Ta. So what is the point in my slow jogging that corresponds to that initial increase in respiration. Also if you don't mind where does oxygen take over from fat as the main source of fuel? And are they the same thing?
Ta. So what is the point in my slow jogging that corresponds to that initial increase in respiration. Also if you don't mind where does oxygen take over from fat as the main source of fuel? And are they the same thing?
Richard_ wrote:
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
Richard_
May be you notice that i didn´t post since some time ago because i don´t pay no credit to your still unknown ad unfinished studies about the influence of muscular training in the distance performances and the strength training need for distance run approach.
http://www.adrenalinechannel.it/show/323.htmlMeanwhile i advise you to watch this video. That´s about strenght training for long distance runners. In this video that´s Luciano Gigliotti the coach of
Steffano Baldini – i really don´t know if you know who they are. Baldini that´s the Olympic marathon Athens winner and a 2:07 runner. I hope that you will be able to get out of your close mind and scientific studies and learn something from the world´s best and how they do it really. Despite that´s in Italian i can resume the video. The subject that´s your passion. Muscular training and strenght training to enhance the distance performance. The need of strenght training to be anolympicwinner. As you may watch Baldini´s training group does 200s in 36sec followed bystrengthexercises during the interval named circuit training. This are the needed training to place Baldini on the top. May be your runners they would need some more training stuff. Included in the Baldini marathon training schedule Baldinialso does LT and MLSS training and long runs and an huge mileage. May be they are wrong and you can teach Luciano Gigliotti how to coach an olympic winner in your new muscular method.That´s a pity you don´t seem to pay attention toMLSS and other training aspects that the best they do always.
Similarities wrote:
Ta. So what is the point in my slow jogging that corresponds to that initial increase in respiration.
?
That's the question now, isn't it? Some might argue none (point that is).
Also if you don't mind where does oxygen take over from fat as the main source of fuel? And are they the same thing?
Oxygen never takes over from fat as a fuel. The two fuels of consequence during intense exercise are either fat and/or glycogen (sugar in the muscle). Oxygen just provides the "oxidant" that allows the fuel to burn. Oxygen will play a role at all intensities unless you are "anaerobic" (e.g. 200 m pace are shorter, and even 200 m has an aerobic contibution).
The "crossover" where predominantly fat oxidation to predominantly glycogen oxidation occurs somewhere around middle intensity (depending on the fitness of the athlete) and is determined by the ...... ding ding...... LT.
The common argument made by proponents of the AeT is that you train the body to burn fat because you are burning primarily fat at the AeT. That may be true, but depending on the definition of AeT, you likely burn more fat (as an absolute value as opposed to %) by running at a higher intensity. The aerobic training stimulus will be stronger at higher intensities (closer to MLSSv if you will), so, *some* might argue, you are undertraining by training at the AeT. Others might argue you need to accumulate a lot of miles if training for the marathon, so, training at a lower intensity will facilitate higher mileage, and that is a decision that needs to be made on a cost/benefit analysis basis.
Again, the AeT is a *very* nebulous concept, even more nebulous than the LT that so many seem to have an issue with, but I think one is likely misguided if they specifically constrain their training to AeT pace (again, depending on how you define it, but it's typcially below most LT/MLSS definitions) in an effort to train the body to burn more fat. The way you burn more fat at a given intensity is to acquire greater capillary and mitochondrial densiity/volume, which will be proportional to training load (interaction of volume and intensity).
Make sense?
Of course, that's not to say you don't want to run at a pace that may correspond to AeT(again, depending on definition), because a runner will likely need to train at a number of different intensities to gain an optimal adaptation (the occassional easy run may occur at AeT pace), but again, emphasizing the AeT pace would be misguided in my view. To run faster, you gotta run faster. Pretty scientific, eh? ;)
Steve
I concur with your last statement, as Doris Heritage Brown once told me at a running camp " Sarah if you want to race fast you have to train fast." This from the 6 time world cross country champion.......
Cheers again steve. I agree specificity is an essential principal. The problem is one can only train hard 3 and possibly 4 times a week. These sessions need to be 48 hours apart. This follows another important principle - recovery of which the work-rest ratio must be observed. So for the rest of the time training needs to be in the recovery zone. So i look at sub maximal running as achieving this.
A friend of mind who was a 70m hammer thrower once said to me that science is a filter for his experiential knowledge. What he meant was that the two areas of science and experience or logic and intuition need to support each other. So when science is thrown at me it should correspond to intuitive thought in some way. The way you present it steve shows that you are alread doing this to a degree.
Right. That was my point regarding the variety of intensities. Your question asked the point of running at the AeT though to burn fat, I believe. That is different than recovery, those are two different purposes. For the purpose of recovery, the pace needs to be slower to facilitate recovery, but you are not training the body to burn fat. Maybe I misunderstood the question, but I interpretted it to relate to the purpose of training at the "AeT" as opposed to recovering.
Steve
Thanks, but hopefully it's more than a "degree". I think of coaching a bit like medicine; the practice of medicine is both science and art. You can have very good medical doctors who don't do very well at the science aspect of things, but they then need to at least learn the details of the applied aspect of the discipline, and can do well by applying the art. OTOH, you can have a medical doctor who is absolutely brilliant at the science aspect, but an atrocious doctor because he/she can't deal with people, or doesn't understand the intangibles. That being said, medicine and the patient's responses to treatment rely on physiology/biology and to say they don't just displays an ignorance of the discipline. Further, if I want the best MD that I can get, you can bet he/she knows the science as well as the art, and will likely not apply one without considering the other.
Steve
I am really enjoying this steve, thanks for all of your help. I realise your knowledge is the product of much time and effort and to receive it free is a blessing. I understand i think because my understanding is the product of my life. I see myself as an eternal student and i find this is a way i develop my understanding. I'm glad i found you.
Hi again. I don't think i mentioned fat as i'm not really interested in that except when i'm helping my mum (sorry mum). I was considering not just recovery. I am hoping that recovery and training the low end of the fitness spectrum can be one and the same. I guess this is similar to what peter snell is referring to when he says train slower to race faster.
Sorry i should have said to a large degree. As someone who is coming more from the practical side i am wanting to get my theory sussed and you are proving more helpful in this than anyone. I do like the way renato phrases things though and i put him ahead of myself in the practical application though. Another friend has just applied for a job as a vault coach in qatar so a possible connection?
OK, so, I misinterpretted. Usually when I get questions about the AeT, it's in regard to recommendations by some (I won't mention names) to train specifically at that intensity (whatever it is) to train the body to burn fat. It's not so much to lose weight, but the teleological argument is, if you can burn fat more effectively you spare glycogen and can perform better. As I pointed out though, training "harder" will train the body to burn fat more effectively, and really for most running events, other than the marathon, fat oxidation isn't even a consideration since you are performing at or above your (sorry) MLSSv.
Anyway, sounds like you're on the right track, recovery runs at an easy pace with intense runs to target aerobic development and you're getting where you need to go.
Steve
Steve McGregor wrote:
the AeT is a *very* nebulous concept, even more nebulous than the LT that so many seem to have an issue with,
Steve
Well at least we are agreed on that point.
I think one is likely misguided if they specifically constrain their training to AeT pace (again, depending on how you define it, but it's typcially below most LT/MLSS definitions) in an effort to train the body to burn more fat. The way you burn more fat at a given intensity is to acquire greater capillary and mitochondrial densiity/volume, which will be proportional to training load (interaction of volume and intensity).
[/quote]
True, also, the amount of fat burned during a run increases as the run progresses. Which makes the following statement you made somewhat innacurate:
The "crossover" where predominantly fat oxidation to predominantly glycogen oxidation occurs somewhere around middle intensity (depending on the fitness of the athlete) and is determined by the ...... ding ding...... LT.
As I said before..... I'm done.
Stop sulking Steve, just becasue I'm calling you out on your dogma.
Why is it that when people study a subject, they think that once they gain a degree or other qualification, they don't need to keep learning?
Learning? ;)
I learn everyday.
BTW, I wonder how it is you figure you're calling me, or anyone else for that matter, out on dogma, when you don't even know the definition of the "dogma". It's a bit like calling someone out on the transcription dogma and claiming proteins code for RNA. Of course they are involved in the generation of RNA, but the code comes from somewhere else. If you don't understand the underlying process, it's hard to argue against it. I'm not trying to be rude, but I spent a fair bit of time trying to convey well founded concepts to you, but you didn't invest the energy to understand the underlying principles in order to make a cogent argument in response. Quoting unfounded anecdoctal evidence is not, to use your own terminology "good science".
I honestly see no point in debating with you anymore since you don't even take the time to learn the "facts" you are supposedly throwing in my face.
I'm not sulking, just have better things to do than chase my tail with you. So, consider this my last post on the topic.
Steve, you are being dogmatic, there are many dubious concepts in physiology, such as Anaerobic Threshold, Lactic acidosis, oxygen debt, etc. MLSS is another example.
If people defend such dubious concepts then they can expect others to disagree. Don't sulk becasue I disagree with you, I know enough to present alternative points of view.
I'm not trying to dominate the thread, and you shouldn't expect to dominate this thread either. You haven't discussed the influence of arousal levels on lactate oxidation, so however much you try to point out what you consider to be the failings in my argument, you are not seeing the full picture.
I'll tell you what; I said I wouldn't post again on the matter, but why don't you elaborate for us
1) how the O2 debt is dubious and 2) how arousal influences lactate oxidation, then I'll jump back in.
Remember now, no cutting and pasting, points off for pliagiarism.
Oh yes, please, also enlighten us on the dubious nature of VO2max and anaerobic capacity since you seemed to have an issue with those last week.
I’m a D2 female runner. Our coach explicitly told us not to visit LetsRun forums.
Great interview with Steve Cram - says Jakob has no chance of WRs this year
Guys between age of 45 and 55 do you think about death or does it seem far away
2024 College Track & Field Open Coaching Positions Discussion
RENATO can you talk about the preparation of Emile Cairess 2:06
adizero Road to Records with Yomif Kejelcha, Agnes Ngetich, Hobbs Kessler & many more is Saturday