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

ARgghh.. OK, that wasn't my fault. Slow server on the LR end. Must be the dodge ads.

Steve

It's what is required in a standing vertical jump or a power clean or a maximal dead lift. That more holistic 100

%. Maximal willpower for a very short period of time also indicates it i think.

I think i will use the 800m as my baseline for a maximal aerobic effort although i really don't where the effort thing is leading, it is such a subjective thing. Thanks for that. Better to instill into the athletes a sense of what 'near best or best' aerobic pace is and to learn to be honest about running at that intensity.

With regard to the peripheral accumulation of metabolites taking time how much time? I thought the transport and diffusion was pretty immediate. Osmotic effect.

yes they were his emails.

remember you called him a moron?

Timothy Noakes wrote:

Fourth, I find it especially quaint that some runners and coaches of the 1950’s and 1960’s are now being held up as the examples of how athletes should train, 60 years later. Is it not possible that the sport has moved on in the past 60 years and that were those coaches to be active today they might not be quite as successful as they once were?

Take for example Arthur Lydiard. I recall that whilst he was extremely successful with a small cadre of New Zealand athletes, he had less successful when he coached in other countries.

Then you recall wrongly. Look at how the Finns progressed after adopting Lydiard's strategies...or nearly everyone else who cared to listen.

Eh? wrote:

Then you recall wrongly. Look at how the Finns progressed after adopting Lydiard's strategies...or nearly everyone else who cared to listen.

Did Lydiard teach the finns to use blood doping ?

yes

Is there evidence that the Fins used blood doping? No. If, hypothetically they did, were they the only ones? Not likely. Either way the playing field is still even.

sim wrote:

Is there evidence that the Fins used blood doping? No. If, hypothetically they did, were they the only ones? Not likely. Either way the playing field is still even.

You are right. Italians did use it too, and with a diffrent training method also had some very good performances and olympic medals.

Not hypothetic, some of them they did confess. Martti Vaino was disqualified and lost a medal in the LA olympics because he was catch and did confess. Several trust sources did report blood doping finn use as a Finn federation dope plan. Even Renato Canova did confess that the finns and italians did a spread use of that kind of dope. When the blood dope use did end among the finns the Lydaird training didn´t work no more on the finns as it used to.

Well, I understand what you are saying, but we can get several different views of "max" effort. Max force certainly occurs during the shortest effort. Max *power* typically occurs over a slightly longer period due to the interaction of force and velocity, but also may be an artifact of methodology. Certainly for all out efforts, max power will be achieved within a few, if not couple of seconds.

BUT Maximal Willpower? Wouldn't you agree that in some ways it takes maximal willpower to run an all out 400 m, or 800 m? Boy, if all out, it takes a lot to finish either one of those. Of course many would argue it actually takes more "will power" to finish a marathon in most cases than to perform a vertical jump.

If by maximum will power you mean maximal motor unit recruitment, then you are right, it is for something like a max lift. Interestingly, that is part of Noakes's argument (I shouldn't speak for him, but who knows if he'll chime back in), that when one "fatigues", or some would say become exhausted, at the end of an effort like the 10 k, that there are a fraction of the individual's motor units recruited, and if they had really "failed" due to peripheral metabolism, they could simply recruit more motor units to keep going at the same effort level. As we have pointed out, events such as the 1500, and certainly the marathon, are completed at a small fraction of the effort level of something like the one rep max, or even 200 m, and yet we quit even though we have not recruited all of our motor units. So, why is that? Because of the CGM? Maybe, hard to say.

Steve

Say it isn't so! Surely Arthur had no knowledge of this, he is too saintly. Seriously though is blood doping enough to produce Olympic Champions? Surely the main two factors are the athletes talent and the coaches talent?

True about a maximal effort over time, however as you surmised i was talking about that single effort of maximal energy expenditure. That moment of effort is more than just effort though, it is the moment when you are most alive and i guess is akin to that moment of maimal effort against fatigue at the end of a race.

I've been stuck on this idea that motor units are found to be still available even after systemic fatigue has occurred. It sounds logical as after a hard 1500m i'm sure i could sit down and do some light weight training. I can definitely still stand up and walk around so some muscle fibres are still available. I could also slow the pace after the finish line and continue, i just couldn't continue at that pace for longer than another 50m. What was stopping me? Definitely it feels systemic. My whole system is in severe pain and i just want to stop. Is it my aerobic system is overwhelmed and now my anaerobic system is trying desperately to make up the difference. Yes. The nasty side effects with using the anaerobic system are what is forcing me to slow or stop. Sure my brain is functioning to regulate all of this including the eventual signals to my muscles to actually stop before they have reached complete exhaustion. Sure it all seems self evident but i don't know about a special CG.

sim wrote:

I've been stuck on this idea that motor units are found to be still available even after systemic fatigue has occurred. It sounds logical as after a hard 1500m i'm sure i could sit down and do some light weight training. I can definitely still stand up and walk around so some muscle fibres are still available. I could also slow the pace after the finish line and continue, i just couldn't continue at that pace for longer than another 50m. What was stopping me?

I think you may be on to something here. It's as if some of your muscle fibers - the strongest but least fatigue reistant - were fatigued and couldn't go on, but some of your other muscle fibers - the weaker but more fatigue resistant - were not yet at the point of full fatigue and could, therefore, continue contracting, resulting in you being able to continue running but at a slower pace.

white punks on dope wrote:

[quote]sim wrote:

Is there evidence that the Fins used blood doping? No. If, hypothetically they did, were they the only ones? Not likely. Either way the playing field is still even.

Not hypothetic, some of them they did confess. Martti Vaino was disqualified and lost a medal in the LA olympics because he was catch and did confess.

One athlete's mistake does not speak for the actions of his countrymen, no matter how much you'd like it to.

Several trust sources did report blood doping finn use as a Finn federation dope plan.

Well, with irrefutable hearsay like that, the Finns must be damned.

Even Renato Canova did confess that the finns and italians did a spread use of that kind of dope.

And Renato, an Italian coach now, can expertly comment on what the Finns were doing then? Come on, man.

Any mores conspiracy theories you'd like to try? Perhaps you know of a second gunman on a grassy knoll...

damn i knew it may lead to this :)

You follow on from my line of logic to the fact that the stronger/fatigue susceptible fibres fatigue first. Lydiard says it is the other way around. I'm sure it might depend on which way you are trained. What is the empirical evidence?

Blood doping was technically legal then though ethically questionable. But if the Finns did it they were't alone.

Well, of course there are still less fatiguable motor units available for recruitment, and certainly you can continue contracting them, but I'm not sure how continuing to run at a slower pace is going to help you win. I guess I don't see your point.

Steve

Timothy Noakes wrote:

Dr. Noakes,

Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts. Sometimes this board can be a bit rude, but please know there are many that greatly appreciate it when a person like yourself comes and speaks.

Ken W.

800 posts.

Wow.

There are a multitude of problems with Noakes' position, as are evident in his post here.

#1, he says he gives evidence for the Central Governor. I have read his work, and the work of others "supporting" this THEORY, and they provide no evidence. No mechanism, no PET scans showing an area of the brain that is activated, nothing. All they do is say that current work does not fully explain everything, so there must be a Central Governor. I could easily say there must be a little gree Martian in my cerebellum doing it and I'd be providing equal support to that theory.

#2, he says that he doesn't believe physiological differences can explain the small differences in performance at the elite level. That is exactly here such small differences can have an impact on the results! It is precisely at the elite level where an extra 30min of sleep, a little change in diet, or one extra good workout can make the difference between a win or loss. I don't think any athlete or coach would say that there is not a mental side to it, but only non-athlete pretend it is the major determining factor. Noakes is also dishonest in trying to draw a comparison between the conscious mental will to win and the unconscious, involuntary Central Governor. They are very, very different things.