Fast twitch slow twitch discussions are nonsense

No, you are wrong. Scientists have proven time and time again that there are different muscle fiber types:

type I - slow-twitch

type IIa - fast-twitch intermediate

type IIx - fast-twitch explosive

Each runner has a different setup of fibers. Muscle fiber distribution is just ONE aspect of running performance, yes all elite middle-distance runners are "fast", as in they are all ~3:30 guys, but they still have big variations in muscle fiber distribution.

There are many HS kids that are always the fastest on 100m reps, or short hill sprints despite doing no sprint training (more fast-twitch %). Then there are the ones who run crazy XC times despite doing low mileage (slow-twitch monsters, think about Justyn Knight who ran low 14's off 40 mpw).

Take two competitive recreational runners, both have a PR of 32:00 in the 10k - but one has a 400m speed of 54, and one a 400m speed of 60. Who is going to win a race in 34:00 when it comes down to a sprint/kick at the end?

Same on elite level. Carlos Lopes and Fernando Mamede were both 27 min 10k runners and the very best in the world. Lopes only had 54s 400m speed, and Mamede had 47s 400m speed. Their training was completely different, yet in a 10k race, both were extremely strong and set records.

Same for current athletes. Lewandowski in the 1500 has 47s 400m speed, whereas Ingebrigtsen only has 50s 400m speed at best. Lewandowski upset Ingebrigtsen in EU Indoor this year, by waiting until 200m to go and then easily passing him and just running his own pace. Even tho both are great, talented runners, the muscle fiber distribution of Lewandowski gave him the edge in that slow race.

Why is this important? Cause the training is very different too. Both run 100 mpw, but Ingebrigtsen does much more work on threshold/stamina, whereas Lewandowski does many fast reps, going down to 50s 400m pace in his workouts (there is a video of him doing a workout on the track which consisted of several ridiculously fast reps). He has more intensity in his training, because that's the stimulus he needs for his muscle fiber setup and running characteristics/strengths.

Yes, I agree with you that sprinters could become decent at longer distances. Carl Lewis and Bolt could both run 15 min 5k if they really wanted to. But how would you train them? Doing long runs, or distance runs wouldn't work, it would feel so awkward to them that they would quit after not even a mile. So you prescribe them lots of 100m or 200m reps, at 50% effort with walking recoveries. Then, you reduce the recovery and work on their aerobic abilities different than for someone with lots of natural slow-twitch muscles.

Explain this then: high school- many students are fit and have similar body fat and similar muscles, yet some are fast and some aren’t. You would say that the fast ones have high percentage of fast twitch fibers. So this makes the slow ones have high percentage of slow twitch- yet they suck also at middle distance running. Conclusion- muscle fibers are only one aspect of running ability and also it isn’t clear how it really works and how much influence it has. Building a program according to your assumed muscle fibers is Mumbo jumbo

Ggggg wrote:

Explain this then: high school- many students are fit and have similar body fat and similar muscles, yet some are fast and some aren’t. You would say that the fast ones have high percentage of fast twitch fibers. So this makes the slow ones have high percentage of slow twitch- yet they suck also at middle distance running. Conclusion- muscle fibers are only one aspect of running ability and also it isn’t clear how it really works and how much influence it has. Building a program according to your assumed muscle fibers is Mumbo jumbo

No, that's not what we mean at all.

Running performance is a product of MANY different variables - VO2MAX, mitochondria, bone density, tendon elasticity, size/length of calves, rate of adaption to training, muscle fiber distribution, lacate threshold, running efficiency, running form, pronation, footstrike, mental strength, etc.

Muscle fiber distribution is ONE part of it. Someone with lots of FT fibers but low VO2MAX can still be a good sprinter. Someone with lots of ST fibers, even if the ratio is perfect for let's say 1500m, but very low VO2MAX of 50 will NEVER be great at anything with running. The person could have the same distribution between ST and FT fibers like Cheruyiout but only be able to run a 5:20 mile even with lots of training.

Muscle fiber in different % exist, even in the same events. Obviously, sprinters got MUCH more FT% than marathoners. But even in a 1500, one guy could be 20% FT and another 35% FT. That would be a huge difference and can be deciding on how a race plays out.

Look at this clip: It shows the European Championship 2018 in Berlin. Ingebrigtsen was leading most race, Lewandowski (red shorts, white shirt) was still in last position at the bell and you can see at the start of the clip, he was in around second-to-last position on the final curve. In the last 100m, everyone is giving all they got, but Lewandowski passes half of the field in the curve on lane 3, and the rest of it on the last 40m, finishing just 0.04 behind Ingebrigtsen. How is he able to do that? He is not suffering more than anyone else in there, he just got more natural speed, more FT% fibers and is faster when he gives maximum effort at the end.

Good luck making Colin Jackson into a distance runner:

https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/2015/08/03/champion-sprinter-has-cheetah-like-super-fast-muscle-fibers/31054099/

Ggggg wrote:

But one thing is sure elite middle and long distance runners are very fast and explosive people.

uhhhh..NOPe

LateRunnerPhil wrote:

Yes, I agree with you that sprinters could become decent at longer distances. Carl Lewis and Bolt could both run 15 min 5k

You're such a moran, Phil.

why do morans go on like this? wrote:

LateRunnerPhil wrote:

Yes, I agree with you that sprinters could become decent at longer distances. Carl Lewis and Bolt could both run 15 min 5k

You're such a moran, Phil.

He'd break 20 the first time just because he's a very well conditioned athlete. If he trained for it, he'd be in the low 16's after about six months, in the 15's after a year. It takes awhile to adapt.

You don't understand that these are absolute BEAST athletes. Just because they are genetically built for sprinting, trained for it and very heavy does NOT mean they can't at least be somewhat decent (which a 15 min 5k is) in a 5k IF they would give up their ability to be world-class in the 100 and 200 and focus on 5k, with the right training based on their muscle fiber distribution and strengths.

Bolt competed at 207 pounds - get him down to 175 or something, train him like a very fast-twitch distance runner (lots of Igloi-style, short aerobic intervals, low mileage) and he would show you what he could do in longer distances.

Of course, he can NEVER compete at an elite level (13:30 or faster) in a 5k - but getting 15 min, which is a typical time for ambitious HS runners IS not impossible despite his legs having 70% fast-twitch muscles. He can condition them to work more aerobic, and slowly build his aerobic system with as I said, Igloi-style aerobic intervals. Many fast-twitch runners have done it and become good at longer distances.

For specific work, he could try 50x100 at 5 min mile pace (goal 5k pace), which for Bolt is a super easy jog and walk the bends for recovery. Then, he could try to slowly increase the distance and reduce the rest until his body is able to run 5k in 15 mins.

Same for others - a slow-twitch monster like Farah might not be able to run 11 flat in a FAT 100, but with training he CAN run much faster than the 12.9 shown in the video above, probably all the way down to 11.5 if he gains significant weight/power. That would also be a respectable time, just like 15 min 5k.

Wait , you say "elite middle and long distance runners are very fast and explosive people.". Ok now you need to compare Eliud Kipchoge to Usain Bolt . Do you think they have the same raw speed and explosivness? No way . Everything is different!!!! BMI 25 for Bolt 19 for Kipchoge V02 max totally different , Their muscles are totally differents , Fast twitch for Bolt , " slow twitch" for Kipchoge but I would say white twitch and red twitch , if you can enter inside a Eliud Kipchoge calf or quad muscles you will see tons of mithocondria his muscles have a perfect adaptation to produce energy using oxigen. A thing that a sprinter dont need at all. You know that Usain Bolt also if he trained since young age to become a marathoner , he will never be able to be an Elite. Cos his genetic is the one of a world class sprinter so BMI, Vo2max, and yes muscolar twitch type are the ones of a sprinter 100 to 400 m

You didn't have to quintuple down on your idiocy.

Maybe you tell us something more useful ?

All this is very interesting but the example is too extreme in my opinion. Now Bolt at 207 pound sure has a very low body fat to go down at 175 pound he need to lose 13kg of muscles . The fast twitch muscles are bigger than slow twitch.

If he goes down to 175 pound probably he will lose all his power, I mean all his anaerobic power and his slow twitch are not enough to compete well. You can with time change fast twitch to slow yes in a certain way but then he still has all his muscles so too heavy to run at 3'/km for 5km.

I dont think Bolt in a real world would be able to run a 5k in 15'.

Guys that run 5k an 15 km are at regional level very very good, of course not elite. Yes Bolt is a world class sprinter but this fact to me is against him to be able to run 5k in 15'. Is a too much of a sprinter!!!!

While maybe a guy at regional level that is a good sprinter let's say 11". Probably can if genetically has good disposition for distance ( higher Vo2max, low bmi)but here come inside the BMI and the VO2 max and these factors are genetic. To run a 5 k in 15' you need to have about 70 Vo2max (now there's people with a smaller Vo2max blah, blah). A good sprinter can have a 40 Vo2max. How can you jump to 70? Losing weight? hmmm yes a little but we talk about athletes with low body fat not of somebody with 20% body fat. Training? you gain a little but not that much considering also that a world class sprinter is extremely specialized in sprint.

Bluesky wrote:

All this is very interesting but the example is too extreme in my opinion. Now Bolt at 207 pound sure has a very low body fat to go down at 175 pound he need to lose 13kg of muscles . The fast twitch muscles are bigger than slow twitch.

If he goes down to 175 pound probably he will lose all his power, I mean all his anaerobic power and his slow twitch are not enough to compete well. You can with time change fast twitch to slow yes in a certain way but then he still has all his muscles so too heavy to run at 3'/km for 5km.

Maybe you are right and Bolt can't get down to 15 min 5k. Maybe he could have if he really tried to, we will never know. I do not know any cases of sprinters moving up successfully, even just for fun after their career is over. Many HS sprinters jog 18 min turkey trots for health later, but they might not have been true sprinters in the first place.

FT muscles are a lot bigger than ST muscles, but this doesn't mean much about overall body weight. Look at jumpers for example (high jump, long jump), they have just as many FT fibers as sprinters but often look very lean. You also see some very lean sprinters compared to Bolt but they are also just as FT as he.

If you were to base FT or ST on looks alone, Allyson Felix could be a long-distance runner. Same with Kim Collins, a 9.9 guy:

LateRunnerPhil wrote:

Look at this clip: It shows the European Championship 2018 in Berlin. Ingebrigtsen was leading most race, Lewandowski (red shorts, white shirt) was still in last position at the bell and you can see at the start of the clip, he was in around second-to-last position on the final curve. In the last 100m, everyone is giving all they got, but Lewandowski passes half of the field in the curve on lane 3, and the rest of it on the last 40m, finishing just 0.04 behind Ingebrigtsen. How is he able to do that? He is not suffering more than anyone else in there, he just got more natural speed, more FT% fibers and is faster when he gives maximum effort at the end.

https://twitter.com/BolsaCorredor/status/1028010711417581568

The exemple is limited. You know that strategy is also a big part

Look at this clip, 400m final 2003

Has Marc Raquil, who is 15-20m behnind everyone else in the last 80 more fast twich than everyone else because he creamed them at the end or because he paced himself differently and had more in stock at the end?

Mesandron wrote:

Has Marc Raquil, who is 15-20m behnind everyone else in the last 80 more fast twich than everyone else because he creamed them at the end or because he paced himself differently and had more in stock at the end?

That's a 400m race, I don't know anything about that event. In middle-distance races, of course tactics play a role, but they are also dependent on a runner's strengths, which are dependent on his muscle fiber setup.

In the clip I posted previously, Lewandowski did pass the entire field except one on the last 120m but did not win the race, despite running the last 400 in 51.5 vs Ingebrigtsen's 53. He said in an interview that he made a mistake by being in last place when the bell rang, and won't make the same mistake again.

This is the indoor 1500m EU final from this year, where everyone thought Ingebrigtsen would make the double. I was one of the only one saying that if the race is slow, there is just no way Ingebrigtsen would win the 1500 vs Lewandowski. And that's exactly what happened:

Both are 1500m runners with very good times, if anything, Ingebrigtsen is able to run faster than Lewandowski all-out. But for some reason, Ingebrigtsen allowed this to be a slow 3:42 race, in which the fast-twitch guy that just needs to hang on and then explode on the last 200m has an easy win. As soon as Lewandowski passed him with 200m to go, it was clear that the race was over, none of Ingebrigtsens insane VO2MAX and threshold values can help him there when the FT guy drops the hammer on him and literally smokes him.

You're making stuff up. Your logic is that having Lewis and Bolt crawl through 100s and 200s will train their legs to run really slowly which will create slow-twitch muscles. Absolute nonsense.

So called scientist and internet scientist like you Late Runner Phil have proven absolutely NOTHING regarding athletic performances and muscle twitch ratio. The ONLY humans who get tested, get muscle biopsies in order to test muscle twitch ratio are a select few elite athletes. Athletes have trained formerly or informally for a LONG TIME before an athlete is tested. Humans grow and shed cells on a daily basis. NO so-called scientist tests infants. You and Otter are filibustering nonsense on these muscle twitch threads. You guys get on these muscle twitch thread, type paragraph after paragraph but still offer no prove against muscle twitch ratio simply is a product a couple dozen years of training.

The reason why some are fast and some are not: 1) Elite sprinters can do full squats x 2 body weight or greater; 2) Sprinting fast is neuromuscular coordination. No one can take up violin or ballet or tennis or hitting a baseball past puberty and do well. One must grow up playing baseball,tennis, violin and ballet early. Sprinting is similar. One grows fiber and shed fibers at an early age in response to stimulus. Sprinting well is based on early stimulus of strength and coordination.

You may or may not continue to filibuster regarding muscle twitch ratio. I guarantee you will offer no proof individuals are born with either many fast twitch or born with many slow twitch muscles.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

You're making stuff up. Your logic is that having Lewis and Bolt crawl through 100s and 200s will train their legs to run really slowly which will create slow-twitch muscles. Absolute nonsense.

No, it's not like that at all. You can't really change your muscle fiber distribution in that way. What you can do, is develop endurance and stamina, both which are required if the goal is to run a solid 5k time. To do this effectively, you need to tailor the training and workout to meet the unique musculature makeup. Bolt and Lewis wouldn't be able to handle long runs or even easy/moderate runs in the intensity and duration required to get in shape for a 15 min 5k. Their stride and running mechanics would feel awkward and terrible at these paces.

BUT if you let them run 100s or 200s with walking breaks at a decent clip (but without going into oxygen debt), they would feel great. They can cruise at 5-5:20 min mile pace, which is brisk, for 100-200m, recover a bit and do it again. Our bodies are highly adaptable, and with time, they could handle more reps, or shorter breaks. Their endurance and stamina gets better and better, and eventually they are able to run a solid 5k.

A long run of 10 miles at 7:30 pace, a 5 mile tempo in 6:00 pace, and a 25x200 or 50x100 as described above are all aerobic and work on stamina and endurance. Which one would you prescribe Bolt or Lewis? Certainly the aerobic intervals. A slow-twitch runner? Probably the long run and tempo, there is nothing a real slow-twitch runner likes doing more than a long run or a good tempo, whereas Lewis and Bolt would hate it, if they could even complete it since it feels so awkward for them.

You know there's literally DECADES of muscle biopsy research on elite athletes? Maybe you should read them.

There are many attributes which make a runner fast or slow or have exceptional endurance or not. A hypothetical runner with 100% slow twitch obviously would not make an elite distance runner because they would be moving too slow. A hypothetical runner with 100% fast twitch would obviously not make a good sprinter beyond 5 meters! Lol. There is a difference in muscle biopsy between elite distance runners and elite sprinters, although not as big of a difference as most would think. Also there are some trainable components and some not, which is why for the most part sprinters are born not made.

Alan

It is true that some runners have better finishes and highest speed but it itsn't that simple. Your reasoning about fast twitch would mean that if a better finisher was able to hang until the last 200 he could just unleash his fast finish regardless of the speed of the race, and it is not true.

El Guerrouj was faster than Kipchoge but lost in a fast race to him in 2003 and won in 2004 in the 5000 in a slow race. Lagat was faster than Bekele and lost a slow 5000 race in Berlin. How can you reconciliate that and explain that pace can ruin the fast twich advantage? If we followed your argument, a FT runner who is not dropped out of the race would win each time.