JasonDoesAsia/JK thread

Look at Frank Shorter's training. Also, from what I gather, Mr. Shorter considered himself a track runner that also ran marathons.

I focus on 5k to 10k races and for me long, slow miles do nothing but make me slow. There's a thread on page 2 or 3, I believe, that discusses LSD for 5k runners.

I agree, junk miles make you slower, even if you run full

out 100's and 200's. It may be that world class athletes are

impervious to this deadening effect. It's also possible that

members of a particular gene pool have some special

adaptive mechanisms that allow them to transition quickly

between 8 minute miles and 4:45 miles.

Is that transition "between" 8 minute miles and 4:45 miles or transition "from" 8 minute miles "to" 4:45 miles? Or are you saying they can run between 8 minute miles and 4:45 minute miles rather quicky? If that's what you mean, then a lot of us have "special adaptive mechanisms." And I thought it was the speedowrk I was doing. Silly me. Maybe it isn't a particular gene pool at all. Maybe, just maybe, it's hard running.

JK can correct me if I am wrong here, but we are talking about OVERALL AEROBIC LONG TERM DEVELOPMENT, not pace development, which is most likely better developed at sealevel doing your hard tempo runs, 8x1000 or 5xMile workouts.

Right now I am at Zhongdian at 10,000 ft altitude. I arrived at 6am this morning after an 11-hour bus ride and 1 hour sleep on the bus, and a 20 mile run yesterday. BELIEVE ME, 8 MINUTE MILES WERE TOUGH!!!!

The last 5km of the 20km I did this morning felt like the last mile in a 10km race. It SUCKED, but the overall aerobic development is what I am after. Zhongdian is a bizarre Tibetan frontier town.

jason

Regarding your 10km question, look at it this way.

Yoko Shibui is the Japanese Recordholder in the 10km. I saw her schedule and the coach has her doing a lot of jogging at about 6min. per km. (10min. per mile)

Reiko Tosa (Silver WorldChamp marathoner last year) is training for a 10km on the track on 29Sept. She is also doing a lot of jogging, in between the hard interval sessions.

DO THEY KNOW SOMETHING THAT YOU DONT KNOW? Keep in mind that they are training at 1900meters alt. (about 6200 feet).

Jason

Where's the physiology behind that post? No reference to the mitochondrial growth or capilarization that occurs at 90-120+ min runs? Anyone on a low mileage program that goes out and makes a big jump for a week or two is gonna feel it big time, very quickly. That's a bullshit result because it's not as if any real "program" was implemented. Try a higher volume, progressive program for two or three years and see the results.

That's the problem with this country, not just athletes but everyone. Everyone wants the absolute easiest, quickest way to get what they want. American athletes are so impatient that they aren't willing to change their lifestyle in order to compete with the world's best. Athlete's will say, "I tried lots of miles and all they did was make me slower," without ever having any sort of plan. Everyone wants the quick fix, the easy way out, and virtually everyone is looking at "this season" instead of years down the road. A short term plan can never produce results down the road.

"The will to win means nothing without the will to prepare."

-- Juma Ikangaa

Look at it this way, why did Morceli do a weekly run at 10minutes per mile, when he could have gone about6-7 minutes per mile and still have it feel quite easy?

Do Morceli, Yoko Shibui and Reiko Tosa know something that we dont fully understand yet? PERHAPS......

If there is one thing to understand about high volume training its mitochondria mitochondria mitochondria. I could list countless articles showing mitochondrial density balloon with high volume training.

Know this though--mitochondrial biogenesis stimulated at low exercise intensities. Its primarily a question of training volume. The pace of the run does effect where those mitochondria are distributed. . . whether they develop in type I or type II fibers, commonly known as slow and fast twitch muscles. The so-called scientists that knock LSD use some rat studies and say that at slow paces you don't recruit fast twitch fibers and hence that don't develop a high oxidative capacity and thus can't be called upon in racing. This is very bad science.

First you need to understand some key differences between rats and humans (I am predominantly a rat researcher so this isn't biased). Human muscles are heterogenous for type I and type II fibers. For example, the human vastus lateralus or gastroc or etc. has a nearly equal amount of type I and II fibers in the average person. The human soleus does have more type I than type two fibers. Rats are different. A single rat muscle is generally homogenous for a either type I or type II fibers.

So when some scientists run some rats at different speeds and say that the oxidative capacity of the type II fibers wasn't developed at 70% of VO2max or whatever, it doesn't fly for humans. At certain speeds for rats certain muscles bare more of the load than others so of course the type II fibers aren't going to be challenged as much.

Things are MUCH different for humans: (If your getting sick of reading by now you need to read this!) Recruitment of different fiber types in the HUMAN vastus lateralus, a major quad muscle, was examined at different percentages of VO2max. The results will probably surprise you.

At 43% of VO2max ALL type I fibers were being recruited and 20% of type IIa (fast-oxidative) were being recruited.

At 75% of VO2max ALL type I and ALL type IIa fibers were being recruited. This represented 85% of the entire muscle mass.

The non-oxidative fast comprised the remaining 15% of the motor unit pool.

(Maximal aerobic power: neuromuscular and metabolic considerations. HJ Green and AE Patla. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. Vol 24. No. 1, pp 38-46. 1992)

Additionally it turns out that after 90 minutes of moderate intensity exercise that these weakly oxidative fibers begin to be recruited. This is why 120 minute runs are great. Don't stop at 90 though or you won't see the benefit. Several studies have shown that the process just begins at 90 minutes.

Also consider that well trained runners are recruiting 90%+ of their muscles mass at 75% VO2max because their pace is faster and requires for force.

So, the point here is that in HUMANS running at slow to moderate paces does indeed involve a large amount of fast twitch muscle. Its all recruited when you start running longe then 90 minutes. Thus, mitochondrial biogenesis is induced throughout the full spectrum of fiber types. With time the type IIb are even converted into type IIa. Salazar was biopsied once and found to have NO type IIb fibers (this is a result of high mileage over years).

Running faster does induce a different set of adaptations that are necessary for optimal performance. But the foundation of it all (on the peripheral side) is mitochondrial density.

Mitochondrial benefits come very quickly, its just a matter of where the whole body is prepared to handle the increased trianing load. Say a guy name JOE is running 50 miles per week. He does this for twelve straight weeks. His increase in mitochrondria between weeks 11 and 12 is minimal if there is any at all. Well, Joe for some crazy reason runs 100 miles a week for the next two weeks--the increase in mitochondria is measureable and quite large. It will just take a while for his legs to recover so that he can experience the benefit. So, build up slow, but certainly build up. Only worry about the pace after you have topped off volume for quite a while.

I know a cx runner who had a relatively successful hs career, although it was based upon high mileage. He went to college, his coach had him running higher mileage and he fell to 4th man. He couldn't handle the volume. He trusted his coach, stuck with the increased mileage, and became the #1 man the following season. He also ran faster times than he ever ran in hs.

Edit above message. His high school mileage was not high mileage, it was low. You may now return to your regularly scheduled run.

I know this local dude, in his early 40s, who runs 15:45 minute 5k's and half marathons in 1:13. Not blazing times, but damn fast considering his age and that he never runs over 25 miles per week.

Explain that.

He's a very talented individual perhaps?

Also, how much did he run when he was younger?

You can beat the locals and be a big fish in a small pond with low miles / high intensity. What JK is talking about is a program that MAXIMIZES an athlete's potential. To do that, you must develop every single oxygen carrying cell you have. High mileage is the means to that end.

I'm not sure what his times were. However, is brother went to the Olympic Marathon Trials and his daughter, who will begin her freshman year in college this year, is nationally ranked. So there does seem to be some genetics at play here.

ET, a question. Is this research specific only to running, or does it apply to all moderate intensity exercise? As a triathlete, I do some very long workouts that involve both bike and run. I simply can't fit in 2 hour runs on my schedule, but is easier to do a 1 hour bike, 1 hour run and work on two disciplines in one workout. Do you think this has the same mitochondrial effect as a 2 hour run?

Tex

It took a huge volume of water a long time to form the grand canyon. Once a channel or canyon is formed, the water flows through without much obstruction. It's quite similar with running. The high volume of training is working like an auger to bring you to the promise land of fast running. Until you get there, just worry about keeping the auger sharp, steady, and well oiled. Your middle aged running buddy has long since been initiated into the promise land, and as long as he doesn't block the path, by being too sedentary, eating poorly, not sleeping, too much sex(unlikely for a man his age) etc., he will have quick access to it. After you break on through to the other side, time will be better spent riding around in your crystal ship polishing the waterways so that a venturi effect is created and maximal water flows with such minimal obstruction that you could hear the scream of a butterfly, well, this is the end.

Dude, you're saying that a man in his early 40s is probably not getting too much sex? You must still be in your 20s then.

I believe a few other studies (can't remember them off hand) have shown that increases in mitochondrial density are most profound when training between 65% and 70% of heart rate reserve, which would correspond to roughly 74% to 79% of VO2max. This speed is NOT even remotely hard. It may be fairly FAST for some rare individuals who have (as I mentioned previously) extremely high economy, but it is still a very COMFORTABLE pace, not even approaching the lactate threshold (which occurs at closer to 90% of VO2max in most people). It IS way faster than a shuffle, so where does the slow shuffling show its benefits? I think probably through capillarization (as long as enough overall mileage is accomplished), relaxation (and correct breathing dynamics), joint integrity, and by preparing the muscles, tendons and ligaments for actual RUNNING.

Moderately long to long singles are indeed instrumental in the process of mitochondrial biogenesis. This begs the question, "Are fairly long singles (a la U. of Colorado) better than doubles?" It's actually a bit of a trick question, because the ideal training pattern for a mature, experienced runner is to do doubles which have the longer session at a little over 90 min. in length and the shorter session a very slow 45-50 min. A single long run (over 120 min.) every 1-2 weeks covers some other bases. This might amount to 150-ish miles per week. If you're only at 80 mpw, you'll have to choose whether to run lots of fairly long singles or to break the running up with doubles. Doubles seem to present less of an injury risk, particularly if the shorter outing is done at a pretty slow pace. But if you resort to doubles at 80 mpw, you might not even get an hour on the longer sessions. You could run two long runs (15-ish miles) during the week, one mid-week and one on the weekend, have a couple of short singles following each of those runs, and do doubles on the other days. If you're very experienced (i.e., have been running for a long time), your best bet might be to just go ahead and do all singles, since your risk of injury as a seasoned runner is likely lower than that of a neophyte.

Fibers can be made oxidative with almost any level of running intensity if the right amount of time is spent at that intensity. Even predominantly anaerobic, intermittant activity like weightlifting can result in converting non-oxidative Type II fibers to oxidative fibers. The problem for a runner is to find out how much running at what speed (and how often and what time of year) will be the right balance. You can't just go to the track and bust out 20 quarters at mile race pace every day (most people would have trouble doing that ONCE without long rest intervals). You could try, but it would only result in chronic acidosis and your times would get progressively slower. You're better off running at easy to moderate intensities and accumulating more time at these speeds, with occasional injections of tough anaerobic training. Figuring out the right workout mixture is the ART of training. And that's another topic.