Isn't "Event Specificity" More Important Than "VO2max" And "LT" Zones And All That?

Coach Mook wrote:

More misconceptions...

You misunderstood my post. Of course both efficiency and capacity are both aerobic. It is all about the same thing. Current training theory, however, differentiates aerobic training into subcategories. This is what I was trying to point out to you. Though efficiency and capacity are both parts of the whole and very much related, each has a much narrower focus.

Thus when Running Dogg wrote of 'aerobic capacity', I believe he was using that term in the widely accepted modern training context, i.e. training at 100% vVO2max pace.

Apparently you wish to use a much broader definition for capacity. That is certainly your right, but you must understand that most coaches will have a somewhat more focused definition than the one you prefer.

Lets break down training into two areas:

1) Conditioning

2) Specific Demands of Racing

With "Conditioning" we are talking about total body conditioning independant of the race distance. This would include aerobic and anaerobic conditioning as well as basic biomechanics and strength..ie: learn how to run with strength and effeciency so that you return as much energy as you give(hills!!!). This would include easy miles, hill work, and INTERVALS. What is Vo2max and what does Vo2max work do? It makes your body, your mechanical and metabolic systems, rise to their peak condition. With intervals you are basically testing the engine at its max, trying to improve the maximum capabilities of your engine. This can be done with intervals (800s-miles at 5k pace or slightly faster) AND with races (3k-5ks). If you've been training for many years you really only need 4-6 of these workouts to fully tax your system. Maybe you do 4x1mile wtih 2-3 minutes rest once a week for 4 weeks, each time you get progessively faster and are able to sustain the pace progressively longer. Maybe during the first workout you only hit 5:05-10 then die off to a 5:15 during the last one. Over the course of a few weeks you get faster and more consistent then during the last workout you run them all at 5:00. Then during the workout after that you still only hit 5:00. Then you know it's time to move on, you've maxed out that workout.

Another form of conditiong is the basic "tempo" run. Again start with a distance of 4-6 miles. Repeat the workout until you reach a consistent fast pace, then you've maxed out that workout for conditioning purposes. Longer tempo workouts such as 8xmile, 4x2mile, 2x4mile, etc would also be included here. These are workouts you don't really focus too much on pace but mostly on feel since you are getting very little rest (go for a 5:1 ratio). If you are getting tired then you are fullfilling the purpose of a conditioning workout.

Going forward you would enter the "Specific Demands of Racing" or the "Event Specificity" area of training. This is when you would run workouts based on your competitive goals. Now maybe you would repeat the 4x1 workout or the tempo run with a specific pace in mind, then you would decrease the rest during the interval workout or increase the distance run. For a marathoner maybe this would be a 10 mile run at marathon pace. This is when pace becomes important and when you would bag a workout because you're not hitting the pace. Either the pace is too fast and you over-estimated your ability or you've continued the workout for too long so quit the workout and pick it up again the following week trying to make it past where you slipped. Examples would be 4x1 with a 4:55 goal. If you hit the goal then the following week you either decrease the rest or add distance (4x2000). If you miss the goal then you repeat the same workout the following week.

Anyway, those are just my thoughts.

Alan

I did not misunderstand your post. I understood it just fine. When Running Dogg wrote of aerobic capacity he stated that you have to train at 100% of Vo2 max to increase it. I simply stated you can clearly run slower to inrease it. You apparently call that slower running effiency training. But it is for the same purpose...to allow the body to use more oxygen. All Aerobic training is used to increase aerobic capacity at a particular speed. I don't believe that vVo2 is the most important speed to train at. I think that goal race pace is the most important.

Back to the issue. The question was asked why is it that we literally try to raise vVO2 with specialized VO2 sessions? Why can't we be more "event specific? Running Dogg stated that you don't run at MP pace because it does not increase your Vo2 max, this is incorrect.

So the question is If you are training for a race that is not very near your vVo2 max what is the point of doing workouts at vVo2 max? There is not a great cooralation between Vo2max and and anything outside of 3k-5k. The further out side that range you get the worse the coorlation.

A training program designed to improve your VO2max might or might not improve your running speed at any given distance. Just because you can run a marathon at 80% of your Vo2 max does not mean that if you raise it you can still run at 80%. You may have gained nothing related to the marathon, and continue running the same performance at 78%. The other question is even if it did improve performance, would it be the optimal way to train? Or is it better to do training at MP?

Coach Mork,

You are suggesting that MP training will increase VO2max, but VO2max training may not improve your MP? That doesn't seem to make sense. Why would it work in one direction, but not the other? Thanks.

Both Coach Mook and Coach K are technically correct. All of the types of training described improve one's aerobic abilities, as pointed out by Coach Mook. Yet Coach K correctly points out that aerobic training is usually broken down into specific groups referred to as efficiency and capacity. Gold stars for both of you!

Anything that increases the amount of mitochondria will increase aerobic capacity (which is the same as vo2 max)

Slow running does this by increasing demand on the muscles to be more fuel efficient, juset as faster running does too.

Now, to answer Skuj's original question, yes goal pace IS more important than other paces in the last few weeks before a major competition, but then again, are you running a time trial at one pace, or do you need to be efficient at several paces within that race to cope with tactics?

There is no one answer to that question, but I would like to point out that those who won medals in Osaka were able to dominate their races. Look at how Bekele's rivals gave him an awesome race. But his sustained last lap surge, which Tirunesh Dibaba and Meseret Defar have also perfected, is a product of practice in both training and racing, whereas their rivals have not been practicing a last lap @ 800m pace.

Thanks for this post. One of the things that all the great coaches do is question. It really makes me think about why I do what I do and the benefits. Since I don't have all the answers (no one does), the reason that it may not be a two way street is a little complicated. It will take more thought on my part to try to explain the facts mixed with my beliefs.

One thing I did not say that Vo2max workouts will NOT improve ones marathon but I also did not state that they would. I do beleive that the need for so called Vo2max sessions in Marathon training is very limited where the need to do distance work in the 3k/5k is very important, not nessasarily at MP pace as I believe that it is an arbitrary pace for 3k/5k runners. (I am more of a believer in Lydiard LT type paces for for these runners.)

Back to the question. Why would it work in one direction, but not the other? In other words how does MP pace benifet Vo2max? and how does Vo2max effect or not effect Marathon pace.

First lets look at what benifets each training intensity provides. Then we must look at the limiting factors in performance in a 5k and a marathon.

I will think about these things further and get back to you. In the mean time it would be great for others to post the the answers to these questions. What benifets does Vos max sessions provide? What benifets does MP training provide? and what is the limiting factors in the 3k/5k and marathon?

I think that a marathon runner needs 98-100% of their Vo2max to be at their best in the race. In other words, some sessions @ 10k pace in the last few weeks before the race for some marathon runners, or extreme workouts at around a very ambitious projection of marathon pace for others. Or a compromise between the two.

wellnow wrote:

I think that a marathon runner needs 98-100% of their Vo2max to be at their best in the race. In other words, some sessions @ 10k pace in the last few weeks before the race for some marathon runners, or extreme workouts at around a very ambitious projection of marathon pace for others. Or a compromise between the two.

I can respect your opinion but you need something to back it up. Why do you think that?

Interesting study on the benefits of focusing on marathon pace in the weeks leading up to a marathon as opposed to training above threshold:

http://coachsci.sdsu.edu/csa/vol12/velikor.htm

Yikes! "Russian"

I went back through a few books (Simmons, Daniels, Vigil, Lydiard, Noakes) and still have yet to find 2 differnt aerobic groups of training broken down into efficiency and capacity.

What is the limiting performance in the races where Vo2 is at or near 100%?

The limiting factor is the Consuption and utilization of oxygen.

What is the Limiting factors in the marathon?

In Marathon running hypogylcemia, glyceride utilization, and muscle fatigue resistance become the limiting factors.

The benifets of Vo2max sessions are to increase the delievery and utilization of oxygen mainly through stoke volume and by-product resistance. ( of course some of the benifets below can allpy here but not to a really signifigant degree)

The benifets of marathon training are to to increase the delievery and utilization of oxygen through increased Capillarization, blood volume, mitochondria size/density, and aerobic enzyme concentrations. It also works on fat burning and prolonged muscle fatigue resistance.

Look at the benifets to the Vo2 max sessions. During marathon running, by-product resistance is not a big limiting factor because you are running at a pace that it will not accumulate to a great degree. Neither is stoke volume because your body is alway getting oxygen at the rate it needs, although it may not be utilizing at the rate it needs.

Now lets look at how Marothon session can improve vo2 max. Increased Capillarization increases the untilization of oxygen. Increased mitochondria size/density increases the untilization, and increased blood volume and enzme concentrations increase the consumption of oxygen.

Since when you compete in a marathon you are running well below your Vo2max oxygen consumption and untilization beome less important although not unimportant. There is still enough oxygen because you don't need 100% anymore. In other words Because you run a marathon at 85% of your Vo2max does not mean if you raise your Vo2max you will still run at 85%. You may run at 80% with the same performance. If Vo2max was that important for a marathoner there would be a stronger coorelation.

Training at your Vo2submax% may be helpful for marathoners, but You would need to figure out your Vo2 at marathon pace and your Vo2max. That would of course end up just being marathon pace.

Is there room for both type of workouts for both types of races? yes, absolutly. However marathon speed will help the 5k runner more than Vo2 max sessions will help the marathoner.

I believe in specificty in training as the best means to produce positive results. That means specific: speed, distance, and comfort level (pain). As Ranato canove posted

"The final goal is to make able the athlete to increase his SPECIFIC TRAINING... My goal is to INCREASE THE LENGTH OF TESTS AT THE SAME SPEED, or THE GENERAL VOLUME OF THE TESTS AT THE SAME SPEED, or TO REDUCE THE RECOVEY TIME AT THE SAME SPEED. In any case, thru the combination of these factors, my focus is to improve the SPECIFIC ENDURANCE of an athlete."

And as I said before I would not even use Vo2max because everyone has a different Vo2max and amount of time they can run at it. Specific Race pace/Goal pace holds to be the most important in my training sessions.

Damn! I'm really enjoying this discussion, particularly the last few posts.

On a sidenote, I'm trying to recall some info from that "Djibouti Explosion" of the late 80s, and a training regimen as such:

Most days: am: 90mins pm: 90mins. !!!!

If anyone can provide any more info on what they did, who the coaches wre etc, that would be lovely. Thanks. Keep it coming, for and against! :)

D2 is right for you wrote:

I went back through a few books (Simmons, Daniels, Vigil, Lydiard, Noakes) and still have yet to find 2 differnt aerobic groups of training broken down into efficiency and capacity.

Martin & Coe refer to aerobic conditioning (efficiency) and aerobic capacity. Capacity is also often called aerobic power. The USATF coaching education curriculum also uses similar terms. They are not unusual, though obviously not uniform.

Thanks that helps with the terminology. Do they actually use the term efficiency meaning the same as conditioning? Or is that something that you have inferred? Just asking because it was in parenthesis and I have not gotten around to the Coe books yet. They are on my list of yet to reads. Yes, I have heard Aerobic power meaning capacity/VO2. Ill have to look through my USATF Coaching stuff to see what I can come up with there for aerobic effiency.

I also found some stuff on Bob Kennedy breaking it into aerobic capacity, aerobic efficiency and aerobic/anaerobic power.

"Easy running improves aerobic capacity, tempo running improves aerobic efficiency and fast interval running improves aerobic and/or anaerobic power."

Aerobic capacity to Mr. Kennedy is base training which is what Coach K called effiency training. and Aerobic Power woek is more like VO2 workouts which Coach K called aerobic capacity. Aerobic efficiency is like steady state or threshold runs.

Part of the point I am making here is that the modern training theory that Coach K was talking about does not exist. Everyone believes something a little different and the terms are not even agreed upon. anyway, here is the article if anyone is interested.

http://www.duathlon.com/articles/3218

PS

2 people use this computer and this site so the last post by D2 is right for you was actually me.

Coach Mook wrote:

More misconceptions, You are thinking of things too simply and independently. First of all, efficiency has more to do with form, range of motion, biomechanics and things of that nature, not so much physiological factors that occur insde the body.

You were doing OK until here. Efficiency, by JDs definition, applies to the metabolic efficiency at the cellular level, not the biomechanical level.

Skuj wrote:Wouldn't fractions or percentiles of GOAL DISTANCE make the most sense though? Why do Marathoners need to do any 5k / 10k pace? Shouldn't paces surrounding the Marathon, ie Half Marathon, and "easy" pace, be of prime concern?

But just because certain sessions are of prime concern doesn't mean you should cut out the others. Almost every top marathoner does some sessions at 5/10k pace at some point in their buildup. This alone seems like a good enough reason to me. Take a look at Malmo's training. Take a look at pretty much any marathoner who has broken 2:15 and you will see some 5/10k pace/effort work thrown in there. I would also be willing to wager a case of beer that the majority of sub 2:15 marathoners do some work at faster than this pace as well. Personally I find doing some work at 5/10k pace makes marathon pace feel much easier. And that seems like pretty good justification to me for doing some work at that pace.

Might want to take a look at what the Japanese marathoners are doing. On the whole over the past couple decades men and women have consistently outperformed the US in terms of quality and quantity.

Coach Mook wrote:

Thanks that helps with the terminology. Do they actually use the term efficiency meaning the same as conditioning? Or is that something that you have inferred? Just asking because it was in parenthesis and I have not gotten around to the Coe books yet. They are on my list of yet to reads. Yes, I have heard Aerobic power meaning capacity/VO2. Ill have to look through my USATF Coaching stuff to see what I can come up with there for aerobic effiency.

What Martin & Coe call aerobic conditioning, USATF calls aerobic efficiency. Different names for the same thing. The phrases "aerobic capacity" and "aerobic power" are also interchangeable. Though not all coaches may subscribe to this terminology, one of the goals of USATF coaching education is to standardize these types of things. So Coach K was right in that restpect, I guess.

By the way, the suggestion the Vigil does not use these terms may not be entirely correct. They may not be apparent in his book, but I believe he was one of the authors of the L2 curriculum. Was he not? If so, it would seem he supports these terms.