More (or less) on what to do during the winter

Discussion in 'Cycling Training' started by Doublebiker, Sep 23, 2008.

  1. Doublebiker

    Doublebiker New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
    [font=&quot]J Strength Cond Res. 2007 Aug ;21 (3):943-9 17685689
    [/font]

    [font=&quot]Impact of training intensity distribution on performance in endurance athletes.[/font][font=&quot] [/font]

    [font=&quot][My paper][/font][font=&quot] [/font][font=&quot]Jonathan Esteve-Lanao[/font][font=&quot], [/font][font=&quot]Carl Foster[/font][font=&quot], [/font][font=&quot]Stephen Seiler[/font][font=&quot], [/font][font=&quot]Alejandro Lucia[/font][font=&quot] [/font]

    [font=&quot]Esteve-Lanao, J., C. Foster, S. Seiler, and A. Lucia. Impact of training intensity distribution on performance in endurance athletes. J. Strength Cond. Res. 21(3):943-949. 2007.-
    [/font]

    [font=&quot]The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of 2 training programs differing in the relative contribution of training volume, clearly below vs. within the lactate threshold/maximal lactate steady state region on performance in endurance runners. Twelve subelite endurance runners (who are specialists in track events, mostly the 5,000-m race usually held during spring-summer months and who also participate in cross-country races [9- 12 km] during fall and winter months) were randomly assigned to a training program emphasizing low-intensity (subthreshold) (Z1) or moderately high-intensity (between thresholds) (Z2) training intensities. At the start of the study, the subjects performed a maximal exercise test to determine ventilatory (VT) and respiratory compensation thresholds (RCT), which allowed training to be controlled based on heart rate during each training session over a 5-month training period. Subjects performed a simulated 10.4-km cross-country race before and after the training period. Training was quantified based on the cumulative time spent in 3 intensity zones: zone 1 (low intensity; <VT), zone 2 (moderate intensity; between VT and RCT), and zone 3 (high intensity; >RCT). [/font]

    [font=&quot] [/font]

    [font=&quot]The contribution of total training time spent in zones 1 and 2 was controlled to have relatively more low-intensity training in Z1 (80.5 +/- 1.8% and 11.8 +/- 2.0%, respectively) than in Z2 (66.8 +/- 1.1% and 24.7 +/- 1.5%, respectively), whereas the contribution of high-intensity (zone 3) training was similar (8.3 +/- 0.7% [Z1] and 8.5 +/- 1.0% [Z2]). [/font]

    [font=&quot] [/font]

    [font=&quot]The magnitude of the improvement in running performance was significantly greater (p = 0.03) in Z1 (-157 +/- 13 seconds) than in Z2 (-121.5 +/- 7.1 seconds). These results provide experimental evidence supporting the value of a relatively large percentage of low-intensity training over a long period ( approximately 5 months), provided that the contribution of high-intensity training remains sufficient. [/font]


    [font=&quot][/font]
     
    Tags:


  2. frenchyge

    frenchyge New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,687
    Likes Received:
    4
    So, if I'm reading that correctly:

    Group 1 did 80.5/11.8/8.3 percent of their training in z1/z2/z3, and
    Group 2 did 66.6/24.7/8.5 percent of their training in z1/z2/z3. Group 1 had better improvement.

    Interesting. Does the full paper say whether total training time/workload was controlled or differed between the 2 groups?
     
  3. Piotr

    Piotr New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2007
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hmm. Was it "better improvement" or less fatigue? It doesn't look like the groups were allowed a proper taper.
     
  4. strader

    strader New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2007
    Messages:
    195
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can anyone explain what ventilatory threshold (VT) and respiratory compensation thresholds (RCT) refered to in the paper represent? I would like to understand what the equivalent cycling training levels would be (L1/2/3/4/5).
     
  5. Steve_B

    Steve_B New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2006
    Messages:
    750
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yeah, I'm wondering that too. Like, did the Z1 group get more volume and/or "CTL"?
     
  6. Doublebiker

    Doublebiker New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
  7. frenchyge

    frenchyge New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,687
    Likes Received:
    4
    Sorry, no. That one is from about a year earlier, involves skiers instead of runners, and didn't test for improvements or training results at all.

    Both do appear to involve Stephen Seiler, however. :)
     
  8. Doublebiker

    Doublebiker New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ooops, my wrong, better check myself next time. The link is to the study that proceeded the one with the runners.

    Interesting though, first they study how the athletes actually train, then they do a long term study on the effects of two different training protocols.

    In reply to another topic (Commentary on Train-Low Compete-High in the ACSM Report, Stephen Seiler Sportscience 10, 8 (sportsci.org/2006/ss.htm)), Seiler made this comment:
    Long duration, low intensity exercise bouts seem to be at least as good–and perhaps better than–shorter more intense loading as a driving signal for key metabolic adaptations at the cellular level, according to several recent studies. I think this idea makes sense from an evolutionary perspective. For our distant ancestors, exercise was presumably often associated with an energy-depleted state and the pursuit of food. Long, low intensity bouts (plus the occasional very high intensity bout to avoid being eaten or trampled) would dominate the prehistoric periodization plan, not 30-minute running bouts performed at the lactate threshold. Is it a coincidence that elite endurance athletes across several sports polarize their training by avoiding anaerobic-threshold intensity? (See, for example, Seiler and Kjerland, 2006.) I had assumed that the explanation for this self-organization pattern (emerging from training experience, not sport science) was found within the rubric of “reducing the sympathetic stress load and avoiding overtraining”. Now we may also see that there are fundamental adaptive signalling issues that also dictate increased duration and decreased intensity for a lot of the total training load.
     
  9. frenchyge

    frenchyge New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,687
    Likes Received:
    4
    Heh, I wonder how our distant ancestors or elite endurance athletes would change their training habits if they had to work a job 40-60 hr/wk, ferry kids between extra-ciricular activities in the evenings, do yardwork on weekends, etc.? ;)

    Actually, it sounds like they train specific to their competitive events. For non-cave-people and non-elite endurance athletes, 1-2 hours near threshold is closer to competition-specific (certainly for running/skiing) than very long, low intensity efforts would be.
     
  10. john979

    john979 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree that understanding the taper may be crucial to interpreting the results.

    "The contribution of total training time spent in zones 1 and 2 was controlled to have relatively more low-intensity training in Z1 (80.5 +/- 1.8% and 11.8 +/- 2.0%, respectively) than in Z2 (66.8 +/- 1.1% and 24.7 +/- 1.5%, respectively).." implies that Z2 subjects had a higher CTL than Z1 subjects, since the training time was controlled, not energy expenditure/TSS.

    Therefore, a pausible conclusion could be that Z1 subjects were simply more "fresh" when performing the simulated 10.4 km race at the training period's end. Moreover, looking at the training load from a TSS perspective, Z2 subjects might have had a significantly higher CTL (and lower TSB) than Z1 subjects, due to the approx 13% time spent in Z2.
     
  11. frenchyge

    frenchyge New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,687
    Likes Received:
    4
    That's possible. I read it to say that the relative contributions were controlled, but the absolute amount of training may not have been, meaning the Z1 group might have just run *more.* That would make for a poorly constructed study, which is why it'd be nice to see the whole thing.
     
  12. john979

    john979 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    0
    Still, a very interesting meta-analysis with some plausible conclusions, the most significant being that among elites with a very high VO2 max, L1 training elicits a higher O2 muscle flux than higher intensity training in non-elites.

    Keep in mind too that studies rarely control for subject's muscle morphology. While elite of specific disciplines have more homogenous muscle morphologies (i.e., marathon runners very high percentage Type 1 muscle fiber), a group of non-elites elites tend to possess a more heterogeneous muscle morphology and untrained subjects posess a very heterogeneous muscle morphology.

    Therefore, it is quite plausible that a group of elite marathon runs might benefit most from a polarized training model, as given their high VO2 max low training intensity will elicit a significant O2 flux in the muscle. In addition, since such subjects lack significant Type II muscle fiber, their only need for high intensity training would be to peak VO2 max, which occurs fairly rapidly.

    OTOH, those with more Type II fiber might benefit more with a larger volume of high-intensity training, to not only peak VO2 max but to elicit Type II muscle fiber training adaptations. Moreover, if such subjects possess only a moderate VO2 max, threshold training might also be required to fully develop Type I fiber adaptations, as their absolute O2 flux at any training level is less than that of an elite athlete.
     
  13. frost

    frost New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2007
    Messages:
    414
    Likes Received:
    3
    Very interesting point! Do you know if there is studies to back this idea?
     
  14. Sikhandar

    Sikhandar New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    Messages:
    199
    Likes Received:
    0
    welcome to the magic world of cycling!!!!! :D:D:D

    no well I'm joking, I think it's a very interesting scientific (well ok some would say "pseudo-scientific") confirm of an old winter-training method as old as cycling!

    Moreover keep in mind that during winter it's important to keep an eye on...your mind itself, you shouldn't terminate your brain energies in doing hard trainings starting from november... You would need them during the first races and during the real "build" period in jan/feb/march... it's important also to enjoy riding sometimes, and winter is optimal for that!
     
  15. Doublebiker

    Doublebiker New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2004
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
  16. john979

    john979 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    0
    Some speculation, I have not the time yet to fully research. However, and this may actually be more pausible, is that from an quadrant analysis perspective, these "low-intensity" rides may have a significant accumulation of time in high-force quadrants. I am leaning more to this.
     
  17. frenchyge

    frenchyge New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,687
    Likes Received:
    4
    Along the same line of thought, fiber recruitment patterns change over the course of the ride, calling in more fast-twitchers later in the ride to help produce the necessary force as fatigue increases. So, lower intensity rides can still put aerobic demands on the type II muscle fibers if the duration is long enough to approach the power v. duration curve at the lower power.
     
  18. john979

    john979 New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Messages:
    244
    Likes Received:
    0
    Very good point -- as Type I fiber becomes fatigued, and it will if the ride is long enough, Type II fiber will be recruited.

    I know such a study would be difficult, but I would love to see the effect ofpure L2 training done on a stationary bike vs. the open road.
     
  19. Piotr

    Piotr New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2007
    Messages:
    794
    Likes Received:
    0
Loading...
Loading...