New Study Says Weight Training Makes Us Faster (True or Not??)

jtupper wrote:

This study being referred to did show a 5% improvement in running economy among the group they studied. .

It also said that "time to exhaustion at maximal aerobic speed (MAS)" was increased 21%, which sounds pretty impressive. But I need to ask: what does that mean exactly, and how long is the typical amount of time that a world class runner can run at MAS ? How about a 17 min 5k runner?

i went from running absolute shit (over 15 for a 5k) to under 14:20. I attribute this in part to strength training. This also was due to running 80-100mpw for a couple years of course. however, i ran like shit when weighing 142 (at 5'11''). after lifting and generally putting on some pounds (to ~153lbs), i felt stronger, and ran that PR along with others.

but if you want to continue to be a wimpy, bony distance runner, that's cool too.

Quoting Jason Karp? Hoooboy. Care to list his publications on the subject.

Heck, post a link to his article. I would love to give it a read.

To what study are you referring? The study that started this has nothing to do with an incline.

A distance runner will likely not add a lot of mass--let's say a really good distance runner anyway. Some people running 18 minutes might well. If that is the case, you cease lifting and titrate the dosage of lifting.

MAS wrote:

jtupper wrote:

This study being referred to did show a 5% improvement in running economy among the group they studied. .

It also said that "time to exhaustion at maximal aerobic speed (MAS)" was increased 21%, which sounds pretty impressive. But I need to ask: what does that mean exactly, and how long is the typical amount of time that a world class runner can run at MAS ? How about a 17 min 5k runner?

A problem I have with any time to exhaustion protocol is that the error of measurement is pretty high. These protocols tend to show large improvements; maybe it comes from test familiarity so you learn how to run longer at a set pace. Also, from a pragmatic point of view there is no event where the rules state that you run (ride or paddle or whatever) at a set intensity for as long as you can. (Now that might be a strategy to cover a distance in that you plan to maintain X:XX pace for 10km, but the goal is to cover the distance as fast as possible or beat everyone else).

If you are into stats (and I am not really) then I think Will Hopkins has written about the problems with time to exhaustion protocols. It might be at

Having coached runners from the international to the high school level, I have always had my runners lift. This is nothing new. Cerutty had his runners lifting in the 40's and 50's. Hackenschmidt (sp?) well before that. It most definetly improves running economy if core strength is emphasized. We stayed away from leg work, preferring to work the legs with ply, sand and hills. It could lead to weight loss if done right. (Increase in muscle density with corresponding increase in metabolic rate)

i went from running absolute shit (over 15 for a 5k) to under 14:20.

This should be put on the top of the forum FOREVER as it embodies the 100%, stereotypical LR post. Checking the boxes on the 3 primary categories:

1. Completely false

2. ....absolutel shit (15+ 5K) Insinuating fast times are actually shit.

3. Anonymous

Congratulations my friend!

heave ho wrote:

now there's some good old fashioned, objective scientific evidence for ya: "aches and pains", "heck of a lot faster" "feel like it takes less energy." WHOOPEE!!

DURING THE TIME YOU IMPROVED YOUR LIFTS 100LBS, OR SINCE THAT TIME, DID YOU IMPROVE YOU 5k PR SIGNIFICANTLY(OVER YOUR PR FROM YOUR "100LBS WEAKER" PERIOD) OR NOT?? And if you didn't run any 5k's during that time, maybe it's because you were too busy lifting..... ??

No BS, did you race a lot faster at distance races or not? if not........

(and while squats are good, benching will do very, very little for a distance runner. So improve 300 lbs for all we care, it won't shit for your distance running)

sorry. Yes, i improved all of my times. I improved my 5k by about 40 seconds, my mile by about 20. And as I said, I'm my acceleration and top speed increased significantly also.

And as far as aches and pains, I mean like IT issues, shin splints, hip & groin muscle pains.

There was another time in 8th grade track, when I ran a 615mile. I didn't run a step, play basketball, or any sport over the summer or fall. All I did was regularly lift weights and especially squats. When I came back for track season, I was a new man - I ran a 5:06 my first time out.

For comparison, when I haven't lifted weights and gotten weaker, I don't improve nearly as much. I improve just a normal few seconds here and there.

I don't know why people don't lift weights. It only makes sense. If you can push the ground harder, then you'll go faster.

The reason I asked earlier in the thread if the other guy improved is because I started a fairly intense weight training program 6 weeks ago. Unfortunately I developed plantar fasciitis 4 weeks ago and missed a good chunk of time, but I'm back to running now. Anyways, once I'm back in shape I would like to see how the weight training benefits my running (if at all), particularly my 5k.

If this thread hangs around long enough I'll post on it once I'm back in shape. As for this year? I averaged roughly 70-75 mpw (some weeks in the 90s, some obviously much lower) all year and ran 15:39 in early May.

Right now I don't have the speed to get under 15:00 for 5k, but I'm hoping that'll change through weight training. If anyone is interested in what I'm doing, it's 2 separate workouts alternated over 3 days per week. I found the program on bodybuilding.com's forums and the 2 workouts consist of:

3x5 squat

3x5 bench

1x5 deadlift

and

3x5 squat

3x5 standing military press

5x3 power clean