Why a combination of HIT-training and low mileage endurance is the future.

HIIT vs Continuous Endurance Training: Battle of the Aerobic Titans

Micah Zuhl, Ph.D. and Len Kravitz, Ph.D.

I liked his earlier work.

Serious runners already do speed work multiple times per week as long as their body lets them.

So I guess the future is now.

Helgerud et al. showed that 4 repetitions of 4-minute runs at 90-95% of heart rate max (HRmax) followed by 3 minutes of active recovery at 70% HRmax performed 3 days per week for 8 weeks resulted in a 10% greater improvement in stroke volume when compared to a long, slow distance training group.

So that's VO2max intervals (4 x 1000 or 1200 at vVO2max), 3 times a week? How doe that square with most running advice: 1 interval session a week, 1 tempo, maybe 1 other quality session, and the remainder easy running? I suppose if you drop all threshold sessions, proper speedwork, long-long run and hills then it just about fits in terms of hard vs. easy days, but really 3 intervals workouts a week is too much, surely?

argv wrote:

Helgerud et al. showed that 4 repetitions of 4-minute runs at 90-95% of heart rate max (HRmax) followed by 3 minutes of active recovery at 70% HRmax performed 3 days per week for 8 weeks resulted in a 10% greater improvement in stroke volume when compared to a long, slow distance training group.

So that's VO2max intervals (4 x 1000 or 1200 at vVO2max), 3 times a week? How doe that square with most running advice: 1 interval session a week, 1 tempo, maybe 1 other quality session, and the remainder easy running? I suppose if you drop all threshold sessions, proper speedwork, long-long run and hills then it just about fits in terms of hard vs. easy days, but really 3 intervals workouts a week is too much, surely?

No.....that is not the point. The point is that HIT-training used in a mix together with threshold work and moderate mileage with a long run can be at least effective as a high mileage system that requires more time for the running to reach same effect.

I will be the guinea pig for this training. Because of injuries I run 15 mpw. The intensity doesn't affect my injuries so I smash intervals every time I run. Let's see if it works. I'll race a few 1500s next summer. Hoping to run 3:50. Currently in about 4:10 shape I'd guess.

Well, I'm convinced. Let me get in my SUV-vehicle and stop by the ATM-machine so I can pay for your training program. All these PhD-doctors seemed to really do some bang up research.

Nothing new under the sun! Low mileage with intense interval training several days a week. This is how milers trained 150 years ago. Intense interval training with low mileage is not new. See Lon Myers. Lon Myers was the first man to race sub-50 (49.4) for 440 yards (on grass) 1885.

djibouti wrote:

I will be the guinea pig for this training. Because of injuries I run 15 mpw. The intensity doesn't affect my injuries so I smash intervals every time I run. Let's see if it works. I'll race a few 1500s next summer. Hoping to run 3:50. Currently in about 4:10 shape I'd guess.

I had a similar injury. At first I really liked my new training plan. I didn't expect it to be as effective as full mileage, etc, but my racing days were behind me so I was happy just to be consistently running. But then within a month or so I was heavily burned out mentally.

Maybe you don't have that problem. It seems entirely possible for different people to be more or less susceptible to that burnout.

One problem with most of these studies is that they only last 6 to 8 weeks. Which is conveniently about the time it takes for people to burn out or grow "stale" and plateau from all these high intensity workouts.

It would be more interesting to do a study following people for years under different training regimens.

You know, people used to train like this, there's a reason why most elites don't anymore.

argv wrote:

Helgerud et al. showed that 4 repetitions of 4-minute runs at 90-95% of heart rate max (HRmax) followed by 3 minutes of active recovery at 70% HRmax performed 3 days per week for 8 weeks resulted in a 10% greater improvement in stroke volume when compared to a long, slow distance training group.

So that's VO2max intervals (4 x 1000 or 1200 at vVO2max), 3 times a week? How doe that square with most running advice: 1 interval session a week, 1 tempo, maybe 1 other quality session, and the remainder easy running? I suppose if you drop all threshold sessions, proper speedwork, long-long run and hills then it just about fits in terms of hard vs. easy days, but really 3 intervals workouts a week is too much, surely?

Most elites combine this type of work with high mileage. In any case this is not HIIT its repetition running. HIIT training uses much shorter sprinter reps than this. They are just borrowing other training methods

HIIT is good for runners who like to jump from one fad to another and are probably on the Dr Phil diet right now

ukathleticscoach wrote:

argv wrote:

So that's VO2max intervals (4 x 1000 or 1200 at vVO2max), 3 times a week? How doe that square with most running advice: 1 interval session a week, 1 tempo, maybe 1 other quality session, and the remainder easy running? I suppose if you drop all threshold sessions, proper speedwork, long-long run and hills then it just about fits in terms of hard vs. easy days, but really 3 intervals workouts a week is too much, surely?

Most elites combine this type of work with high mileage. In any case this is not HIIT its repetition running. HIIT training uses much shorter sprinter reps than this. They are just borrowing other training methods

HIIT is good for runners who like to jump from one fad to another and are probably on the Dr Phil diet right now

Exactly.

I also do high intensity HIIT intervals for training.

If it weren't for the mental burnout and physical plateau, I would say OP is on to something.

Every body is different though, so I'm sure there are a number of people who will do okay on it.

Sure, if you care about exercising for 6-8 weeks of your life go right ahead and do this. It's not bad exercise for most people. It is, however, practically irrelevant to actual distance running. Distance runners live and die by their red blood cell development, which they will primarily get through volume and good quality done amid that large volume. Red blood cells live for about three months and the quality of your red blood cells depends somewhat on the level of your running when you created them. Anyone serious about distance running needs to stop looking for excuses to be lazy and actually go run. A few months of good running volume will comparatively annihilate 6-8 weeks of high intensity interval training for any distance beyond 800m.

Convinced guy wrote:

Well, I'm convinced. Let me get in my SUV-vehicle and stop by the ATM-machine so I can pay for your training program. All these PhD-doctors seemed to really do some bang up research.

I wonder if they're doing any PCR reactions for these mouse samples.

The great white shark wrote:

It seems that the right mix of HIT-training and endurance training is the superior way of training.

https://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Article%20folder/HIITvsCardio.html

These guys are laughed at in Norway by actual athletes and actual coaches.

Kaggestad, the coach of Ingrid Kristiansen, said one time that these guys are responsible for a generation of young cross country skiiers training the wrong way.

So, these guys recommend fartleks witj uptempo recovery? The novelty is off the charts! Step out of your lab and go talk to your local HS coach.

Brojos, how about a FP blurb about academics burying their heads in the sand?

Please pop the real one. wrote:

djibouti wrote:

I will be the guinea pig for this training. Because of injuries I run 15 mpw. The intensity doesn't affect my injuries so I smash intervals every time I run. Let's see if it works. I'll race a few 1500s next summer. Hoping to run 3:50. Currently in about 4:10 shape I'd guess.

I had a similar injury. At first I really liked my new training plan. I didn't expect it to be as effective as full mileage, etc, but my racing days were behind me so I was happy just to be consistently running. But then within a month or so I was heavily burned out mentally.

Maybe you don't have that problem. It seems entirely possible for different people to be more or less susceptible to that burnout.

I've been doing this training for a few years since i stopped running seriously. If I don't feel like running I simply take the day off. This way I can constantly run hard and avoid burn out.

I find it good for maintaining fitness but not great for making improvements. But it would probably work wonders for someone starting from a lower level of fitness. I'd say it would get you from 7:00 to 6:00 in no time. This is why HIIT is so popular. It inevitably improves mediocre runners. They couldn't help but improve from their low level of fitness.

Anyways, my plan is to combine it with some decent cross training and fix my terrible diet then see how we go.

The great white shark wrote:

It seems that the right mix of HIT-training and endurance training is the superior way of training.

https://www.unm.edu/~lkravitz/Article%20folder/HIITvsCardio.html

What i can tell you as a "decent" age group guy (45-50) is that if you want longevity that is the way to go, if of course you arent crippled by then by all that excess mileage you did when you were young...

But that's more like 40/50 miles a week, with a short/medium interval session in it, hills of all shape & sizes, and some short, good tempo pace. Oh no more than 10 miles long run....