Mr. Renato Canova: Could You Please Answer a Question About Effective Ways to Improve the Lactate Threshold?

aw hav i upset you?

hill workouts, sprinting, bounding and skipping are nothing like the 600 workouts Renato uses to bring athletes to a peak. Please don't pretend to be more knowledgeable than you are.

Kindest regards, perlease.

perlease wrote:

aw hav i upset you?

hill workouts, sprinting, bounding and skipping are nothing like the 600 workouts Renato uses to bring athletes to a peak. Please don't pretend to be more knowledgeable than you are.

Kindest regards, perlease.

Apparently you have not read Renato's numerous posts including the training programs of his elite distance runners. If you had, you would realize your sad lack of reading comprehension and reasoned discussion skills.

You have primarily upset the bandwidth capacity of this website with your mindless dribblings. I encourage you to return to your unproductive life of sneaking looks at pornography right before your boss passes through and scolds you for inept and inefficient management of the drive-thru window at McDonald's.

Of course, during the basic period we don`t use repetitions very fast. We prefer to work for improving all the types of SPECIAL RESISTANCES, expecially STRENGTH ENDURANCE that has a very big influence on the Specific Endurance.

For example, using circuits lasting about 3/4 min with very long recovery, at the max. intensity, we can increase the periferal endurance imrpoving at the same time strength and capyllarization. An example of circuit can be the following :

- 80m bounding (flat)

- 10 squat jumps on the place

- 300m running very fast on flat ground (finishing where a hill starts)

- 10 exercises for abdominals starting with the back on the ground

- 60m sprinting climbing

- 40m skipping very fast climbing

- 60m sprinting climbing

- 40m bounding climbing

- 60m sprinting climbing

- 10 squat jumps on the place again

- 200m very fast climbing

This circuit uses about 400m flat plus 360m climbing, and is very good for middle and long distance. With athletes of 800m, we can use the same type of work with shorter distances, lasting no more than 2 min.

Because the only way that we use for recruiting the most part of the fibres of one muscle is WORKING AROUND THE MAX INTENSITY, and the capacity of recruiting fibres is very important not only for the speed, but also for the endurance, due to the turn-over of the fibres of the same muscle, every circuit must be done at max intensity. At the end, the level of lactate is very high, and we have to recovery well before going for another circuit (normally, 5/6 min for long runners, 8/10 min for 800m runners).

But, what is important to know, is that, after using repetitions on track at high intensity (for example, 4 x 600m at 1:22 rec. 6/8 min for an athlete able running 1:47) without adequate aerobic support, for a time longer than 3 weeks, you can check that your Threshold decreased. Instead, after using circuits with adequate aerobic support, your Threshold increases. I suppose that this fact is due to the more global involvement of a higher percentage of fibres during the training, having a combined effect with the aerobic work able to push the Threshold, while fast tests on track have an OPPOSITE effect on the Threshold.

I hope that readers can understand my post, because it is for me very difficult to explain without dictionary a scientific concept. So, may be that I wrote some word that does`nt exist. I apologyze, hoping that someone of mother tongue can translate in good English my words.

At what point in the season do you do this? How long? What day...or more specifically...what session would this be during the week?

Renato, thank you very much for this info. We really appreciate your help.

Renato, really you speak excellent English.

I am curious what you think of the training article mentioned by John Andrews about John KEllogg's threshold training; i.e. threshold pace being a steady state of ~ 10,000 meter pace+ 15 secs./mile.

Do your athletes use this type of work?

Renato Canova wrote:

But, what is important to know, is that, after using repetitions on track at high intensity (for example, 4 x 600m at 1:22 rec. 6/8 min for an athlete able running 1:47) without adequate aerobic support, for a time longer than 3 weeks, you can check that your Threshold decreased. Instead, after using circuits with adequate aerobic support, your Threshold increases. I suppose that this fact is due to the more global involvement of a higher percentage of fibres during the training, having a combined effect with the aerobic work able to push the Threshold, while fast tests on track have an OPPOSITE effect on the Threshold.

Renato,

Your explanation is clear and makes perfect sense.

Thank you for your helpfulness.

I have only said this, in various forms, for a year and half on letsrun.com, but I guess it takes a guy with Renato's reputation to make it stick. I am humbled by Renato's influence. How long will it take before people forget this key principle and hammer away at lactic acid interval and disregard threshold? History repeat itself, unfortunately! Tinman

Antonio,

¿Vas a Atenas por los Juegos Olimpicos este mes? El equipo de fútbol portugese se ve bien para Atenas. Solo el equipo brasileño aparece mejor. También, ¿cómo está la aptidud de Rui Silva? ¿Crees que puede ganar una medalla la proxima semana?

Renato,

do you use long runs right below the anaerobic threshold to increase this threshold?

How will such a workout look like?

Thanks for your interesting postings:-)

Perhaps Renato is on his way to Athens?

Tinman wrote:

...Because somewhere around 70 miles per week a runner's body stops responding in the same proportions as before when the workload was increase from 40 to 60 per week...

...As described earlier, increasing 10 miles per week from 70 to 80 does not improve your performance more than about 4-5 seconds per mile and probably not at all form 80 to 90 per week. So, you gotta fatigue your muscle fibers a bunch in order for the mileage bump to work...

...I say, therefore, you better bump it at least 20 per week, perhaps 30 per week, if you are not going to increase the intensity of training...

Would it be smarter to look at the percentage by which mileage is raised rather than the number of miles? For example, moving from 40mpw to 50mpw is an increase of %25, but to increase by %25 starting from 70mpw would require an additional 17.5mpw.

Also, is it wise to go straight from 70mpw to 90-100mpw without the gradual progression that is used to achieve lower personal high levels of training?

HS Guy:

It is my opinion that you need to restrain your enthusiasm for increasing to high mileage at your age. I'd rather you run an hour per day and see how fast you can run while doing that, then later, when you are out of high school, increase you mileage and or time running per week. i.e. get the most you can from minimal training before bumping the workload.

Indeed what you posit about thinking of trainng increases in mileage as related to percentages of original is a good idea. Tinman

As described earlier, increasing 10 miles per week from 70 to 80 does not improve your performance more than about 4-5 seconds per mile and probably not at all form 80 to 90 per week. So, you gotta fatigue your muscle fibers a bunch in order for the mileage bump to work...

Tinman, while I respect your knowledge and your valuable contributions to the board, I must disagree with your above statement.

Such theory is blatantly contradicted by the experience and results of generations of Americans, Europeans, Africans, and Asians who have enjoyed tremendous success in distance running while training at levels far higher in volume than you have cited above.

Frankly, I can do nothing but disregard posts like this which attempt to numerically extrapolate a performance improvement based on seconds/mile when no such prediction could possibly approach accuracy.

The lifetime aerobic base and continued aerobic pressure in the form of well over 100 miles/week used with consistent success by athletes from 1500m-marathon by the world's greatest athlete offer IN TRIAL AND ERROR what pseudoscience and unsupported convictions do not.

When you critque, look more closely at posts. I did not say one should not do higher mileage, in fact my statement suggests that middle ground should be avoided. I said, "So, you gotta fatigue your muscle fibers a bunch for the mileage bump to work." I suggested that functional fitness levels off at around 70-80 miles per week and going simply to 80-90 per week is likely to not be enough stimulus for improvement. Rather, bumping even higher than 90 is what is implied. In an earlier post, I said that bumping 20, even better yet 30 miles per week is what will produce results.

So, as it stands, I would rather a person adapt to 70-80 per week, then bump to 100-110 and try that amount of distance work. Then, if positive results occur at that level, insteady of going to 110-120 per week, try 130-140 per week. Elite runners who are efficient and strong may find this in line with their personal experience. The small bumps in training after 70-80 miles are not equivalent to small bumps, say from 40-50 or 50-60 per week. Make sense?

I hope we are on the same page and not attacking each other. Tinman

Then my apologies are offered, I missed that portion of the post and should have read more closely. No personal attack intended.

I have only said this, in various forms, for a year and half on letsrun.com, but I guess it takes a guy with Renato's reputation to make it stick.

Yes you see I have recommended running 7x 1500 meters with 50 yard jogs in between and well of course this is not the same as Renato says but let's pretend that it is okay?? That way I can say that I said the same thing that he says, even though it's not the same, but different, and I can pretend to wonder why runners pay no attention to me!

I hope you can see what I mean and that I am correct about this. And by the way I am humbled by Renato's influence. And allowing me to pretend that I said the same thing that he said, even though I didn't and don't have a clue about anything.

How long will it take before people forget this key principle and hammer away at lactic acid interval and disregard threshold, like I would know the difference huh huh and like all these garbage terms mean anything anyway huh huh huh?

Hey keep watching for my messages! History will repeat itself, unfortunately! -- Pretendman

Were you dropped on your head as a child? Did your mother feed you toxic waste instead of formula?

If not, what the hell is wrong with you?

John Andrew wrote:

Were you dropped on your head as a child? Did your mother feed you toxic waste instead of formula?

If not, what the hell is wrong with you?

That could be the answer! Or it could be the rain here in Oregon, soaking in to my sloppy succulent sneakers and giving me porous consumption.

However the important is that I'm here!

So just ask me! And even though I don't really know the answer to anything, I will pretend that I do, and confuse it with longgggggggggggggggggggggggggg paragraphs with lots of ambigious terminology, even going to great lengths to ask Renato Canova to comment about it, of course taking the credit for my own highly developed ego in the process.

Now don't blame me if I insult a few other highly regarded heros along the way. That's just my nature! Hey.... we might be related!

And if any of this upsets you, just remember it must have been the head drop, or the rain, and really isn't my fault.

Goodbye for now.... and have - a - nice - day!

Cushie cushie.... kissie kissie..... :-***

-- Pretendman