How does alactic sprinting affect aerobic ability?

Moreover, if you prefer "Cogito ergo sum" to "Non sum qualis eram," you are putting Descartes before Horace.

D'oh!

Vice versa.

I would find a fairly steep hill of 60m (hard surfaced like asphalt) and SPRINT up it. I would then walk back down, taking as much recovery as I needed (2-2.5 min.) Usually did these sprints on the day before a track workout. Tried to vary the hill that I used to keep the stimulus varied.

Start with 1 and work up to 8-10 reps....this is the best way to slowly introduce the stimulus into your program. I did them 1-2x/week. I would keep on saying "faster, faster" to myself while I did these to help me elicit max speed.

Hope that helps.

Coach DD wrote:

I couldn't disagree more. Alactic sprinting plays an important, albeit small, role in most races 800 and up.

. . .

Any distance runner who ignores the ATP/CP contributions during the first 7 seconds , or so, of running is missing an important component of successful racing. Since this is a "use-it-or-lose-it" component, it makes sense to take advantage of it at the start of a race to improve one's position. It's a small contribution, but certainly a valuable one.

Wow. I entirely agree, and you said it more succinctly than I could have.

The first 5-8 seconds (or so) of a race are a freebie: basically you can go as hard as you want, with essentially no lactate "penalty."

This ties in with the earlier thread on starts:

A mechanically-sound start, plus the ATP/CP opening burst, can give a runner a "free" 5m+ advantage over where s/he would be with the typical distance runner's "walk off the line" start. Yes, even pace is important for the distance runner, but even PACE does not mean even EFFORT--take off at the gun!

The danger, of course, is that a distance runner won't take off for just 5-8 seconds at the start, but instead will maintain that opening effort for a 200 or so. This will certainly come back to bite her/him in the ass. So I usually presented it to my distance folks as a question of getting up to pace immediately--"the sooner you get to pace, the sooner you can relax into it." This often takes a lot less than seven seconds, but better safe than sorry.

I also think there's an ATP/CP component to "checking out" during a race: running 10-15 very quick steps (= 3-5 seconds), perhaps to pass someone, then settling back to pace. During the checkout, form slightly changes and I suspect that some fresh motor units come into play--hence the feeling of relief that a checkout gives you may partly stem from the ATP/CP contribution to the "firing" of those fresh motor units.

(This may explain in part why passing someone quickly--in five seconds or less, say--particularly in the second half of a race, feels easier than taking 15-20 seconds to slowly edge by; and why you can feel relatively refreshed after a quick pass, and relatively beat after a long, slow one.)

I've long had the feeling that this differential recruitment of motor units was part of what Igloi was getting at when he coached two different gaits (were they "swing" and "speed"?) for his distance runners. At a certain point(s) in the race, you could switch from one gait to the other and get that little boost.

I do agree with an earlier poster: obviously, the start means less, the longer your race. But it still means something, even in a 10,000m.

fUrCeOsNhN wrote:

Just one question: During a finishing kick of a longer race, is the ATP/CP system still used? Such as Martin Lel running the last 200m of a marathon in ~28? If it is, then I agree that it is very important.

No, that stored energy is long gone by the end of the race. Use it at the beginning to get yourself in desired postion, free of any potential boxing, etc, or lose it.

I disagree that CP is all used up quickly, in longer races, you have time to resynthesize it, I believe you can do this in races as short as 1500m

This is a popular misconception that is found in old text books and others which have not been updated.

the 38/2 ratio relates the the amount of glycolytic ATP in relation to the amount of ATP available from aerobic respiration of another molecule. They are two different sources of energy and the ration has nothing whatsoever to do with efficiency. But the old texts were written without the knowledge that lactate could be used as an aerobic muscle fuel.

Now this I agree with, lengthening the stride and increasing and maintaining stride power is essential for all distance runners.

ummmmm wrote:

KudzuRunner wrote: One tip GM offered proved extremely helpful: count 30 footfalls (pick one foot or the other) at a stride rate of approx 180 and you've just done a 20-second stride.

Most decent runners' normal stride is 180. People should aim to run at this cadence all the time, not just for strides.

You're right. I assumed everybody knew that.

Sometimes training has nothing to do with energy systems or the metabolic pathways involved. Sometimes it is simply about the muscle.

"Alatic sprinting" is beneficial for all runners because it improves Neuromuscular Coordination. Basically, it teaches your body how to run. Many distance runners know how to train, but few know how to run.

Sprinting is basically specific strength training for distance runners. The idea is that somehow the muscular coordination, and high power output will transfer over to your racing speeds.

Lets say you run a 5k in 15:00. Let's say the force produced during each stride during your 5k is value=0.

During the course of training you include strides and short sprints. The byproduct of this training is increased muscular coordination, decreased excess leg movement, decreased excess vertical movement, and increased power generated with each stride and thus increased forward propulsion.

Now, during your 5k everything else is the same, same energy output, same threshold values, same vo2max, same everything...the only thing that has changed is your ability to generate force. Now the force produced during each stride is value= +1 and you can now run the 5k in 14:45.

You can have two runners who have the same exact metabolic measurments (Vo2max, threshold, etc) and the same exact biological measurments (ht, wt, body fat, ect) and still have two very different athletes because one is able to:

1. Produce more muscular force with each stride because they have either strength trained, have done more strides/sprints, or just plain old genetics.

2. Produce more forward motion and less vertical motion with each stride due again to strides and more lifetime miles leading to a more fluid stride.

When you have increased muscular force and decreased excess vertical motion you have an increased stride length and thus increased speed. Stride rate cancels out because most if not all trained distance runners have very similar stride rates. Anytime I hear Rawson make his "turnover" comment I cringe. In general your turnover will remain fairly constant unless you are sprinting.

Alan

Runningart2004 wrote:

During the course of training you include strides and short sprints. The byproduct of this training is increased muscular coordination, decreased excess leg movement, decreased excess vertical movement, and increased power generated with each stride and thus increased forward propulsion.

When you have increased muscular force and decreased excess vertical motion you have an increased stride length and thus increased speed.

Alan

Doesn't Gebreselassie bounce quite a bit when he runs? So did Kipketer too. Look up the indoor 800m world record on youtube. Half the time the announcers talk about how Kipketer just bounces along.

In regards to your increased force=increased speed comment, I would agree with this only as long as the athletes aerobic or anerobic energy systems are trained well enough to supply the needed energy. Having a powerful stride is good but without the base it is useless for distance running, perhaps even counter productive as it may gobble energy faster? (not exactly sure about that last part).

I certainly agree with 90% of your post though.

wellnow wrote:

I disagree that CP is all used up quickly, in longer races, you have time to resynthesize it, I believe you can do this in races as short as 1500m

You cannot resynth CP while you are running. You must be at rest. Sorry.

"Doesn't Gebreselassie bounce quite a bit when he runs? So did Kipketer too. Look up the indoor 800m world record on youtube. Half the time the announcers talk about how Kipketer just bounces along."

Announcers don't know anything. It's like Rawson's "turnover" comments. They aren't there to provide scientific commentary.

If you actually videotaped Geb and Kipketer and the like and had a reference point (ie: fence line in the background) you should notice very little vertical movement when compared to recreational runners. Now, if you do notice a lot of vertical movement toward the latter stages of the race that is a sign of fatigue setting in and a runner compensating by trying flex the hip and extend the knee upward in hope of a better "turnover". Even so, even the best runners have technical "flaws". MJ always got hounded because of his upright running posture...but it worked for him.

Alan

I still disagree. It's safe to say that the announcers have seen a lot of runners of all abilities compete. Although there is no "data" to support the claim, the announcers must have seen something to provoke that comment. They looked at Kipketer compared to the other runners and noticed that he had a bouncier stride.

Here's the race...it's a good one.

Anouncers, who's job it is to announce athletics and have probably seen thousand of top level runners compete don't know anything about the subject? I mean, when it comes to Carol Lewis saying "Now lets see whose got the turnover on the last lap", EVERY RACE, I agree. But the British announcers are usually pretty good.

letsrunners just keep getting dumber. This site isn't what it used to be.

Nope wrote:

You cannot resynth CP while you are running. You must be at rest. Sorry.

Who says?

Nope wrote:

You cannot resynth CP while you are running. You must be at rest. Sorry.

wellnow wrote:

Who says?

Me, for one. I'm no expert, but that's my understanding from listening to people who are a lot smarter than I am.

Think about it. While you are running, you're body is too busy producing energy for the moment. It's not going to divert resources to muscle ATP/CP storage.

hi for one when you extend your knee you straighten your leg and to do that upwards whilst running it was cause all sorts of problems with continuing.

Secondly it is a function of being 'on rhythm' that leads to the bounciness. It is also a function of being upright that leads to bounciness. A bouncing ball stores and releases energy on each bounce. A human can run easier if his body can bounce similarly.

I only say this because the very desire to minimise bounce and put that energy into striding forward is what takes people off rhythm, often leads them to lean forward too much and usually results in an over striding situation. Find your natural rhtyhm and get into the groove of it and natural bounce will come your way.

Nope wrote:You cannot resynth CP while you are running. You must be at rest. Sorry.[/quote]

wellnow wrote:

Who says?

Coach DD wrote:

Me, for one. I'm no expert, but that's my understanding from listening to people who are a lot smarter than I am.

Think about it. While you are running, you're body is too busy producing energy for the moment. It's not going to divert resources to muscle ATP/CP storage.

I done thunk about it, but I don't know what you mean coach.

CP is used continuously throughout a race, with a lot of it being used in the first few seconds and then rapidly diminishing amounts for the next few seconds, but always some of it will be resynthesized during a long race, although perhaps not during a sprint. That's my take.