Running Research News And Events

High-Rep, Short-Recovery Strength Training Gets Runners Into Hydrogen-Management Industry

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 00:00:00 -0600

When you are running fast, hydrogen icons (protons) tend to pile up in your leg-muscle cells. Although it is no longer clear that such accumulations automatically induce fatigue (1), it is very probable that they can have a negative impact on overall muscle-cell function (2). When you are finishing the last 400 metes of a 1500-meter, 5-K, or 10-K race at a furious pace, climbing a hill during challenging competition, or making a powerful within-race surge, it is nearly certain that you are better off if your leg-muscle concentrations of protons are moderate, rather than high. High-Rep, Short-Recovery Strength Training

But how do you maintain proper proton prudence during hard running? We know that high- intensity interval training can help in this matter (3), but the effects of strength training on hydrogen-ion frugality are less clear. One inquiry found that athletes who engage in regular strength training have better proton regulation, compared with non-strength-trained individuals (4), but the control subjects in this research were untrained individuals, leading skeptics to suggest that training per se - and not necessarily strength training - causes proton modulation to prosper.

Nonetheless, there is good reason to believe that resistance training might give muscle cells a hand with their hydrogen problems. One key is that vigorous, high-rep strength training has been shown to produce a large drop in intramuscular pH and a significant rise in blood-lactate concentration - similar to the changes which occur during high-intensity running (5). These "signals" associated with resistance training may act as they do after top-quality running, producing appropriate muscular adaptations and upgrades in hydrogen-handling capacity.

To find out if strength training really works in this way, highly regarded researcher David Bishop and his team from the School of Human Movement and Exercise Science at the university of Western Australia recently worked with 16 female athletes who were involved in such sports as hockey, netball, and soccer (6). Eight of the subjects carried out a high-repetition strength-training program (with three to five sets of 15 to 20 reps per exercise) over a five week period, while the other eight served as controls. High-Rep, Short-Recovery Strength Training

Both groups continued with their usual athletic pursuits over the five-week time frame, and the strength-training regime utilized a combination of free weights and exercise machines. The first six exercises of the strength-training workouts emphasized the legs and included squats, lunges, and step-ups (all completed with free weights), along with leg presses, leg extensions, and leg curls (performed with machines). To balance out the leg activities, upper-body exertions were incorporated into the sessions, including bench presses and shoulder presses (with free weights), along with seated rows and lat-pull-downs (carried out on machines), and even good-old-fashion sit-ups.

The resistance utilized per set was gradually reduced so that the athletes could perform at least 15 reps in each 40-second time period.

For each exercise, the appropriate number of sets (three to five) was completed before the athlete moved on to the next exertion. Each set was performed for 40 seconds ( and thus for 15 to 20 reps), followed by a 20-second rest. Since this rest period was fairly short, the resistance for sets following the first one was reduced (so that the athletes could still hit 15 to 20 repetitions within their sets). This meant that the first set was conducted at 70 percent of the RM load (e.g., 70 percent of the resistance which could be handled for three - and only three reps), the second set at 60 percent of 3RM, and sets three through five at 50 percent of 3RM.

The athletes actually completed two to three sets of each exercise during the first two weeks of the project and then three to five sets during the last three weeks of the research. When the subjects could complete 20 reps of a particular exercise for all sets during two straight workouts, the total load was upgraded by the smallest amount available for the relevant piece of equipment. As a practical matter, this meant that the advance in weight lifted during an exercise such as leg pressing was about 10 percent per week. A five-minute warm-up on an exercise bike tuned up the women prior to each strength-training session. High Rep, Short Recovery Strength Training

And how did the female athletes respond to all this lifting? After the leg exertions within a typical strengthening session, blood-lactate levels soared to an average of 9.1 mmol L-1, similar to the concentration which is commonly observed after a hard running workout conducted at an above-lactate-threshold intensity. Heart rate was also rather lofty, scoring at 85 percent of max.

Although body mass did not change, leg-press 3RM strength improved by 23 percent after five weeks (but remained unchanged for controls). The strength training also improved the ability of the athletes to carry out a high-intensity sprint-interval training session which involved 5 X 6 seconds of maximal sprinting, with 24-second recoveries. Total work performed during this workout advanced by 110 to 12 percent after five weeks for the strength-trained athletes, but not at all for the control individuals. Peak power attained during each of the sprints also advanced for strength-trained females (but again, not for controls).

To learn more about how High-Rep, Short-Recovery Strength Training Gets Runners Into Hydrogen-Management Industry (the full article can be read by purchasing Vol. 22 Issue 8 of Running Research News) and many more running related topics, simply click-on the Back Issues link, and select the volume and issues number, from the drop-down menu. A subscription to Running Research News is another way to receive valuable information about running. Running Research News Subscription

Vitamins C AND E Seems To Provide Protection For Endurance Athletes' Airways

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 00:00:00 -0600

Relatively low levels of ozone (<120micrograms/m3) can affect lung function in endurance athletes, making it more difficult to bring large volumes of air into thelungs (Respiratory Effects of Low-Level Photochemical Air Pollution in Amateur Cyclists," American Journal od Resp. Crit. Care Medicine, vol. 150, pp.962-996, 1994). As a result, exercise scientist have searched for years to find ways to minimize ozone-related respiratory problems in athletes. Vitamins C And E

Ozone, also known as O3, is actually an unstable form of oxygen. If you have been even mildly interested in atmospheric science and air pollution over the past few years, you are well aware that there is "good ozone" and also "bad ozone" in the earth's atmosphere. The "good ozone" occurs naturally in the upper atmosphere, approximately 10 kilometers above the earth. There, it forms a protective layer which helps to shield the earth from the harmful rays of the sun.

At ground level, however, the very same gas becomes "bad ozone." Ground-level ozone can harm human lung tissue, crops, and manufactured materials. The ground-level O3 is formed when nitrogen oxides and reactive organic gases (hydrocarbons) react chemically in the presence of sunlight. Nitrogen oxides, of course, are produced by fuel-burning engines; reactive organic gases are released by motor vehicles, solvents, a variety of different consumer products, and petroleum-processing plants.

Ground-level ozone tend to induce bronchoconstriction (narrowing of the airways), which decreases air flow into the lungs and potenially limits oxygen delivery to the blood. Even though endurance athletes have well-trained respiratory systems, they are quite prome toozone-induced problems. That's because athletes can maintain very high ventilation rates for prolonged periods of time - and thus drag more ozone into their lungs, compared to "couch potatoes". In addition, the "mouth breathing" (instead of routine nasal breathing) associated with heavy exercise takes away one of the body's key lines of defense against ozone - the trapping of ozone molecules in the nasal membranes, which prevents the irritating gas from reaching the lower air passages. If you live in or near an urban area, it's likely that ozone is having at least some impact on your respiratory function when you train and race. Vitamins C And E

What can you do to protect yourself from ozone's effects? Theorizing that antioxidants might help control ozone-related damage to the airways, researchers in Mexico City recently gave "antioxidant cocktails" to street workers exposed to fairly high levels of ozone. These cocktails contained vitamin C, vitamin E, and beta-carotene, and they did indeed have a protective effect on lung function in the workers (:Antioxidant Supplementation and Respiratory Function among Workers Exposed to High Levels of Ozone," American Journal of Respiratory Crit. Care Medicine, vol. 158, pp. 226-232, 1998).

Dutch Cyclist, Ozone, and Vitamins C and E

These workers were not exercising hevily, however. Would a similar cocktail have a beneficial effect in endurance athletes - even at lower ambient levels of ozone? To find out, researchers at Wageningen Agricultural University and the Netherlands Institute of Health Sciences in the Netherlands recently divided 38 Dutch cyclists (35 males and three females) into two groups: Members of one group received a daily dose of 500mg of vitamin C and 100 mg of vitamin E, while cyclists in the second group ingested only a placebo. The study was carried out in a "double-blind" manner (neither researchers nor athletes initially knew who was actually getting the potentially protective vitamins).

During the study, the cyclists worked out and competed in their usual manner. Average workout duration was 104 minutes, and mean workout heart rate was 141 beats per minute, but race pulse rates ascended to an average of 173 bpm. The athletes' lung functions were checked after workouts and races ( a total of 380 different tests were performed). Ozone concentrations were moderate; average ozone level was 77 micrograms/m3, and he range ws 14-186 micrograms/m3; this corresponds roughly with an average of .055 ppm and a range going up around .12 ppm ("Double- Blind Intervention Trial on Modulation of Ozone Effects on Pulmonary Function by Antioxidant Supplements," American Journal of Epidemiology, vol. 149, pp. 306-314, 1999).

Blood levels of vitamin E shot up about 48 percent in the supplement group, and plasma vitamin C rose by 4 percent; concentrations of two vitamins were essentially unchanged in placebo cyclists. When the researchers looked at average ozone levels during the eight hours before testing, they unearthed an interesting fact: As ozone levels increased, the amount of air the athletes could force out of their lungs in one second and the quantity of air they could exchange with the enviroment decreased in the placebo group - but were unchanged in the vitamin-ingesting cyclists. In other words, the vitamins seemed to protect cyclists from losses in respiratory function associated with ozone exposure. Vitamins C And E

For example, when ozone levels increased by about 100 micrograms/m3, the placebo riders could force 95 ml less air out of their lungs during a forced exhalation, while the drop-off for the supplementers was only 1 ml. C and E seemed to be reducing the extent of bronchoconstriction.

It's unclear what effects these differences would have on performance times, but it's clear that the C and E supplementation helped keep the athletes' airways more open and should have made intense exercise feel more comfortable. In a separate study, subjects took daily vitamin C (250mg), vitamin E (100mg), and a vegetable-based cocktail for two weeks, after which they were exposed to ozone levels of 800 micrograms/m3 (.4ppm) during two hours of exercise. During this period of exercise and ozone exposure, decrements in lung functioning were modest in the supplementers, compared to individuals who took in only a placebo ("The Role of Dietary Antioxidants in Ozone-Induced Lung Injury in Normal Human Subjects, " American Journal of Respir. Crit. Care Medicine, vol. 157 (supplement): A195, 1998).

But, do you really need to worry about ozone's effects on your lungs? After all, isn't it true that air quality is getting better?

Well, ground-level ozone levels are dropping. For example, last year ozone levels in the Los Angeles area exceeded California state standards on "only" 114 days. While that might seem like a lot, it was down from an average of 242 over the limit days 20 years ago.

Health advisories - when ozone soars above .15ppm and everyone is advised to avoid vigorous outdoor exercise - were in effect on "just" 43 days in Los Angeles 1998, down from 184 outrageous days in 1977, and there were "only" 12 "stage-1 Episodes", when ozone levels rocket above .20 ppm and people start getting really sick.

In other words, the air is getting cleaner, but in major urban areas like Los Angeles it still contains enough ozone to produce problems. Even the Dutch countryside, which is not notorious for its severe air pollution, contained air with enough ozone to interfere with respiratory function in the Dutch cyclists described above. Unless you live in a pristine wilderness, taking vitamin C and E to protect your lungs seems to be a fairly reasonable thing to do. It won't neccessarily help you attain a new PR, but it should have at least some positive influence on airway function. Vitamins C And E

In addition to taking Vitamins C and E, what else might you do to protect your lungs from ozone? Here are some tips:

Train during time periods when ozone levels tend to be lower - early in the morning or late in the evening.
Don't train during time periods when ozone levels exceed .12 ppm.
If your newspaper doesn't publish daily ozone levels pay attention to its "Pollutant Standards Index." If this index is below 100, then ozone levels are usually not too damaging.
If you're going to be racing in a city with ozone problems, try to get there a few days ahead of time so that your respiratory system can adapt to the foul air. While that may seem crazily stressful to your body, it's important to remember that your respiratory system can adapt to ozone exposure, lessening (although not elimanating) the negative reaction to the gas. In other words, the first time you plunk yourself down in an ozone soup, you might have a severe exercise-limiting reaction, whereas a couple of days in the broth will make your airways less reactive and get you breathing - and running - like one of the natives.

To learn more about Vitamin C and E, along with other informative topics. Like:

Things were so easy, until VVO2MAX and then TLIMVVO2MAX had to come along
3 X 1600: A fine workout - and a great way to predict your 5K time
RONALDO DA COSTA'S Unique marathon training
ANDRO is linked with a higher risk of cancer
Is there an increased risk of arthritis in runners' knees?
What caused a stress fracture in the sacrum?
Getting tired too early in races

(the full articles can be read by purchasing Vol.15 Issue 2 of Running Research News) and many more running related topics, simply click-on the Back Issues link, and select the volume and issues number, from the drop-down menu. A subscription to Running Research News is another way to receive valuable information about running. SUBSCRIBE NOW!

BEST LACTATE-THRESHOLD WORKOUTS

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 00:00:00 -0600

What is the best possible workout for advancing your running velocity at lactate-threshold? Best Lactate-Threshold

That is an important but "dangerous" question. After all, a single workout does not exist in a training vacuum, producing adaptations which occur totally uniquely, without any influence from the overall training plan in which the workout is deployed. In one set of circumstances, for example, a session of 3 X 1600 at 5-K race pace might help put a sharper edge on a runner's vVO2max. In a different context, the 3 X 1600 could push the same athlete "over the brink" into an over-trained state.

Nonetheless, we know that certain sessions can produce unique effects on lactate-threshold speed, and that these effects are often specific to the runner involved in the training. For example, running for 60 minutes at a moderate pace (below lactate-threshold velocity) probably will have a significant, positive effect on lactate-threshold speed for the relatively inexperienced runner who has been logging about 10 to 15 miles of running per week. However, this same session would have no effect at all on lactate-threshold velocity for the experienced, 70-mile per week runner who has been engaged in lots of high-quality training. The latter individual would probably have to soar up to intensities of 90 to 95 percent of VO2max and beyond to get lactate-threshold speed moving in the right direction.

As you can see, it is possible to give specific workouts the "thumbs-up" or "thumbs-down" sign when it comes to lactate-threshold improvement, and one of our tasks as runners is to identify the sessions which are likely to have the greatest impact on threshold and then position them properly in our training. Best Lactate-Threshold

But how do we identify such sessions? Fortunately, that job has been made easier for us, thanks to recent work carried out by Carl Paton and Will Hopkins of the Centre for Sport and Exercise Science at the Waikato Institute of Technology and the Department of Sport and Recreation at the Auckland University of Technology in New Zealand (1). Paton and Hopkins have conducted an extensive literature search for scientific papers dealing with the effects of training on the performance and physiology of endurance athletes.

This search used stringent criteria. For examplem Paton and Hopkins excluded studies which investigated the effects of training on performance in subjects who were merely recreationally active, instead of being involved in serious training. The New-Zealand duo also eliminated inquiries carried out with individuals who did not have the characteristics of serious endurance athletes ( for example, exercisers with low aerobic capacities, low training frequencies, etc.). The studies examined by Paton and Hopkins also had to be peer-reviewed and published in a respected scientific journal.

In addition to looking for research which explored the link between training and improvement in lactate-threshold speed, Paton and Hopkins also searched for studies whick looked at the effects of training on general endurance performance, maximum power (measured during an incremental test), maximal oxygen consumption, exercise economy, and body mass. Included in the Paton-Hopkins diggings were studies which focused on moderate- and high-intensity interval training, tempo running, plyometrics, and resistance training.

The study which produced the greatest increase in lactate threshold in runners was the research (often mentioned in the pages of Running Research News) carried out by Leena Paavolainen and Heikki Rusko in which experienced runners reduced their mileage from 70 to 45 miles per week, substituting( for this mileage) explosive training which includes progressive series of jumps, bounds, hops, and very fast running(2). The jumping-bounding-hopping-sprinting workouts designed by Paavolainen-Rusko team, carried out three times a week for nine weeks, yielded about a 6.8-percent increase in lactate threshold. Best Lactate-Threshold

Almost as good for threshold were the workouts employed by Edmund Acevedo and Allan Goldfarb of the University of North Carolina at Greensboro in their study of seven well-trained male distance runners (3). These runners had an average age of 22, and they were actively involved in competitive racing; mean VO2max was 65.3 ml.kg-1.min-1. As the study began, the young runners were training six to seven days per week, averaging five to 12 miles of daily running. Weekly volume averaged 50 to 65 miles before and throughout the investigation. RRNEWS Subscription

THE 10-MINUTE ALTERNATIVE TO STRETCHING

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Fri, 16 Dec 2011 00:00:00 -0600

If your pre-workout stretching doesn't seem to be doing much for you, give the following 10-minute warm-up routine a try. Bear in mind that a good warm-up should do three things for you:

(1) Increase your heart rate, so that the initial stages of your training session don't over tax your ticker, (2) Prepare your muscles for strenuous activity, and (3) Wake up your nervous system - so that it's ready to control your muscles properly during vigorous workout. This protocol will do all three, and it only takes 10 minutes:

(2) Wake up your leg muscles (1 minute): Walk in a relaxed fashion, alternating light, relaxed steps with long, exaggerated strides. On each extended stride, vigorously swing the opposite arm forward.

(3) Wake up your heart and leg muscles (4 minutes): As you jog unbelievably slowly, notice any tight spots in your body and focus on unkinking the tension.

(4) Wake up your nervous system (1 minute): Skip - in place or in a forward direction - while trying to lift your knees as high as possible.

(5) Wake up your heart (2 minutes): Run at the basic pace you'll utilize in your workout for one minute, and then jog very easily for one minute.

(6) Give your nervous system a green light (2 minutes): Hop lightly on both feet for about 20 seconds, and then hop lightly on your right foot for 15 seconds and your left for 15 seconds. Walk easily for 10 seconds, and then jump continuously - as high as possible on both feet - for 15 seconds. Walk for 10 seconds, and then try "hot-stove" jumping, getting your feet barely off the ground on each jump and trying to make as many contacts with the ground (with both feet) as you can in 20-25 seconds. Walk for 10 seconds or so.

(7) Run!

A subscription to Running Research News is another way to receive valuable information about running. Best 2012

How Running Affects Sleep (and Vice Versa)

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Wed, 09 Nov 2011 00:00:00 -0600

Adequate Regenerative Sleep is Critical for Good Running and Health

Dedicated distance runners leave no stone unturned in their eternal quest for improvement, showing discipline far beyond what one would expect from most recreational athletes. They slog long miles on sore legs in nasty weather, sprint around the track doing interval workouts, buy the best high tech running shoes, and drink protein laced sports drinks after training. They pump weights diligently, pay good money for coaching schedules, and avidly consume running books and magazines.

Despite this extraordinary dedication, most runners grossly neglect an aspect of training and recovery that would seem to be commonsense- sleep. Getting adequate sleep is one component of the training and recovery cycle that is readily correctible. In fact, it�s indispensable. One of the fundamental rules of recovery is getting enough sleep to allow the body to repair itself.

Yet, a look at the facts about our appalling sleep habits in the U.S.A. (Box 1) convinces me that we need to emphasize the importance of runners getting adequate sleep far more stringently than is currently being practiced by coaches and exercise scientists. I also strongly suspect that other westernized countries suffer from similar levels of sleep afflictions.

Amazingly, while researching this topic I found that most books on running, written by the �experts�, either completely neglect to mention the restorative powers of sleep, or at best pay only lip service to its importance. Only three contemporary running books acknowledge, at a depth more than the standard banal �make an effort to get adequate sleep�, how critical sleep is for runners. Moreover, none of the several dozen books on running that I examined based their superficial recommendations for sleep on any research�certainly no studies were quoted. Perhaps the authors thought getting enough sleep is so obvious that it only needs passing mention?

Sleep is not just something that�s �good to do�, but something that will help our bodies recover faster from running workouts. In addition, many medical research papers show that getting adequate sleep reduces our chances of contracting diseases like cancer, heart disease, heart attacks, high blood pressure, and diabetes. Getting enough sleep also prevents a general impairment of our immune system.

So what does research tell us about running and sleep? In particular, does sleep improve, and does sleep loss affect running performance? We�ll take a look at these questions and finish up by reviewing how much sleep we need and some bedtime tips on how to sleep better and deeper.

Does running improve sleep quality?

People who exercise claim they fall asleep faster, have deeper sleep, wake up less often, and feel less tired during the day. Although these claims are difficult to verify, scientists have shown that people who exercise regularly and intensely spend more time in stage 3 and 4 slow-wave sleep (O�Connor et al. 1995, Kubitz et al. 1996). Trinder et al. (1985) for example, found that fit runners, who average 45 miles/week, spend 87 minutes in slow-wave sleep, 13 minutes or 18% longer than deconditioned people.

Brassington et al. (1995) concluded that physically active older men and women slept longer, took less time to fall asleep, and were more alert during the day than sedentary older people. Sherrill et al. (1998) studied 722 adults and found that men and women who exercised regularly had fewer sleep disorders. G. Passoss (in her presentation at the 2008 Annual Meeting of Associated Professional Sleep Societies) stated that patients with chronic insomnia who did moderate aerobic exercise drifted off to sleep 54% faster than other groups, and slept 37% longer (Passoss 2008).

Several other studies have shown that when people first take up running (and other endurance sports), their sleep quality is improved, and that exercising longer than 1 hour further improves sleep quality (Youngsted 1997, Youngsted et al. 1997). Shapiro et al (1984) found that the sleep quality of army recruits improved during 18 weeks of basic training, with most positive effects occurring in the first 9 weeks. A caveat here though; severe and prolonged exercise such as that experienced in ultrarunning and marathon events, may actually disrupt sleep (Montgomery et al. 1985).

What effects does exercise intensity have on sleep?

A few research papers discovered that higher intensity exercise that causes sweating promotes a better quality of sleep than low-intensity exercise (O�Connor et al. 1995, Youngsted 1997). Perhaps this is because sweating causes the body to cool rapidly, which bring us closer to the lower temperatures we experience during slow wave sleep. Thus, we transition into slow wave sleep more quickly because of this cooling effect.

When is the best time of day to run to ensure good sleep?

There is debate over this issue. Running intensely for 20-30 minutes raises your body temperature at least 2 degrees. Doing this immediately before sleep will delay your transition to deeper sleep because it takes 4-5 hours to cool back down. For this reason, it�s recommended that you exercise no closer than 3-4 hours before bedtime, and some coaches say 6 hours before. This is good advice when you consider that some exercise scientists believe that running too close to bedtime would leave the sympathetic nervous system stimulated for several hours, making it harder for you to get to sleep.

A study by Tworoger et al. (2003) at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle found that an hour of walking every morning relieves many sleep problems in older women (50-75 years). Women averaging 3.5 to 4 hours of morning exercise a week got to sleep earlier, and did not experience as many sleep problems, as the evening exercise group. Morning exercise appears to set our circadian rhythms to stay awake during the day, and cause sleepiness at night.

Where does all this research leave us? A comprehensive meta-analysis of sleep and exercise research by Kubitz et al. (1996) found that exercisers fell asleep faster, and sleep longer and deeper than non-exercisers. As for the question of whether you should work out in the morning, afternoon, or evening; I�d recommend you find what works best for you by trial and error.

How does sleep repair the body?

Table 1. The four stages of sleep

Stage 1 Transitional, light sleep, with slowing down of the brain activity and vital signs, and dreamlike thoughts.

Stage 2 Lighter deep sleep and slower vital signs, lasting about 30 minutes in adults. We spend about 50% of our sleep time in this stage.

Stage 3 & 4 (Slow-wave, delta sleep) Deep sleep with depressed vital signs and slow, low frequency, high amplitude brain activity (delta waves), leading to Rapid Eye Movement (REM). During REM our eyes dart about rapidly and we have vivid dreams. General protein synthesis, cell growth and division, and tissue repair and growth take place during all four stages of sleep, but mainly during slow-wave delta sleep. The release of growth hormone for cell growth is at its circadian peak during delta sleep, and most scientists agree that delta sleep activity reflects the metabolic activity and energy expended by the athlete during the previous day (Shapiro et al. 1984).

Does sleep loss impair running performance?

Sleep loss has been shown to cause a cascade of unpleasant effects ranging from impaired endocrine and immune system function to reductions in memory, concentration and cognitive performance. Social consequences of sleeplessness appear to be irritability and inability to enjoy family and social relationships. But what happens when we lose sleep the night before a race? Will this adversely affect our running performance?

Researchers of sleep deprivation have looked at its effects on VO2 max, treadmill running and walking to exhaustion, respiration levels, maximal heart rate, and other parameters of endurance exercise. Generally, sleep loss ranging from 4-60 hours does not impair performance in short term and unskilled endurance activities like running, rowing and swimming (e.g., Pilcher et al. 1996, VanHelder et al. 1989). The adrenalin rush of competition (aka �arousal�) appears to override any negative physical consequences of sleep deprivation. But there does appear to be great variability in the individual�s response to sleep deprivation. Some people are highly susceptible to sleep loss, while others seem to be resistant to it. Martin et al. (1981) highlighted this variability when they walked sleep-deprived subjects to exhaustion on a treadmill. Two sleep-deprived subjects actually increased their walking time to exhaustion, 4 showed no significant change, and 4 subjects showed a large decline in time to exhaustion! This is something you need to bear in mind if you anticipate running with little or no sleep. If you�re susceptible to sleep loss, expect to perform below your best.

Additionally, sleep-deprived endurance athletes often complain that their races feel much harder than usual (Bond et al. 1986), so don�t expect to feel good during or after the race if you�re sleep-deprived. Another disadvantage of sleep deprivation for distance runners is that it takes longer to recover from races due to elevated stress hormone levels. Studies by Kuhn et al. (1973), Opstad et al. (1980), Hart (1983), Jezova et al. (1985), and VanHelder and Radomski (1989) have demonstrated that catecholamine and cortisol levels are increased with the combination of sleep deprivation and exercise, while only a few studies have found no effect of sleep deprivation on those same hormones.

Another concern is that our ability to dissipate heat may be affected by sleep loss. Dr. Michael Sawka, at the U.S. Army Research and Development Center, Natick, Massachusetts, believes that �sleep loss can depress the body�s thermoregulatory system by reducing our ability to sweat during exercise��potentially something that could impair the endurance athlete�s performance significantly (Nash 1985).

Many studies have investigated the effects of sleep deprivation on non-endurance activities like carrying sandbags, carrying loads on a wheelbarrow, and walking with a backpack; and all these activities appear to be adversely affected, i.e., performance was reduced. Sleep deprivation also impairs sports that require high levels of motor skills and coordination, but these activities are of limited interest to runners unless you happen to do marathons while juggling or performing mathematical equations. So if you miss several hours of sleep for a night or two before your race, your performance is not likely to be impacted unless you are particularly susceptible to sleep deprivation.

How much sleep do we need?

Adults need between 7.5 to 8 hours of sleep a night. The U.S.A. is one of the most sleep-deprived nations in the world with 71% of its population sleeping less then 7.5 hours a night. The average American only has 7 hours of sleep, with one third of us averaging 6 hours or less per night. Why is there a high percentage of sleep-deprived Americans? Many of us just don�t want to turn off the lights, and research shows that artificial light disrupts sleep by interfering with our circadian rhythms.

To nap or not to nap?

Another area of debate by scientists is the issue of napping. Should you take naps during the day or avoid them because they may keep you awake at night? The anti-nappers claim that if you�re sleepy during the day, you�re not getting enough sleep at nighttime�and they have a good point. Apparently 80% of nappers sleep worse after an afternoon nap, and only 20% sleep better. Most readers will know whether napping degrades your nighttime sleep or not.

Waterhouse et al. (2007) concluded that a post-lunch nap improves alertness and aspects of physical and mental performance following partial sleep loss, and thus may be of use to athletes who have lost sleep during training or before competition. But, if you must nap, make sure you do this at the same time every day, and for no longer than one hour. Do not nap any later than 3 p.m.

Bedtime Tips�How to Sleep Well

Preparation for sleep

• Maintain a regular bed and wake time schedule, including on weekends.

• Establish a regular, relaxing bedtime routine (e.g., reading in bed, relaxing in a hot bath 1-2 hours before bedtime, meditation, breathing exercises, etc.).

• Skip watching the news before bedtime if you find that it causes you to feel uneasy or stress. Likewise avoid activities like watching TV, eating, planning or problem solving while in bed. We tend to fall asleep if our body is relaxed and our mind is not focused on anything exciting or stressful.

• Avoid caffeine and nicotine close to bedtime (some say from noon on). This includes coffee, tea, soft drinks, and chocolate.

• Avoid alcohol because it causes sleep disruption during the night.

• Avoid heavy meals close to bedtime.

• Exercise regularly, but avoid exercising heavily within 3 hours of bedtime.

Your sleeping environment

• Create an environment that encourages good sleep: dark room (use blackout shades), absolute quiet, cool and comfortable temperature.

• Blue light, emitted from computers, televisions, digital clocks and DVD players interrupt your body clock, or circadian rhythms; cover them at night.

Can�t sleep?

• See your physician or sleep disorder specialist if you think you have a sleep disorder.

• If you wake up, stay in bed, close your eyes and relax. If you still cannot sleep, read a book.

• Avoid oversleeping, as it causes shallow, disturbed sleep.

Good bedding

• A good mattress is essential for good sleep.

• A German study in 2001 found that a medium-firm pillow significantly improves sleep. Your pillow must support your head without burying it.

• Cover your nonallergenic foam pillow with a dust mite protective cover. Put your pillow into the dryer every few months to kill dust mites, and replace it every two years.

Light Therapy

People suffering from sleep deprivation have been found to respond well to full spectrum lights (10,000 lux fluorescent lights), for 30-minute sessions early in the morning. This helps them get to sleep earlier and stay asleep longer. It is believed that the regular exposure to this light triggers the nighttime release of melatonin. This important hormone helps maintain your body�s internal clock, giving you that sleepy feeling in the evenings.

Conclusions

Perhaps it�s time you evaluated your sleep habits to see whether you are allowing yourself enough sleep for maximum running performance. Remember, the constant cycle of overload, followed by adaptation and recovery is what improves your running, week-by-week and month-by-month. It�s critical that you give yourself enough sleep to recover from your training and racing. For good sleep, you need at least 30 minutes of moderate aerobic exercise, five or more days each week, and running is a perfect mode of aerobic exercise.

Box 1

Consider these disturbing data about our sleeping habits.

70- 80 million Americans have serious, incapacitating sleep problems.

62% of Americans have problems sleeping a few nights a week.

20% - 40% (about 40 million) of Americans have insomnia, sleep apnea, or restless leg syndrome.

40% of adults are so sleep deprived during the day that it interferes with their daily activities.

Nearly half of older adult Americans say they do not get a solid night�s sleep.

40% of insomniacs self medicate themselves with over the counter meds or alcohol.

Sleep loss and disturbances play a major role in 100,000 automobile accidents each year.

Consumers spend $1.1 billion each year on products used to promote sleep.

Costs of insomnia to industry are estimated at $45 billion annually, in terms of decreased productivity and accidents.

"FREE CHAPTER" GREAT WORKOUTS

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Thu, 20 Oct 2011 00:00:00 -0500

CHAPTER I
AN OVERALL VIEW OF TRAINING

In preparing for events ranging in length from 800 to 100,000 meters, you should always emphasize the quality of your training over mere volume. That is, you should stress speed (and the development of a higher maximal running speed), instead of placing your primary
focus on the accumulation of mileage.

Why is this so? If you had 100 runners standing before you and you wanted to figure out which ones would finish near the front in a race (regardless of whether that race covered 800 meters, 10K, a marathon, or 100K), one of the simplest and most effective forecasting techniques would be to time each runner in a 20-meter dash!

The runners with the fastest 20-meter times would also be the individuals with the quickest clicking�s for 5K � and for the marathon! On the other hand, if you ranked the runners according to weekly average mileage, you would no relationship at all between training distance per week and performance time!

While this linkage is surprising to runners and coaches, the majority of whom think that the 20-meter sprint is an �anaerobic� event and that running events like the 10K and marathon are purely �aerobic� endeavors, the simple 20-meter test is very accurate. It has been verified in research carried out by Heikki Rusko, Leena Paavolainen, and Ari Nummela of the KIHU Research Institute for Olympic Sports in Jyvaskyla, Finland with 17 male endurance runners (1). In this Finnish research, the connection between 20-meter and 5000-meter race velocities was extremely strong, even though the average 20-meter speed of 8.15 meters per second was roughly 76-percent faster than 5-K alacrity. As it turned out, 20-meter time was a better predictor of 5-K speed than that vaunted �aerobic� variable, VO2max, and 20-meter burning was almost as good as another big-name physiological characteristic � running economy. GREAT WORKOUTS

Could the 20-meter, 5-K connection detected by the Finns be purely a fluke? If you think so, consider the research carried out at the University of Nebraska at Omaha, in which Aaron Sinnett, Kris Berg, and their colleagues determined that performance times for 10,000 meters can be predicted with a high degree of accuracy using two other attributes of speed and power � 300 meter sprint time and plyometric leaping distance (2). Sinnett, Berg, and co-workers also found significant correlations between 10-K performance and 50-meter sprint time, as well as vertical jumping ability.

Why are researchers finding that �anaerobic� physiological attributes are so important for success in almost purely �aerobic� events? To put it another way, why are exercise scientists discovering that measures of speed and explosiveness are great predictors of performance in races which seem to rely more on endurance than on power?

To understand this completely, let�s take a close look at the Nebraska-Omaha study carried out by Sinnett, Berg, et al. In this fascinating work, the researchers examined 36 experienced runners (20 men and 16 women) whose 10-K times varied from 32:36 to 56:24. The age of these runners ranged from 19 to 35 years, and 27 of the athletes were preparing for a marathon as the research was conducted. The 36 subjects were running about 30 miles per week and had trained five times weekly for at least six months before the study started. Nineteen of the 36 subjects engaged in some form of strength training, and 27 had completed a marathon at some point in their running careers.

They were not beginners! Sinnett and Berg were smart to put all of the runners through a 50-meter sprint test. For one thing, Rusko and the Finns had found predictive success for the 5K with the even-more abbreviated 20-meter sprint. In addition, essentially none of the power created for 50-meter sprinting from a standing start is derived aerobically; the energy for 50-meter blast-offs comes from the �phosphagen system� within muscle cells, i. e., from existing ATP within muscle cells and from the high-energy phosphates which are donated by creatine phosphate to ADP inside muscles to make ATP (ATP is the energy currency for muscle fibers; its energy is used directly to produce muscle contractions; all other �fuels� for muscle contraction, including carbohydrate, fat, protein, and creatine phosphate, must first be converted to ATP before any muscular action can take place). GREAT WORKOUTS

Not even a single molecule of oxygen is required for the phosphagen system to work, and thus the 50-meter sprint is a true �anaerobic� test. The 300-meter test was another good choice for the Nebraska researchers. Running all-out for 300 meters from a standing start puts little energetic demand on the aerobic system; it instead depletes the phosphagen system in about 10 seconds or so and then relies almost exclusively on the �glycolytic energy system,� an oxygen independent, intracellular, energy-producing mechanism which relies on the breakdown of glucose to pyruvate and lactate for the creation of immediately usable energy (in the form of our friend, ATP).The 36 athletes also performed two vertical-jump tests, one with a dynamic counter-movement involved and the other from a static, flexed-knee beginning position.

For these tests, each athlete�s vertical reach was first assessed as he/she stood motionless next to a Vertec instrument. Every runner simply reached as high as possible with his/her dominant arm, without letting the heels raised off the floor. To determine actual jumping height, the loftiest reach in inches from this standing position was subtracted from the highest mark made on the Vertec instrument during the two jumps.

For the jump with counter-movement, the athletes started in a standing position next to the Vertec device, quickly descended into a semi-crouched, flexed-knee position, and then � without the slightest hesitation � jumped straight up with maximum power and attempted to touch the highest-possible point on the Vertec instrument. For the no-counter-movement vertical jump, the runners started from a static take-off position, with the knees locked at 90 degrees of flexion. Each athlete held this position for three seconds and then jumped as high as possible� straight up. In the counter-movement jumps, the �snap-back� of muscles which have been quickly stretched provides a significant amount of the force required for vertical leaping without incurring the penalty of direct energetic cost.

For the no-counter-movement jumps, the force is provided primarily by energy-costly, active contractions of propulsive muscles which are forced to work �from a standing start.� As you might guess, athletes whose muscles can generate much work by means of energetically cheap, elastic reactions tend to be able to run quite efficiently, i.e., at relatively low percentages of their maximal rates of energy usage. Such athletes tend to find specific speeds of movement to be easier to sustain, compared with those athletes whose muscles have less-enhanced elastic properties. GREAT WORKOUTS

These athletes would also be capable of generating greater power (attaining higher maximal speeds), compared with elastically deficient runners, and since the enhanced elastic forces would supplement the normal forces created by the costly breakdown of ATP. In other words, having ample elastic characteristics in the leg muscles is a good thing for a runner! Small wonder that one of the highest compliments an elite Kenyan runner can pay another competitor is to say, �You run as though you have springs for legs.� Note that muscle elasticity has nothing to do with a runner�s aerobic prowess. A runner with great elasticity might have a high VO2max or a low VO2max; there is simply no direct connection.

The final test of �anaerobic� prowess � the plyometric leap test � was initiated from a standing position, from which the athletes performed three consecutive forward leaps by springing from one foot to the other; for the third and last leap, the athletes landed on both feet. In effect, the plyometric leap test was just like the triple jump performed in track and field, except that the leap exam was carried out from a standing rather than a running start.
Actual plyometric-leap length was measured from the heel which was closer to the starting line after the third leap back to the starting line itself. Sinnett, Berg, and their fellow researchers found that there were significant correlations between 10-K time and (1) 50-meter sprint time, (2) counter-movement jump height, (3) non-counter-movement jump height, and (4) percent body fat. The two best predictors of 10-K success were plyometric leap distance and 300-meter sprint performance.

Just by itself, plyometric leap distance explained a whopping 74 percent of the variation in 10-Krace times for the entire group of 36 runners. Together with 300-meter sprint performance, plyometric leap distance accounted for an incredible 78 percent of the variance! To summarize, one �anaerobic� attribute � plyometric leap distance � was able to account for nearly three-fourths of the variation in performance times for this relatively large group of distance runners. �Aerobic� variables such as VO2max, lactate threshold, and running economy have been known to do worse than this in various studies of endurance-running performance (i. e., they have accounted for substantially less of the variation in performance). Two �anaerobic� attributes � plyometric leap length plus 300-meter run time � accounted for about four-fifths of the 10-K variation.

Should you begin carrying out daily three-jump plyometric training in order to improve your racing performances? No, not at all (although such effort can be profitably included in your overall program): What this Nebraska study simply means is that the power and elastic characteristics of your leg muscles will play a large role in determining how well you will perform in your races. Thus, you need to carry out the kind of training which will optimize such characteristics � the kind of effort described in detail in this book. GREAT WORKOUTS

If you are somewhat shocked about the ability of �anaerobic� factors such as plyometric leaping distance, counter-movement jump height, 300-meter sprint time, 50-meter sprint performance, and 20-meter clocking to predict distance running performances, you shouldn�t be. For one thing, it is readily apparent that the fundamental attributes which promote better sprint times, notably the ability to apply more force to the ground during foot strike and the ability to apply that greater force more quickly, can also be great for middle- and long-distance running, provided a runner can develop the ability to sustain such
enhanced power outputs for the necessary amount of time.

Greater force will translate to longer strides, and quicker force production will mean faster strides; the combination taken together can lead to major improvements in running velocity � and the ability to run faster in your chosen competitive distance. There are other fundamental reasons for this linkage between �anaerobic� and �aerobic� factors, which I will explain in a moment, and several other research studies also connect such apparent �opposites.� For example, in Heikki Rusko�s 5,000-meter research, 5-K fortune was well predicted by 20-meter time, but it was also forecast by another high-speed attribute which Rusko called VMART � the maximal speed a runner could attain during a series of progressively more difficult, increasingly anaerobic, short-duration sprints. During Rusko�s strenuous VMART tests, his runners initially jumped on a treadmill and cruised along for 20 seconds at a pace of 3.71 meters per second (7:14 per mile) with a treadmill grade of four degrees. 100 seconds of recovery followed, and then the runners burst along for 20 seconds at 4.06 meters per second (6:36 per mile).

This pattern (20 seconds of fast running alternating with 100 seconds of recovering) continued for as long as possible, with each successive 20-second jaunt taking place at a speed which was .35 meters per second faster than the previous work interval. The runners kept going until they collapsed or began to fall off the treadmill during one of the 20-second explosions (fortunately, all of the Finns were �in harness,� with their special, light-weight, leather �straightjackets� connected to both an automatic treadmill brake and an overhead support arm which held them Tinkerbelle-style whenever their leg muscles ceased
producing adequate power).

The average speed at the collapse point was 6.57 meters per second (4:05 per mile), so you can see that the Finnish harriers did quite well on the four-degree treadmill grade. Naturally, the speed attained wasn�t as great as during the 20-meter races (wherein 8.15 meters per second turned out to be the average velocity), since the 20-meter pacing occurred on flat ground with �fresh legs� and the VMART test took place in the face of considerable built-up fatigue (the 20-meter sprints were helped along, too, by their short duration of approximately 2.5 seconds, while VMART had to be sustained for 20 seconds).
As we have indicated, VMART was a terrific predictor of 5-K prowess. In fact, just like 20-meter sprint time, VMART was better than the venerable VO2max in predicting 5-K race time. In fact, VMART was even superior to running economy at foretelling what would happen in a 5-K race! GREAT WORKOUTS

The question you have to be asking right now (especially if you are a 5-K runner) is: How can I optimize my VMART? That is the right question to ask, especially since it is certain that the optimization of VMART will improve your performances significantly, even if you are an 800-meter runner � and even if you are a 100-K competitor. Rusko�s outstanding body of research reveals that hikes in mileage do not maximize VMART, nor should they be expected to do so. To have a great VMART and to reach your highest-possible VMART, you have to be able to run fast � faster than you do now. Running tons of miles at moderate paces will not get this done; in fact, there is a good chance it will reduce the power and explosiveness of your leg muscles (not to mention the spiked risk of injury which goes hand in hand with high-mileage training).

The route to an optimal VMART travels through regions of high intensity, high-quality, explosive training, not through phases of vast volumes of moderate-speed miles. Despite what any coach may tell you, you do not get faster by focusing on running lots of miles at slow and moderate velocities � and then hoping for the best. VMART moves upward optimally in response to high-quality, not high volume, running.

The findings of Rusko and Berg are supported by those of the great South-African researcher Tim Noakes, who may have gotten this whole �paradigm shift� rolling with an elegant study published in 1988 (3). In Noakes� investigation, endurance performance was well predicted by the top speeds which athletes could attain on a treadmill; those runners with the highest peak running speeds also had the best endurance race times in their portfolios. As was the case with Rusko�s research, peak running velocity was a better predictor of performance than VO2max; it was also far superior to running economy. As if that were not enough, a completely separate investigation has also found that 50-meter sprint time was well correlated with 10-K performance (4). In addition, Ronald Bulbulian and his co-workers determined that 58 percent of the variation in five-mile run times in well trained college athletes was accounted for by the capacity to perform high-intensity (�anaerobic�) running (5).

In yet another study, famed exercise physiologist Dave Costill and his associate Joe Houmard took a close look at the physiological qualifications of 10 runners who trained about 50 miles per week and averaged a not-too shabby 16:43 for the 5K (6). Although oxygen-dependent chemical reactions provide about 93 percent of the energy needed to run a 5K, maximal aerobic capacity VO2max was again a poor predictor of performance. The two best prognosticators of 5-K finishing time were anaerobic power (the ability to sprint at high speed) and a variable called time to exhaustion (TTE). You heard it right: Even though anaerobic energy creation accounts for only 7 percent of the energy required for a feverish 5-K race, raw anaerobic power is a superior predictor of 5-K success, compared with aerobic capacity (VO2max). GREAT WORKOUTS

In Costill�s 5-K runners, anaerobic power was measured during short sprints and vertical jumps. TTE was calculated in this way: A stopwatch started as an athlete began running on a flat treadmill at an intensity of 85 percent of VO2max (which normally translates into around 90-92 percent of max heart rate). The treadmill grade was then increased by 3 percent every two minutes, and the clock stopped when the runner could no longer continue at the appropriate pace. TTE was simply the total time an athlete could hold out on the treadmill and represented a runner�s ability to sustain very high-intensity, significantly
anaerobic running. Thus, the Costill-Houmard study parallels the other investigations we have described: Attributes of power, often called anaerobic factors, outweigh aerobic factors such as VO2max and economy in determining overall race performance.

The fundamental mechanisms underlying the connection between outstanding anaerobic capacities and exceptional endurance performances are not really difficult to grasp. As we have already mentioned, the factors which promote very high sprint speeds (more force applied to the ground, force applied more quickly) will also foster considerably faster distance running. In addition, middle- and long-distance runners with very high maximal running speeds will always tend to out-compete harriers with more-modest maximal velocities, since any specific race pace will represent a higher percentage of maximal and will therefore be more difficult to sustain in the latter case.

To put it another way, if endurance-runner A has a peak running velocity of 8 meters per second, and endurance-runner B has a max of just 6.8 meters per second, runner A has a much better chance of running a 5K in 15 minutes flat (i. e., at 5.56 meters per second). For runner A, 15-flat pace would be just 70 percent of maximal speed; for B, it would be way up there at 82 percent of max. There is one simple fact about competitive running which you can definitely �put in the bank:� The closer you are to your maximum running speed, the shorter will be the time during which you can sustain your effort.

To put some more numbers on this kind of thinking, if you have a max speed of 8.15 meters per second, a 5-K alacrity of 4.63 meters per second (for an 18-minute 5-K finishing time) would be only 57 percent of your running-speed max, whereas if you�re a poor soul with a maximum of just 7 meters per second, you would have to settle in at 66 percent of your max during an 18-minute 5K, and the pace would feel (to your mind, muscles, and lungs) quite a bit tougher. Having a high max velocity makes it more likely that you will be able to handle the higher end of possible race speeds in all of your races. If you have a high max speed, you already have the ability to run fast, and your key additional task is to train in a manner which optimally extends the time over which you can run at your sizzling paces. Running long and slow does not help in this regard, because it simply does not prepare your body for high-velocity effort. Other so-called �anaerobic� attributes besides peak speed should also have a strong impact on your middle and long-distance performances. Think about Rusko�s VMART tests, for example: You�ll recall that the VMART exam consisted of 20-second work intervals and 100-second recoveries. GREAT WORKOUTS

The work intervals were carried out on a treadmill with a four-degree grade, and the speed of the work intervals progressed from 7:13 per mile to 6:36 per mile to 6:05, 5:38, 5:15, 4:55, 4:37, 4:21, 4:05, and � for some of the athletes � even to 3:55 and 3:43. This means that the top-dog VMART runners would have to be superb not only at running fast but also at minimizing leg-muscle fatigue during high-intensity effort. The fatigue minimization would be a function of good �buffering� within muscles (i. e., the ability to deal with increases in muscle acidity associated with very fast running) and an excellent lactate clearance capacity. These attributes would give athletes high anaerobic capacities and also great success during fast-paced middle- and long-distance competitions. Although it may be difficult for some athletes and coaches to accept, better buffering within muscles is not fostered by long running (since little buffering is required during prolonged efforts).

Similarly, an outstanding lactate clearance capacity is not developed through high-volume work (since there is little lactate to clear when training speeds are mainly sub-maximal). Ultimately, the optimization of VMART hinges on whether a program of high quality training is utilized.

Noakes himself did some theorizing on this important matter. Based on his laboratory investigations (in which he uncovered the great importance of peak running velocity in determining distance performance ability), Noakes believed that something called �muscle contractility� was very important for running success. To him, muscle contractility was a measure of the quickness and forcefulness of muscle contractions; it was not an indicator of muscular endurance, at least when monitored at medium to slow speeds. As he pointed out, individuals with excellent muscle contractility can achieve very high workloads during their training sessions. Such training can position an athlete to carry out more work at a high fraction of max running velocity, which of course would be one of the best ways to optimize that critical performance variable.

Note, too, that exceptional contractility would also expand plyometric leaping distance, the variable which Sinnett, Berg, et al. found to be so predictive of 10-K performance (2).
Taking a slightly different approach, Heikki Rusko argued that �neuromuscular characteristics� were a key component of racing success. By this, he meant that runners whose muscles were capable of explosive, coordinated contractions (as evidenced by high VMART speeds and excellent 20-meter times) would have a definite edge in competitions. Heikki supported these contentions by showing that running velocity was inversely related to foot-strike time, both in the 20-meter dash and the 5K itself. GREAT WORKOUTS

In both events, if you could �sort� a large group of runners by their foot-strike times, with the fastest foot strikers on one end and the slowest on the other, you would also have done a nice job of assembling the runners according to their race speeds (for both 20 and 5000 meters). The best 5-K runners were not the ones with the best maximal aerobic capacities and running economies; in fact, those variables had fairly weak predictive power.

The top-of-the-class runners were the ones with powerful neuromuscular characteristics, as evidenced by their explosive foot strikes. Let�s take a moment to put some numbers on this, too. A reduction in foot-strike time of just 1/300 of a second could reduce 5-K time by 10 seconds for a 16-minute 5-K runner (provided the abbreviation in foot-strike time did not lead to a loss of stride length). In addition, trimming contact time by only 1/100 of a second could lead to a 30-second 5-K improvement. Interestingly, the difference in average contact time between the fastest and slowest 5-K runners in Rusko�s study was about 27 milliseconds (2.7 hundredths of a second), and this difference was associated with a 54-second difference in 5-K finishing time.

Rusko was also able to show that stride rate was directly related to 5-K speed; the higher the stride rate, the quicker the 5-K finish time. Since stride lengths were comparable among the 5-K runners, it was the decrease in foot-strike time which increased stride rate. Since it occurred without a drop in stride length, the more-abridged (i. e., more-explosive) foot-strike pattern allowed runners to eat up more real estate during each minute of running. As a runner, you should be aware that the so-called �anaerobic� characteristics which have a strong impact on middle- and long-distance running performance � plyometric leap distance, 20-meter sprint time, 50-meter sprint performance, 300-meter sprint clocking, foot-strike time, stride rate, muscle contractility, neuromuscular characteristics, VMART, muscle buffering capacity, and max running speed � are all very trainable.

Just running miles won�t optimize these variables, however; to improve your power characteristics, you will need to utilize a training program which emphasizes high-intensity workouts like the ones described in this book. GREAT WORKOUTS

The conventional methods of training for middle and long-distance races are dead. Although many runners and coaches are blissfully unaware of the situation, the worlds of middle- and long-distance running are currently going through a major paradigm shift, in which the emphasis is changing from the pursuits of mileage, �strength,� and higher aerobic capacity to the quest for greater power and the ability to sustain high power outputs for lengthier periods of time. It�s no longer enough to run miles and to worry only about your aerobic development, with a little �speed frosting� added on top of the program shortly before a major competition. In fact, it never was enough; we simply did not have enough scientific information to demonstrate that it was wrong to think that high-power, �anaerobic� traits could not help and might even hurt distance-running performances. Once we began to learn that anaerobic characteristics are helpful to distance runners, we began to see that the paradox of anaerobic traits improving aerobic performances is not really a paradox at all. Power factors (such as plyometric leaping ability, 50-meter sprint time, muscle contractility, etc.) which make sprinters faster also make middle- and long-distance runners faster.

The really good news is that power factors can be improved by even the most plodding of runners. The great news is also that such improvement is not a risky business, even if you are a relatively inexperienced runner. If you train to improve your power in a progressive and reasonable way, the process is not injury-producing; it is actually injury preventing (because your muscles and connective tissues develop an improved capacity to withstand large forces). If you are training correctly, your power and endurance characteristics will come together to produce your best-possible race times, from 800 meters all the way up to an ultra-marathon. Your overall goal, in fact, is to optimize your power while simultaneously maximizing those key physiological factors mentioned in the Introduction (vVO2max, lactate threshold, and economy) � the physiological factors which will allow you to sustain high power out puts in your preferred races. This book is filled with workouts which will help you optimize both your power and stamina, as well as your ability to handle the specific demands of your preferred race distances. GREAT WORKOUTS

Why Do Carbs Save And Even Boost The Production Of Proteins

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Mon, 17 Oct 2011 00:00:00 -0500

When training increases in volume or intensity, considerations related to total carbohydrate intake, the timing of carb intake, and the impacts of diet and training load on protein metabolism become particularly crucial, because upswings in training can deplete muscle-glycogen stores and throw athletes into a state of "negative nitrogen balance," in which they are losing more protein than they are making.

To see what sort of nutritional strategy might be best for athletes who are undergoing an increase in total training load and who want to max-out muscle glycogen and stay positive with protein, Mark Tarnopolsky and his colleagues at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario recently studied 10 active female athletes over two separate, one-week periods (8). The choice of female athletes as subjects was particularly appropriate, since many sports-active females have abnormally low protein (9) and total-calorie (10) intakes. Marathon

Prior to the onset of the study, all 10 women had participated regularly in some form of endurance activity; the average training load was three 45-minute workouts per week. All of the athletes were eumenorrheic, and they were tested only during the mid-follicular phases of their menstrual cycles (days four through 11). Average VO2max, measured during progressive cycling to fatigue, was 46.3 ml/kg-min.

The athletes completed two separate seven-day interventions – a control trial and a post-exercise-supplementation trial. During these two trials, the athletes� energy, carbohydrate-, and protein-intake patterns were exactly the same: The women consumed approximately 2160 calories per day and 1.4 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight per day (and thus 86 grams of protein each day). The overall composition of their diets was 58-% carbohydrate, 16-% protein, and 26-% fat.

On days one, three, and four of the seven-day trials, the women worked out in the mornings by cycling for one hour at an intensity of 65% of VO2max (about 76% of max heart rate). On day three, the women completed a second, additional one-hour workout at 37

65% VO2max in the afternoon, and on day six the athletes finished off a 90-minute exertion at the 65-% VO2max intensity. On the seventh day they didn�t rest, instead cycling for as long as possible at 75% VO2max (about 85% of maximal heart rate). Thus, the volume associated with each week�s training schedule was nearly 150% above the usual level (335 versus 135 minutes). Marathon

During the study, both the control and post-exercise-supplementation groups made use of a beverage produced by Mead-Johnson Canada Inc. which is called "Results." 66% of the calories in this quaffable came from carbohydrate, while 23% originated in protein, and 11% were derived from fat. The post-exercise-supplementation athletes imbibed "Results" immediately after their one-hour bike rides ended, while the control groups consumed the same amount of the Mead-Johnson product at breakfast, well before the bicycle exertions were undertaken. As mentioned, total energy, carbohydrate, and protein intakes were identical in the two groups; the only difference was in the timing of the "Results" ingestion.

And what an impact that difference had! When the beverage called "Results" was taken right after exercise instead of at breakfast, the experimental results were significantly different for a wide range of variables, including fat oxidation, carbohydrate concentrations, protein breakdown, exercise capacity, and body weight! As you might expect, carbohydrate breakdown tended to be greater during workouts when the extra carbohydrate (from "Results") was taken in the morning, before the workout, rather than after the training session. Also not surprisingly, fat oxidation was greater during exercise when "Results" intake was postponed until after a workout was over.

These findings are simple to explain: When athletes take in extra carbohydrate at breakfast, their liver and muscle stores of glycogen tend to rise, and thus they have more carbohydrate fuel available for prolonged exercise later in the day. When carbohydrate intake prior to exercise is more minimal, fat is forced to supply more of the energy needed for long exertion.

The key results, though, related to nitrogen balance, body mass, and performance. When "Results" was taken in after exercise rather than at breakfast, nitrogen balance was positive, which simply means that the athletes were taking in more nitrogen than they were losing (which is another way of saying that their protein stores were increasing). When "Results" was taken at breakfast, on the other hand, nitrogen balance during the heavy training was negative (protein was being lost).

In addition to saving protein, drinking "Results" right after workouts also prevented excessive losses in body weight during the heavy training. When "Results" was quaffed after training sessions, the athletes lost 1.5 pounds during the seven-day period of extended training, but when "Results" was just a breakfast potable the loss in mass totaled 3.1 pounds, a statistically significant difference. Last (but not least), use of "Results" after workouts - rather than at breakfast - allowed the athletes to exercise an average of 47-% longer (!) during the 75-% VO2max effort which took place on day seven.

As you take in these results, again remember that the athletes were eating the same amount and type of food during the two different trials; the only difference was the timing of the "Results" guzzling! Marathon

90-minute exertion at the 65-% VO2max intensity. On the seventh day they didn�t rest, instead cycling for as long as possible at 75% VO2max (about 85% of maximal heart rate). Thus, the volume associated with each week�s training schedule was nearly 150% above the usual level (335 versus 135 minutes). Marathon

The post-exercise-supplementation athletes imbibed "Results" immediately after their one-hour bike rides ended, while the control groups consumed the same amount of the Mead-Johnson product at breakfast, well before the bicycle exertions were undertaken. As mentioned, total energy, carbohydrate, and protein intakes were identical in the two groups; the only difference was in the timing of the "Results" ingestion.

Also not surprisingly, fat oxidation was greater during exercise when "Results" intake was postponed until after a workout was over. These findings are simple to explain: When athletes take in extra carbohydrate at breakfast, their liver and muscle stores of glycogen tend to rise, and thus they have more carbohydrate fuel available for prolonged exercise later in the day. When carbohydrate intake prior to exercise is more minimal, fat is forced to supply more of the energy needed for long exertion.

When "Results" was taken at breakfast, on the other hand, nitrogen balance during the heavy training was negative (protein was being lost). In addition to saving protein, drinking "Results" right after workouts also prevented excessive losses in body weight during the heavy training. When "Results" was quaffed after training sessions, the athletes lost 1.5 pounds during the seven-day period of extended training, but when "Results" was just a breakfast potable the loss in mass totaled 3.1 pounds, a statistically significant difference.

Last (but not least), use of "Results" after workouts - rather than at breakfast - allowed the athletes to exercise an average of 47-% longer (!) during the 75-% VO2max effort which took place on day seven. As you take in these results, again remember that the athletes were eating the same amount and type of food during the two different trials; the only difference was the timing of the "Results" guzzling! the beverage called "Results" was taken right after execise instead of at breakfast, the experimental results were significantly different for a wide range of variables, including fat oxidation, carbohydrate concentrations, protein breakdown, exercise capacity, and body weight!

Last (but not least), use of "Results" after workouts - rather than at breakfast - allowed the

REPLACING MILES WITH EXPLOSIVE MOVES

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Sat, 17 Sep 2011 00:00:00 -0500

Manys runners loathe the idea of dropping mileage and replacing the "lost" miles with explosive strength training, but new research from Finland reveals that such a strategy can significantly improve maximal running speed and leg muscle power - workout any loss in maximal aerobic capacity. In the new investigation, experienced runners reduced weekly mileage by 20 percent and upgraded maximal running velocity by 3 percent. REPLACING MILES WITH EXPLOSIVE MOVES

What happens if you suddenly decided to chop 20 percent of your usual miles from your weekly log - and then replaced that lost mileage with explosive training which required a comparable amount of time? Many runners would suggest that such a move would deplete maximal aerobic capacity (VO2max), because of the lower overall volume of endurance training which would be conducted. Furthermore, many coaches and runners would say that the change would produce a drop in fitness and race performances, because of the necessarily abridged maximal aerobic capacity. Given such thinking, it is not at all surprising that so few runners carve away at their mileage and substitute explosive work for their endurance-type training.

However, there have been various hints in the scientific literature that such substitutions could produce surprising benefits. Some research, for example, has shown that "anaerobic work capacity" (the kind of thing which is fostered by explosive training) can have an important impact on endurance performance (1). In addition, Tim Noakes' now classic paper revealed that "neuromuscular characteristics" {basically, the ability of muscles to produce high amounts of force very quickly) could predict endurance-performance capability more successful than good-old VO2max (2). Producing force quickly is a key adaptation associates with explosive training. Thus, these inquires suggest that the traditional thinking about mileage and high-power work might be wrong.

Fortunately, the question of what really happens when endurance work is replaced by explosive training intrigued by Jussi Mikkola, Heikki Rusko, and their colleagues at the Research Institute for Olympic Sports in Jyvaskyla, Finland. Recently, Mikkola, Rusko, and their co-workers asked 13 well-trained young runners (nine males, four females) who were training about 8.8 hours per week to pare 1.7 hours from their weekly logs (leaving about 7.1 hours of endurance training) - and then to incorporate 1.7 hours of explosive training into their schedules each week for a period of eight weeks (thus maintaining the usual 8.8 total hours of effort). These runners were young (average age = 17.3 years) and fit (mean VO2max = 62.4 ml'kg-1 min-1). REPLACING MILES WITH EXPLOSIVE MOVES

The explosive training was carried out three times a week (which meant that each session lasted for about 34 minutes). The workouts consisted of high-speed sprint intervals ((5 to 10) X (30 to 150 meters)), jumping exercises with no additional resistance (alternate-leg jumps, and hurdle jumps), and "gym exercises" with fairly light resistance (half squats, knee extensions, knee flexions, calf raises, abdominal curls, and back extensions). For the gym exertions, two to three sets of six to 10 repetitions were utilized, and the underlying philosophy for all of the explosive movements was to use very high action velocities.

And, yes, this was a Heikki Rusko study, so there was a very nice control group - 12 individuals in all (nine men and three women) who were also young (17.3 years) and fit (VO2max = 61.8 ml'kg-1min-1). These controls pretty much stayed away from the explosive training during the eight-week period, instead focusing on 8.5 hours per week of endurnce training.

Muscle strength, jumping ability, and 30-meter running speed were measured in both the explosive and control groups at the beginning and end og the eight week period. And - since this was a Rusko study - all runners performed a maximal anaerobic running test, or MART (Rusko is one of the primary developers of the MART). A MART can be completed on a treadmill (3 & 4), but in this research the testing took place on an indoor track. Basically, a MART is a series of 150-meter runs, with 100-second recoveries between runs and a five meter flying start before each 150-meter effort. The velocities of the 150-meter runs are tightly controlled. In this research, the first was carried out at 39.4 meters per second (101.5 seconds per 400 meters) for females and 4.75 meters per second (84 seconds per 400 meters) for males. After that, the velocity was increased by .41 meters per second for each consecutive 150-meter effort. At the well equipped Rusko lab in Jyvaskyla, the runners were guided into running at the correct velocity by a "light rabbit" (a moving light which moved around the track at the required speed). In a MART, the last 150-meter run is completed at maximal effort, and ordinarily about nine to 10n 150-meter surges are completed per test. Fairly fast speeds are attained during the test. For example, a male runner who manages to perform 10 150-meter runs would complete the last effort at no less than 8.44 meters per second (47 seconds per 400 meters, if he could "hold on" that long).

Over the course of eight weeks, the explosive training paid major dividends. The maximal speed in the MART (the velocity attained for the last 150-meter sprint) increased by 3 percent in the explosively trained runners - but failed to budge at all in the regular, endurance-trained subjects. Furthermore, 30-meter speed (the top velocity achieved in a 30-meter sprint which was preceded by a 20-meter flying start) advanced by 1.1 percent for the explosive runners - but was stagnant for control individuals. REPLACING MILES WITH EXPLOSIVE MOVES

To learn more about how REPLACING MILES WITH EXPLOSIVE MOVES (the full article can be read by purchasing VOL. 23-3 of Running Research News) and many more running related topics, simply click-on the Back Issues link, and select the volume and issues number, from the drop-down menu. A subscription to RUNNING RESEARCH NEWS is another way to receive valuable information about running.

"FREE CHAPTER" OF AURORA

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Sat, 17 Sep 2011 00:00:00 -0500

WHY THE FASTEST RUNNERS OFTEN GET STIFFED

TRADITIONALLY, ENDURANCE ATHLETES have not placed a major emphasis
on explosive strength training. The rationale for this avoidance of explosive
work has been that such training might carry a high risk of injury, and that
high-speed, �anaerobic� movements have little relevance for the �aerobic�
athlete whose success depends on steady endurance. AURORA

However, scientific evidence continues to show that such thinking is
wrong: Th e research reveals that explosive training helps endurance athletes
in a number of key ways. For example, in a brand-new study carried out by
Rob Spurrs and co-investigators at the University of Technology in Sydney,
Australia, explosive training improved performance times for 3-K runners by
almost 3%.

The explosive workouts designed by Spurrs and colleagues were simple to
carry out, and the athletes performed them only two times a week for three
weeks and then three times a week for three weeks (1). Just eight diff erent, easy to-
learn exercises were utilized (squat jumps, split-scissor jumps, double-leg
bounds, alternate-leg bounds, single-leg forward hops, depth jumps, double-leg
hurdle jumps, and single-leg hurdle hops), and the Australian athletes usually
performed no more than four of these exercises per workout (generally using
two to three sets of 10 to 15 reps per exercise). Before the six-week study began,
the athletes were running about 35 to 50 miles per week.

Here are descriptions of the less-familiar exercises: To carry out split-scissor
jumps, an athlete would start with one leg out in front of the other. If the left
leg was in front of the right leg, the distance between the back of the left heel
and the toes of the right foot would be approximately one shoe length. The
athlete would then bend at the hips, knees, and ankles and then attempt to
jump as high as possible. While airborne, his legs would cross so that the right
leg would be in front of the left upon landing. This action would continue for
the duration of the set, creating a scissor-like action throughout the drill (and
a split stance with each landing). Subjects were given instructions to jump as
high as they possibly could – but with minimal ground-contact time during
each landing stage of the movement. Thus, the runners had to compromise the
vertical height of their jumping somewhat in order to decrease the duration of
ground contact. No restrictions were given to the athletes regarding the depth
of knee or hip flexion, but the runners were asked to maintain upright posture
with their torsos. FASTEST RUNNERS

To perform depth jumps, an athlete stood on a box with a height of 40
centimeters (15.75 inches). Then, the athlete was instructed to simply step off
the box, as though he were taking a routine step on normal ground. During
the 40-centimeter, downward �flight,� the athlete had to quickly bring the
non-stepping foot into position so that the landing was made on both feet
simultaneously. Upon landing, the athlete attempted to minimize ground contact
time and yet jump as high as possible.

After coming back to terra firma following the explosive jump, the athlete simply stepped back onto the box andrepeated the overall action for the prescribed number of times. When steppingoff the box, an athlete was not permitted to �step down� from the box, as he
would when debarking from a train or stepping off a kitchen stool. Rather, the
action was supposed to be a step forward from the box, as though another box
of the same height was ready to meet the stepping foot and then a quick 40-
centimeter plunge.

To carry out double-leg hurdle hops, an athlete jumped over 10 hurdles,
positioned 115 centimeters (45 inches) apart, with a height of 70 centimeters
(27.6 inches). Th e athlete jumped over each hurdle, landing and taking off on
two legs, until all 10 hurdles had been cleared (movement was continuous).
Again, the athlete was instructed to minimize ground-contact time.

While doing single-leg hurdle hops on one leg at a time, an athlete also
jumped over 10 hurdles in continuous fashion, but this time the hurdles were
only 42 centimeters (16.5 inches) high and were placed 160 centimeters (63
inches) apart. Minimal ground-contact time was again the order of the day.
The pervading theme for all of the exercises used in the investigation was
to get as high as possible with the least amount of ground-contact time. For the
double- and alternate-leg bounds and also for the single-leg forward hop (i. e.,
the drills which focused more intently on horizontal movements), this theme
was also applied – but with the added instruction that the greatest-possible
horizontal distance should be covered with the most-abbreviated-possible
ground contact. FASTEST RUNNERS

After just six weeks of the power sessions (15 workouts in all), the
explosively trained Australian runners improved 3-K running time by
16 seconds, while control competitors (who ran in a similar way but did no
explosive work) failed to upgrade 3-K running ability at all.

Stiffer? Yes, I know that sounds strange. After all, isn�t stiff ness supposed
to be a bad thing for endurance runners, something you attempt to avoid by
faithfully carrying out stretching activities?

Well, stiffness can be a negative, if it is excessive, but in this case the
increased stiffness helped the runners react with the ground more explosively
with each footstrike. Their legs were less compliant, and as a result they probably
spent less time in the stance phase of the gait cycle without sacrificing an inch
of stride length; in fact, it is likely that stride length was greater than before the
explosive training began. FASTEST RUNNERS

Overall, explosive training improves endurance-runners� performances by
expanding forward propulsion with each foot strike at an energy cost which is
less than before and with a total footstrike time which is less than before the
training began. Explosive training makes runners both more economical and
faster.

Overall, it is clear that explosive work is an essential part of an endurance athlete�s
training. Endurance athletes who avoid explosive sessions have a
difficult time achieving their highest-possible levels of performance.

Reference
(1) �The Effect of Plyometric Training on Distance Running Performance,�
European Journal of Applied Physiology, Vol. 89, pp. 1-7, 2003

SORE NO MORE

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Tue, 16 Aug 2011 00:00:00 -0500

You have had the experience: You've gone out for an extra-long run, worked out on some steep hills for the very first time, or completed an unusual number of work intervals on the track - and then paid the grisly price. For a few days after your effort, your legs felt stiff, your muscles and tendons were tender and sore, and your usual leg strength was missing in action.

What did you actually do to your legs to create so much discomfort and weakness? Did you set back your training, or are such occasional bouts of pain and feebleness a normal part of the training process? Was there anything about your soreness induction which would actually be good for you during subsequent training? Before we respond to these key questions, let's take note of a fact which will help us with our answers: You have probably also had an interesting, follow-up experience with soreness. That is, it's likely that you performed - at a later date - a workout similar to the one which produced so much leg distress initially, after a few weeks of other sorts of training, for example. Somewhat surprisingly, this second session produced no ill effects at all - not even a whisper of protest from the sinews and cables in your lower appendages. Why did the first effort lead to misfortune, while the second failed to perturb your legs at all?

This scenario, in which a specific workout produces pain after its initial completion and then rubs milk-and-honey balm on your legs after its second and subsequent fulfillments, has been noticed by exercise scientists and is often called the "repeated-bout effects" (1 & 2). Amazingly enough, the "protection" from soreness and enfeeblement which occurs after the first training session can last for several weeks - and possibly for as long as six months in some cases (3).

Why should we care about this? If we can understand the underlying mechanism which produces protection from significant soreness, it might be possible to train in ways which invoke this mechanism (without producing significant tissue damage) and thus protect ourselves from muscle strains and training-related tendon damage. There might, in fact, be a general routine, a combination of strength training and running, which, when carried out during an initial phase of training, could provide many protective benefits over the course of a training year.

To date, investigations which have attempted to unravel the mystery of the repeated-bout mechanism have produced some extremely interesting results. Some research has suggested, for example, that a muscle group does not have to be exercised in the same manner in the initial and subsequent bouts of exertion in order for a protective effect to occur (a clear violation of our hallowed specificity-of-training principle).For example, one study found that 100 maximal, eccentric contractions of the quadriceps muscles furnished protection against quadriceps damage following a subsequent bout of downhill running (4).

That word "eccentric" will appear repeatedly as we talk about post-workout soreness, so let's deal with it for a moment. Recall that eccentric muscle contractions are notorious for producing soreness and that an eccentric muscular contraction is one in which a muscle is exerting force and attempting to shorten - and yet ends up being elongated by other forces acting on the muscle. A good example of this is what happens to your quads as you run. The poor fellows' contract when your foot hits the ground, but the forces of impact make your knee flex anyway, and the quads get temporarily stretched and lengthened - as they are trying to shorten and keep the knee joint under control. Put yourself on a significant hill and run in a downward direction - and things get much worse for the quads. Since your foot is falling farther with each step, the leg is accelerating downward to greater extent than usual, and thus the forces on the quads are considerably augmented. The eccentric-strain damage to the quads is more extensive, and post workout quadriceps pain is likely to appear - if you have not done much prior downhill running.It is clear that eccentric strains produce a significant amount of leg discomfort which is part of running training. However, there is also something about eccentric straining/training which ultimately provides a considerable amount of protection for muscles and tendons (5). In short, eccentric strains damage muscles - but lead to adaptations which are highly protective.

To learn more about Sore No More (the full article can be read by purchasing Vol. 22 Issue 4 of Running Research News) and many more running related topics, simply click-on the Back Issues link, and select the volume and issues number, from the drop-down menu. A subscription to Running Research News is another way to receive valuable information about running. BUY NOW.

GET YOUR LACTATE-THRESHOLD SPEED IN 30 MINUTES

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Tue, 16 Aug 2011 00:00:00 -0500

As my youngest daughter Sabrina might say, there are at least 30 kabillion ways to estimate your lactate threshold. Some of them are even accurate.

Your running sped at lactate threshold is, of course, something to be concerned about. After all, various studies have suggested that lactate-threshold speed is the best predictor of endurance performance (1 & 2). Lactate-threshold velocity is simply the speed above which lactate begins to accumulate rather dramatically in the blood. It works as an endurance-event predictor because lactate is a key fuel, much-preferred by the muscles, and pile-ups in the blood indicates that the muscles lack the machinery necessary to process lactate at high rates (a bad thing, since lactate is such an important source of energy).

Because lacatate threshold is important and it can be estimated in various ways, many coaches and training books prescribe or recommend workouts which involve running for varying amounts of time at lactate-threshold velocity. This practice harkens back to the research of Swedish physiologist Bertil Sjodin and his colleagues (3), whi appeared to find that a weekly 20-minute workout at lactate-threshold speed, when carried out over a 14-week period, improved lactate-threshold velocity significantly. Bertil's bunnies were not compared with runners who worked at paces faster than their thresholds, and in fact there was not even a control group in Bertil's inquiry, but the practice of running at threshold caught on, and it is still extremely popular today. In-vogue running books and beloved running magazines recommend training at threshold, and exercise scientist in respected laboratories report that they are regularly contacted by runners and triathletes who would like to know the "best" way to estimate lactate threshold; frequently, these athletes have been instructed by their coaches to carry out a significant amount of training at threshold each week.

So, let's say that you'd like to be a conventional sort of runner and carry out some at threshold training, with continuous runs at your threshold pace. What is the best way to estimate your threshold?

You could have your threshold speed measured at an exercise-physiology laboratory, of course. You would end up with an extensive print-out of your blood lactate readings at various running speeds, and you might even enjoy a chat with an exercise physiologist about what the data points really mean. But, the procedure would be expensive and time consuming, and your test would probably be conducted on a treadmill, with no assurance that your lactate profile would be identical to the one obtained while you were running on something like, say, good-old Mother Earth. Also, you would need to perform the test several times over the course of a season, as your fitness changes, and that means having lots of bucks and - hopefully - living not too far from a hospitable exercise physiology laboratory.

Naturally, you could utilize one of the commercially available, portable, lactate analyzers, which are pretty accurate and have come down in price to reasonable levels. However, you must prick your finger or ear repeatedly to carry out the threshold test, and you must be a little savvy with your blood sampling and handling techniques. WIth all the bloodletting, your mind may not be completely focused on your running (thus giving you a false reading for your threshold speed), and you can easily screw up the bloody part of theprocess. Don't forget, too, that when the bloodbath is over you will still have to "fit the curve" (graph your blood-lactate levels as a function of running speed). Once your graph looks nice, you also must decide in unerring fashion exactly where lactate threshold is to be found on the upward-curving line.

In contrast with these first two possibilities, Jack Daniels' "VDOT methods" for determining lactate-threshold velocity is a bit easier on your wallet and pain receptors. Described in his book, Daniels' Running Formula, the VDOT method calls for you to enter your performances at a variety of distances into equations and tables developed by Daniels (4). Your velocity at lactate threshold, along with other important training speeds (including interval pace and marathon tempo, for example), can then be calculated.

A 3200-meter time trial is also considerably more facile to conduct than a full-blown lactate-threshold exam and has been thought by some to provide a reliable estimate of lactate-threshold velocity. For this test, you only need to do one thing: On a day when you are feeling great and gale-force winds are not whipping across the track, you perform a maximal-effort 3200-meter run. You then calculate your lactate-threshold velocity (LTV) with the following equation:

LTV (in meters/minute) = 509.5 - 20.82 X [3200-meter time in minutes]

Let's say, for example, that you completed your 3200-meter run in 12:15. Changing 12:15 to 12:25 minutes and plugging it into our equation, we have the following:

LTV = 509.5 - 20.82[12.25]

LTV = 509.5 - 255.05

LTV = 254.45 meters per minute (or 1609/254.45 = ~ 6:19 per mile)

Although this technique appears to be slightly suspect (note in this case how close LTV is to the full blast 3200-meter speed), research has found that it predicts the running speed linked with blood-lactate levels of 4.0 mmol L-1 pretty accurately, and the running speed coinciding with 4.0 mmol L-1 is often considered to be LTV (5).

To learn more about Get Your Lactate-Threshold Speed In 30 Minutes (the full article can be read by purchasing Vol. 21 Issue 8 of Running Research News) and many more running related topics, simply click-on the Back Issues link, and select the volume and issues number, from the drop-down menu. A subscription to Running Research News is another way to receive valuable information about running. BUY NOW.

Where Do You Go For The Ultimate In 5-K Training?

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 00:00:00 -0500

Have you been scrambling to find the Solution to your 5-K training woes? Would you like to knock another minute or two off your 5-K time? If so, you have arrived at the right place. Running Research News, has blended their training philosophies and cutting-edge techniques into a top-notch 5-K training program.

RRNews' Intermediate 5-K Program is designed to propel your 5-K performances to a higher level. Your running is about to change! With RRNews' program, you will reach a new performance pinnacle - where you will regard yourself as an outstanding runner, not just someone who runs. RUNNING AT ITS FASTEST

Every training scheme has to have a basic foundation, and RRNews' 5-K program is built around high-quality running workouts and a "backbone" of strength training for running. Running-specific strength training keeps you away from injury, reduces fatigue, improves your running efficiency, and ultimately makes you much faster. All of these thing are of course great for the 5K.

The traditional method of training for the 5K, with a base of mileage, followed by tempo training, some hill work, and then several weeks of speed training, has gone out the window, thanks to recent advances in the field of exercise physiology. As Nietzsche once said, to perform at your very best it is important "to climb as high into the pure icy Alpine air as a philosopher ever climbed, up to where all the mist and obscurity cease and where the fundamental constitution of things speaks in a voice rough and rigid but inescapably comprehensible." To reach their true performance peaks, 5-K runners need to optimize VO2max, running economy, vVO2max, lactate-threshold speed, running-specific strength, power, and race-specific preparations. The program you are about to embark on will do all of these things for you! RUNNING AT ITS FASTEST

The program is clear, concise, and straightforward to carry out, taking you day by day through 26 weeks of transforming training. The overall scheme follows RRNews philosophy of progressing from easier to harder workouts, of moving from strengthening exercises which are less specific to running to those which are more specific, and of progressing to workouts which are more and more like the demands of running at 5-K goal pace in your most-important race of the season. Recently, one of RRNews runners used the program to improve her 5-K time from 24:30 to 19:36! RUNNING AT ITS FASTEST

With RRNews training, the goal is not to knock yourself out with tons of hard work and then hope for the best on race day. With this new program, you gradually work your way up to higher and higher levels of fitness, so that you are totally ready to "breathe the pure Alpine air" and climb to your highest-possible level of performance when it really matters.

Welcome! We are here to help you reach your highest goals as a runner. RUNNING AT ITS FASTEST!.

PLANNING THE RIGHT TAPER: FAST, EXPONENTIAL DECAY MAY BE THE WAY

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 00:00:00 -0500

Almost all athletes and coaches agree that tapering - the reduction of training in a systematic way - is a good thing, because it ensures good recovery from heavy training (Gibla, M.et al., : The Effects of Tapering on Strength Performance in Trained Athletes, " International Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. 15, pp. 492-497, 1994) and is a key part of preparation for an important competition (Shepley, B. et al., "Physiological Effects of Tapering in Highly Trained Athletes," Journal of Applied Physiology, Vol. 72, pp. 706-711, 1992).

Unfortunately, there is wide disagreement about how tapering periods should be constructed. These debates revolve around how long a tapering period should be, the extent to which training volume, intensity, and frequency should be reduced during a taper, and also - very importantly - the rate at which these variables should be reduced.

One dispute has centered around whether tapers should contain "step reductions" in training or " exponential decays." In a step reduction, total training is reduced by a certain amount, and the new volume of training is sustained throughout the tapering period. In an exponential-decay situation, the quantity of training decreases steadily over the course of the taper (there is no step-down in volume but rather a continuous slide), reaching bare-bones levels at the end of the tapering period. One popular step-down strategy is to clip training by 5 to 70 percent and then maintain the new, lower volume of work for one to three weeks. Traditionally, exponential decays have been linked with shorter durations of time, often four to eight days.

Until now, the relative merits of step-reduction and exponential-decay tapering have been poorly evaluated. Several years ago, outstanding tapering theorist Joe Houmard asked 5-K runners to cut training by 70 percent for three weeks (a step reduction). At the end of the 21 -day period, the runners' 5-K race times were not significantly better, nor did the runners exhibit greater muscular power (Houmard, J. et al., "Testosterone, Cortisol, and Creatine Kinase Levels in Male Distance Runners during Reduced Training, " international Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. 11, pp. 41-45, 1990). In contrast, a seven-day exponential decay in which training volume was reduced each day and overall weekly volume dropped by 85 percent produced dramatic improvements in 5-K race times and muscular power (Houmard, J. et al., "The Effects of Taper on Performance in Distance Runners," Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, Vol. 26, pp. 624-631, 1994).

This has led some tapering theorists to argue that when training volume is reduced aggressively and progressively to an extremely low level, performance is improved to a greater extent, compared with a single (or even several-) step reduction over a more extended period of time. Some anti-step scientists even go on to argue that step reductions usually maintain performance but do not enhance it.

Such arguements are not completely fair, however, since step-reduction tapering has been linked with fairly impressive gains in physical capacity. For example, in a classic study carried out by renowned exercise physiologist Dave Costill in his laboratory at Ball State University, collegiate swimmers reduced training volume from 10,000 (!) to 3200 yards per day during a 15-day period (Costill, D. et al., "Effects of Reduced Training on Muscular Power in Swimmers," Physician and Sportsmedicine, Vol. 13, pp.94-100, 1985).

After this 15-day step-reduction taper, the swimmers' performance times improved by 3.6 percent, their arm strength and power swelled by up to 25 percent, and blood-lactate levels were lower during 200-yard swimming "sprints". These results led Costill to recommend - in his fine book Inside Running: Basics of Sports Physiology - tapering periods of approximately two-weeks duration, with volume set at about one-third of usual levels (a large step reduction).

In later work, Raymond Kenitzer and Catherine Jackson asked 15 female collegiate swimmers to pare training volume by about 60 percent over a four-week period (Kenitzer, R. and Jackson, C., "Blood Lactate Concentration in Female Competitive Collegiate Swimmers during End Season Taper," Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, Vol. 21 (2), p.S23, 1989).

For the long distance swimmers involved in the study, volume dropped from 8000 daily yards to 3500 yards. During this step-reduction taper, blood-lactate levels fell steadily for about two and one-half weeks, and performances increased progressively over the same time frame. After two and one-half weeks, however, lactate concentrations and performance times both began to worsen. Kenitzer and Jackson drew the obvious conclusion: 60-percent, step-reduction tapers lasting up to 17 to 18 days are good things.

Step reductions can do more than maintain performance levels. However, the exponential cause was advanced pretty dramatically shortly after the publication of Kenitzer's work. Another scientist with a strong interest in tapering, Duncan MacDougall of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario (Canada), asked a group of well-conditioned runners who were averaging 45 to 50 miles of running per week to try out three different kinds of one-week tapers. The three startegies were:

(1) Doing nothing at all during the week (a 100-percent step-reduction),

(2) Running about 18 miles during the week at a leisurely pace, with a complete-rest day at the end of the week (a 64-percent step reduction), and

(3) Undergoing a drastic exponential decay in training over the week, with an emphasis on quality running. Using this strategy, the runners completed five hard 500-meter intervals on the first day of decay, four 500-meter blasts on the second day, 3 X 500 on day three, just 2 X 500 on day four, and a single 500-meter surge on day five. After a rest on day six, they were ready to be tested on day seven (as were the employers of strategies one and two). Importantly, each 500-meter interval was performed at about one mile race pace, and since the runners warmed up with 500 meters of inchmeal running before the quality intervals were undertaken, the total training volume for the week was about 10K, or just over six miles. Thus, this decay involved an overall 87- to 88-percent reduction in training (MacDougall, D. et al., "Physiologic Effects of Tapering in Highly Trained Athletes," Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, Vol.22 (2), Supplement, #801, 1990)

To learn more about Planning the Right Taper (the full article can be read by purchasing Vol. 17 Issue 5 of Running Research News) and many more running related topics, simply click-on the Back Issues link, and select the volume and issues number, from the drop-down menu. A subscription to Running Research News is another way to receive valuable information about running. BUY NOW.

The Science of Kenyan Eating

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Sat, 18 Jun 2011 00:00:00 -0500

It's strange, but true: The nutritional practices of the best endurance athletes in the world have not been carefully studied.

Those "best endurance athletes" are clearly the Kenyan runners. Attempting to verify this fact for you is probably unnecessary, but it can at least be noted that one study found that athletes from one collection of Kenyans, the Kalenjin tribe, had won approximately 40 percent of all major international middle-and long-distance running competitions in the 10-year period from 1987 to 1997 (1). In addition, approximately half of all the male athletes in the world who have ever run the 10K in less than 27 minutes hail from Kenya. When they are allowed to enter freely, Kenyan athletes dominate road races around the world. It would be possible to continue in this vein for many more sentences. 20 Kenyan Commandments

And yet, until now the eating habits of the very top-level Kenyan runners have not been examined in a scientific way, even though the Kenyans' nutritional practices must assuredly represent a key reason for their running success. The person who might argue that "If only the Kenyans would eat differently, they could run much faster," would appear to be flimsy ground. The Kenyans are doing things right when they sit down at their dinner table, or they would not be so dominating in international competitions.

To answer these questions, Yannis Pitsiladis of the international Centre of East African Running Science in Glasgow, Scotland, along with Mike Boit (the Olympic bronze-medal winner from the 1972 Games), Vincent Onywera, and Festus Kiplamai from the Exercise and Sports Science Department at Kenyatta University in Nairobi and the Department of Foods, Nutrition, and Dietetics at Egerton University in Njoro, Kenya, recently monitored everything that went into the mouths of 10 elite Kenyan runners over a seven-day period at a training camp near Kaptagat, Kenya (2). This brace of Kenyan athletes was truly top-level, including several Olympic medalists and also first-place finishers from the Paris and Athens World Championships.

(1) Breakfast at 8:00

(2) Mid-morning snack at 10:00

(3) Lunch at 13:00

(4) Afternoon snack at 16:00

(5) Supper at 19:00

To learn more about More News Concerning The Science of Kenyan Eating (the full article can be read by purchasing Vol.21 Issue 1 of Running Research News) and many more running related topics, simply enter "the science of Kenyan eating", in the Search-Archives" box to the right. A subscription to Running Research News is another way to receive valuable information about running. EAT LIKE A CHAMP

A FINE FOOTSTRIKE

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Sat, 18 Jun 2011 00:00:00 -0500

How do we actually "take the brakes off" during the stance phase of the gait cycle? Two factors must be at work: First, our nervous systems must be highly reactive, so that muscular actions which inhibit forward propulsion can be inhibited from the moment of impact and muscular actions which boost propulsion can be instigated without hesitation. Second, our movements must be well-coordinated, so that there is no need to spend extra time (and energy) restoring the body's equilibrium position in response to awkward movements. Footstrike must be an explosive time, not a period in which weakly controlled joint movements must be corrected prior to toe-off or in which the leg muscles "throw on the brakes." What we want to achieve is both extreme quickness and incredible control. Footstrike-related deceleration must be minimized.

A routine for you; to dramatically enhance quickness, abbreviate the time duration of footstrike, and decrease energy wastage during the footstrike portion of walking and running, carry out the following routine several times a week:

(1) Jog along with very springy, short steps, landing on the mid-foot area with each contact and springing upward after impact. As you move along your ankles should act like coiled springs, compressing slightly with each mid-foot landing and then recoiling quickly - causing you to bound upward and forward. Move along for one minute with quick, little spring-like strides, alternating right and left feet as you would during regular running. After this minute is completed, jog in your regular manner for about 10 seconds, and then "spring-jog" for about 20 meters, alternating three consecutive spring-like contacts with your right foot with three contacts with the left (e.g., three hops on your right foot, three hops on your left, three more on your right, etc., until you have traveled about 20 meters). Jog in your usual manner for 10 seconds again, and then spring-hop along for meters on your right foot only, before shifting over to 20 meters on the left foot alone (make certain that you land in the mid-foot area with each ground contact).

(2) Perform two 40-second sets of one-leg hops in place on each leg. Stand in a relaxed position, with your full body weight supported on your left foot only. Lift your left heel slightly, so that the force of body weight is passing through the ball of the left foot (your right knee is flexed so that your right knee is off the ground). Then, hop rapidly on your left foot at a cadence of 2.5 to 3 hops per second (25 to 30 foot contacts per 10 seconds) for the prescribed time period, while maintaining relaxed, upright posture. Your left foot should strike the ground in the area of the mid-foot and spring upwards rapidly, as though it were contacting a very hot burner on a stove. Your hips should remain fairly level as you do this; try to minimize vertical displacement of your upper body.

(3) "Box-hop" with "sticks" for 60 seconds on your right foot, rest for a few seconds, and then shift over to 60 seconds of box hopping on your left foot. After resting for a moment, repeat with each foot. The box utilized for this exercise should be sturdy and about six inches in height. To perform the exercise, stand about two meters away from the box, and then hop forward quickly toward the box on one foot only. As you near the box, hop up onto the box surface (continuing to hop on only the chosen foot), and then hop quickly off the "far" side of the box. When you land on the other side, hop forward explosively, i. e., with as little ground-contact time as possible. In this explosive hop, try to avoid significant vertical oscillation of your center mass; you are trying for length, not height. When you land from this explosive hop, continue hopping on the same foot four more hops, and when your foot touches down after the fourth hop. "stick" your position, i. e., and stop movement completely while remaining relaxed and nicely balanced on your single foot. Jog back to the starting point on both feet, and then continue the exercise on the chosen foot until the time limit is up. Following a short rest, do the hopping routine on the other foot.

(4) Complete 10 high-knee explosions with your right leg, rest for a few seconds, and repeat with your left leg. To carry these out, stand with erect but relaxed posture with your fully body-weight supported on your right foot. Begin by jumping very lightly in place on your right foot only, but then suddenly - while maintaining fairly erect posture - jump vertically while swinging your right knee up toward your chest (your left arm should swing forward as your right knee comes up). Land back on your right foot in a relaxed and resilient manner, jump lightly for a few moments, and repeat nine more times, before resting briefly and continuing the pattern on your left leg.

(5) Perform 3X 20 seconds of Shane's In-Place Accelerations. To carry these out, stand with erect but relaxed posture with your feet directly below your shoulders. Begin by simply jogging in place, but then - when you feel ready - begin to dramatically increase your in-place "stride rate", building up fairly quickly to as rapid rate of striding as you can sustain (remember that you are not moving forward to any significant degree). Keep your feet close to the ground as you do this; you're not shooting for high knee lift but rather for dramatically minimized foot-contact times. Maintain erect but relaxed posture. As you accelerate up to "top speed". it sometimes help to turn your legs slightly outward at the hips.

To minimize the risk of injury, at least at first, please make sure that all of these activities are completed on a "forgiving" surface (soft dirt, grass, cushioned artificial turf, or wooden gym floor).

The above quintet of quicksilver exercise will of course enhance the reactivity of your nervous system and thus help to minimize footstrike time. Naturally, strength and coordination of the weight bearing leg are also needed to ensure that energy will not be wasted correcting non-optimal leg and body movements associated with footstrike. As mentioned, the overall idea is to create quick-to-act legs which channel all available energy toward forward propulsion, without the need to correct anti-propulsive movements.

Stay tuned for exercises that strengthens the legs tremendously and improves balance and coordination to a close to maximal extent.

To learn more about A Fine Foot strike (the full article can be read by purchasing Vol.17I ssue 5 of Running Research News) and many more running related topics, simply click-on the Back Issues link, and select the volume and issues number, from the drop-down menu. A subscription to Running Research News is another way to receive valuable information about running. BUY NOW.

VP TRAINING-JUST RIGHT FOR MARATHONS AND 5KS

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Fri, 13 May 2011 00:00:00 -0500

At this time of year, marathon runners are looking for the perfect "tune-up" workouts for their marathons - sessions which spike fitness and increase the likelihood that an up-coming marathon can be completed at goal speed. 5-K runners, on the other hand, are searching for sessions which will produce one last 5-K PR before the season ends.

Strangely enough, both groups of runners can employ the same kind of training - in the form of VP workouts. Performed properly, VP (variable-pace) sessions produce major up-swings in aerobic capacity, vVo2max, and lactate threshold, all of which are important for 5-K and marathon success. VP training also enhances running economy at both 5-K and marathon speeds, making goal pace for either race more sustainable.

VP running is very similar to traditional interval training, but it differs from classic interval work in a fundamental way: When you conduct intervals, you ordinarily alternate between a high-quality velocity (your work-interval speed) and a rather-low-quality pace (your recovery, jogging speed). In VP training, you interchange two very important, high-quality running speeds during the course of your workout.

How is a VP workout actually constructed? Here's a perfect example of this unique form of training:

Carry out a thorough warm-up which fires up your cardiovascular and neuromuscular systems. Then, run 400 meters at your current (or reasonable-goal) 5-K pace and - without stopping for recovery - run 400 meters at your current, goal, or estimated marathon pace. Once you have completed the marathon - pace 400, return - without a break - to 5-K pace for another 400 meters. Finally, scamper through a fourth 400 - back at marathon tempo again. To summarize, you will have run four 400s in succession (1600 meters total) no recovery at all; the first and third 400s will have been at 5-K speed and the second and fourth at marathon pace. Jog lightly for three to four minutes to recover.

To learn more about VP training (the full article can be read by purchasing Vol.21 Issue 5) and many more running/marathon related topics.

Simply select Vol. 21 Issue 5, in the "back issues" box, or enter any subject you wish to learn more about. A subscription to Running Research News is another way to receive valuable information.
Subscribe Now.

FATS, VITAMINS, AND YOUR SORE ACHILLES

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Tue, 05 Apr 2011 00:00:00 -0500

What has Soren Mavrogenis been doing lately?

That question has not exactly been rolling off athletes' lips, especially since Soren's latest published paper - "Pyeloureteral Junction Stenosis and Ureteral Valve Causing Hydronephrosis" (Scandinavian Journal of Urology and Nephrology, Vol.35(3), pp. 245-247, June 2001) - has nothing at all to do with athletics. But give the fellow a chance! In addition to his pyeloureteral pursuits, the Dane is currently carrying out extremely interesting research on the treatment of athletic injuries, and his findings may one day help you bounce back from an injury more quickly than expected and as a result set a new personal record or win an important competition. A physiotherapist with Denmark's Olympic Committee, Mavrogenis has effectively treated several hundred cases of recurrent inflammatory injuries with a novel dietary supplement (Reuters Health, April 27, 2001).

Tested for the first time in 1996 on a group of rowers from Denmark's National Rowing Team, Soren's nostrum appears to have remarkable anti-inflammatory properties (research on the overall healing properties of the treatment will be published in a peer-reviewed journal shortly).

Of course, most routine athletic injuries are treated with icing, rest, physiotherapy, and the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS), and Soren does not sermonize against the use of either rest or ice. However, the innovative Dane does leave the NSAIDS on the shelf, instead relying on a combination of essential fatty acids, vitamins, and minerals to soothe inflammation and restore injured body parts. He has reportedly found success with a variety of ailments, including both "tennis elbow" and golf elbow."

Soren's supplement does contain fats, so you might be reasonably asking, "Don't golfers already eat enough fat?" That's a reasonable question, but the problem, of course, is that they usually eat the wrong fats (i.e., the ones which seem to be pro-rather than anti-inflammatory). Soren's nutritional supplement contains a rich lode of inflammation-fighting omega-3 fatty acids (from fish oil), some omega-6 fats (from borage oil), four vitamins (A, B6, C, and E), and also the minerals selenium and zinc. According to Mavrogenis, most patients respond positively to the treatment in just two to three weeks, although very serious cases may require several months. "The results of this research confirm our clinical observations and leave us with the clear impression that inflammatory injuries can be treated without the use of NSAIDS. I see this as a ......breakthrough in modern physiotherapy.

For the first time, we are able to offer our patients a safe and reliable treatment for stress injuries with chronic inflammatory response. In fact, it is our experience that with this new treatment, as opposed to conventional treatment, athletes are able to train actively while receiving treatment," says Soren. "The bad cases require the use of intensive ultrasound and certain massage techniques in addition to the antioxidants and essential fatty acids, but in the milder cases the use of nutrients alone is adequate," notes Mavrogenis. Norwegian sports authorities have been carefully watching Soren's work (naturally, Norwegians do not want Danes to leave them behind). Since inflammatory injuries to shoulders, elbows, knees, and Achilles tendons account for one-fourth of all job-related absences in Norway, Soren's anti-inflammatory regimen is now being tested by NIMI (no need to mention that this is Norsk Idrettsmedisinsk Institut). one of Scandinavia's foremost treatment facilities for sports injuries. We'll report on NIMI's findings in a future issue of this newsletter.

But isn't this all a little far-fetched? How can a few fatty acids - plus several vitamins and minerals - foster fast healing in an elbow nearly wrecked by overuse on the tennis courts - or in a knee inflamed by hundreds of miles of endurance running? The story just sounds too good to be true.

But it may not be. Bear in mind that scientific research has actually been fairly kind to the idea that omega-3 fatty acids and anti-oxidants can help to control inflammatory injuries. To understand why this is, remember that exercise generates increased quantities of "oxygen free radicals" and increases lipid peroxidation (the oxidative attack on key fats found in cell membranes, including muscle-fiber membranes fall apart and produce leaky, non-functional muscle cells.

As a defense against this disastrous possibility, the human body produces a fairly potent anti-oxidant called superoxide dismutase; superoxide -dismanyus production speeds up when individuals embark on regular and at least moderately strenuous training programs. Evidence suggests, however, that the superoxide-dismantus system is prone to being overwhelmed. Prolonged submaximal exercise has been shown to result in elevated amounts of skeletal-muscle lipid-peroxidation byproducts, indicating significant damage to the muscles (Free Radicals and Tissue Damage Produced by Exercise," Biochem Biophys Res Commun, Vol. 107, pp. 1198-1205, 1982). Clearly, the superoxide-dismutase system lets a significant number of free radicals "through its net."

Before we continue, let's review our story: Exercise can greatly increase the production of cell-damage free radicals. The magnified rates of lipid peroxidation resulting from this oxygen radical production may cause muscle damage. The human body has its own anti-radical defense system, but it doesn't provide complete protection from injury. In addition, the damage produced in the muscles as a result of exercise can "snowball" over relatively short periods of time. For example, in one study researchers found more muscle damage three days after a strenuous workout than they had found one hour after exercise ceased ("Adaptive Response in Human Skeletal Muscle Subjected to Prolonged Eccentric Training, " International Journal of Sports Medicine, Volume 4, pp. 177-183, 1983).

This was a bit surprising, since researchers believed significant muscle repair would have occurred during the three-day interim. In another investigation, exercise scientists found that intense exercise produced immediate muscle damage, but the damage actually became much worse 24 and 48 hours after the workout was over, even though no follow-up exercise had taken place ("Ultrastructural Changes after Concentric and Eccentric Contractions of Human Muscle," Journal of Neurol Science, Vol. 61, pp. 109-122, 1983). In other word, in a muscle traumatized by exertion, there is a post-exercise period lasting for up to three days or more in which muscle damage is actually accelerated, rather than minimized, even when no further exercise occurs.

To learn more about how to Fats, Vitamins, and Your Sore Achilles (the full article can be read by purchasing Vol. 17 Issue 3 of Running Research News) and many more running related topics, simply click-on the Back Issues link, and select the volume and issues number, from the drop-down menu. A subscription to Running Research News is another way to receive valuable information about running. BUY NOW.

The 10-Minute Alternative To Stretching

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Sun, 06 Mar 2011 00:00:00 -0600

If your pre-workout stretching doesn't seem to be doing much for you, give the following 10-minute warm-up routine a try.

(1) Increase your heart rate, so that the initial stages of your training session don't overtax your ticker

(2) Prepare your muscles for strenuous activity

(3) Wake up your nervous system - so that it's ready to control your muscles properly during a vigorous workout. This protocol will do all three, and it only takes 10 minutes:

* Wake up your leg muscles (1 minute): Walk in a relaxed fashion, alternating light, relaxed steps with long, exaggerated strides. On each extended stride, vigorously swing the opposite arm forward.

* Wake up your heart and leg muscles (4 minutes): As you jog unbelievably slowly, notice any tight spots in your body and focus on unkinking the tension.

* Wake up your nervous system (1 minute): Skip - in place or in a forward direction - while trying to lift your knees as high as possible.

* Wake up your heart (2 minutes): Run at the basic pace you'll utilize in your workout for one minute, and then jog very easily for one minute.

* Give your nervous system a green light (2 minutes): Hop lightly on both feet for about 20 seconds, and then hop lightly on your right foot for 15 seconds and your left for 15 seconds. Walk easily for 10 seconds, and then jump continuously - as high as possible on both feet - for 15 seconds. Walk for 10 seconds, and then try "hot-stove" jumping, getting your feet barely off the ground on each jump and trying to make as many contacts with the ground (with both feet) as you can in 20-25 seconds. Walk for 10 seconds or so.

* Run!

To learn more about running, training, nutrition, injury prevention, and strength training. Sign-up for Running Research News and keep your running in full force RRNews

DO TRIATHLETES HAVE FEWER INJURIES? WHICH TRIATHLETES GET HURT?

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Sun, 06 Mar 2011 00:00:00 -0600

In theory, triathletes should have fewer overuse injuries, compared to other endurance athletes. After all, "cross training" is believed to minimize the risk of injury (and is even prescribed for injured athletes as a way to recovery), and triathletes cross train routinely. A triathlete whose main strength is running, for example, could be described as cross training for two-thirds of all workouts (if running, swimming, and cycling workouts occur with equal frequencies). Indeed, initial reports indicate that overuse injuries may be lower for triathletes; one study found an annual overuse- injury frequency of 41 percent in a group of triathletes, compared with the usual 50 to 65 percent injury rates found in "pure" runners ("An Epidemiological Investigation of Training and Injury Patterns in British Triathletes, "British Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol.28, pp. 191-196,). TRIATHLETES

However, other research has identified a 90 percent (!) injury rate in triathletes, well above the norm for endurance-sport participants ("Overuse Injuries in Ultraendurance Triathletes," American Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. 17, pp. 514-518). Indeed, some sports-medicine experts argue that triathletes are more prone to injury, since each of the three triathlon sports tends to trigger a particular type of malady.

Swimming, for example, is known to induce shoulder injuries, which are seldom seen in running. Biking is associated with a higher risk of low-back problems, which are usually not a problem in endurance swimmers. In addition, triathletes often carry out more total workouts per week, compared with " straight" swimmers, runners, or cyclists. From these perspectives, triathlon competition might be considered a "high-risk" sport.

So the question remains: Do triathletes get injured more or less often, compared with "specialist" endurance athletes? In addition, which triathletes are at the highest risk for injury? Do psychological state, physical build, age, and gender play a role in determining risk? How about the number of years of triathlon experience, the time spent competing, training pace, and even stretching?

To answer these questions, researchers at Staffordshire University in Stoke-on-Trent recently examined the five-year training programs of 12 elite triathletes from British National Squad, 17 national-development-team memebrs, and 87 male club triathletes ("Injury and Training Characteristics of Male Elite, Development Squad, and Club Triathletes," International Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. 19, pp. 8-42). An injury was defined as any musculoskeletal problem causing cessation of training for at least one day, a reduction in training mileage, the taking of pain medicine, or the seeking of mediacl aid. Overuse injuries were recorded separately from traumatic injuries, such as those resulting from bicycle accidents. TRIATHLETES

As it turned out, injury prevalence did not differ significantly between the ability groups; 75 percent of elite, 75 percent of developmental, and 56 percent of club athletes suffered an overuse injury during the five-year period ( the downturn in injury rate in the club athletes was not statistically significant); total time taken off from training as a result of injury was also not different between groups.

In addition, there was no significant difference between the three groups in the proportions of athletes sustaing injury in particular parts of the body; for example, club athletes were no more likely to sustain Achilles-tendon injuries, compared with developmental and elite triathletes. The knee, Achilles tendon, and lower back tended to be the most-injured body areas for the athletes overall. Injury occurrence was not linked to age, height, weight, or body-mass index.

The Curse of Running

As you might expect, running injuries were responsible for most of the problems, accounting for from 58 to 64 percent of all injuries in the three groups; cycling was far back with 16 to 34 percent, and swimming produced very few difficulties. A key question then was: What factors increased the risk of running injury? The Staffordshire-University researchers were able to identify total weekly triathlon training distance (the sun of running, swimming, and biking mileage), weekly cycling distance (!), swimming distance per week, total number of workouts per week, cycling training pace, and number of weekly running workouts as key risk factors for running injury.

These findings might seem surprising at first. After all, why would an extra hour spent swimming or an extra 40K on the bike increase an athlete's risk of developing a running injury? The key, of course, is that while such efforts do not produce the kind of impact damage to muscles associated with running, they can - when carried out in large-enough volume - retard muscular recovery enough so that muscles respond less well to the stress of running and are thus more vulnerable to being injured as a result of run training. TRIATHLETES

Triathlon training is a true "balancing act;" workouts which ultimately improve cycling or swimming fitness can sometimes hurt running capacity or even increase the risk of sustaining a running injury by temporarily retarding muscular recovery. In such cases, it might be better to attempt to improve cycling or swimming fitness less avidly and thus maintain the ability to run strongly and without injury. When a triathlete plans a high-quality bike or swim workout, he/she needs to take into account not only the effect the session will have on bike/swim fitness but also the impact it will have on subsequent running efforts. If a killer bicycle exertion boosts cycling fitness a notch or two but prevents the completion og high-quality running workouts, what has actually been gained?

For many triathletes who want to improve overall performance - and who are training within limited time frames, the key may be to assess in which sport the greatest gain can be made, i.e., the sport in which the greatest improvement in overall race clocking can be attained. That sport will then be emphasized most heavily in training - and workouts in the other two activities which might hinder development in the "high-improvement" sport will be eschewed.

What about injury? Is the triathlon truly a high-risk sport? The 75-percent injury figures cited above seem high, but it's important to note that such a rate of overuse injury was observed over a five-year period; in comparsion, studies have found that 50 to 65 percent of endurance runners are injured during just one year of training. Thus, overuse-injury frequency often ranges from nine to 12 training sessions per week. Avoidance of a pattern of "hammering away" in a high impact sport such as running and an engagement with three different movement patterns (running, swimming, cycling) does indeed seem to be beneficial, from an injury-prevention standpoint. On the other hand, the three-movement plan probably does not give triathletes an advantage over pure swimmers and cyclists; since the latter do not include running in their training schemes, they are likely to have lower injury rates, compared with athletes.

Here is our final take-home point: Since triathlon injuries tend to revolve around the knee, lower back, and Achilles tendon, triathletes should spend extra time strengthening those parts of their bodies in functional ways, i.e., during movement patterns which mimic those occurring naturally in their sports. TRIATHLETES

To learn about Glucosamine and Chrondroitin Sulfate: Great Theraphy For Athletes' Joints?, Is The Use Of Variable Pace Better Than Keeping An Even Keel?, Or Rage Against The Machine: Re-Build Your Body Without Expense Exercise Equipment (the full articles can be read by purchasing Vol. 17 Issue 8 of Running Research News) and many more running related topics, simply click-on the Back Issues link, and select the volume and issues number, from the drop-down menu, or type in another topic of interest. A subscription to Running Research News is another way to receive valuable information about running. BUY NOW.

WHY THE FASTEST RUNNERS OFTEN GET STIFFED

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Fri, 28 Jan 2011 00:00:00 -0600

FREE CHAPTER From "How Do You Become A Faster Runner"

TRADITIONALLY, ENDURANCE ATHLETES have not placed a major emphasis on explosive strength training. The rationale for this avoidance of explosive work has been that such training might carry a high risk of injury, and that high-speed, �anaerobic� movements have little relevance for the �aerobic� athlete whose success depends on steady endurance.

However, scientific evidence continues to show that such thinking is wrong: The research reveals that explosive training helps endurance athletes in a number of key ways. For example, in a brand-new study carried out by Rob Spurrs and co-investigators at the University of Technology in Sydney, Australia, explosive training improved performance times for 3-K runners by almost 3%.

The explosive workouts designed by Spurrs and colleagues were simple to carry out, and the athletes performed them only two times a week for three weeks and then three times a week for three weeks (1). Just eight different, easy to-learn exercises were utilized (squat jumps, split-scissor jumps, double-leg bounds, alternate-leg bounds, single-leg forward hops, depth jumps, double-leg hurdle jumps, and single-leg hurdle hops), and the Australian athletes usually performed no more than four of these exercises per workout (generally using two to three sets of 10 to 15 reps per exercise). Before the six-week study began, the athletes were running about 35 to 50 miles per week.

This action would continue for the duration of the set, creating a scissor-like action throughout the drill (and a split stance with each landing). Subjects were given instructions to jump as high as they possibly could � but with minimal ground-contact time during each landing stage of the movement.

Thus, the runners had to compromise the vertical height of their jumping somewhat in order to decrease the duration of ground contact. No restrictions were given to the athletes regarding the depth of knee or hip flexion, but the runners were asked to maintain upright posture with their torsos.

To perform depth jumps, an athlete stood on a box with a height of 40 centimeters (15.75 inches). Then, the athlete was instructed to simply step off the box, as though he were taking a routine step on normal ground. During the 40-centimeter, downward �flight,� the athlete had to quickly bring the non-stepping foot into position so that the landing was made on both feet simultaneously. Upon landing, the athlete attempted to minimize ground contact time and yet jump as high as possible. After coming back to terra firma following the explosive jump, the athlete simply stepped back onto the box and repeated the overall action for the prescribed number of times.

When stepping off the box, an athlete was not permitted to �step down� from the box, as he would when debarking from a train or stepping off a kitchen stool. Rather, the action was supposed to be a step forward from the box, as though another box of the same height was ready to meet the stepping foot � and then a quick 40-centimeter plunge. To carry out double-leg hurdle hops, an athlete jumped over 10 hurdles, positioned 115 centimeters (45 inches) apart, with a height of 70 centimeters (27.6 inches). The athlete jumped over each hurdle, landing and taking off on two legs, until all 10 hurdles had been cleared (movement was continuous). Again, the athlete was instructed to minimize ground-contact time.
While doing single-leg hurdle hops on one leg at a time, an athlete also jumped over 10 hurdles in continuous fashion, but this time the hurdles were only 42 centimeters (16.5 inches) high and were placed 160 centimeters (63 inches) apart. Minimal ground-contact time was again the order of the day.

The pervading theme for all of the exercises used in the investigation was to get as high as possible with the least amount of ground-contact time. For the double- and alternate-leg bounds and also for the single-leg forward hop (i.e., the drills which focused more intently on horizontal movements), this theme was also applied � but with the added instruction that the greatest-possible horizontal distance should be covered with the most-abbreviated-possible ground contact.

After just six weeks of the power sessions (15 workouts in all), the explosively trained Australian runners improved 3-K running time by 16 seconds, while control competitors (who ran in a similar way but did no explosive work) failed to upgrade 3-K running ability at all.

Interestingly enough, the explosive training also improved the efficiency of the Australian harriers, enhancing running economy (the oxygen cost of running at a particular speed) by from 4 to 7% at three different velocities. The training improved the rate of force production in the athletes� calf muscles and also made the runners� legs stiffer by 11 to 15%. Stiffer? Yes, I know that sounds strange. After all, isn�t stiffness supposed to be a bad thing for endurance runners, something you attempt to avoid by faithfully carrying out stretching activities?

Well, stiffness can be a negative, if it is excessive, but in this case the increased stiffness helped the runners react with the ground more explosively with each foot strike. Their legs were less compliant, and as a result they probably spent less time in the stance phase of the gait cycle without sacrificing an inch of stride length; in fact, it is likely that stride length was greater than before the explosive training began.

Overall, explosive training improves endurance-runners� performances by expanding forward propulsion with each foot strike at an energy cost which is less than before and with a total foot strike time which is less than before the training began. Explosive training makes runners both more economical and faster.

What about injury? The power-trained Aussies suffered from nothing more than a little soreness after their first few explosive workouts; after that, everything proceeded smoothly. In fact, carefully conducted explosive training should be anti-injury, since it enhances muscles� abilities to withstand high, sudden force loads. Overall, it is clear that explosive work is an essential part of an endurance athlete�s training. Endurance athletes who avoid explosive sessions have a difficult time achieving their highest-possible levels of performance. Buy The Book

Rest And Recover

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 00:00:00 -0600

Programming rest and recovery into your training schedules ensures important benefits. First, you�ll be healthier�which means you�ll have minimal interruptions to your training from illness or injury, thus your training will be more consistent. Second, by adequately recovering from the stress of training, your body�s musculo-skeletal and cardio-respiratory systems will adapt faster making you stronger and aerobically more fit. In fact, Pfitzinger (2005) claims that, �It can be argued that your improvement as a highly motivated runner is chiefly limited by your ability to recover� (P.203). I couldn�t agree more! So the principle is simple: train hard, then rest to recover.

Key to training and improving your performance is to stress, or overload, the body with a hard workout, and then to allow it to recover while it adapts. Sometimes we refer to the recovery and adaptation processes as super-compensation. These days, it is clear that overload (a well-known training principle � see Box 1) and recovery are the magic ingredients of any training program. If I can get esoteric for a minute, overload and recovery are the yin and yang, representing balance in training.

Box 1. The Principles of Progressive Overload

To improve, the runner must progressively overload his system with more frequency, or intensity, or duration of his training efforts. This overload must be enough to cause new adaptations to the body. Overload by itself is not sufficient to cause improvement. It must be accompanied by recovery to permit adaptation to take place.

But as with many aspects of distance running, the devil�s in the details. Many questions come to mind about the practicalities of implementing a successful recovery strategy into your program. For example:

1. How hard should you work out to improve?
2. How many days should you train hard each week?
3. How much rest do you need to recover from a hard workout?
4. Should you have complete rest during your recovery days, or can you do other activities to maintain your cardiovascular fitness, while giving your legs a chance to recover from the pounding?

In this article, we�ll look at what conventional wisdom says about these questions concerning the non-nutritional aspects of recovery, and next month we�ll examine nutritional strategies for proper recovery.

When considering the factors that constitute proper recovery, we should first examine the myriad of lifestyle factors that affect our ability to recover from running. The good news is that most of our lifestyle factors are controllable. We can evaluate our lifestyle habits and then take measures to improve them.

Here are some of the most common lifestyle factors that we believe contribute to maximal recovery.

Are You Quick To Recover Or Slow To Recover?

Alas, we have to take the cards that our genetic fate has dealt us, and make the best of it. Our genetics are a major player in our ability to recover from hard workouts. Some runners are flattened for days after a hard interval-training workout, while are able to run a solid ten miles the following day without the slightest ache or pain. If you consistently recover from your workouts within 24-48 hours, count your genetic blessings! If, like me, you hobble around for days after an intense workout, you�re going to have to live with the fact that you�re slow to recover and need to plan for a longer recovery, i.e., allow 2-3 days of easy running, or (gasp) actually take a day off completely from running.

How Does Age Affects Recovery?

Any master athlete will tell you that as we age we need more recovery time. Over the age 40, we need anywhere from 1-3 days of rest and/or recovery workouts after a strenuous running session. I leave this up to the reader to decide when to schedule a rest day and when to do light running workouts to ensure good recovery. However, it should be noted that cross training is invaluable here, as it permits the runner to do a solid cardiovascular workout while giving legs a break from the pounding. Thus the runner can train most, if not all, days of the week without interruption. Moreover, cross training can be combined with strength training, something that most runners are notably remiss at doing. Strength training has great benefits to runners in terms of strengthening muscle, tendon, and ligament, and improving lactate tolerance. Lastly, older runners should be moderating their running sessions, supplementing or substituting their recovery sessions with cross training activities, and allowing more days between stressful running workouts to recover completely.

What About Gender and Recovery?

Women tend to take longer to recover from high stress workouts than men, largely because of hormonal differences. Testosterone, the dominant male sex hormone, plays a big role in muscle growth and repair, conferring an advantage to males. Although female athletes appear to have higher levels of testosterone than non-athletes, female athletes still have lower overall levels than their male counterparts and should avoid following training schedules that are designed for men. There are also significant strength differences between the two genders due to size differences. However, pound for pound, this difference is largely reduced as to make it almost insignificant. But, women are likely to take longer to recover from running workouts because of the reduced overall strength.

What Is The Relationship Between Sleep and Recovery?

Quality and quantity of sleep significantly contribute to recovery. Good sleep is essential for your body to repair itself, and conversely, a chronic (long term) inadequate volume and quality of sleep will impair your recovery from training. Unfortunately, this essential requirement for recovery is grossly inadequate in most runners, indeed in most people. Chronic sleep loss and poor quality sleep are endemic in the more developed western countries like the U.S.A, Canada, U.K., New Zealand and Australia.

Box 2. How Does Sleep Repair The Body?

We sleep in 4 stages, alternating between non-rapid eye movement (NREM) and rapid eye movement (REM). Each sleep cycle takes about 90 minutes. The average adult sleeps about 7.5 hours, or five full cycles, with 20% of that time in REM. Anabolism (repair) takes place during the four stages of sleep shown below, but particularly in stages 3 and 4.
Sleep deprivation is categorized as short-term and long-term. A shortage of sleep will not cause a decline in running performance. So if you are traveling internationally to compete in a marathon, and are short a few hours sleep, your performance should not be reduced, although sleep-deprived endurance athletes often complain that subjectively, their races feel much harder than usual (Bond et. al. 1986, also see October 2009 issue of Running Research News (volume 25 issue 8) �Coping With Jet Lag In International Marathons�.

Researchers of short-term sleep deprivation have looked at its effects on VO2 max, treadmill running and walking to exhaustion, respiration levels, maximal heart rate, and other parameters of endurance exercise. Generally, the data shows that sleep loss ranging from 4-60 hours does not impair performance in unskilled endurance activities like running, rowing, and swimming (Pilcher et al. 1996, Van Helder et al. 1989). The adrenalin rush of competition appears to override any negative physical consequences of short-term sleep deprivation. However, there is considerable variability in our response to short-term sleep deprivation.

Some people are highly susceptible to sleep loss, while others seem to be resistant to it. A study by Martin et al. (1981) highlighted this when they walked sleep-deprived subjects to exhaustion on a treadmill at a set pace. Two sleep-deprived subjects actually increased their walking time to exhaustion, 4 showed no significant change, and 4 subjects showed a large decline in time to exhaustion! This is something you need to bear in mind if you anticipate running with little or no sleep. If you�re susceptible to sleep loss, expect to perform below your best. In contrast, long-term sleep deprivation has been shown to reduce cardiovascular performance by 11% (Walters 2002) and slow glucose metabolism by 30%- 40% (Spiegel 1999). So the implication here is that we should ensure that we get 7.5 to 8 hours of quality sleep every night for healthy regeneration.

Some other quick advice: eat your final meal of the day well before you go to sleep, and going to bed at the same time each night will set your circadian rhythms into a nice routine. Also, avoid bright lights at night, and if you�re not sleeping well, examine your life stressors and whether you are overtraining.

The good news about sleep and training is that scientists have shown that people who exercise regularly and intensely (without overtraining) spend more time in stage 3 and 4 slow-wave sleep. For example, Trinder et al. (1985) found that fit runners, who average 45 miles/week, spend 87 minutes in slow wave sleep, 13 minutes or 18% longer than deconditioned people. For more details on sleep and recover, and the significance of sleep phase, please refer to my August 2009 Running Research News (volume 25 issue 6) article on �How Running Affects Sleep and Vice Versa�.

Use Of Heat and Cold Contrast Therapy

In heat and cold contrast therapy, the athlete applies heat to the legs (a heat pack, a hot water bottle, or a hot tub) for 2-3 minutes and then applies cold (ice cups, cold packs or cold bath) for a similar amount of time. This can also be simulated in the shower by flushing hot then cold water over the legs and hips. This cycle can be repeated 2-5 times. This contrast therapy is believed to improve blood flow to the muscles (Bompa 1999), eliminating lactate that has accumulated in the muscles (Calder 2004), reducing inflammation, reducing delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS) and pain relief (Bompa 1999), and help the runner relax psychologically. Physical therapists will tell you the best time to apply contrast therapy is within 20-30 minutes of finishing your training run.
Sauna- Closely related to contrast therapy, taking a sauna bath is believed to have recuperative effects.

For example, DeVries et al. (1968) found that the heat of a sauna relaxes muscles. The electrical activity of the muscles was reduced bringing about lowered muscle tension. Anything that lowers muscle tension should encourage relaxation and help recovery.

Massage Therapy

The use of massage therapy by runners of all levels is widespread. Whether the laying on of hands actually helps heal damaged muscle tissue in the lower extremities, thus speeding up recovery time, or whether it has a relaxation effect of the runner has yet to be determined. Other benefits of massage therapy are claimed to be improved blood flow to the legs, relaxation of muscles, enhanced nutrient and oxygen delivery to the muscles, increased removal of lactic acid, improved flexibility of the muscle and connective tissues, breaking down of scar tissue, and a kind of pre-emptive therapy on �knotty� areas that are tightening-up and that could become injured. However, the research on the recovery properties of massage therapy is disappointing.

Results suggest that it is either ineffective or has only limited influence on DOMS (delayed onset muscle soreness) and muscle repair and swelling. Studies by Galloway and Watt (2004), Smith et al. (1994), Dawson et al. (2004), and Weber et al. (1994) concluded that the effects of massage are minor or transitory. There is one promising study by Zainuddin et al. (2005) that found that massage was effective in alleviating DOMS by approximately 30% and reduced swelling. Regardless of the scarcity of evidence, massage is a harmless and relaxing modality that certainly cannot harm the runner, and may have some benefit.

Running Shoes

Treat yourself to a new pair of running shoes � right now! While you�re out pounding the road, it�s not the lightness of the running shoe that is important but what�s between you and the road. Chances are that your current pair has lost its cushioning�the Ethyl Vinyl Acetate (EVA) material in running shoe midsoles breaks down within a few months, and somewhere around 600-800 miles of running. You�ll feel it when your shoes are losing their shock absorbency�suddenly they�ll feel hard, like you�re running on wooden planks. If you�re a heavier runner (>160 lbs), or if you pronate severely causing excess wear and tear on your shoes, you�ll chew through your shoes a lot faster.

A biomechanist friend of mine, who is a runner herself, told me about an interesting way that she addresses the problem of running shoes breaking down. She has several pairs of shoes, including different models that she places on a �shoe tree�. Every day she wears a different pair of shoes, giving the other shoes a chance to recover. She also believes that wearing different shoe models exercises her legs through a slightly different range of movement, thus widening her �band of movement� as she runs. This helps maintain her kinesthetic and proprioceptive awareness, and keeps her injury free. It certainly has helped her, because she has been running for years without injury.

Finally, some advice to help you avoid what many a runner has found out the hard way. The phrase, �You get what you pay for�, very much applies to running shoe purchases.

Generally, the more expensive the shoe model, the more comfortable and the more cushioning and motion control devices it will have. Don�t skimp on your running shoes. It�s okay to buy top of the line running shoes, in fact I strongly recommend it. The extra expense will be more than compensated for by the extra comfort and extra protection that the higher quality shoes offer you.

Running Surfaces

Consider the surfaces you typically run upon. Biomechanists have a nasty way of reminding us of the brutal facts of running. They define the total force that your body (primarily legs, hips and back) absorb while running by multiplying the total number of steps you take on a run, by the amount of force you generate with each step. Considering that every time we land, our body absorbs the impact of 1.5-3 times our body weight (depending on our speed), the total impact adds up to tens of thousands of pounds, even over a short distance like 5 miles. Shocking! No wonder 60% of us get injured every year!
What can we do to reduce this impact? Running on grass, sawdust, treadmills, or dirt surfaces significantly reduce landing shock when we run.

Can you do some trail running or at the very least jog around a large grassed sports field? (Soccer fields are ideal). (For more details please refer to my article in June/July 2009 Running Research News (volume 25 issue 5) �Seven Reasons Why Every Distance Runner Should Train on Trails�). Concrete should be avoided at all costs, and asphalt is only a slightly better running surface, so minimize this.

Tweaking Our Training Program To Ensure Recovery

Highlighted above have been the excellent preventive measures that we can use in our daily routine to ensure adequate regeneration and recovery. These have included getting quality sleep, using heat and cold contrast therapy and massage therapy, wearing quality running shoes and replacing them often, and running on softer surfaces when possible are all. But how can we adjust our training schedules to allow for adequate recovery? First, understand that the real key to recovery is avoiding overtraining; i.e., prevention is the most effective method. What are some of the adjustments we can make to our training schedules to enhance our recovery? Here are five key rules to follow that will make a big difference.
Highlighted above have been the excellent preventive measures that we can use in our daily routine to ensure adequate regeneration and recovery. These have included getting quality sleep, using heat and cold contrast therapy and massage therapy, wearing quality running shoes and replacing them often, and running on softer surfaces when possible are all. But how can we adjust our training schedules to allow for adequate recovery? First, understand that the real key to recovery is avoiding overtraining; i.e., prevention is the most effective method. What are some of the adjustments we can make to our training schedules to enhance our recovery? Here are five key rules to follow that will make a big difference.

1. Plan A Regeneration Week Every Three Or Four Weeks Into Your Training Schedules

The use of a periodized program is the one major change you can make that will have a tremendous effect on your overall recovery (Norris and Smith 2002). Periodized programs are simple to design. Schedule one week of lower intensity and shorter duration running every three (or four) weeks. This ensures adequate recovery of muscle tissue, refueling of your energy reserves, relieves the monotony of your standard training schedules, and gives you a psychological break from rigorous training.

How slow should your training efforts be during the regenerative week? Nice and easy, about 60% to 70% of your maximal heart rate. It should feel like you are cruising well below your standard �hard� training pace, and you should be able to talk comfortably while running. You should not feel drained after these recovery runs.

How much should you shorten your training efforts? Aim to reduce your standard daily training distance by 25% to 50%. By reducing your distance and pace you will have lots of energy by the end of this week. You�ll also find that in the following week you�ll feel renewed and your training pace should be faster than normal. Runners are often concerned that they�ll lose some of their fitness when they cut back temporarily during their regeneration week, but have no concerns here. In fact, numerous papers on carbohydrate loading and tapering show that a few days off, or of reduced running, actually improves performance as the muscle tissue recovers, rebuilds, and stores more glycogen (Costill et al. 1985).

One final word about using periodized schedules: our bodies do not follow schedules perfectly, no matter how well designed. There will be times when the runner will have to deviate from the schedules because recovery may take longer than anticipated. Having a fatigued athlete sticking to his schedule invites further fatigue and perhaps poor health.

2. Follow The Hard-Easy Principle Of Recovery Training

Recovery doesn�t just consist of taking a day off from running here and there, or doing a short easy jog occasionally�there�s far more to it than that. At the very least you should follow a hard training effort with one or more easier training sessions. Your recovery runs should be done at a lower intensity than your hard workouts, with the objective of enhancing your recovery. This is a good time to let you in on a little realized fact�a long training run, even if at a moderate pace, is still considered a hard run. Long runs deplete your carbohydrate stores and cause considerable muscle damage�definitely qualifying them as hard runs. Thus, recovery from extended distance runs is essential before you do your next hard run.

3. Don�t Be Afraid To Take A Day Of Complete Rest When Needed

Back in the 1970s, a runner in my former running club confessed to a training program where he took one rest day each week. The rest of us (in our over-trained state) openly mocked him for such unmanly behavior. However, he had the last laugh going on to represent New Zealand in many international races on the track and road. His coach obviously saw above the unbending of the fanatical Lydiard training doctrine that reigned supreme in that era, and caused many runners to over-train. His athletes shined through as a result. Now I�m a Lydiard disciple to the core, and even had the honor of having Arthur Lydiard coach me at various times in my running career. But I did notice that the majority of distance runners around me were grossly over-trained and fearful of taking any time off to allow recovery. Not allowing for recovery was simply the prevailing attitude at the time and it was almost impossible to question the Lydiard doctrine if one lived in the heart of Lydiard country (Auckland, New Zealand). The fact is, there is no one-size �fits-all training program, and many of us got caught up in the 100 miles per week mania, even if we were physically unable to handle it.

4. Only Train Hard When Your Body Is Ready To Train Hard

If you�re fatigued while training hard, your body will not adapt properly and your immune system will be impaired, making you more susceptible to any bacteria and infections. In my keener days, I�d run 100-120 miles per week often for 8 to 10 weeks and wonder why I regularly got sore throats, colds, or the flu virus of the month. This happened like clockwork about every 6-8 weeks.

5. Recovery Starts At The End Of Your Training Session�The Cool Down

A warm-down (known as cool-down in the U.S.A.) is a grossly neglected technique for speeding up your recovery. It is a phase designed to adjust your body from exercise to rest. The cool-down has many positive effects including bringing heart rate and blood pressure down to normal, preventing pooling of blood in the legs, reducing O2 from the tissues, speeding up resynthesis of waste products and metabolites that have built up during exercise, allowing the muscular system to recover after strenuous exercise, and help us psychologically unwind after our training efforts. A basic cool-down should include decreasing, light aerobic activity (such as 5-10 minutes walking) followed by some light stretching and relaxation exercise (such as yoga poses or stretches).

6. Recover From Races

The rules are simple for recovering from a race, rest or jog until you�ve recovered. This means your legs will no longer be stiff and sore, there will be no point on your muscles that are sore to the touch, and you will have regained your energy for daily activities. Cross training at a low intensity can really help with this. For example, cycling, deep water running (Calder 2004) and walking on the elliptical trainer are all non-impact aerobic activities that do not stress the legs, while maintaining your cardiovascular fitness. Avoid weight training for your legs until they are fully recovered.

7. Allow For Psychological Recovery From Racing and Training

There are many studies on the close interrelationship between over-training and under recovery, and the necessity of mental recuperation after stressful training and competition (Lehmann et al 1999). These papers examine the need for athletes to become self aware of the various mental and emotional stressors in life, as these interfere with recovery. As you might expect from your own observations of people under stress, the individual athlete�s ability to deal with these stressors vary tremendously from person to person, and thus a minor irritant to one runner may be a major problem to another (Kellmann and Kallus 1999).

8. Use A Heart Rate Monitor To Assess Recovery

The use of resting heart rate and the heart rate monitor are now commonly used to assess whether a runner is working harder than normal to achieve the same pace and distance (i.e., under recovered). Early morning heart rate should be established over several mornings upon waking up. The average should be calculated, and on ensuing mornings, if the resting heart rate is elevated by more than 5 beats/minute, it is a reasonable indicator that the runner is still recovering from the previous day�s training. The runner can also establish normal cruising pace heart rate, and when training, if this heart rate is significantly elevated, it could be a sign that the runner is incompletely recovered from the previous day. Finally, the role of over-training and under recovery needs to be discussed.

Although they are two different beasts, their end result is the same�the runner does not recover between training bouts to get maximum adaptation, and in many cases, will invite illness or injury. For a complete list of recovery strategies from overtraining, refer to my article in the June/July 2008 Running Research News (volume 24 issue 5) �Overtraining in Runners--Signs, Symptoms, and Prevention�.

These, then, are the main players in recovery�a training principle that is grossly neglected in many runners. For the coach and runner reading this, I�d remind you of one thing- recovery is NOT an optional training principle.

To keep from missing out on valuable training information sign-up for a RRNews subscription today! Keep Ahead Of The Pack

What To Do When You're Just Out Running Around

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Mon, 06 Dec 2010 00:00:00 -0600

There are days when it is nice to �free-lance� one�s interval workouts, and research carried out by Stephen Seiler and colleagues in Norway indicate that such sessions can be extremely high in
quality, even though little attention is paid to specific pace. Seiler�s research suggests that one-minute intervals produce the highest average running velocities, while four-minute intervals are linked with the topmost oxygen consumption rates; similar blood-lactate levels are achieved with both types of interval. It is probably beneficial for athletes to �mix� interval lengths during
such free-form sessions.
Almost all of us have days when we have a track workout scheduled – but we just don�t want to go. It may be that we have been to the track a little too often recently, and that the thought of running ovals gives us a distinct feeling of ennui or dread. Or it might be that even though we are highly motivated there is simply no sense in attempting our pace-based effort on the track, since wind, rain, or even ice would make it impossible to maintain a planned velocity. In such cases, is there an alternative workout which would provide benefits similar to the projected track session?

If we decided to run somewhere else, in a place at which we really enjoy running, could we give big boosts to vVO2max, lactate threshold, economy, and speed – the kind of booster shots that the track running would have furnished, even if we don�t actually run at a specific pace?

Thanks to research carried out by Stephen Seiler and Jarl Espen Sjursen from the Department of Health and Sport at Agder University College in Kristiansand, Norway, we know that the answer to these questions is a resounding �yes.� In the Seiler-Sjursen investigation, runners were able to conduct great interval workouts even when they did not attempt to run at specific paces (1).

12 athletes (nine males and three females) from a Kristiansand running club participated in the study; all trained regularly, competed in races, and carried out interval training routinely. The runners had been training for at least four years prior to the onset of the investigation and averaged 5.4 workouts per week, with two weekly interval sessions. When the study began, the athletes were tested for ventilatory threshold (a surrogate for lactate threshold), maximal heart rate, VO2max, vVO2max, and peak blood-lactate concentration.

Average age of the subjects was 28 years, VO2max rested at a nifty 65 ml kg-1min-1, vVO2max was a not-shabby 19.7 km/hour (5.47 meters per second, or 73 seconds per 400 meters), and lactate threshold settled for approximately 84 percent of VO2max.

During the four consecutive weeks following this initial testing, each athlete performed a �self-paced� interval workout on a laboratory treadmill once a week as a replacement for one of his/her usual interval sessions. No running velocity was specified for these lab treadmill sessions; each athlete was simply instructed to run as well as he could.

Work-interval length was tightly controlled, however, and was set at one, two, four, or six minutes, depending on the workout. The work-to-rest ratio was set at 1:1, so that recovery intervals were always equal in time duration to the work intervals, and the total amount of quality running carried out per workout was fixed at 24 minutes.

Thus, during one week the athletes would run 24 X 1 minute, with 1-minute recoveries; during another they would perform 12 X 2 minutes, with 2-minute recoveries. Within yet another week, the runners would hit 6 X 4 minutes (4-minute recoveries), and they would also complete a session with 4 X 6 minutes (6- minute recoveries). These workouts were performed in random order over the four week period. As mentioned, the athletes attempted to maintain the highest average running velocity they could across the full set of work bouts within each interval session,
although no specific velocity was called for. Just as the athletes selected their own intensity for each work interval, they were also free to choose their running pace during the recovery intervals.

The study was carried out during the early precompetition phase of training (from mid-February through early March), and the subjects were instructed to refrain from hard training on the day prior to the self paced interval sessions.

As you might expect, several of the runners underestimated their sustainable velocity during the initial work intervals, apparently in an attempt to make sure there was �still something in the tank� for the last intervals of the workout. When the average running velocity of the first four
minutes of quality running were compared with the mean velocity over the last four minutes of the sessions (minutes 21 through 24), the upward swing in actual velocity averaged 5 percent, 4 percent, 4 percent, and 1.5 percent for the one-, two-, four-, and six-minute work durations,
respectively.

The goal of the research, of course, was to see whether the resulting workouts would be high-quality – and also to determine whether specific work interval lengths would produce better workouts when athletes were free to choose their own intensities.

There was little question that the self-paced workouts were high-quality. All four sessions, for example, shot lactate levels up to nearly 5 mmol/Liter and crested heart rate at over 90 percent of maximum during the work intervals.

There were, however, some very interesting differences between the sessions. For example, the peak rate of oxygen consumption reached during the work intervals was highest for the two-, four-, and six-minute intervals, compared with one-minute surging; VO2peak reached 92 to 93 percent of VO2max with the former work-interval lengths, versus just 82 percent of VO2max for the one minute work intervals. Six of the 12 runners reached their highest level of oxygen consumption during the four-minute work-interval session. Perhaps surprisingly, however, average oxygen consumption for the entire workout was absolutely equivalent between the four sessions!

The reason for this was that oxygen consumption during recovery was significantly lower for the two-, four-, and six-minute workouts, compared with the one-minute affairs. Essentially, oxygen consumption rate dipped to as low as 26 percent of VO2max during the two-, four-, and six-minute recoveries but slipped to only 46 percent of max with the one minute recoveries. In effect, oxygen consumption rate was lower during the work intervals for the one-minute-work interval session, compared with the two-, four-, and six-minute intervals, but oxygen consumption rate was greater during the recoveries for the one-minute-work interval session, compared with two-, four-, and six-minute recoveries.

This balanced out and left the one-minute intervals in the same average overall oxygen consumption bag as the longer intervals. Blood-lactate levels and ratings of perceived exertion
were virtually identical for the four different workouts, but there were very interesting differences in running speed. Specifically, the athletes ran fastest of all when the work-interval lengths were set at one minute, a little slower when the interval durations were two minutes, slower still at four minutes, and slowest of all with the six-minute intervals.

Before we continue this discussion of speed, we should perhaps answer the question which just
popped into your mind: If the athletes were running more slowly with the two-, four-, and six minute intervals (compared with the one minute blasts), how could peak oxygen-consumption rate be higher with those intervals, compared with the one-minute jobs? Are not running speed and oxygen consumption rate correlated?

Indeed they are, but time plays a role here, too. That is, when you run at a specific pace, it takes awhile for oxygen consumption rate to rise to the topmost level associated with that pace. One minute is not long enough for the rise to be completed, which is why one-minute intervals were associated with more modest mountain-tops of O2 consumption. Two minutes, on the other hand, usually do provide adequate time for oxygen intaking to reach its apex. Thus, as you can see, you could run very fast for one minute and yet never take in oxygen at as high a rate as the
fellow/gal running more slowly – but for two, four, or six minutes at a time; the latter intervals allow more time for oxygen to �climb the ladder.�

As mentioned, athletes ran fastest with the one-minute intervals, which is not so surprising. Runners are more likely to �give it all they�ve got� when they know that the torture will be over in one minute, compared with two, four, or six minutes of potential agony. There is definitely a tendency to explore higher speeds when a runner knows that top-end sizzling will only have to last for 60 seconds. As a result, the one-minute intervals were performed at an average speed of 113 percent of vVO2max, while the two went down with 107 percent of vVO2max, the fours called up 105 percent, and the six-minute big boys got 102 percent of vVO2max.

Were all of the workouts high-quality? Absolutely! If you went to a park, the beach, or a forest trail and ran 24 X 1, 12 X 2, 6 X 4, or 4 X 6, while attempting to run as well as you could, would you get a great workout? Of course! Is one workout �better� than the others? This depends on what you are trying to accomplish.

If you want a workout which pushes your oxygenutilization system to the edge, it would appear that the two-, four-, and six-minute work-interval lengths would be ideal (and perhaps especially the four-minute intervals, since they prodded half of the athletes to reach their utmost oxygen grabbing), compared with the one-minute saunterings. This would appear to be particularly true since the recovery intensities employed by the 12 athletes in this Norwegian study were extraordinarily light – settling at just 26 to 31 percent of VO2max during the two-, four-, and six-minute workouts.

Ordinarily, a reasonable athlete can maintain at least 50 percent of VO2max during a recovery period, and if that had been the case in this study the waves of oxygen consumption for the two-, four-, and six minute-interval workouts might have been even higher (the one-minute intervallers did manage to get O2 consumption up to a typical 46 percent of VO2max during their recoveries). In addition, it is important to note that rambling continuously in a quality way for four to six minutes at a time is more like a race situation, compared to a one-minute, on-off pattern. Thus, the longer intervals are more specific to racing, too.

However, also note that the one-minute intervals do offer a key advantage – the opportunity to run faster. Running more quickly during workouts will have a superior effect on maximal running velocity, which is a good predictor of performance in events ranging from 800 meters all the way up to the half-marathon. Running more speedily should also have a better impact on running economy at high speed and thus might provide more of a nudge for vVO2max, compared with the longer-interval workouts, even though the latter seem to feature higher peak oxygen-consumption rates.

Of course, there is nothing at all to stop you from mixing the different kinds of intervals within your self-paced workouts. For example, you might roll through 12 X 1 minutes, very fast, while you are feeling pretty fresh, and then settle down for 3 X 4 minutes, not quite so fast but still pushing it. This would really mimic a race situation, in which you must sustain a challenging
pace on a more-continuous basis, even though you are experiencing a lot of fatigue. You could get creative, too, having fun with a workout consisting of 4 X 1, then 3 X 2, then 2 X 4, and then finally 1 X 6 in sequence, with equal recoveries throughout.

The Kristiansand research revealed some interesting things about the heart-rate response to interval training. For example, the peak heart rate reached during each work interval
inched up over the course of a workout, usually edging up by about five beats per minute from the first work interval to the last.

What was much more significant, however, was the upward trend in end-recovery heart rate (the heart rate observed at the end of each recovery period) over the course of the sessions. In fact, end recovery heart rate was often 25 beats per minute higher at the end of the recovery period which was just prior to the last work interval of a session, compared with the first recovery period of a workout. This was true even though recovery oxygen consumption rate and even blood-lactate level remained stable over the course of the sessions. In effect, recovery heart rate did not seem to be tightly connected to recovery processes at the muscular level, and thus the practice of using heart-rate recovery as a guide for deciding when to begin a subsequent work interval appears to have a shaky foundation. Yet, we still have coaches who advocate beginning work intervals when heart rate reaches 120 (or some other magical figure) during recovery.

So, what should you do if you can�t – or won�t – go to the track on a certain day? Simply have fun! Warm up thoroughly, and then – in a place where you really enjoy running -perform a self-paced workout, selecting the work-interval lengths according to your preference and goals. You may not be able to finish 24 minutes of quality running during your first self-paced stab, depending on your fitness and experience; if not, you can gradually work up to this amount of quality running per session (and slightly more, if your fitness warrants).

If you want to work on speed, skew things toward the one-minute intervals; if you want to stress oxygen consumption and 5- or 10-K-type paces, bias the workout toward four- and six-minute intervals. A key thing to remember is that you will have a great workout – no matter what work-interval duration you select. You can simply have fun with the session, relaxing yet pushing yourself to run quickly – and without any specific worries about the actual pace you are maintaining. The result will certainly be higher fitness; in this Norwegian study, the athletes increased the total distance they could run at a hard pace until exhaustion was reached by a full 5 percent, simply by replacing four of their typical interval workouts with the self-paced interval sessions. Pick-Up Your Copy Now

How Do Female Runners Push Lactate Threshold Speed Closer To VO2MAX?

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Wed, 17 Nov 2010 00:00:00 -0600

I HAVE A LONG-TERM INTEREST in lactate threshold, lactate-threshold training, and in the way in which lactate-threshold speed determines the quality of endurance performances; the book, Lactate Lift-Off, addressed these topics (1). So, I am very interested in research which has recently emerged from Spain, in which researchers from the Department of Research and Development at the Athletic Club of Bilbao compared the physiological characteristics of 17 highly trained male runners with those of 11 equally well-trained female harriers (2). All 28 of these runners were tested for maximal aerobic capacity (VO2max), running velocity corresponding with a blood-lactate concentration of 4 mmol/liter, lactate-threshold speed, the energetic cost of running, and the running velocity corresponding with maximal aerobic capacity (vVO2max).

As you might expect, the Spaniards found that the male runners had higher max aerobic capacities, higher running speeds at VO2max, and higher lactate threshold speeds. These comparisons are not �fair� ones, however, since males typically enjoy higher blood-hemoglobin concentrations and lower percent body- fat readings, compared with females. These edges naturally give males higher aerobic capacities and loftier speeds at lactate threshold.

A much-more interesting comparison involves the degree to which male and female runners can push their lactate thresholds up toward VO2max; the greater the extent of this pushing, the better the running performance. For example, novice runners often hit lactate-threshold speed (defined as the velocity above which lactate begins to accumulate in the blood) at a modest intensity of just 60 percent of VO2max. In contrast, many well-trained runners do not reach lactate threshold until they rise to 85 to 87 percent of VO2max, and some Kenyan-runners� threshold readings have soared to 92 percent of max aerobic capacity. These are important considerations from a performance stand point, because muscular fatigue seems to increase dramatically above lactate-threshold intensity, while remaining more manageable below the threshold.

Do experienced female runners compensate somewhat for their lower VO2maxs, less-hefty hemoglobin�s, and slightly enhanced fatty tissue by narrowing the gap between lactate threshold and VO2max to a greater extent, compared with males? The Spanish research indicates that they do: The competitive female runners in the Bilbao study attained a higher percent VO2max at both lactate-threshold speed and at 4 mmol/liter blood-lactate concentrations, in comparison with the seasoned males.

What remains is to find out why this is so. Do the muscles of female runners respond to their slighter inflows of oxygen (compared with male oxygen floods) by becoming more efficient at utilizing oxygen to break down lactate, or perhaps by getting better at pulling lactate out of the blood so that it can be processed to provide the fuel for running? Or, were the Spanish women simply training in ways which fostered greater improvements in lactate threshold, compared with the male training techniques?

Once we can answer these questions, we should have a better understanding of how to narrow the gap between lactate threshold and VO2max � we should comprehend the techniques which are best for pushing lactate-threshold velocity as close as possible to vVO2max. In the meantime, it is comforting to know that any running workout conducted at 10-K pace or faster is a powerful stimulus for lactate-threshold improvement, since it upgrades the ability of muscle cells to break down lactate for energy � and also enhances their capacity to remove lactate from the blood. Become A Faster Runner

Off-Season Conditioning For Runners

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 00:00:00 -0600

Have you thought about your winter training yet? If not, keep in mind there isn�t a magic plan. If you want to improve your running, you should follow an off-season conditioning program. Most important you�ll want to stick with it, and it�s not unheard of to bang out your best 10K time in the first spring road race, around April or May. This, of course, can be a motivating factor that spurred you on even more to train longer and harder.

I suspect that far too many recreational and semi-serious runners, marathoners, triathletes, and ultra runners regard the short, dark, rainy winter days as an excuse to take it easy. This makes their attempts to regain their previous hard-earned fitness so much more of an uphill struggle and wastes a lot of time. Conversely, if runners can improve their fitness during the winter months there is no reason why they should not have their best ever season the following year.

The winter months should be seen as a time when you put in as much conditioning work as you can comfortably handle, without getting sick, injured, causing a divorce, or having your kids fail to recognize you because you�re always out on the roads or at the gym.

With the winter months looming up, it�s time to establish a concrete plan and set some goals for your winter conditioning program. Here�s some advice that will help you achieve these.

The Goals of Your conditioning Program

Improving your distance running is all about learning to delay fatigue while maintaining a higher wattage for a longer period of time while running. Your conditioning goals is thus to lay a foundation for the higher intensity training to follow. The better conditioned you are, the better you can handle the anaerobic training that follows, and recover from it faster. The key is simply running time on your feet.

Fitness Element

Goal

Aerobic Fitness

Develop your cardiovascular endurance enough to sustain running for hours at a time by exercising the aerobic pathway energy system.

Muscular Strength and Power

Have enough strength to provide a reserve for faster running that will follow such as interval training, repetition training, hill sprinting, etc.

Balance between the Major Muscle Groups

Prevent one muscle group overpowering its opposing group, which leads to injuries. Also, ensure you are exercising the muscle groups used while running.

Strengthen your Core Musculature

Maintain your posture when running for hours, without fatiguing. Prevent low back pain.

Minimizing your Injury Risk

Have your muscles in optimal condition to reduce incidence of muscle strains and delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS)

Aerobic Conditioning

Running for sustained time periods requires a high level of stamina. We call this cardiovascular or aerobic endurance. Many adaptations happen with aerobic training; increased capillary beds that deliver more oxygenated blood to your working muscles, increased proliferation of mitochondria to process your ATP, an increased oxygen uptake that enables you to distribute more oxygen, maximizing your use of slow and fast twitch muscle fibers for long cruising, and learning to burn your carbohydrate and fats more efficiently as fuel. The combined effect of these is to enable you to resist fatigue for longer.

Flexibility

Recent research shows that flexibility may not be the panacea it is claimed to be in terms of injury prevention, reducing post exercise muscle soreness, and improving sports performance. Many exercise scientists now believe that having a stronger, less flexible musculature enables you to develop more power in your movements, Vs over-flexible muscle groups that resist high force movements less efficiently, and are thus more prone to injury.

Nevertheless, I�m not giving you absolution to ignore basic stretching of the muscle groups you use when running. You should do a few stretches for your back, shoulders, hamstrings, quadriceps, calf muscles, hip flexors, buttocks, and arms, especially after finishing each workout. The goal of your stretching is to prevent a further reduction in the range of motion about your joints that may come from strength training and aerobic activity. You do need a reasonably lengthy range of motion while running.

It�s important to keep up several days of running each week, including at least one long run. Winter is also a great time to introduce some cross-training into your program. How and when you do this running and cross-training is your choice. Some runners cut back their outside running and hit the treadmills, bikes, elliptical trainers, stair machines, swimming pools, etc, at their nearest fitness club. Others bite the bullet, throw on the Gore-Tex, and slog through the rain and wind out on the roads every morning or night (wearing their reflecting vests, I hope!). At least in winter, you won�t have to deal with the overheating problems that you experience in summer.

There are five distinct phases that you should be following in your overall training program to improve your distance running. They are base building (aka conditioning), strength building, speed building, tapering for your races, and recovery. In your winter conditioning program you�ll be focusing on base building and strength building.

RRNews takes a different approach from many coaches in the conditioning phase because we include strength training in the conditioning program. We also strongly recommend that runners do at least one faster run each week to keep their leg speed and neuromuscular coordination up, work on their anaerobic capacity, further increase their VO2 max, and the myriad other improvements that fast paced running endows you with.

How long should your conditioning phase last? For recreational and semi-serious runners I�d recommend a solid three months. A good time to start this is in November, December, or January at the latest. And how many days should you be training? As many as you can squeeze in given your time, personal, and energy constraints.

Programming Rest and Recovery into Your Conditioning Program

Gradually increase your weekly mileage and the distance of your long run. Avoid racing during your conditioning phase. Every third or fourth week, you�ll need an easier week where you do less volume than the previous three weeks, to allow your body to adjust to the high volume of training. Simply cut 20-30 minutes off every training run or cross-training effort.

A Typical Weekly Running and Conditioning Schedule for Runners

Day

Workout

Monday

Recovery Day: short run (30-45 minutes slow) or aerobic cross-training

Tuesday

Strength Training or aerobic Cross-Training or Core Training

Wednesday

Faster paced run: can be fartlek, intervals, hill repeats, or tempo run.

Thursday

Recovery Day: short run (30-45 minutes slow) or Aerobic Cross-Training or Core Training

Friday

Rest Day No Training

Saturday

Long Run-1.5-2 hours steady pace.

Sunday

Medium distance run-1-1.5 hours steady pace

Muscular Strength/Power

We no longer believe that running alone is enough adequate conditioning for the sport. Running is hard work. The essence of resistance training is to train your muscle groups to deliver more force, or power, with each stride, by overcoming the resistance more efficiently. The stronger your muscles, the larger the range (or reserve) will be between your cruising and maximal efforts when running, which translates into cruising at a lower percentage of your maximum effort for a longer time.

Physiological benefits of resistance training include increasing the size of your fast twitch muscle fibers and motor units, improved neuromuscular coordination and thus better muscle fiber recruitment, greater resistance to muscular fatigue, greater storage of intramuscular energy stores such as glycogen and Creatine Phosphate, a lower risk of injury, and a faster metabolism.

The following split workout strength training program allows for balance between muscle groups while focusing on the major muscle groups, the legs, buttocks, back, core, shoulders, and arms, used while running. Few sports activities place such repetitive stress on the leg musculature as running, so that�s primarily where we concentrate our strength training efforts.

What muscles should you be strengthening and stretching?

Body Area

Muscles Involved

Legs/hips

Gluteals, hamstrings, quadriceps, calf.

Back

Latissimus dorsi, rhomboids, and the trapezius

Core

Rectus abdominus, obliques, and the spinal erectors.

Chest and shoulders

Pectorals and the deltoids

Arms

Biceps, triceps, and the muscles of the hand, wrist and forearms.

Designing Your Off-Season Conditioning Program

This program should be followed for 10-12 weeks. The strength training workout can be done 2-3 days each week, with at least one rest day between each session. If you are very fatigued and sore after this workout, split it into two workouts, and allow two days rest between each session.

Start with one set of 10-12 repetitions of each set for 2-3 weeks until you are comfortable with the exercises. Then from weeks 4-6, do two sets of each exercise. From weeks 7-12 do 3 sets of each exercise. If you are already an experienced weight trainer, start in at 2-3 sets of each exercise.

Start your resistance-training program gradually, especially if you have not done weights before. Beginners should enlist the aid of a personal trainer to ensure they do the exercises with good form.

Because our programs emphasizes running-specific strengthening, outstanding recovery, and moderate total mileage levels, your risk of injury is low. In case an Achilles tendon, a plantar fascia, a knee, or some other portion of your anatomy does begin to complain as your training proceeds, however, here are some tips to follow which will help you get over the injury and continue with your schedule: Training

(1) If you experience any pain at all while running, stop your workout immediately.

(2) Recover (with rest) until the symptoms are no longer present while running, and then continue with your schedule.

(3) If you need more than a day or two to recover from an injury, substitute bike workouts for the running sessions (provided the bike sessions do not aggravate the injured area). Use intensities and time durations on the bike which are similar to the ones associated with the scheduled running workouts.

(4) If you are experiencing significant tightness, please be certain to thoroughly stretch out the tight area after all of your workouts. Training

after all of your workouts. Training

Warning Signs of Running Injury, and Coming Back from Injury

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Sun, 10 Oct 2010 00:00:00 -0500

Research has identified that the best predictors of injury are weekly mileage, consecutive days of running, and history of previous injuries (Macera et. al. 1989). Moreover, half of all injuries can be traced back to a previous injury in the same area (Macera et. al. 1989). Interesting enough, Ven Mechelen et. al. (1993) found that the average runner could expect to be injured once every 150-200 hours of running.

Most running injuries can be tracked to one cause or a combination of causes, such as overtraining, poor flexibility, low strength, running surface, physical trauma, and running shoes. The list of culprits is endless, for example: 1) from doing too much running too soon after an injury, running too often, running too fast and too hard, and insufficient rest between workouts; 2) overstretching and running fast without adequate warm up, 3) running on uneven surfaces, slanted or curved roads, and hard surfaces like concrete or tarseal roads; 4) improper shoe choice (running in shoes made for other sports) to running excessive mileage without changing running shoes frequently, and 5) trauma such as tripping, falling or twisting your ankle. Moreover, poor running biomechanics, combined with any of the above is often enough to cause injury.

What pain is ok for runners?

It�s often difficult to discern between the general muscle soreness experienced after a workout, and the beginnings of an injury. Typically, if the discomfort dissipates a day or so after the training run, or disappears after 10 minutes� running, it�s fine to run. However, some injuries creep up on us slowly, getting progressively worse over days, weeks, or even months, while other injuries are immediately evident. Pay attention to both types.

General guidelines for warning signs of Injury

If you notice any of the following, you�re on the injury train, so be prepared to slow down and stop running.

� Reduced range of motion about the joint, compared with the other side.
� Swelling, especially around the joint or on a muscle; when checking for swelling (by comparing the affected area with the non-affected area) feel for heat and look for redness in the area.
� Affected muscle does not generate as much force as its opposing counterpart. This can be difficult to measure, but if you attempt to lift weight on one leg and you cannot lift the same weight as easily on the other leg, or if it feels painful when contracting, you have an injury.
� Numbness or tingling sensation in a body region may indicate nerve compression; these can be serious, so see your sports medicine physician immediately.
When you feel pain, take notice and heed these warning signs of impending injury:
� Pain and discomfort at the beginning of the run that becomes worse as you continue to run.
� Pain that forces you to alter (shorten) your stride or limp.
� Pain that you feel coming on after a few minutes of running and continues at a low nagging level.
� Pain that stops you running or walking.
� Pain that persists after you stop running.
� Pain that persists during and interferes with normal daily activities.
� Pain when you walk up stairs or uphill.
� Pain or stiffness especially in the mornings or after rest.
� Pain that continues for more than a day or two, worsens, and does not get better.
� Pain and tenderness in one particular spot on a bone, muscle or joint that you can actually feel with your fingertips. You can check this by feeling the same spot on the other side of the body�if there is no pain you probably have an injury.
� If you need to take anti-inflammatory or painkilling medications such as aspirin, ibuprofen, or Tylenol.
� Dull, aching, sharp, or severe pain that keeps you awake at night.
� Pain in the joints of ankle, knee or hip.

Most common injuries with symptoms

Plantar Fasciitis- A sharp stab or deep aching underneath your foot, from the heel to the arch. It will hurt a lot first thing in the morning when you walk around, or after you�ve been sitting for a long time.

Iliotibial Band Syndrome- Pain on the outside of the knee or when you bend it at a 45-degree angle, or at the hip.

Runner�s Knee- Tenderness behind or around the patella, usually around the center of the kneecap. Pain increases when sitting with knees bent for a long period of time, or when climbing stairs or running uphill.

Shin Splints- Tenderness, soreness, or pain along the inside of your calf region and beside the shin. This can also be a dull, deep, aching pain and usually happens only when you�re running.

Achilles Tendonitis- Dull or sharp pain anywhere along your Achilles tendon, but usually close to the heel. You�ll usually feel pain when squeezing the Achilles tendon in the affected area, and may sometime feel lumps or nodules along the tendon.

Coming back from running injuries

If any of the warning signs for impending injury appear, it�s time to take some action to minimize the damage. Above all, make sure you don�t make things worse, so stop running!

You need to begin self-treatment immediately. Here�s where most runners lose the plot�they wait for the injury to heal by itself, by stopping training and hoping things will work out ok. The injury usually settles down with complete rest, but there is a 50% chance that it will recur again (Macera et. al. 1989). Leaving an injury to heal itself usually results in a mass of scar tissue building up in the affected area, which causes problems later. Here�s what you should do.

Self-management of your running injury

� Rest! DO NOT RACE.
� Ice the area for 10-15 minutes, several times per day (minimum 2-3 times) for the first 3 days. Never apply heat to a new injury.
� Compress the area firmly with a bandage (but not tight enough to stop blood flow to the area).
� Elevate the area above the level of your heart when you sleep. Reducing the blood flow to the area minimizes inflammation and swelling.
� Stretch the affected area gently if there is no pain.

If the injury is not severe enough to stop your running, you must modify your training. Here�s how:

Frequency of running- Cut back to running every second day (or cut your frequency of running days per week by 50%). Avoid running on consecutive days (Macera et. al. 1989).
Duration (length) of your training runs- Reduce your distance by 50%. Initially, try jogging very slowly for 5-10 minutes.

Running intensity (speed)- Cut back on your running intensity by 1-2 minutes per mile slower than your normal training pace, or walk if running causes pain.

Running surface and terrain- Jog on a soft level surface like grass or dirt trails. Avoid uphill and downhill running, and on hard surfaces.

Post training- Always ice the affected area after you run. Gently stretch the affected area with one or two stretches. Hold each stretch for 15-30 seconds. Check your running shoes for excessive wear, and to be safe purchase a new pair.

By doing these steps, there�s a good chance your injury will turn around within a week or two so you can gradually start to increase your running again. This is where you must develop a sense for your limits by listening closely to what your body is telling you. For example, if your injury starts getting sore around 3 miles, then keep your running to 2 miles. You alone can determine how much running is safely within your limits.

A good indicator that you are recovering from your injury is how the affected area feels in the mornings. If there is no pain in the affected area in the morning or during your training efforts, you can slowly build your running backup to where you were. However, if it�s stiff, sore, and has you hobbling around in the mornings, you may have to take the next step.

Still not getting better?

If, after a few days or a week, your pain and swelling have still not receded with the therapeutic measures, it�s time to visit your sports medicine physician. The doctor will diagnose your injury and advise you on whether you need to stop running and take anti-inflammatory medications. Your physician may also determine whether you need physical therapy (PT) treatment.

Physical therapists have seen your injury before in hundreds of other limping runners, so listen closely to their advice, and when they prescribe some home exercises for you, do them. Following an in-home program will help turn your injury around very quickly. Your PT will also perform some other magic on your injury with various modalities including ice, heat, electric stimulation, ultrasound, massage, and mobilization exercises.

Another specialist you might consider seeing is a podiatrist to see if you need some form of orthotic foot support to address any biomechanical idiosyncrasies of your running style. If your friends have commented that you pronate a lot when you run, this may be just what you need to stay injury free while running.

You also need to be aware that feelings of hopelessness and frustration may overcome the runner with enforced time off from running. Often the runner will completely stop all exercise.

This practice is highly counterproductive�stopping training completely causes a dramatic reduction in VO2 max (your ability to process oxygen) and will therefore cost you many weeks of slogging to regain lost fitness (Coyle et. al. 1984). But take heart, because many research studies have found (if your training was done correctly) that reduced training shows almost no reduction in fitness for periods of 1-15 weeks. In fact, Brynteson et. al. (1973) found that when intensity of training remains unchanged, VO2 max is maintained for 15 weeks, even when frequency and duration of training are reduced by as much as two thirds. Houmard et. al. (1989) demonstrated that when frequency and duration of training are kept constant and intensity is reduced by one third or two thirds, VO2 max is significantly reduced. What this means is that you can train fewer days per week, with shorter sessions�and as long as you train hard�you won�t lose any fitness.

Clearly, if you�ve been instructed not to run by your physician you�re going to have to make some choices about other types of cardio-respiratory exercise you do. This is a good time to do some cross training. Performing other exercises has the added benefit of developing parts of your body that are neglected by running. Other types of cardio-respiratory exercise include swimming or walking, or some of the non-impact equipment in your local fitness club, such as the elliptical trainer, stationary bike, or rowing machine. Remember, to maintain your fitness you�ll need to exercise at a high intensity, so aim to get your heart rate above 80% of your estimated maximal heart rate. This is difficult with stationary cycling as you will most likely suffer from localized muscle fatigue in your legs before you can get your heart rate up close to your normal running heart rate. This is OK and to be expected. You�ll still get a great workout from cycling. While trying these other exercises, monitor your pain levels to make sure they are not aggravating the injury. If you feel pain, try a different activity. You can continue with your strength-training program while injured as long as you avoid exercising the affected area.

If you haven�t done any resistance training previously, this would be a great time to start strengthening the rest of your body. For more information about cross training, refer to the article in Running Research News volume 24 issue 9.

Deep water running

If you want to try an interesting activity that simulates running, and is unlikely to aggravate your injury, try deep water running in your local swimming pool. It is especially helpful for runners suffering from stress fractures where most activities tend to aggravate the symptoms. Deep water running is done wearing a flotation vest, and really works your legs, trunk, arms, and cardiovascular system. You can simulate interval workouts, long steady workouts, and everything in between with deepwater running.

Research on this alternative non-impact running mode is very promising. Several studies show that deep water running can be used to maintain fitness. Florida State University researchers had one group of well trained male runners do deep water running for 6 weeks, while another group continued with their regular running program at the same time (Wilber et. al. 1996). The deep water running group maintained their VO2 max, lactate threshold, and running economy for the six weeks of water running. Another study at Brigham Young University found that 2-mile run times were maintained after 6 weeks of deep water running (Eyestone et. al. 1993). This was confirmed by a study at the University of Toledo, where trained runners who did 5-6 sessions of deep water running for 4 weeks had no change in their 5 km times, VO2 max, lactate threshold, and running economy (Bushman et. al. 1997).

Deep water running technique

Wearing a flotation belt around your waist, jump in the deep end of the swimming pool. Simulate your running style in the water. At first it feels uncoordinated because you�re learning a new skill, and establishing your correct posture. If you lean forward slightly you can actually run forward, while if you remain upright you�ll run on the spot. Either works. Some runners like to do laps so they can measure their progress. You will notice that your leg turnover is not nearly as fast as when running on dry land, because the water slows your movements. You will not be able to get your heart rate up as high as you can when running.

Research done at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm concluded that heart rate during deep water running heart rate is about 10% lower than dry land running. So to get full benefits of this technique, you�ll need to push yourself hard.

Deep water interval training

Interval workouts seem to be particularly effective with deep water running. Here are two sample interval workouts that you can try.

Deep Water Running Workout #1

� 5 minute warm up.
� 1 minute fast, 1 minute easy
� 2 minutes hard, 1 minute easy
� 3 minutes hard, 1 minute easy
� 4 minutes hard, 1 minute easy
� 3 minutes hard, 1 minute easy
� 2 minutes hard, 1 minute easy
� 1 minute hard, 1 minute easy

Deep Water Running Workout #2

� 6 x 3 minutes hard with 1 minute recover
� Do 2 sets

Some mistakes to avoid when returning to running

A common mistake is for the runner to rush back into his training program to try and make up for the missed running. Never try to catch up on lost training days, as it is likely to aggravate the injury again.

When on the comeback trail your body is composed of many different systems, all integrated at different levels. Ideally they act as a smoothly functioning unit, but when you are deconditioned or injured, and starting up again, some systems are more out of condition than others. For example, you may notice your respiratory system (breathing) returns to condition faster than your muscular system (leg muscles). Here, you need to be patient and wait until the slowest adapting systems catch up with the faster adjusting ones.

Rehab is an important part of coming back from an injury. But one mistake and you�re back on the injury list, chafing at the bit to get back out on the roads. The canny runner listens closely to his body and adjusts his workouts accordingly. Pain sends a clear message that our tissue has temporarily reached its limit. Ignoring this message inevitably ends in re-injury, so heed the messages your body is sending and take it slowly.

Training mistakes and warning signs of injury that Fiona ignored

1. Kept the same running shoes for more than 6 months, while doing high mileage.
2. Increased weekly mileage too quickly.
3. Ignored tightness in calf muscle.
4. Did not slow down her training runs while increasing her mileage.
5. Did not warm up at beginning of training runs.
6. Continued to speed up her training runs.
7. Kept running on calf muscle as it started cramping.

Have You Gone Mental?

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Fri, 10 Sep 2010 00:00:00 -0500

Race day has come and gone. In preparation for this race you grew tired of seeing lane lines in the pool months ago, explored hundreds of miles of rural Michigan roads on your new bike, and nearly gave yourself iliotibial (IT) band syndrome (see Box 1) by running 40 miles per week. In short, your training was spot on and you were physically prepared for the race. You had all the go-fast gear to cut those precious seconds off your splits. Unfortunately, the race didn�t go as well as you had hoped. Perhaps race-day weather was less than optimal. Perhaps you didn�t get as much sleep as you wanted in the days leading up to the race. Perhaps your nutrition strategy (pre- and/or during race) left you with an illuminated �empty� sign for a decent portion of the race. Perhaps you hadn�t considered what it would be like to race by yourself, no training partners, left with only your own thoughts. This is a common problem affecting many endurance athletes: lack of mental preparedness.
While endurance sports such as marathons and triathlons can be extremely physically demanding, there is another aspect of training often overlooked by many athletes: mental training. Mental fatigue, anxiety, doubt, etc. can cause athletes of all abilities to lose focus and miss their chance at a personal record or simply crossing the finish line. Mental outlook and preparedness is extremely important in a race and in a training session, no matter the distance. While a DNF (did not finish) or slow race is always an unfortunate outcome on race day, it is slightly more comforting when the underlying cause of this disappointment is out of our own control (i.e. flat tire or wardrobe malfunction). The good news is that mental preparedness can be controlled and, in fact, improved by any and all athletes. However, this is something that must be practiced, like anything else.

Based on my own observations, it seems that most marathon runners and triathletes train with a partner, a local club and/or a team. Training with other people can definitely help to attain certain endurance and/or speed goals. Time in the saddle and time spent running go by much faster when there is someone to talk to. Many athletes will even tell you that regardless of whether or not they talk to their training partner, it helps just knowing that someone else is there �sharing the burden.� Although training in pairs or groups has its obvious benefits, training alone is equally important though the reasons may not be as apparent. In my opinion, many athletes chose to swim, bike and/or run with others because long hours in the pool, biking on rural country roads, or running on the trails can get lonely. Sure, the iPod can help dull the pain (mild discomfort as I like to call it) on those long run sessions, but it�s no substitute for a training buddy. For me, it�s generally the beginning of a long training session that is hard to get through. Just knowing that I will be out on the road for an extended period of time is tough, especially when I�m only 5 or 10 minutes in. Even worse though is that point where I�m ¾ done with a workout and doubt wants to creep in. This is the point you meet your �other self.� This person is full of doubt, questions your ability and wants to give up and take it easy the rest of the way home. Your �other self� usually only shows up when you�re alone so the only way to overcome this person is to train alone. However, your �other self� may also show up on race day despite all the other people participating in the same race. It�s amazing that you can feel lonely despite being surrounded by thousands of people. Hence, the importance of ignoring or defeating this person becomes clear. The question then becomes, �How can I defeat this sense of doubt and keep it from affecting my race?� The answer is surprisingly simple. You have to prove the �other self� wrong. There are a few ways to do this.

One of the biggest causes for concern, and self doubt, on race day (or training day for that matter) is the weather. Granted, there is nothing anyone can do about the weather but we still worry about it. We check the weather daily, perhaps hourly, during race week. I admit that I�ve been guilty of rearranging my training schedule to avoid outdoor training on an unusually harsh day. And I always hope for calm, sunny, warm race days. While it�s true that the months of May through October (aka race season) are typically warm and somewhat sunny, this does not mean that your race day will follow suit, especially in Michigan! The point is that we must train in all sorts of conditions. Running in the rain is generally not very fun and can even be a bit unpleasant. However, when you run into the same conditions on race day, the same conditions won�t seem so daunting. Experiencing various weather conditions in your training and therefore knowing what to expect on race day, will go a long way towards quieting that �other self.� And let�s face it, sometimes it IS fun to run in the rain. So get out there and have some fun regardless of the conditions.

Advice 1: Train in all sorts of environmental conditions so that poor conditions are not as daunting.

Then, the next time you wake up to a cold and wet race morning you�ll have the confidence to get out the door expecting to have a better race than most. You will plan to have a good race, no matter the conditions.

Even in the best weather most, if not all, athletes have �bonked� at some point or another, whether in a training session or in a race. This is not only physically debilitating, but it also has the potential to destroy your mental outlook for a race. Of course, the easiest way to avoid this potential pitfall is to have a sound nutrition plan. However, sometimes the best laid plans do not pan out and we have to deal with some fatigue. �Bonking� or experiencing feelings of extreme fatigue will surely make that �other self� show up and question your abilities. So how do we deal with it? The first step in combating this problem is consistent training. Set up a schedule or training plan and stick to it. Don�t skip training days just because it�s Monday and you don�t feel like training. And don�t avoid training simply because you feel a little tired. Am I telling you �never miss a training session�? No, this is definitely not the case. In some instances you may do better to take a day off, especially after a long and strenuous training week. It was been suggested that training on a low fuel tank can actually be beneficial to an athlete. That said, I do not condone heading out for a training session without properly fueling! In fact, I always stress proper nutrition to all my athletes. However, on a particularly long run you may find yourself �out of gas� and you�re still a couple miles from home! The most important thing to do in this situation is avoid panic. You�ll get home but it may take a bit longer than you had anticipated. Slow down, walk, and take a break if you have to. Shorten your stride and get those legs turning over at a higher rate (this is good advice even if you�re not tired). This will allow you to utilize your aerobic engine more effectively and conserve �fuel.� Give yourself a pep talk. It may sound silly, but this is a great way to quiet that �other self.� Many times, fatigue is the result of dehydration. Take in some fluids and then find some calories if you�re able. For example, some Gatorade will provide you with a quick source of much-needed carbohydrates and hydrate you at the same time. When you�ve finished a training session such as this it�s important to recall what went wrong so you can avoid repeating the same mistake on race day (and make sure to properly recover!). As terrible as it may sound, this experience (though unplanned) can be extremely valuable in building confidence and muffling the �other self.�

Advice 2: To combat surfacing of that �other self� during periods of extreme fatigue you need to train consistently (even when tired), stress proper nutrition, give yourself periodic pep talks, and evaluate the conditions when the �other self� surfaced as to avoid repeats in the future.

As is many sports, visualization can be a great way to achieve success in running. Golf provides a great analogy. Many times, a golfer will stand back and imagine hitting a good shot before even addressing the ball. This can work (although in a different sense) in your marathon (10k, 5k) training and racing. When you are out hitting the pavement imagine yourself in a race. BUT, don�t think that you have to go at race-pace in all your training sessions. Instead, stick to your plan for the day. If it�s a tempo day, then stick to it. If it�s a hill day or a speed day, hammer away.

Advice 3: Mentally visualize success and overcoming misfortune.

Regardless of your pace, visualize yourself in a race situation. The same holds when misfortune befalls you. A cycling analogy works well here. When you get a flat tire during a race avoid hitting the panic button. This is something you�ve done in the comfort of your own house/garage. Now, make yourself familiar with this process in a different locale. In fact, a long training ride may be a great opportunity to practice changing a tube whether or not you�ve got a flat. This is the single most common problem a cyclist will run into on race day. Perhaps you can think of a similar situation you�ve experienced during a running race. Experience is the best remedy here and will keep you under control in an otherwise stressful situation.

Advice 4: Determine what gives you that �mental edge.�

The final piece of advice I can give you in dealing with your �other self� is to think about what gives YOU a �mental edge.� Whether this edge is real or perceived is not the point. The point is that it makes you feel more confident on race day. Perhaps a pair of marathon flats, a speed suit, or shaving your legs makes you feel faster.

Advice 5: Always give yourself a confidence boost and end on a positive note.

On your next long run find a great hill and pretend you�re on heartbreak hill in the Boston marathon and feeling great while those around you are crumbling. Imagine that the fellow runner 100 meters in front of you is the race leader� and you�re minimizing their lead with every step. Whatever it is that gives you that extra confidence boost is worth doing. Take some time and think about what will give you that mental edge over your �other self� (or perhaps other athletes).

Although it may be difficult to keep the voice of your �other self� at bay, it can be done. Just like running, improving this discipline will take practice. Always remember to give yourself a confidence boost whenever possible. And always end on a positive note.

DOES CROSS-TRAINING IMPROVE RUNNERS PERFORMANCE?

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 00:00:00 -0500

Have your running times stopped improving, leaving you wondering what you can do to give it a kick-start? Are your training runs boring and you�re looking for something to make it fun again? Cross Training

Have you reached a point where you just cannot squeeze any more running into your schedule because you�ll get injured? Are you getting injured frequently?

If any of these are happening to you, consider cross training (CT). Recent research shows that supplementing, or even replacing part of your running program with other forms of exercise might be just what you need to avoid boredom, minimize injuries, and take your running to a new level.

What is cross training? The term refers to a wide variety of training activities that are not your primary focus (running), but may still have a positive crossover effect on your running. Indeed many coaches apply cross training to experienced marathoners and beginners alike. Successful athletes in most sports practice some form of cross training. Cross Training

Cross Training became a buzzword back in the 1980�s, with the advent of triathlons. Triathletes were forced to indulge in multi-sport training because of their three events. Soon afterwards, runners took up cross training and many found racing times and training performances improving, and they were injured less.

But for a long time, research proving the effectiveness of cross training lagged behind. What, then, are the purported advantages of cross training?

Running Performance Improvement
One of the strongest arguments in favor of cross training is the concept that you can do extra endurance training with less strain on your running muscles and joints. This indirect conditioning is most beneficial when the runner feels he or she is maxing out on their mileage, and (based on past experience) further running would put them over the edge, precipitating injury.

Somewhere around 50 miles per week seems to be the breakdown point for many semi-serious runners, although this self destruct point is relative to many variables in runners; years running, age, gender, experience, natural biomechanics, etc. What we do know is that when runners flirt with this much mileage, injuries soon follow.

Non-specific cross-training that uses other aerobic activities enables the runner to get more endurance training in without further compromising the running muscles and joints. It uses the same muscle groups in a different (non weight-bearing) way.

Even more exciting for the competitive runner who has reached a plateau, is the fact that these added workouts can be done at high intensity, further stimulating the aerobic (citric acid cycle) pathway for increased gains in maximal oxygen uptake.

A high intensity cycling session, for example, enables the runner to develop increased lactate tolerance, buffering capacity, and fuel resynthesis, without undergoing the high impact stress on the legs of an interval-training workout.

A runner who already performs 2-3 high intensity workouts weekly, risks injury or overtraining by adding more running workouts at this level. However, throwing in an intense stairclimber or cycling session gives the runner an extra workout each week that could help take him or her to a new level, without the added trauma of high intensity running.

It�s also possible that cross-training may activate more motor units, and thus muscle fibers, and develop much needed strength in the upper body that is generally neglected in runners although there is no direct research proving any of these claims at this time. Cross Training

However, research has shown that endurance type training does transform type IIa muscle fibers into type IIbs, meaning they�ve taken on endurance characteristics. In addition, endurance training makes many other changes to muscle tissue including increased mitochondrial density increased capillary density, increased metabolic enzyme activity, and increased glycogen storage.

Cross Training for injury prevention
With repetitive movement like running that operate through a restricted range of motion it�s easy to overwork the same muscles and joints, leading to injuries. These injuries are primarily caused by trauma to the muscles, tendons, joints, strength imbalances, shortened muscles, and decreased flexibility caused by your legs going through the same motion thousands of times. It�s thought that cross training will re-establish symmetry between your muscle groups.

By doing extra endurance work in other low impact or low weight bearing aerobic activities like cycling, stair climbing, swimming, deep-water running, or using the elliptical trainer, you get an �active rest�, with virtually no stress on your joints, and you�ll recover from those pesky lower extremity injuries or muscular soreness far faster than rest alone.

At least this is what common sense tells us about cross training. Surprisingly, a study by Murphy et al concluded that cross training might not reduce injury rate. Another study found that, �cycling can be a great choice for runners to loosen the repetitive stress of running that contributes to overuse injuries. But cycling may come with its own set of problems, particularly back pain�.

Another study (Cipriani et al) concluded that �multisport training may also contribute to a specific category of injuries, those related to the cumulative effects of cross-training�. This points to the need to know how to balance the different demands of a multi-sport training program--more about this later. Cross Training

Cross Training for Variety in Your Training Program
Avoiding burnout is one of the most appealing aspects of cross training for the serious runner. Anything you can do to reduce the boredom and monotony that sets in after several months of doing the same training will benefit your running.

If you�re not enjoying your running sessions you�ll soon find yourself skipping workouts, leading to decreased training volume, and inevitably, reduced performance. Cross training enables you to take a mental break from the stress of single-sport training and gives you much needed variety by breaking your program up and adding spice to your routine.

For exercise enthusiasts using running as their primary means of developing cardio-respiratory fitness, cross training will balance the strength and endurance between muscle groups. However, this advice is written for the runner looking to improve racing and training performance, so will not dwell on general fitness benefits of cross training.

What cross-training activities are complementary to running?
Several activities have been shown to complement running effectively, including cycling, stair climbing, deep-water running, swimming, and using the elliptical trainer.

The Principle of Specificity
Note that all these exercises use the legs for a major part of propulsion. Despite this similarity, an important principle of exercise science is glaringly defied by cross training�that of specificity.

This aged principle states that if you are to improve in a specific sport, you should practice that activity solely, and by throwing other similar activities into the mix you confuse your neuromuscular system, thus actually retarding your running progress.

One study (Foster et al) more or less confirmed this principle. Well-trained men and women added either running or swimming to their baseline running schedules, versus a group that continued their baseline running. The training period was for 8 weeks. Cross Training

After the post-tests were done, the extra running group improved in a test that measured lactate build up at a set velocity, while the other groups did not. And the researchers had the sense to put in a field test that actually measured running times over 2 miles. Again the extra running group improved the most, by 26.4 seconds, with the cycling group improving its times by 13.2 seconds. The running baseline group did not improve its time significantly. So, according to this study, cross training may improve running performance, but not as much as a running only program.

You see, you�re supposed to use the same type, speed, duration, and range of motion of an activity to improve your desired sport, in this case running. Because of their differing emphasis on various muscle groups, the nervous and muscular systems work in contrasting ways during different activities. This explains why world-class athletes like Tour de France cyclists, for example, are not world-class marathoners.

These elite cyclists exercise most of the muscle groups used in running, but in a very different way. Thus they are extremely efficient at cycling, but would be only average in distance running because their neuromuscular system is not efficient in the mechanics of running.

Lance Armstrong recently ran the Boston Marathon (April, 2008), recording a time of 2:50:58. Certainly this time is not to be sneezed at, but a thousand Boston marathoners can boast that they beat the 7-time winner of Le Tour.

But, like many age-old tenets of exercise science, there is contradicting research showing that indeed some activities can help improve other sports.
The case for strength training has been made convincingly enough now, that most elite endurance athletes, including runners, do some form of resistance training.

But what effect do aerobic activities have on running? Certainly coaches will tell you the best way to training for running is by running, yet some recent studies appear to contradict this principle. And for a long time no published study had linked cross training with actually improving running performances, until recently. . . .

Then a study by Ruby et al., had three groups of exercisers do a ten-week training program of running, or cycling, or a mixture of both. Their results found that all groups improved VO2 max. (The oxygen processing ability of the body) similarly. So, this study showed that at least a combined cross-training program achieves similar fitness to sports specific training. Cross Training

Another study (Millet et al), looked at cross-training effects in elite triathletes. It concluded that a certain amount of cross-transfer training occurs between cycling and running, but not with swimming.

One of the most promising studies to validate cross-training, conducted by Mutton et al., looked at the effects of running four days/week compared with a combined cycling (2 days/week) and running (2 days/week) schedule, for a total of four days/week, over a five week training program.

The results for both groups were almost identical, both groups improving VO2 max significantly, and reducing their 5 km run times by 7% (running only) and 8% (running/cycling). This showed that augmenting a running program with cycling showed no decrease in performance over a running only program.

Another cycling/running study at the university of Toledo found similar results, when 10 well-trained runners (who averaged 30-35 miles/week), added 3 cycling workouts per week to their existing training schedules, for 6 weeks. The workouts were all high intensity, such as 5-minute interval efforts, 150-second and 75-second high intensity bursts, and a longer duration workout of 50 minutes at 80% of maximal heart rate. Another group of runners added three similar running workouts to their training schedule.

After 6 weeks the running/cycling group times came down by almost 30 seconds, from 18:16 to 17:48, or 3%, which was almost the same as the running only group�s average. The conclusions were that adding extra running sessions was no better than adding extra cycling sessions.

A California State University study also used two groups of runners for a study on cross training. A running only group and a cycling only group performed a 9-week training program. At the end of the training both groups performed the same in running tests. Cross Training

An interesting study in 2003 found triathletes who cycled at a fast cadence reduced their 2-mile times by 7% on average. The implications are that cycling at a faster speed cadence similar to running improves running performance. The researchers theorize that the neuromuscular effects of fast cycling transfer to running, if done at a similar cadence.

A review by Tanaka concluded that there is clearly some transfer of training effects, (VO2 max.), from cycling to running. This is most noticeable when running is the main cross-training method. Swimming however, has minimal effects on running or cycling. Perhaps, after all, the specificity principle isn�t as significant as many coaches and exercise scientists have long believed.

At the very least, it appears that certain activities preserve and maintain running fitness while the runner is doing less, or even no, running. This in itself could be a reason for the runner to cross-train. Cross Training

DEHYDRATION�IT�S NOT WHAT IT USED TO BE

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 00:00:00 -0500

Traditional ideas about drinking during running have lost their steam. The old, dried-up philosophy is that dehydration is to be avoided at all costs and that runners should drink, drink, and then drink some more during their prolonged efforts to avoid overheating and enhance performance. Such desiccated thinking ignores the facts that overheating is caused by environmental conditions and running pace and that the best runners usually end their races more dehydrated than slower individuals.Dehydration

Dehydration: It�s just not what it used to be. In the old days of running, dehydration was a very bad thing, something to be feared. If your sweat losses were great enough during a run, you
automatically became dehydrated, and if you were dehydrated you were suffering from a disease, a pathological condition. Automatically, your risk of overheating � and thus �heat cramps,� �heat exhaustion,� and heat stroke went up, and your performance capacity went down.

Such thinking had a scientific seal of approval, thanks to a classic piece of research carried out by C. H. Wyndham and N. B. Strydom, published in 1969, with the rather ominous title, �The Danger of an Inadequate Water Intake during Marathon Running� (1). This study purported to show that deficient drinking during prolonged running produced dehydration and thus significant health risks. For most runners and coaches, that all seemed logical enough. After all, wouldn�t dehydration reduce plasma volume and thus curtail blood flow to the skin during exercise (a key cooling mechanism)? If an athlete�s body were low on fluid, wouldn�t sweat rates tend to dry up, further impairing the cool-off process?

And� in the dehydrated state - wouldn�t blood flow to the muscles drop, thus decreasing oxygen delivery to the sinews and putting the brakes on running pace? It was hard to answer �no� to those questions, and the solution seemed to be to drink, drink, and then drink some more during
extended running in order to fend off any possibility of desiccation. Today, many runners find themselves securely enmeshed in the dehydration-is-terrible-therefore drink- as-much-as possible during- exercise paradigm. Dehydration

There�s just one problem with all of this: It�s just plain wrong. As Tim Noakes of the University of Cape Town points out, the classic study of Wyndham and Strydom did not really pinpoint any dangers associated with miserly water consumption during marathon running (2). In fact, the
investigation actually revealed that the runners who were dehydrated to the greatest extent were the most-successful � they were the winners of the races which were analyzed!

Nonetheless, the Wyndham-Strydom paper put in place a widely accepted, much-trusted bit
of (il)logic regarding exercise in the heat, namely that (1) dehydration during running causes heat stroke, (2) the only way to prevent heat stroke is to thwart dehydration, and (3) individuals who collapse during exercise in the heat must have a heat disorder related to dehydration, which can only be treated with fluid therapy. Over the past 15 years, Noakes has steadily dismantled this (il)logical structure (although the dismantling has not been adequately noticed by the running community).

First, Tim and his colleagues at the University of Cape Town were able to show that body temperature in marathoners is not related to dehydration status (3). Post-marathon rectal temperatures were taken from 30 fit marathon runners (average VO2max = 58.3 ml.kg 1.min-1) to see if the temps would be related to extent of dehydration, running velocity during the race, and/or estimated, within-race metabolic rates. As it turned out, the marathoners� body temperatures were significantly linked with their running paces and metabolic rates, not with dehydration. Dehydration

The faster the marathoners ran, the hotter they were. Greater dehydration, though, did not lead to higher internal temperatures. This kind of finding, while somewhat unexpected (given the popularity of the dehydration paradigm), certainly makes sense. After all, about 75 percent of the energy created during running is heat energy � only 25 percent is actually utilized for propulsion.

Faster running means that heat is produced at higher rates, and thus one would expect marathon race pace to be fairly tightly linked with body temperature. Subsequent work by Noakes and co-workers verified the lack of connection between dehydration and overheating � and reinforced the idea that dehydration does not hurt performance. In one study carried out with participants in the 2000 South African Ironman Triathlon, percentage change in body weight during competition (a marker of dehydration) was totally unrelated to post-race rectal temperature or finishing time (4). In a second comprehensive investigation which included athletes from both the 2000 and 2001 South African Ironman competition, body temperature was again not tightly linked with extent of dehydration, and dehydration also failed to predict the risk of medical complications of any kind following the event (5).

Says Noakes, �Humans evolved to run long distances in extreme heat as they chased antelope in
Africa. If they couldn�t do that, they couldn�t survive. Sweating evolved as an adaptation that allowed us to chase the antelope; with sweating, we wouldn�t overheat during the chase. The antelope, in contrast, could not sweat (and still can�t), and thus they overheated, had to slow down, and were captured� (6). Got it? Our ancestors engaged in heavy sweating. It dehydrated them but kept them cool. The poor antelope couldn�t sweat, stayed well-hydrated, and were the losers in this hunting �game.� Dehydration

Dehydration was a good thing, because it helped to prevent overheating. As Noakes points out, the �Bushmen� (San) of southern Africa often wait to begin their hunts until ambient temperature reaches about 40 degrees Centigrade (~ 104 degrees Fahrenheit), knowing that pursuits under such conditions will overheat their prey. In one situation about which Noakes is aware, Bushmen
ran for six hours, while the temperature reached 46 degrees Centigrade (~ 115 degrees Fahrenheit), before overcoming their victims. During those six hours, the San pursuers drank a maximum of one liter of fluid each. They ended up dehydrated � but happy with their success, and without medical complications.

�That is how we evolved the ability to run and the capacity to sweat,� says Noakes. �And sweating� and its associated dehydration � protected us from heat stroke; it did not - and does not - cause it.� �One of the concerns I have is that this condition of dehydration has now become a medical disease. Dehydration actually means that your body fluid stores are reduced. That does not mean that you have a medical condition as a result or that there is an automatic medical crisis caused by fluid loss from the body.

What now frequently happens is that runners, during prolonged exercise, may begin to develop various symptoms, and they often believe that these symptoms are caused by the �disease� called dehydration. Instead of saying, �I have a headache,� a runner tends to immediately make the diagnosis of dehydration because he has been taught that all symptoms during exercise indicate that the medical condition called dehydration must be present. Of course, the runner also believes that there is only one cure � drinking more fluid.� �A key thing for your readers to remember is that dehydration is not a medical condition with specific symptoms and signs like tuberculosis or pneumonia. Dehydration

Rather, dehydration is purely a biological state in which total body water content is reduced. There is absolutely no evidence that - at the levels of dehydration achieved by normal runners � symptoms appear which are the exclusive results of those reductions in body water.� As Noakes points out, runners can actually fare quite well from a performance standpoint while in the dehydrated state. �What they can do in the heat was clearly shown by the winner of the Olympic
Women�s Marathon race in 2004. Mizuki Noguchi, the victor, ran without distress in 35-degree heat (105 degrees Fahrenheit), even though she was drinking very little and thus must have been in a dehydrated condition.�

In fact, as Noakes suggests, moderate levels of dehydration may convey some direct advantages (in addition to the indirect benefits associated with cooling). The moderately dehydrated athlete is lighter than the well-hydrated individual, and thus his/her running economy should be enhanced. In addition, VO2max is expressed per kilogram of body weight, and thus dehydration-related losses in weight might increase VO2max. It is likely that it is no accident that Wyndham and Strydom�s winning marathoners were the most-dehydrated individuals in their overall investigation.

Don�t take all of this the wrong way, though: You�ll still want to consume a sports drink during your exertions lasting an hour or more, especially since the sports drink will provide carbs for your muscles as they gradually become glycogen-depleted during your efforts. The point is that you do not need to over-drink � either before or during your long run or race. Attempting to match your fluid-intake rate with your sweat rate is unnecessary. Rather, a reasonable intake of five to six ounces of sports drink (e. g., five to six regular swallows) every 15 minutes or so during your run is appropriate, even though your sweat rate (and thus body water loss) will probably be greater than that.Dehydration

Note, too, that overdrinking is not only unnecessary: it carries with it a risk of a real medical condition � hyponatremia. Consuming lots of plain water during prolonged running in an effort to ward off dehydration constitutes one of the main risks of developing this sometimes-deadly disorder. As Noakes says, it is far better simply to drink according to the dictates of thirst. �As long as athletes drink according to thirst during their efforts, they will develop neither severe dehydration nor over hydration.� In a recent paper providing guidelines for fluid replacement, Noakes urges athletes not to consume more than 800 ml (~ 27 ounces) of fluid per hour as they exercise (7). ©

References
(1) �The Danger of an Inadequate Water Intake during Marathon Running,� South African Medical Journal, Vol. 43 (29), pp. 893-896, 1969
(2) �Dehydration during Exercise: What Are the Real Dangers?� Clinical Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. 5 (2), pp. 123-128, 1995
(3) �Metabolic Rate, not Percent Dehydration, Predicts Rectal Temperature in Marathon Runners,� Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, Vol. 23 (4), pp. 443-449, 1991
(4) �Weight Changes, Sodium Levels, and Performance in the South African Ironman Triathlon,� Clinical Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. 12 (6), pp. 391-399, 2002
(5) �Weight Changes, Medical Complications, and Performance during an Ironman Triathlon,� British Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. 38 (6), pp. 718-724, 2004
(6) Tim Noakes, personal communication
(7) �Fluid Replacement during Marathon Running,� Clinical Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. 13 (5), pp. 309-318, 2003

CAN YOU BE PULLED TO HIGHER-SPEED RUNNING?

info@runningresearchnews.com (Teressa Blanchett) — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 00:00:00 -0500

A RECENT ARTICLE in The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research (JSCR) enhances our knowledge of what it takes to improve stride rate, a key factor in speed amelioration (1). As the previous essay in this book pointed out, your running speed is a function of two key variables, stride length and stride rate. In fact, your speed is simply stride length multiplied by stride rate. If � when you move along at your maximal intensity � you cover four meters with each stride and take 90 strides (180 steps) per minute, your max velocity is 4 × 90 = 360 meters per minute, or 6 meters per second. Expressed another way, your best-possible pace is 400/6 = 66.67 seconds per 400 meters.

This number is of much more than esoteric interest. As Leena Paavolainen, Heikki Rusko, and several other excellent researchers have pointed out, max running speed (defined as your best-possible velocity in a 20- to 50-meter race, embarked upon from a �flying� start) is a terrific predictor of your success in the mile, 3-K, 5-K, 10-K, and �even� the marathon. To put it another way, �anaerobic prowess� leads to great success in aerobic events. The bottom line is that the factors which are great for improving 20- to 50-meter sprint time (i.e., longer stride length and higher stride rate) are also wonderful for upping performance in long-distance events. For the latter, you just need to make sure you have the underlying physiological capacity necessary to sustain the higher speeds (associated with longer strides and loftier stride rates) you acquire during training. Become A Faster Runner

In the JSCR article, researchers from the National Academy of Sports Medicine and California State University-Chico took a look at what happens when good-quality collegiate sprinters run very fast while being simultaneously �towed� with an elastic cord. Although this might seem a little strange to you, there is a logical argument supporting this practice as a means of improving stride rate. Here�s the concept: You are running very fast, using your best-possible stride rate, but the elastic cord attached to your body forces you to move even more quickly (since the cord in effect continuously drags your body forward, adding additional velocity to the max speed which you are intrinsically capable of producing).

Since the elastic cord is making you move faster than you ordinarily do, you have no choice but to increase your stride rate (the number of steps you take per minute). Otherwise, your body will be unsupported at critical moments during the gait cycle, and you will topple forward onto your face.

Does this sound reasonable? Sure � in theory. But what actually happens when runners� max speeds are artificially increased by means of an elastic tow rope? Is stride rate optimized?

If stride rate were truly upgraded as a result of tow training, it would be a good thing, of course. If you carried out a number of �towed� workouts, your nervous system would learn how to handle a higher stride rate, and � as long as stride length was not compromised � max running speed would be improved. Other runners would begin to worry about you, or � if they did not worry about you � they would at least begin to be concerned about your sudden, seemingly unexplainable and dramatic accelerations during races.

Well, brace yourself: I have a bit of bad news. In the Cal study, the elastic cord towing had no affect whatsoever on stride rate. Here, I�m not even talking about long-term changes in stride rate, the kind you might see after eight weeks of rigorous training. No, the elastic-cord towing did not even advance stride rate during workouts in which the elastic cord was utilized. Become A Faster Runner

That�s right: Stride rate (during maximal 20-meter sprints) was about 127.5 strides (255 steps) per minute � with and without the elastic-cord towing. To put it bluntly, the elastic-cord towing did not produce any change in stride rate during training. Thus, one would not expect elastic-cord towing to be a valid technique for improving stride rate over extended periods of work.

True, running speed with the elastic cord was greater, compared with velocity without the �free tow.� This makes sense: If you have an elastic cord pulling you along, you should be able to move faster than usual! This increase in speed was completely a function of stride length, which burgeoned by about 7 percent with the cord (from 1.9 to 2.03 meters per stride).

Does that mean that elastic-tow training is a great method for expanding stride length? Actually, no! As the Cal researchers (Rodney Corn and Duane Knudson) were able to point out, the fattening of stride length was not the result of greater force production by the runners� leg muscles; it was almost entirely due to the pull of the elastic cord. Basically, the runners were responding to the cord-towing by positioning their feet further in front of their centers of mass with each foot strike, an effect which could actually enhance braking forces (and decrease speed) if carried over to non-towed running. Elastic-cord towing may be a lot of fun, but its value as a speed-enhancing technique has yet to be verified.

So, how do you actually spike stride rate in order to boost your max running speed? The best evidence we have suggests that maximal strength training and explosive work (the use of high-speed sprints and very quick strengthening movements) represent the proper path to a higher stride rate.Become A Faster Runner