You can measure intensity however you want. Mmol or Vo2max have some advantages. But most people have no clue what they mean.the differences between a sub elite running a 70min hm and an elite guy running a 60min hm just aren't big enough to worry about for most of us. If you want to worry about them buy the lactate monitor and do the lab tests..if your coaching some HS team the take away is consider replacing 6x800 all out with 5*1 run 20-30s slower over the summer
Bakken writes, ' Contact a physiology lab where you can get an accurate lactate threshold test (illustration 1) The value you should focus on is the value you get when you start accumulating lactic acid. This will be the baseline for your training. If a lab is unavailable to you, the lactate threshold ranges from 3.0 mmol/l to 4.5 mmol/l on the Aekray meter. If you are a typical long-distance runner, you will be close to 3.0 (from 4.0 to 3.0) and as a middle-distance type usually closer to 4.5.'
Again, he also writes ' The higher the level an athlete achieves, the lower the 'lab threshold' also becomes.'
JS thinks he could teach Bakken a thing or two about the lactate threshold.
Well, now I gonna surprise you and many more. )) I don`t think I can teach Bakken about the so called " lactate threshold" that he already knows about it. But you must interpret correct what he wrote. He doesn`t wrote that a top elite runner can go from an individual 4.0 LT down to 3.0 LT . What he wrote is that a long distancers` ( of any level) LT mostly vary from 4.0 down to 3.0 . If you are a world class athlete you can ( in most cases) tolerate a higher concentration of lactate ( and "clear" it) before it starts to accumulate compared to runners at lower levels.
The Bakken article says, "The higher the level an athlete achieves, the lower the 'lab threshold' also becomes". It sounds like most runners have a lab-tested LT close to 4.0 mmol/l, but that elites are more in the 2.5 to 3.0 range.
Is it possible to bring down your LT from 4.0 to 3.0 from training appropriately? If so, how?
No, it's not possible.Your lactate threshold is about 4.00 mmol/ l even if you are an elite runner.The difference is more like the elite runner can hold a significant high speed even at 2.5 - 3.5 mmol/ l.And the main thing out of this that training the lactate threshold is most effective in the range of 2.5- 4.0 mmol/ l.What many forget when it comes to training and physiology is that the basics are the same even if you are a hobby jogger or a world top runner.Some tend to think that the world's best runners bodies must function in a different way, but they don't . 🧙♂️
I mean I dont know how you can even post such a silly comment at this point, especially after all the data we have from lab tests and people with personal lactate meters.
The basics are not the same. And to Answer Flowrunner, yes, you can change this, by doing a substantial amount of Zone 2/LT1 work. If you want to effectively flatten your curve and lower you lactate #s at a given threshold, a lot of aerobic work will do just that. The less you are using your glycolytic system for your energy contribution, over time, that will also lower the production of lactate for a given speed and your max lactate capacity/building rate over time. That's why everyone, at some point, if they want to maintain some speed and power in the glycolytic system has to do some work there. It's the whole underpinning around the concept of VlaMax
What Ingebrigtsen, Kipchoge and Blummenfelt all have in common?
It is to hit there target paces very disciplined for each training session. It matters if you do the intervals at 95%CV or 90%CV or 85%CV. Interval length matters, rest time matters, total interval volume matters.
JS thinks he could teach Bakken a thing or two about the lactate threshold.
Well, now I gonna surprise you and many more. )) I don`t think I can teach Bakken about the so called " lactate threshold" that he already knows about it. But you must interpret correct what he wrote. He doesn`t wrote that a top elite runner can go from an individual 4.0 LT down to 3.0 LT . What he wrote is that a long distancers` ( of any level) LT mostly vary from 4.0 down to 3.0 . If you are a world class athlete you can ( in most cases) tolerate a higher concentration of lactate ( and "clear" it) before it starts to accumulate compared to runners at lower levels.
You are talking about production/clearance, everyone else is talking about accumulation to identify LT2.
Look at top level triathletes. All LT2 under 3.0 mmol. Jakob probably has an LT2 around 3.0-3.2, but he is also using his glycolytic system much more than an IM/HIM type athlete and has much much more running speed and power than ultra endurance athletes.
A sprinter vs a GC rider in the Tour are going to have very different LT2s, just a fact.
If you took the evolution of a Triathlete from Sprint to IM you would see the same phenomenon. Early in their career when they were mixing many more elements of speed/power/vo2 max work for the shorter distances, VLAMAX would be higher and so would their absolute VO2Max and Lactate THreshold numbers. As they extend their distance to IM distance, you are going to see very little work in that severe domain and very little need for anaerobic contributions since this is not the limiting factors in those races, and thus the glycolytic power they now have is going to go down substantially unless specifically tended to and revisited throughout certain microcycles.
The Norwegian Triathletes are in such a phase right now. They switched to long course post Olympics and their glycolytic power fell of. They still want to go back to Olympic distance so now they are in the process of going back to high intensity work. Their LT2s range from 2.2-2.7 mmol
The Bakken article says, "The higher the level an athlete achieves, the lower the 'lab threshold' also becomes". It sounds like most runners have a lab-tested LT close to 4.0 mmol/l, but that elites are more in the 2.5 to 3.0 range.
Is it possible to bring down your LT from 4.0 to 3.0 from training appropriately? If so, how?
No, it's not possible.Your lactate threshold is about 4.00 mmol/ l even if you are an elite runner.The difference is more like the elite runner can hold a significant high speed even at 2.5 - 3.5 mmol/ l.And the main thing out of this that training the lactate threshold is most effective in the range of 2.5- 4.0 mmol/ l.What many forget when it comes to training and physiology is that the basics are the same even if you are a hobby jogger or a world top runner.Some tend to think that the world's best runners bodies must function in a different way, but they don't . 🧙♂️
This idea of a 'fixed' physiology just shows your lack of understanding on the topic.
So top level athlete do metabolic profiling why? So they can support the cost of lab equipment for high end sports scientists?
Your physiology is constantly changing and responding to stimulus you give it. Again, why would people periodize your training if you at the end you're going to be just like joe hobbyjogger at the line when it matters?
Jakob is raising his profile or ceiling during his "base" phase with all the double threshold and hill work (which is just VO2 work in disguise) until the competition phase where he starts to work on economization at shorter distances as he tries to 'push up' all the speeds at which his thresholds and critical speeds are occurring. LT and VO2 are put into 'maintenance' in this final period as racing and glycolytic power are becoming more and more important for race fitness.
When you see the schedules, his race period you start seeing a double threshold here and there, some single thresholds, some 400's @ 5k/vo2 pace and a lot more 300's/400's likely with full rests trying to stay under 10.0 mmol.
This is why he keeps saying again and again 'im a better 5k runner than 1500, always have been' because that is exactly the system they run and the profile he now has metabolically
@shirtboy2022 Thank you, I've learned a lot from your posts and want to study them further to fully understand everything. You mentioned Zone 2/LT1. About what heart rate range would Zone 2/LT1 be? My max HR is 185 and my lactate threshold is at 165 bpm.
No, it's not possible.Your lactate threshold is about 4.00 mmol/ l even if you are an elite runner.The difference is more like the elite runner can hold a significant high speed even at 2.5 - 3.5 mmol/ l.And the main thing out of this that training the lactate threshold is most effective in the range of 2.5- 4.0 mmol/ l.What many forget when it comes to training and physiology is that the basics are the same even if you are a hobby jogger or a world top runner.Some tend to think that the world's best runners bodies must function in a different way, but they don't . 🧙♂️
I mean I dont know how you can even post such a silly comment at this point, especially after all the data we have from lab tests and people with personal lactate meters.
The basics are not the same. And to Answer Flowrunner, yes, you can change this, by doing a substantial amount of Zone 2/LT1 work. If you want to effectively flatten your curve and lower you lactate #s at a given threshold, a lot of aerobic work will do just that. The less you are using your glycolytic system for your energy contribution, over time, that will also lower the production of lactate for a given speed and your max lactate capacity/building rate over time. That's why everyone, at some point, if they want to maintain some speed and power in the glycolytic system has to do some work there. It's the whole underpinning around the concept of VlaMax
Are you aware that most of us aren't talking about the so called LT1 here? Not even Bakken talked about LT 1 in what we saw some sentences written by him. We are more talking about the so called LT 2 here that usually is the reference lactate threshold level most runners and coaches refer to when discuss it and use it in their training programs.
By the way , any direct "lactate threshold" doesn´t really exist! However, a maximal level... Did you know that? ;)
Why it got the name "lactate threshold" originated from scientific researches with measurments at a little too few speeds.This meant that the continous climb wasn`t as clear as if they had measured on many speeds with much smaller differences among themselves.
As far as I have seen the Ingebrigtsens don`t use their lactate meter when running easy steady distance or recovery runs in zone 1/2 , do they?
I mean I dont know how you can even post such a silly comment at this point, especially after all the data we have from lab tests and people with personal lactate meters.
The basics are not the same. And to Answer Flowrunner, yes, you can change this, by doing a substantial amount of Zone 2/LT1 work. If you want to effectively flatten your curve and lower you lactate #s at a given threshold, a lot of aerobic work will do just that. The less you are using your glycolytic system for your energy contribution, over time, that will also lower the production of lactate for a given speed and your max lactate capacity/building rate over time. That's why everyone, at some point, if they want to maintain some speed and power in the glycolytic system has to do some work there. It's the whole underpinning around the concept of VlaMax
Are you aware that most of us aren't talking about the so called LT1 here? Not even Bakken talked about LT 1 in what we saw some sentences written by him. We are more talking about the so called LT 2 here that usually is the reference lactate threshold level most runners and coaches refer to when discuss it and use it in their training programs.
By the way , any direct "lactate threshold" doesn´t really exist! However, a maximal level... Did you know that? ;)
Why it got the name "lactate threshold" originated from scientific researches with measurments at a little too few speeds.This meant that the continous climb wasn`t as clear as if they had measured on many speeds with much smaller differences among themselves.
As far as I have seen the Ingebrigtsens don`t use their lactate meter when running easy steady distance or recovery runs in zone 1/2 , do they?
Well aware of what you think you're talking about. You of course are never very clear with your terminology so im not sure why'd you start on this topic.
He talked about it, trust me.
"By the way , any direct "lactate threshold" doesn´t really exist! However, a maximal level... Did you know that? ;)" Maybe that was a sentence. Lactate Threshold exists. The argument is over the second turn point and what to call it. You cant even seem to get the controversies right here.
As far as you've seen. We could fill a forum with what you havent seen and dont know.
No, it's not possible.Your lactate threshold is about 4.00 mmol/ l even if you are an elite runner.The difference is more like the elite runner can hold a significant high speed even at 2.5 - 3.5 mmol/ l.And the main thing out of this that training the lactate threshold is most effective in the range of 2.5- 4.0 mmol/ l.What many forget when it comes to training and physiology is that the basics are the same even if you are a hobby jogger or a world top runner.Some tend to think that the world's best runners bodies must function in a different way, but they don't . 🧙♂️
This idea of a 'fixed' physiology just shows your lack of understanding on the topic.
So top level athlete do metabolic profiling why? So they can support the cost of lab equipment for high end sports scientists?
Your physiology is constantly changing and responding to stimulus you give it. Again, why would people periodize your training if you at the end you're going to be just like joe hobbyjogger at the line when it matters?
Jakob is raising his profile or ceiling during his "base" phase with all the double threshold and hill work (which is just VO2 work in disguise) until the competition phase where he starts to work on economization at shorter distances as he tries to 'push up' all the speeds at which his thresholds and critical speeds are occurring. LT and VO2 are put into 'maintenance' in this final period as racing and glycolytic power are becoming more and more important for race fitness.
When you see the schedules, his race period you start seeing a double threshold here and there, some single thresholds, some 400's @ 5k/vo2 pace and a lot more 300's/400's likely with full rests trying to stay under 10.0 mmol.
This is why he keeps saying again and again 'im a better 5k runner than 1500, always have been' because that is exactly the system they run and the profile he now has metabolically
I just add this; Try to explain the success of the many world class top runners in history e.g Bernard Lagat, Michael Mysyoki , Jim Spivey, Vincent Rouessau and many , many more on relatively very low mileage and relatvely little work at zone 1/2 . Absolutely impossible to explain with your frames of reference. No need to periodize your training. Just sharpen it up before more important races. Well, notice here that I have never told that high mileage and periodizing doesn`t function. I just talk about a linear low mileage method that gives at least the same good results, even for the Hobby Jogger Joe, on much less mileage . Keep it simple. That`s the smartest and best way to do it.
@shirtboy2022 Thank you, I've learned a lot from your posts and want to study them further to fully understand everything. You mentioned Zone 2/LT1. About what heart rate range would Zone 2/LT1 be? My max HR is 185 and my lactate threshold is at 165 bpm.
Assuming you got that from wearing a HRM strap and letting Garmin calculate automatically, correct?
If so id say LT1 HR range: 142-155.
LT2 HR Range: 155-168
This of course comes with the usual caveats around HR (time of day, hydration, drift/how deep into the workout you are, etc)
Some interesting dynamics with HR around the Thresholds:
For LT1, you should see the normal linear drift, with very little difference between your avg HR and your max HR for any one interval.
For LT2, are you start to get around your MLSS you will see your HR do some funky things when you clearly get over your "LTHR" and see some clear divergences in your AVG HR and MAX HR for any intervals, especially mid way or late in the workout.
In your case, you might be pretty solid below 165 but as the workout progresses you will see flutters in your HR when you go over 165. It will be 165 for a minute, then all the sudden 172, then back down, and then up again. When you see this, you can be pretty sure you are over a 'steady state' and your body is starting to drift into another domain of physiological response.
I find the Garmin LTHR to be actually pretty good and very accurate in my case, confirmed through Lactate testing. Just my 2 cents on HR
What Ingebrigtsen, Kipchoge and Blummenfelt all have in common?
It is to hit there target paces very disciplined for each training session. It matters if you do the intervals at 95%CV or 90%CV or 85%CV. Interval length matters, rest time matters, total interval volume matters.
@shirtboy2022, thank you very much for your advice. The data comes from being tested in a lab. I really appreciate your putting numbers to the LT1 and LT2 ranges based off of my personal numbers. I do workouts like 4 mile tempos that get me into the LT2 range. Also, I do workouts like 7 mile marathon pace runs that are in the LT1 range. I can definitely relate to the observations you provided on how the HR creeps up.
The Bakken article seems to say that runners like himself before and Jakob Ingebrigtsen today spend more time in a certain range in order to do a huge amount of 'threshold training'. Is Bakken referring to the LT1 or LT2 range?
I just add this; Try to explain the success of the many world class top runners in history e.g Bernard Lagat, Michael Mysyoki , Jim Spivey, Vincent Rouessau and many , many more on relatively very low mileage and relatvely little work at zone 1/2 .
It's always the same names, JS. If there are/were so many, many more, why don't you tell us a few more names. And how about some runners who are still competing today. You are stuck in the past and your biggest problem is your incurable narcissism. You are incapable of learning from those who know more than you. You are incapable of saying "Hey, maybe I am not right. It would be great if I learned from someone with better knowledge." No, because then you would have to admit you may be wrong.
This thread is extremely interesting and useful. Please stop spamming it with your I-know-better-you-people-don't crap.
@shirtboy2022, thank you very much for your advice. The data comes from being tested in a lab. I really appreciate your putting numbers to the LT1 and LT2 ranges based off of my personal numbers. I do workouts like 4 mile tempos that get me into the LT2 range. Also, I do workouts like 7 mile marathon pace runs that are in the LT1 range. I can definitely relate to the observations you provided on how the HR creeps up.
The Bakken article seems to say that runners like himself before and Jakob Ingebrigtsen today spend more time in a certain range in order to do a huge amount of 'threshold training'. Is Bakken referring to the LT1 or LT2 range?
I just add this; Try to explain the success of the many world class top runners in history e.g Bernard Lagat, Michael Mysyoki , Jim Spivey, Vincent Rouessau and many , many more on relatively very low mileage and relatvely little work at zone 1/2 .
It's always the same names, JS. If there are/were so many, many more, why don't you tell us a few more names. And how about some runners who are still competing today. You are stuck in the past and your biggest problem is your incurable narcissism. You are incapable of learning from those who know more than you. You are incapable of saying "Hey, maybe I am not right. It would be great if I learned from someone with better knowledge." No, because then you would have to admit you may be wrong.
This thread is extremely interesting and useful. Please stop spamming it with your I-know-better-you-people-don't crap.
Do you know what? Just ignore him. The problem is that you just can´t stop yourself from answering him and then he gets all the attention in the thread.
@shirtboy2022, thank you very much for your advice. The data comes from being tested in a lab. I really appreciate your putting numbers to the LT1 and LT2 ranges based off of my personal numbers. I do workouts like 4 mile tempos that get me into the LT2 range. Also, I do workouts like 7 mile marathon pace runs that are in the LT1 range. I can definitely relate to the observations you provided on how the HR creeps up.
The Bakken article seems to say that runners like himself before and Jakob Ingebrigtsen today spend more time in a certain range in order to do a huge amount of 'threshold training'. Is Bakken referring to the LT1 or LT2 range?
To add on to everything that’s been laid out before, which has been really good, ppl have to remember ‘double threshold’ is not the same workout in the same day, it’s a different but similar stimulus in the same day.
That first threshold is always the same 6min reps keeping the lactate under 2.2-2.5 depending where you see (bakken recently hinted 2.2). now bear in mind this is on a Lactate Pro 2 which converts to probably 1.7-2.0 on your us available lactate plus. 1.7-2.0 is very much around lt1.
now, you get the evening threshold, 1000s/400s keeping under 3.2-3.5 mmol. Thats an lt2 workout or ‘threshold’ workout in the colloquial or Daniels sense of the term.
Your using that first workout to springboard to the second and get a very controlled stimulus and volume.
if anything i bet they are more worried about being ‘over’ on the morning workout than ‘over’ on the evening workout
I just add this; Try to explain the success of the many world class top runners in history e.g Bernard Lagat, Michael Mysyoki , Jim Spivey, Vincent Rouessau and many , many more on relatively very low mileage and relatvely little work at zone 1/2 .
It's always the same names, JS. If there are/were so many, many more, why don't you tell us a few more names. And how about some runners who are still competing today. You are stuck in the past and your biggest problem is your incurable narcissism. You are incapable of learning from those who know more than you. You are incapable of saying "Hey, maybe I am not right. It would be great if I learned from someone with better knowledge." No, because then you would have to admit you may be wrong.
This thread is extremely interesting and useful. Please stop spamming it with your I-know-better-you-people-don't crap.
Threads actually been not that bad by LR.com standards!
