"What everyone gets wrong about endurance training"

Everything about the training process, including programs, experiences, etc.

User avatar
Jwolf
Kevin Sullivan
Posts: 37476
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 10:02 pm
Location: Vancouver

"What everyone gets wrong about endurance training"

Postby Jwolf » Sat Feb 03, 2018 9:09 am

The title of the article is very click-baity, but it's a good article none-the-less.

https://www.outsideonline.com/2270151/w ... aign=tweet
Support me in my fundraising for the Boston Marathon, Boston Public Library team:
https://www.crowdrise.com/o/en/campaign ... iferwolf11

User avatar
Spirit Unleashed
Lynn Williams
Posts: 21763
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 7:38 am
Location: The Texas Tropics

Re: "What everyone gets wrong about endurance training"

Postby Spirit Unleashed » Sat Feb 03, 2018 1:17 pm

Thanks. I guess it is not so bad how slow most of my training is.
Athlete....Maniac 973....Marathon Maniac 6645
Live the most amazing life you can live - La
marathon runners are awesomeness personified - Ian
Bucket list: http://www.tassietrailfest.com.au/
http://ultramonk.blogspot.com/

User avatar
La
Kevin Sullivan
Posts: 47990
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:11 pm
Location: Lesleyville!

Re: "What everyone gets wrong about endurance training"

Postby La » Mon Feb 05, 2018 10:00 am

Good article. My only criticism is that he failed to cite his sources for the claims he was making about why his approach is the right one. he linked to one Norwegian study, but that was about the breakdown of workouts by elite athletes (not the science behind why they train that way). If you're going to be critical of other people's claims (e.g., CrossFit/HIIT), then you have to back yours up with science.
"Maybe I will be my own inspiration." - UltraMonk (Laura)
"Everywhere is walking distance if you have enough time." - Steven Wright

User avatar
Jwolf
Kevin Sullivan
Posts: 37476
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 10:02 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: "What everyone gets wrong about endurance training"

Postby Jwolf » Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:02 am

La wrote:Good article. My only criticism is that he failed to cite his sources for the claims he was making about why his approach is the right one. he linked to one Norwegian study, but that was about the breakdown of workouts by elite athletes (not the science behind why they train that way). If you're going to be critical of other people's claims (e.g., CrossFit/HIIT), then you have to back yours up with science.


The linked article wasn't just one study-- it was a meta-analysis of MANY studies, so more of a review article. In it the authors do a lot of analysis behind the reasoning for coaches/athletes using the methods they do, including a breakdown of physiological changes and adaptations from workouts of different lengths.

Lots of science in that article-- and it's very interesting!
Support me in my fundraising for the Boston Marathon, Boston Public Library team:
https://www.crowdrise.com/o/en/campaign ... iferwolf11

User avatar
La
Kevin Sullivan
Posts: 47990
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:11 pm
Location: Lesleyville!

Re: "What everyone gets wrong about endurance training"

Postby La » Mon Feb 05, 2018 11:26 am

Ah, OK. The way he referenced the article didn't indicate that it supported more than just this claim, "examined the actual distribution of training intensity used by elite athletes across the full spectrum of endurance sports. The conclusion: The best in the world complete about 80 percent of their training volume at low intensity, 7 to 8 percent at moderate intensity, and about 12 to 13 percent at high intensity."
"Maybe I will be my own inspiration." - UltraMonk (Laura)
"Everywhere is walking distance if you have enough time." - Steven Wright

User avatar
ultraslacker
Site Admin
Posts: 46890
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 5:33 pm
Location: paradise
Contact:

Re: "What everyone gets wrong about endurance training"

Postby ultraslacker » Mon Feb 05, 2018 10:53 pm

so to simplify it for the average joe, if we were to make an 80/10/10 rule--80% low, 10% medium, 10% high, that'd work for most people.
"You're an ultrarunner, normal rules don't apply to you." (Doonst)


First say to yourself what you would be; and then do what you have to do. ~Epictetus

User avatar
La
Kevin Sullivan
Posts: 47990
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 9:11 pm
Location: Lesleyville!

Re: "What everyone gets wrong about endurance training"

Postby La » Tue Feb 06, 2018 9:42 am

ultraslacker wrote:so to simplify it for the average joe, if we were to make an 80/10/10 rule--80% low, 10% medium, 10% high, that'd work for most people.

Sounds reasonable. I think it would need to be further qualified to say:

1) That you need to define how you're measuring intensity - is it by HR? Pace? Something else?
2) If by HR, do you know what your zones are for each of those intensity levels?
3) That the percentages are based on time spent at each intensity level as a total for the week (because you might have a workout that consists of all 3 intensities)
"Maybe I will be my own inspiration." - UltraMonk (Laura)
"Everywhere is walking distance if you have enough time." - Steven Wright

User avatar
Jwolf
Kevin Sullivan
Posts: 37476
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 10:02 pm
Location: Vancouver

Re: "What everyone gets wrong about endurance training"

Postby Jwolf » Tue Feb 06, 2018 2:43 pm

ultraslacker wrote:so to simplify it for the average joe, if we were to make an 80/10/10 rule--80% low, 10% medium, 10% high, that'd work for most people.


Yes. And really, simplest is best for many!

The take-away from the article is that no matter what approach people have taken to get to the best mix of training for endurance athletes, they all come to the same basic simple 80/10/10 formula (or some people call it 80/20). It doesn't matter whether think about it terms of HR other physiological markers, self-perceived exertion, pace, etc. Perceived exertion can work well for most people (easy/moderate/hard) but the key is to be honest with yourself about what is low/easy intensity. Many people run too much volume at a pace that they say is "easy" but is really too high intensity for their fitness. And too much can lead to overuse, fatigue, and injuries.
Support me in my fundraising for the Boston Marathon, Boston Public Library team:
https://www.crowdrise.com/o/en/campaign ... iferwolf11

IronColl
Lynn Williams
Posts: 19393
Joined: Fri Dec 09, 2005 2:51 pm
Location: Right here
Contact:

Re: "What everyone gets wrong about endurance training"

Postby IronColl » Tue Feb 06, 2018 8:56 pm

La wrote:
ultraslacker wrote:so to simplify it for the average joe, if we were to make an 80/10/10 rule--80% low, 10% medium, 10% high, that'd work for most people.

Sounds reasonable. I think it would need to be further qualified to say:

1) That you need to define how you're measuring intensity - is it by HR? Pace? Something else?
2) If by HR, do you know what your zones are for each of those intensity levels?
3) That the percentages are based on time spent at each intensity level as a total for the week (because you might have a workout that consists of all 3 intensities)


Yes, exactly this!
If all that you read is everything you believe then let go, then let go, then let go.

Nothing will change if you never choose.

2018 goals: May half marathon, September half marathon

Dstew
Bill Crothers
Posts: 3384
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 7:41 pm

Re: "What everyone gets wrong about endurance training"

Postby Dstew » Mon Feb 12, 2018 12:03 am

The problem with the article is that it is very sloppy. It interchanges the term fitness and endurance several times. Some interesting studies show that to maximize one's health benefits, 450 minutes of exercise a week is required with about 30% vigorous. Vigorous seems to be defined as breaking a sweat. Thus walk 5 hours, run 2.5 hours per week. That more and higher intensity starts one on the reverse U curve where the benefits start to decrease. And HIIT has consistently shown to be very effective. In fact the "H" for High may need to be as High as it was once thought. So the article really should be more specific and read for running endurance stamina and fitness, 80/20. And even then, the caveat that your results may vary. I ran 3:50 marathon at sea level using the 80/20 method. It allowed me to run over 500 K one month without a major injury. But just for the heck of it, the next year at altitude, I ran a 3:51 using the FIRST method and with about one third of the mileage. Thus I do have to question whether it really matters that much of the majority of runners who are not elite or world class. That instead, what is fun and allows you to do so in as injury free manner as possible is the "best" method.


Return to “Training ”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest