@Renato Canova; Physiologically explanation of 'new' turbo diesels like Mutai, Mosop, Radcliffe...

The easy answer is these athletes don't get glycogen depleted for 2 reasons:

1. They re-fuel during the race as best they can

2. They are a LOT more economical than the rest of us.

For a very interesting conversation on this topic, and more specifically the 2 hour marathon physiological requirements, see Journal of Applied Physiology's commentary on the Michael Joyner's 2 hour marathon paper.

More specifically, the difference in blood lactate between 3mM and 4mM is really not that much and this is why I say that. If you get an athlete to run near their lactate threshold, they will recruit a certain amount of muscle which will produce lactate, but this will also be more rapidly "buffered" (primarily oxidized by slow twitch fibers). The result is you produce, for example, 10 mM of lactate but 6 mM is constantly buffered, resulting in a "net" lactate of 4 mM.

If you run slightly faster, you will now recruit more muscle, which will result in greater blood lactate production. BUT, you will also oxidize more blood lactate as well, primarily because of the increased blood flow to the oxidative fibers (among other things). So, you may now produce 11 mM but you will also buffer 7 mM, again resulting in a "net" lactate of 4 mM.

More specifically, we have seen athletes' maximal lactate steady state (a correlary to the lactate threshold) of 6-8 mM, and some athletes able to sustain a steady-state blood lactate of 10 mM for 30 mins or more! I should define steady-state as well...to clarify "steady state" is defined as a change of less than 1 mM for the last 20 minutes of a 30 minute (or more) exercise bout, and we have done a lot of work recently to try to pin-point where EXACTLY this point (zero slope in blood lactate vs time) occurs and how it changes with training, but that may be a topic for another thread.

jT

bump

jtupper-ware:

Are you Jack Daniels or someone else?

bump

he normally posts under jtupper

I fully agree the explanation of jtupper-ware, that can be very much better of mine because the knowledge of exact English terminology (for me is more difficult to explain).

I published as IAAF Academy a work about the use in training of special circuits for increasing strength endurance, in order to create the MAX LASS (maximum lactate steady state). This is not a research, but consists in the evaluation (only using lactate levels) of some of the best runners (including the WR holder of steeple Saaeed Shaheen) in different part of the season, after a test connected with their training and their specific event. We saw that, when their "specific" shape was growing, they had the ability to stay at almost the same level of lactate (very much higher than the classic threshold) for a long period of time, depending on their type of training. For athletes in top shape for 5000m (duration under 13') we can suppose an ability to stay about 9-10 mml for the central part of the race (for example, during second, third and fourth km), only moving from 8 to 10 mml, while the last km can launch their lactate till values of 14-16 mml.

If you take the lactate immediately after the test, you cant have a real value, because for the next minutes the concentration of lactate in the blood continues to grow, while the production of lactate inside the muscle fibres already is over.

Going to the marathon, the new type of athletes have a high ability in buffering. One of the reasons of this may be the improvement in the permeability of the membrane. One of the ways for defining "Endurance" is "the speed of removing lactate from muscle fibers or buffering".

So, if with marathon runners "old style" our goal was to reduce the production of lactate at the speed of the race, in order to teach to the muscle fibres to use as fuel, at the same speed, more fatty acid and less glycogen (and this fact could build the ability in lasting longer at the Marathon Pace), now we look for increasing the speed of buffering, allowing the athletes in using a part of the lactate they produce.

A top marathon runner till 2000/2005 was no more able to overtake 10mml with any type of test, because the goal of his training was to reduce the produiction of lactate (that is connected with the consumption of glycogen).

A top marathon runner of today is still able to reach 15mml of lactate, if we do a max test (for example, 2' uphill at max speed).

So, they can use a percentage of lactate (may be 20%) as new source of energy, and this fact means not only that the average of speed for all the marathon can be faster than before, but also that the index of resistant between different distances (for example, HM and Marathon) has the trend to become more close. If till now we spoke about a 5% of difference between the HM speed and the Marathon speed for a well trained athlete (5% of 1 hour in HM is 1:03:00 that is a marathon in 2:06:00), now we look for reducing this index to 4% (in the above case, 4% of 1 hour is 2:24, so 62:24 x 2 = 2:04:48).

If we are able to create for an athlete able running 59' in HM (and now there are many) this level of specific endurance, we can have somebody able running in 2:02 in short time.

Coach Canova,

When you say that the new breed of marathon runner can reach 15 mml of lactate are you talking about during a Fundamental Phase of training or actually in the Specifc Phase itself.

In other words, are you training them more like a sub 13' 5k and sub 27' 10k guy in the Fundamental Phase of their cycle in order to increase this membrane permability and then changing over to a Specifc Phase for marathon specifc training. Or are you doing more speed/intensity in the Specifc phase to retain that 15 mml ability.

This is great information, thanks to you and jtupper for sharing this discussion.

MPR

Jtupper & Coach Canova,

One follow-up question if I could. Is a "wave workout" a good way to increase the permability of the membrane. The workout specificly I am talking about is one where you alternate miles (or kilometers) at a little quicker than race pace and a little slower than race pace. In this way taking the body into a higher lactate position than backing off slightly and allow for slight reductions in lactate and the repeating.

The end result may be a 20k run alternating k's at MP - 5/10 seconds and k's at MP + 10/15 seconds.

I have had good success with this type of workout in a marathoners specifc phase, but want to better understand WHY it works so well so that I can use it most effectively.

Your thoughts on this are greatly appreciated.

Renato Canova wrote:

So, they can use a percentage of lactate (may be 20%) as new source of energy, and this fact means not only that the average of speed for all the marathon can be faster than before, but also that THE INDEX OF RESISTANT resistant between different distances (for example, HM and Marathon) has the trend to become more close. If till now we spoke about a 5% of difference between the HM speed and the Marathon speed for a well trained athlete (5% of 1 hour in HM is 1:03:00 that is a marathon in 2:06:00), now we look for reducing this index to 4% (in the above case, 4% of 1 hour is 2:24, so 62:24 x 2 = 2:04:48).

If we are able to create for an athlete able running 59\' in HM (and now there are many) this level of specific endurance, we can have somebody able running in 2:02 in short time.

Here you refer the INDEX OF RESISTANCE. This is true for every distance run. But you Renato on another thread you say:

I say during my congresses or lecturers for IAAF, \"There are not events of RESISTANCE, but only events of SPEED, because in any case the winner is the fastest as average in the race.\"

Renato. In every distance run event, the prime one factor is SPECIFIC RESISTANCE what it means to delay the SPEED with a minimum of speed pace intensity decrease. This is what´s SPECIFIC RESISTANCE really.

Of course SPEED and SPECIFIC RESISTANCE is what does makes faster performances, one without the other is not efficient. However THE NATURE of distance events takes SPECIFIC RESISTANCE as prime factor. Imagine that you have the speed of 9.58 of Usain Bolt the speedy one in the world, but from 800m to the marathon Usain speed is useless without specific resistance. However with low speed than 9.58 but with specific resistance you can win to Usain every distance run.

I guess you might change your sentence \"There are not events of RESISTANCE...\" to this one: \"Every distance run event is of RESISTANCE, because the main factor that able the winner to be fastest in distance events is SPECIFIC RESISTANCE\".

Don´t you agree ?

Antonio, during the Summit in Charlotte in January, I produced some slides. The first was :

"There are no events of RESISTANCE, but of speed only, because in any case the winner is the fastest in the race..."

The second was :

"The fast among athletes having the same ENDURANCE. So, the key in training is to enhance the SPECIFIC ENDURANCE".

How always I ask to coaches / athletes looking mainly for speed, "what can you do with your speed if are not able to stay with the leaders till the end ?".

So, it's obvious that, if you are an athlete able running 10000m in 28' and you are in WCh, your first goal is to become able running in 27'30" or less, not to be able to finish fast, because your fast finish can move you from position 20 to position 19... and this is not important, but if you are able to run 27'30" (also using a last slow lap) may be you can be in top 10. And, on the other side, if you run a competition in 29' with athletes fast in the final having 29' as PB, you are so much fresh that can win in any case the race. Sop, speed is a false problem.

Of course, I fully agree with you : in training, the priority is to improve the SPECIFIC ENDURANCE. This is the cake, every other thing is the cherry on the cake.

What good result did you have?

I don't understand 100% of the above...but this is good stuff, great thread!

News Fit to Print wrote:

What good result did you have?

Runners improving their aerobic threshold and narrowing the gap between aerobic threshold and lactate threshold during the specific phase. As evidenced by race times (since I don't have access to lactate testing equipment).

Oh I thought you would share race results, places earned in races, times improved... Not just a bunch of jargon. No worries.

MPR wrote:

News Fit to Print wrote:

What good result did you have?

Runners improving their aerobic threshold and narrowing the gap between aerobic threshold and lactate threshold during the specific phase. As evidenced by race times (since I don't have access to lactate testing equipment).

Sad you are sidelining a great thread with your personal vendetta against me. If you have a problem with me call me or e-mail me, I pretty much know who you are. Then we can discuss this in a rational manner not just through annonomous posts on LetsRun.

Yes, I have had very good success with the athletes I train. Particularly in the longer races (half marathon and marathon). But why would I/ should I go through a laundry list for you, I'm sure my athletes don't want their accomplishments judged by annonomous posters on this message board. This thread isn't about me (or them) it is about a great discussion by Coach Daniels and Coach Canova about breakthroughs and a potential paradeigm shifts in the sport of marathon running.

My question for you is why you have not asked the same questions I have, or it simply easier to criticise others annonoumosly rather than seek to expand your knowledge.

Coaches Daniels and Canova I apologize for the interruption to your comments.

All fibers produce lactate, because all of the stored carbohydrate is converted to lactate. Also lactate isn't buffered, you are confusing lactate with lactic acid, which is never produced.

Renato, why would the top guys use MORE glycogen and produce more lactate in a marathon? I don't agree with you.

They are producing less lactate in the early stages and using more fat, earlier in the marathon than less well trained runners, this means that they have slightly more glycogen available towards the end of the race.

But they have to have good legs on the day. We have seen how many of the best marathon runners can have good and bad days, just like any other runner.

Renato Canova wrote:

So, they can use a percentage of lactate (may be 20%) as new source of energy, and this fact means not only that the average of speed for all the marathon can be faster than before, but also that THE INDEX OF RESISTANT resistant between different distances (for example, HM and Marathon) has the trend to become more close. If till now we spoke about a 5% of difference between the HM speed and the Marathon speed for a well trained athlete (5% of 1 hour in HM is 1:03:00 that is a marathon in 2:06:00), now we look for reducing this index to 4% (in the above case, 4% of 1 hour is 2:24, so 62:24 x 2 = 2:04:48).

If we are able to create for an athlete able running 59' in HM (and now there are many) this level of specific endurance, we can have somebody able running in 2:02 in short time.

I thanks that you actually wrote the whole idea despite we don´t see the slides !

You know. Some ideas out of context can be dangerous and wrong interpretation. The fact is that someone on this board did profit YOUR short SENTENCE to argue against what I consider a rich methodological analysis, the RESISTANCE RATIO or RESISTANCE INDEX, and as you might agree, the need of modern training to focus on specific endurance.

I want to profit your good point about INDEX OF RESISTANCE, that can be done as runner profile analysis as well as training modulation, to relate the HM with the marathon as you suggest.

Here is the table from the 58:23 Tadesse HM world record. 59:00, 59:30 and 60:00 HM and what performance would be 4% and 5% marathon RESISTANCE RATIO or RESISTANCE INDEX.

HM 58:23 – marathon (4%) 2:01:26 – (5%) 2:02:35

HM 59:00 – marathon (4%) 2:02:43 – (5%) 2:03:54

HM 59:30 – marathon (4%) 2:03:45 – (5%) 2:04:57

HM 60:00 – marathon (4%) 2:04:48 – (5%) 2:06:00

Now the list of all half marathon performances from the tadesse World record to sub 60:00 HM (only pb for each runner.

On the right side/or down the marathon performance of all the runners that on this HM top rankind when they did sub 2:07:33 marathon. I don´t include the recent Boston marathon by obvious reasons.

58:23 Zerisenay Tadese (ERI)

58:35 Samuel Wanjiru Kamau (KEN) 2:05:10

58:52 Patrick Makau Musyoki (KEN) 2:04:48

58:55 Haile Gebreselasie (ETH) 2:03:58.2

58:57 Sammy Kitwara Kirop (KEN)

58:59 Wilson Kipsang Kiprotich (KEN)

59:05 Evans Cheruiyot Kiprop (KEN) 2:04:57

59:07 Paul Kosgei Malakwen (KEN)

59:07 Jonathan Maiyo Kiplimo (KEN)

59:08 James Kwambai Kipsang (KEN)2:04:26.9

59:09 Bernard Kiprop Kipyego (KEN)

59:10 Paul Tergat (KEN) 2:04:55

59:14 Wilson Chebet Kwambai (KEN)2:06:12

59:15 Deribe Merga Ejigu (ETH) 2:06:38

59:19 Tilahun Regassa Dabe (ETH

59:20 Moses Mosop Cheruiyot (KEN)

59:21aRobert Cheruiyot Kipkoech (KEN)2:07:14

59:22 John Kirui Kiprotich (KEN)

59:26 Francis Kibiwott Larabal (KEN)

59:26 Patrick Ivuti Mukutu (KEN)

59:27 Wilson Kebenei Kiprotich (KEN)

59:27 Robert Kipchumba Kipkorir (KEN)

59:30 Yonas Kifle (ERI)

59:30 Geoffrey Mutai Kiprono (KEN)2:04:55

59:32 Dieudonné Disi (RWA)

59:32aMartin Lel Kiptolo (KEN)2:05:15

59:33 Marilson Gomes (BRA)

59:35 Tsegay Kebede Tadesse (ETH)2:05:18

59:36 Samuel Kiplimo Kosgei (KEN)

59:37aDejene Birhanu (ETH)

59:37 Stephen Kibiwott Kipkoech (KEN)

59:39 Silas Kipruto Sematei (KEN)

59:39 Wilson Kiprop (KEN

59:39 Lelisa Desisa Benti (ETH)

59:41 Benson Barus Cherono (KEN)

59:42aHendrick Ramaala (RSA)2:06:55

59:43 Ryan Hall (CA/USA) 2:06:17

59:43 Jairus Chanchima (KEN)

59:43 Charles Munyeki Kiama (KEN)

59:44aKiplimo Kimutai (KEN)

59:45 Joseph Maregu (KEN)

59:45aTekeste Kebede (ETH)2:07:23

59:48 Mekubo Mogusu Job (KEN)

59:48 Martin Irungu Mathathi

59:49 Tadese Tola Woldegeberel 2:06:31

59:50 Gideon Ngatuni Lekumok (KEN)

59:51 Titus Masai Kwemoi (KEN)

59:52 Fabian Roncero (ESP)2:07:23

59:52 Dickson Marwa (TAN)

59:53 Eshetu Wondimu Tsige (ETH) 2:06:46

59:53 Peter Kamais Lotagor (KEN)

59:54 Mathew Kipchirchir Koech (KEN)

59:55 Samuel Mwangi Gichochi (KEN)

59:56 Shem Kororia (KEN)

59:56 Fabiano Joseph (TAN)

59:56 Evans Kiplagat Barkowet (KEN)

59:56 Getu Feleke (ETH)2:05:44

59:56 John Mwangangi Nzau (KEN

59:56 Leonard Langat (KEN)

59:57 Eric Ndiema (KEN)

59:58 Moses Tanui (KEN) 2:06:16

59:59 Jaouad Gharib (MAR)2:05:27

As you might see, no one get closer to 4% neither 5% straight, and Haile Gebreselasie, the actual marathon WR, is the best one on that RATIO OF RESISTANCE that with 58:55 HM and 2:03:58.2 shows to be one of the best RESISTANCE RATIO from the world HM best.

This ranks the HM world best. At the side of the marathon best you have a little number of runners that did 4% ratio like Duncan Kibet or Sammy Korir. However or they didn´t their best HM performance yet due that the HM isn´t first event choice or they need to be faster in HM to obtain the 4% ratio of resistance and get the sub 2:03 marathon that Renato talks about.

Eventually, running and athletics isn´t mathematics as Renato remembers, but to dream or just optimistic isn´t mathematics or methodology either !

If it´s permit, in my opinion, the 4% marathon WR RESISTANCE RATIO can be done but with advanced methodology that the present methodology doesn´t seems to possess. But let´s see what´s the future will bring.

I don´t mean one outstand WR, one individual fantastic performance, I mean the special type of modern methodology that can reduce the resistance ratio to 4% or lesser.

Renato. Do you remember how long you preview that 10000m world record would be broke very soon, because it´s the weaker one in distance running ?

In 2007, 7 years ago then. I didn´t see no one to get that on 1000m WR yet, I know that the 10000 track is not run as many times that on the past, but might be one day...