7k feet
7k feet
Pretty fit.
pretty fit lol. eat lots of red meat and take your distance days easy
Altitude is overrated.
It will take you about a year to get used to this altitude. You will be good at mountain races but you will loose speed because you don't have the turnover anymore.
Just enjoy the scenery and the different kind of races you can do.
You can get pretty fit but you can't be passive. Just being at altitude won't make you "fit."
Hemoglobin actually increases within 24 hours of being at altitude. It's a natural physiologic adjustment to being at altitude. You would need to be there for a while, though, to see long-term benefits when coming down from altitude.
I live in Chicago but have a home near Silverthorne, CO, at just under 9000 ft. I probably spend about a total of 4 to 6 weeks there every year in total but usually just a week at a time. I don't like to run when I'm there because I haven't been able to adjust quickly enough for it to be enjoyable. I do a lot of cycling when the pavement doesn't have snow on it but I'm a much better cyclist than a runner anyway. I also do a lot of hiking as long as it isn't spring when a lot of my favorite trails are sloppy. In the winter I primarily ski, snowshoe, and ride snowmobiles. This may be more psychological than physiological but when I get back to Illinois I feel like running is a lot easier for me. That feeling is only initial and I don't see a lot of long-term benefits.
It's better to spend a few 4-6 week stints at altitude each year.
Seppo Kaitenenn wrote:It's better to spend a few 4-6 week stints at altitude each year.
It's better to live at altitude to train and race at sea level if you are looking at improving race times.
Altitude does not make you fitter.
Work makes you fitter no matter what the altitude.
Most people who have never been to altitude before will see a huge boost, especially if you spend an extended time period (several months) up there. Anecdotal, but one of my close friends started going to Flag in the summers. Before he went up, he could run 68s for 3k. After the first trip, he could do it for 5k. After the second trip, it was nearly his 10k pace. He went from a mid-pack D1 runner (8:30, 14:40) to a regional qualifier (14:00) to a national elite (28:30), and credited almost all of his improvement to altitude training.
my two pennies wrote:
Most people who have never been to altitude before will see a huge boost, especially if you spend an extended time period (several months) up there. Anecdotal, but one of my close friends started going to Flag in the summers. Before he went up, he could run 68s for 3k. After the first trip, he could do it for 5k. After the second trip, it was nearly his 10k pace. He went from a mid-pack D1 runner (8:30, 14:40) to a regional qualifier (14:00) to a national elite (28:30), and credited almost all of his improvement to altitude training.
Obviously times are rounded for anonymity.
my two pennies wrote:
Most people who have never been to altitude before will see a huge boost, especially if you spend an extended time period (several months) up there. Anecdotal, but one of my close friends started going to Flag in the summers. Before he went up, he could run 68s for 3k. After the first trip, he could do it for 5k. After the second trip, it was nearly his 10k pace. He went from a mid-pack D1 runner (8:30, 14:40) to a regional qualifier (14:00) to a national elite (28:30), and credited almost all of his improvement to altitude training.
But he only spent 3-4 months a year at altitude during base/summer training? I've heard that the benefits wear off after a few weeks post altitude, so if he was running those times outdoors in may I'm not sure the improvement can be fully attributed to altitude .
my two pennies wrote:
Most people who have never been to altitude before will see a huge boost, especially if you spend an extended time period (several months) up there. Anecdotal, but one of my close friends started going to Flag in the summers. Before he went up, he could run 68s for 3k. After the first trip, he could do it for 5k. After the second trip, it was nearly his 10k pace. He went from a mid-pack D1 runner (8:30, 14:40) to a regional qualifier (14:00) to a national elite (28:30), and credited almost all of his improvement to altitude training.
If these were summer sojourns, wouldn't he have been better at cross country than track? How did he do at cross country?
Why hasn't Flagstaff only produced 2 elite runners = Brian Shrader and Rochelle Kanuho?
My 2 cents - altitude is great in preparing you for 1968 Olympics, but doesn't do much for sea level racing.
Wouldn't Austin be a better fit for the modern runner than Flagstaff, since more likely to race in humidity than at 7,000'?
Former ski bum wrote:
Altitude is overrated.
It will take you about a year to get used to this altitude. You will be good at mountain races but you will loose speed because you don't have the turnover anymore.
Turnover? What's that?