Lactate based training
Moderator: The forum police - (nee naw)
- gregsmith01748
- Friend of the Free Spirits web site 2015
- Posts: 1194
- Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:51 pm
- I row on...: Model C with PM4
- Location: Hopkinton, MA, USA
Re: Lactate based training
Interesting conversation.
I have tried out the iphone app called "ithelete" to use HRV as a tool to manage training, but it has consistently told me that I am never ever too tired to go hard. My conclusion was either it was wrong, or I was lazy. I finally gave up on it because it made me feel bad about myself.
As for the Hagerman article, I read it a few months ago and I had a minor crisis when I read the part that you quote. I respect the man's accomplishments and I think he has done reasonable work with the US National team, but hearing that I was wasting my time by going longer than 30 minutes was shattering. It was essentially the opposite of the theory of training that I was using. It also didn't correlate with what I had read about elite level rowing (Gevvie Stone posting 20K OTW workouts on a daily basis, the book Last Amateurs that talked about a daily second erg session at steady state intensity and 70 minutes duration for the oxford crew. The sport science articles that I read about polarized versus threshold training for runners, and rowers. Tom, I think your explanation about his comments being more applicable for elite athletes might be true. Ultimately I decided to ignore the article because I couldn't put it into context.
I have tried out the iphone app called "ithelete" to use HRV as a tool to manage training, but it has consistently told me that I am never ever too tired to go hard. My conclusion was either it was wrong, or I was lazy. I finally gave up on it because it made me feel bad about myself.
As for the Hagerman article, I read it a few months ago and I had a minor crisis when I read the part that you quote. I respect the man's accomplishments and I think he has done reasonable work with the US National team, but hearing that I was wasting my time by going longer than 30 minutes was shattering. It was essentially the opposite of the theory of training that I was using. It also didn't correlate with what I had read about elite level rowing (Gevvie Stone posting 20K OTW workouts on a daily basis, the book Last Amateurs that talked about a daily second erg session at steady state intensity and 70 minutes duration for the oxford crew. The sport science articles that I read about polarized versus threshold training for runners, and rowers. Tom, I think your explanation about his comments being more applicable for elite athletes might be true. Ultimately I decided to ignore the article because I couldn't put it into context.
Greg - Age: 53 H: 182cm W: 88Kg (should be 83Kg)
Training blog: https://quantifiedrowing.wordpress.com/
Training blog: https://quantifiedrowing.wordpress.com/
-
- True Free Spirit
- Posts: 645
- Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2014 2:13 pm
- I row on...: Model D with PM5
- Location: Berne, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: Lactate based training
…a litte bit of topic, but if you don't care, I don't care too.gregsmith01748 wrote:Interesting conversation.
Greg, I am not surprised. Good that you did stop using it.I have tried out the iphone app called "ithelete" to use HRV as a tool to manage training, but it has consistently told me that I am never ever too tired to go hard. My conclusion was either it was wrong, or I was lazy. I finally gave up on it because it made me feel bad about myself.
Technically it can't work. The scattering/deviation (good translation?) of these low quality (for this purpose it is what it is) beat-to-beat transmitters is way to high, but for simple beat-to-beat measurement during excise it's really good enough. No dought. E.g. you can buy of each brand 10 pieces and let them measure up on a calibrated system… the result will vary in the range of 5-300%.
The "Vitalmonitor" you even can't use out of the box. It needs to be calibrated "on you", which takes – for the first initial working/recommendation – about one week. After two/three weeks of usage the system is quite well calibrated on you. After one month of usage there's enough data to be full calibrated. But it needs some sort of discipline (morning measurement - most important, creating the day calibration; before exercise - when doing more then one session per day; 10-20min after exercise – to see the immediate session impact; 60min after exercise - so the the "long term" impact and the ability of recovery) to get the most out of it.
It's very interesting to see how training (intensity, strength training, duration), stress (workload), sleep (long and good, short and good, long and bad) or affects your power.
I can post some screenshots of my personal measurements here. Would not have issues with that.
- gregsmith01748
- Friend of the Free Spirits web site 2015
- Posts: 1194
- Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:51 pm
- I row on...: Model C with PM4
- Location: Hopkinton, MA, USA
Re: Lactate based training
439 euro! Wow, I'll have to save up for a while to buy that toy!
Very interesting material on the website. It's cool that you can look directly at the spectrum of HRV, that's the parameter that is actually reported and discussed in the scientific literature. The other HRV products assume that people are too stupid to be able to understand or deal with the data so they hide it from you.
Very interesting material on the website. It's cool that you can look directly at the spectrum of HRV, that's the parameter that is actually reported and discussed in the scientific literature. The other HRV products assume that people are too stupid to be able to understand or deal with the data so they hide it from you.
Greg - Age: 53 H: 182cm W: 88Kg (should be 83Kg)
Training blog: https://quantifiedrowing.wordpress.com/
Training blog: https://quantifiedrowing.wordpress.com/
-
- True Free Spirit
- Posts: 645
- Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2014 2:13 pm
- I row on...: Model D with PM5
- Location: Berne, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: Lactate based training
It's a lot of money, I agree. But it's worth every penny. For sports/health it's the best investment I ever have done. If I could travel back in time and start from scratch, one of two "things" I would take with me, is this piece of equipment.gregsmith01748 wrote:439 euro! Wow, I'll have to save up for a while to buy that toy!
The other possibility… technically they can't bring up this information.gregsmith01748 wrote:The other HRV products assume that people are too stupid to be able to understand or deal with the data so they hide it from you.
The stainless steel contacts of the vital-monitor are that sensitive, that the… öhhmmm, how you say that the in english?… during measurement I can see the heart rate ECG in real time… if I start to move the chest belt around, even only slightly, the ECG curve changes immediately in real time and I get a deflected result.
-
- Spends too much time in the forum
- Posts: 96
- Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 10:45 am
- I row on...: Model C with PM3
Re: Lactate based training
Yeah I agree Greg, as mentioned ive personally filed it as an interesting study but that the pool of athletes were the "elite" so probably not a fair distribution across "normal" athletes. That paper and dr3do's comments on the lenght of some of the workouts did make me wonder about what (even if) there is an optimum lenght of time that you would train to get the maximum aerobic benefit. Like you say there is a lot of reports of people doing serious mileage of 20km plus etc but then you have reports like the paper and what MChase advocates which is a "relatively" shorter 30mins to an hour.gregsmith01748 wrote:As for the Hagerman article, I read it a few months ago and I had a minor crisis when I read the part that you quote. I respect the man's accomplishments and I think he has done reasonable work with the US National team, but hearing that I was wasting my time by going longer than 30 minutes was shattering. It was essentially the opposite of the theory of training that I was using. It also didn't correlate with what I had read about elite level rowing (Gevvie Stone posting 20K OTW workouts on a daily basis, the book Last Amateurs that talked about a daily second erg session at steady state intensity and 70 minutes duration for the oxford crew. The sport science articles that I read about polarized versus threshold training for runners, and rowers. Tom, I think your explanation about his comments being more applicable for elite athletes might be true. Ultimately I decided to ignore the article because I couldn't put it into context.
It seems that currently the safest bet is to do an hour, as MChase has shown, but would there be a greater improvement from doing more (80 mins? 90? 100?), unfortunately I cant seem to find any studies looking into the "optimal" amount of time spent training to get the max benefit aerobically, so its mostly guesswork at the moment
-
- Warming up
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2014 11:39 am
- I row on...: Model C with PM4
- Location: Cape Town
Re: Lactate based training
I always enjoy your posts and this time even more so!stelph wrote:Oh don't get me wrong, as part of various training plans Ive tested in the past ive done several 90+ min ergs and I agree that once you have got used to the amount of time they do tend to go "relatively" quickly so you dont get too bored, however as mentioned it was more the intensity that I was curious about as it is lower than I expected, do you do those sessions many times a week?dr3do wrote:Hey stelph, thanks for asking.stelph wrote:Out of curiosity, why do you choose to do a number of very low lactate rows?
What I have figured out, by doing it by myself, it has reasons like technique work (maintaining proper/good technique over long time, when the posture muscles start to get tired is quite hard), economization (improving strict fat burn power/capacities), recovery & well being. If you like I can translate&create this one an english version of it.
A proper maintained long UT3 row is not that boring… To be honest, I find it quite difficult to be 100% on every stroke.You may find it better (and less boring )
I was interested to read this white paper by Fritz Hagerman (who famously works closely with the US 8 and Mike Teti) where one point he notes is that
"We have convincing data, including muscle biopsy histochemical and biochemincal indicators, which support that rowing continuously at a low steady state intensity for 60minutes or longer for any calibre of rower, is not more effective in maintaining aerobic capacity than 30 minutes of rowing at the same work intensity."
http://96bda424cfcc34d9dd1a-0a7f10f8751 ... ystems.pdf
That doesnt mean to say I dont personally think the longer sessions arent useful, particularly from a mental point of view (as you say, working on technique etc) but perhaps hour long sessions are sufficient to get the aerobic development necessary and also all the other benefits from a longer erg
Just my own personal thoughts anyway
The Hagerman training table is pretty much what I have been doing on my own so I agree with him . After doing hour upon hour of UT2 rowing previously I have switched to long interval UT1 and up. My training times are down to 40% of previous volumes but I would say I'm as quick from 5k down. Everyone is different but I am adamant that for me UT 1 and AT long intervals have made me faster and my body recovers quickly. It will get interesting when I hit a wall and stop improving. Provided that's on the right side of 6:30 / 2k and 3:05 / 1k I don't mind! Then I would rather have another go at being a LWT than trying to eek a couple of seconds more as a HWT.
That said I really enjoy reading all the stats and the different points of view that everyone has.
Rodney H
Age: 45
Height: 1.91m
Weight: 87kgs
Age: 45
Height: 1.91m
Weight: 87kgs
- gregsmith01748
- Friend of the Free Spirits web site 2015
- Posts: 1194
- Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:51 pm
- I row on...: Model C with PM4
- Location: Hopkinton, MA, USA
Re: Lactate based training
I think that also correlates to the Dutch approach that went into rojabo. I am sure that the approach works for some folks, but it didn't agree with me. It's possible that I pushed it too hard and what I saw was chronic overtraining, but my performance really crashed after a few months of going shorter and harder. I am now getting back to form after 2 months on a polarized plan with plenty of UT2/UT1 meters.rhr wrote:
The Hagerman training table is pretty much what I have been doing on my own so I agree with him . After doing hour upon hour of UT2 rowing previously I have switched to long interval UT1 and up. My training times are down to 40% of previous volumes but I would say I'm as quick from 5k down. Everyone is different but I am adamant that for me UT 1 and AT long intervals have made me faster and my body recovers quickly. It will get interesting when I hit a wall and stop improving. Provided that's on the right side of 6:30 / 2k and 3:05 / 1k I don't mind! Then I would rather have another go at being a LWT than trying to eek a couple of seconds more as a HWT.
That said I really enjoy reading all the stats and the different points of view that everyone has.
The other thing I wonder is the impact of really long term effects. For example, for someone like me who was sedentary to different degrees until 4 years ago and then started building an aerobic base, is it possible that my aerobic base is more fragile compared to someone who has spent their whole adult life as an athlete? The other factor might be other exercise beyond the erg. So, if you commute by bike for an hour a day, then the need to do aerobic work on the erg would be less.
Lots to think about.
Greg - Age: 53 H: 182cm W: 88Kg (should be 83Kg)
Training blog: https://quantifiedrowing.wordpress.com/
Training blog: https://quantifiedrowing.wordpress.com/
-
- True Free Spirit
- Posts: 645
- Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2014 2:13 pm
- I row on...: Model D with PM5
- Location: Berne, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: Lactate based training
I don't think it's even possible to say that in a general manner. Sessions which are pruned in intensity (like UT3/UT2 clearly are), can only be "intensified" by extending the amount of excise time.stelph wrote:It seems that currently the safest bet is to do an hour, as MChase has shown, but would there be a greater improvement from doing more (80 mins? 90? 100?)
The right amount depends on goals, fitness level, health level, and and and… E.g. for a person who is not or badly trained, already a 30min "powerwalk" can be an "huge exercise" and for someone who's extremely well trained a power walk of 3h is recovery.
Me neither. What I found over the time are only fragments of informations within articles, which I then patch worked together.stelph wrote:unfortunately I cant seem to find any studies looking into the "optimal" amount of time spent training to get the max benefit aerobically, so its mostly guesswork at the moment
-
- Warming up
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2014 11:39 am
- I row on...: Model C with PM4
- Location: Cape Town
Re: Lactate based training
The Rojabo is an interesting topic. Anecdotally there seems to be potential for a huge margin of error when doing the initial testing. If you push too hard then the rate 26 workouts looked distinctly like flat out 5k TT's. It would also seem that a strong aerobic base is a given.
When will you know when your aerobic base is built for the long term? How does one know when you don't need more LSS? Personally I didn't see a dramatic difference in my times for the long distances when I did a lot of UT2. My sprint distance times were still far better than predicted by any of the "curves". My times did improve when I did EF marathon plan, but that is a plan with lots of 85% HR and up rowing. There is SS rowing in the plan but who wouldn't need that after 80 mins of 85%~95% of max HR rowing the day before! So I was unsure as to whether my aerobic engine improved at all doing UT2.
Ultimately I am a sprinter trying to expand his repetoire beyond the sideshow events. No matter what aerobic training I have done, running or rowing, up to 1k is still my strongest area. The effort / return trade off doing UT 2 just wasn't there for me. Perhaps it is for you.
When will you know when your aerobic base is built for the long term? How does one know when you don't need more LSS? Personally I didn't see a dramatic difference in my times for the long distances when I did a lot of UT2. My sprint distance times were still far better than predicted by any of the "curves". My times did improve when I did EF marathon plan, but that is a plan with lots of 85% HR and up rowing. There is SS rowing in the plan but who wouldn't need that after 80 mins of 85%~95% of max HR rowing the day before! So I was unsure as to whether my aerobic engine improved at all doing UT2.
Ultimately I am a sprinter trying to expand his repetoire beyond the sideshow events. No matter what aerobic training I have done, running or rowing, up to 1k is still my strongest area. The effort / return trade off doing UT 2 just wasn't there for me. Perhaps it is for you.
Rodney H
Age: 45
Height: 1.91m
Weight: 87kgs
Age: 45
Height: 1.91m
Weight: 87kgs
-
- True Free Spirit
- Posts: 645
- Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2014 2:13 pm
- I row on...: Model D with PM5
- Location: Berne, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: Lactate based training
Desirable genetics… I remember my time in school, as I had to run the 50m, 100m or 200m. Horrible. I was the slowest ever boy in my age (age range: 12-15y). I really tried hard and gave my best, but even students 2-3y younger ran faster than me.rhr wrote:Ultimately I am a sprinter trying to expand his repertoire beyond the sideshow events. No matter what aerobic training I have done, running or rowing, up to 1k is still my strongest area.
-
- Spends too much time in the forum
- Posts: 96
- Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 10:45 am
- I row on...: Model C with PM3
Re: Lactate based training
Another article on the Polarised type training plan
http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/enduran ... very-41932#
This one is interesting as it references several sports (including rowing) and highlights how at the top end all the sports all tend towards a more polarised training plan than one at Threshold, infact for the rowers (data from Juniors training for the World Champs) the majority of the work at sub 2mmol and only 30 mins out of 13 total hours at higher intensities (the actual study on Junior worlds rowers is linked below)
http://journals.humankinetics.com/ijspp ... lassRowers
Also stumbled across this brief study on the effect of sampling time on measuring lactate, which seems to suggest that you can take up to 45 seconds and still get a valid lactate value, which might be useful to know for all you self-samplers out there
http://journals.humankinetics.com/ijspp ... inedRowers
http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/enduran ... very-41932#
This one is interesting as it references several sports (including rowing) and highlights how at the top end all the sports all tend towards a more polarised training plan than one at Threshold, infact for the rowers (data from Juniors training for the World Champs) the majority of the work at sub 2mmol and only 30 mins out of 13 total hours at higher intensities (the actual study on Junior worlds rowers is linked below)
http://journals.humankinetics.com/ijspp ... lassRowers
Also stumbled across this brief study on the effect of sampling time on measuring lactate, which seems to suggest that you can take up to 45 seconds and still get a valid lactate value, which might be useful to know for all you self-samplers out there
http://journals.humankinetics.com/ijspp ... inedRowers
-
- Warming up
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2014 11:39 am
- I row on...: Model C with PM4
- Location: Cape Town
Re: Lactate based training
I would expect juniors who have limited aerobic bases to do lots of steady state work. Depending on how long your off season is will determine how much time you should do in the sub 2 mmol when you get back to training. It would be interesting to see how much UT2 work is required if you train year round.stelph wrote:Another article on the Polarised type training plan
http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/enduran ... very-41932#
This one is interesting as it references several sports (including rowing) and highlights how at the top end all the sports all tend towards a more polarised training plan than one at Threshold, infact for the rowers (data from Juniors training for the World Champs) the majority of the work at sub 2mmol and only 30 mins out of 13 total hours at higher intensities (the actual study on Junior worlds rowers is linked below)
http://journals.humankinetics.com/ijspp ... lassRowers
Also stumbled across this brief study on the effect of sampling time on measuring lactate, which seems to suggest that you can take up to 45 seconds and still get a valid lactate value, which might be useful to know for all you self-samplers out there
http://journals.humankinetics.com/ijspp ... inedRowers
Rodney H
Age: 45
Height: 1.91m
Weight: 87kgs
Age: 45
Height: 1.91m
Weight: 87kgs
- gregsmith01748
- Friend of the Free Spirits web site 2015
- Posts: 1194
- Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:51 pm
- I row on...: Model C with PM4
- Location: Hopkinton, MA, USA
Re: Lactate based training
The author of the study that Tom posted wrote an excellent survey article about polarized training back in 2009. There are a few snippets that address your point.
First. Here is a comparison of a group 18 National level UK rowers who were "detrained" for 25 days and then put on one of 2 programs. A LIT polarized program or a threshold program. The gains in the 2k results were pretty similar, but the improvement in aerobic base was substanially better in the group for LIT training.
The paper also included a survey of training intensity distribution for a world class rower (Olaf Tufte). By my eyeball, it looks like 70 to 80% of the rowing is zone 1 or 2. (Not including time spent weight training.
Finally, since I ain't a world class athlete (by any possible definition), the section of the paper about recreation athletes was of interest to me. Essentially, it discussed the difference in training time between elite and rec athletes and whether the right strategy was to change the proportion of LIT and HIT training because the training volume was so much lower. The position in the paper was the it was NOT a good idea to do that.
First. Here is a comparison of a group 18 National level UK rowers who were "detrained" for 25 days and then put on one of 2 programs. A LIT polarized program or a threshold program. The gains in the 2k results were pretty similar, but the improvement in aerobic base was substanially better in the group for LIT training.
The paper also included a survey of training intensity distribution for a world class rower (Olaf Tufte). By my eyeball, it looks like 70 to 80% of the rowing is zone 1 or 2. (Not including time spent weight training.
Finally, since I ain't a world class athlete (by any possible definition), the section of the paper about recreation athletes was of interest to me. Essentially, it discussed the difference in training time between elite and rec athletes and whether the right strategy was to change the proportion of LIT and HIT training because the training volume was so much lower. The position in the paper was the it was NOT a good idea to do that.
Greg - Age: 53 H: 182cm W: 88Kg (should be 83Kg)
Training blog: https://quantifiedrowing.wordpress.com/
Training blog: https://quantifiedrowing.wordpress.com/
-
- True Free Spirit
- Posts: 645
- Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2014 2:13 pm
- I row on...: Model D with PM5
- Location: Berne, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: Lactate based training
Greg, very helpful you post with all the embedded snipets/scans/screenshots. =D>
-
- Warming up
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2014 11:39 am
- I row on...: Model C with PM4
- Location: Cape Town
Re: Lactate based training
Thanks Greg.
The bottom section refers to recreational runners - I've seen this piece before and agree. However, this relates to longer distance runs - between 10k and marathon length. The % splits between aerobic and anaerobic for runs of those lengths is much more skewed to aerobic than a 2k row. A marathon is 98% aerobic. A 2k row, depending on whose stats you use and whether it was for males / females is closer to 70%-75% aerobic.
The bottom section refers to recreational runners - I've seen this piece before and agree. However, this relates to longer distance runs - between 10k and marathon length. The % splits between aerobic and anaerobic for runs of those lengths is much more skewed to aerobic than a 2k row. A marathon is 98% aerobic. A 2k row, depending on whose stats you use and whether it was for males / females is closer to 70%-75% aerobic.
Rodney H
Age: 45
Height: 1.91m
Weight: 87kgs
Age: 45
Height: 1.91m
Weight: 87kgs
-
- Free Spirit
- Posts: 451
- Joined: Fri Dec 03, 2010 10:07 am
- I row on...: Model C with PM5
- Location: Brno
Re: Lactate based training
Very helpful discussion guys! Thanks
Training Blog: http://blog.rowsandall.com/
Free Data and Analysis. For Rowers. By Rowers: http://rowsandall.com
- gregsmith01748
- Friend of the Free Spirits web site 2015
- Posts: 1194
- Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:51 pm
- I row on...: Model C with PM4
- Location: Hopkinton, MA, USA
Re: Lactate based training
While I agree that the specific study referenced for recreational athletes is not directly on point for 2k rowing events, I think the question that the author of the survey paper had was a bit different. The rest of the paper showed that a polarized plan was shown to be most effective for elite atheletes in multiple sports including rowing at the 2k distance. The section on recreational athletes was trying to answer the question about whether you should cut training times in a way to preserve the same 80/20 ratio of LIT and HIT, or if you should essentially keep the same amount of HIT and do less LIT. In essence, the rest of the paper basically made the point that rowers should train basically like distance runners. This section said that recreational runners should do 80/20. I made the leap that recreational rowers should also train like distance runners. Actually, I think we should trying like middle distance runners (5k to 10k). Marathon training is a bit of a different animal.rhr wrote:Thanks Greg.
The bottom section refers to recreational runners - I've seen this piece before and agree. However, this relates to longer distance runs - between 10k and marathon length. The % splits between aerobic and anaerobic for runs of those lengths is much more skewed to aerobic than a 2k row. A marathon is 98% aerobic. A 2k row, depending on whose stats you use and whether it was for males / females is closer to 70%-75% aerobic.
Greg - Age: 53 H: 182cm W: 88Kg (should be 83Kg)
Training blog: https://quantifiedrowing.wordpress.com/
Training blog: https://quantifiedrowing.wordpress.com/
-
- Spends too much time in the forum
- Posts: 96
- Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 10:45 am
- I row on...: Model C with PM3
Re: Lactate based training
Id heard rowing is more like 80% Aerobic, infact after a quick search and according to this study which calculated it from oxygen uptake in 8 rowers it suggests a 2k is actually closer to 84% Aerobic when on an erg, going up to 87% on the waterrhr wrote:Thanks Greg.
The bottom section refers to recreational runners - I've seen this piece before and agree. However, this relates to longer distance runs - between 10k and marathon length. The % splits between aerobic and anaerobic for runs of those lengths is much more skewed to aerobic than a 2k row. A marathon is 98% aerobic. A 2k row, depending on whose stats you use and whether it was for males / females is closer to 70%-75% aerobic.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19707782
I am afraid I know nothing about running, but the first search I did came back suggesting that a 5k is around 84% and a 10k is about 90% Aerobic
http://runnersconnect.net/running-train ... c-running/
So as Greg suggests, people training for a 2k would probably get the best results training in the same way as these middle distance athletes
-
- True Free Spirit
- Posts: 645
- Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2014 2:13 pm
- I row on...: Model D with PM5
- Location: Berne, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: Lactate based training
80%+… that's what I found in my language too.stelph wrote:Id heard rowing is more like 80% Aerobic, infact after a quick search and according to this study which calculated it from oxygen uptake in 8 rowers it suggests a 2k is actually closer to 84% Aerobic when on an erg, going up to 87% on the water
-
- Warming up
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2014 11:39 am
- I row on...: Model C with PM4
- Location: Cape Town
Re: Lactate based training
Dr. Jim Johnstonstelph wrote:Id heard rowing is more like 80% Aerobic, infact after a quick search and according to this study which calculated it from oxygen uptake in 8 rowers it suggests a 2k is actually closer to 84% Aerobic when on an erg, going up to 87% on the waterrhr wrote:Thanks Greg.
The bottom section refers to recreational runners - I've seen this piece before and agree. However, this relates to longer distance runs - between 10k and marathon length. The % splits between aerobic and anaerobic for runs of those lengths is much more skewed to aerobic than a 2k row. A marathon is 98% aerobic. A 2k row, depending on whose stats you use and whether it was for males / females is closer to 70%-75% aerobic.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19707782
I am afraid I know nothing about running, but the first search I did came back suggesting that a 5k is around 84% and a 10k is about 90% Aerobic
http://runnersconnect.net/running-train ... c-running/
So as Greg suggests, people training for a 2k would probably get the best results training in the same way as these middle distance athletes
Dr. Fritz Hagerman has found that a typical 2000-m race is about 75% aerobic and 25% anaerobic.
This was why I raised the question Tom. Having done both running and rowing I agree that a 2k row is more like a 5k or even a 1 mile run. A 1 mile run is still 80% aerobic. If Hagerman is correct then 75% is closer to an 800m race. Bannister did about 30 mins training a day, all hard, Emil Zatopek did insane volumes but also ran longer distances. Different approaches. In training for 5k's specifically I would reduce my LSS run down from 30-35k for a marathon to more like 10-15k and only 1 run of this length. Typical plans have 3x days hard (4x1k, 8x800 etc), 1 day rest, 2 days 40-45 easy and 1 day 60-75 mins easy. If you run 40-45 mins easy you only cover about 7k's. 7k's on the rower is less than 30 mins at UT2 - or should one do equal time?! The key for a 5k is speed endurance, so 3x week you do runs in and around your race pace. In all plans the recommendation is clear - if you drop a run in the week drop one of the easy 30-45 min runs - don't miss the others.
Between Jan and June last year I ran about 2,000 km, roughly 80k a week average (incl tapers so some 100k + weeks). Lots of it LSS in preparation for marathons and ultras (often +-3hr Sat / 2 hr Sun). Stepping onto the rower after that lot I didn't see the need for more aerobic work albeit that running isn't rowing. I still believe that we each need to work out what training gives us, as individuals, the best results, subject to time / training constraints. The rowers in the study were doing +-95k / week. That means +-30k for the MIX group at hard paces - to me that could result in over training. You won't find 5k specialists doing that kind of hard running a week. More like half that - based on distance. If they dropped the rowing training volume by 50% would the results be the same? Who knows. So many variables.
When I do a 2k TT I don't struggle with breathing, HR or muscle aches, I struggle with lactic acid build up. To me that's a signal that I need to train to clear lactic acid more efficiently. This is my weakness.
Rodney H
Age: 45
Height: 1.91m
Weight: 87kgs
Age: 45
Height: 1.91m
Weight: 87kgs
-
- Spends too much time in the forum
- Posts: 96
- Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 10:45 am
- I row on...: Model C with PM3
Re: Lactate based training
I think what im taking from all of the studies that have been done into Polarised vs threshold is that most are not saying that Threshold training is bad, infact it does seem that some people react very well to threshold training (seemingly those "gifted" athletes like Bannister) but that studies suggest that Polarised gets equal if not better results, even in races (like a 2k) where you might be surprised that such low intensity workouts would make a differencerhr wrote: This was why I raised the question Tom. Having done both running and rowing I agree that a 2k row is more like a 5k or even a 1 mile run. A 1 mile run is still 80% aerobic. If Hagerman is correct then 75% is closer to an 800m race. Bannister did about 30 mins training a day, all hard, Emil Zatopek did insane volumes but also ran longer distances. Different approaches.
I think the length of time needed to see benefits in Polarised training is one area (for rowing) where more research is needed, I have read that a common misconception is that to do proper Polarised you have to do loads of mileage, where as I understand it as being at its simpliest making sure you at least the 80:20 split of aerobic/anaerobic. We know from MChase that doing an hour a day of the Aerobic workout at sub 2mmol (so 7 hours of Aerobic) with short sessions of Anaerobic see benefits in his group of kids. It might be possible for Polarised to work with less exercise than that but until someone tries it we would have to guessrhr wrote: In training for 5k's specifically I would reduce my LSS run down from 30-35k for a marathon to more like 10-15k and only 1 run of this length. Typical plans have 3x days hard (4x1k, 8x800 etc), 1 day rest, 2 days 40-45 easy and 1 day 60-75 mins easy. If you run 40-45 mins easy you only cover about 7k's. 7k's on the rower is less than 30 mins at UT2 - or should one do equal time?!
[/quote]rhr wrote: When I do a 2k TT I don't struggle with breathing, HR or muscle aches, I struggle with lactic acid build up. To me that's a signal that I need to train to clear lactic acid more efficiently. This is my weakness.
I think the idea is that polarised and particularly Aerobic training can help with lactic acid build up. Instead of thinking about training to clear lactic acid, instead I think about training to increase the efficiency of your muscles so that the levels of lactic acid do not rise as quickly. The "low and slow" 80% of aerobic training encourage muscles to increase growth of capillaries and also add more mitochondria which means your muscles become more efficient at using lactate as a fuel, hence why as you get fitter there is less lactic acid in the blood and why people talk about moving your lactate curve to the right, this means as you exercise the lactate buildup would be slower and so you can last longer/go harder than you could before. T
-
- Warming up
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2014 11:39 am
- I row on...: Model C with PM4
- Location: Cape Town
Re: Lactate based training
I think the idea is that polarised and particularly Aerobic training can help with lactic acid build up. Instead of thinking about training to clear lactic acid, instead I think about training to increase the efficiency of your muscles so that the levels of lactic acid do not rise as quickly. The "low and slow" 80% of aerobic training encourage muscles to increase growth of capillaries and also add more mitochondria which means your muscles become more efficient at using lactate as a fuel, hence why as you get fitter there is less lactic acid in the blood and why people talk about moving your lactate curve to the right, this means as you exercise the lactate buildup would be slower and so you can last longer/go harder than you could before. T[/quote]
We agree on this Tom. My personal belief is that my previous rowing training, before the 12 - 18 months "off" to run marathons and ultras, which consisted almost exclusively of UT2 / 3 up to 10hrs / week significantly developed my aerobic engine. Then when I ran I did lots of LSS sessions up to 8 hrs / week. At what point does my curve stop moving to the right? Surely there is some genetic barrier beyond which I cannot progress or where my capillaries / mitochondria cannot be developed further? I think I'm very close to that point hence the reason I feel - for me - that the best bang for my buck is to now focus on improving my aerobic capacity by doing 80% / 20% but doing the 80% closer to LT not UT2. Perhaps I'm mistaken but my body is happy with the volumes / intensity and can recover enough to do the 20% hard sessions. So I'm going to continue living in a fools paradise!
We agree on this Tom. My personal belief is that my previous rowing training, before the 12 - 18 months "off" to run marathons and ultras, which consisted almost exclusively of UT2 / 3 up to 10hrs / week significantly developed my aerobic engine. Then when I ran I did lots of LSS sessions up to 8 hrs / week. At what point does my curve stop moving to the right? Surely there is some genetic barrier beyond which I cannot progress or where my capillaries / mitochondria cannot be developed further? I think I'm very close to that point hence the reason I feel - for me - that the best bang for my buck is to now focus on improving my aerobic capacity by doing 80% / 20% but doing the 80% closer to LT not UT2. Perhaps I'm mistaken but my body is happy with the volumes / intensity and can recover enough to do the 20% hard sessions. So I'm going to continue living in a fools paradise!
Rodney H
Age: 45
Height: 1.91m
Weight: 87kgs
Age: 45
Height: 1.91m
Weight: 87kgs
-
- Warming up
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2014 11:39 am
- I row on...: Model C with PM4
- Location: Cape Town
Re: Lactate based training
Interesting report to add to the mix:
http://www.gssiweb.org/Article/sse-54-m ... c-training
Am keen to hear everyone's views.
http://www.gssiweb.org/Article/sse-54-m ... c-training
Am keen to hear everyone's views.
Rodney H
Age: 45
Height: 1.91m
Weight: 87kgs
Age: 45
Height: 1.91m
Weight: 87kgs
-
- True Free Spirit
- Posts: 645
- Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2014 2:13 pm
- I row on...: Model D with PM5
- Location: Berne, Switzerland
- Contact:
Re: Lactate based training
Just to let you know… I've tried to read this article three times, but had always the feeling of "searching a needle in the hay". I'm not sure if I can find the point, within all this "generic/generalization text".rhr wrote:Am keen to hear everyone's views.