I just dont get it. For months, Ive been forcing myself to run at a snail’s pace, working to establish a monster aerobic engine for the coming season. But so far all I’m getting is fat and slow. I’ve heard and read that lower intensity exercise burns fat, but I have trouble believing it. Does it burn more fat, or is it just that a greater proportion of calories burned come from fat. Also, a good hard run is so much more rewarding - what’s the harm of running hard most of the time, with one long (slower) run mixed in once a week?
Charlie,
The benefit from base training comes when you start to go long. You become more efficient at a lower heart rate (meaning you can go longer at the same pace at a lower heart rate). This is good for an IM or marthon because you maintain the same speed with less effort. Thus you are fresher for the last miles. This happens over time as your body becomes accustomed to training at the lower HR. Then it becomes harder muscularly to keep the HR even at 140. So as your heart becomes stronger your muscles have to do extra work if you want to keep your heart rate at 140. Then the process becomes cyclical.
If you train hard all the time you lose the efficiency and burnout. If all you are doing is short races then you will not notice the full benefit of base training. However, you will benefit if you do the base training now and then add the speed work later and closer to your events. This way you build your base and prepare your body for the extra effort of speedwork. The long slow runs and bikes now build not only your heart and lungs but ligaments and muscles so they hold up better when you add the speed.
As for burning the most fat, aerobic workouts do burn the most fat as a percentage of calories burned. True, if you work out at a HR of 165 for 1 hour you will most likely burn more calories than if you work out at a HR of 140 for 1.5 hours, but inthe latter 50-55% of your calories will be fat while in the former you may be only burning 30-40% fat calories.
Bottom line: If you don’t trust the base training theory don’t do it. But remember that come September when you are too tired and too burnt out to go long in an IM or marathon.
FYI - I am no coach and do not have a degree in exercise phys. Just read a good bit on the topic.
Jeremey
Base training is definitely a good thing, as it helps establish a foundation for speedwork and the really hard stuff closer to race season.
That said, I think that there is a misconception that base = easy. Remember the goals you are trying to achieve during base training, ie to increase aerobic capacity. You cannot do that if you don’t test the limits of your aerobic capacity. The trick is to not go too hard, and set yourself up for burnout later in the year, or injury.
During base period, I try to avoid doing the flat out interval sessions. My HR on the bike will still be at about 65-70% of max, slightly higher for the run. Sessions are also typically longer as well, so that I can get my weight down to where it should be.
One of the things you are also trying to to is increase your fat metabolism at higher intensities. To that end, I try to avoid any kind of energy drinks, power bars, etc either before or during my workouts, unless I’ll be doing over 3 hours. I don’t know if there is any good science behind this, but it seemed to work for me last season as my endurance was better than ever.
Also, remember the most important goal. Unless you’re a pro, you ain’t making a living at this, so its just for fun. If going hard in training is fun for you (and it should be, since training is where we spend most of our time) then go right ahead.
cheers,
J
There’s something else to consider: I’m no doctor, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that at lower intesities, you do burn more fat AS A PERCENTAGE of total calories burned. So what? Well, Fat metabolism is aerobic (i.e. you need oxygen to metabolize fat) and sugar metabolism in anaerobic (does not require the presence of oxygen). So what? Well, if you run at aerobic levels your body adapts to the need for fat metabolism by increasing the effeciency of the delivery of oxygen to your muscles. How does it do this? Increases stroke volume in your heart and increase the capillary volume in your muscles. Both happen (and especially capillary increase) at lower intensity (aerobic) levels.
Again - I’m not a doctor, I just play one on TV.
Charlie, quick question for you. How do you know you are actually doing base work? Have you been assessed ? It is possible that you are training too low of an intensity to get the benefits of base training
Paul
Base training gives you the endurance (or work capacity as it’s called in other sports) to handle and maximize the “really tough training”. You can’t do B before you do A, or at least you canot do it “really well”. Think of it like that and it makes base training relevant. Anyone can do intervals. Not everyone has the foundation to make intervals work as they should.
Speed work, etc is the icing. Base training is the cake. One without the other isn’t as good as having both. You also don’t want more icing than cake.
It’s the same thing as in other fields … everyone wnats to do the fancy stuff without spending time on the foundation stuff. Then they wonder why their potential is lower than others.
A wider base means a higher peak. That cliche has been around for decades, and there’s a good reason why. Build a wide base.
I’ve heard and read that lower intensity exercise burns fat, but I have trouble believing it. Does it burn more fat, or is it just that a greater proportion of calories burned come from fat.
That is true, but misleading, and misapplied. Slow cardio burns a higher percentage of fat, than does fast cardio (simple terms). Fast cardio burns more overall calories. Creating a caloric deficiency (more calories burned than eaten) is what controls fat/weight loss. You can all the cardio/training you want, but if cals in = cals out, you won’t lose (not unless you are going all out in the gym and adding as much muscle as fat you lose … which is hard to do)
Think of it like this, woud you rather have 60% of $20 or 40% of $100?
When losing weight/fat you want to burn the greatest amount of calories possible. Calories in vs. calories out. It really is as simple as that.
To burn more calories by exercising more is not efficient nor practical. (It’s easier to trim 300 cals from your diet than it is to burn an extra 300 cals by exercising). The simplest way to lose fat/weight is to simply “eat less”. More responsibly would be to “eat cleaner”. Keep the volume the same but trim the fat, dairy, and sugars (replaced with veggies and fruit and lean meat).
Hey Triple Threat…Nice post.
However, I’ve got to correct one item…
The Triple Threat Triathlon Team was founded in South Bend, IN in 2000. It has 15 members wearing really cool LG tri unis. Last year, they sent 2 members to Kona. Sorry to burst your bubble;-) You may want to contact them for a uniform with “your” name on it.
The Triple Threat Triathlon Team was founded in South Bend, IN in 2000. It has 15 members wearing really cool LG tri unis. Last year, they sent 2 members to Kona. Sorry to burst your bubble;-)
Crap! I’m not even going to train anymore. With the name “Triple Threat”, I was certain that it had been used before. I wasn’t trying to be original, just self-motivating. I’ll come up with something else to describe the “one-man circus” I call my “training”.
I can’t compete with cool uniforms (or Kona). I concede to them. =)
How 'bout the “Fin-Spin-Win” Club? No? OKay, I’ll keep working.
Not busting your chops…Just throwing props to my old friends in South Bend (the armpit of the universe and a tough place to train).
How about, “guy who is lucky enough not to live in South Bend?”
Or…“My favorite event starts after the race,” “My significant other is hotter than yours,” or simply “Triple Sec…Mix it and move”
Cheers,
Puskas
Thanks all - I think I get it, but your responses have raised a few more questions. 1. How important is it that** all** my base training is done in the aeorbic zone. Can I mix in at least one semi-intense tempo run, or will that cancell out the long term advantages of aerobic training? 2. Is it normall to expect that my speed will diminish during this time, or should I at least be able to maintain?
Can I mix in at least one semi-intense tempo run, or will that cancell out the long term advantages of aerobic training?
What if you do a tempo run? Are you going to get in trouble, get grounded? Have your car taken away? (trying to be funny). You can mix in a run if you want, it’s YOUR training right? One run isn’t going to erase everything else you’ve done. The idea is to not abuse zone-3 or to do “too much, too soon (or too often)”
**Is it normal to expect that my speed will diminish during this time, or should I at least be able to maintain? **
You don’t get faster by running slow (not immediately). I would have some type of “faster than zone 2” run going on. I would imagine that the speed lost is rather easy to regain, so I doubt it’s “critical” to do tempo work, but it certainly eases my mind.
You didn’t mention what distance you were training for. That factors in on how much base work and basic skill training is inolved.
I’ve been racing sprints and olympic with some success for 5 years. However, It became obvious last season that aerobic base is a weakness for me during two 1/2’s (my results in terms of AG placement were significantly lower).
I intend to race IMMOO in '04, and at least one other half. Thus my increased concentration on building my base.
Increases stroke volume in your heart and increase the capillary volume in your muscles. Both happen (and especially capillary increase) at lower intensity (aerobic) levels.
Any exercise requiring less than 100% of VO2max is, by definition, aerobic.
The training intensity that maximizes gains in stroke volume and capillarization has not been clearly established, but it is definitely greater than that most people consider “base training”.
Those are characteristics indicative of a high VO2max. Most training protocols that target increases in VO2max include high intensity work (as stated above).
My personal feeling is that the primary benefit of ‘base training’ is adaptation of the working skeletal muscles (i.e. increased levels of aerobic enzymes). The only reason you limit intensity while base building is to allow increased training volume. The body responds specifically to the stress applied. Typical base building training plans don’t stress the cardiovascular system as much as they stress the skeletal muscles through increased volume (i.e. mileage).
Charlie,
Thanks for the post and to all the informed replies. I have been working with some of my non-aerobic friends on weight loss programs. The thing I try to get across to them is the level of intensity required to actually build aerobic fitness and burn fat - which is much lower than they realize. There are certainly two groups of people out there - those of us who are fit and work out regularly and those who need to get in shape and/or lose weight.
I have read so many times that doing 60 minutes at 70% MHR burns XX fat and XXXX total calories with a minimal afterburn. And that the same 60 minutes at 85% MHR burns XXX fat and XXXXX calories with a greater afterburn. That’s fine, but it’s a ridiculous comparisong. I am constantly trying to get my out-of-shape friends to go easier but longer. The same applies to the fit folks. If your comparison is a overdistance run at 60 minutes or a tempo run at 60 minutes, the better fat burn is the hardest workout. But, if you can do a tempo run at 60 minutes, you should be doing a overdistance run at 90 minutes. Go slow, but longer.
When I have only 40 minutes to run, I change my workout - tempo run. But for base building, I would rather run 90-120 minutes slowly. A much greater benefit to my next season. So let’s not confuse time constraints with the amount of fat burned. If you have the time, go long and slow. If you don’t, kick it in a bit and get the benefit of the harder workout. But in the end, the more slow, long workouts you get the better next year will be.
That being said, have fun.
Steve
I agree with what chubby hubby is saying. My comments regarding “fast” and “slow” cardio is for fat/weight loss consideration only (usually in terms of maintaining weight classes for powerlifting, etc or for staying lean in bodybuilding) … not triathlon training.
Most folks I know would rather go “hard” for 20 minutes and burn the same calories you would burn by going “slow” for an hour (provided you can go hard for 20 minutes without seeing Jesus). Cardio for most folks is something that they want to “get over as soon as possible”.
You have a choice, go long and slow, or short and fast. Both use calories, and both will get you into shape. Obviously, for a triathlete you should get used to long and slow, before you start going fast.
Charlie,
Base training, which benefits all cellular adaptions also benfits all the changes in the muscle cells that make the cells able to use more oxygen and produce more energy. These benefits respond to TIME of running, NOT intensity. So the more time you spend on your base days the more benefits in the muscle cells. Naturally slower running is better because running faster doesn’t do any better at this job and you are willing to run longer if you are going easy and comfortable. NO GREATER cell benefits by going faster, but the best pace for slow runs is what is comfortable for each runner. With my athletes, I prescribe them to do base/easy running at a HR of 85-95% of their AT. The pace can and will vary day to day, but the basic effort is the same. Going to fast (with no greater benefit) may actually be detrimental if it drains you for a following day’s workout. Also, going too fast (faster than need be) shortens the time spent running and the cells respond to time, not distance.
Good luck!
Charlie, et al.;
The following represents a couple of snippets from an article I wrote on proverbial base training, and which dissents from the mainstream thought that is so often regurgitated with too little critical analysis.
The rest of the article can be viewed on my website, www.triathloncoach.com. Other relevant articles include, Training Backwards, the Pyramid Turned Upside Down. Also, Tall Tales on HR Training which comments on the misguided use of age-based subtraction methods, fat burning, etc.
M2: Rethinking Base Training
Another competitive year comes to a close, a brief training respite ensues, and then triathlon and cycling talk inevitably turns to Base.
“I gotta start logging my Base miles, lots of them. It’s all about saddle time, count those hours. Pace must be strictly easy because it is Base-building time. Tis the season for LSD. If you are going to build a house, you need a strong foundation or your house will collapse! Yikes!”
Indeed, let us consider the simplistic rote analogies of if you are going to build a house, you have to have a strong foundation, and in endurance training a strong foundation can only be represented by a large volume of LSD miles…
Perhaps we might pause here to provide a definition of Base that we might all agree on:
Base training is that beginning of a training course that will allow you to maximally progress throughout the training period leading up to your primary race goal
However, the devil is in the details and based on what I see too many people doing in the name of Base, as in non-varied LSD training, my characterization of traditional base training is redundant and relatively unproductive training.
The primary reasons to reconsider the effectiveness of LSD training are: Fails to recognize that athletes are generally active throughout the year and prepossess a stable muscle structure and base level of conditioning Exaggerates the period of time necessary to “build base” before moving on to more focused and productive training intensities Fails to consider that there may be other more effective methods for building base
I agree. If someone is just starting out or returning from a long layoff (injury/illness) then I can see how base training would be needed. But for those of us who train year round, I don’t see the need for a prolonged base period. I think some high intensity unstructured(fartlek)training is helpful during the off-season both mentally and physically.
How do we know that a linear periodizied training program actually works? It seems like it would be difficult to get enough people to commit to an entire year to test whether the program works or not.
How do we know that a linear periodizied training program actually works?
erm, because every consistently successful pro endurance athlete uses it ? Name me one that doesn’t periodize…
The body responds to stress by adapting or by breaking down. The adaption is the training response we’re after. The problem is that with similiar stresses being applied all the time, the adaptations slow down or cease. That’s why it’s vital to keep switching the stresses around.
For Mark Allen, this meant stopping the year-round high intensity training, and adding in regular periods of heart-rate-based low intensity. If you read his training articles, you’ll find he emphasizes the changes - do the low-intensity stuff until it stops working (you’re not getting faster), then switch to a period of high-intensity until that stops working, etc.
For Michael McCormack, this meant doing less base training, and more high-intensity stuff: worked great for him, but unfortunately he’s based his entire training/coaching philosophy on what worked for him…
For endurance athletes, one of the most significant factors in base training is to teach the body to burn fat and spare the glycogen. There are other measurable physiological benefits which base training accomplishes: but high-intensity training either does not, or does so only at increased risk of injury.
In the end, we all are as Sheehan said, ‘an experiment of one’. But that doesn’t mean we should ignore the basic physiology of training… As always, most of the details can be found in Tim Noakes’ Lore of Running.
erm, the Kenyans. I’m not doubting the value of periodization but the method of linear periodization. X weeks of base (low intensity), followed by LT type training, followed by vo2max training. Is this really the most effective way to reach a peak five-six months from now. The Kenyans appear to train at a greater level of intensity earlier and it doesn’t seem to be hurting them. I’m just addressing Charlie’s original post and that m2 has made some valid points.