Blog Archives

correlation between vo2max & lacate threshold

4/26/2015

Athletes I speak with at races tend to think that there is a linear correlation between their VO2max and LT (Lactate Threshold) values. Regardless of the time of year, regardless of the phase of training they are in, and regardless of their natural physiological characteristics, the trending thought is that they should be equally strong and proficient in both key areas of race fitness. The athletes I work with typically come into the program with a similar mindset.

The challenge here is that there is no linear causality between VO2max and LT.

As a goal, the correlation to strive for is FTP watts coming in above 85% of VO2max watts, even shooting for as high as 90%. I've read about athletes being as high as 95% but that was from the mid-2000s which tells me the data was relying on EPO-juiced athletes, whether the lab coats knew it or not. So, I would say shooting for an 85-90% correlation between FTP and 5min maximal output tests is the goal.

The correlation is about metabolic efficiency - how well can the body process lactate before OBLA occurs (Onset of Blood Lactic Acid). OBLA is when lactate production "tips" and is produced faster than the body can process it - typically around 4mml (millimoles) of lactate.  Within that 85-90% correlation mentioned above, you're not necessarily "better" if you're higher. If you're naturally stronger at VO2max, then your correlation would be lower, or visa versa if you're naturally stronger at FTP.  As an example, Frank Shorter had a pedestrian VO2max but a super high LT. Which is why he was "just ok" in the 5k/10k but world champ at the marathon. 

If your correlation rises above 90% and closer to 95%, then it’s time to look at your VO2max as a limiter and start focusing on opening the body up. VO2max tends to be a limiter when your body is inefficient at transporting O2 to the working muscles during intense exercise. The only way to become more efficient is to train your VO2max system. For those who track power, this would equate to L5, or 106-120% of FTP. For those who only train by HR, this would equate to 90-95% of Max HR.

Conversely, if your correlation is below 85%, then you probably need to spend some time focusing on your LT. Power-wise, this is L4, or 90-105% of FTP; even SST is a great zone to focus on at 88-93% of FTP. In HR terms, this would be 84-92% of Max HR.

For those using power in their cycling training, this is the whole reason to perform the 1min, 5min and FTP tests. When you collect the data points and better understand their correlation, you can start to better focus your training because you have identified your limiters and can specifically attack them. By doing this, you will get more out of your training, reduce the negative impact of your weak spots and, ultimately, allow yourself to experience greater successes in competition.

Happy Training,
Coach Nate

0 Comments

Training too much?

4/19/2015

0 Comments

Regardless of the distances you concentrate for your racing efforts, there tends to be a certain volume of training you feel necessary to complete in order to be properly prepared. If, for some reason, your race efforts are below your expectations then the immediate knee-jerk reaction is to train more. "Boy, I was slow so I must be out of shape. Gotta train more and whip myself into shape. That'll do it!"

And, indeed, this may be the appropriate remedy. However, a different approach might be equally effective, or even more so to get that elusive zip back into your racing. Maybe instead of ramping up your volume you should cut it back. Significantly.

Seasoned endurance athletes have so many years of so many miles stored up in their neuromuscular systems. This is why we can bounce back after a layoff (when we are "so" out of shape) and get back to top form very quickly. However, that top level of fitness can also be a rut in the road, wagon wheel tracks that are six inches deep because year after year we achieve that certain level of fitness but never surpass it. So, while all those years of training are a big help when it comes time to get back in the swing of things, it can also be a hindrance to our progress.

Let's say as a runner you are accustomed to 60-mile weeks. You do some sort of speedwork once/week and a weekly long run on Saturdays. You run 6 days a week. What if instead you cut back to 40 miles per week? You shortened your speedwork intervals from 800s/1000s/1600s down to 400s, completed your long run every other Saturday and incorporated more recovery days during the week (either days off or shorter/easier runs). Your fear would be, "I'm going to get out of shape." It would be mine, too. But, time and again, I see my athletes benefit from reduced volume and better focus on (1) their workouts; and (2) rest and recovery. The added rest and lower volume adds much needed "snap" to the legs, allowing athletes to train and race at a higher level. Those wagon wheel ruts would fill right up and you'd be charging down a new path of less resistance.

As a real world example, one of my Masters athletes was concentrating more on running (than swimming or biking) this past fall/winter. Just to try something different. She swam/biked 3 days each per week and was running 5 days (about 50 miles). Now that Summer is approaching, I added one day per week on the bike and cut back to 4 days per week running. During only the second week of this new approach, her running took a big step forward in speed.

She is not training any harder or longer. All I did was change things up ever so slightly - changing one run workout to a bike workout. The effect on me was noticeable and significant. Because she is not pounding her legs as much (running trashes the legs more than biking or swimming), they are more fresh day in/day out. This allows her to push harder within a given HR zone (non-recovery) and, thus, get more out of the workouts. The higher volume running weeks laid a nice foundation but also dug deep wagon wheel tracks. Now she has broken out of them and is moving forward faster than before.

Come Summer, I'll be cutting back her running to 3 days a week. By then, she won't have to worry about losing any run fitness. And the added zip to her step will allow her to race strong and hard, without worry of fading away at the end.

If you're feeling the need to try something different, try decreasing your volume. If you don't realize the results you are hoping for, not to worry. You can ramp things back up and be no worse for the wear. On the other hand, decreasing your volume just might be the shot in the arm your training routine needs.

Happy Training,
Coach Nate

0 Comments

prioritize your races

4/12/2015

0 Comments

Don't Weight Your Racing Grades.

When I was in high school, we worked off a 4-point scale: As were worth "4", Bs were worth "3", and so on. If we were in college-level courses, our grades in those particular courses were weighted, meaning we got graded on a 5-point scale for them: As were worth "5", Bs were worth "4" and so on. On each report card, I had two class rankings and two grade point averages - one taking into account my college-level courses and one only taking into account my high school-level
courses. Got confusing at times because very little in this system was clear cut and precise.

Your racing needs to be black and white. As you decide how you are going to fill up your racing
schedule for the year, you will be determining which races are your most important (A), which are pretty important (B) and which are nothing more than hard weekend workouts (C). But once you designate your races as A/B/C, you must adhere to this ranking system.

When you are preparing for an A race, everything you do leading up to that race is supposed to specifically gear you up to perform at your best during that race. Nothing less. Once you hit that peak, it is critical to recover, regroup and refocus for the next push. Inevitably, this will entail a short period of transitioning or detraining. If you have really prepared 100% for your A race - mentally, physically and emotionally - then the day after you should not be saying, "OK, I'm ready for what's next!" You'll need a short break to recharge, whether you admit it to yourself or not.

So, does it make sense to schedule two A races a month apart? No. Yes, it is possible to hold a peak for 4-6 weeks, but it's a big gamble. It is hard to stay peaked mentally, physically and emotionally for a sustained period of time. If you absolutely must designate two races in cloe proximity as A races, then it would be best for them to be back-to-back or no more than 2 weeks apart. Best to spread them out so there is at least 2 months betwen A race efforts.

Likewise, be honest with your training and effort during B and C races. Sure, the goal is always to
race as hard and fast as you can, but you have to keep everything in perspective. Everything is a dress rehearsal for your A race(s). So, does it make sense to "weight" your B and C races, effectively turning them into A and B races? No, it does not.

Put for 100% effort in all your racing, but realize that "100%" is relative. When you go into a C race
broken down because you haven't backed off in your training, "100%" may only be 80% of your full potential. And that's OK. It's dress rehearsal, remember? You get into trouble when you back off on your training leading into B and C races in an attempt to have great results every time you race. What you are doing is possibly improving your performance in you B and C races, but you are also running the risk of hampering your chances of having breakthrough performances in your A races. By "weighting" your B and C races - assigning them greater importance than they truly deserve - you are neutering the performances of your A races.

Think of your A race as the climax in a dramatic movie. Throughout the movie, you can feel the energy, restlessness and tension mounting with every passing minute until the climax is reached. In a great movie, that climax can hit you like an earthquake. In a bad movie, it kinda passes and you wonder, "Is that the climax or did I miss something?" Create clear and differentiating boundaries around your A/B/C races, and your A races will be similar to the former scenario. Put too much emphasis on the B and C races, and your A races will instead be similar to the latter
scenario.

Define your racing goals clearly and adhere to them. Prepare the way you need to in order to have breakthrough performances in your A races and chalk the rest of them up to rehearsal and experience. I'd rather get beat at local/regional events and then win a national title than be a local hero and get throttled at nationals because I let my ego rather than common sense determine how I was going to structure my training around my racing.

Avoid this potential pitfall and you will have more energy and enthusiasm - as well as more power,
strength and speed - for your most important races of the season.

Happy Training,
Coach Nate

0 Comments

hard core

4/6/2015

0 Comments

Working the core = overrated.

Say what? Yep, that's what I'm sayin'. Before anyone gets into a huff over this, I'll clarify that some people can certainly benefit from core-specific work. But, in general, I think targeting the core for most athletes is overrated.

It all started when I read an article focusing on Dan Martin, an once up-and-coming Irishman and superb climber racing on the Garmin professional cycling team. He was asked if he attributes a strong core to his climbing like a billy goat. His answer was, "No." In fact, he avoids working his core because he noticed when he did work it, his climbing prowess took a hit. It kept him from being fluid on his bike. Martin figured his core was naturally strong enough simply by the daily rigors of riding his bike.

Martin's reasoning made sense to me. Back as a swimmer, I scratched my head at all the ab work we did during our dryland exercises. Even at a young age, I wondered why completing roughly 400 turns per workout, which clearly targets the core, wasn't enough. So, flash forward to today, and I've decided to ignore my core and see what happens. Would I be OK, or would I start to fall apart during long or arduous rides? Would my climbing be better off or worse off? Would it be affected at all?

My answer came when I did my first-ever Pilates class. For those who have never tried Pilates, it's 60 minutes (in the case of this class) of core-specific torture. I felt burning in my abs like never before. When the class was done, my abs were 'wobbly', like any muscle group is after being worked overtime in the gym. I thought, "Oh, boy, when I wake up tomorrow, I'm not going to be able to move an inch I'll be so sore!" But, when I woke up, I was not stiff or sore in my core, very much to my surprise.

What I did find of value in the Pilates class is the focus on the glutes and hip flexors, two areas I know I need to strengthen to improve my pedaling efficiency. Those 2 areas turned out to be a bit stiff after the class, letting me know that they got a good workout in. I'll continue to go to Pilates to shore up those areas; the core will be worked as well, but I'd rather focus the hour on my weak areas if I had a choice.

My guess is I'm not alone here. I think many of us could spend our time more valuably, targeting areas of our bodies that are truly weak. IMO, we too easily buy in to the mantra of "strengthen your core and all will be well in the world."

Food for thought, if nothing else . . .

Happy Training,
Coach Nate

0 Comments

correlation between vo2max & lacate threshold

Training too much?

prioritize your races

hard core

Archives

Categories