Coaches - What should your Heart Rate be at for Tempo Runs?????

your explanation doesn't make any sense. What is "neuromuscular coordination"? And how do you explain the fact that one can use non-running movements to achieve gains in aerobic fitness, which applies to running? Example swimming or biking.

And how have you come to your conclusion? Is there any scientific backing to your ideas? A real question, if you have any I'd be interested to read it.

Kenyans and ethiopians aren´t better than others thanks to better neuromuscular coordination. They are more aerobical than others and at every intensity they have lower lactate levels and that way they can keep going longer. For example when Bekele is running at his VO2max he can keep that pace much longer than I can, for example. They are aerobic monsters compared to us mortals.

Two runners, both have Vo2max of 80, both have Lactate Threshold of 85% of vo2max. One runs the 5k in 15:00...the other in 13:00. What's the difference? The velocity.

You can't run on heart and lungs alone. Muscle contractility is not the same for everyone.

The difference between Henrietta Housewife running a 5k in 30 minutes and Bekele is the Vo2max and Lactate Threshold of course. But the majority of the difference between Bekele and a 15:00 5k runner is NOT. Between a competitive runner and an elite runner you'll see little % difference in such measures as Vo2max and Lactate Threshold BUT much greater % differences in performance. It's the muscles that contract and move you forward.

Alan

Difference between elites vs. 15min 5k runners would be able to show by muscle biopsy. Elites usually has more slow twitches and those fast one are more efficient aerobically. Of course at top level you have to be able to sprint quite well too but the anaerobic capacity isn´t so important.

allan, what are the things that improve neuromuscular coordination? i never thought about this deeply before but i think maybe thats where some of my problems are. is it running fast or are there any exercises you suggest? thanks alot.

My point is also very simple -- the model is not broken.Aerobic and Anaerobic Capacity are just two boxes in the model."Neuro-muscular coordination" fits in the "mechanical efficiency" box. It's been there all along.I disagree with your characterization of the "majority of physiologists and coaches". I say the majority use a classic aerobic model, which includes anaerobic capacity, aerobic capacity, lactate threshold and efficiency. This makes the rest of your point moot -- if the stupidity is not there, there is no dogma.

wellnow wrote:

My point is really very simple. Aerobic and Anaerobic capacities are very easy to maximize and I suggest that this takes only a few weeks at the most for an out of shape runner. For a regular trainer, we are already there.

However, the vast majority of phsiologists and coaches are simply ignorant of the issue of neuromuscular coordination; the fact that all voluntary movement is controlled by the brain, and that this issue is absolutely fundamental to our improvement in running. So they try to explain everything in terms of aerobic/anaerobic development. This stupidity, as you know has been going on for almost 90 years. If that isn't dogma, then I don't know what is.

Wellnow's issue appears to be with the terminology used. As another poster in another thread once observed, it's like someone getting indignant and supercilious about the use of the phrase "the setting sun" because the sun doesn't really set, the Earth rotates.

Whether a tempo run results in improved performance because it increases the lactate threshold or improves very slightly the aerobic capacity or increases neuromuscular coordination is largely irrelevant unless you're a scientist. For runners, the important bit is that properly done tempos help improve performance; therefore, we should do them.

wellnow wrote:

My point is really very simple. Aerobic and Anaerobic capacities are very easy to maximize and I suggest that this takes only a few weeks at the most for an out of shape runner. For a regular trainer, we are already there.

However, the vast majority of phsiologists and coaches are simply ignorant of the issue of neuromuscular coordination; the fact that all voluntary movement is controlled by the brain, and that this issue is absolutely fundamental to our improvement in running. So they try to explain everything in terms of aerobic/anaerobic development. This stupidity, as you know has been going on for almost 90 years. If that isn't dogma, then I don't know what is.

Pardon, but why do coaches have their athletes cross train, and they're able to comeback within weeks (vs. someone who doesn't cross train and takes months to get back to the same fitness level)?

CraigMac4h wrote:

Wellnow's issue appears to be with the terminology used. As another poster in another thread once observed, it's like someone getting indignant and supercilious about the use of the phrase "the setting sun" because the sun doesn't really set, the Earth rotates.

Whether a tempo run results in improved performance because it increases the lactate threshold or improves very slightly the aerobic capacity or increases neuromuscular coordination is largely irrelevant unless you're a scientist. For runners, the important bit is that properly done tempos help improve performance; therefore, we should do them.

Neuromuscular coordination is the most important issue in determining your pace. However, unlike aerobic and anaerobic capacities it can be constantly improved. If you realize this, then you can be more confident about being able to keep improving your running.

When I tell people that I can keep improving my times, at age 46, they say it's impossible blah blah blah. But each year I do this.

Of course I am not as fit as the really great runners, but that is something we can all strive for, although many will deny this, it's not unreasonable to say that all of us can improve a lot even if we have already achieved a lot.

Perhaps you should read more of the Hadd threads, and you will see why I am not a Hadd fan.

He talks a lot about the mythological lactate threshold, belief in which prevents people from seeing the bigger picture.

U.N.O. wrote:

Kenyans and ethiopians aren´t better than others thanks to better neuromuscular coordination... at every intensity they have lower lactate levels and that way they can keep going longer. For example when Bekele is running at his VO2max he can keep that pace much longer than I can, for example.

U.N.O. That IS better neuromuscular coordination. You just aren't educated enough to realize it.

Your education begins here:

All voluntary movement is controlled by the brain. This is neuromuscular coordination:

I don't mean to dispute or downplay the importance, but how can you say with so much confidence that neuromuscular coordination is the *most* important? (Maybe you can say it's the most understated, overlooked, or least understood, or something else). To make such a comparison requires being able to isolate and measure the specific effect of neuromuscular coordination, from the effect of all the other adaptations that occur in the heart, lungs, muscles, organs, etc. I'm just curious. Has anyone isolated these different effects? How did they measure the effect of neuro-muscular coordination?Since it comes for free, with classic "aerobic" and "anaerobic" training, maybe this important issue is really a non-issue, as long as we train with specificity.

wellnow wrote:

Neuromuscular coordination is the most important issue in determining your pace. However, unlike aerobic and anaerobic capacities it can be constantly improved. If you realize this, then you can be more confident about being able to keep improving your running.

When I tell people that I can keep improving my times, at age 46, they say it's impossible blah blah blah. But each year I do this.

Of course I am not as fit as the really great runners, but that is something we can all strive for, although many will deny this, it's not unreasonable to say that all of us can improve a lot even if we have already achieved a lot.

How can I be so certain the neuromuscular coordination is the most important factor in running or any sport?

Well it's really very simple. Neuromuscular coordination determines how skillful you are at any sport. As I said on another thread, running and cycling skills are not transferable. I just couldn't ride a fast 50k time trial on the bike right now because I am so out of practice. Now of course I would be much faster than an overweight unfit person, but I would be much slower than a well trained cyclist who has the same or similar fitness to me.

Tempo Time wrote:

I am curious as to what your Heart Rate should be at for Tempo Runs/Aerobic Threshold Runs.

I don't want to suggest any heart rates, but I believe that tempo runs should be anything in length from a few minutes at a fast pace, to 90 minutes or even 2 hours at Marathon pace or slightly slower.

You have to learn to get a feel for these runs, so don't worry if you get it wrong from time to time, experience success and failure at pace judgement, that's the only way to learn.

wellnow,

how do you improve your neuromuscular coordination?

Progressive pace runs. Start slow finish fast. Or start at a medium pace and gradually speed up. Tempo runs where you increase the pace slightly. Interval sessions where the pace is consistent but the last one is faster, ending with a sprint.

In fact as you get fitter, you should practice sprinting very fast at the end of your hard runs. Start with a short sprint very fast, and as you get fitter, lengthen the sprint until you can sprint flat out for 200m or more.

All of this training improves neuromuscular coordination. You need to ability to run as economically as possible at every pace without your pace dropping. If this happens in medium to long runs, then stop, jog or walk home. Ther is no point forcing your body to keep going when you have passed this point of fatigue.

I was hoping for a little more science, and a little less anecdote.To say it's the most important factor implies that we can isolate and measure the net effect of each of the many factors that lead to performance related improvements. I simply can't imagine how.Otherwise, you simply can not say the "most", in a scientifically meaningful way.

wellnow wrote:

How can I be so certain the neuromuscular coordination is the most important factor in running or any sport?

Well it's really very simple. Neuromuscular coordination determines how skillful you are at any sport. As I said on another thread, running and cycling skills are not transferable. I just couldn't ride a fast 50k time trial on the bike right now because I am so out of practice. Now of course I would be much faster than an overweight unfit person, but I would be much slower than a well trained cyclist who has the same or similar fitness to me.

The point is that wellnow speaks in one language and refuses to acknowledge that everyone else is saying the same thing in a different language. He is being stubborn and secretive to appear that he has extra knowledge.

It is clearly a semantic argument he wants to have, not one about running and training.

He might be a bit lacking in personal skills, but I really don't think wellnow is making merely a semantic argument. It seems to me that Noakes makes a very similar argument, or rather, an argument for the same end. Lore of Running is a very long book and covers many topics quite thoroughly and I highly recommend it, but one of the conclusions of his Central Governor Model (which, for whatever it's worth, I am not necessarily convinced by-not saying it's wrong, just that he didn't convince me-though I agree with his conclusion anyway)is that the fastest runner is going to be the runner with the muscles best suited for running. That's very oversimplified, but I'm too tired to reproduce his full argument / explanation. I'll check back again tomorrow and maybe post more.