Interesting study I saw on voloume in running training

tuckerm

Saw this study on Twitter.  Has a kind of EN flavor to it.

 

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091111122026.htm

 

Thought everyone might like to see it.

 

TM

mgraffeo

Those are some pretty legit athletes seeing that benefit (average 10k time of 37:20 before intervention, 36:20 after).

There's been a lot of data in the literature about 30s intervals improving performance (do a google search on Tabata intervals to see a bunch more).

Philosophically very similar to the VO2 work we do here to 'raise the roof'.  One thing I find interesting about these studies is how the "raise the roof" training seems to "raise the ceiling" all by itself (ie. improved 10k performance) without any specific "raise the ceiling" training after the new roof has been set.  Makes me think that these athletes might see even bigger improvements if they did this study followed by 4-6 weeks of Threshold training...

Mike

tuckerm

I have read all about the Tabata workouts. Crazy stuff. And yes, these gains were crazy for such highly trained athletes. Off to the bike now 3 x 10'.

Coach Patrick

Also just hard to compare given the (likely) weekly volume of someone who runs a 36-37' 10k. That many weeks of lighter volume, regardless of amt of 30s intervals, would probably lead to a positive Training Stress Balance. My guess is few of those doodes ever took 8 weeks away from their traditional approach! But impressive nonetheless...

Paul Hough

I read the article and it sounds like more junk science.   I'm speaking as a runner only and not a triathlete, but when you take a group of people who have been training regularly, cut their volume and throw in speedwork, you basically have the definition of a peak phase.  Of course their short term results will be faster.  But to infer that you will get better over time that way is sheer nonsense.  The decline in elite level U.S. distance running from post-Salazar to pre-Hall is basically a result of the quality without sufficient hard base mileage.   If you want to succeed in running, you cannot skimp on the mileage.   

 

Al Truscott

Posted By Paul Hough on 23 Nov 2009 07:19 PM

I read the article and it sounds like more junk science.   I'm speaking as a runner only and not a triathlete, ...The decline in elite level U.S. distance running from post-Salazar to pre-Hall is basically a result of the quality without sufficient hard base mileage.   If you want to succeed in running, you cannot skimp on the mileage.   

[Emphasis added]

Adding mileage is probably a good idea for most runners; it may be counter productive for triathletes.