Seiler 80/20 vs threshold

Define Anaerobic?

Define Anaerobic training?

A majority of the top middle distance and distance runners do threshold training and/or tempo runs. Do them. Don't overthink this. Eliminate them from your training at your peril.

When the body produces more lactate than it can use. Anywhere from zone 4 to all out tabarra.

My point is not that one should not do thresholds and tempos. Many of Seilers "example" athletes do some threshold work. However, if training at a high lactate level for 10% of your training would not harm aerobic development, but help it, why not add it in?

qewjfwibvwier wrote:

A majority of the top middle distance and distance runners do threshold training and/or tempo runs. Do them. Don't overthink this. Eliminate them from your training at your peril.

If you read the polarized stuff they aren't doing tons of anaerobic work. They are doing work at 90-100% hr(i.e. about HM-3k pace). Realistically good luck at trying run like 10 miles(about 15% for a 60mpw) at 5k pace and up without breaking down after 8 weeks.

And a lot of what runners consider threshold work (hour pace) is right at the edge of what is considered high intensity work. If you train at 90% versus 88% intensity isn't something we can measure. The polarized crowd is against those hard steady runs(say you MP is 5:30 and easy run is 630. They don't want you running 6 min miles) that some people like.

*tabata

Right now, I would need to do 5mpw at high intensity, and could do some of that on the bike. Lets say that I do 4*8 minutes at 5:45 mile pace (5:17 pr), that is 5 miles. I could also add on a bike or swim session to increase the time at zone 4 or 5.

I am currently at 53 mpw, increasing 2 miles per week.

RunnerWithoutAnAerobicBase wrote:

When the body produces more lactate than it can use. Anywhere from zone 4 to all out tabarra.

So Aerobic Capacity is Anaerobic?

You need to do better than that. Try again.

Sorry for posting again, but my goal is to get to NXN this fall. My plan was to build from 20mpw to 80-100 over the course of around .5 year (I started in December). Then I would do 4*8 min all out bike workouts twice a week, with a long run, 3 threshold sessions, and a lot of easy milage.

I don't have a lot of genetic talent, but want to give it 100% to see if I could get to 15:xx in the 5k (what I estimate I will need to get to NXN).

>4 milimoles of lactate?

RunnerWithoutAnAerobicBase wrote:

I am starting to believe that acidosis does not decrease mitochondrial function (Matt Fitzgerald has a good article about this on Triathlete). Are there any other reasons (besides mental burnout) that one should follow a 80/5/15 model of training, where you go 100% effort for 15-20% of your training, and then take it easy for 80% of your training? I know that the Ingebrigtsens do not do this, but maybe, if anerobic training actually IMPROVES aerobic function, one would benefit from more all out training (mental and physical benefits).

Thoughts?

Also, should you periodize training, or can you improve multiple systems at the same time?

To run fast in long distance one want to maximize the aerobic capacity of as much of the muscle as possible, including the fast muscle fibres. To train the fast twitch to contribute one obviously need to train them and that at paces where the lactate is at higher levels and the acidity is also increasing. The question is how fast, for how long.

Tabata's research and a lot of research based on that indicate that short and intense is very efficient to develop an aerobic capability, but a retired swimming coach Ernest Maglischo who follows that line of thinking also states there is evidence that slow twitch muscle fibres are best trained at threshold and lower and even that just doing very high intensity is very inefficient in conditioning the slow twitch fibres aerobically.

On the other hand, long runs seem also to finally condition faster muscle fibres when the slow twitch get depleted and the faster ones needs to step in, but this might be a very inefficient way of targeting the fast ones.

The threshold philosophy does not just do thresholds. The ingebrigtsens are doing a fast (hill) workout every week of the base phase (and they also do shorter threshold work targeting more of the faster fibres as well even if not at high lactate levels). They also do fast work to peak for races of course,

Recently research was presented that too much intense interval actually lowers performance, but with needed recovery, the performance shortly after peaked. I think this falls well inline with experience that too much work over too long at VO2 max paces might burn you out if not getting proper recovery.

Then Canova and several prescribe using a ladder of paces both faster and slower than race pace. All abilities are needed, from pure mechanical efficiency and max lactic power down through lactic production, accumulation, and clearance. I think the load of the paces around accumulation can be tough since the lactate and paces are high and the rep lengths relatively long to actually accumulate. they have their mission for peaking though.

My point is that anaerobic work may target the aerobic development of just the fast twitch muscles and not the slow twitch which are the really important for any endurance effort. One also need the aerobic targeting training from say just faster than threshold and slower and the slower you go the more volume to condition the slow twitch.

There are no certain facts here so a hard question to answer.

RunnerWithoutAnAerobicBase wrote:

Also, should you periodize training, or can you improve multiple systems at the same time?

I think the philosophy to include training on all more or less continuously makes sense. Magness and Canova have their funnel caring about all abilities from pure speed down to pure long endurance through the base phase and focusing on the race paces close to races. One could still use periodization but at a shorter time scale and with proper maintenance of the different abilities if focusing on ohter abilities in one period. Block periodization has been shown to give a benefit over more even training, but can risk injury especially for running with the relatively high impact in training.

First off, I want to thank you for you responses.

Second:

Do you by any chance have the studies that show burnout from too much VO2 max training? I know that many people say that this exists, but many pro triathletes (Lionel Sanders for example) do very hard workouts year round. Essentially, I am not arguing the benefit of threshold work, tempos, etc., but asking if a few tabata exercises on top of the other work would provide benefit.

always intrigued by these discussions. i will say from a triathlete perspective there is a huge difference between cycling and running (and swimming workouts) for that matter. HR varies for each discipline w/ running being the most intense. i have done many threshold (and even VO2 max) workouts where my HR stays in the high 150s/low 160s on the bike and my LT is around 168-170. Cycling workouts are almost entirely power based for for these reasons. The effort is there, but its generally much easier to recover from. Swimming is even less stressful on the body.

So maybe my run sessions should be threshold but I should add in 1/2 swim or bike sessions that are really hard to get the benefit without the long recovery.

i think its def possible that some triathletes get more out of their run training by utilizing other disciplines. some runners might run their best on 50 miles per week (allowing them to stay consistent and have some quality) then of course any 4 hours long rides and quality cycling work thrown on top of that will have additional benefits.

RunnerWithoutAnAerobicBase wrote:

First off, I want to thank you for you responses.

Second:

Do you by any chance have the studies that show burnout from too much VO2 max training? I know that many people say that this exists, but many pro triathletes (Lionel Sanders for example) do very hard workouts year round. Essentially, I am not arguing the benefit of threshold work, tempos, etc., but asking if a few tabata exercises on top of the other work would provide benefit.

Actually, I think a Tabata style is better than long VO2 max work. Tabata makes it possible to have a very high pace/intensity, but where the short breaks can make the load less than for longer reps. I would prefer the short rep short rest style rather than the long reps. There is good evidence that for example 30/30 gives better gains than 3 or 4min reps. I would still consider long vo2max work if it is to prepare for races needing VO2max to give the proper speed endurance.

As to evidence, I think the recent study at least showed how the mithocondria worked less well after too much high intensity interval workouts, but it also showed how fast the body could recover back to peak performance. This was done over a short time though so the effect over months, I do not know.