http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15288459


Applies more to running than cycling, but when you look at a movement pattern such as tibial acceleration, which has some literature link to injury, the interesting part is tibial acceleration decreases in this study with fatigue. Very often, high tibial acceleration in the literature increases injury risk.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11517672

Add in the potential increase in impact force from fatigue, with the body's need to decelerate movement during activity...Couple random pubmed studies don't prove anything- but does make one wonder.

Still tend to go back to the mantra of "biology is messy," and although we know a lot, there is still a lot of speculation. But, performance on consecutive days even though the muscles feel fatigued still falls back on the recruitment pattern of the type muscle?- but I know that many can reach into the pain cave for planned overreaching cycles longer with a cycling block than for a running block, which probably leans toward impact trauma playing a factor (though not sure to what degree).

---

http://www.reathcon.com

Surely someone wasn't selected due to the lactate number? The decision not to select him must have been based on performance tests.

I can't believe that is the reason why the man wasn't selected.

Can Jerry clarify?

Sigh.....

---

Steve

http://www.PeaksCoachingGroup.com

late to the party bc of travelling and no internet at home for some reason the cable company can't figure out. This would also be a great post in the coaches forum. And I haven't read the whole thing so I may be duplicating some/a lot/all of the psots.

IMO:
Ultimately performance wins races. Physiological testing provides context for performance. It's a lot easier to do performance testing, to gather data from PM's, to have athletes do a test of X or XX duration every few weeks vs having them go to a lab.

Is it nice to know the physiological testing values? Sure. But when my athletes do that, I take that data and go back to their performance data and see how it correlates, not the other way around.

Physiological data may be a starting point for helping to determine selection for Jrs or Srs in sports but it should be an adjunct to performance not the other way around.

Great thread Andy.

---

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

But the rower in question just got off an erg and his power or 2k time was not one of the best. What was intriguing was the incredibly high VO2 max. But the relatively low lactate levels was a negative for those choosing the team.

It shouldn't have been if they had understood a different theory of physiology. They could have trained him to get faster over 2k but what they couldn't train as easily was the huge aerobic capacity. It was one of the best in the world but he did not make the team.

Here is another example from the same testing



The rowers with the best V4 had the slowest 2k erg score of this group.

The assessment was

the rower with the fastest V4 time had the slowest 2000 m time. which shows that speed in a race (simulated race) is not entirely a function of the V4 measure.

However, there was no test for anaerobic capacity. Anaerobic capacity is obviously important in a race that lasts only 6 minutes. Lactate levels after a rowing race are often above 20 mmol/l. A measure of anaerobic capacity would allow the coach and sports scientist to better evaluate the conditioning of each athlete.

The athlete with the fastest V4 time may have had a lower anaerobic capacity. This may explain the low lactate readings which lead to a high V4 time. Also a lower anaerobic capacity may be why the 2000 m time was slower.

Obviously, these are not all the data but were chosen to illustrate a point and use the test referred to above.


------------

---

Jerry Cosgrove

Sports Resource Group
http://www.lactate.com
https://twitter.com/@LactatedotCom

Well, that's one way to put it, isn't it?

---

Steve

http://www.PeaksCoachingGroup.com

Good point- a nice example is the physfarm/Dr. Skiba folks. Use their software modelling, and it will be recommended to have a good number of daily training to create the model, with frequent field tests to augment daily training. This also focuses on a real-world field test (ex: 45min TT) as a reference point for the math modelling, rather than a lab test.

This entire thread has me thinking that maybe the ENTIRE industry has perhaps missed a major point of testing- in the 1980's, when lab testing was made available for athletes at a significant cost (or at no cost for the elite of the elite), many forward-thinkers thought there must be an accurate/reliable way to have the individual at home get in better quality measurements...technology advances, and we see the 1990's/early 2000 push for new tech outside of SRM, PowerTap, and Polar...now moving toward 2015, we're seeing NIRS and 9-axis accelerometers be available maintstream.

...now, you throw an internet search out there and you're going to hit a metric f-ton of devices to measure performance in the field (no more Douglas bag running around the track with Dr. Daniels in a golf cart)...

Point being, physiological testing in a lab has little place for the majority of us- but is still essential to have progress for science and research (let academia solicit for test subjects). But when you have devices that can produce reliable and accurate measurements on your wrist or bike, go with performance.

---

http://www.reathcon.com

I'm starting to think of Jerryc as a performance artist.

I will give him some credit though. I believe he actually completed one entire post without invoking Olbrecht. Chapeau!

---

Steve

http://www.PeaksCoachingGroup.com

But Jerry isn't claiming that V4 predicts performance. If I understand him, he is saying that the lactate testing gives insight into the athlete and thus helps determine the best way to train the athlete.

Having seen athletes ruined by idiots who forced them to train in a manner which did not suit their physiology I can see the value in the approach Jerry is putting forward.

As far as determining threshold I can't see how using lactate testing can offer anything but are we sure lactate testing doesn't tell us anything about an athlete we can't find out from power or pace testing alone?

I'm also not sold on the reliability, it seems a lot of things affect lactate levels so you need to be very careful to make sure you are not directing training in the wrong way due to a duff result in one test. This may well be the value in Jerry's gadget as it enables more frequent easy non invasive testing.


Is it coincidence that the people taking the piss out of Jerry are someone from Hunter Allen's PeaksCoaching the 'leaders in power' and Andrew Coggan, who wrote the training with power book with Hunter Allen?

No, I think we have some people with pretty good credibility giving the rest of us their expert (and they'd be considered this everywhere) views. They may favour a methodology that they've invoked with some success but I don't think that makes them outrageously biased to the extent of dismissal. I've found all of the views interesting and very worthwhile.

There was no need for them to take the piss though. See posts 58 and 59.

By the way I don't dismiss their views, I mostly agree with them, I don't think it was fair to take the piss out of Jerry, there was no need for it. Spoilt what was an interesting and informative discussion.

The coincidence is that over the years, I have come to very similar viewpoints to AC's by virtue of logic and scientific understanding. I will allude to my coaching presentations, as well as the classes I teach in the academic curriculum in which I am involved, and in all cases I am very consistent in my statements. In fact, in the lab testing course we teach at the graduate level, we teach lactate threshold testing and I then go on to state that there is very little value in it for some disciplines, most notably cycling. Further, I also caution the students not to get too wrapped up in the "scientific" approach to training whereby emphasis is placed on such things as lactate, HR and HRV to dictate training. Let the training dictate the training and if you collect some sciency data along the way that helps inform/confirm, great, if not, you're probably still going to do better than letting the tail wag the dog. As a result, I am a good fit for PCG due to my use of power in my everyday practice and extensive knowledge of the scientific background.

As I also stated in the other thread though, there are disciplines where lab testing is of value (e.g. running) and I place a fair bit of emphasis on them. That being said, much of the information Jerry presents is either misguided or just wrong, but by invoking authorities in the statements, gives them credibility.

Nuff said, gotta go collect some lactate....

---

Steve

http://www.PeaksCoachingGroup.com

I don't think we really "took the piss out of him", to use the parlance of your time (sorry, watched the Big Lebowski again last night). Jerry presents himself as an expert in lactate testing/analysis, but at the same time, says a number of things that detract from that expertise. There are too many of them to address on an individual basis and regardless, the rebuttal would simply be cloaked in the authority of another, such as Olbrecht or Hagerman. So, it's easier to simply point out the weakness of the positions in general and leave it at that. If you want to pour through the archives of Slowtwitch and Wattage, all the relevant info has already been rehashed more times than I can probably count. The main points have already been presented on this thread and the other lactate testing thread anyway. The dead horse is looking pretty beat up at this point.

---

Steve

http://www.PeaksCoachingGroup.com

 
You criticize me for evoking Jan Olbrecht. Yes, I am guilty of that. I got his book translated and then edited it in English so I should be familiar with what he is saying. I have had hundreds of conversations with him. So what you are saying is Olbrecht is misguided or just wrong. Or is anything I am saying at odds with what Olbrecht is saying.

I suggest you deal with the concepts and not use ad hominems about me. From another recent thread, his basic ideas:


Olbrecht uses three different models/technologies to advise the athletes he works with. It is important to understand each to optimally train an athlete.

First, he uses a model of metabolism that involves the interaction of both the aerobic and anaerobic systems. You must measure both to accurately understand what is behind each athlete's performance.

Most coaches of endurance athletes only worry about the aerobic system and fail to consider the effect of the anaerobic system. But the strength of the anaerobic system is one of the key determinants of the threshold so it must be a consideration in training.

Second, Jan uses lactate testing to get at the capacity of each of these systems in order to understand just how developed each is. Lactate is the output of the anaerobic system (glycolysis) and a fuel for the aerobic system so it is possible to estimate the capacity of each with a lactate test.

Jan prefers lactate testing to any other type of tests to estimate these parameters which are then inputs for his model of metabolism. He did the original testing of distant tests as a graduate student at the Sports School of the University of Cologne. He developed and validated what is known as the T30 for swimming and published his results in 1985.

Relationship Between Swimming Velocity and Lactic Concentration During Continuous and Intermittent Training Exercises


Int. J. Sports Med. 6 (1985) 74—77

One of the reasons he rejected the distant test approach was that it didn't tell one what was behind the threshold. For that one has to do other types of tests. So if one wants to train the threshold optimally in a specific direction, it is necessary to know what lies behind it.

For a detailed discussion of the lactate threshold based on Olbrecht's ideas go to

http://www.lactate.com/lactate_threshold.html

It is very long but it is not an intuitive model so takes some effort to understand it.

Third, what people really care about is not so much the testing but just how to train to get better. Tell me how fast and how long I am supposed to go.

So the third part of Olbrecht's approach is just what improves aerobic capacity and what affects anaerobic capacity. Since it is the interaction of these two capacities which will determine the threshold.

Notice I did not say the improvement of anaerobic capacity since the proper level of the anaerobic system will not be maximal for an endurance athlete. Generally, there is never enough aerobic capacity so maximal is usually the best. However, for certain sports trying to achieve a maximal aerobic capacity may be counter productive to developing other capabilities needed to excel.

It is this third aspect that is most important and one has to ask just what is necessary to maximize aerobic capacity and also train the anaerobic capacity to an appropriate level.

Olbrecht has a book on his training philosophy and it is on swimming but the principles in it apply to any sport. He uses these principles for the triathletes he advises.

http://www.lactate.com/bkolbr.html

The basis for the model that Olbrecht uses is based on the work of Alois Mader and others at Cologne. Here are some references.

Mader, A. and H. Heck (1986). "A theory of the metabolic origin of "anaerobic threshold"." International Journal of Sports Medicine 7(Sup): S45-S65.

Mader, A. (1991). "Evaluation of the endurance performance of marathon runners and theoretical analysis of test results." Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness 31(1): 1-19.

Mader, A. (2003). "Glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation as a function of cytosolic phosphorylation state and power output of the muscle cell." European Journal of Applied Physiology 88(4-5): 317-38.

Hartmann, U., & Mader, A. (1996). The metabolic basis of rowing. In Rogozkin & R. J. Maughan (Eds.), Current research in sports science (pp. 179-185). New York: Plenum Press.

Mader, A., Hartmann, U., Hollmann, W. (1988). Der Einfluß der Ausdauer auf die 6minütige maximale anaerobe und aerobe Arbeitskapazität eines Eliteruderers. S. 62-79. In: Steinacker, J.: Rudern: Sportmedizinische und sportwissenschaftliche Aspekte. Berlin: Springer.

Mader, A., (1994). Aussagekraft der laktatieistungskurve in kombination mit anaeroben tests zur bestimmung der stoffwechselkapazität. In: Clasing, D., Weicker, H., Boening, D.: Stellenwert der Laktatbestimmung in der Leistungsdiagnostik. Stuttgart: G. Fischer.

He has tested over a thousand athletes in the last 25 years, most on an ongoing basis so he is able to see how they develop based on the training they do. Many are World Champions and Olympic medal winners but the bulk are athletes of lesser ability. So he has lots of feedback as to what works. I would hope that people would consider his ideas instead of denigrating them.

So deal with the ideas. They are stated above in abbreviated form but expanded discussion can go into them a little further. They are all available in his book.


----

---

Jerry Cosgrove

Sports Resource Group
http://www.lactate.com
https://twitter.com/@LactatedotCom

Jerry could you tell me more about why you or O. think anaerobic capacity is a key determinant of threshold?

I don't have the numbers handy but last time I did some napkin math on this, you take given anaerobic capacity in kilojoules, divide it over around an hour of effort, and you only get something like 5 watts out of it. So the differences between athletes anaerobic capacity would only explain a couple watts of their threshold power typically.

You would definitely be very interested in the breakdown for a rowing or cycling event in the 5 minute range (or 1 minute, or 10 minutes) or for road cyclists who of course have to have a little bit of everything.

But I'm not sure how different you train an triathlete who has a small anaerobic output vs one who has a big one. Either way I think you try to get as much aerobic power out of them as possible yes?

---

---

Kat Hunter reports on the San Dimas Stage Race from inside the GC winning team
Aeroweenie.com -Compendium of Aero Data and Knowledge
Freelance sports & outdoors writer Kathryn Hunter

Not me but Olbrecht. Also not the key but one of the three main determinants. The others are aerobic capacity or VO2 max and economy.

This threshold is called by different names, maximal lactate steady state, OBLA (onset of blood lactate accumulation), anaerobic threshold (Wasserman's original definition was different than how it is used today) or lactate threshold. What is all the commonality here. Namely, the glycolytic anaerobic energy system which produces lactate.

So the threshold is based on the maximum effort one can maintain without producing lactate levels that continually rise. It is based on a level of the anaerobic system to produce at a steady state various metabolites, of which one is lactate (actually it is pyruvate that is the output but nearly all of it immediately turns into lactate.).

The level of contribution by the anaerobic system varies by person and by how strong it is. Make it stronger and it will contribute more at the same effort level. Make it weaker and it will contribute less at the same effort level. This means that one is affecting the effort level which the maximum lactate steady state occurs or one is moving the threshold by changing the anaerobic system.

Here is the model we have on our web page on the lactate threshold:



http://www.lactate.com/lactate_threshold.html

This is a long page but discusses the rationale behind this model. Over a period of about 2 months I fiddled around with the graphics till the image above was approved by Olbrecht and he said I could put his name on it.

Olbrecht's definitions of aerobic capacity, aerobic power, anaerobic capacity and anaerobic power are not the same as how many use these terms in the academic literature but he believes his use of the terms are more precise.

Aerobic capacity is VO2 max and this is consistent. Anaerobic capacity is the equivalent of VO2 for the glycolytic system. It is the maximal amount of energy that one could theoretically generate through the glycolytic system. It is often abbreviated as VLa max to indicate the nature of this system to produce lactate.

Power is how much can actually be utilized during an event. For an endurance event aerobic power is essentially the same as the maximal lactate steady state.

This is all in his book.

Some implications of this, are that the threshold can be trained in three fundamental ways, building aerobic capacity, adjusting anaerobic capacity and economy.

If anyone is interested, read our page and ask questions. If something is wrong or imprecise, I am gladly ready to correct it

----------

---

Jerry Cosgrove

Sports Resource Group
http://www.lactate.com
https://twitter.com/@LactatedotCom

+1

Can you point to anything that is truly novel about this conceptualization? 'cause from where I sit, I ain't seeing it...

Thank you for endorsing what we are trying to communicate.

Jack Mott's question seemed to indicate that he did not understand how the anaerobic system affected the threshold so that is why I brought up this model. He also did not seem to understand our point about the importance of training the anaerobic system.

We presented these ideas on the triathlon in 1998 a year after van Lierde set his world record time. Since then I have not seen many talking about training the anaerobic system in order to move the threshold for the triathlon. But your agreement should help advance this concept.


--------

---

Jerry Cosgrove

Sports Resource Group
http://www.lactate.com
https://twitter.com/@LactatedotCom

I should have included this in my answer above but we have a long discussion on the triathlon on our website (19 modules) and four are on the anaerobic system. In one we call anaerobic capacity the gatekeeper for the aerobic system.

http://www.lactate.com/...obic_gatekeeper.html

and this module titled "Training to control the gatekeeper for aerobic energy"

http://www.lactate.com/...bic_controlling.html

Hope this helps explain the point of view we are recommending for consideration.


----------

---

Jerry Cosgrove

Sports Resource Group
http://www.lactate.com
https://twitter.com/@LactatedotCom

So what you're basically getting at is peripheral vs. central adaptations, and stating that max lactate/anaerobic capacity uptake determines the speed/performance, and lactate production aerobic capacity provides the volume of available energy?

---

http://www.reathcon.com

You've mentioned that twice but only really justified it vis a vis cycling being a pretty much closed loop exercise.

Can you expand on why you think lab testing has more relevance in running vs cycling - how you use it.

For that matter if you think it is important in swimming, this being a tri board and all.

Do you mind? I'm trying to watch Kona... ;)

Seriously, the main reason being that cycling is so straightforward (i.e. no biomechanical economy issues) and we can get very accurate data regarding power output in high resolution from portable, on board PMs . The only "lab" testing that would really be of importance in cycling would be the aerodynamic lab (i.e. wind tunnel). Again though, we run into the same issue with the resolution of the testing. Since position is more "static" than metabolism/fitness, this isn't as much of an issue. Still, I personally prefer the field testing approach.

Anywho.... for running and swimming, we have a different scenario. Both have economy components that can be substantial (swimming more so than running) and that can mask the underlying physiology. For example, we may have a runner who provides us with performance data indicating he can run a 16:00 5k. Well, if he's chubby, he could potentially be a 15:00 5 k guy. How long has he been running? Are there some technical improvements that could come? Might he be a 14:30 guy? If we do some lab testing, we could find that his VO2max is decent, but he is "heavy" for his frame, so, that will result in improvement. We might also find that his economy is not great, so, that might improve. Coupled with some gait analysis, we might find ways to tweak the mechanics that would result in improvements. OTOH, if it turns out he's lean as a rail and has good mechanics and his VO2max is modest.... that's probably all you're going to get.

Further, the data we get regarding performance in running is subject to greater variability than cycling by virtue of the data itself. We're not getting power, we're generally getting pace, which although can be corrected for grade changes (e.g. NGP), is still subject to variations due to surface type etc.

You'll notice that lactate analysis never factors into the discussion. Based on the data from a VO2max, economy, performance and some gait analysis, that's all I really need. Lactate won't do much more for me and possibly would be a distraction. That being said, most people who want lab testing done feel like you are short changing them if they don't get lactate as part of the analysis. They'll willingly pay more to have it done simply because of the widespread perception that it's of major importance.

Swimming is another different animal altogether. Two things have greater bearing on this discussion in swimming than the other two disciplines, 1) it is very difficult to perform lab testing in swimming that holds much ecological validity. 2) The technical/economical contribution to swim performance is such that the physiology is almost irrelevant. In other words, good technique can so dramatically make up for average/poor physiology that "just swim" is probably the best approach.... with proper technical guidance. Regardless of the starting point, almost anyone can get substantially better and if you can't, you've been swimming so long it's likely self evident.

Alright, can I go back to watching Kona now?? ;)

---

Steve

http://www.PeaksCoachingGroup.com

I am not sure I understand exactly what you are asking. Energy production takes place peripherally in the contracting muscles. There is certainly energy production in the blood and oxygen transport system and these systems are essential for a good performance and will affect VO2 max. But that it not what is mainly at issue here.

Anaerobic capacity will affect the percentage of VO2 max that can be utilized during a race. It is not the only thing but a major factor limiting access of the aerobic system during a race or workout.

Lactate if carefully measured can be a good indicator of the strength of the aerobic system. It can also be an indicator of the strength of the anaerobic system but here it is less precise as an indicator.

The aerobic system provides the bulk of the energy during a distance event which is why an athlete wants to use as much as possible. Two ways to increase this use of aerobic energy is to build VO2 max and to lower the anaerobic capacity. By far the best long term strategy is building VO2 max.

I hope this helps.


------

---

Jerry Cosgrove

Sports Resource Group
http://www.lactate.com
https://twitter.com/@LactatedotCom