JK is brilliant

curiousity brings me to the next question; what are your best times? Both you and wello?

"Why waste your time hurling stupid insults under an anonymous name?" "I offer my apologies for the name-calling, but remember that I do not dish it out unless it comes my way first"

Show me an example of one of my stupid insults? My first post on this topic did address issues I had with the formulation of some of the theories put forth in JK's article. These were not addressed. Fine. I'm not really sure why I bothered.

I found your first post now and address it below. I consider the idolatry comment a stupid insult as I feel reasonably confident do some others. I personally enjoy running a great deal and JK has helped my improvement immensely. I consider him a very good guy and so I take offense and insult at your suggestion that I have committed "idolatry" by complimenting his abilities.

What has he made up?

JK never said faster running leads to reduced economy.

On the contrary, he advocates frequent SHORT bouts (10-35 seconds) at fast speeds to maintain and improve economy and speed. Here is his article about this if you are interested:

Excessive lactic acid production results from LONGER (40 seconds+) intense efforts at paces fast enough to maintain or improve speed.

JK, as far as I know, often speaks from the perspective of a high school coach speaking about high school athletes. He has stated his concern that the country has had poor results in distance running because the young high school runners are burned out from the beginning and are never able to use their talent, having wasted themselves with the wrong ype of training.

I saw a post yesterday about a kid who does three interval sessions a week in the summer. That stuff is going to ruin your enjoyment of the sport and stagnate your performance. Especially with the sensitive central nervous systems of high schoolers and the risk of training poor economy by inducing low blood pH (and this is the result of frequent anaerobic work, particularly when performed in non-sharpening periods), this training will compromise performance.

As for long runs enlisting fast twitch fibers, this is logic; you have a finite fuel supply in your slow twitch muscle fibers, which, on a run of sufficent length (I believe JK said about 110 minutes, or 22-23 miles in an elite marathon), will be exhausted. To continue running, you must change fuel supplies. You have to continue using muscle fibers to propel yourself forward, so the body accesses the only fibers not being used in great quantity (in the article JK wrote 2 days ago, he used the analogy of weak people and strong people pushing a boulder up a long hill), the fast twitch fibers.

One type of fast twitch, the IIa, can be trained to become more oxiative. These fibers contribute to explosive activities, but more along the lines of a semi-sprint like the 800. The most intense activites, like the 100, are reserved to the IIb fibers.

So that is my layman's understanding, and for the rest you should maybe ask JK.

My questions centered around this statement in his most recent article:

"Slow running maintains very low muscle lactate levels, which is likely one of the key factors in its ability to influence economy. As mentioned, higher intensity will also create important changes (such as mitochondrial density), but the resulting acidosis interferes with efficient movements (ultimately even inhibiting muscle contractions), which reinforces less orchestrated recruitment patterns and promotes inferior use of available oxygen"

So, the hypothesis is, as I understand it, that when fast twitch fibers are recruited, poor motor unit recruitment patterns are enforced, and a less economical gait pattern is programmed leading to a less efficient runner. My question is why wouldn't very long runs lead to the same poor running economy, since, as JK points out, recruitment of faster fibers occurs as a result of fatigue?

I am aware that JK has previously promoted faster turnover work as a means to improve running economy. I am not sure how that advice balances against the theory advanced in the most recent article.

It is very possible that I am misunderstanding what JK wrote most recently. If that is the case, I welcome an explanation.

"So that is my layman's understanding, and for the rest you should maybe ask JK"

It was my impression that I was.

Wow you ripped me good.

You are so powerful. Is that from JK's Koolaid?

Wejo couldn't run the trials in the Marathon or the 10K because he was injured.

He has suffered, don't pull PRs.

If JK was as consistent at peaking, as you claim, he would have been able to run well when it counted.

NOT INJURED.

Look at the writing on the wall...

INJURED WHEN IT COUNTS MOST!!!!!

vut? wrote:

INJURED WHEN IT COUNTS MOST!!!!!

On the contrary, he has run his best at national championships. Forgetting those two 4th place finishes, are we, "vut?"? Oh, sorry, coming from 30:13 in college to 28:06 and 4th in the country isn't good enough for an armchair quarterback like you. He has to win the Olympics in order to avoid criticism, right?

T.S. Eliot said, "Only those who risk going too far can possibly find out how far they can go." I bet you'd rather be uninjured and having a lifetime PR of 30 minutes when you could be running 28 minutes and battling it out with Meb and Culpepper with less than a mile to go by taking some risks in your training.

With your powers of logic, when Geb was hurt and dropped out of the hour record attempt, you probably would have been right there to point out, "Oh, look at him now! His past work ethic was obviously stupid since it's finally gotten him injured." - all the while ignoring how far he had come and what he had done in the past.

I can try to explain, as JK does not seem to ever post anymore.

Fast twitch fiber recruitment, if you are using the fibers for prolonged periods of time EXCLUSIVELY (like with anaerobic work), WILL reinforce the wrong recruitment patterns because you are tying up. If you practice flailing about and tying up, you will not improve.

But with long runs, you first fatigue the fast twitch fibers and then work the fast twitch IIa fibers OXIDATIVELY.

It is a good question and I am sure someone can explain it better than me, but this is what I understand of it.

vut? wrote:

Wow you ripped me good.

You are so powerful. Is that from JK's Koolaid?

Wejo couldn't run the trials in the Marathon or the 10K because he was injured.

He has suffered, don't pull PRs.

If JK was as consistent at peaking, as you claim, he would have been able to run well when it counted.

NOT INJURED.

Look at the writing on the wall...

INJURED WHEN IT COUNTS MOST!!!!!

No, vut, you ripped yourself pretty good because you come across as a really stupid person.

What the hell are you blathering about? Koolaid?

And does your cerebral cortex process information and receive electrical impulses from outside stimuli?

Because Wejo ran the marathon trials and dropped out BECAUSE HE WAS NOT IN CONTENTION.

A question for you, though I have little hope you can be pressed to understand logic and reason; why do you visit a site that announces as its mission the goal of spreading John Kellogg's training approach?

What travels through the mucked up mucus-filled swamp you call a brain? Because if you don't like JK and his training, STAY THE HELL OFF THE SITE YOU STUPID PIECE OF FILTH.

rojo wrote:

Then he gets on the JK plan. He finally breaks 30 and runs like 2949in 1998 - one year later. He improved more in that year (25 seconds) than in the previous 3 combined.

2000-28:27.58 5r2 MSR Walnut CA 14 Apr

2001 28:10.14 1 McGill Montréal 10 Jul

2003 28:06.58 4 NC Stanford CA 19 Jun.

Wejo, meet me in the urine room.