Or without you? With beaming insights such as "However, i would add a short specific period near/at race pace very close to the race event."
Wow, do you think that would be wise? Should you be decreasing volume and increasing intensity near a race?
Or without you? With beaming insights such as "However, i would add a short specific period near/at race pace very close to the race event."
Wow, do you think that would be wise? Should you be decreasing volume and increasing intensity near a race?
Is doing a cv workout and a threshold workout in the same week too close to the same then?
For instance
Tuesday - 5x1k @ CV w/ 200 jog, 5 min rest, 4x150 fast
Friday - 4 miles @ LT, 5 min rest, 4x200 @ mileish
VS
Tuesday - 20x400 @5k w/ 60 sec rest
Friday - 4 miles @LT, 5 min rest, 4x200 @ mileish
Probably. You'd probably want that Friday workout to be something lighter early in the season (M pace tempo) and some mixed pace workout later in the year.
CV can be done year round if you dont want a hard periodization. But if you respond better to that, you probably want that 400s @ 5k workout in your plan instead, preceded by a healthy amount of traditional Threshold.
shirtboy2021 wrote:
shirtboy2021 wrote:
"Nobody in this thread gets it.
Run a ton of miles, most of them easy.
Run two workouts a week, most of them controlled tempo runs.
Run some fast stuff every once in a while while staying smooth.
Be consistent over time.
Race."
Exactly what everyone in this thread is advocating, so yeah sure, this as well
LoL! )) You haven`t read in this thread what everyone is advocating with that claim..... ))
What you need to succeed is far from " a ton of miles" :)
take a breath, noticed the sarcasm -- 'ton of miles' doesn't mean much
lexel wrote:
I am not aware of any study showing that high lactate levels destroy/damage mitochondria or high levels of acid in the blood destroys/damage mitochondria. Would love to see such a paper.
My IAAF instructor referenced Neumann but I can not seem to find the actual study with a web search. Hartmann might have done some work on this as well. I have it somewhere. I will keep looking because I would also like to see it again.
unbelief wrote:
quit trolling you clown. You’ve got incredible training to execute and not explain to the audience here, yet maintaining this air like you know anything about physiology.
How do any of the claims make Coes training impossible? Im asking about a real program here, not your supposed ‘training’
The 'Biologist' you are refering to has lots of outdated ideas. He's one of the 'Lactic Acidosis' crowd. Fast training improves mitochondrial function, not the opposite.
And why is he talking about 3 minute recoveries for a 4.20 miler doing 8x400 in 65?
If you can't do that session with 90 seconds or less recovery you're training too hard for your current condition.
And I was the 4.20 7 mmol guy, Seb Coe was the 15mmol 3.47 guy. Did we damage our mitochondria?
No, obviously not. His much higher Anaerobic capacity would mean he had a much higher buffering capacity also.
S. Canaday wrote:
Well yes, in laymen's terms this all what "Running Economy" is.
Running Economy is efficiency....so energy needed to run a certain pace.
COACH WIZARD says "reduced energy consumption at pace".
It's all the same thing though. An efficiency improvement.
Now the efficiency could from dealing with higher lactate levels or being able to have heart and lung efficiency (efficiency in blood flow with oxygen to the muscles with capillary beds and at the cellular level with mitochondria ), efficiency in burning fat as a fuel, and efficiency in movement patterns).
Now that last point is touching on is the "Running Form" component of Running Economy. You move better with developed neuromuscular pathways and you get better at running around your specific race pace as your body adapts to moving at that pace (or slightly faster than that pace). "Speed Training" to get all slower paces to feel more comfortable in a sense. It's another reason why you'd do Strides or gym work or all-out 10 sec Hill Sprints with full recovery.
But the kicker is you may improve Running Economy at 5km race pace (with a lot of 400s at 5km pace) and become more efficient at that, while at the same time your Running Economy at Marathon Pace might actually diminish. Usually not. But it depends on the runner and what other workouts they are doing in the full Training Plan.
COACH WIZARD also doesn't seem to acknowledge the concepts of periodization or diminishing returns though....so there's that....
Mitochondriac wrote:
Isn't that true of any specific pace training?
I had many years of improvement. It was wonderful. I know how to race a wide range of ditances just like you do Sage. I don’t coach though. But I like to talk to coaches and athletes.
It's all been figured out by the best runners and coaches decades ago. Some people try to overexplain it and I can see their mistakes easily because they don't understand Bioenergetics. Yes efficiency is the key to improved Biomechanics and Endurance.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2021.629914/fulllexel wrote:
I am not aware of any study showing that high lactate levels destroy/damage mitochondria or high levels of acid in the blood destroys/damage mitochondria. Would love to see such a paper.
More realistic to me is the muscle damage theory as well as the theory that is is the high performance itself (for whatever reason) which damages/destroys mitochondria.
But i guess we have to agree that there seems to be practical evidence to it, for whatever reason behind. That has a lot of implications.
With that thoughts
thresholdftw wrote:
Treshold training is superior to both. As in actual treshold, and especially double treshold. And by actual treshold I mean 3.5 or below in lactate.
seems to me a very good strategy. Keeping the damage low, but still improving.
However, i would add a short specific period near/at race pace very close to the race event.
This study indicates HIIT training enhances hippocampus mitochondrial function in rats
Flavian wrote:
Is doing a cv workout and a threshold workout in the same week too close to the same then?
plenty of people doing 2 thresholds/week. This should be equally tolerable.
I believe in working both ends of the spectrum. LT early on and transitioning to CV mid season. While working 1500m pace work and transition to 3k/5k work mid season. Late season tapering with less volume while hitting a blend of tempo w/ 1500’m pace work to finish it off. It works for a majority of my athletes and it’s not complicated. We teach running economy early while working on endurance then hit goal 5K/10k paces mid season racing shorter distances early and targeting big 5k/10K later in the season
no idea wtf you’re talking about
also no idea what a 7 mmol 4.20 guy is
And bro you ran 4.20, most anyone can do that off of any rinky dink training program
I thought we were talking serious athletes here
What's Coe's 5k/10k PR? Yeah not who we are discussing here. Try to follow the plot
If you cant distinguish the training of a middle distance guy from what we are discussing here feel free to drop
Yes, of course you did. Coe was trading aerobic fitness for anaerobic power.
Why is this tradeoff so hard to understand?
Seppo Kaitenenn wrote:
I think it is. Traditional long intervals at 3k-5k pace are just too taxing for average people to recover from. If you want to work out at these paces, stick to 400s and 600s. CV reps should be between 2 and 6 minutes.
My take is that it depends on the purpose of the training. CV pace represents an important ability needed for racing faster (as also lactate threshold does). So it makes sense to in the base training to develop the lactate threshold and the CV pace as high as possible (call it aerobic strength or aerobic support). But VO2 max also have its role in heightening the roof and pull these paces up (through that higher VO2 max also will automatically raise the pace at a percentage of VO2 max) So maximizing VO2 is also important, but can be trained from a lot of different training. CV will be quite good at pushing the VO2 max, but also easy volume will raise it... This depends on the athlete. Mature athletes have already maxed their VO2 and should maybe focus on other stuff.
The hard intensity between LT and VO2max is increasingly taxing due to the anaerobic workload, the employment of faster muscle fibres, and pure impact increase, so obviously more recovery is needed. Polarized training models might work cause the hard part is just a fraction of the total volume, so there is enough recovery.
I agree in what Tinman says that CV at least for younger athletes is a sustainable even if slower path to developing VO2max and aerobic strength.
Still I think VO2max training has its role in preparing for racing, maybe for distances as long as HM, but obviously for 3k/5k/10k. Canova found that when his runners performed well, they had developed an ability to work at a high steady state lactate level for the race distance and hard intervals in prep for racing could develop this. So I definately think VO2max is needed in prep work, but I do not think it is sustainable.
Now, short reps at VO2 max paces is something different. VO2 max is not reached, but the work definately is producing lactate, even if the average lactate levels are not comparably high. These reps definately prime the muscles for racing and have their place.
I believe in the threshold training model of maximizing volume at or below 3.5mmol, but with some work into the hard intensity towards VO2 max. It just needs to be limited doses to give a sustainable training over time. Recovery is key.
Also the main type of training you do impact the lactate curve. The more easy volume, the higher LT pace can be obtained, but the anaerobic capacity might be reduced, while VO2max training definately will increase the anaerobic capacity on the expence of a lower LT pace. This does not say that you cannot race well, depending on how much role the anaerobic work means for the race. Obviosly, middle distance needs a high anaerobic capacity, but surely also aerobic capacity. 3k/5k are surely hard and with an anaerobic component, but the aerobic part is the main cotnributor. 10k starts to be very connected to CV and LT pace where anaerobic capacity is just important for top athletes and their finishing ability to win races.
bodyweight plus wrote:
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphys.2021.629914/fullThis study indicates HIIT training enhances hippocampus mitochondrial function in rats
Thx, thats interesting.
I can safely remove the theory 'Lactate itself, destroys/damages mitochondria'.
LOL you didn't read a word of that article, did you?
shirtboy2021 wrote:
LOL you didn't read a word of that article, did you?
Lol, keep up that humor, but listen more to boomers :)
Right before reading this thread I was comparing my intervals workouts.
Here is my recent experience, as an old, retired, hobby jogger.
After 2 months of easy running, I'm now finishing the 5th week of intervals.
Monday: 10x300 with jogging between them.
I'm doing it for speed.
I'm not feeling exhausted after it and neither the muscles seemed affected.
Every week seemed the same.
Tuesday: easy run.
Wednesday: 10x600 intervals with a break until the HR drops to 60% of MHR.
I'm doing it for VO2MAX.
I'm not feeling exhausted after this, but my legs are affected.
After each week my legs become less and less affected.
Thursday: easy run.
Friday: 2x1200 during an easy run.
The pace is close to the Wednesday intervals.
I'm doing it for lactate threshold.
I feel drained every time, but no leg pain.
Same experience every week.
Saturday: long easy run.
Sunday: rest.
So far it seems to work well.
I can tell by the HR per km.