Sub 1:50 800m Training

I think this is wrong. There are two types of FT muscle and there is evidence you can convert one to the other (at least from FTb to FTa) and everything I have seen suggests that you can increase the aerobic enzymes in FTa (at least) with training. This part of the reason to recommend tempo runs versus long runs for improving aerobic endurance.Now if long runs help train FT that is a bit more controversial. I know snell believes it does but some people have objected to his viewpoints.

So the PC system supports the first 10-20 seconds of the race and is used for explosive movements.

And it takes at least a few minutes to fully replenish itself.

Are the guys who do strides up until the minute before the race, bounce around on the start line and jump trying to keep their legs warm and ready actually depleting their PC stores? Is 2-3 minutes of standing around better?

I can't imagine just standing there before a race, but that's what Kipketer did. Cool as ice.

I vote or a good warm up, including some strides, then stand there for last 2 to 3 minutes, not standing on the spot, maybe a little walk around, but full recovery, no jumping, springing, etc before the start.

I will respond to your points in order.

1.This is an asumption and I am by no means stating it as fact, but, if you have the option to do two 30 minute runs it would have a greater effect than one 60 minute run. The pace that you can maintain for 30 minutes is faster and taxes the aerobic system at a faster pace.

2.I'm not 100% sure what you are trying to stay but I think I get the gist. The problem is unless I learned wrong muscle contraction is a all or none response, meaning your body doesn't selectively fire certain strands of a muscle body.

3.I like what your saying and I have felt that durring longer runs but 800m runners use a ton of hamstrings and glutes.

I agree most elite athletes do have a longer run in their training, but that doesn't mean we necessarly have to accept that as a correct method.

SS.

I have heard about fiber conversion but I had not heard of increasing the aerobic abilities of the slower of the fast twitch. Could you point me in the direction of a study for this, I'll check pubmed tonight as well.

The latest research points to thinking of muscle fibers as a continuum, not individual classifications.

You can shift the fiber's characteristics to the left or right along that spectrum. Meaning, you can shift it to have more aerobic characteristics or anaerobic characteristics. Now, the shifts of the fiber are very small, but definately make a difference.

Pmoax wrote:

I will respond to your points in order.

1.This is an asumption and I am by no means stating it as fact, but, if you have the option to do two 30 minute runs it would have a greater effect than one 60 minute run. The pace that you can maintain for 30 minutes is faster and taxes the aerobic system at a faster pace.

.

1. Regarding doubles vs singles: I think what OS4 is saying is with 2X7 miles at 6:00 pace and 1X14 miles at 6:00 pace, the 14 miler will produce greater aerobic benefits. However, you can indeed run the 2X7 miles faster because it is split up, maybe 5:30-5:45 pace in this example.

I think it varies from runner which is better (doubles and slightly faster or singles and slower), but any runner can benefit from mixing it up and doing both.

The classic rat study:Dudley G., Abraham W., Terjung R., Influence of exercise intensity and duration on biochemical adaptations in skeletal muscle J. Appl. Phsiol 1982, 53(4), 844-850is the one that comes to mind immediately. I am pretty sure there were a couple of human studies that had some what similar results (not exactly but the trends) but a quick google isn't popping them up.

Pmoax wrote:

Fast twitch muscles cannot become more aerobic and they cannot become more anaerobic. Fast twitch are fast twitch muscles they function through their designated energy pathway.

Still nobody has given me a reason with any scientific backing for long runs and their bennifits for 800m training.

ss aswered already to you about ft coming more aerobic but you can find lots of studies about this, try google something like "oxidation training fast twitches"

I found some good stuff from Joe Rubio, Martin/Coe for example.

About long runs, there is one study to think; experience. But main point is if you run doubles almost every day you don´t have to necessarily run so long.

Old Sub 4,

So what would you think of a session like 6X200m at 800m race pace with 2-3 min rest weekly during base phase; is this enough work to adversely affect an 800m runner's early preparations?

Can such a workout be used effectively year-round for neuromuscular maintainence without harming an athlete's aerobic development?

So after all this discussion about form on this post I have been working on changing mine. I have been trying to run with my hips forward using my upper quads and and buttucks for each stride, while focusing on generating a stronger push-off. This seems to work o.k. for my shorter runs, but I did a long run like this on Sunday and it was extremely fatiguing. Yesterday I only ran about a little over a mile before I decided to quit because I was so stiff. Today I don't feel much better. Should I really be doing this on my distance runs? I feel so much more comfortable with some forward lean, where I'm using my hamstrings more.

Do you have any advice Old Sub 4?

wellnow, after all this time i am going to agree with you that running form is the underlying factor in gaining efficiency (or do people call it economy). Whichever word is preferred the fact remains the same. The more efficient the athletes posture is and the more efficient their mechanics are, the less energy is required for the same task. This is pretty clear in the development of the car/plane etc engine and applies to a runner equally. The less effort required in maintain posture the better.The less effort in moving ones limbs and trunk the better.

Vasala finishing his 1500m in Munich in 72 is an excellent example.

But would you say Vasala finished so strongly and in such an excellent sprinting position simply because he had a stronger posture and stronger locomotion muscles?

If Vasala had simply run out of energy (as a global term) 100m from the finish he would quite literally fall to the ground and begin to sleep. The energy has run out and if it completely runs out in a person then that person will fall unconscious ie sleep. If the energy depletion is short of this (and it almost always is) then simply the runner will not be able to maintain their ideal form ie that which they have when fully rested and energized.

See form and energy cannot really be separated. However, training form (posture and mechanics) can allow the runner to maintain their form for the same given energy levels.

Alternatively, having higher energy levels can allow a runner to maintain form for longer like in the Vasala falling asleep example above.

High performance is about maximising performance - there are a number of limitations to this maximisation. One is posture, the other is mechanics, another is fitness (aerobic and anaerobic if we are talking 800m as they are roughly equal in requirements for that event).Of course another is psychology but that is something not present in this current discussion.

Whatever the weakest link will be the factor most limiting performance. To say form is the most important is to probably be satisfied with sub-optimal performance in athletics.To say fitness qualities are the most limiting factor is to suffer the same sub-optimal satisfaction.

ps if you like to race all year round then you will be happy with lydiard - even in his base preparation phase he would include a 5000m timetrial on Wednesday and a 10000m timetrial on Saturday. The difference between him and yourself is that timetrials are not races - not quite. They will always fall that little bit short of a true race situation. Why? Because racing is like the flowering and fruiting of the tree. It only occurs during one period of the annual cycle of that tree. Of course some trees flower all year round ... but those trees grow far slower than the annual flowering variety. The energy for growth is limited - it can be used either for deepening the roots/enlargening the trunks and limbs OR flowering and fruiting. One purpose takes away from the other. Why does Lydiard do timetrials during the base phase? Because he is training a whole person, a whole athlete. Focusing on just one element like the aerobic will simply develop that one aspect in the athlete/person. It won't be developing the whole athlete/person. Similarly the tree doesn't just develop the roots before it develops the trunk - both occur simultaneously side by side, simply because the whole tree is being grown by nature, it doesn't separate and specialise like the intellectual human has a tendency to do once they have a little bit of knowledge.

Am I doing this right wrote:

So after all this discussion about form on this post I have been working on changing mine. I have been trying to run with my hips forward using my upper quads and and buttucks for each stride, while focusing on generating a stronger push-off. This seems to work o.k. for my shorter runs, but I did a long run like this on Sunday and it was extremely fatiguing. Yesterday I only ran about a little over a mile before I decided to quit because I was so stiff. Today I don't feel much better. Should I really be doing this on my distance runs? I feel so much more comfortable with some forward lean, where I'm using my hamstrings more.

Do you have any advice Old Sub 4?

I'dlike to reply because mechanics is my specialty - first through my time as a decathlete trained under a Soviet coachand later through my investigations into Aikido, Pilates, Feldenkrais, Alexander Technique, Jeet Kune Do and even seated meditation.

The hip (pelvis)position is the most critical of all factors in the above arts. Simply because it supports and contains the physical center which is commonly known in the world of biomechanics as the center of gravity. It is very important in my opinion to know where this exists within oneself if one is interested in any physical activity.

The physical center lives roughly one inch below your belly button and sits right at the front of the spine. From behind it sits right in the middle of the two Sacro Iliac joints - the joints which articulate (control the movement) between the spine and the pelvis (including the legs which are directly attached to the pelvis.)

If you were in space and were hit anywhere from any direction,you would spin in a 360 circle around this point.

So the hips are the key to running. The important question is what is the optimal position for the hips. The simple answer is in their naturally balanced position. This is a natural thing for every animal species on the planet except for older humans. I say older because every baby and young child retains their balanced hip position. Only after some time has passed does this get balanced position become lost. It gets lost for lots of reasons but mainly due to the massive amount of sitting we have to endure in modern lifestlye and the overemphasis on intellectual thinking modern society requires. This is difficult to observe as it becomes slightly imbalanced but is obvious as the imbalance becomes extreme. Check out a persons posture who is forced to think with effort. The head comes forward. In many older and aged people they literally walk around leading with the head - you can see them everywhere.

The counterbalance to this head forward position is a hip backwards position. Hence the need for most runners to somehow bring their hips forward in order to refind balance.

To now answer your question specifically, it is not the upper quads or even the gluteus maximum that addresses this problem. Instead other muscles are required to reposition the hips. Much smaller muscles in the hips hold the hips in position (glute minimus and medius for example)- the glute max is for locomotion not hip stability. The quads are for locomotion and not hip stability. The deeper abdominal muscles work together with the smaller glute muscles in controlling hip position and stability.It is there that need to be identified and developed to truly find the ease of running upright and balanced.

flow wrote:

To now answer your question specifically, it is not the upper quads or even the gluteus maximum that addresses this problem. Instead other muscles are required to reposition the hips. Much smaller muscles in the hips hold the hips in position (glute minimus and medius for example)- the glute max is for locomotion not hip stability. The quads are for locomotion and not hip stability. The deeper abdominal muscles work together with the smaller glute muscles in controlling hip position and stability.It is there that need to be identified and developed to truly find the ease of running upright and balanced.

What is the best way to target these muscles in core exercises? On the ball? Specific exercises?

Thanks in advance.

Am I doing this right wrote:

So after all this discussion about form on this post I have been working on changing mine. I have been trying to run with my hips forward using my upper quads and and buttucks for each stride, while focusing on generating a stronger push-off. This seems to work o.k. for my shorter runs, but I did a long run like this on Sunday and it was extremely fatiguing. Yesterday I only ran about a little over a mile before I decided to quit because I was so stiff. Today I don't feel much better. Should I really be doing this on my distance runs? I feel so much more comfortable with some forward lean, where I'm using my hamstrings more.

Do you have any advice Old Sub 4?

I don't know what Old Sub 4 might say, but here's my humble opinion if u care....

I've experienced the exact same situation as you have. Running 'sitting' with hips forward & using glutes & upper quads for distance runs. Felt real stiff and fatigue later, and realised that this is not the correct mechanics for endurance runs.

My opinion is that this form is only for sprinting. You might want to shift your form closer to it during the final drive for home in a race or time trial, but not fot distance runs, or even for most of your harder interval training.

I believe you can run reasonably fast using your hamstrings, leaning forward from the ankles, and generally having a lower rear pick-up of the foot. The hips forward style has the effect of recruiting too much upper body musculature, which tires the whole body up, and not just the lower body. My experience is that when I run with hips a bit more neutral, keeping feet landing just below my centre of gravity (ie like the African distance runners do), I am more relaxed esp in trunk and shoulders, and can breathe better.

I feel that the hips forward running position limits oxygen intake & utilisation, because you are drawing from the more fast twitch dominant muscles, and are working more anaerobically. You are at this point leaning not from the ankles but from the trunk/waist, and this brings your feet higher & closer to your glutes while landing a bit in front of your hips with each stride. You are expanding more effort with each stride because you are lifting & moving the entire leg, rather than just picking up the feet alone using the hamstrings (which is comparatively far lesser work).

My experience is that such a stride pattern will last only for about 80-100m the most, after which it becomes too draining to hold form. Usually only the top sprinters are able to hold such form under duress. If distance athletes attempt to train/race like that, they will end up having slower cadence, choppy stride pattern, and spending too much time in the air than necessary.

My view is that you can keep this form only when you are training for pure speed or power. This means short term energy production. You can try to hit it when doing 'kick-building' sessions in which you change gears from a slower pace to a faster finishing one. But generally I feel you should stick with using hamstrings and leaning forward.

curiously wrote:

The latest research points to thinking of muscle fibers as a continuum, not individual classifications.

You can shift the fiber\'s characteristics to the left or right along that spectrum. Meaning, you can shift it to have more aerobic characteristics or anaerobic characteristics. Now, the shifts of the fiber are very small, but definately make a difference.

This is correct and in fact if you think about it it is the only thing that makes sense.

You might not be able to move a fibre from one end of the spectrum to the other, but you can increase the aerobic capacity of all fibres. Just as you can increase the contractile strength of all fibres.

I going to have to agree with what you are saying. I couldn't run again yeasterday and I'm still sore and tight today from my Sunday run. I seem to feel much more comfortable with an anterior pelvic tilt. This gives me a little forward lean from the ankles and I'm able to generate power that feels easier and lasts longer.

I looked at a lot of film on youtube and it seems that many of the top runners (el g, coe, etc.) have an anterior pelvic tilt.

I didn't get the feeling that this was what OldSub4 was advocating "sitting" on a long run. It sounds like he's more focusing on the muscles that will get one through the majority of the 800m efficiently, not the form used by Coe in the last 100m of, say, the 1500m final in LA.

Am I doing this right wrote:

I going to have to agree with what you are saying. I couldn't run again yeasterday and I'm still sore and tight today from my Sunday run. I seem to feel much more comfortable with an anterior pelvic tilt. This gives me a little forward lean from the ankles and I'm able to generate power that feels easier and lasts longer.

I looked at a lot of film on youtube and it seems that many of the top runners (el g, coe, etc.) have an anterior pelvic tilt.

i ask you why fall into the lazy mode, forever reinforcing your current way ... change my friend change ...you can if you have the will.

The hips are meant to move and not be locked into the one position. As you leave the ground with one leg the other is stepping forward for the next stride. The hips are meant to move! One side working off the other. One coxal bone counterbalancing the other one. The anterior tilt ideally temporary and occurs when the leg is travelling behind the CofG.Yet at the same time the opposite leg is moving forward of the CofG and it's coxal bone is moving into posterior tilt. Ideally that is.

It is an unfortunate situation where the hips have lost their own muscular control and it may be a journey to regain this. Step one is to gain stability. Step to to gain mobility.

Core training is a useful scientific advance. Yet it is also often leading only to the gaining of stability. Look beyond this semi-developed concept chock full of half-baked ideas. Use it to gain an increased awareness of this part of your body and then to increase the stability of this area. Then move on - further on to the realm of hip mobility. Running regularly as you all seem to do is the key to this mobility, continue it whilst you gain stability - two sides of the same coin, working together forevermore. Move your hips and not just your legs - look at the wonderful Borzakovsky for obvious hip mobility - to Ovett and Vasala and Elliot for hip mobility.

Mr Elliot probably the best although i also argue with myself over this - but for the greatest MD coach understanding of running mechanics you can't go past PErcy Cerutty.

see this for something to study, look at it over and over, first thing in the morning and last thing at night - get the imprint etched into your mind. It is my favourite. I wish he could have raced Vasala and Ovett - what a race that would have been.

Wow great clip thanks. A great runner. Powerful yet unimpeded hip extension over a large range of motion the name of the game. There is a picture in lore of running of elliot in midstride and it looks like he is nearly doing the splits. It is impossible to run fast without it.

Funny you should mention Ovett, it is his birthday today, as well as another Elliott (Peter).

In a group of runners running at the same exact pace it is generally very easy to pick out the best couple athletes due to their more balanced and more "open" strides, as well as other factors, such as a lack of overstriding, looking more relaxed and maybe having a lower arm carriage.