If Tim Noakes "Central Governor" Model is Correct AND there is NO Lactate Threshold, HOW should this effect my train

Steve McGregor wrote:

As I pointed out in one of my earlier posts, the MLSS pace will correspond to 10 km pace for one individual, 15 km pace for another and for an elite 1/2 marathon..............

So, instead of having to use 10 km pace as a reference for one runner, and 1/2 marathon pace for another, it's simpler just to refer to MLSS pace.

Steve

I don't follow your logic there Steve, even though you explained it in terms of different abilities.

All experienced runners know what their race paces are. So that is what we should refer to, not some confusing and highly debateable terminology.

Not really. As I posted quite a few posts ago, the MLSS only corresponds to an effort that can be maintained for a much longer period of time. Specifically in the case of the 3000, most will certainly run (on the road) in less than 12 min, more likely less than 10 min so, although performance will be influenced by factors that contribute to the MLSS, performance will also be strongly influenced by VO2max, and maybe even anaerobic capacity to a certain extent, depending on a number of factors. The 800 will be much more dependent upon anaerobic capacity and VO2max and only slightly by MLSS. Sure, there will be pacing where you will not be increasing lactate, or acidosis, or VO2 as quickly as for the 1500 or even 800, but nothing will be "stable". The pacing strategy is really just prolonging the inevitable, that being fatigue due to a number of factors. The inevitable comes either by pacing constantly, or holding back a bit and "finishing" strongly.

Steve, please less dubious terminology if you don't mind.

Argh...

Yes, they do or may, but *their* paces don't necessarily correspond to someone elses. So, in order to avoid having to make the conversion when talking about one person's training and relating to someone else's, a common reference point, the MLSS pace is of value.

Further, this point

'All experienced runners know what their race paces are."

is not necessarily true. You might be surprised. For example, if I talk to a collegiate XC runner about his training/racing, he may never have run an all out 10 k, let alone 1/2. So, he may not have any point of reference for a pace.

Further, further, when we talk about adaptations, I'll refer to MLSS in order to avoid the more confusing LT concept. They're both of value to me, because I understand the disctinction between all the definitions and conditions which they are valid. For the athlete though, a singular definition is of more value. We have a more concrete reference point to discuss what is going on with his training. Since his LT/MLSS is increasing, it would be nice to be able to discuss it.

I think I've pretty much covered all the bases on this one. It's clear you don't see any value in MLSS as a concept, part of it due to misunderstanding, part of it due to something else I'm not sure of. So, I'll probably just leave it at that. Not much point in continuing to flail on this dead horse... it's getting kind of stinky at this point;)

Steve

eyeye... Cmon. This is ludicrous. Less dubious than VO2max and anaerobic capacity?

I'm done.

wellnow, please post less, if you don't mind.

Steve McGregor wrote:

I think I've pretty much covered all the bases on this one. It's clear you don't see any value in MLSS as a concept, part of it due to misunderstanding, part of it due to something else I'm not sure of. So, I'll probably just leave it at that. Not much point in continuing to flail on this dead horse... it's getting kind of stinky at this point;)

Steve

You've provided some great detail, very nicely done. Thanks for your knowledge on this one.

Thank heavens we can always rely on the athletes to teach the scientists and geeks how it is actually done.

Then the scientists analyze everything and present data to anyone who will listen as the gospel and the word, that is till the next test by another geek shows things to be different.

Sadly; from what I see, the scientist's greatest contribution to sport has been the performance enhancing drugs that have come into sport

nuff said

Steve,

I am not providing the references for you. It was claimed that you presented only information from Billat about MLSS being a 20-30 minute repeated test and I was simply providing some extra references to support your claim. You are right, so I was trying to offer some extra support against the naysayers.

Keep going strong, Steve, you are doing a great job!

Tinman

Steve

I will be back with some more copy and past information.

Keep going strong, Steve, you are doing a great job! I will copy for future past your post arguemnts

By Tinman

runfastcoach@gmail.com

I've been aware of your falseness for a while tinman. At first in the canova lactate thread when he pointed it out. Since them i've seen nothing to change my mind and this only serves to reinforce it. Can you apply you research practically? There is no evidence of it. Care to supply some. You may notice richard has disappeared after being called on the same short coming.

Renato said that Bekele a sub 26:30 when he did split at 5000m of the 10000m Olympics in 13:50 as he did he was in MLSS. When he did speed the pace in the last 5000m in some 13:15 he was able to run so fast simply because he did the first half in MLSS. May be that´s not scientific accurate MLSS but that´s technical MLSS.

If you consider MLSS empirically as 1 hour pace for top class runners the HM WR by Samuel Wanjiru is 58:33 some 2:47 pace that is sub 14 5k split. This runner does a sub 13:50 5k tempo in his MLSS pace.

Similarities wrote:

You may notice richard has disappeared...

You noticed wrong. I havn't disappeared. I don't place any importance on MLSS so I don't have any need to discuss it.

Perhaps your observation about tinman is equally wrong.

I'm not sure if you are arguing with me or not, but I'll buy that. His demonstrated 10k was actually a 4:14 pace (26:20), I believe, and he ran the first half well below that, at a pace he could sustain for an hour, then was able to finish the last 5000 at his 10 k pace of 4:15, which was still a tad slower than his actual "all out" 10 k pace, which is why he still had a kick at the end. So, the first half of the race he was running at his MLSSv and finished the second half above it. Theoretically, he should have been able to run the whole thing at 4:15, or faster, considering he had done one in competition at 26:20 just a couple months before, and I would think the Olympic finals motivation, in conjunction with a taper should be worth a couple % boost. I'm not sure what the point it, but I'll buy it, as astonishing as it is.

Steve

Ah you're still reading and waiting for a moment when you can say something. I'm sorry but you don't live in reality, you live in your own head stroking your own ego. You have no place talking about elite athletics. Of course prove me wrong with some (any) applied knowledge.

runfastcoach wrote:

Steve

I will be back with some more copy and past information.

Keep going strong, Steve, you are doing a great job! I will copy for future past your post arguemnts

By Tinman

runfastcoach@gmail.com

-----------------------------------------------------------

Note; whoever is posting as runfastcoach is not me.

Tinman

Steve. In line with your lock-step concept i am wondering if raising the aerobic threshold causes everything else to raise.

Steve. In line with your lock-step concept i am wondering if raising the aerobic threshold causes everything else to raise.

I'm not really partial to the "aerobic" threshold. I know some people like that terminology/concept, but you really only find it in the lay literature for the most part. So, to be honest, I really don't know. Sorry.

Steve