No, your velocity or power (or heart rate) for 30 min would be much higher than your velocity or power (or heart rate) at lactate threshold.
______________

I don't personaly use or prescribe that test, but the *theory* is that you won't motivate yourself to ride as hard in 30 minute test than you would in a 30 minute race.......but again, I have no experience in the matter.

Thanks for the CP clarification. That would cause confusion.

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

I think you're missing the point: lactate threshold is an exercise intensity that can be maintained for quite some time (e.g., marathon pace, at least if you're reasonably quick), even if you aren't motivated by competition. The intensity that coaches and athletes routinely refer to as "LT" is in fact much higher, and is thus much closer to (or is) maximal lactate steady state/critical power/OBLA.

The mass transport of O2 via the circulation. The reason that I used that term instead of "maximal cardiac output" is that it includes arterial O2 carrying capacity and pulmonary O2 transport, both of which also play a role.

If it helps any, when dealing with isolated muscle stimulated to contract in vitro (and perhaps even in situ), O2 uptake seems to be limited by diffusion, not convective tranport.

OK, Diesel

I did much pondering on this topic during my meeting (that I have to return to in 10 minutes). Here's what I have come up with:


1) Friel's initial target audience is cyclists. Cyclists not only need the ability to endure a long race, or back to back races, but also need to posses the ability to sprint to the finish, attack, sustain a break, etc......

2) Friel address these needs by covering SIX basic components of training.

3) In an attempt to explain them he comes up with a graphic that links them together in a way that the audience (readers of his book) can easily understand. Unfortunately, his graphis is just plain incorrect. It does a fine job if his goal is to get an ignorant reader (meaning one who is starting from scratch in the learning process) to buy into the fact that the 6 aspects of training are important and that they have a relationship. For many people, that's all they want to know and are content to just follow his system (which seems liek a sound system). However, for the person who attempts to understand the concepts and begin to asses their own training (like myself), he leads them down the wrong path.


He begins with the force, endurance, speed triangle. Fine. But then he bridges the gap between Force and endurance with "muscular endurance" (which, according to his charts leads me to believe that he is talking about Lactate Threshold) and between speed and endurance with "anaerobic endurance " (I think) which is V02max. Both of these are misleading. They simply don't relate in that fashion.


Here I have taken the training pyramid present in many running books and applied it to Friel's model to show how the graphic *should* be displayed (forgive me....I'm short on time....did the best I could):



And this is how it should relate to Friel's triangle (whoch shouldn't be a triangle at all):




I'm OK with Force and Speed combining for power.....much like a track and field sprinter has a combination of leg strength and quick moving muscles....but quickness has little to do with "V02max" and force has little to do with "lactate threshold".......in fact, lactate threshold and v02max have more to do with each other despite being on opposite ends of the triangle. Like Paulo said earlier, this should all be under the endurance umbrella.


gotta go..................

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

"I did much pondering on this topic during my meeting (that I have to return to in 10 minutes). Here's what I have come up with:"

Wow, must have been an exciting meeting!

;-)

Jodi

Barry,

It just pains me to see the graphics you posted. Also you got the wrong triangle/piramid...

There should be an administrator to pull posts like those! ;-)

a) I was a sophist long before I trained as biochemist. i ceased my endeavours in biochem a long time ago - the wholly tractable nature of software is much more appealing.
b) Such people *do* exist. Please note that when I said "cannot ride", I did not intend that to be interpreted as "could never ride", merely as "cannot, given their current training plans and physical conditioning, ride at this level". i am well aware that you could take any sub-55 40k tt'ist and convert them into a fast century rider if they were willing to train for it.
c) My main goal in contributing to the thread was to refute Paulo's claim that "Strengths and weaknesses can only be related to the 3 energy systems". I think that I actually succeeded at that quite well.
d) the fact that this forum is filled with cyclists (and friends of cyclists) who can both ride a sub-55min 40km tt *and* a 4-5hr century seems to have made my use of that kind of example rather poor judgement.

I think you're missing the point: lactate threshold is an exercise intensity that can be maintained for quite some time (e.g., marathon pace, at least if you're reasonably quick), even if you aren't motivated by competition. The intensity that coaches and athletes routinely refer to as "LT" is in fact much higher, and is thus much closer to (or is) maximal lactate steady state/critical power/OBLA.
________________

Lactate Threshold as I have understood it from Dr's Daniels, Martin, and Pfitzinger is defined to be very closer to what a trained runner can maintain for ~ 60 minutes. Marathon Pace has been described as being sleightly slower than that (though not much slower for elites). If they change the terms in their books I'll have to believe you for now.


A well trained distance runner should be able to RACE a 30 minute race at roughly 16 seconds per mile faster than they can for 1 hour. So, the theory (that....as I said, I don't use) is that if an athlete wanted to find a rough estimate of what their pace would be at their lactate threshold, they can do a 30 minute time trial test. Due to a lack of motivavation, they will likely not be able to sustain their full race pace (say their potential is 5 min/mile) and thus slow down to a pace closer to pace at LT (in this case 5:16/mile). Now the argument is....will they slow down that much? Personaly I think 8 seconds a mile is more reasonable....which is why I don't use the test.

Does that make sense?

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

That's maximal lactate steady state/critical power/OBLA.

I like books just as much as the next person, but you love them, Barry...

It's not Friel's work......

If you read Bompa, he uses rowers and swimmers. For swimming, he uses the analogy of taking a 100m specialists and turning them into a 1500m specialist. That person has the "force", but needs to increase duration. Compare that to a 5000m swimmer who has the opposite situation.

I do like the LT analogy, but no one really cares what I think b/c I'm not a coach. My point is that this is a simple analogy that people understand.

Some feel you need endurance before speed...but there are SOOOOO many tri-geeks who would rather stick around Olympic distance before IM, even at the elite ranks. Of course, both "endurance" sports, but the relative force is different.

You don't need speed to race Olympic distance.
The relative force is different, but not that different. More importantly, the difference in forces between racing an OD race and an IM is VERY SMALL when compared with the maximum force you can apply to the specific movement.

IT'S ALL ENDURANCE, DAMN IT!!!!!!! ;-)

So..you're telling me that Normann beat Macca because he had more endurance?

I've got the Martin and Coe book at home, but haven't read it is a while, and I've never read the others. Regardless, if any of them define lactate threshold as the pace that a trained runner can maintain for ~1 h, they're wrong.

It drives me nuts that people think an Oly distance is a short race.

It's over 2 hours for almost everyone in the field.

   
Never said it was a short race.....but it certainly is relative to IM.

Or maybe it was because he had more speed...or was it more force? Yeah, yeah, that's it: he used the Force! ;-)

Seriously, I think you're proving Paulo's (general) point: if you really want to understand what limits performance at various durations, it's best to use terms that have specific, clear-cut definitions (e.g., VO2max). Layman's terms such as "endurance" or "speed", while familiar to all, are simply too poorly defined to be truly useful when attempting to communicate complicated ideas. Or, to put it another way: the precise communication of precise ideas requires the precise use of precise terminology.

(BTW, if I were to try to more precisely define "endurance", I would describe it as "the terminal slope of the power-duration relationship".)

If I increased my FTP by 15%, did I increase my endurance or force?

I don't know, which is the problem with using such vague terms as "endurance" or "force". What obviously can be said, however, is that you increased your functional threshold power by 15%, which means that your lactate threshold must have gone up by about that much.

I happen to like that one too - if for no other reason than I feel like I paid my tuition dollars to the right people. (

The paper made a lot of sense, while Knoakes' response was not a great rebuttal. But to say that I read through and understood everything that they were saying on the first read is not true. (and I haven't read again.) There are a lot of the things they were doing in the lab that I didn't really enjoy, thus didn't apply. Now I wish I had.

Sometimes I feel that Knoakes is so concerned about preaching his thoery that the value of what he has to say is lost. Therefore it fits into the mold (and my perception) of academic research.

Anyway - I posted a thread about this when I was reading those papers... it didn't go anywhere, but I'm still hoping for some more enlightenment.

previous thread: http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...est=10855175#1106904

---

--

garyd
endurancebasecamp.com

Indeed, some would argue that it's better to be known than to be right. Still, Noakes' ideas, although sometimes way out in left field, do serve the purpose of keeping everyone on their toes, such that they don't begin to think that they know more than they really know.

Did the LT thread not explain this very issue in relatively gruesome detail? How did people not walk away with a clear understanding that scientific LT intensity (~2mmol/L) is much lower than Friel LT intensity (~4mmol/L)? To give people a sense of how low LT is, let's throw out the other wonderful term (which AC loves so much) that is a much closer reflection of scientific LT: aerobic threshold (AeT).

Thanks, Chris

Maybe he should improve his popularity even more.... as I obviously can't remember his name (and spelling).

I do agree with:

"such that they don't begin to think that they know more than they really know"

Noakes' book and papers have made me spend way more time looking into what I do and do not know more than I would have had he not written them. Or cause the uproar that ensures around the ex phys community.

I often wonder if all this internal debating and blogging actually makes me a less effective coach as most of the athletes I talk to just need help and encouragement to train and then train more.... it probably doesn't matter what they are doing at the levels they train at.

Now to go back and finish the last few pages of this thread....

---

--

garyd
endurancebasecamp.com

That's maximal lactate steady state/critical power/OBLA.

I like books just as much as the next person, but you love them, Barry...

______________________

Thanks Paulo. I wouldn't say that I "love" them. I just wanted to be clear where my information came from. That gives AC (or you) a better understanding of where I am coming from. I'd love to read up on as much ex-phys as you two do......but other endeavors tend to get in the way sometimes. So i read what I can.

; ^ )

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

Barry,

It just pains me to see the graphics you posted. Also you got the wrong triangle/piramid...

There should be an administrator to pull posts like those! ;-)
_____________________________________________________

My mind reading skills are crapping out right now. Do you think the information is bad? If so, why? (and please explain it better).

Or are you making fun of my graphics? If so, be prepared for a mind blast!

---

-----------------------------Baron Von Speedypants
-----------------------------RunTraining articles here:
http://forum.slowtwitch.com/...runtraining;#1612485

He who knows not, and knows not that he knows not, is a fool - shun him.
He who knows not, and knows that he knows not, is a child - teach him.
He who knows, and knows not that he knows, is asleep - wake him.
He who knows, and knows that he knows, is a wise man - follow him.

Attributions:, Persian Proverb Confucius