General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Re: QUERY: Why optimize a marathon runner's fat burning mechanism?

Donovan Rebbechi · 2004-08-28T20:21:01+00:00

Hello, What is the reason marathon training programs emphasize optimizing the fat burning mechanism through long, slow distance? *Long* distance optimises a whole lot of mechanisms. The main reason to train "slowly" is that it is hard to train for very long at your 5k race pace (for example) What it ultimately boils down to is specificity. Simply put, if you don't do long runs in training, a 20 miler will feel really difficult even if you only do it really slowly. The argument that such optimization spares glycogen during a race seems not to hold up. The body stores 2000 to 2500 glycogen calories, Not necessarily. Those numbers assume that you're reasonably well adapted. It also assumes that you exclusively use aerobic metabolism to burn that glycogen. Once you start using anaerobic metabolism, cellular level adaptions play a role. Metabolism becomes a more complicated, multi stage process, where the initial breakdown of the glucose molecule does not release all available energy. The better the cellular adaptions, the more heavily you can use anaerobic metabolism without rapid lactic acid accumulation. enough to make it to mile 20 or 25. Wrong again. 100 calories per mile is about right for a 137lb runner. If you're heavier than that, you will burn more than that. Since the runner is taking glucose on board through sport drinks at fluid stations, Which cannot be absorbed very quickly. it seems likely he or she will cross the finish line with a glycogen reserve. If he/she runs at an appropriate pace, *and* trains properly. In fact, the bonk is glycogen depletion, and most training manuals contend a runner that hydrates properly (with a sodium- glucose solution) will not bonk. Provided that they pace themselves properly, and train properly. When they cross the finish line, the wall will still be ahead of them. Also, competitive marathoners race at paces that demand glycogen as fuel. And distances that require heavy use of other energy sources. So, again, what is the value of training slow if the purpose is to condition the fat burning oxidative mechanism? Training *long* is more important than training slowly. But if you try run your 20 miler like it's a race, you'll be sluggish for 2 weeks, so it's a good idea to do it slowly. Why not train fast to compete fast That's a fantastic idea, and most advanced marathon training programs do include speedwork. But you can't have it both ways -- you've got to do short-and-fast training for speed, and long-and-slow training for endurance. Attempt to do long-and-fast training, and you will burn out very quickly. and take glucose on board during the race to use it as the predominant fuel? A fast marathon runner will use glucose as the predominant fuel regardless. Cheers, -- Donovan Rebbechi http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Started by Donovan Rebbechi · 28 August 2004 · Last activity 1 September 2004 · 15 posts · 283 views

← Back to General fitness, health and nutrition

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

01 / Original postRe: QUERY: Why optimize a marathon runner's fat burning mechanism?Donovan Rebbechi · 28 Aug 2004 02 / This pagePosts 1–15Page 1 of 1 · chronological order 03 / Latest replyPost #15SwStudio · 1 Sep 2004

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section: General fitness, health and nutrition
Published: 28 August 2004
Last activity: 1 September 2004
Original author: Donovan Rebbechi
Posts: 15
Discussion status: Public discussion
Total views: 283
Views / 30 days: 0
Topics: Race-day nutrition Recumbent cycling Taper and peaking

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Original post
Donovan Rebbechi
Archived post

28 August 2004, 20:21 UTC #1

mirror said:
Hello,
What is the reason marathon training programs emphasize
optimizing the fat burning mechanism through long, slow distance?
*Long* distance optimises a whole lot of mechanisms. The main reason
to train "slowly" is that it is hard to train for very long at your
5k race pace (for example)
What it ultimately boils down to is specificity. Simply put, if you
don't do long runs in training, a 20 miler will feel really difficult
even if you only do it really slowly.
Quoted message said:
The argument that such optimization spares glycogen during a race
seems not to hold up. The body stores 2000 to 2500 glycogen
calories,
Not necessarily. Those numbers assume that you're reasonably well
adapted. It also assumes that you exclusively use aerobic metabolism
to burn that glycogen. Once you start using anaerobic metabolism, cellular
level adaptions play a role. Metabolism becomes a more complicated,
multi stage process, where the initial breakdown of the glucose molecule
does not release all available energy. The better the cellular adaptions,
the more heavily you can use anaerobic metabolism without rapid lactic acid
accumulation.
Quoted message said:
enough to make it to mile 20 or 25.
Wrong again. 100 calories per mile is about right for a 137lb runner. If
you're heavier than that, you will burn more than that.
Quoted message said:
Since the runner is
taking glucose on board through sport drinks at fluid stations,
Which cannot be absorbed very quickly.
Quoted message said:
it seems likely he or she will cross the finish line with a
glycogen reserve.
If he/she runs at an appropriate pace, *and* trains properly.
Quoted message said:
In fact, the bonk is glycogen depletion, and most training
manuals contend a runner that hydrates properly (with a sodium-
glucose solution) will not bonk.
Provided that they pace themselves properly, and train properly.
Quoted message said:
When they cross the finish line,
the wall will still be ahead of them.
Also, competitive marathoners race at paces that demand glycogen
as fuel.
And distances that require heavy use of other energy sources.
Quoted message said:
So, again, what is the value of training slow if the purpose is to
condition the fat burning oxidative mechanism?
Training *long* is more important than training slowly. But if you try
run your 20 miler like it's a race, you'll be sluggish for 2 weeks, so
it's a good idea to do it slowly.
Quoted message said:
Why not train fast to compete fast
That's a fantastic idea, and most advanced marathon training programs do
include speedwork. But you can't have it both ways -- you've got to do
short-and-fast training for speed, and long-and-slow training for endurance.
Attempt to do long-and-fast training, and you will burn out very quickly.
Quoted message said:
and take glucose on board during the race to use it as the predominant
fuel?
A fast marathon runner will use glucose as the predominant fuel regardless.
Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Report
Mike Tennent
Archived post

30 August 2004, 12:43 UTC #2

Donovan Rebbechi said:

Attempt to do long-and-fast training, and you will burn out very quickly.
Amen.
It was before your time here on r.r, but we had one guy a few years
ago who suddenly got religion after attending a lecture by a top
runner.
Indy decided that long and fast was the way to train for his next
marathon. Instead of the lowly 9 - 10 minute pace he was used to (and
capable of,) he decided 7:30- 8:00 was LSD work for him. (Indy wasn't
very fast to start with.)
It wasn't pretty.
Mike Tennent
"IronPenguin"
Operating Traffic Lights
Crossbucks
Special Effects Lighting
http://www.ironpeng.com/ipe

Report
Phil M.
Archived post

30 August 2004, 20:16 UTC #3

Mike Tennent said:
Donovan Rebbechi said:

Attempt to do long-and-fast training, and you will burn out very

quickly.
Quoted message said:
Amen.
It was before your time here on r.r, but we had one guy a few years
ago who suddenly got religion after attending a lecture by a top
runner.
Indyrunnr and I got into it about hill running during a marathon race. He
was convinced that charging up every hill was the way to break the
competition. I'm sorry, but if you're a mid-packer, the best way to run
hills is to maintain effort. That will get from point A to point B in the
shortest amount of time.
Phil M.
--
"Learn from the mistakes of others. You can't live long enough to make
them all yourself." Martin Vanbee

Report
SwStudio
Archived post

30 August 2004, 23:53 UTC #4

"Phil M." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
Quoted message said:
Indyrunnr and I got into it about hill running during a marathon race. He
was convinced that charging up every hill was the way to break the
competition. I'm sorry, but if you're a mid-packer, the best way to run
hills is to maintain effort. That will get from point A to point B in the
shortest amount of time.
I remember Indy. Anyway, I think hills *are* an opportunity
to break competitors, but not charging up them.
I think the best use of a hill is to take it at even pace but crest it
strongly, at slightly above even effort. I find little packs tend to slow
down en masse at the tops of hills, as if we've all silently condoned a
little rest period together. You know what I mean, it happens all the
time when you are in a race with little packs of several runners.
Sometimes just maintaining pace will do if everyone does this silent
slowdown , thinking that they have safety in numbers.
To me, this seems the absolute best moment to make a move. It's like
everyone just admitted they are tired without saying a word. Looking
strong and picking it up right as you crest the hill really demoralizes
those on the edge of lactic blowout. On the flats, if you try to pass
people they psychologically feel more of a need to not allow it. You
are on equal footing, so to speak, and they are more likely to offer a
fight, and also more likely to be able to stay with you. The hill offers
an excuse..."let him go", etc. It also allows to to find out right away
who is fresh enough to present a problem to you. No one will follow
you unless they know they can back it up. Leaving the comfort of the
pack is a risky proposition.
cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton, ON)
www.allfalldown.org
www.absolutelyaccurate.com

Report
Doug Freese
Archived post

31 August 2004, 00:24 UTC #5

"Mike Tennent" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Indy decided that long and fast was the way to train for his next
marathon. Instead of the lowly 9 - 10 minute pace he was used to (and
capable of,) he decided 7:30- 8:00 was LSD work for him. (Indy wasn't
very fast to start with.)
It wasn't pretty.
For while after he bailed out in huff(nobody likes me I'm gonna eat some
worms) I kept an eye on his races and he was continuing to [censored] the bed
with all his races. Always some excuse and never his training. The
irony, I can't even remember his real name anymore. Shame on me.😉
DougF

Report
Phil M.
Archived post

31 August 2004, 01:21 UTC #6

SwStudio said:
"Phil M." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
Quoted message said:
Indyrunnr and I got into it about hill running during a marathon
race. He was convinced that charging up every hill was the way to
break the competition. I'm sorry, but if you're a mid-packer, the
best way to run hills is to maintain effort. That will get from point
A to point B in the shortest amount of time.
I remember Indy. Anyway, I think hills *are* an opportunity
to break competitors, but not charging up them.
I'm speaking from the middle of the pack. I'm not trying to break anyone.
I'm only trying to *not* break myself.
Quoted message said:
I think the best use of a hill is to take it at even pace but crest it
strongly, at slightly above even effort. I find little packs tend to
slow down en masse at the tops of hills, as if we've all silently
condoned a little rest period together. You know what I mean, it
happens all the time when you are in a race with little packs of
several runners. Sometimes just maintaining pace will do if everyone
does this silent slowdown , thinking that they have safety in numbers.
Could be. I haven't raced enough to know first hand. If they are slowing
down at the creast that much, they probably were running up too fast. In
the few races I've been in lately, I have noticed that many runners will
not slow their pace enough to be an even effort, not even close. So they
end up passing me on the uphills during the first half of the race. I
will usually pass them on the downhills. Gradually, as we enter the
second half of the race, these same runners aren't going up the hills
quite so fast. I'm maintaining my effort while keeping pace with them on
the uphills, and still passing on the downhills.
Phil M.
--
"Learn from the mistakes of others. You can't live long enough to make
them all yourself." Martin Vanbee

Report
Phil M.
Archived post

31 August 2004, 01:22 UTC #7

Doug Freese said:

"Mike Tennent" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
Indy decided that long and fast was the way to train for his next
marathon. Instead of the lowly 9 - 10 minute pace he was used to (and
capable of,) he decided 7:30- 8:00 was LSD work for him. (Indy wasn't
very fast to start with.)
It wasn't pretty.
For while after he bailed out in huff(nobody likes me I'm gonna eat some
worms) I kept an eye on his races and he was continuing to [censored] the bed
with all his races. Always some excuse and never his training. The
irony, I can't even remember his real name anymore. Shame on me.😉
David Frazier.
Phil M.
--
"Learn from the mistakes of others. You can't live long enough to make
them all yourself." Martin Vanbee

Report
Sam
Archived post

31 August 2004, 02:47 UTC #8

I have never really worried about people passing me on the downhill as long
as the DH is not at the end of a race. Rarely will a person get away from
me on a DH and not "come back" to me later in the race.
Of course tactics really only work in a race where you know where you are in
relation to the competitors. In a large marathon or race where it really is
impossible to know where you are in the standings, it is moot since you are
really time trialing. Small, local races are a different story or if you
have a few competitors you are trying to beat (like my friend who stayed on
my shoulder the first 2 miles of a 5K--I was determined to hold her off as
long as possible).
I do like to go strong over the top of the hill and in a race where I know
my competitors are behind me, I like to surge just past a corner. It is
demoralizing for the trailing person to come around the corner and see that
you have gained a few meters on them.
"SwStudio" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:
"Phil M." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
Quoted message said:
Indyrunnr and I got into it about hill running during a marathon race.

He
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
was convinced that charging up every hill was the way to break the
competition. I'm sorry, but if you're a mid-packer, the best way to run
hills is to maintain effort. That will get from point A to point B in

the
Quoted message said:
Quoted message said:
shortest amount of time.
I remember Indy. Anyway, I think hills *are* an opportunity
to break competitors, but not charging up them.
I think the best use of a hill is to take it at even pace but crest it
strongly, at slightly above even effort. I find little packs tend to slow
down en masse at the tops of hills, as if we've all silently condoned a
little rest period together. You know what I mean, it happens all the
time when you are in a race with little packs of several runners.
Sometimes just maintaining pace will do if everyone does this silent
slowdown , thinking that they have safety in numbers.
To me, this seems the absolute best moment to make a move. It's like
everyone just admitted they are tired without saying a word. Looking
strong and picking it up right as you crest the hill really demoralizes
those on the edge of lactic blowout. On the flats, if you try to pass
people they psychologically feel more of a need to not allow it. You
are on equal footing, so to speak, and they are more likely to offer a
fight, and also more likely to be able to stay with you. The hill offers
an excuse..."let him go", etc. It also allows to to find out right away
who is fresh enough to present a problem to you. No one will follow
you unless they know they can back it up. Leaving the comfort of the
pack is a risky proposition.
cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton, ON)
www.allfalldown.org
www.absolutelyaccurate.com

Report
SwStudio
Archived post

31 August 2004, 05:56 UTC #9

"Sam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
Quoted message said:
I have never really worried about people passing me on the downhill as

long
Quoted message said:
as the DH is not at the end of a race. Rarely will a person get away from
me on a DH and not "come back" to me later in the race.
Of course tactics really only work in a race where you know where you are

in
Quoted message said:
relation to the competitors. In a large marathon or race where it really

is
Quoted message said:
impossible to know where you are in the standings, it is moot since you

are
Quoted message said:
really time trialing. Small, local races are a different story or if you
have a few competitors you are trying to beat (like my friend who stayed

on
Quoted message said:
my shoulder the first 2 miles of a 5K--I was determined to hold her off as
long as possible).
I do like to go strong over the top of the hill and in a race where I know
my competitors are behind me, I like to surge just past a corner. It is
demoralizing for the trailing person to come around the corner and see

that
Quoted message said:
you have gained a few meters on them.
I have a friend who is my main competitor in the sense that we
both run similar times and enjoy the positive rivalry. He is in the
top few in Canada in the 50+ division, and strangely is more
likely to beat me in a 5k than a HM although I am only in my
mid 30's. His training is unorthodox and I could describe it to
anyone interested.
Anyway, my point is that his strategy is to surge a bit in the
middle of a race.... the 3rd km, so to speak. Many a race he has
done this to me. Suddenly he's 20 metres ahead and I'm thinking
I will catch up later because it's not that far. Of course, he beats
me by 20 metres.
I like to race hard and honest right fron the start, and have trouble
using tactics even when I know it's a better choice. For example,
I can't help but start to drift out of a pack when I feel good, if only
for a few seconds. In this way I wear my 'racing heart' on my sleeve.
I envy those that can hold off.
cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton, ON)
www.allfalldown.org
www.absolutelyaccurate.com

Report
TheBillRodgerz
Archived post

31 August 2004, 10:20 UTC #10

Quoted message said:
I have a friend who is my main competitor
Does he know how to trim quotes? Or is he an [censored] too?

Report
Email address hidden
Archived post

31 August 2004, 16:10 UTC #11

SwStudio <[email hidden]> wrote:
.....
Quoted message said:
I have a friend who is my main competitor in the sense that we
both run similar times and enjoy the positive rivalry. He is in the
top few in Canada in the 50+ division, and strangely is more
likely to beat me in a 5k than a HM although I am only in my
mid 30's. His training is unorthodox and I could describe it to
anyone interested.
David,
I would be interested in reading it. Can you post it?
Thanks,
jobs

Report
SwStudio
Archived post

1 September 2004, 01:08 UTC #12

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
Quoted message said:
SwStudio <[email hidden]> wrote:
....
Quoted message said:
I have a friend who is my main competitor in the sense that we
both run similar times and enjoy the positive rivalry. He is in the
top few in Canada in the 50+ division, and strangely is more
likely to beat me in a 5k than a HM although I am only in my
mid 30's. His training is unorthodox and I could describe it to
anyone interested.
David,
I would be interested in reading it. Can you post it?
No problem, Jobs:
He is 54 (just turned) and currently runs about 17:10 - 17:15 for
5k, and about 1:19:45 for half marathon.
Training consists of going to the gym six days a week, which will
typically include 4 days of recumbant bike and 2 on regular stationary
bike. These bike workouts are almost always classic lactate threshold
type events, in which he carefully monitors HR to keep it in the proper
zone (half-marathon sort of effort level, so to speak). They usually last
an hour; maybe 40 minutes if he's tired. He keep the cadence at about
108. Afterwards he usually does about 30 minutes of stretching and
abdominal work.
One day a week he runs, and this is often a hard 10 miler. Again, he
clearly likes the threshold zone.
If a race is coming up, he tapers a bit, but will usually do 5km on the
treadmill the day before at 10mph, which works out to about 18:45
with the initial speedup at the start. This is the only time he runs, aside
from the Sunday 10 miler.
cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton, ON)
www.allfalldown.org
www.absolutelyaccurate.com

Report
Email address hidden
Archived post

1 September 2004, 02:20 UTC #13

SwStudio <[email hidden]> wrote:
....
Quoted message said:
He is 54 (just turned) and currently runs about 17:10 - 17:15 for
5k, and about 1:19:45 for half marathon.
That's an impressive time. More so for a 54 year old.
Quoted message said:
Training consists of going to the gym six days a week, which will
typically include 4 days of recumbant bike and 2 on regular stationary
bike. These bike workouts are almost always classic lactate threshold
type events, in which he carefully monitors HR to keep it in the proper
zone (half-marathon sort of effort level, so to speak). They usually last
an hour; maybe 40 minutes if he's tired. He keep the cadence at about
108. Afterwards he usually does about 30 minutes of stretching and
abdominal work.
It's very interesting. So, pretty much all he does is bike, and bike hard.
Quoted message said:
One day a week he runs, and this is often a hard 10 miler. Again, he
clearly likes the threshold zone.
So, in other words, he has no easy days at all as far as legs go.
Quoted message said:
If a race is coming up, he tapers a bit, but will usually do 5km on the
treadmill the day before at 10mph, which works out to about 18:45
with the initial speedup at the start. This is the only time he runs, aside
from the Sunday 10 miler.
I wonder what he could do if he were to go for the orthodox training
methods - easy days, hard, LT, LSD, repeats, etc..
I would think it might not possible for him to do a marathon at
a relatively comparable level using his current methods.
Thanks for psting the information.
jobs

Report
Donovan Rebbechi
Archived post

1 September 2004, 03:13 UTC #14

Quoted message said:
SwStudio <[email hidden]> wrote:
...
Quoted message said:
He is 54 (just turned) and currently runs about 17:10 - 17:15 for
5k, and about 1:19:45 for half marathon.
That's an impressive time. More so for a 54 year old.
Quoted message said:
Training consists of going to the gym six days a week, which will
typically include 4 days of recumbant bike and 2 on regular stationary
bike. These bike workouts are almost always classic lactate threshold
type events, in which he carefully monitors HR to keep it in the proper
zone (half-marathon sort of effort level, so to speak). They usually last
an hour; maybe 40 minutes if he's tired. He keep the cadence at about
108. Afterwards he usually does about 30 minutes of stretching and
abdominal work.
It's very interesting. So, pretty much all he does is bike, and bike hard.
Bike is much easier on recovery. There is no eccentric loading, and you don't
have the rapid contractions associated with high impact. I've never had DOMS
from a bike ride, even hard bike rides when poorly adapted. On the other hand,
even an all-out 50m dash is enough to cause DOMS if you're poorly adapted.
Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

Report
SwStudio
Archived post

1 September 2004, 13:06 UTC #15

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
Quoted message said:
I wonder what he could do if he were to go for the orthodox training
methods - easy days, hard, LT, LSD, repeats, etc..
He is afraid of injury. He has seen all his peers fall by the wayside
as the years have passed. He knows he could be a little faster at
specific distances if he trained properly, but is loathe to change a
system that keeps him in the top few in the country with no injury.
Quoted message said:
I would think it might not possible for him to do a marathon at
a relatively comparable level using his current methods.
I agree - again, he knows the limitations but is willing to stick with
what he's got and see where it takes him as he ages further.
cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton, ON)
www.allfalldown.org
www.absolutelyaccurate.com

Report

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.

Jump through the discussion

What we know about this thread

Continue through CyclingForums

Active in this thread