Educated Runner

Seven Questions to Ask for Powerful Hill Workouts

educatedrunner — Sun, 11 Apr 2010 00:52:00 GMT

This is the first installment of a two-part series on hill training.

Most runners include hill workouts in their schedules, and hill sessions can represent one of the most-productive forms of training for endurance athletes. There’s only one problem: Many runners don’t know how to construct hill workouts properly. Poorly planned hill sessions produce sub-optimal gains in overall fitness.

A collection of great hill workouts is like a key chapter in your overall training book, the volume which ends on the last page with a nice PR. To put together that essential chapter, it’s important to ask seven key questions:

(1) For hill training, what is the optimal hill inclination?

(2) How many hill reps should be performed per workout?

(3) How fast should you run on your uphills?

(4) How should you run the downhills?

(5) How much recovery is needed between uphill surges?

(6) Are hill drills important?

(7) Should you strengthen yourself in any systematic before embarking on a series of hill workouts?

Here are detailed answers to each of the seven questions:

(1) What is the optimal hill inclination?

At a given running speed, more work must be done per step on a steep hill, compared to a gently inclined knoll (because the body must be lifted a greater vertical distance per ground contact on the more-severe monticle). That means that precipitous hills should produce higher heart rates, greater oxygen-consumption taxes, and loftier blood-lactate levels.

There’s a catch, however, and it resides within that introductory phrase – “At a given running speed.” The truth is that running speed is seldom constant as hill inclination changes; many runners move very quickly on mild hills (~ 2 to 3 percent) and slow down appreciably when assaulting a more-challenging upslope (~ 8 to 10 percent).

For this reason, it’s a great idea to use a mix of different hills (either in separate workouts or within individual sessions). On mild hills, it’s possible to run at close to 5- or 10-K race speeds, while performing the additional work of lifting the body vertically. This enhances strength while continuing to “teach” the nervous system to operate at high intensities. Steep hills slow down velocity and yet challenge the neuromuscular system to produce more work per step (augmenting raw leg strength greatly). The resulting combination of speed plus strength (which comes from training on both tame and rugged hills) will make you a much-more powerful runner.

(2) How many hill reps should be completed per workout?

This question is important: Too few reps can produce a mediocre day of training, instead of a great one, while too many climbs can increase the risk of injury and staleness. The 5-percent rule provides a good start. If you are running 30 miles per week, your initial max amount of hill climbing per workout (using the 5-percent rule) is (.05 X 30) = 1.5 miles. On a 400-meter hill, this would amount to six 400-meter climbs, of course.

While this might seem overly conservative, it minimizes the chance of malady, especially since you will be running back down the hill for recovery (please see question # 4). As long as everything is going well, you can gradually advance the amount of uphill running you complete per session as you progress through the hill-training phase of your overall program.

For a general approach to the problem of how to progress with workout duration and training volume over time, please read our article on the dubious value of the 10-percent rule here.

(3) How fast should you run on the uphills?

Two strategies are reasonable. First, you can simply run your hills with race effort. If you have a hilly 10K coming up, for example, you could hit your hills with the kind of intensity you want to maintain in that 10-K competition. Your exertion will be very difficult, yet controlled – and specific to the demands of your racing. This mode of conducting a hill session can be very confidence-building and will provide great specific preparation for a race. Also, the intensity is certainly high enough to move oxygen-consumption tariffs and blood-lactate levels into fitness-advancing territories.

But, especially on shorter hills (gentle or steep), it can be quite productive for you to employ max effort, getting to the top just as quickly as you possibly can. While this can increase the risk of injury, especially of the hamstring nature, it maximizes O₂ employment and blood lactate and can have a dramatic impact on your power (by enhancing force production by your leg muscles and the rate at which that augmented force is applied to the ground). A reasonable strategy is to mix some max climbs and race-specific climbs together within a single workout to produce a beautiful “recipe” for running-capacity advancement.

(4) How should you run the downhills?

Like a basketball. On your downhills, you should run lightly, so that you can recover from your just-completed uphill assaults, and it’s very important to learn how to run downhill correctly (fast and economically), so that you will fare well during hilly competitions. From a form standpoint, the proper thing to do is to lean forward slightly as you run downhill, as scary as that might be. Land on your midfeet, not your heels, and bounce from foot to foot like an elastic ball, letting gravity take care of most of the work.

Avoid the temptations to lean back and to land on your heels, which would produce a braking effect and tarnish gravity’s gift to you. The key is to relax and bounce, bounce, bounce down the hill, like a basketball. Each ground contact will be minimal, just long enough to control body position. Practice this on gentle hills before you take the strategy to your local version of Mount Everest or K2, of course. Eventually, you will be able to run extremely quickly on downhills – with very little oxygen cost (since gravity is doing so much of the work).

If you are doing hill reps, you should begin your next uphill run as soon as you have reached the bottom of the hill, if possible. If you do need a few seconds of additional recovery before you initiate your next climb, simply jog around at the bottom of the hill; don’t stand in place with your hands on your knees. If you keep ascending and descending without significant break, your oxygen-consumption wharfage and blood-lactate appearances will be maximized, which are very good things.

Bear in mind that downhill running can be quite damaging to the quads if you have never done it before. This is one reason for the 5-percent rule (question # 2). If you are worried about your quad health, it is OK to walk back down a few of your hills, and even walk back down a few of your hills backwards, for a few of your workouts. But, a much-better strategy would be to strengthen your quads and whole legs thoroughly before embarking on your hill phase of training (question # 7).

(5) How much recovery is needed between uphill surges?

See question # 4. In general, the amount of time it takes to let gravity bounce you back down the hill is the optimal recovery time. However, if you are employing a really long hill, perhaps a mile in length, implying a mountain, the jog back down will take too long, and it is important to have someone available to drive you back to the bottom. This may seem a little strange, but it is the way to get the most benefit from sessions carried out on very prolonged climbs.

(6) Should you perform drills on hills?

Although a hill is little more than a large lump of earth, it is actually an extremely valuable training tool. Doing nothing but running on your favorite knob means that you will miss an opportunity to complete the hill drills which have a unique impact on your running capacity.

Such drills include hill bounding (running up the acclivity with extra-long steps, while maintaining excellent speed), hill accelerations (maintaining a step rate of > 200 as you climb while reducing step length), one-leg sprint hopping (moving up the hill as fast as possible by hopping on one foot only – this actually advances the oxygen-consumption tariff incurred by the hopping leg, compared with sprinting up the hill on both legs, and thus promotes a higher oxidative capacity in the leg muscles), reverse hill climbing (running up the hill backwards, a great strengthener for the quads), and downhill heel jogging (ambling down the hill on the heels with the ankles dorsi-flexed – a great strengthener for the shins, but progress carefully).

About 10 to 12 minutes of drills, carried out during the first half of a hill workout, can have a profound effect on strength, endurance, speed, and overall running ability.

(7) Should you strengthen yourself before embarking on a series of hill workouts?

This is critically important: Pre-hill-training strengthening will reduce the risk of ham blow-outs, protect the quads and knees during downhill running, and foster higher-quality hill sessions.

The right progression is X weeks of general strengthening (using circuits which work the whole body), Y weeks of running-specific strengthening (with movements which mimic the mechanics of running), and then Z weeks of hill work. See what comes after hill training in our upcoming series on How to Get Faster. Understand how long X, Y, and Z should be in our forthcoming epic on training periodization..

Educated Runner Announces Its First-Ever Australian Running Camp

educatedrunner — Mon, 15 Mar 2010 14:10:00 GMT

Educated Runner is very excited to announce the establishment of its first-ever running camp down under – the Snowy Mountains Running Camp in beautiful Australia. This camp totally transforms attendees’ running – and provides a fabulous vacation on top of the running make-over.

The camp is coordinated by Owen Anderson, Ph. D., the founder of Educated Runner, and Kyle Williams, an experienced Australian trekker, runner, and guide who hails from Canberra. Owen and Kyle have put together an amazing camp experience, one which provides state-of-the-art, scientifically based training, along with the opportunity to enjoy one of the most-spectacular areas in all of Australia.

Campers will stay from May 23-28, 2010 in the Athlete’s Village at the Lake Jindabyne Sport and Recreation Centre, right in the heart of the ruggedly beautiful Snowy Mountains. This is alpine country, with over 87 hectares of picturesque running trails and scenic beauty, close by Mount Kosciuszko (at 2228 metres in height, Australia’s tallest peak).

But when you attend you will be doing much more than trail running and taking in the splendor of the Snowies. On the Jindabyne track, we’ll conduct careful vVO₂max testing, and then Owen and Kyle will show you exactly how to set up a progression of workouts which will optimize your vVO₂max, a key predictor of performance.

Very importantly, Owen and Kyle will also shoot video of you while you are running at different quality speeds. We will then analyze your form and help you make the four key transformations in running technique which enhance your economy, upgrade your speed, and reduce your risk of overuse injury.

There’s even more: Our Snowy Mountains camp is the only running get-together in the world which features a full progression of running-specific strength training, consisting of movements which mimic the mechanics of running and thus have the most-potent impact on your fatigue-resistance and raw running speed. We’ll show you how to put everything together, from general strengthening through running-specific drills and then on to hill training and explosive work. When you leave the camp (regretfully after six great days), you’ll know exactly how to plan and periodize your training in order to reach your true potential as a runner.

Have injuries plagued you from time to time? That’s no problem: Owen and Kyle will show you exactly what you need to do to strengthen your plantar fasciae, Achilles tendons, shins, knees, hamstrings, ilio-tibial bands, or whatever other anatomical structures have given you the blues in the past. You’ll leave our camp with an insurance policy against future overuse injury.

Owen brings a very relaxed style of interacting with people and a wealth of running knowledge to the camp. He has written three books on running (Lactate Lift-Off, Great Workouts for Popular Races, and Aurora), and he is currently working on a fourth volume, The Science of Running, for Human Kinetics Press. Owen has enjoyed much coaching success: One of his athletes, Diane Palmason, won the Fifth Avenue Mile in New York City and has held four world records as a masters runner. Another, Catherine Dugdale, won the Welsh Cross-Country Championship seven consecutive times and represented Great Britain in the Commonwealth Games.

The Snowies are Kyle Williams’ back yard: He has led many treks through these mountains and will always choose the best locations for our workouts. Each session will be conducted at 1000 to 2228 metres of altitude in a pristine environment, far from the hustle and bustle of the city.

The price for this amazing experience is just $895 (AUS) or $805 (US), including transportation from Canberra to the camp, five nights of overnight lodging, educational materials, and all meals. Sign up for this incredible “down-under” experience which transforms your running and provides an unforgettable vacation at the same time right here.

Elite Kenyan Runners Are a Lot Like Norwegian Olympians

educatedrunner — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 15:38:00 GMT

The Winter Olympics are over, and somehow the US media missed a key story coming out of the Games. In the rush to check on the day-to-day condition of Lindsey Vonn’s shins, the exploits of athletes from the little kingdom of Norway were ignored.

Such ignorance was a mistake. Norway did astonishingly well at the Games, capturing 23 of the 86 medals awarded (27 percent). That’s a rather shocking development when one realizes that Norway’s population is 4.8 million, just .07 percent of the world’s total of 6.8 billion folks. Only one out of 1417 persons walking this earth is a Norwegian citizen, and yet Norskies captured more than one out of every four medals given out at the Games.

Norway’s gold-medal count was nine, the same tally achieved by the United States, a country with 64 times as many people. Norway’s population size is very close to Colorado’s total of five million people, and Norway’s geographical area of 385,000 square kilometers is close to Montana’s overall wing span. If Coloradoans had brought home 23 badges of honor, the unique glory of such athletic achievement would certainly have been trumpeted on the pages of USA Today and Sports Illustrated. If Montanans had been bringing back such a collection of gold, silver, and bronze, wouldn’t we have heard about it, big time? Instead, our Viking athletic friends flew back to their little country with very little fanfare.

The Norwegian exploits bear a remarkable resemblance to what Kenyan male runners accomplished at the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympic Games. If we throw out the relays and examine all other running events (from 100 meters up to the marathon), Kenyan men took home nine of the 33 medals awarded in Beijing. Yes, that’s 27 percent – the same as the Norlanders’ share of medallions in all sports at the 2010 Winter Games.

But of course a key difference is that when Kenyan athletes fare extremely well the tabloid press erupts with the news that Kenyans probably possess the right genes for performance, that they are genetically superior to runners from the rest of the world. The remarkable sprinter from Jamaica, Usain Bolt, shares a similar fate. When he blows away the field and sets world records at 100 and 200 meters, the talk immediately turns to genetics - and (even more condescendingly) to steroids.

The Norwegians, of course, are a different story altogether. When they out-compete big-brother Russia to the east, garnering 50-percent more medals than their Russian counterparts (despite Russia’s population of 142 million), the lofty Norwegian performances are simply the result of discipline, hard work, scientific training, culture, and the unique Norse environment. While Russian heads roll, not a whisper is heard about Norwegian DNA.

It must certainly be true that culture and environment play key roles in the Norwegian successes. If you strap skis and skates onto the feet of young people, encourage their participation in skiing and skating, provide the perfect physical environments for skiing and skating, make skiing and skating your national sports, treat your best skiers and skaters as national heroes and reward them with scads of the world’s strongest currency, doesn’t it stand to reason that you will end up with highly competitive skiers and skaters? No rocket science (or foray into the genetics of performance) is required to understand this.

And yet the genetic rationale is reached for immediately whenever Kenyans excel. This is despite the fact that the Kenyan athletic culture and environment bear strong resemblances to cultural and environmental factors in Norway (without the snow, skis, and skates, of course). Kenyan kids are sent off to school barefooted, and they run, run, run, fast and hard, to school and back, to their friends’ farms and back, over rugged terrain with uneven footing, in the process building up tremendous strength, endurance, and coordination. Thanks to the unshod condition of their running, young Kenyans’ arches and ankles become powerful springs which move the runners forward explosively with the most-minimal of ground-contact times.

The other Norwegian factors are there, too. Kenyan kids are encouraged to become runners, the Kenyan environment is perfect for running (temperate and dry, with lots of hills to build strength), running is the national sport of Kenya, the top Kenyan runners become national heroes, and the internationally successful Kenyan runners bring home what are king’s ransoms in Kenya (although not in the world’s strongest currency). Sound familiar?

Scientific studies have been performed on elite Kenyan runners to “discover” the genetic basis for their high achievements (of course, no such inquiries have been conducted on Norwegian Olympic performers). So far such inquiries have borne little fruit. And why should they? Just as the “secret” of Norwegian Olympic success can be found on the ski paths and ice rinks of Norway, the “mystery” of Kenyan endurance-running dominance is actually just a logical tale of intense training, environment, and culture.

The Geranium in Your Running Program Might Need Some Water

educatedrunner — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 02:02:00 GMT

There is a geranium in your running program, and it needs to be nurtured.

I came to this realization yesterday after reading Flannery O’Connor’s wonderful and aptly named story, “The Geranium.” By the way, even though Flannery O’Connor never ran a step in her life, few writers have more to say to runners. I’ll explain why in a moment.

The story progression in The Geranium focuses on a troubled fellow named Old Dudley. Now that “Geranium” has appeared four times in the first five sentences of this essay, can you imagine how many geranium Googlers will end up reading this narrative about running? SEO-copywriting experts would give me a huge pat on the back – if I were actually writing about Geranium sanguineum.

But back to old Dudley, who is very well-named – he is old, and he’s a bit of a dud, too. He lives with his daughter’s family in a large, nondescript apartment building in New York City, with long dog-run hallways and stairways which open like gaping wounds onto the floors below. The adjacent apartment structures are replete with rasp-faced individuals hanging out of their windows and look so similar to Old Dudley’s apartment complex that he gets lost whenever he ventures out onto the street. Dudley’s relationship with his daughter is tense and empty, his grandson doesn’t speak to him (even though they share a room), and Dudley’s son-in-law appears only on weekends and uses the word “nah” to keep conversations rolling along. The “golden days” are actually pretty rough for Old Dudley.

The star of the story, the geranium, sits in a window in a neighboring apartment building, about 15 feet away from Old Dudley’s window. The plant is on a tight schedule, appearing at 10 each morning and disappearing at 5:30 in the afternoon, and Dudley likes to gaze at the plant as the day progresses. That cranesbill in a pot reminds him of his life “back home” in Georgia, when times were much better. Down south, Dudley had lived in the upstairs corner room of a boarding house, and he was the king of the domicile, the cool guy who protected the old ladies with jiggling heads who gossiped in the parlor each evening. For fun, he fished and hunted with Rabie, who could steal cleaner than a weasel and who knew where all the fish in Coa County could be found.

The geranium, with everything it represents, becomes the organizing principle in Old Dudley’s life. He counts on it being in the window every day; he needs to see it to remind him that times were better, that he once had a happy life which was complete and made sense. The geranium’s appearance at 10 each morning is reassuring and allows Dudley to make it through each troubling day.

Of course, the day comes when the geranium does not take its place in the window (if Flannery had been writing with the commercial or personal-growth communities in mind, she might have called her story “Who Moved the Geranium?”). The non-appearance of the potted plant occurs at a particularly bad time for Old Dudley, at a moment when he is extremely lost and disoriented.

The surly geranium owner is in the window instead of the actual cranesbill, and he is a very poor replacement for the potted plant. Mr. Geranium tells Dudley that he doesn’t like folks looking in his apartment window, and that he “only tells people once” (presumably before geranium-related violence will occur). He also tells Dudley that the geranium has plummeted six floors, and Dudley’s downward glance reveals a mangle of pot shards, black dirt, up-thrust white roots, and crinkled pink petals.

Dudley vows to retrieve the geranium, but his trip down the tape-measure hallway and into the cavernous stairwell does not go smoothly. Old Dudley returns to his apartment, geranium-free and defeated.

What does Dudley’s tale have to do with your running? If you are like most runners, you have a geranium in your running – something which helps you organize your training program, something which makes you feel good about what you are doing. Sometimes the geranium is in your window, right where you want it, but at other times that geranium gets a few wilted leaves or falls away from you a long ways. When that happens, it’s your job to retrieve the geranium and repair it.

You have probably never thought about it in this way, but the troubled geranium might actually be your performances. You might be going through a period during which you are not running your 5Ks as fast as you used to, during which your marathons are troubled or your workouts are not going smoothly at all. Your performance geranium has fallen a long way, and you are feeling bad about it.

Or your wilting geranium might simply be the way you feel about your running. Perhaps you have lost some enthusiasm for training, perhaps you are no longer getting the satisfaction you once obtained from conducting quality workouts. Maybe you don’t look forward to your sessions with energy and zeal any more.

When your geranium has fallen apart, it’s not a time for despair. Geraniums tumble and get broken frequently; almost every runner experiences a geranium loss at some point.

An essential part of running is realizing that a fallen geranium is not gone forever, it can be retrieved. That geranium simply needs a little water, perhaps some glue for its pot, and maybe a little more dark soil for its roots.

Replanting the geranium might involve getting up early one morning and going out for a beautiful, rhythmic, steady run, not worrying about pace at all but just flowing along, with no one else around, and then returning to your house just when the cardinals and robins are preparing their morning matins and that wondrous aurora is beginning to appear in the east.

The following day, packing in rich soil around your geranium could involve hitting some one-minute intervals, anywhere, at a brisk pace like mile or 5-K running, flowing along powerfully, with enough recovery in between, and no worries about anything other than enjoying the fast movement, the warmth of your muscles, and the sweat flowing out onto the surface of your skin.

Each day thereafter, replenishing your geranium would be the same as nurturing yourself, doing things with your running that are really satisfying and fun. And a funny thing – when you do that, when you take the time to cultivate your running and fertilize it with joy, the petals on your geranium will burn with the brightest-possible colors, and your running will be very unlikely to fall six stories again.

---------------------------------------------------------

To understand more about Flannery O’Connor’s impact on your running, to enjoy a fantastic time, and to make perfect those geraniums which are called running form, running-specific strength and vVO₂max, please sign up for one of Owen-Anderson’s summer running camps at http://www.educatedrunner.com/Camps.aspx Runners of all ages and ability levels are welcome (and nurtured) at these highly educational, very “vacational” camps.

BAREFOOT RUNNING: WHAT THE HARVARD STUDY REALLY SAID

educatedrunner — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 17:20:00 GMT

The running pot is simmering in the popular press these days, and the heady vapor which is emerging proclaims that barefoot running provides the pathway to salvation for a large fraction of the running population.

You’re familiar with the claims by now: That barefoot running erases existing running injuries. That barefoot running reduces the risk of future running maladies. That barefoot running is healthier and more natural than shod running. That barefoot running diminishes impact forces and the rate at which those collision forces are transmitted up the legs. That barefoot running can even improve performances.

Soon we will hear that barefoot running lowers the risk of some forms of cancer.

The acute hubbub surrounding barefoot running is the result of the publication of both Christopher McDougall’s New-York-Times-bestselling book, Born to Run, and a paper entitled “Foot Strike Patterns and Collision Forces in Habitually Barefoot versus Shod Runners,” which debuted in the prestigious journal Nature on January 28 of this year. Aided by seven colleagues from a variety of institutions, Daniel Lieberman of the Department of Human Evolutionary Biology at Harvard University was the principal investigator in the Nature study. Lieberman et al looked at the kinematics and kinetics of running in five different groups: (1) Habitually shod athletes from the USA, (2) Currently shod runners from the Rift Valley in Kenya who grew up running barefooted, (3) Runners from the USA who began running in the shod condition but have now adopted a barefoot-running lifestyle, (4) Adolescent Kenyan harriers who have never worn shoes, and (5) Adolescent Kenyan runners who have run shod for most of their lives.

Ironically, the popular press has been using the Harvard study as a launching pad for the idea that barefoot running is healthier than shod ambling, even though Lieberman’s paper provided no data at all to test the idea that barefoot running lowers the risk of running injuries!

Here’s what Lieberman et al actually found:

(A) Habitually shod runners (groups 1 and 5 from above) who grew up wearing shoes are usually rear-foot strikers (RFS), meaning that their heels make the first impacts with the ground during running, right at the beginning of the stance phase of gait. This is not new information. The strong link between running in shoes and heel-striking has been known for many years.

(B) Runners who grew up running barefooted or who switched to running barefooted (groups 2, 3, and 4) are generally fore-foot strikers (FFS), meaning that they tend to land initially on the balls of their feet while running, after which their heels drop down to make contact with the ground. Again, this is nothing new – the tight connection between barefoot running and FFS (and also MFS, mid-foot striking) has been general knowledge for years.

(C) Impact forces transmitted through the foot, ankle, and leg immediately after impact with the ground are about three times greater in shod runners using RFS, compared with barefoot runners with FFS. Some – but not all - previous studies have shown this same relationship, with RFS producing greater impact force during the first portion of stance, compared with MFS and FFS. The sudden rise in force with RFS, immediately after ground contact, is known as the “impact transient.” The disparity in impact transient between barefoot and shod running represents a “foundation” for the belief that barefoot running is “safer” and less injury producing. While this appears to be logical thinking, it is important to know that no study has ever shown that greater impact forces during the first portion of stance magnify the risk of running injury.

(D) Rates of loading of impact force are actually quite similar between shod RFS runners and barefoot FFS athletes (Figure 2b from the Nature paper). The rate at which impact force is loaded into the leg has also been suggested to be a risk factor for injury, although convincing proof of this notion does not exist.

(E) During the early stance phase of barefoot FFS running, there is greater knee flexion, greater dorsi-flexion at the ankle, and a 74-percent-greater drop in the center of mass, compared with shod RFS running. “Vertical compliance” is defined as the drop in the runner’s center of mass relative to the vertical force during the impact period of stance, and it is obviously greater in barefoot FFS running, compared with shod RFS. Vertical compliance varies as a function of running-surface hardness, and this is why force-loading rates are similar for barefoot FFS runners over a wide array of running surfaces (the runners adjust compliance according to surface). This is not novel information, however.

(F) During barefoot FFS ambling, the ground reaction force torques the foot around the ankle (and therefore increases the amount of work carried out by the ankle, compared with shod RFS running). With shod RFS running, the ankle converts little impact energy into rotational energy. Potentially, this could spike the rate of ankle-area injuries (for example in the Achilles tendon and calf) for barefoot runners, although this hypothesis has not been tested.

And that was pretty much it! The Nature investigation did disclose some interesting information about the effective mass of the foot and shank (which we won’t discuss here), but it offered no other information about the potential links between barefoot running and either injury or performance.

And that’s why it’s too early for you to consider changing from shod to barefoot running, unless such a shift would be a lot of fun for you. There’s just no proof that barefoot running will reduce your risk of injury or make you faster.

In fact, it’s important to remember that most injuries in running are caused by an imbalance between the strain and micro-damage experienced by a muscle or connective tissue during training and the tissue’s ability to recover from such stress. This imbalance can occur when training is conducted shod – or barefooted! A weak or overly tight hamstring muscle which has been undone by excessive mileage won’t care if its owner was running barefooted or wearing shoes – it will still feel the pain.

Now it is certainly true that barefoot and shod running are different from kinematic and kinetic standpoints, and this may have a bearing on injury rates. Shod running, at least shod running in big-heeled modern running shoes, almost automatically means RFS. With RFS, the ankle plantar-flexes immediately after impact as the bottom surface of the foot moves downward to make contact with the pavement. This places the shin muscles under strain immediately after heel impact, as they have to control this significant plantar flexion. In contrast, during barefoot (FFS or MFS) running the ankle immediately dorsi-flexes after impact, placing eccentric strain on the Achilles tendon and calf muscles as they attempt to control dorsi-flexion. Thus, it’s possible that shod RFS might be linked with a higher risk of shin injuries, while barefoot FFS and MFS could be connected with a greater rate of Achilles and calf maladies. This notion has not been tested yet, however.

One thing is for certain: If you throw your running shoes in the trash bin and embark on your usual training program in the barefoot condition, you will probably soon be calling your sports-medicine physician (and perhaps looking for that trash bin). This is because if you have been running in shoes you are probably a RFS runner, and when you change to the naked-foot condition you will most likely become MFS or FFS. This will change the forces applied to various parts of your lower limbs, and – specifically – your Achilles and calf will come under pressures which they have not encountered before in your lifetime as a runner. So, please proceed cautiously if you decide to let the skin hit the road.

What does EducatedRunner recommend? The use of very comfortable, relatively minimal running shoes which permit actual proprioception, protect the bottoms of the feet from rough surfaces, and are conducive to mid-foot striking (MFS). From a performance standpoint, this overall strategy should eliminate the braking action commonly associated with RFS (the foot tends to land out in front of the center of mass, creating a slowing effect with RFS) and thus should upgrade speed and enhance economy. A shift from RFS to MFS will also eliminate the “impact transient” which might be a cause of running injury, and it will heighten the compliance of the leg, fostering the ability to run on surfaces of increased hardness without amplifying the impact forces experienced by the legs. MFS also tends to lead to an increased cadence while running (> 180 steps per minute), which EducatedRunner believes is a good thing.

When you make this shift from RFS to MFS, however, be sure to do it gradually. Abruptly changing from 40 miles per week of RFS to the same volume with MFS is a sure way to find the Achilles heel in your running program.

The Striking Point

educatedrunner — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 01:47:00 GMT

A runner’s choice of foot-strike pattern is likely to have an effect on running economy, competitive performance, and the likelihood of overuse injury. The foot is the only body part which directly supplies propulsive force to the ground during running, and it is also a part of the lower limb which is highly susceptible to injury.

The two most commonly used foot-strike techniques are the rear-foot strike (RFS), in which the heel of the running shoe is the first structure which makes impact with the ground during gait, and the mid-foot strike (MFS), in which the middle portion of the running-shoe sole makes initial contact. In a recent, elite-level half-marathon, about 75 percent of participants were using the RFS pattern at the 15-K point of the race, with 24 percent utilizing MFS and 1 percent engaged in fore-foot strike (FFS).

Many exercise scientists and coaches recommend the more-popular RFS pattern as the optimal ground-contact strategy; one theory is that RFS reduces the jarring, possibly higher-impact forces associated with MFS. Compared with MFS, RFS has been linked in one investigation with superior running economy, a key predictor of competitive performance. The mechanism for this effect on economy is unknown, although it has been suggested that RFS allows the running shoe and skeletal system to absorb ground-impact forces more effectively, thus reducing required muscular forces and lowering oxygen-consumption rate.

While experienced runners tend to favor RFS over MFS by at least a three-to-one margin, motion analysis of Olympic-Games competitors has suggested that Olympic medalists and are more likely to employ MFS. In addition, video analysis of world-champion and world-record-holding runners, including Paul Tergat, Haile Gebrselassie, and Paula Radcliffe, has indicated that such competitors employ MFS and occasionally FFS, not RFS, both while training and competing.

Research has also shown that the frequency of the MFS pattern increases with competitive ability; in one study carried out with elite- and near-elite-level runners, 36 percent of the male, top-50 finishers employed MFS in a race, vs. just 20 percent of the 51^st to 200^th-place runners in the same competition. In this investigation, MFS was utilized by three of the first seven female finishers (43 percent) but by only four of the other 28, slower women in the race (14 percent).

Compared with RFS, performance may be enhanced with MFS because ground-contact time is shorter (by about 17 milliseconds at a running velocity of approximately 5 to 5.5 meters per second and by approximately 10 milliseconds at slower speeds). As a consequence of the more-abridged contact time, stride rate is also higher for MFS at any specific speed. Improvements (decreases) in ground-contact time and increases in stride rate have been linked with enhanced running economy and faster 5-K performances. In addition, a key difference between the top competitors in an elite road race and the slower elite performers in the same competition is the shorter average ground-contact time of the faster finishers. Such findings suggest that MFS may be the superior foot-strike pattern from a competitive standpoint.

Although the world’s-best endurance runners prefer MFS over RFS, the effects of MFS and RFS on running economy have yet to be determined. As mentioned, one study has detected enhanced economy with RFS, compared with MFS. Research has also revealed that runners tend to adopt the most-economical running style possible for their individual anatomical and physiological characteristics. At least 75 percent of experienced runners favor RFS over MFS, suggesting that rear-foot striking may be the most-economical pattern.

It is highly likely that the world’s-best endurance runners have optimized most aspects of their running mechanics, however. Given that running economy is such a strong predictor of performance, the ubiquity of MFS among super-elite runners suggests that MFS may produce highly economical running. Compared with MFS, it is also clear that RFS leads to a more-extended leg at foot strike and a longer time of maximum knee flexion during the support phase of gait. This suggests that RFS produces a longer period of muscle activation per running step, which might increase the oxygen cost of running and lead to poorer economy with the RFS pattern.

There is very little scientific information available to assess whether MFS and RFS have differing effects on the likelihood of running injury. Ground-reaction force (GRF) is thought to be an important predictor of running injury; runners with higher vertical maximal forces tend to experience greater lower-extremity pain, and elite runners with elevated ground-reaction forces tend to have an increased risk of stress fracture. The extent of motion around the ankle and knee joints during gait is also believed to be a predictive factor for injury.

It is clear that MFS and RFS produce different patterns of ground-reaction force. Runners who employ RFS generally demonstrate a pronounced, initial spike in GRF during the first few moments of stance which is usually absent when MFS is the ground-contact strategy. In contrast, average peak-to-peak amplitude for medio-lateral GRF can often be three times greater in MFS runners, compared with RFS competitors.

Research reveals that MFS and RFS are associated with differing patterns of muscular work, force production and power absorption in various parts of the leg during running. Compared with RFS, MFS has been linked with higher peak power absorption and eccentric work at the ankle during gait. It is possible that these effects may lead to an overworking of the lower-leg muscle groups and increase the risk of Achilles-tendon injury for MFS runners. Other research has suggested that runners who attempt to “convert” from RFS to MFS experience significant muscle fatigue and severe delayed-onset muscle soreness (although these factors may merely be the result of a change in running style and thus motor-recruitment patterns, rather than a reflection of the negative characteristics of MFS).

Although RFS may reduce the forces placed on the ankle during running, research suggests that it tends to increase the power absorption and total work performed at the knee, compared with MFS. Thus, it is possible that RFS could be connected with a higher rate of knee injury, compared with MFS.

Accelerometers attached to the skin or embedded in the tibia have been utilized to gauge loads placed on the lower extremity during running. Accelerometer studies demonstrate that peak acceleration measures are greater at slower stride rates (and thus longer stride lengths) for any specific running speed. Such data suggest that the loading rate for impact forces would be lessened by a shift from RFS to MFS, since the latter is strongly linked with higher stride rates and shorter strides.

Nonetheless, it is clear that the differing effects of MFS and RFS on ground-reaction forces, rotational forces, and muscle and tendon strain in various parts of the leg during running are not yet well-understood.

The bottom lines? Although scientific research has not exactly sung the praises of MFS over RFS, EducatedRunner believes that this is one area in which scientific investigating has been rather deficient. EducatedRunner strongly endorses the use of the MFS pattern during running and believes that it enhances economy, promotes performance, and lessens the likelihood of injury, compared with RFS. EducatedRunner is now involved in a research project to compare the merits of MFS and RFS and will write much more about this topic in coming months.

Barefoot, Nearly Barefoot, and Bearfoot Running

educatedrunner — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 18:59:00 GMT

Barefoot running is taking off! One reason for this is the increasingly popular story which is being spun about the nature of a barefoot run: According to some “experts” (and of course many non-experts), unshod running decreases impact forces with the ground, reduces the likelihood of injury, and also enhances running economy, a key predictor of performance. Compared with stuffing one’s feet in 800-gram brogans with mattress-like mid-soles, barefoot running also appears to be particularly natural and “free,” making it attractive to many runners.

A beautiful romance, overall, but one small, thorny point is that scientific research on barefoot running (and the difference between shod and unshod harrying) is still a bit limited, especially from performance and injury standpoints.

Nonetheless, the barefoot bandwagon is surging forward, carrying along with it expensive products which allow runners to mimic barefoot running. The Nike Free shoes introduced to the market a few years ago represented an attempt to reproduce the patterns and forces of barefoot running without the trouble of actually putting one’s soles on the line.

And one current form of naked-foot imitating is to run clad in Vibram Five Fingers light-weight “shoes.” The Vibrams are thought to allow the bare-skin experience without abrasive experiences between the corpus callosum of the plantar surfaces of runners’ feet and the road or trail.

In a study carried out at the Institute of Sport Medicine and Sport Science in Rome, eight experienced barefoot runners ran with the Vibrams, with regular running shoes, and with nothing at all on their feet. When running barefooted, the athletes made contact with the ground in a more plantar-flexed position at the ankle, compared with shod hurrying (i. e., they tended to be mid-foot strikers without their shoes). When unshod, the runners had shorter contact times with the ground, more-abbreviated stride lengths, lower impact forces with the ground, and higher stride rates.

How did Five Fingers check out? Well, the Vibrams were linked with lower oxygen-consumption rates and diminished peak impact forces, compared with wearing shoes. As was the case with barefoot running, Five-Fingers pacing produced potent plantar-flexion for ground contact.

So, this Roman research rang a positive bell for barefoot running, since impact forces were lower and economy was enhanced. Five Fingers seemed to win, too, but wait: There was nothing necessarily special about the Vibrams, no unique characteristics which produced the plantar-flexed landings, lower peak impact forces, and drop-offs in oxygen consumption. It’s just that the Vibrams were much lighter and thinner than regular running shoes, allowing the barefoot mimicry to go on.

And since that’s the case, there’s really no reason to shell out $80 for a set of Vibrams which probably cost no more than five dollars to make. A pair of good-old fashion bedroom slippers will protect the soles of the feet from rocks and glass on one’s favorite running route, and they will also be associated with more-plantar-flexed landings, smaller impact forces, and nicer economy. Plus, the darned things are inexpensive. You can get seven pairs of them, one for each day of the week, for the price of a single set of Five Fingers.

THE CLOUDS IN THE BACKGROUND

educatedrunner — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 16:56:00 GMT

On a magnificent Sunday in early September, I took my 12-year-old daughter to the Michigan State Fair in Detroit, and it was one of those times when it is easy to think, "We'll never have a day quite like this again."

And when you also think, just below the surface, that time is passing way too quickly, after all I was just walking my daughter, one-day-old, down the street in her carriage, just home from the hospital, it can’t really be 12 years ago, and now I barely see her and she is six years away from leaving for college.

It was sunny, dry, and beautiful at the Fair, the light cleansed and pure, the temp at 77, the crowd exhilarated and screaming on the scary rides, laughing and talking, walking down the midway and taking in huge quantities of home-made lemonade and sugar-coated elephant ears. No one cared that the day was going by too quickly, everyone was having too much fun to notice that my daughter and her friend were going on ride after ride, including some that they had no business being on, huge steel contraptions which threw them high in the air with wild spins and then jerked them downward with violent accelerations.

I was the guardian, the one keeping track of time, watching the clock because of our necessary six-o-clock departure, feeling those 12 years gone by, and the day was so beautiful and fragile that it was also filled with extremely intense pain. Instead of enjoying the moments, the succession of rides, the smiles and shrieks of delight, I was focused on how soon the day would be over – on how quickly cherished things can pass away.

When I sent my friend Dave an account of what had happened at the Fair, he replied that I was failing to look for and appreciate “moments of perfection.” As he pointed out quite wisely, many, many beautiful things had happened at the fair, but I had filtered them through my preoccupation with the transitory nature of life and thus had failed to receive and enjoy them.

Thanks to Dave, things went much, much better two weeks later when my daughter and I traveled to an old country mill and discovered two moments of near perfection, one when I steered her away from the graveled path on the edge of the apple orchard into the interior, where we found a dark, grassy alleyway with trees brimming with Galas on either side. She was entranced with her apple picker, although it was nothing more than a long broom stick with a lacrosse-like trapper at the end, with protruding wire fingers to strip branches of the reddest and juiciest orbs. I taught her how to reach the highest fruit with her picker and how to taste the most-promising apples with no feeling of stealing - and to throw the left-over cores on the ground without the guilt of polluting or littering. Each bite of gorgeous Gala produced a mix of sugar and juice on the apple's edge, causing nearby bees to behave like cockatiels and walk along our hands to get to the line between white and red, the luscious border. The bees were so engrossed in their task and drunk with fermented sugar that it never occurred to them to sting, and we filled our sack merrily, until it was half-full, when my daughter announced that it was time to feed the fish in a nearby pond.

We rushed back to the apple barn with our too-sparsely populated sack, coaxed a bag of fish food out of a reluctant, wanting-to-go-home vendeuse, and walked hurriedly to the pond, which we found to be perfect, devoid of afternoon pickers and humanity of any sort, with thin lines sketched on the glassy green surface by hurrying water striders. At first the pond seemed empty of fish, too, but a few despairing throws of pellets into the water suddenly produced a collection of catfish mouths, gaping and swallowing, moved along by the swirling and splashing bodies of the gigantic fish. Albino carp tried to sneak past the thrusting barbels and slapping caudal fins, but the catfish were far too aggressive, keeping the beautiful white streaks at bay and away from the prizes, the tiny nuggets which my daughter was tossing so happily into the water.

The fish were so tame that they followed my daughter right along the shore, moving in rhythm with her walking; the purplish cats had no fear and rolled somersaults in the water under my daughter’s relentless shower of food. She talked to the fish, saying “Here” with each sprinkling and “Come on little fella” to a small, bold cat which nearly came out of the water to get the choicest grains. Clouds edged over the sun as we finished the catfish dinner, and so our walk back through the appled woods was especially dark and particularly moody and happy. There was no need to talk in the car as we returned to Lansing.

And so it goes with our training. When we focus on nothing more than what we are doing - those small moments of perfection within our workouts, that’s when we train most effectively and thus become much-better runners.

If we are thinking, “I should be doing this much better, I should be hitting my splits, I should be running a lot faster,” that’s when we relinquish control of what we are doing. That’s when our running economy goes south, and that’s when we lose our so-necessary moments of perfection. Those perfect moments are present when we abandon our dark thoughts and begin moving our muscles and joints in smooth and efficient ways – and thus enjoy the thrill of movement. That exhilaration can be there, suddenly, even when our splits have been bad or the pace of our long run has been too slow.

Although it is a difficult concept for many runners, it is actually OK to throw away all negative thinking during training and racing. And it is even better than OK to throw oneself into the excitement of the moment, the powerful bounding from one leg to the other, the sensation of flying along the ground.

When we think, darkly, “Oh, I’m tired and I’ve still got five more intervals to complete (or five more miles to run),” that’s when we shut out a wondrous moment of perfection, and that’s when our running becomes much, much less than it can be.

When running a workout or race, it is not the time to think about the hostility of the universe, the unjustness of life, or a previous failure as a runner. It is a time to be perfect.

THE BEST TRAINING AFTER YOUR VVO2MAX TEST

educatedrunner — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 15:10:00 GMT

The six weeks after a vVO₂max test are often the busiest time in a runner’s life. Shocking that a simple six-minute exam could create such a productive frenzy, but the vVO₂max effort can do everything – evaluate fitness, set up stunning workouts, and even establish goal pace for an important race.

The test is straightforward. After a warm-up which fires up your nervous system, on a day when you are recovered and feeling great, run as far as you can on the track in just six minutes. Measure your distance covered by counting laps and eyeballing lengths from familiar track marks or using a hardware-store’s measuring wheel (if you have a GPS device, simply run on any flat surface with your contraption in play). Cool down in either case, and you are ready for six remarkable weeks of training.

Once you have your six-minute distance, it’s easy to calculate vVO₂max. Let’s say that you run 1537 meters in six minutes, for example (bear in mind that the following math will work for any distance). 1537 divided by 360 seconds (the total time of the test in seconds) = 4.27 meters per second. That’s your vVO₂max.

Now, 4.27 meters per second does not exactly produce much harmony when we are out for a run. Most of us wouldn’t know whether we were hitting 4.27 meters per second during a session or not. Not good, since the goal of vVO₂max workouts is to run precisely at vVO₂max.

So, let’s always convert vVO₂max into a 400-meter tempo - that will make things much-more manageable. 400 meters divided by 4.27 meters per second = 93.7 seconds per 400 meters. For convenience, let’s call it 94 seconds per 400 meters. We’re now ready to set up some brilliant, high-intensity workouts.

For example, a few days after your test, you could run 10 X 200 meters in 47 seconds each (that’s 94 seconds per 400 tempo). Warm up well before a workout like this, and of course cool down and stretch afterward (we’ll deal with optimal warm-ups, cool-downs, and stretching in future blogs).

By dictates of the Billat Convention, recovery intervals inside a vVO₂max session are always equal in time duration to the work intervals and consist of easy running, not walking. So, in our 10 X 200 meters in 47-seconds-each example, you would jog for 47 seconds after every 47-second work interval. There’s not much science behind this, but – anecdotally – making the recovery intervals longer can harm the blood-lactate and oxygen-consumption characteristics of the workout (which you don’t want to do), and trimming the recovery intervals can make it difficult to hit all of your work intervals in the sweet bull’s eye.

Progressing with your vVO₂max workouts is important, so during week two you could perform something like 6 X 400 in 94 seconds each. Progression with vVO₂max training involves lengthening the work intervals and the total time spent at vVO₂max per session.

As long as the 400 workout has gone well, week three could see 8 X 400 in 94 each, with 94 recoveries.

Week four would then have 6 X 600 in (94 + 47) = 141 seconds (2:21) each, with 2:21 jog recoveries.

Weeks five and six would then be set up for 5 X 800 in 3:08 each, with 3:08 restorations.

A few rules to remember: Conduct one vVO₂max session per week, not two. Carry out vVO₂max training on days when you are well-rested. Don’t fall into a depression if you miss a few splits here and there – just relax and keep working; the results will come. And don’t use work intervals which are more than a few seconds longer than three minutes.

After six weeks, you’ll enjoy a shiny new lactate-threshold speed and enhanced economy, things which vVO₂max training improves. And of course you’ll probably have a faster vVO₂max, too. Which means it will be time for a six-minute vVO₂max re-test! And then – most likely – a subsequent, well-deserved upgrade in your training intensity for your next six-week training period. After all, you’ll be a better runner.

In an upcoming blog, we’ll look at using your little vVO₂max test to create goal paces for races, even long competitions like half-marathons and marathons.

SCHEDULE FOR OWEN'S VERMONT GET-AWAY ANNOUNCED

educatedrunner — Thu, 16 Jul 2009 06:00:00 GMT

The full schedule for Owen’s August Running Get-Away in Vermont is now available:

OWEN’S RUNNING GET-AWAY

AT THE GOVE HILL RETREAT

THETFORD, VERMONT

AUGUST 15-20, 2009

“The top performances of the future will, increasingly, result from ‘spirit’ and high intelligence. All things will be found to be possible – when we understand truly the principles, fundamentals, and mysteries of training.” – Percy Cerutty, How to Become a Champion

SCHEDULE FOR THE WEEK

SATURDAY, AUGUST 15

3:00-5:30 P. M. - Meet Owen at Manor House, check in to room (if you are not a commuter), unpack, tour Gove Hill Retreat, relax by Gove Lake, rest

5:30-7:00 P. M. – Sumptuous evening meal in Manor House dining hall

7:00-9:00 P. M. - First “class-room” session: Introduction to the camp, ice-breaking activities

SUNDAY, AUGUST 16 (General-Strengthening Day) (aka “Woodstock: One Rocking Place to Run”)

Schedule for the day

6:30 A. M. – First run of camp: From Prosper Road in Woodstock to the Taftsville Covered Bridge by way of the carriage trails of Marsh Billings National Park

8:00 A. M. – Bread-breaking in always-friendly dining area

9:30-11:00 A. M. – Class-room session: Training Theory I

11:15 A. M. – 12:30 P. M. - Demo session: How to warm up and cool down in optimal ways (aka “Runners Have Nervous Systems, too”)

12:30-1:30 P. M. – Lunch, with bounties of the season, at Manor House

1:30-3:45 P. M. - Free time

3:45-5:30 P. M. - Workout: General strengthening, using bars, bells, and balls, at Gove Hill Retreat soccer field

5:30-6:45 P. M. – Another inspiring meal prepared by our hosts, Bernice and Bill

7:00-9:00 P. M. – Class-room session: Tales of Old Kenya, plus Training Theory II

Quote for the Day: “Always remember that the goal of your training is not to knock yourself out with hard workouts and then hope for the best; your goal is to gradually work your way up to higher and higher levels of fitness.” – Sammy Lelei (59:24 PR for half-marathon)

MONDAY, AUGUST 17 (Running-Specific-Strengthening Day) (aka “The Appalachian-Trail Sampler”)

Schedule for the day

7:00 A. M - vVO₂max testing at Dartmouth College track in Hanover, New Hampshire

8:30 A. M. - Breakfast

9:30-11:00 A. M. – Class-room session: Understanding vVO₂max and vVO₂max training, plus the value of running-specific strength training

11:15 A. M.-12:45 P. M. - Demo workout: Running-specific-strengthening movements (at Gove-Hill athletic field, with majestic views of the Green Mountains in the background)

12:45-1:30 P. M. – Lunch (another inspired meal from Bill and Bernice)

1:30-3:45 P. M. - Free time

3:45 P. M. - Incredible Kenyan-style run on the Appalachian Trail, with bogs, meadows, beaver ponds, and stately trees

5:30-6:45 P. M. - Evening meal

7:00-9:00 P. M. – Class-room session: Running-specific-strengthening follow-up, analysis of Horwill’s Law of Running, plus putting together a logical training program, with all proper progressions

Quote for the Day: “When you get really tired while you are running, simply speed up! You will feel much better if you do.” – Sammy Lelei

TUESDAY, AUGUST 18 (Hill-Training Day) (aka The Mount Etna Eruption)

Schedule for the day

6:30 A. M. – Getting fired up: A run to the Gile Mountain Fire Tower (and back, of course)

8:00 A. M. - Breakfast

9:30-11:00 A. M. – We travel to Etna, New Hampshire for our class-room session, which involves speed secrets - what you need to do to get faster, plus introductions to hill and lactate-threshold training, and continuation of work on overall training program

11:15 A. M. - 12:45 P. M. – Running like royalty on Etna’s King Hill, introduction to hill drills and different kinds of hill running

12:45-1:30 P. M. – Mid-day picnic lunch in Etna

1:30-3:45 P. M. - Free time (possible trip to Dartmouth College and Hood Museum in Hanover – or King Arthur Flour in Norwich)

3:45-5:30 P. M. – Fun workout (location TBD), followed by a cool-off in the crystal-clear Gove Lake

5:30-6:45 P. M. – Seafood Night: Bill works his magic with sea-food recipes and delicacies from New England

7:00-9:00 P. M. – Class-room session: How they do it – secrets of the elite Kenyan runners

Quote for the Day: “It is OK not to train for three or four days in a row, or even longer, if you feel you need the recovery. The person who works out every day is usually as well-prepared for his/her races as a donkey.” - Sammy Lelei

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 19 (Explosive-Training Day) (aka Unlocking the Speed Which Has Been Lurking, Hidden, in Our Legs

Schedule for the day

6:30 A. M. - Introduction to explosive training (location TBD)

8:00 A. M. - Breakfast

9:30-11 A. M. – Class-room session: Explosive training, sports nutrition, specific race preparations, principles of cross training, building your program

11:15 A. M. - 12:30 P. M. - Demo session: Finish explosive and running-specific drills

12:30-1:30 P. M - Lunch

1:30-3:45 P. M. - Free time

3:45-5:30 P. M. – Running with the dogs: “Lactate stackers” on Dogford Road

5:30 P. M. – Cajun Night: Bill offers up the special, incredibly tasty Cajun dishes he learned to prepare as a top chef in New Orleans

7:00 P. M. – Fun activities, with a trip to the historic Norwich Inn

Quote for the Day: “Never enter races in France. At the awards ceremonies following the races, it is very difficult to tell whether you are headed for the guillotine or for the presentation of a medal and an actual paycheck. Plus, when you get back home, it is very difficult to convince Kenyan banks that French francs have any value.” – Sammy Lelei

THURSDAY, AUGUST 20 (The Synthesis)

Schedule for the day

6:30 A. M. – Apocalyptic graduation run on the incredible Cloudland Road

8:00 A. M. – Festive breakfast

9:30 A. M. – Class-room session: Summary of week, putting all the elements of great training together into a cohesive and productive plan

10:45 A. M. – Final general-strengthening session

12:30 P. M. – Bill’s special farewell lunch

1:30 P. M. – Camp ends

Quote for the Day: “When we say good-bye in Kenya, we always say ‘Kwa heri,’ which means ‘Go in peace and blessedness.’” – Sammy Lelei

Educated's Excellent Ekstrand: His Fitness Is Up in Uppland

educatedrunner — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 00:04:00 GMT

The runners coached by EducatedRunner.com have been doing extremely well. A case in point is Ingmar Ekstrand, an intelligent, tough-minded, 63-year-old runner who hails from the beautiful university city of Uppsala, Sweden. Ingmar has life-time PR of 3:10 for the marathon and in the past year has hit 20:43 during a club-run 5K and 3:34:00 for the 26.2-mile event. Before coming to EducatedRunner, he was a confirmed Lydiardite, with weeks filled with 17- to 18-kilometer runs and a nearly mandatory 25- to 30-K, LSD workout each Sunday. He arrived at EducatedRunner’s door step wanting to be faster in shorter races and more-confident in competitions.

At the beginning of this month, coach Owen placed Ingmar on a lower-volume, higher-quality training plan, dropping his weekly Ks from 100 to about 60, boosting Ingmar’s workout intensity, and adding strength training to his program (the combination of quality running and resistance work is a cornerstone of the EducatedRunner philosophy).

Over the past three weeks, Ingmar has completed some notable workouts, including the following:

(1) 7 X 400 in 87 seconds each, with 87-second jog recoveries (a session which EducatedRunner.com would term a vVO₂max-plus workout),

(2) 3 X 1000 in 3:50-3:55 each, with four-minute jog recoveries (the projected split for this one was 4:18, but Ingmar felt so good with his reduced volume that he took off and felt great at the faster speeds!),

(3) A marathon-prep session, with 6K easily, 12K at marathon tempo, and 6K easily,

(4) Three circuit sessions with series of 10 different exercises interspersed with high-quality running segments ranging in length from 400 to 800 meters, and finally

(5) A vVO₂max test, which involved running all-out for six minutes continuously. This was a shock to Ingmar’s system: After a winter of running at tempos of 11 to 12 km/hour, his neuromuscular system was jolted by the update to 16 km/hour! Ingmar covered 1610 meters during the exam, for an average of 4.5 meters per second (89.5 seconds per 400 meters). Completion of the vVO₂max test provides a benchmark which can be used to chart gains in running capacity in the months ahead. vVO₂max can also be employed to create a variety of high-intensity workouts, including the vVO₂max-plus session described above (# 1).

This kind of training pushed Ingmar’s fitness up so high that Saturday he won the Regional (Uppland) Cross Country Championship (4K) in his division, completed over a very tough and hilly course. The key period of the race was the second lap, when Ingmar overtook his opponents during a challenging uphill segment and then charged steadily toward the finish (the photo at the top of this story shows Ingmar, in second place, getting ready to make his decisive move). He is looking forward to a series of upcoming races and of course to toeing the starting line for the Stockholm Marathon on May 30.

As Ingmar himself points out, moving his six-minute, vVO₂max-test distance up to 1700 meters, a reasonable goal, would represent a close-to-6-percent upgrade in vVO₂max and thus in all of his race times. Before too long, he will be in sub-20-minute territory for the 5K, for example, and he will knock about 13 minutes off his marathon time. Stay tuned to this blog for further reports on Ingmar’s progress. He’ll be transitioning soon from general strengthening (as represented by the circuit workouts) to running-specific strength training and then on to hill and explosive work.

VAK Training Helps You Reach Your Goals

educatedrunner — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 23:39:00 GMT

VAK training can transform your running. VAK refers to the practice of stating your running goal verbally – and then experiencing the achievement of the goal Visually, in an Auditory fashion, and Kinesthetically.

For example, your goal might be the achievement of a certain finishing time in a marathon. To begin a VAK training session for this goal, you would simply make yourself very comfortable, relax, close your eyes, and say, “I am going to finish the Boston Marathon in 2:59 (or any relevant race and time).”

Follow up your statement by experiencing the finish of the race Visually. Think how you will look as you run the final 800 meters to the finish line, your legs striding forward powerfully, your arms moving rhythmically and in synch with your legs, your shoulders back, your head up, and with a broad smile on your face. Visualize how it will look to take that final stride across the finish line, to accept the congratulations of the race-support crew, to walk toward the recovery area with a feeling of great fulfillment and accomplishment. Focus on such visual images for a few minutes, relaxing and enjoying them completely.

Then, experience the final moments of the marathon in an Auditory fashion. Hear the cheering for you as you approach the finish line, the clapping from bystanders and the strong words of support from the crowd. Hear the announcer calling out your name. Hear the sound of your feet bounding along the ground and the sound of your very rhythmic breathing. Hear the heartfelt congratulations you will receive after you cross the finish line. Hear your friends shouting to you, “You did it!”

Finally, experience the finish of the race kinesthetically. Imagine how great it will feel to see the finish line ahead. Think how exhilarated you will be as you make your final charge toward the finish line. Feel your nervous system and leg muscles waking up for that final surge. Think how the ground will feel as you stride across those last few meters. And feel how great it will be to relax totally after you cross the finish line. Your whole body will be warm, and your spirit will be joyful; your mind and body will be unified.

The Law of Attraction says that we make things happen by thinking about them in advance. It says that we make our goals real for the first time and begin to believe and trust that we can attain them by thinking about them deeply, by thinking about what they really are and how much we really want them, and by experiencing them in the VAK ways. I know that VAK works. I never truly realized that I could attain my goals until I began using VAK. Regular practice of VAK also brings great internal peace; it is a form of meditation.

VAK is also the perfect antidote to negative or doubting thoughts. If you think “I might be able to achieve this goal,” then that doubting thought becomes ingrained in your mind, forms a groove right across your cerebral cortex, takes on a life of its own and “lights up” on race day, and – sure enough – on your day of competition you might be able to attain your goal, but then again you might not. It is important to use VAK immediately whenever the doubtful voice shows up, during your preparations for a key race or within the race itself. VAK is the perfect anti-venom for the crippling fatigue and I-can’t-go-on syndrome which can strike during competitions. When exhaustion strikes, you can call up your VAK images, sounds, and feelings instantly – and say “I am going to do this!!”

VAK is also extremely forward-thinking. When you employ VAK, you focus on future successes, not past disappointments and mistakes. VAK is an extreme confidence-builder: As you see, hear, and feel yourself succeeding, you come to believe that you indeed have the power to reach your most-important goal.

Let’s face it: You want to reach your running goal very badly. VAK puts your whole mind and body to work on the task of achieving your goal, and hitting your target time becomes very real and absolutely possible. Using VAK can be a very emotional process, helping you see just how important your goals are to you – and why they are important. You’ll understand yourself better when you employ VAK regularly. Systematic use of VAK will boost your self-esteem and create the mental state which is necessary for optimal performance. When that mental approach is combined with the physical prowess you have achieved through challenging training, your previous limits will be broken, and you will soar far above your previous performances.

Why Have a Coach?

educatedrunner — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 14:03:00 GMT

Endurance runners sometimes ask why it is beneficial to go to the trouble and expense of having a coach. They’re thinking that it might be just as good (or maybe even better) to forgo the weekly or monthly tutoring of a real-live human mentor and to follow a high-quality “canned program” instead. After all (the thinking goes), if you’ve got a great schedule to follow, isn’t that enough, especially if you are the kind of runner who doesn’t need or like “hand-holding?”

What is forgotten during such cognitions is that working with a good coach is like having a 10-year-old checking out your training, a check-out which can lead to some notable PRs.

In one of his memorable films, the great runner Groucho Marx, portraying a soldier-like commander of some sort who was examining a chart of military movements, uttered the famous line, “A child of three could understand this map.” After a moment of reflection, he followed up with, “So bring me a child of three, as soon as possible.”

Groucho was admitting his cartographic shortcomings, but he was also acknowledging the fact that a set of innocent, naïve eyes, unaccustomed to looking at things in the usual way, can often understand complicated situations and produce important insights.

That’s certainly one reason why I like to take my 10-year-old daughter grocery shopping with me: She locates important things in the store that I would never see. Just the other day she found “pinwheel picks” in a spot within the store which I had walked by scores of times over the last few years, without ever detecting the presence of these unique items.

In case you are not a regular pinwheel-pick user, pinwheel picks are simply extra-long toothpicks with brightly colored pinwheels at their ends, and they automatically help kids reach PRs in the fruit-consumption segments of their meals. Put a fork or spoon next to a bowl of fruit, and your child might eat about half of what’s in the bowl, if you are fortunate. Stick a pinwheel pick in one of the pieces of fruit, and all of the fruit will soon be gone. It’s just a lot more fun eating fruit with something which has a colorful pinwheel at one end, compared with stabbing the stuff with the same implement used to ingest chicken.

My daughter could see something in the store which would instantly double her fruit consumption - but which I would never see, because I didn’t know how to look. I knew how to search for high-quality fruit but not how to seek the key to the achievement of my goal – greater consumption of that fruit. In effect, I was walking through the store with blinders on.

A good coach knows how to find things which you can’t see. That’s why I say it’s like having a 10-year-old take a close look at your training. A helpful coach can “see” counter-productive self-talk during races, self-talk which might seem completely normal to you. An involved coach can also detect other problems which you might not think about (or might not know how to assess), including low carbohydrate intake and an overall mental approach to training which precludes major improvement. These are difficulties that a “canned program” can’t address.

A good coach also knows how to define the problem at hand correctly. In the case of the fruit-eating, I had defined the overall process as: Go to store, acquire high-quality fruit, drive fruit home, present fruit to daughter, daughter eats fruit. The most-important part of the process for me was the acquisition of the “high-intensity” fruit: If that were achieved, “daughter eats” should become reality, I thought.

My daughter (the actual fruit-eater) had defined the process correctly, that is, in a way which would help her actually improve her fruit stamina. Her conception was simpler, too: Make fruit-eating fun, daughter eats fruit. It contained the key element – make fruit-eating fun, the factor that I was too blind to find.

A great coach can make training simpler and more fun (and therefore lower in anxiety) and can define the improvement process correctly for you. He/she can identify the key elements of training which will optimize your improvements in performance. And, he/she can guide you through the correct progressions of training, so that you’ll not only acquire high-quality “fruit” (training sessions) but will also arrange the various mangoes, apples, and oranges in exactly the right way for you.

With my coaching program, you’ll get a set of eyes which will look at you and your running in a completely new way. I’ll help you find the things which have been missing in your training and guide you carefully toward some very exciting running performances. It will be an exhilarating experience for you as you feel your running capacity soaring, and it will be a great thrill for me to see you transform your running.

To sign up for the program, click here

The Fundamentals of Usain's Insane 100-Meter Bolt

educatedrunner — Wed, 20 Aug 2008 20:00:00 GMT

Usain Bolt’s gold-medal-winning and world-record-setting 9.69-second performance over 100 meters at the Beijing Olympics was an astonishing surge of “running lightning.” Let’s take a look at how he accomplished it.

In contrast to the other sprinters in the race, who took about 44 steps to cover the 100-meter distance, Usain required only 41 steps. His step length averaged 100/41 = 2.44 meters per step. Everyone else hovered around 100/44 = 2.27 meters per step, a 7-percent diminishment (compared to Usain). It’s tempting to say that Usain won the race because of his long strides.

But hold on a minute: Step length is a function of the force placed on the ground during each contact, but it is also a variable which depends on height – longer limbs naturally lead to more-expansive strides. Usain stands 6’ 5”, according to media reports, or about 1.96 meters. The third-place finisher in the Beijing 100, Walter Dix, is only 5’ 9”, or 1.75 meters.

Among well-trained distance runners who are competing in a 5- or 10-K race, step length averages about 1.03 times height. You can readily see that things are quite different in the world of elite sprinting. During the Olympic-final 100, Usain’s relative step length was 2.44/1.96 = 1.24 times height. Walter’s relative step length was 2.27/1.75 = 1.30 times height.

Oops! We can see that Usain did not win the race because of his extraordinarily long strides. In fact, his steps were relatively shorter than Walter Dix’s, when expressed in relation to height.

What else might have accounted for Usain’s astounding speed? Actual velocity in a race is a function of just two things – step length and step rate, so let’s compared the step rates of Walter and Usain (we already know that Usain had a longer absolute step length and a shorter relative step length). Walter finished the race in 9.91 seconds to get his bronze medal, and so his step rate was 44/9.91 = 4.44 steps per second. Step rate is usually expressed in steps per minute, even when a race lasts less than one-sixth of a minute (like this Olympic final), so let’s figure Walter’s step rate that way: 4.44 steps per second X 60 seconds per minute = 266.4 steps per minute. That’s putting them down on the ground!

Usain’s step rate was 41/9.69 = 4.23 steps per second. Bringing that figure up to standard, we have 4.23 X 60 = 254 steps per minute. He was laying them down, too, but his step rate was actually 4.7-percent lower than Walter’s.

And thus we can see the fundamental nature of the competition between the two men. Usain covered more absolute ground with each step, so Walter had to try to make up for that by making more steps per second. He worked valiantly – and ran so explosively that Usain’s step rate was 4.7-percent smaller than his.

If step length had been equal – or in fact if Usain had managed less than a 4.7-percent advantage in step length over Walter, the race would have gone to the little fellow. Walter’s problem was that Usain’s step lengths were 7-percent broader. From elementary school math, we know that 7 minus 4.7 = 2.3 (here, we are simply subtracting 4.7, Walter’s advantage in step rate, from 7, Usain’s edge in step length). And 2.3 percent was almost the exact margin of difference between Walter and Usain (.023 X 9.91 = .228 seconds, just a whisker above the actual .22-second disparity).

If Walter had boosted his step length by “just” 2.4 percent (greater than the 2.3-percent difference between the two men), he would have won the race. However, bear in mind that an elongation of step length might have hurt Walter’s step rate (because more time would have been needed on the ground to generate the force necessary to fly farther between steps). Most importantly, during very high-speed running a runner reaches his/her limit on step length before reaching his/her limit on step rate. In other words, beyond a certain point (as a runner gets closer and closer to max speed), further increases in velocity can only be accomplished by upping step rate, not by boosting step length. Thus, it’s very likely that Walter could not have augmented step length by even .1 percent and maintained his 10.09 meters per second velocity (100/9.91).

The bottom line? Usain won the race not because of his extraordinarily long steps, which were actually less impressive than Walter’s, taking height into account. He won despite having a lower relative step length and a slower step rate. The key was that the difference in absolute step lengths between Usain and Walter (a “plus” for Usain) was greater than the disparity in step rates (a “minus” for the gold-medal winner). Putting it another way, Usain had optimized his combination of step length and rate, producing a lightning-Bolt of astonishing running.

This begs the questions: How can endurance runners optimize step length and step rate and thus become intrinsically faster runners? This is important not just for “kicking” at the ends of races: Scientific research has revealed that 50- and 300-meter sprint times do a better job of predicting 10-K performance than VO₂max (maximal aerobic capacity). In an upcoming series of articles on this blog, we’ll cover the training strategies which are best for upgrading stride length and rate – and thus for making you a much-more-successful (and “better-educated” runner).

Limiting Fatigue When You Run

Wed, 23 Jul 2008 15:04:00 GMT

One of the great mysteries of running is why elite African endurance runners have greater fatigue-resistance, compared with runners from the rest of the world.

What do we mean by fatigue-resistance? It is simply the ability to sustain a high-quality pace.

If you tell an elite African runner to run as far as possible at an intensity of 90 percent of maximal aerobic capacity (VO2max), he/she will often be able to race a half-marathon at that level of effort. But, if you provide the same instructions for an elite American or European distance runner, he/she will be able to run for only six or seven miles before slowing down. The elite African has greater fatigue resistance - an enhanced capacity to perform at a high intensity for a sustained period of time without diminishing pace.

Traditionally, we have tried to explain differences in performance between endurance runners by invoking an “aerobic paradigm.” Superior performances were thought to be the result of higher aerobic capacities and therefore faster speeds.

However, the disparity in fatigue-resistance between African and white runners can not be due to differences in VO2max, because research shows that elite white and black runners have similar aerobic capacities. The truth is that runners who share the same VO2max can have great differences in fatigue-resistance – and that endurance runners with higher fatigue-resistance can beat runners with greater max aerobic capacities.

In a study carried out at the University of Cape Town, nine African and eight Caucasian distance runners with similar 10-K race times, VO2max values, and peak treadmill velocities were compared (peak treadmill velocity is simply the maximal speed reached on the treadmill during a VO2max test). Despite these similarities, the African runners possessed superior fatigue resistance: They could run for 21 percent longer at an intensity of 92 percent of peak treadmill velocity, compared with the whites.

Such research suggests that the physiological factors which determine VO2max and fatigue-resistance are quite different. VO2max is easy to figure out: Since the heart is an “oxygen pump,” VO2max depends on cardiac output – and the ability of the muscles to utilize the oxygen delivered by the cardiovascular system. In contrast, exercise scientists have struggled to explain the mechanisms responsible for superior fatigue resistance.

One theory is that differences in fatigue resistance might be explained by glycogen concentrations. Runners with superior fatigue resistance might have a higher capacity to store glycogen in their muscles and liver. If this were the case, they would run low on carbohydrate fuel less quickly during endurance competitions and thus would be able to sustain quality paces for longer periods of time.

Research does show that the appearance of fatigue during distance running often coincides with the development of low liver- and muscle-glycogen levels. Scientific research has been unable to verify this “energy depletion model” of fatigue resistance, however. Note, too, that the energy depletion hypothesis suggests that individuals with different degrees of fatigue resistance would begin their races at similar percentages of VO2max, with the lower-fatigue-resistance athletes gradually falling off the pace as glycogen depletion began to develop. In the real world, runners with greater fatigue-resistance seem to adopt faster paces at very early stages in their races, before glycogen depletion becomes a factor, compared with runners with lower fatigue-resistance.

A competing theory suggests that fatigue-resistance is closely related to an athlete’s ability to dissipate heat while running. A high rate of heat accumulation during running is directly related to fatigue: Race times during the marathon and also during the 3-K steeplechase and 10K worsen as the environmental heat load increases. Runners whose internal temperatures rise slowly during running tend to experience less fatigue, compared with individuals who heat up quickly. Small runners tend to dissipate heat more quickly and experience slower increases in body temperature as they run, compared with larger runners, thanks in part to the larger surface-to-mass ratio in the smaller individuals. Interestingly enough, elite black distance runners tend to be smaller than their elite white competitors. In one study, elite blacks weighed an average of 56 kilograms, compared with elite whites, and the blacks were only 169 centimeters in height, compared with 181 centimeters for the whites. Presumably, this would have allowed the blacks to get rid of heat more easily during prolonged efforts, compared with the whites. In some research, during the shorter events of 1.65 to 3K (when heat dissipation is not such an important factor because of the brevity of the running), the performances of elite blacks and whites have been equivalent.

However, it is unlikely that heat-dissipation capacity can completely account for differences in fatigue resistance. For one thing, black African runners with similar degrees of fatigue resistance can vary tremendously in height and weight. Their wide variations in body size should produce great differences in heat-dissipation ability and thus broad disparities in fatigue resistance, but they don’t.

Furthermore, the heat-dissipation theory suggests that elite African and elite white runners should begin competitions at very similar speeds, with whites falling off the pace as heat dissipation becomes a problem. Instead, elite Africans often compete at higher speeds from the opening seconds of a race, compared with whites, when body temperatures should be equivalent.

A better theory may be that fatigue-resistance is related to the way in which runners’ leg muscles function as “reverse springs” during running. The leg muscles are often referred to as springs, but in reality they function quite differently. When an automobile hits a bump in the road, its springs first compress to soak up the energy of impact and then expand, releasing that energy. When a runner’s foot hits the ground, his/her key leg muscles actually expand (lengthen) at impact instead of compressing and then shorten, the reverse of what happens with a mechanical spring.

This muscular “stretch-shortening” cycle is quite useful to the distance runner. The rubber-band-like “snap-back” of the muscles after they have been lengthened from impact provides much of the propulsive force required to move forward. Once the muscles have been stretched during contact with the ground, the resulting shortening occurs without the need to expend energy (just as no further energy must be added to a rubber band once it is stretched to make it snap back powerfully). In effect, the energy stored in the leg muscles at impact is simply released. This is highly efficient, especially when compared with the alternative, which would require active, energy-consuming muscle contractions to get off the ground and stride forward.

This stretch-shortening cycle is not without its problems and perils, however. For one thing, research suggests that muscles become less willing to be stretched and less enthused about transferring energy in the stretched-to-shortened phase of the cycle during an extended running effort. This breakdown in muscle functioning during running has been called “stretch-shortening muscle fatigue.”

The intolerance of stretch and the slow-down in energy transfer create a situation in which both the braking and push-off components of the stance phase of gait may be elongated, leading to a slow-down in stride rate and thus running speed. The resistance to stretch which develops during a prolonged run could also reduce propulsive force, shortening stride length. These changes can not be explained by variations in oxygen utilization or upswings in body temperature: They are related to the quality of the muscles and their ability to stand up to the stresses of the stretch-shortening process. Runners with “higher-quality” muscles should achieve and sustain optimal stretch-shortening function longer during competitions and thus should have greater fatigue-resistance.

What actually causes the breakdown in stretch-shortening function? Stretch-shortening expert Paavo Komi of Finland notes that the stretch-shortening cycle actually damages muscle cells during prolonged running. Much of the damage probably occurs when muscles are stretched out at impact with the ground, and the muscular mayhem has a significant effect on muscle mechanics, as well as muscle and joint stiffness.

If all this is true, runners with the greatest fatigue resistance would be the ones with the greatest contravention of stretch-shortening muscle injury during running. The key question would then be: What training techniques optimize the limiting of stretch-shortening muscle injury? It would appear that training techniques which accentuate and exaggerate the stretch-shortening properties of muscles, for example very high-speed running and explosive, running-specific drills, would create the greatest advances in stretch-shortening function. On the other hand, high-mileage training might induce the greatest stretch-shortening damage, simply because of the very high volume of stretch-shortening cycles – and the lack of stimulus for improvement of stretch-shortening function (since the cycle is never pushed to its max).

There is also the possibility that increased neural drive in African runners might be responsible for their enhanced ability to sustain a high percentage of VO2max. If this is the case, it would have significant training consequences for non-African runners.

Neural drive is simply the extent to which the nervous system stimulates muscles during activity. High neural drive in runners means that the nervous system is sending lots of nerve impulses to motor units in the leg muscles (motor units are simply collections of muscle fibers which are controlled by a single motor nerve); low neural drive means that the nervous system is letting muscle cells hang like anserine slabs of beef between the bones to which they are connected. If African runners have greater neural drive, it could explain their ability to run for a longer distance at any percentage of VO2max. To put it simply, the nervous systems of African runners would be more willing to stimulate leg muscle cells at a high rate over long distances, compared with the nerve-command systems of white runners. When faced with the task of running as long as possible at an intensity of 90 percent of VO2max, white-runners’ nervous systems might be more apt to say, “Are you kidding me? I don’t want to work that hard for 13 miles. Seven or eight miles should be about right.”

The notion that neural drive is linked with the greater fatigue resistance of African runners is related to the Central-Governor Model (CGM) of fatigue. The CGM says that the nervous system decides, just before a particular effort is commenced, what level of effort can be sustained over the duration of the exertion. This subconscious decision is purportedly based on the nervous-system’s assessment of what intensity can be maintained for the distance at hand without incurring significant muscle damage. A level of effort is chosen which assures a decent running speed – without producing mayhem in the muscles or disturbances to the body’s necessary physiological systems. This chosen level of exertion might be higher in African runners, compared with whites. To put it another way, Africans’ Central Governors might be more tolerant of higher intensities.

If the theory is correct, neural drive should actually decrease when runners become fatigued. If runners slow down while neural drive remains the same, then the fatigue “problem” must reside in muscles, not in the nervous system. A reduction in running speed with the same neural drive would mean that the nervous system was trying just as hard as ever to keep the muscles going, but the poor sinews were simply not up to the task of sustaining pace.

The first part of the testing of the hypothesis – looking at whether drops in neural drive are linked with fatigue – was evaluated in a study carried out by Alf Thorstensson and his colleagues at the Swedish School of Sport and Health Sciences in Stockholm, Sweden, and the Department of Neuroscience at the Karolinska Institute, also in Stockholm. Eight well-trained distance runners with an average VO2max of 69.3 ml.kg-1.min-1 participated in the research.

After a fatiguing, two-hour, 26.8-K run at 75 percent of VO2max (which corresponded with a pace of 13.4 kilometers per hour, or a tempo of 7:13 per mile), the runners’ leg muscles had not lost any of their ability to generate force (this was demonstrated via electrical stimulation of certain leg muscles). Nonetheless, muscular force production had dropped off by about 17 percent, and this was completely explained by an 18-percent reduction in neural drive. In other words, the muscles were not more tired, but the nervous system was! Alf showed that the fatigue associated with running can indeed be caused by reductions in neural drive.

What does this mean for your running? When your calves, hams, and quads begin to “tire” during your marathons or long runs, a significant part of this fatigue is likely to be caused by a reduction in neural drive.

But how do you prevent nervous-system fatigue – and how do you increase neural drive during running, so that you can move along more quickly and set PRs? Research on this subject is in its infancy – no, it is actually in its fertilization stage. But, one activity which has been linked with increased neural drive is strength training. Research suggests that relatively high intensities may be required to upgrade neural drive, employing resistances as great as 80 to 90 percent of the 1RM (one-repetition max). Running-specific strength training with pretty heavy weights may be a great way to boost neural drive (because it forces the nervous system to send mega-waves of impulses to the muscles during running-specific movements).

This is not surprising. What would be shocking would be a finding in which training which employed low levels of neural drive led to a major adaptation in which high levels of neural drive were suddenly utilized during competitions. The actual research has yet to be undertaken, but it seems likely that high-neural-drive running training, i. e., efforts which involve very high-speed running and scalding efforts over hilly terrain, will be the type of work which leads to an increased neural drive in competitive situations - and thus greater fatigue-resistance. Incidentally, this is exactly the kind of training which African runners, including the Kenyans, prefer.

Elite non-African runners who want to compete with the elite Kenyans might want to consider adopting this kind of training, along with intense running-specific strength training, in their efforts to develop Kenyan-like fatigue-resistance. The old, high-volume systems of training, ostensibly created to optimize VO2max, simply won’t get the necessary fatigue-resistance job done.

You and Your VO2max

Wed, 23 Jul 2008 14:56:00 GMT

VO₂max is not a German rocket or a type of hair treatment: It is your maximum rate of oxygen consumption. Even though it is actually a rate of oxygen use (often expressed in milliliters of oxygen consumed per kilogram of body weight per minute), it is popularly referred to as maximal aerobic capacity.

VO₂max has a bearing on your endurance-running performances, because oxygen acts as an electron catcher during energy producing metabolic processes which happen inside your cells. Without a continuous supply of oxygen to catch the electrons, the energy production grinds to a halt. Inside your muscle cells, the energy obtained as part of oxygen’s Yogi-Berra act is utilized to form ATP – a high-energy compound which is used to provide the direct energy for your muscle contractions. To put it simply, if your muscles have a high rate of oxygen utilization they can create lots of ATP while you are running your 5K or marathon, and you can usually run faster than the poor sap with a lower rate of oxygen utilization.

VO₂max responds directly to training (unless, of course, you are an experienced runner who has already maxed-out his/her aerobic capacity). A novice runner can expect a VO₂max upgrade of about 15 to 20 percent after 12 to 16 weeks of good endurance training, but the possible range of improvements is quite large. Some runners might get only a small VO₂max nudge of 2 to 3 percent, while others could possibly raise VO₂max by 80 percent or more.

Each percent improvement in VO₂max generally improves performance to a similar extent. For example, if you lift your VO₂max by 5 percent, you can expect a 3- to 6-percent enhancement of your 5-K time.

However, that is only true as long as your VO₂max-expanding training did not hurt some other variable which influences your performance. In one study, runners augmented VO₂max by 5 percent, but their 5-K performances did not improve at all because the training they carried out had hurt something called running economy, which is the actual oxygen cost of running at a certain speed. In other words, these runners had a higher max rate of oxygen consumption, but it was “costing” them more oxygen than before to run at their usual 5-K paces, and thus their performance times did not improve. As endurance runners, we ordinarily run our races at some specific, fixed percentage of VO2max. If VO₂max goes up but your oxygen cost of running a 5K stays the same, you’ll increase your 5-K pace to keep that fixed percentage constant. If your VO₂max and economy go up by similar amounts, the fixed percentage will not have changed, and your 5-K performances will stay the same.

“OK,” you’re saying, “I’d better get busy training in ways which optimize my VO₂max, but how do I do that?”

From an inside-your-body standpoint, you could hike VO₂max by boosting the size or strength of your heart, which would upgrade cardiac output (the amount of blood pumped by your heart per minute). Since your blood carries oxygen, this would increase the rate of oxygen delivery to your leg muscles. Provided the leg muscles could actually use that increased supply oxygen, your VO₂max would go up.

That’s a key point, because the leg muscles do have to get into the oxygen-utilization act. They do so through a process called mitochondrial biogenesis, during which the density of tiny structures inside muscle cells - called mitochondria – increases. The mitochondria are the stages upon which oxygen actually struts. Increase mitochondrial density, and you’ve automatically got more places where oxygen can work to create additional ATP for your running.

When you carry out good-quality, VO₂max-expanding training, your genes inside your muscle fibers which code for mitochondrial biogenesis are unlocked and “read” during the recovery period which follows, and this triggers a series of metabolic processes which cause new mitochondria to be formed. That’s a key adaptation to your training, one which you’ll want to maximize.

Another adaptation is the growth of new capillaries – tiny blood vessels – around your leg-muscle cells. As your leg muscles become more and more entwined with these capillaries, more oxygen can be “dropped off” per minute of running (remember that blood is the oxygen supplier), and thus VO₂max can increase.

What kind of training should you carry out to make all these things happen? In the old, dark days of endurance training, we believed that increased mileage was the key way to optimize VO₂max. Studies showed that increasing weekly mileage from 10 to 20 miles might produce a 10-percent spike in VO₂max – and that burgeoning from 20 to 40 miles might cause another big uptick, maybe about 6 to 7 percent or so.

However, the research also uncovered the workings of a familiar physiological principle – the law of diminishing returns. As mileage increased, VO₂max gains became more and more difficult to find. In fact, above about 60 to 70 miles per week it was impossible to measure VO₂max gains at all.

You might be quite curious about this, since elite American runners often log 100 to 120 miles of running per week, purportedly to build “aerobic endurance.” Why are they doing that?

That is actually a great question, since they are certainly not expanding VO₂max in the process. A common answer is that they are building strength and stamina, but research suggests that such training actually may weaken muscle fibers, and any strength gained might simply be the strength necessary to continue running 100-plus weeks, not the strength needed to run a 5K or marathon faster.

Research has actually shown that intense training is the most-potent producer of VO₂max upgrades. Here, “intense training” is defined as work which is carried out at speeds which cause oxygen-consumption rates to climb to 90 percent of max to VO₂max itself.

If you are a newcomer to the world of endurance running or consider yourself to be a slow runner, don’t be put off by the term “intense.” Intensity is completely relative, depending entirely on your own ability as a runner: You don’t have to run a sub-five-minute mile to carry out intense training. For many runners, for example, eight-minute per mile pace will be associated with 90 to 100 percent of VO₂max and will be great for pushing VO₂max upward.

But how can you figure where your individual VO₂max resides on the great VO₂max scale? You could go to an exercise-fizz lab and have the darned thing measured for $175 or so. But, it would be determined on a treadmill, and your oxygen consumption might be different out in the real world, on terra firma. The protocol might involve treadmill inclinations to get your oxygen consumption up pretty high, and thus your result might not reflect your VO₂max on a level surface. And – you would end up with a number, say 50 milliliters of oxygen consumed per kilogram of body weight per minute, for your VO₂max, and it would be hard to know exactly what to do with that number.

An easier and more-practical way to get a feeling for your VO₂max is to test yourself on a measured course, say a track, a measure roadway, or anywhere if you have a GPS device. On a day, when you are feeling great, simply warm up and then run as far as you can in six minutes, holding a hard, steady pace. Measure how far you have run, and then cool down with a couple of miles of light jogging.

You can then calculate a training pace which should be intense enough to push your VO2max upward. For example, if you covered 1600 meters during your six-minute test, that’s an average speed of 1600/meters divided by 360 seconds (six minutes), or 4.44 meters per second. As you are training, it’s hard to know whether you are actually hitting 4.44 meters per second or not, so it is best to convert this to a per 400-meter tempo. 400 meters divided by 4.44 meters per second yields 90 seconds per 400 meters. That’s nice! If you set up a workout which focuses on running 400s in 90 seconds each (with about the same amount of recovery time – 90 seconds – between the 400-meter work intervals), you would be assured that you were running fast enough to evoke any VO2max response which is physiologically possible for you.

If you cover 2000 meters during your six-minute test, the average speed would be 2000/360 = 5.56 meters per second, for a training tempo of 400/5.56 = 72 seconds per 400 meters (with 72-second jog recoveries).

If you complete 1200 meters during the six-minute affair, average velocity is 1200/360 = 3.33 meters per second, and desired training pace is 400/3.33 = 120 seconds per 400 meters (with 120-second recoveries).

You can see that the process of creating a VO₂max-expanding workout is really simple. If you use this kind of training session approximately every week or at least every other week, you’ll be well on your way to augmenting your VO₂max. Be sure to re-check yourself with the six-minute test every six weeks or so. Your six-minute performance should gradually increase over time (it doesn’t have to increase every time, though), and as it does it will upgrade your training paces in a natural, organic, and productive way for you.

Finally, it’s nice to know that running a 5-K race is one of the very best ways to stimulate VO₂max improvement. Most runners achieve an intensity of about 95 percent of VO₂max or so during their 5-K competitions, and that’s right in the desired zone for making the heart, mitochondria, and capillaries get into VO₂max-building mode.

Questions about this article? Someone is always minding the store at www.educatedrunner.com Contact Owen at owenanderson2006@comcast.net for a personal response.