Mr. Canova,
What are your thoughts regarding Bernard Lagat?
Mr. Canova,
What are your thoughts regarding Bernard Lagat?
ventolin^3 wrote:
blah blah blah blah blah blah, which converts to
blah blah
"it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing"...
this was a very general? Could you be more specific?
my friends, the athletes Renato coaches have superior aerobic engine. Mutai practiced and practiced.
For the sedentary hobbyjogger, If 4mmol/l lactate is reached during marathon at later miles, there is sometimes an involuntary explosion of feces. This is why compression socks are in high demand in America.
jtupper-ware wrote:
Running economy (measured in ml/kg/min) is in fact inversely related to VO2peak. But, why? Does this make any sense? We know good runners have a high VO2peak AND good running economy...so why the paradoxical relationship. There are 2 studies that show this relationship:
Pate et al (1992) - Very heterogenous group. I actually have spoken to Pate about this on several occassions. The inverse RE vs VO2max relationship exists because the paces at which the good runners had to run were not RELEVANT training paces for them...they were far too slow that the runners never ran that slow, and their economy was poor as a result.
Morgan and Daniels (1994) - very homogeneous group. The relationship probably exists because in order to be a very competitive distance runner (like the subjects that Morgan and Daniels had), you either need a very high VO2max or good economy. If you are one of those runners with a low VO2max, you need to compensate for that by having very good economy. Similarly, runners with high VO2max's tend to use "additonal energy" because they can, compared to runners with low VO2max's.
This point is addressed in Fletcher et al (2009). Economy of locomotion: beyond the measurement of oxygen uptake. The inverse relationship is simply a function of how running economy is typically expressed.
jT
You want to know the reason why VO2 peak is inversely related to economy? Here it is:
http://jeb.biologists.org/content/211/20/3266.fullRenato also made this point here on letsrun back in 2004 a few years before this research was published.
erivas wrote:
I don’t understand why no one has understood why these numbers do not make sense. If Canova is using these measurements that were taken prior to Boston, this is further proof that the wind helped them perform at a higher level than they were capable.
There is no “new” turbo diesel athletes. A marathon at blood lactate of 4mmol/l is too high. One would have bonked running at that intensity. It’s just too much sugar burning at that pace to complete a marathon without running out of fuel. Also, you can’t compare that to Paula Radcliffe, published studies have shown her to have very low blood lactate across all intensities, not higher.
Agreed.
Mr Renato and others
Will ability in the 400m affect the Marathon performance?
For example if a runner improves from 55 to 52 seconds in the 400m will this improve performance in a Marathon?
He can now run at a lower % of max speed and can be more economic in the Marathon.
How fast can Mosop or Mutai run in an 400m?
The distance specific training will suffer to improve by 3s over 400m. Unless, of course, we are talking about an untrained athlete (by elite standards that is).
okey dokey wrote:
my friends, the athletes Renato coaches have superior aerobic engine. Mutai practiced and practiced.
For the sedentary hobbyjogger, If 4mmol/l lactate is reached during marathon at later miles, there is sometimes an involuntary explosion of feces. This is why compression socks are in high demand in America.
rofl
@Canova - I'm trying to understand the statement about Moses doing nothing above 85% in the Boston Analysis thread (I don't recall the exact words). I looked at the summaries for all the workouts you posted (no summary for April so I didn't get that month) and converted to miles so I could relate :). I see most of the mileage is slower than MP+15% but nearly nothing for MP-15% - is this the point - essentially no speed work faster than MP-15%? I can also see the specificity build up especially in March with 22% of the mileage between Aerobic Power and Specific HM.
mpm(*). % MP . . Jan . Feb . Mar
6:10 . . 131% . 59.2% 71.6% 52.6% Rigeneration Mileage
5:38 . . 120% . 18.1% .9.5% 21.3% Basic Aerobic Mileage
5:14 . . 111% . 11.8% .3.7% .2.9% Aerobic Endurance Mileage
4:58 . . 106% . .6.2% .7.0% 10.7% Aerobic Power Mileage
4:42 . . 100% . .1.1% .6.8% .6.7% Specific Marathon Speed Endurance
4:26 . . 94% . . 2.0% .0.0% .5.1% Specific HM Speed Endurance
4:10 . . 89% . . 1.5% .1.5% .0.4% Specific 10000m Speed Endurance
<62/400m . . . . 0.0% .0.0% .0.3% Speed
mpw . . . . . . . 128 .124 . 102
* fast end of the range
Remember this is at 8,000ft!!!!!!!!!!!
kayry wrote:
I see most of the mileage is slower than MP+15% but nearly nothing for MP-15% - is this the point - essentially no speed work faster than MP-15%?
Nice chart. Good point.
Kevin halfmarathon wrote:
I'm interested Rita Jeptoo who ran lisbon, santa pola, and rotterdam marathon. I think she'll run chicago marathon this year in a personal best time of 2:23:25
Her training consisted of twice daily doping to the gills.
Maroon wrote:
Hello Renato,
As you asked in the 'Boston analysis' thread I open a new thread concerning the next subject that was already mentioned by some other people too:
Why can atletes like Geoffrey and Moses run a marathon at 4mmol/l average, instead of the 2-2,5 mmol/l that is more usual? Training with a lot extending the intensity?
And: 4mmol/l = 3mmol/l from basic value instead of 1mmol/l with 2mmol/l, so a bigger amount of energy that will be produced by the Anaerobic Lactic System (so using more sugar). How in the world do this atletes not reach glycogen-depletion (far) before the finish-line?
They didn't run with such high lactate values. Qutie the opposite. Below 2 mmols of lactate.