Gibbens, who seems to be omnipresent these days, is after a strawman. While VO2max is a limiting
factor in exercise, it is not the only factor and I know of no one who thinks it is.
What was the protocol for your VO2max test? Was it on a bike or a treadmill? There are ramp
protocols where the intensity increases every minute, you are less likely to get a VO2max (plateau
of O2 consumption) on that type of test. You will get a peak VO2. Also, if you take a person who is
not accustomed to cycling and put him/her on a cycle ergometer, you are less likely to see a plateau
mainly because local fatigue will stop the test before the heart and lungs give out. Basically the
untrained muscles of the legs [censored] out first.
Gibbens trots out this 2 days of running is better than 5 mess without understanding the study. He
has posted this elsewhere. The study he refers to was looking at improving VO2max (something Gibbens
"argues" does not exist by the way). The runners did intervals 2 days and 5 days. The two day group
did just as well at improving one aspect of fitness, VO2max. All that tells us is that you do not
need to run intervals for 5 days to improve VO2max. That does not mean running only 2 days will make
you a better runner. Gibbens misuses and misrepresents this study.
I would like to see the research he claims supports that increasing mileage increases the injury
rate. A flaw in this idea is that one needs to add mileage reasonably. If you double mileage every
day, you are likely to get injuries.
"SlowRunner" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:zs2bb.2795$Rd4.784@fed1read07...
Quoted message said:Why do you say an optimal protocol is a combination of both if intervals
all
Quoted message said:the time improves both?
I found it interesting reading this article from Gibbens because I am one
of
Quoted message said:those people who have had my VO2max tested and did not show a VO2max. In fact, as Noakes states,
about 50% of people tested don't show a VO2max.
So,
Quoted message said:something limited my performance before I got to VO2max - if indeed there
is
Quoted message said:such a thing. In any case, Gibbens argues that it's muscle contractility:
runtexu.comforum posts.aspOpen ↗
Running Physiology - The State of the Art
Part 7 - Review
By Richard Gibbens
Through the first 6 parts of this series we have discussed in some detail the current
state of the art of running and endurance physiology. In this final part we will
review the major points covered
and
Quoted message said:advance an alternate theory for the reader's consideration.
The theory currently dominating the exercise physiology world, at least from the
perspective of training recommended by leading authors, trainers, the popular press,
and coaches, is that of VO2max. The concept
of
Quoted message said:VO2max holds that the limiting factor in endurance performance is the
body's
Quoted message said:ability to absorb, transport and utilize oxygen. Put succinctly, the
reason
Quoted message said:you can't run faster is that you can't get enough oxygen to your running muscles. When you
increase the amount of oxygen available to your
muscles,
Quoted message said:you will then be able to run faster.
Due to some significant challenges to the theory of VO2max,
two
Quoted message said:additional factors have been proposed by exercise physiologists. These two factors are lactate
threshold and running economy. They are as follows.A runner produces lactate (or lactic acid) in greater and greater quantities as
running speed increases. This is believed to happen because of the body's inability to
provide enough oxygen to meet the increasing energy needs of the muscles. It is widely
believed that
lactate
Quoted message said:is a prime cause of fatigue and hence limits performance. It is further believed that lactate does
not increase linearly, instead showing a threshold, such that at some running speed the amount of
lactate being produced by the body increases significantly. The theory holds that if a runner can
increase the pace at which he can run before crossing this "lactate threshold" running performance
will be significantly improved.Running economy is a measure of the amount of oxygen a runners uses at any running
speed. It has been observed that even though runners may have the same VO2max, the
amount of oxygen they use at any running
speed
Quoted message said:can be very different. This difference or "running economy" is used to explain why it is possible
for a runner with a lower VO2max to beat a
runner
Quoted message said:with a higher VO2max.
Since VO2max, lactate threshold, and running economy dominate the beliefs of
physiologists, most (all?) running and endurance training programs are designed around
these beliefs and are crafted to improve one
or
Quoted message said:more of the above variables. Workouts such as tempo runs, aerobic runs, anaerobic runs, lactate
threshold runs, and VO2max runs have been promoted as methods to improve the above factors.
Additionally, basing workouts on some percentage of heart rate and using a heart rate monitor
to stay in
the
Quoted message said:appropriate range has been an easy method to employ the workouts mentioned above without the
necessity of expensive laboratory equipment or trained technicians.Do They Really Exist?
Significant challenges to the concepts of VO2max, lactate threshold and running
economy exist. The counter arguments are based on research, empirical evidence, and
logic. The most significant of these challenges concerns the assumption that VO2max
limits performance; this
has
Quoted message said:been assumed, but has not been proven. A significant amount of research
has
Quoted message said:been done that really calls into question whether VO2max, lactate
threshold,
Quoted message said:or running economy are viable concepts.
Alternatively, I have advanced the idea that the true limiting factor in running
performance is the muscular system, not the body's
ability
Quoted message said:to utilize oxygen.
I further contend that basing a training program on a flawed theory (VO2max) could
very well mean that the training program is equally flawed. In the least, the training
program would not be designed to optimally improve the factors that limit performance,
and hence training results would be sub-optimal.Since muscles are the true limiting factor in running performance, training programs
must be based on improving muscular power. Numerous studies have shown that high force
production training is the
best
Quoted message said:method for accomplishing this. Additionally, research also shows that
much
Quoted message said:less frequency is required than most running programs advocate. Two days
of
Quoted message said:running has been shown to be as effective as 5 days of running. I
recommend
Quoted message said:2 - 3 quality workouts per week. Also, there is no evidence that easy
runs
Quoted message said:promote faster recovery. Instead, as training volume increases so does
the
Quoted message said:number of running injuries.
I hope that this review of the current state of the art in running physiology has
proven useful to you and I welcome questions or comments. You can reach me at
[email hidden].Other articles: runtexu.comforum posts.aspOpen ↗
A study conducted at the KIHU Research Institute for Olympic Sports in Jyvaskyla, Finland on 17
endurance runners found that 5k race times could
be
Quoted message said:accurately predicted from 20 meter sprint times. Not only that, but 20 meter sprints were a better
predictor of 5k performance than VO2max.1A study conducted at the University of Nebraska found that the10k performance of trained runners
could be accurately predicted from the 50 meter sprint, the 300 meter sprint, and from plyometric
leaping distance (plyometric leaping distance is similar to the triple jump, except that it is
performed from a standing rather than a running start).2The most interesting thing about this study was that plyometric leaping distance was the single
best predictor of 10k performance, accounting for
a
Quoted message said:whopping 75% of the variation in 10k race times; it was a much better predictor of performance
than either VO2max or that exalted attribute, lactate threshold.The common factor that 20m, 50m, 300m, and plyometric leaping distance all have in common is
that they are all "anaerobic" events. They are strength events; they are not "aerobic" or
endurance events.runtexu.comforum posts.aspOpen ↗
runtexu.comforum posts.aspOpen ↗
runtexu.comforum posts.aspOpen ↗
runtexu.comforum topics.aspOpen ↗"Donovan Rebbechi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...
Quoted message said:In article N3p9b.56183$nf3.46286@fed1read07 said:VO2max? Muscle Contractility? Nerves?
Everything boils down to VO2Max and running economy.
Running economy = speed/VO2, so IOW if your VO2 max is high but you
can't
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:run quickly, it's because of your running economy.
Having said that, there are several factors that affect both VO2 Max and running economy.
Among those that affect VO2 max include the rate at which your heart can pump blood, capillary
density, amount of mitochondria, and body weight.Factors that can influence economy include your shape (hip width, leg
length),Quoted message said:type of muscle fiber (slow/fast twitch), body composition, small scale nervous adaptions
(neuromuscular), larger scale (running form), and
muscle
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:conditioning.
Quoted message said:Anyone have any thoughts on this? Has anyone tried long slow runs all
theQuoted message said:Quoted message said:time vs. intervals all the time?
Intervals all the time will almost certainly be better, because they
improveQuoted message said:VO2 max, and running economy. Slow running will improve VO2 max, but not economy. The optimal
protocol, which athletes use, is a combination of
both.Quoted message said:
Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi pegasus.rutgers.edu~elflordOpen ↗