 10,000 on the track and Porter never broke 28 on the track (but he did break 28 on the roads) - in Porter's 2 Olympics he finished way below of what he should have finished at least on paper - both times mid pack at just below 4:40 pace - because of Virgin's 27:29 I give the "victory" to Virgin who trained at 1000 feet in Illinois - then the other example is Rodgers vrs Shorter - 2 evenly matched guys in terms of ability and sometimes Shorter beat Rodgers and sometimes the other way around - Shorter trained at 5500 feet and Rodgers at basically sea level in Boston. And fast foward to 6 days ago Jorgenson who's been training at Mam Lakes high elevation, really didn't place all that great relatively speaking at Peachtree- If altitude training was really that effective, she should have won the race - then look at Sage, doing 4:50 mile repeats at altitude yet in Copenhagen fell way short of his capabilities on paper. It seems it definitely doesn't hurt you (altitude training) but don't think it turns you into "super runner" either.