Actually I have read the vast majority of the papers and listened to arguments from others and been to conferences where these issues are hashed out.
My gut tells me that it is not as simple as Noakes makes it out.
Actually I have read the vast majority of the papers and listened to arguments from others and been to conferences where these issues are hashed out.
My gut tells me that it is not as simple as Noakes makes it out.
Average_Joe wrote:
Scientician wrote:I can see why you are only an average joe, Average_Joe.
You might possibly consider starting some races faster and also practising surges during a race. Maybe even do some faster paced training now and then.
I'd love to but my Central Governor is prohibiting me of course. Didn't you read Noakes?
It was probably your Central Governess. She told you that you were stupid and worthless and would never amount to anything.
Of course she was wrong. But a part of you still carries that feeling of inferiority into every race and training session.
Perhaps hypnotherapy might help your confidence?
My gut tells me that it is not as simple as Noakes makes it out.[/quote]
My gut too. The planet Saturn had three rings and nine moons until we sent probes there for a better look.
The theory is useful but we are still working on the details of Darwin's so why not Noakes's too?
That prof at Harvard spent $400,000 to find the dead fish but no one is offering that to study how runners fossilize at the end of races.
I bet if some rich old lady named Rose sent him $400,000 he could do some serious science. We could all go to South Africa to be subjects in Tim's lab.
Tom
Some of Noakes' things a bit far fetched but in general it makes perfect sense.
·Each system (muscle, cardiac, etc) has its limit.
·There is feedback from these systems to the brain (blood: glucose is falling, muscles: you are not producing energy at the same rate as you are using it, blood/muscles: it’s becoming too acidic, muscles: your Na/K ATPase is being inhibited, it’s getting too hot, etc).
·There is feedforward from the brain back to the body (it’s ok to speed up, you should slow down).
·The brain tries to prevent each system from reaching catastrophic fatigue by telling you to slow down (if your muscles can’t continue to contract at the same rate/ same level of force production they you will slow or stop running).
·If one of the systems reaches its limit, exercise ends. You cannot sprint or increase pace at the end of a race if lactic acid or T-tubule disturbances are inhibiting/overcoming the performance of your muscles.
·The messages from the brain telling your body to slow can be overcome when you are highly motivated. Thus explaining how you can run faster at the end of an exhausting race for a short period of time before one of the systems reaches it's limit.
Like I said, some of Noakes’ stuff is out there, but the general idea makes sense. He may not believe that VO2max can be reached, but that does not take away from the basic idea that all systems work together and receive controlling input from the brain
Recent studies have showed us that actually doing some training and not spouting some quasi-intelligent scientific nonsense on a message board will help athleties get quicker.
fletch wrote:
Scientician wrote:As Noakes explained, we use different fibres at different times, circulating the effort between fibre types during the excercise.
You may have actually alluded to something that supports Noakes Central Governor model rather than refutes it.
I'm not sure how an in-situ set-up with no central innervation supports the central governor model. Could you explain?
Could you explain how it refutes the central governor model?
I accept your explanation for the cause of fatigue with or without central innervation (if that is what you are suggesting)
We could use that research to suggest that fatigue does indeed occur in muscle fibres during excercise whilst others are being rested.
This is part of Noakes Central Governor model that differs from A.V. Hill's original Central Governor model of 1924.
Derderian wrote:
Last night I went to a lecture at Harvard by Jenkins on the Tiktaalik. That's the name he gave to a fossil fish that had arm and leg type structures 375 million years ago. There's a lot in a name.
Central Governor is a boring name. I think about evolutionary biology in order to explain running. So to mitigate between my friends Joe and Tim let me tell you how I explain fatigue to the athletes I coach.
Our ancestors, human and before, had to move to live. But those who moved too hard and destroyed their bodies in the process to either get food or escape from being food or get a mate, died without reproducing. Just like appetite, if any ancestors had an appetite set lower than the amount of food necessary to survive, they would die before they could reproduce. Gone.
I imagine the survivors, us, have have a dialog in our bodies,like one between the bridge of the Starship and the engine room that says, "Yo, if you keep running after that food you will wreck, wreck the main thrusters and we will be dead in space." Then the engine room lies and says there is no more power. (on steamships you can only throw the decking into the furnace for just so long before the crew has no where to stand.)
So you conclude the food is not worth it. You live for another day.
Or if being chased the dialog goes, "You fool,you are gonna die if you keep running, so stop, stand and fight and you might have a chance! We'll load the photon torpedoes."
The same dialog occurs if you are fighting a co-specific or showing off to get a mate. There is no reproductive future in dying for love, lunch, or during escape.
We descended from such decisions.
But there is great value in getting closer to the edge than the other guy. Those who get closest to the edge more often win.
We run to eat, fight, or f*** and live to do it another day.
Those are much more interesting things to do than listen to some central governor drone on about heart rates, ions, and acids.
Tom
Tom, I like your explanation, it's the same one I use. The question is: did I plagiarise you or did you plagiarise me?
Scientician wrote:
It was probably your Central Governess. She told you that you were stupid and worthless and would never amount to anything.
Of course she was wrong. But a part of you still carries that feeling of inferiority into every race and training session.
Perhaps hypnotherapy might help your confidence?
Silly rabbit. The Central Governor doesn't "talk to us". It merely controls us. Remember now, Noakes says that it is the ONLY explanation for why we start off races at different paces. Not because we choose too, mind you. But because the Central Governor... governs us.
Now it seems you're saying that the only reason I don't sprint to a 60 second 400 meters at the start of a marathon is merely that I lack self confidence, is that it? It's certainly within my ability to do so, it's just that it has always seemed rather pointless.
Is that your normal racing plan? How did you manage to overcome the Central Governor? More importantly, what did you learn from the experience about yourself -- aside from the fact that it's a really dumb plan?
Scientician wrote:
Tom, I like your explanation, it\\\'s the same one I use. The question is: did I plagiarise you or did you plagiarise me?
My central governor detected your powerful brainwaves.
The training ideas come from coaches and athletes and scientists try to figure out why it works. Not the other way around. If it works who cares why.
The more science one uses for training the less successful they will be. Physiological testing is mostly useless. The best way to judge your fitness is by racing. The best variable to base your training off of is your race time. Worrying about all that other stuff just becomes your Central Governor.
actuall, yes wrote:
Noakes's theory would suggest emphasizing race-pace or faster intervals: they teach the central governor that running at a given pace will not cause heart damage.
Again, how does this change the way people train. Specificity. You don't train to run a marathon at 5:30 pace by running a lot of 400 repeats in :70. Likewise, you don't train to run a 5k at 5:00 pace by doing nothing but long slow distance at 7:00 pace. Yes you should incorporate training at all intensity levels, but the focus should be geared specifically to the demands of the race whether those demands be on the CNS or the periphery. It's like arguing why the sky is blue? Who cares...it's blue.
Alan
Scientician wrote:
fletch wrote:I'm not sure how an in-situ set-up with no central innervation supports the central governor model. Could you explain?
Could you explain how it refutes the central governor model?
Because in this set-up, the central governor is removed.
Runningart2004 wrote:
"and should atheletes train any differently because of his theory? not really"
This is the only important thing said in this whole thread. Who cares if the chicken or the egg comes first as long as it gets across the street right?
Alan
The very first sentence in the first post of the thread says it's a trivial topic. Why not learn a little about human physiology. It's not going to hurt you.
Noakes always had very wobbly hands on Blue Peter if seem to remember.
Who's round is it anyway?
Well, here I go thinking the thread was dead, so I check out for a week or so ...
I come back, and wow! We're front-page stuff, have Noakes on the horn ... fantastic! It's great debate material, and IS practically applicable. Is top-end performance limited only by Q (cardiac output) in elite athletes? If so, I would think training top-end athletes would be a hell of a lot easier.
To those who have read the Snell article (again): do you agree with his choice to use trials instead of participants for his "n" when determining statistical significance?
The Brink-Elfegoun article is indeed interesting, and I liked their experimental design (very creative, imho). However, it does not discount that the "Central Governor" may be linked to factors other than heart tissue work output - or that several systems may contribute feedback simultaneously to the CNS.
My opinion:
Are there mechanisms for central fatigue? YES.
Are there mechanisms for peripheral fatigue? YES.
Which limits performance? Its always an integration of systems - many things affect which might be the biggest factor in a given circumstance.
Good evidence for central limits in longer duration exercise at 'aerobic' intensities with substrates available - especially where hyperthermia is concerned.
But in many instances, i believe peripheral fatigue is the main factor (i.e. limits performance before central mechanisms do). E.g. In shorter more intense exercise.
Anyway, i don't think you'd find any concensus that the central governer is the best theory of fatigue that's out there. To say its the ONLY one that makes sense of observations may be Tim's honest opinion, but its quite different to state it as fact (which is how i read his email).
IMO, the term 'central governer' implies too much 'intelligent control'. Where central limits are apparent, i prefer the term 'mechanism(s)'.
Runningart2004 wrote:
Again, how does this change the way people train. Specificity. You don't train to run a marathon at 5:30 pace by running a lot of 400 repeats in :70. Likewise, you don't train to run a 5k at 5:00 pace by doing nothing but long slow distance at 7:00 pace. Yes you should incorporate training at all intensity levels, but the focus should be geared specifically to the demands of the race whether those demands be on the CNS or the periphery. It's like arguing why the sky is blue? Who cares...it's blue.
Alan
How do you know what works best if you know nothing about what is going on? What do you have to add to the conversation? Maybe it would help you to know something about why those schedules work that you mindlessly follow.
Maybe your working hard on something you really don't need. But you'll never know. Who cares about that, not me.
Average_Joe wrote:
Scientician wrote:It was probably your Central Governess. She told you that you were stupid and worthless and would never amount to anything.
Of course she was wrong. But a part of you still carries that feeling of inferiority into every race and training session.
Perhaps hypnotherapy might help your confidence?
Silly rabbit. The Central Governor doesn't "talk to us". It merely controls us. Remember now, Noakes says that it is the ONLY explanation for why we start off races at different paces. Not because we choose too, mind you. But because the Central Governor... governs us.
Now it seems you're saying that the only reason I don't sprint to a 60 second 400 meters at the start of a marathon is merely that I lack self confidence, is that it? It's certainly within my ability to do so, it's just that it has always seemed rather pointless.
Is that your normal racing plan? How did you manage to overcome the Central Governor? More importantly, what did you learn from the experience about yourself -- aside from the fact that it's a really dumb plan?
I learned to use different training paces and different race tactics in order to adapt.
My plan is working rather well, thanks for asking.
fletch wrote:
Scientician wrote:Could you explain how it refutes the central governor model?
Because in this set-up, the central governor is removed.
You also removed the most important part of my last post.