| SportsLab of Real Fitness, Inc. The Science of Running |
| Matt Woods, MS Exercise Physiology 178-B East Milltown Road, Wooster, OH 44691 Phone 330.465.8724 Email mswsportslab@yahoo.com www.rfsportslab.com |
| 10 SMALL CHANGES THAT YIELD BIG RESULTS by Matt Woods, Exercise Physiologist 1) Get control of your racing schedule and limit competition to the bare minimum to achieve primary seasonal goals. Determine which competitions are required and go from there (State, Regional, District, Conference (high school)). Compete every other week prior to these mandatory meets or compete in two to three week series followed by a week or two off. It’s your program, you can control how often and why you race (Use periodization. Peak when it counts.) 2) Limit the amount of quality to no more than two threshold or above efforts per week. In other words, if you race on Saturday, there would be one other hard effort during the week. If there is no race that week, then two hard sessions can be employed. Races are the hardest workout. Don’t exclude them from your training prescription. 3) Allow two recovery days following all major stresses and two recovery days before all races. Don’t do long runs on Sunday following a Saturday race. Wait until Monday. Hard workouts should be on Wednesday when racing on Saturday. 4) Favor anaerobic threshold (tempo) sessions over VO2 max work and lactate tolerance work. Recognize races as VO2 max stresses. Don’t double your emphasis of one physiological parameter each week. Alternate physiological stresses so that you don’t have back-to-back replication of the same stress. (Training is a matter of physiological balance.) 5) Slow down on recovery runs. These should be two minutes per mile slower than race pace. Have big variation between your hard and easy. 6) Utilize short alactate hill sprints with full recoveries two days per week following regular recovery runs on day prior to hard workout. This is the most specific speed and power development a runner can do. (10-15 seconds with 2:00-3:00 minute recoveries) 7) Employ year-round strength training, particularly core strength two days per week. Recognize that running is not just a metabolic issue, but is largely neuromuscular and dependent on elastic energy. 8) Sacrifice immediate results for bigger, long-term results. Interval training and anaerobic work will elicit a minor short-term performance enhancement, but tempo running will yield a much bigger improvement in the long run. 9) Anaerobic capacity development can be limited to a few short intervals following a tempo session. 10) Utilize a proper dynamic warmup before all races and hard sessions. |
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
| Malone University Cross Country and Distance Coaching Seminar (July 15, 2009) Featuring Jack Hazen, Head Malone Cross Country and Distance Coach, Matt Woods, Exercise Physiologist, Van Rose, and Dugan Hill Malone University Cross Country Camp for Junior High and High School Athletes (July 12-15, 2009) ***Check Malone Website for 2010 Seminar and Cross Country Camp - Details to Be Announced at a Later Date*** (For registration details, see website: http://www.malonerunning.com/) |
Determining Optimal Training Intensities
by Matt Woods, Exercise Physiologist
Introduction
One of the most important factors in optimizing individual performance improvement and enhancing training efficiency is to have objective means of
establishing and monitoring training paces or efforts. It is particularly important in a group setting to be able to prescribe training paces for each runner.
These methods of training pace assignment can be either very simple field tests or more sophisticated laboratory procedures. Ideally, a coach and/or
athlete would employ a combination of methods, depending on the time of year and availability. At the Real Fitness SportsLab, we utilize each of the
following methods when assisting runners in pursuit of their performance goals.
1) Physiological Testing – One of the primary services at the Real Fitness SportsLab is physiological testing performed by exercise physiologist Matt
Woods. A typical test battery at SportsLab would involve a lactate profile and a VO2 max test. Through a combination of these two laboratory tests, the
entire range of effective training paces can be determined. These tests are completely individualized according to the runner’s current physical
abilities and the actual test protocol is customized based on a discussion of the runner’s recent race performances, training and personal bests. From
these tests, a runner can learn their true max heart rate, VO2 max, aerobic threshold, anaerobic threshold, and peak lactate, along with the
corresponding heart rates, paces, and lactate levels. Although the tests are performed on a treadmill, the transferability to overground running is quite
good and creates a repeatable test in a controlled setting. Optimally, a runner would undergo four tests per year, but even two would be quite effective.
This type of performance monitoring is clearly the most sophisticated of the available methods, but is surprisingly affordable.
2) Field Tests – The following two field tests are an inexpensive, highly repeatable, and very specific means of determining optimal training
intensities. Both tests can be surface or terrain specific to enhance their transferability to the conditions that a runner is training to race in.
a) The 1.5 Mile Test is aimed at determining velocity at VO2 max (v VO2 max). It is well established that the velocity or pace that VO2 max occurs
at can be maintained for about 6 to 10 minutes. The 1.5 mile distance fits nicely into that 6 to 10 minute time period. The objective is to run an even-
paced, all-out effort over 1.5 miles, on a course or surface that will be your dominant racing or training surface. In other words, if you are racing in cross
country conditions, your 1.5 mile time trial should be on grass and hills. If you are preparing for track, then the track would be appropriate for the test.
Although percentages of the actual velocity determined from the test can be used to assign training paces, at SportsLab we have devised a simpler
method for calculating the training paces. For simplicity’s sake, it is easier to call the 1.5 mile time trial pace, 3k pace. Under ideal conditions, if
rested, a runner could come pretty close to maintaining that pace for 3k. From there, it is very simple to add 16 seconds per mile to determine
approximate capability over 5km, 10km, half marathon and marathon. By adding 16 seconds per mile for each successively longer distance, current
individualized training paces can be determined. Anaerobic threshold pace would be about 40-45 seconds per mile slower than the 1.5 mile time trial
pace and aerobic threshold about 70-75 seconds slower. Easy recovery pace is about 2 minutes per mile slower.
Some coaches and runners may find that the paces are a little slower than what they are capable of, but that functions as a built-in safeguard to prevent
overtraining.
For women, the conversion from one distance to another may be closer to 20 seconds per mile. Regardless, this simple, repeatable test provides a
current insight into the pace that quite accurately determines VO2 max velocity.
b) The 10 Mile Time Trial is an excellent assessment of a runner’s pace at anaerobic threshold. It is well established that the pace that a runner can
maintain for an even-paced one hour all-out effort, corresponds very closely to the traditional 4 mmol anaerobic threshold. Although slower runners will
require a longer time period to cover 10 miles, whatever distance a runner can cover in around an hour is applicable. The average pace per mile for
the distance covered in one hour can effectively be used to determine anaerobic threshold pace. The pace at the anaerobic threshold is one of the
biggest determinants of distance running success. The higher the pace at the anaerobic threshold, the faster the sustainable race pace will be at
virtually all competitive distances. For younger or slower runners, a 7 to 8 mile distance can be used to determine the anaerobic threshold speed.
Although the term anaerobic threshold has become outdated, the concept of developing a high sustainable speed over a longer distance has greater
ramifications for distance running performance. The point at which there becomes a rather abrupt increase in lactate production and the body’s ability
to metabolize it, is a critical performance-limiting factor. Sustained efforts at one hour race pace will gradually enhance the shuttling of lactate both
within and outside of the working muscles.
3) Recent Race Performances – A third way, and possibly the most effective and specific way of assigning training paces, is current race
performances. A runner’s times, from races within the last 2-4 weeks, if run under good conditions, are the best reflection of the athlete’s present physical
abilities. From these race times, it is possible to determine equivalent performances at other distances and, therefore, bracket the target distance for
optimal race preparation. Both underdistance and overdistance capability are critical to maximizing performance at the focal distance. By using
current race performance, a runner can train at present race pace and at the pace of one distance above and one distance below. In other words, as a
5000 meter runner, it is necessary, during the racing season and the specific preparation period, to run at 5k pace, 3k pace and 10k pace. If you do not
have recent race performances at all three distances, tables that give equivalent performances or using a 12-16 second per mile conversion, will predict
the possible performances at the surrounding distances. Noted physiologist, Jack Daniels, was one of the first to produce mathematical formulations for
determining equivalent race performances. He was also able to assign a predicted VO2 max that corresponded to those performances. Those
interested in using his tables to determine the performance equivalents can find them in his book Daniels’ Running Formula. There are also
equivalency tables on the Internet which allow you to plug in a recent race time and instantly get the equivalent performance at virtually every
distance.
When determining training paces, there is always the debate of whether to run at current race pace versus goal pace. We believe that it is better to train
at current ability and cut down to goal pace over the course of the workout. In a typical interval session aimed at instilling race-specific fitness, you
would run the majority of the intervals at present ability, as demonstrated by a recent race or equivalent performance, and run the last interval or two at
goal pace. Another way of ensuring the overload that will allow an improvement from present race pace is the use of workouts at one distance below the
target distance. Goal pace would be somewhere between the two paces, and by doing sessions at both paces and adding a progression element
through the workout, goal pace capability can be attained. Balancing current capability with future ambitions is where the art of coaching comes in
and the critical part of optimizing improvement.
4) Heart Rate Monitoring and Lactate Monitoring – Our fourth method of establishing and controlling training intensity is heart rate and lactate
monitoring. Both of these methods can be completely individualized and remove subjectiveness from the training process. To effectively utilize these
methods, some preliminary testing must be done, but this ensures that the parameters are current and individualized.
In the section on Physiological Testing, we discussed how, during the lactate profile and VO2 max test, heart rate and lactate measures would be
obtained. These measures will coincide with the critical physiological parameters that will be the focus of a properly balanced training program.
Through physiological testing, a coach and athlete can obtain heart rate and lactate numbers to dictate easy aerobic running, aerobic threshold,
anaerobic threshold, VO2 max, peak lactate, and max heart rate. A properly designed lactate profile can give you heart rates and lactates for a range of
paces from easy aerobic running up to anaerobic threshold. Consequently, you have a test that is repeatable and can be used to assess improvements.
When applying this information to actual training, you can focus on hitting a specific heart rate and/or lactate, as opposed to a specific pace. This
approach is more intrinsically focused than a pace-based approach and may be better suited for adverse conditions such as heat or altitude. By
focusing on individual heart rate and lactate parameters that correspond to known physiologically effective training zones, the arbitrary nature of pace is
avoided. Ultimately, to run a particular time in a race, the extrinsic reality of the clock must be met, but the process of getting there must also take into
consideration daily performance fluctuation.
Although more expensive and technical than other training control methods, heart rate and lactate monitoring represent the cutting edge of athletic
training. A runner can ultimately learn the subjective feeling that corresponds with a particular heart rate or lactate, but that can take considerable
time. As suggested earlier, the ultimate coaching approach is to blend the various methods and use them according to the demands of a specific
workout or training environment.
For information on how to optimize your training process and create your own idealized set of training parameters, CONTACT Real Fitness /
SportsLab today. Matt Woods, Exercise Physiologist
Phone 330.465.8724 or Email mswsportslab@yahoo.com
by Matt Woods, Exercise Physiologist
Introduction
One of the most important factors in optimizing individual performance improvement and enhancing training efficiency is to have objective means of
establishing and monitoring training paces or efforts. It is particularly important in a group setting to be able to prescribe training paces for each runner.
These methods of training pace assignment can be either very simple field tests or more sophisticated laboratory procedures. Ideally, a coach and/or
athlete would employ a combination of methods, depending on the time of year and availability. At the Real Fitness SportsLab, we utilize each of the
following methods when assisting runners in pursuit of their performance goals.
1) Physiological Testing – One of the primary services at the Real Fitness SportsLab is physiological testing performed by exercise physiologist Matt
Woods. A typical test battery at SportsLab would involve a lactate profile and a VO2 max test. Through a combination of these two laboratory tests, the
entire range of effective training paces can be determined. These tests are completely individualized according to the runner’s current physical
abilities and the actual test protocol is customized based on a discussion of the runner’s recent race performances, training and personal bests. From
these tests, a runner can learn their true max heart rate, VO2 max, aerobic threshold, anaerobic threshold, and peak lactate, along with the
corresponding heart rates, paces, and lactate levels. Although the tests are performed on a treadmill, the transferability to overground running is quite
good and creates a repeatable test in a controlled setting. Optimally, a runner would undergo four tests per year, but even two would be quite effective.
This type of performance monitoring is clearly the most sophisticated of the available methods, but is surprisingly affordable.
2) Field Tests – The following two field tests are an inexpensive, highly repeatable, and very specific means of determining optimal training
intensities. Both tests can be surface or terrain specific to enhance their transferability to the conditions that a runner is training to race in.
a) The 1.5 Mile Test is aimed at determining velocity at VO2 max (v VO2 max). It is well established that the velocity or pace that VO2 max occurs
at can be maintained for about 6 to 10 minutes. The 1.5 mile distance fits nicely into that 6 to 10 minute time period. The objective is to run an even-
paced, all-out effort over 1.5 miles, on a course or surface that will be your dominant racing or training surface. In other words, if you are racing in cross
country conditions, your 1.5 mile time trial should be on grass and hills. If you are preparing for track, then the track would be appropriate for the test.
Although percentages of the actual velocity determined from the test can be used to assign training paces, at SportsLab we have devised a simpler
method for calculating the training paces. For simplicity’s sake, it is easier to call the 1.5 mile time trial pace, 3k pace. Under ideal conditions, if
rested, a runner could come pretty close to maintaining that pace for 3k. From there, it is very simple to add 16 seconds per mile to determine
approximate capability over 5km, 10km, half marathon and marathon. By adding 16 seconds per mile for each successively longer distance, current
individualized training paces can be determined. Anaerobic threshold pace would be about 40-45 seconds per mile slower than the 1.5 mile time trial
pace and aerobic threshold about 70-75 seconds slower. Easy recovery pace is about 2 minutes per mile slower.
Some coaches and runners may find that the paces are a little slower than what they are capable of, but that functions as a built-in safeguard to prevent
overtraining.
For women, the conversion from one distance to another may be closer to 20 seconds per mile. Regardless, this simple, repeatable test provides a
current insight into the pace that quite accurately determines VO2 max velocity.
b) The 10 Mile Time Trial is an excellent assessment of a runner’s pace at anaerobic threshold. It is well established that the pace that a runner can
maintain for an even-paced one hour all-out effort, corresponds very closely to the traditional 4 mmol anaerobic threshold. Although slower runners will
require a longer time period to cover 10 miles, whatever distance a runner can cover in around an hour is applicable. The average pace per mile for
the distance covered in one hour can effectively be used to determine anaerobic threshold pace. The pace at the anaerobic threshold is one of the
biggest determinants of distance running success. The higher the pace at the anaerobic threshold, the faster the sustainable race pace will be at
virtually all competitive distances. For younger or slower runners, a 7 to 8 mile distance can be used to determine the anaerobic threshold speed.
Although the term anaerobic threshold has become outdated, the concept of developing a high sustainable speed over a longer distance has greater
ramifications for distance running performance. The point at which there becomes a rather abrupt increase in lactate production and the body’s ability
to metabolize it, is a critical performance-limiting factor. Sustained efforts at one hour race pace will gradually enhance the shuttling of lactate both
within and outside of the working muscles.
3) Recent Race Performances – A third way, and possibly the most effective and specific way of assigning training paces, is current race
performances. A runner’s times, from races within the last 2-4 weeks, if run under good conditions, are the best reflection of the athlete’s present physical
abilities. From these race times, it is possible to determine equivalent performances at other distances and, therefore, bracket the target distance for
optimal race preparation. Both underdistance and overdistance capability are critical to maximizing performance at the focal distance. By using
current race performance, a runner can train at present race pace and at the pace of one distance above and one distance below. In other words, as a
5000 meter runner, it is necessary, during the racing season and the specific preparation period, to run at 5k pace, 3k pace and 10k pace. If you do not
have recent race performances at all three distances, tables that give equivalent performances or using a 12-16 second per mile conversion, will predict
the possible performances at the surrounding distances. Noted physiologist, Jack Daniels, was one of the first to produce mathematical formulations for
determining equivalent race performances. He was also able to assign a predicted VO2 max that corresponded to those performances. Those
interested in using his tables to determine the performance equivalents can find them in his book Daniels’ Running Formula. There are also
equivalency tables on the Internet which allow you to plug in a recent race time and instantly get the equivalent performance at virtually every
distance.
When determining training paces, there is always the debate of whether to run at current race pace versus goal pace. We believe that it is better to train
at current ability and cut down to goal pace over the course of the workout. In a typical interval session aimed at instilling race-specific fitness, you
would run the majority of the intervals at present ability, as demonstrated by a recent race or equivalent performance, and run the last interval or two at
goal pace. Another way of ensuring the overload that will allow an improvement from present race pace is the use of workouts at one distance below the
target distance. Goal pace would be somewhere between the two paces, and by doing sessions at both paces and adding a progression element
through the workout, goal pace capability can be attained. Balancing current capability with future ambitions is where the art of coaching comes in
and the critical part of optimizing improvement.
4) Heart Rate Monitoring and Lactate Monitoring – Our fourth method of establishing and controlling training intensity is heart rate and lactate
monitoring. Both of these methods can be completely individualized and remove subjectiveness from the training process. To effectively utilize these
methods, some preliminary testing must be done, but this ensures that the parameters are current and individualized.
In the section on Physiological Testing, we discussed how, during the lactate profile and VO2 max test, heart rate and lactate measures would be
obtained. These measures will coincide with the critical physiological parameters that will be the focus of a properly balanced training program.
Through physiological testing, a coach and athlete can obtain heart rate and lactate numbers to dictate easy aerobic running, aerobic threshold,
anaerobic threshold, VO2 max, peak lactate, and max heart rate. A properly designed lactate profile can give you heart rates and lactates for a range of
paces from easy aerobic running up to anaerobic threshold. Consequently, you have a test that is repeatable and can be used to assess improvements.
When applying this information to actual training, you can focus on hitting a specific heart rate and/or lactate, as opposed to a specific pace. This
approach is more intrinsically focused than a pace-based approach and may be better suited for adverse conditions such as heat or altitude. By
focusing on individual heart rate and lactate parameters that correspond to known physiologically effective training zones, the arbitrary nature of pace is
avoided. Ultimately, to run a particular time in a race, the extrinsic reality of the clock must be met, but the process of getting there must also take into
consideration daily performance fluctuation.
Although more expensive and technical than other training control methods, heart rate and lactate monitoring represent the cutting edge of athletic
training. A runner can ultimately learn the subjective feeling that corresponds with a particular heart rate or lactate, but that can take considerable
time. As suggested earlier, the ultimate coaching approach is to blend the various methods and use them according to the demands of a specific
workout or training environment.
For information on how to optimize your training process and create your own idealized set of training parameters, CONTACT Real Fitness /
SportsLab today. Matt Woods, Exercise Physiologist
Phone 330.465.8724 or Email mswsportslab@yahoo.com
A Question of Over or Under
By Matt Woods, Exercise Physiologist
For many runners and coaches, once the aerobic base is established, the dominant training focus becomes speed. Two to three days a week
during the pre-competition and racing periods, the emphasis shifts from quantity to quality. Typically, this means performing workouts that are
substantially faster than race pace and broken into intervals much shorter than the race distance. Although anaerobic capacity and lactate
tolerance play a definite role in race performance, particularly the middle distances, the use of these types of workouts exclusively needs to be
closely examined. The general belief is that running enough faster than the required race pace imparts a physiological cushion that makes race
pace seem easy. From a purely neuromuscular standpoint, this is probably true, but long distance racing is very much a metabolic issue.
Whether by design or tradition, the abandonment of endurance work during the racing season has been the common practice for many coaches
and runners. This drastic shift in physiological emphasis comes with a definite opportunity cost. There seems to be a hope that the prior
endurance work will carry the runner through the racing season and that the gain in anaerobic capability will offset any loss in endurance
capacity. While this may hold true for a short period of time, the typical racing season is 8-10 weeks, much too long to function under significantly
reduced mileage and anaerobic dominance.
The purpose of this article is not to discuss the entire scope of organizing a seasonal training plan, but instead, the error in sacrificing strength in
the name of speed. Why does underdistance work predominate over overdistance work in the goal of improving performance? Both coaches
and runners alike in their evaluation of race performance, will often cite a lack of speedwork as the limiting factor. They assume that a lack of
subrace pace work prohibited them from sustaining the required race pace or caused them to be left behind during the race. While this can be
true in some cases, the opposite problem is more likely at fault. The reality is that few runners possess the required general, special, and specific
endurance for their racing ambitions and, in most cases, no amount of enhanced oxygen debt tolerance will remedy the situation. In short, speed
cannot substitute for a lack of endurance. Endurance, in all its forms, is the prerequisite for distance running success.
Few coaches or runners would argue against the need to create a strong aerobic foundation prior to the racing season. For most runners, this
means copious amounts of long, slow distance, maybe sprinkled with a weekly tempo run. What transpires after the base period is more dubious
and is where many training and racing programs become unraveled.
Certainly, the balance of training may shift in favor of intensity during the racing period, but to what extent dictates how much of the prior
endurance capability is lost or preserved. Endurance training is very much dependent on a succession of increasing intensity work, with each
step facilitating the next. The critical error that many coaches make is jumping from relatively low intensity aerobic work to very high intensity
anaerobic sessions without filling the gaps. This seems to be especially true during the racing season.
Anaerobic work and even running at close to VO2 max, should only be viewed as a final polish to the pursuit of cumulative aerobic foundation.
For those lacking the development of the ability to maintain a high percentage of their VO2 max for extended periods, anaerobic work is likely even
detrimental to race performance. In other words, a less developed runner is more likely to continue to improve over the racing season by using
endurance focused training instead of the customary lactate tolerance work.
What is really at play is the question of lactate clearance versus lactate tolerance. Lactate clearance is the domain of endurance facilitated by the
muscles’ ability to use lactate as a fuel and transport it both within and outside muscle cells. Lactate tolerance is dependent on buffering capacity
and the muscles’ ability to continue to contract despite the acidic environment. A high buffering capacity is not a substitute for clearance ability
and vice versa. The two capacities necessitate a very different training approach and is where many coaches misinterpret the physiological
demands of a particular event.
In short, overdistance focus, or what is commonly called special endurance, is many times a better approach to facilitating performance than the
emphasis on sub-race pace work. Those paces that are in close proximity to the specific race pace, but are slightly slower, can be much more
valuable in promoting sustainable race pace than the lactate tolerance instilled through sub-race pace work.
Over a typical racing season of 8-10 weeks, most runners have an opportunity to race both over and under their specialty distance. These races
by themselves have a profound fitness development effect. The combination of over, under and the target distance, coupled with enough
supporting aerobic work, may be all the intensity a runner requires. Small amounts of anaerobic work can easily be added to endurance
maintenance sessions to impart lactate tolerance and finishing capability. In other words, the necessity to dedicate entire training days to oxygen
debt tolerance is unnecessary and can be overly taxing.
The real challenge for the coach is to create and maintain balance through the specific preparation and racing periods. The anaerobic threshold
work that should have been an integral part of the base period should not be abandoned nor should VO2 max work for the middle distance
runner. The less racing that is done, the more control the coach has over the race specific fitness acquisition. The more racing that is mandated
or chosen, the more careful the coach must be in creating physiological balance and maintaining prior endurance gains.
If you would like to find out more on how to construct an optimal seasonal plan, either as a coach or athlete, contact Real Fitness, Inc., SportsLab,
for an individualized assessment of your needs and requirements.
By Matt Woods, Exercise Physiologist
For many runners and coaches, once the aerobic base is established, the dominant training focus becomes speed. Two to three days a week
during the pre-competition and racing periods, the emphasis shifts from quantity to quality. Typically, this means performing workouts that are
substantially faster than race pace and broken into intervals much shorter than the race distance. Although anaerobic capacity and lactate
tolerance play a definite role in race performance, particularly the middle distances, the use of these types of workouts exclusively needs to be
closely examined. The general belief is that running enough faster than the required race pace imparts a physiological cushion that makes race
pace seem easy. From a purely neuromuscular standpoint, this is probably true, but long distance racing is very much a metabolic issue.
Whether by design or tradition, the abandonment of endurance work during the racing season has been the common practice for many coaches
and runners. This drastic shift in physiological emphasis comes with a definite opportunity cost. There seems to be a hope that the prior
endurance work will carry the runner through the racing season and that the gain in anaerobic capability will offset any loss in endurance
capacity. While this may hold true for a short period of time, the typical racing season is 8-10 weeks, much too long to function under significantly
reduced mileage and anaerobic dominance.
The purpose of this article is not to discuss the entire scope of organizing a seasonal training plan, but instead, the error in sacrificing strength in
the name of speed. Why does underdistance work predominate over overdistance work in the goal of improving performance? Both coaches
and runners alike in their evaluation of race performance, will often cite a lack of speedwork as the limiting factor. They assume that a lack of
subrace pace work prohibited them from sustaining the required race pace or caused them to be left behind during the race. While this can be
true in some cases, the opposite problem is more likely at fault. The reality is that few runners possess the required general, special, and specific
endurance for their racing ambitions and, in most cases, no amount of enhanced oxygen debt tolerance will remedy the situation. In short, speed
cannot substitute for a lack of endurance. Endurance, in all its forms, is the prerequisite for distance running success.
Few coaches or runners would argue against the need to create a strong aerobic foundation prior to the racing season. For most runners, this
means copious amounts of long, slow distance, maybe sprinkled with a weekly tempo run. What transpires after the base period is more dubious
and is where many training and racing programs become unraveled.
Certainly, the balance of training may shift in favor of intensity during the racing period, but to what extent dictates how much of the prior
endurance capability is lost or preserved. Endurance training is very much dependent on a succession of increasing intensity work, with each
step facilitating the next. The critical error that many coaches make is jumping from relatively low intensity aerobic work to very high intensity
anaerobic sessions without filling the gaps. This seems to be especially true during the racing season.
Anaerobic work and even running at close to VO2 max, should only be viewed as a final polish to the pursuit of cumulative aerobic foundation.
For those lacking the development of the ability to maintain a high percentage of their VO2 max for extended periods, anaerobic work is likely even
detrimental to race performance. In other words, a less developed runner is more likely to continue to improve over the racing season by using
endurance focused training instead of the customary lactate tolerance work.
What is really at play is the question of lactate clearance versus lactate tolerance. Lactate clearance is the domain of endurance facilitated by the
muscles’ ability to use lactate as a fuel and transport it both within and outside muscle cells. Lactate tolerance is dependent on buffering capacity
and the muscles’ ability to continue to contract despite the acidic environment. A high buffering capacity is not a substitute for clearance ability
and vice versa. The two capacities necessitate a very different training approach and is where many coaches misinterpret the physiological
demands of a particular event.
In short, overdistance focus, or what is commonly called special endurance, is many times a better approach to facilitating performance than the
emphasis on sub-race pace work. Those paces that are in close proximity to the specific race pace, but are slightly slower, can be much more
valuable in promoting sustainable race pace than the lactate tolerance instilled through sub-race pace work.
Over a typical racing season of 8-10 weeks, most runners have an opportunity to race both over and under their specialty distance. These races
by themselves have a profound fitness development effect. The combination of over, under and the target distance, coupled with enough
supporting aerobic work, may be all the intensity a runner requires. Small amounts of anaerobic work can easily be added to endurance
maintenance sessions to impart lactate tolerance and finishing capability. In other words, the necessity to dedicate entire training days to oxygen
debt tolerance is unnecessary and can be overly taxing.
The real challenge for the coach is to create and maintain balance through the specific preparation and racing periods. The anaerobic threshold
work that should have been an integral part of the base period should not be abandoned nor should VO2 max work for the middle distance
runner. The less racing that is done, the more control the coach has over the race specific fitness acquisition. The more racing that is mandated
or chosen, the more careful the coach must be in creating physiological balance and maintaining prior endurance gains.
If you would like to find out more on how to construct an optimal seasonal plan, either as a coach or athlete, contact Real Fitness, Inc., SportsLab,
for an individualized assessment of your needs and requirements.