Recent exchange of emails:
1)Glen
Right
I think that I understand the problem but you will have to think about it, try out what I mean and confirm.
What I think you are doing is actually not stressing the DNA to create change because you are taking the stress off at the key point. what do i mean by this. Well each layer of chemistry denoted by a pulse is unique. As you go to higher pulse you are burninga richer a fuel in terms of oxygen and sugar.
So when you work at a given chemistry level(or levels) you stress the enzyme exchange process until a point where they can no longer and other more expensive chemical levels and heat are needed to make the process work. At this point you are in the stress box and the DNA starts to create change to produce more enzymes.
NOW what i think you are doing is at this point in the training or before this point you are often turning up the heat by working at a higher pulse. This increases the amount of muscle being used - increasing the work centres , increases Oxygen and sugar which increases ATP production and in general takes the load off the muscles that were under pressure. In short the red box is removed from that level and you then start again at a new level. If the session is nearly finished then the second level will also never reach stress.
This means that the lower levels are not being stressed as you would wish but also the higher levels nare neither, or if you do reach maximum pulse it is only once and that is not enough to make the DNA sweat.
So long runs must remain slow 135-145 and you must stay in that pulse box even if you slow down, until you can taste the fat burning stress in your mouth. This may take 30km
Steady runs need a "wave" method of running where you keep slowing to take the pulse back down and then take it back up steadily over the pulse band repating again and again until you can feel the stress, but not going harder at the end.
Fast steady runs both short and long however must be fast from the beginning constantly taking the body into stress and holding it there until the pressure becomes unbearable and then easing for a short time and repeating.# I used to run two runs of 30km plus like this each week.
Reps must be a variation. On some you maintain the load but do not increase the effort. On others you gradually increase the effort and load like races until the last part is hell and on others you go hard from the start and keep the pressure on all the time.
What this does reemphasise is that timed intervals are fine if you are going to continue to run them until stress appears but useless otherwise. It is simply impossible to guage where the red box is. So free running is best because you can maintain each run until stress (a mini red box) and then in the later repeat the stress time amnd time again, irrespective of the length of the run.
On hard fartlek keep the recovery short to ebnsure that stress comes repeatedly.
You mentioned after the race that you reached 4km OK. That is the red box point. How often have you run 4km at race speed and tried to extend the box? I suspect - and it is probably my fault - hardly ever. When i wasa 30 min 10k runner then at least twice a week i was running much more than 10km at race pace and trying to run a lot faster for 8km to get used to new speeds and tempos.
You are running enough. What is needed now is greater clarity and focus about what you are doing chemically on each run trying to get the stress right.
Comments and quastions please.
Glen
2) Marcus
So in essence I’m going to continue what I’ve been doing so far but now with better focus on stress – which means longer runs but not letting pulse rise (= not letting pulse escape the red box), reps where I maintain a certain pulse, say 170, and not letting it escape to a higher level where a new type of chemistry waits to take over so the one I’m putting my stress on doesn’t have to adapt. In real hard sessions I am supposed to keep the stress until death is close and then have a short rest and then go there again (close to death) and maintain & repeat until I can’t do anything meaningful because pulse simply won’t rise to the level I was working anymore; say 180+ (because the chemistry for that work has been used up during the session – am I understanding this correctly?).
I take it from the SMS:s last night I’m still supposed to add a bit of speed to my running – or am I mistaking? – do you want me to continue to focus long reps on the middle range (160-175) or do you want me to go and seek more of VO2-max (180+) or is it, as I’m suspecting: you want me to do what I’ve been supposed to do all along, which is a mix of all above but getting more effective at the work (= hitting the red box better)This, I think, has been the point (your point) through most of these 3 years: keep doing what I’ve been doing but understanding it better.Do you feel I am understanding what you are trying to say?
-marcus
3) Glen:
Yes
I think that this is a much better understanding. I think that we are going in the right direction because you clearly needed a stronger base before launching off onto harder and more focussed work. I did not expect that the base would become so strong that it pulls you back onto it. But it does not matter becuase it is there and it is valuable.
You do need faster work because I think that the 160-170 work on longer reps is primarily using fat and red muscle. that is fine but i want some more sugar and white used. that does mean operating at higher speeds to get out of the fat strength area.
You will remember that i said that the years of damage may take time to change. I think that one area was the mitochondria and the pathways through that that use sugar. new ones of these can only be opened I suspect by either removing sugar by hard runs of 60-80mins and creating change that way because the DNA recognises a shortage of sugar and tries to open new paths to get more, or by creating higher level stress by operating more at 400-1500m speed and the DNA identifying that the throughput is too small. I suspect that the higher pulse at the end of runs on its own without a strong lack of sugar does not have that sort of pressure. In otherwords the higher pulse is less an indication of high energy requirement than the body trying to deal with inneficiency and stress. they are not the same and the DNA response will not be the same.
So yes more of the same but I think that repeated short intervals is needed to try to create change by high rate sugar burning stress at least once a week.
Sunday now alternate one long slow one long hard On the slow one you could do a second short fast run of 15 mins in the evening
Mon - same as now but look for stress
Tues - same keeping reps around 160-170
Wed- same but look for stress or a harder longer run with repeated pressure
Thur short reps - lots of them
Fri rest or two easy
sat hard but we should start looking for 300/1500/3K pace work or the 4x1600m session
What do you think?
Glen
Monday, December 18, 2006
Saturday 16th of December
AM
*30 min easy running + strides.
*10K test: 37:27. (avg.178 / high 191).
*10 min easy running.
PM
*Rest.
*First 2k in 6:50 (10 sec faster than last Saturdays fastest 2k rep - the exact same track) - ran OK until 4 K. Died, totally, in a hill at 6K - or more of a feeling of fading and being unable to do anything about it. Hard terrain (or at least felt like it).
AM
*30 min easy running + strides.
*10K test: 37:27. (avg.178 / high 191).
*10 min easy running.
PM
*Rest.
*First 2k in 6:50 (10 sec faster than last Saturdays fastest 2k rep - the exact same track) - ran OK until 4 K. Died, totally, in a hill at 6K - or more of a feeling of fading and being unable to do anything about it. Hard terrain (or at least felt like it).
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
Saturday 9th of December
AM
*30 min easy running + strides.
*3x 2k / 5 min recovery with Rachid (1:53) in 20 m/s wind:
1) 7:12 (171/183) ; 5 min (124/110)
2) 7:05 (174/184) ; 5 min (134/124)
3) 7:00 (178/188) ; 2 min standstill (151/118).
*5x ~200m on gravelroad ~28 sec/walkback.
*10 min easy running.
PM
Rest.
*The 2K:s were much harder than i expected, wind was hard and the terrain was rougher than I believed it would be; small but sharp hills and lots of turns. Still, the speed is slow and pulse is high. I didn't have any bigger trouble following Rachid, uphill I had to struggle a bit, but downhill I felt I run better than him. I lost about 1-2 sec to him each rep in the last 50 m. I did, however, manage to run the last K of the last rep 3:20ish.
*Glen says this shows my VO2 max isn't working and he is right. And he also says that's because I haven't done any VO2 max work, and that's also right. And it's because it hasn't been part of the programme. It may have to change soon, but for a while still the middle register (pulses from 160 up to threshold [180] is going to be worked at).
AM
*30 min easy running + strides.
*3x 2k / 5 min recovery with Rachid (1:53) in 20 m/s wind:
1) 7:12 (171/183) ; 5 min (124/110)
2) 7:05 (174/184) ; 5 min (134/124)
3) 7:00 (178/188) ; 2 min standstill (151/118).
*5x ~200m on gravelroad ~28 sec/walkback.
*10 min easy running.
PM
Rest.
*The 2K:s were much harder than i expected, wind was hard and the terrain was rougher than I believed it would be; small but sharp hills and lots of turns. Still, the speed is slow and pulse is high. I didn't have any bigger trouble following Rachid, uphill I had to struggle a bit, but downhill I felt I run better than him. I lost about 1-2 sec to him each rep in the last 50 m. I did, however, manage to run the last K of the last rep 3:20ish.
*Glen says this shows my VO2 max isn't working and he is right. And he also says that's because I haven't done any VO2 max work, and that's also right. And it's because it hasn't been part of the programme. It may have to change soon, but for a while still the middle register (pulses from 160 up to threshold [180] is going to be worked at).
Friday, December 08, 2006
Thursday 7th of December
AM
*40 min easy running, avg.132. + 2x 50x bounding uphill.
PM
*20 min easy running.
*10x 45 sec /15 sec recovery - total avg. 156.
*5 min recovery.
*10x 45 sec / 45 sec recovery - total avg.a 151 (high.182).
*10 min easy running.
*Fast and good running. I was up on my toes and i dare not judge distance but I felt really good - the last of the harder (later set) of 45 secs was came close to threshold, and perhaps over, but only for last seconds of last reps.
AM
*40 min easy running, avg.132. + 2x 50x bounding uphill.
PM
*20 min easy running.
*10x 45 sec /15 sec recovery - total avg. 156.
*5 min recovery.
*10x 45 sec / 45 sec recovery - total avg.a 151 (high.182).
*10 min easy running.
*Fast and good running. I was up on my toes and i dare not judge distance but I felt really good - the last of the harder (later set) of 45 secs was came close to threshold, and perhaps over, but only for last seconds of last reps.
Sunday, December 03, 2006
Friday 1 of December
AM
Rest.
PM
*10 min easy running.
*8K fast: 27:10. Avg. 172, high. 183, 2 min standstill: 121. First 2K in 6:35.
*~40 sec slower than personal best on this loop. Felt like threshold would have dropped to 174 - the feeling at 174 is what I usually have at 180-182. When I saw 177 I was under considerable stress. 183 came in the finishing hill. It felt fast and good until last K when I understood I couldn't do a PB on this.
AM
Rest.
PM
*10 min easy running.
*8K fast: 27:10. Avg. 172, high. 183, 2 min standstill: 121. First 2K in 6:35.
*~40 sec slower than personal best on this loop. Felt like threshold would have dropped to 174 - the feeling at 174 is what I usually have at 180-182. When I saw 177 I was under considerable stress. 183 came in the finishing hill. It felt fast and good until last K when I understood I couldn't do a PB on this.
Friday, December 01, 2006
Tuesday 28th of November
AM
Rest.
PM (late in the evening)
*50 min fast running (avg. 167) with Tommy.
*10 min slow running + strides.
*Fast & fun, we headed towards town and always chose to turn where we got a green light, almost got lost. Tommy was floathing, as usual, and I had to fight a bit to keep same tempo as he, there was a resistance in my running and I wasn't as bouncy as I'd like to be (tired) - but OK and a good session.
AM
Rest.
PM (late in the evening)
*50 min fast running (avg. 167) with Tommy.
*10 min slow running + strides.
*Fast & fun, we headed towards town and always chose to turn where we got a green light, almost got lost. Tommy was floathing, as usual, and I had to fight a bit to keep same tempo as he, there was a resistance in my running and I wasn't as bouncy as I'd like to be (tired) - but OK and a good session.
Monday 27th of November
AM
*40 min easy running, avg. 140 + strides.
PM
*10 min easy running.
*5x 40x bounding uphill / walkback recovery.
*5 min jog.
*1h 20 min easy running with 3x 1:30 -2:00 hills hard (all the way to pulse 180).
*The bounding really got to my legs, I felt it when I tried running the hills hard. Must do more of it - it has been ignored for too long now.
AM
*40 min easy running, avg. 140 + strides.
PM
*10 min easy running.
*5x 40x bounding uphill / walkback recovery.
*5 min jog.
*1h 20 min easy running with 3x 1:30 -2:00 hills hard (all the way to pulse 180).
*The bounding really got to my legs, I felt it when I tried running the hills hard. Must do more of it - it has been ignored for too long now.
Saturday 25th of Novmber
AM
Rest (or rather - splashing about in a spa, sauna, and having an enormous lunch).
PM
*25 min easy running.
*Strides.
*7x 1000 m (indoors - with Juha Kukkamo) / 1 min rest.
1 - 4) 3:20 - 3:19, then 5) 3:15, 6) 3:14, 7) 3:10.
2 min standstill: 111.
*10 min easy running.
*One more than last Saturday and 2 min standstill 10 beats lower, which might have to do with last reps last 400 not being as fast as last week (even if whole rep was 1 sec faster).
*Not easy: I had pasta and salmon coming out of my ears through whole session. Stride was still OK, I think, but as I felt as bad as I did, I did not pay proper attention.
*Don't have the write up of pulses here as I write this down, must come back to it.
AM
Rest (or rather - splashing about in a spa, sauna, and having an enormous lunch).
PM
*25 min easy running.
*Strides.
*7x 1000 m (indoors - with Juha Kukkamo) / 1 min rest.
1 - 4) 3:20 - 3:19, then 5) 3:15, 6) 3:14, 7) 3:10.
2 min standstill: 111.
*10 min easy running.
*One more than last Saturday and 2 min standstill 10 beats lower, which might have to do with last reps last 400 not being as fast as last week (even if whole rep was 1 sec faster).
*Not easy: I had pasta and salmon coming out of my ears through whole session. Stride was still OK, I think, but as I felt as bad as I did, I did not pay proper attention.
*Don't have the write up of pulses here as I write this down, must come back to it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
