Simple question (with perhaps a not so simple answer). Does working on building lactate tolerance in one sport affect one’s threshold level in other sports? If so, to what extent?
To clarify, doing threshold workouts for the run requires more recovery than say, going hard on the swim. So if lactate tolerance is not localized (at a muscular level), wouldn’t it make sense to do all your intervals in the swim and build up your threshold for all three sports that way?
My guess is that something’s wrong with that logic, but I’d like to hear from the powers that be exactly what is wrong.
Yes, because lactate tolerance doesn’t exist.
Ummm… ok.
Let’s try that again. Can we get someone who actually wants to help rather than just sound smart?
SWOo is right. Read This:
http://survey.cyclingnews.com/fitness.php?id=fitness/2004/lactic_frederick
To clarify, doing threshold workouts for the run requires more recovery than say, going hard on the swim. So if lactate tolerance is not localized (at a muscular level), wouldn’t it make sense to do all your intervals in the swim and build up your threshold for all three sports that way?
My guess is that something’s wrong with that logic, but I’d like to hear from the powers that be exactly what is wrong.
It is localized. If you ever want a decent demonstration of it, try rock climbing. Your forearms will get shot pretty quickly (or ‘pumped out’ as long as we’re talking about climbing). All the running in the world isn’t going to help that, apart from making you lighter, anyway.
Thanks, J7. Your link is much more helpful.
Now, I guess I’ll have to rephrase the question a bit to get around the ‘semantics’ hounds. So we know that intervals accomplish something – improves a certain ‘system’ within our body. Whether that system is “lactate tolerance” or (according to the article) our body’s ability to use lactose as fuel, is not as important to me. I don’t care as much about the specifics as how it impacts my training.
With that said, will improvements to that ‘system’ (whatever it may be) as triggered by workouts in one sport, apply to other sports? Or are these improvements (whether its lactate tolerance or ability to use lactose as fuel) localized at the muscles that performed the workouts?
Ahh, just saw your post. Thanks!
although not specificly on point i found this discussion of anerobic threshold interesting.
http://www.roble.net/marquis/coaching/billat.html
particularly this part.
Most activities do not require all body parts to be involved in an activity at the
same intensity level. A cyclist will work the legs extremely hard but, by
comparison, the rest of the body will function comfortably in an aerobic zone of
metabolic activity. A swimmer pounding out stroke after stroke in a 1500 m race
works the arms at an intensity that employs a high level of anaerobic energy supply
but the rest of the body is “relaxed” and functioning at quite a basic aerobic
level. Even in running, in a marathon the legs work hard while the arms and upper
body “save energy.” In these activities, lactate is produced by the primary working
muscles and resynthesized by the muscles engaged in mild supportive activity. Those
muscles cleanse or “sponge” out lactate so that the blood supply to the hard
working muscles is quite low in acidity when returned to those muscles. Thus, any
lactate measure is a measure of the “general functioning” of the body, not the
actual work performed by the primary sporting muscles. Differences in technique
most probably would account for a significant portion of many inter-individual
differences in lactate assessments than work levels or movement economy.
In many “aerobic” sports the actual prime mover muscle groups work at an anaerobic
level rather than aerobically as is inferred from anaerobic threshold testing. The
common perception of anaerobic threshold does not give any information or
understanding of what actually is happening in important aspects of a performance.
Even the slightest improvement in movement economy (technique) in the “anaerobic
prime movers” could make a significant difference to performance.
Simple question (with perhaps a not so simple answer). Does working on building lactate tolerance in one sport affect one’s threshold level in other sports? If so, to what extent?
Not sure what you mean by lactate tolerance. I’m not a physiologist, but I have asked this question of one. My undertanding is that the principal beneficial adaptations that increase performance at lactate threshold, increased mitochondrial desnity and increased mitochondrial enzymes, occur in the muscle fibers stressed during exercise.
If that is the case, I would expect that any crossover between sports is proportional to the commonality of muscle fiber utilization between the two activities. So, speed skating and cycling - probably lots of crossover. Cyling and swimming - probably not so much crossover.
To the extent that “lactate tolerance” is a biochemical resistance to fatigue that takes place during high intensity exercise, probbaly not. Those changes are really going to be specific to the parts of the muscle that are working.
To the extent that lactate tolerance is mental, whether in the higher levels or lower levels of the brain, then drilling it and being used to pain in one sport can carry over to another.
But really, if you want to build up your ability to drill it while running, you’re gonna need to spend time drilling it while running; and it is very likely that will be the best use of your time if you want to work on that ability.
On a somewhat related note, how relevant is that type of thing to what we do in triathlon?
Great article. Lactate threshold occurs at a metabolic level and is not sport specific/muscle specific. If someone increases their lactate threshold as the result of swimming, their LT for running, biking etc. also changes accordingly.
I happen to be on a 6-week program to increase my LT (hopefully by 7-15BPM) and am using running as my main mode to garner the necessary metabolic response/adaptations.
Here’s the program: Monday - 60min run (3-20min intervals) where I am going up and down from 60% max HR to 95% HR. Tues is a 45min tempo run at @74% of my MHR. Wed-off. Thursday, Bike intervals between 74%-85%MHR again up and down. Friday 30 min swim, 35mins of mile repeats between 85%-91%bpm (I run a 7 min. mile then 3min 30sec recovery at 74%MHR then do it two more times. Sat 80min. LSD at @70%MHR Sunday 90min bike LSD at @70%MHR.
That’s what I thought as well, but according to this excerpt in the article above the primary movers are not the only muscles that ‘cleanse’ our blood supply of lactate. Perhaps efficiencies in other muscles can contribute??
“In these activities, lactate is produced by the primary working
muscles and resynthesized by the muscles engaged in mild supportive activity. Those
muscles cleanse or “sponge” out lactate so that the blood supply to the hard
working muscles is quite low in acidity when returned to those muscles. Thus, any
lactate measure is a measure of the “general functioning” of the body, not the
actual work performed by the primary sporting muscles.”
That’s what I thought as well, but according to this excerpt in the article above the primary movers are not the only muscles that ‘cleanse’ our blood supply of lactate. Perhaps efficiencies in other muscles can contribute??
Not sure what question you are really asking here. When you asked about lactate tolerance in two different sports, I thought you were asking about whether the benefits of training in and around threshold intensities were transative between sports.
If your question is about what tissues can metabolize lactate, that’s different than my impression of what you were asking. That said, I still don’t know what you are really asking.
Lactate is both a by-product of metabolism and a fuel that some highly aerobic tissues are able to metabolize. As far as I understand, it (lactate) isn’t in and of iteself, an enemy to endurance performance. Lactate level is a marker for intensity, but not the cause of an inability to sustain a given work level.
On a somewhat related note, how relevant is that type of thing to what we do in triathlon?
It’s based on what our body uses for energy sources and the efficency of using that source . Go out for a nice “slow” jog. You can talk, breath comfortably, all day. At this point, your body is using mostly carbohydrates/fats for energy. For people who do HR training, some call it the fat burning zone. I don’t remember the exact % but I think it’s like 75% carbs/fats vs. 25% glycogen (as the HR goes up an down, so does the energy sourced used %). Check what you heart rate is doing. Say it’s 120bpm. This is efficient.
Ok, then pick up the pace and sprint for 3-5mins. How long can you hang on at this pace - for me, not long! Your body will begin to use more glycogen as an energy source, say 75% vs. only 25% carbohydrates/fats (again, changing as the HR increases/decreases) which is less efficient and has limited supplies. The anaerobic zone. Your HR will be much higher, say 180bpm. You can run at that pace, but not for long. It’s less efficient.
There are varying points in between and at a particular HR, we go from using a higher % of carbs/fats as energy to a higher % of glycogen. At the HR point this happens is what is referred to as the lacate threshold or the anaerobic threshold.
By training the body to adapt to a higher LT, we are able to become more efficient in the manner in which we use energy. The result is that you will be able to SBR with a higher HR, thus going faster, while being more energy efficient burning more carbs than sugars.
How you ask? That’s were my knowledge wanes. It’s at the chemical/cellular level and related to the Cori Cycle. I am trying to understand it but am not there… yet.
Yes, I am asking whether the benefits are transitive between sports. But I see the point that is being made. If lactate isn’t the cause of fatigue then which muscles metabolize lactate and at which rate is irrelevant.
The next question is- what system does high intensity intervals improve? If not LT, then it’s got to be something else right? Because obviously, intervals WORK. They wouldn’t be around if they didn’t. And this ‘system’ that is targeted by that type of training… is it transitive between sports?
On a somewhat related note, how relevant is that type of thing to what we do in triathlon?
My perception is very. This is “raising the other side of the curve” I believe. The
problem is that it hurts a lot. 
-Jot
There is no such thing as “anaerobic threshold” from a physiological standpoint.
That’s what I thought as well, but according to this excerpt in the article above the primary movers are not the only muscles that ‘cleanse’ our blood supply of lactate. Perhaps efficiencies in other muscles can contribute??
“In these activities, lactate is produced by the primary working
muscles and resynthesized by the muscles engaged in mild supportive activity. Those
muscles cleanse or “sponge” out lactate so that the blood supply to the hard
working muscles is quite low in acidity when returned to those muscles. Thus, any
lactate measure is a measure of the “general functioning” of the body, not the
actual work performed by the primary sporting muscles.”
The old theory is that Lactate Acid was a negative bi-product of cellular enegry. They’ve come to discover that lactate itself is an actual energy source/fuel. When the article refers to the “cleanse” in current theory, it is talking about the body actually ‘using lactate’ as a fuel source. This happens in all muscles, not only those that are most engaged in the particular activity (i.e. legs -running, arms-swimming).
Lactate threshold occurs at a metabolic level and is not sport specific/muscle specific. If someone increases their lactate threshold as the result of swimming, their LT for running, biking etc. also changes accordingly.
Not true.
P.S.: Thank you for giving me an idea on how to tweak my webinar for USAC next month so as to address some additional misconceptions re. lactate threshold and what it represents.