|
Nov 2016
8:05pm, 25 Nov 2016
2,475 posts
|
Ninky Nonk
But you managed to come to the conclusion without a power meter.
Therefore you didn't and don't need a power meter.
And a power meter won't tell you what proportion of hill training you need to do, and when, you still need to figure that out yourself.
|
|
Nov 2016
8:13pm, 25 Nov 2016
2,476 posts
|
Ninky Nonk
Although I agree it's easy to think of runners as hearts and lungs and forget about the muscles of the legs.
Similarly I think the neurological elements of running are often forgotton/underplayed. I'd love to have a betterunderstanding of the role of synaptic and neuron function in triggering muscle fibres. Understanding the trainability of these and the best ways to achieve or develop optimum muscle fibre recruitment could really improve running economy and improve strength/reduce fatigue.
|
|
Nov 2016
12:48pm, 26 Nov 2016
1,758 posts
|
Canute
NN,
The evidence that I had not adequately conditioned my leg muscles only became clear in an important marathon race. If the evidence had become clear earlier I might have improved the balance of my training.
50 years ago there was no prospect of using a power meter. We had to evaluate as carefully as we could what our own bodies were telling us about our weaknesses and how we needed to adjust our training. Because I value the simplicity of running, my natural inclination is to rely as much as possible on a careful evaluation of what my own body tells me, but the messages from the body are often difficult to interpret. I think it is very likely that the data from a power meter will provide more reliable information than subjective experience.
However, the question of whether or not an athlete should utilise technology to enhance efficiency of training is a matter or aesthetic or moral values. I find the high technology of the Oregon Project distasteful, but it is not easy to know where to draw the line.
As for training the brain to optimise the function of legs, heart and other organs, that is a fascinating issue.
|
|
Nov 2016
1:04pm, 26 Nov 2016
10,338 posts
|
Chrisull
Canute - how did it become clear (not doubting you, just interested, as a coach myself in how to differentiate it between say general fatigue and having gone too fast early on ?)
|
|
Nov 2016
1:28pm, 26 Nov 2016
1,759 posts
|
Canute
Chrisull, the slowing was associated with great difficulty in getting airborne. Subjectively I was spending too long on stance, though without the data from a power meter, that is only a subjective impression.
The interesting question is whether or not more hill training (or plyometrics) might have minimised the slow down. I think it is very likely that it would have improved my performance, but there has to be a balance. Too much stress on the legs in training is counter-productive. Nonetheless, I suspect that most recreational runners not develop adequate leg muscle resilience to maximize their potential in the marathon.
In light of the fact that you cannot avoid training on hills, I would be interested to hear your experiences of getting airborne in the late stages of a long race.
|
|
Nov 2016
1:48pm, 26 Nov 2016
2,477 posts
|
Ninky Nonk
Assuming that the best training is the most specific - my suggestion for those who suspect a lack of strength at the back end of a marathon would be a hilly long run. With as many hills at the back end as possible. This can be progressed by adding marathon effort sections to the hills.
I imagine that this would be much more effective than any plyometrics.
|
|
Nov 2016
2:28pm, 26 Nov 2016
23,088 posts
|
SPR
Plyometrics, sprints and strength training will improve base strength and power, this in turn will mean that when you're running at marathon pace, you are using a smaller %age of base strength/power.
Agree that you need to train it while running as well. Hills will help but if you're just slogging up them at the end of a run, it won't help as ground contact times lengthening is issue and that will just compound the issue. What you want to do is teach the body to still be able to recruit muscle fibres quickly when tired, so LRs with fast finish, LRs with surges making sure to keep good form might be a good idea.
|
|
Nov 2016
2:30pm, 26 Nov 2016
23,089 posts
|
SPR
In terms of power work I'd add sprints, then strength work, then plyometrics in that order assuming you don't have time to do all of these. There's no point in plyometrics if you don't sprint, unless you are doing lower impact plyo to get you ready to sprint.
|
|
Nov 2016
3:07pm, 26 Nov 2016
10,339 posts
|
Chrisull
Canute - I struggle, I've been getting soreness in my right glute that verges on chronic at the moment that I'm sure is connected to hillwork. If I train religiously on the flat (ie the one patch there is here, so it can get dull), it improves. I struggle to "stride it out" later in a long run, when I feel that I potentially have the aerobic capability to do so. I think the hillwork at the moment might be counter productive.
I have followed a polarised schedule and the HRM I am often just 75% average for 3 runs a week (using Karvonen modified formula), but my legs are really sore towards the end of any long runs (more so than usual). So today I have just equalled my 800 metre pb, (2.38) and this was on my own, the previous one was on a track with fellow runners. Last week I managed a 2.41 800m. My observation is that the hillwork is making me stronger, and potentially faster, but is now not helping me on my long runs. I did some really dramatic hill runs on constant 15% slopes in Basque country in the summer, but again other than very short distance improvements (mile or less), it didn't translate (although all my performances have been down since May by about 2 minutes).
However I do think my weight (2-3 kilos up on normal) does make a difference on the Cornish hills, I notice when I've lost weight during marathon training it's easier to get up them, as they're mostly shortish and sharp (and the weight loss didn't happen this time), so it could be a bit of this and given I'm 4 years older than when I last ran on the Cornish - 42 compared to 46.
|
|
Nov 2016
3:10pm, 26 Nov 2016
10,340 posts
|
Chrisull
So SPR you've pretty much answered my observations in your previous post:
" Hills will help but if you're just slogging up them at the end of a run, it won't help as ground contact times lengthening is issue and that will just compound the issue. "
I'd think plyometrics is where I might go looking next. And some more concentrated sprints, speedwork later on in runs as SPR suggests.
|
80/20
Jun 2019