Misconceptions about Lactate Threshold

Triathlon Forum
28

as mentioned earlier i enjoy this particular discussion. but being the lawyer that i am, allow me to wade in with this observation/question.

we know for certain that athletic performance is capable of improvement. the question is - what physiological changes within the body account for the improvement, and how did the changes occur. a correlative question is - are the changes we can detect anecdotal or indeed causitive?

as mentioned i’ve read extensively on this subject but i’m by no means trained. however, i feel confident that despite what i read, when you tweak V02, you tweak LT and vice versa

i simply don’t buy the idea that running at a specific intensity will improve LT, while running only slightly harder will improve V02 . don’t you red-line the LT when you pass into the V02 training zone?

i think you’re better off measuring resting heart rate over a long period. if it declines or holds steady, then fitness and endurance is steady or improving. if it increases, one may be overtraining.

sv-

29

I think the whole point is that if it’s a moving target, what value does it have in establishing training intensity?

30

Sid, I appreciate your thoughts, but I am looking for somewhat more empirical data. I think I read in a previous post on a different thread that was discussing paces for workouts, Jack Daniels states that threshold running does not improve your LT, but simply makes it easier to be there, that the other paces to train help increase fitness.

Is there anyone who could help me out with my example that I mentioned about thresholds?

thanks in advance

31

if all you can measure is overall blood lactate levels and you can’t determine the rate of lactate production and lactate utilization independently, the point cannot be determined in the real world with any sort of accuracy.

Where do you get these crazy ideas?

Here’s one reference and one that relates to the value of the lactate measuring device discussion that gave birth to this thread:

“Bad News for Lactate Lovers: Little Lactate-Level Readers Reveal Lactate of the Moment Accurately but May Fail to Foretell Finer Fitness” Running Research News, Volume 18, Issue 7, September 2002.

32

Mitch, I think you are talking about something That I posted about my old coach. What Jack would tell you if you asked him about threshold running is that training at that intensity your body learns to deal with or tolerate with the effort and the lactic acid. It doesnt make it easier per se, as running hard and fast, at what I consider the AT is never easy. Steady state runs and Intervals provide you with the work capacity and a high Vo2 max, threshold running fine tunes that high effort. You run the prescribed workout at your prescribed effort, (ie: your vdot is 62 which puts your 5k at time at about 16:34 pr, your Th mile pace is 5:45, so you run 6x1 mile at 5:45 with 1 min rest) be it with Jacks Vdot chart, the forumla 6 sec per400m slower than 5k race pace or AT heart rate. Your body will adapt to that uncomfortable effort making the pace more tolerable.

34

Thanks Jason, This makes a little bit more sense to me as far as threshold training, I just ordered Daniels running formula also, I think that book will help, I also ordered Serious Training for Serious Athletes, that book looked good too.

Nobody answered my other question yet though which was you are running, and your body is producing 3.8mM of lactic acid, and you are clearing 3.8mM. You are keeping a steady effort, but not all out. Then a hill comes, you attack the hill and you start to produce say 4.4mM of lactic acid. You start to feel the burn and you cant keep that intensity, you are gonna “blow”, you are creating more acid than you can get rid of. Now lets say, on a consistant basis that effort is 175 bpm. Couldnt you pretty much say that keeping your HR at or below 175 or which feels like redline is in fact is a threshold of some sort? A threshold between maintaining your effort and blowing?

35

Here’s one reference and one that relates to the value of the lactate measuring device discussion that gave birth to this thread:

“Bad News for Lactate Lovers: Little Lactate-Level Readers Reveal Lactate of the Moment Accurately but May Fail to Foretell Finer Fitness” Running Research News, Volume 18, Issue 7, September 2002.

Running Research News - that’s the basis for your position??

Gimme a break. I’m trying to drop in here every once in a while while I get some work done.

Best I could do in a couple of minutes.

Owen Anderson cites five journal references. Dig those up and see if you come to the same conclusions he did.

Though only one person’s opinion, I thought it directly applicable to this thread.

36

So what do you think of the webiste cuttingedgeworldwide.com?someone else posted it earlier i think, and it was a knife site! I did s google search and found it. Insight? what do you think that entire program where it bases everything off of lactate testing?

37

Provided that the rates of lactate production and utilization increase in a predictable manner as a function of exercise intensity, then determining the point at which production exceeds utilization is very easy: it is the point at which blood lactate concentration begins to increase.

The sum total of lactate production and utilization is all that can be indicated by measuring blood lactate levels. If both vary based on the workload, how can you accurately identify an inflection (threshold) point?

If somehow utilization maxed out and production kept increasing as intensity increased, you could probably identify that inflection point by a steepening of the curve. But I think many physiologists now argue that lactate utilization also increases with increases in intensity (but obviously at a different rate).

Are you saying that when blood lactate levels simply rise above some arbitrary, baseline level (as many have argued), that we should call that a ‘lactate threshold’?

38

Ok here is question. Lets say you are running, and your body is producing 3.8mM of lactic acid, and you are clearing 3.8mM. You are keeping a steady state effort, fairly cranking, but not all out. Then a hill comes, you attack the hill and you start to produce say 4.4mM of lactic acid. You start to feel the burn and you cant keep that intensity or you are gonna “blow”, you are creating more LA than you can get ride of. Now lets say, on a consistant basis that effort (climbs sprints whatever) is 175 bpm. Couldnt you pretty much say that even if there is no “real” threshold, that keeping your HR at or below 175 or “redline” that in fact is a threshold? A threshold between maintaining your effort and blowing? Also if this is the case, couldnt you just train at intensties at or near that 175 to better deal with the effort? I think that is the idea behind Coggan’s 2x20 workout no?
Also, I would like to find out who does any of this sort of testing? Lacate testing, vo2 testing? Even if most doesnt feel it to be helpful I would still like to give it a try, i think the information may help. Has anyone seen the cuttingedge.com site? Has anyone had any experience with this stuff? I did a vo2 test in college in the flume once swimming, but I would like to try a test on a treadmill or bike

Thanks for the advice

I think that’s the equivalent of a field test. Why bother with a lab?

This is where I think the ‘training with power indication’ folks have it right. They establish CP30 or CPwhatever and base their training on percentages of power levels they can maintain for a given time period.

39

You keep saying you believe, or you think, If I said on here that I think or I believe that we never landed on the moon, would my thoughts be valued to others, I am not sure, now if you cam out and told us that you where some world renowned exercise scientist, or gave us some credentials, maybe I would feel more comfortable with your thoughts, no disrespect ment here.

From what I am trying to understand, and Chamelion please correct me if I am wrong, but wouldnt a threshold be different in everyone, so there is no baseline # like 4mM, but in you maybe 2.2 in me 3.2 in justcurious 4.1, and after that point you can no longeer clear it out, wouldnt that be a threshold, a threshold point in which you can no longer maintain a pace aerobically? The definition of threshold is:*a level or point at which something would happen, would cease to happen,*something happening would be going anaerobic, something ceasing could be the clearing of lactic acid no? Wouldnt this be a turning point?

41

Are you saying that when blood lactate levels simply rise above some arbitrary, baseline level (as many have argued), that we should call that a ‘lactate threshold’?
Yes - but the simplicity and even seeming arbitrariness of that definition alters neither the validity of lactate threshold as a concept, nor its utility as a tool for designing training programs.

You’re referring to what Noakes (among others I believe (I’ll continue to use ‘I believe’ when referring to something from memory, something that’s theory as opposed to fact or truth, or something I can’t easily confirm)) calls a lactate ‘turnpoint’. He describes this as the exercise intensity or running speed that produces a blood lactate concentration of 3 mmol per liter. Seems that at intensities below this workload, blood lactate levels initially rise but then actually fall if the speed is maintained. At intensities that induce the approximate 3 mmol per liter blood lactate level, blood lactate initially rises, but then eventually levels out (if the pace can be maintained) at some elevated level. It was thought that this turnpoint could be used to predict marathon times, but it still fell short of things like treadmill performance during a VO2 max test and racing performance at shorter distances were more valuable.

If this thread is of interest, I strongly suggest checking out pp 157 - 164 of the Fourth Edition (2003) of Dr.Tim Noakes “Lore of Running”. He does a nice, concise job of showing the exponential nature of the rise in blood lactate concentration as exercise intensity is increased. Exponential curves do not show a specific inflection point.

42

I Think that is the equivalent of a field test, why bother in a lab?

Why bother? Because in a lab you can reproduce identical conditions every time. I have a 5.6 mile loop near my house with a bike lane that is great to do speed work on, and great for a field test, but there are a few problems. 1) there re two red lights, if you get caught then, they are very long reds and you get screwed, 2 it is near the ocean, so on any given day the wind can come from many angles, at different speeds and then there are days when there is no wind. All of these variables can skew your field test results. Also you have rain, heat humidity and cold to deal with. In a lab, the environmental factors are controlable.

43

OK guys. So you do your elaborate lab testing instead of some very simple field testing…

Does it do a better job of predicting future performance than a field test or past performances? Probably not.

Does it let you do a better job of prescribing training intensity? Probably not. So your training prescription is off by a couple bpm, watts, or sec per mile… Who cares? Even if you nail down some mythical ‘lactate threshold’ your still relying on some arbitrary system to use that ‘threshold’ in the real world to prescribe workload.

Just because you can measure something does not prove it’s either valid or worth doing.

Nice discussion…

44

Absolutely true - you can get a descent measure of LT via heart rate by using a field test (there are a number of them out there).

So why use a lab? To use Mitch’s example: He ran the hill and felt the burn and had a HR of 175 and deemed this threshold. What if he then ran a slightly easier hill and felt the burn at 170? Then an easier one and felt the burn at 165. Then at 160 he didn’t feel the burn. So now he concludes his threshold is 165. Doing flat sprints would make this eaiser as he could narrow it down even more. The advantage of a lab is that it makes the process quicker, easier, and (somewhat) more accurate as several measures are taken at various intensities. Downside - more expensive.

I have my own phys lab and can test myself for free so I’ve never done the field tests. I won’t knock them - I’m sure they can be pretty accurate.

I think there’s an important point which only a few have mentioned - However you determine LT (regardelss of what the research says) can anyone who had tried lactate training comment opn how valuable they found it. Personally, I fell that it has improved my susatinable pace during races.

  • good thread - keep it up
45

“Couldnt you pretty much say that keeping your HR at or below 175 or which feels like redline is in fact is a threshold of some sort? A threshold between maintaining your effort and blowing?”

yes. your HR might vary a bit at that intensity but if you can dial in your effort level on a given day, you’ve got the right idea.

for example, a couple weeks ago i felt good doing a tempo run and my pace was X / mile with a HR avg 175. today i did the same run but felt bad (sore muscles, fatigue) and my pace was X + :45 sec / mile with a slightly higher HR avg.

my threshold-pace, on the day to day basis, changed greatly, however my max threshold-pace has probably not changed much, if all systems are go. or in other words, the point at which my body produces more lactic acid than it can clear appears to be tied somewhat closely to my HR but not to pace as it is influenced by other situational/perceived factors.

(one of) the uses of LT training is to improve economy and lactate buffering (increase your steady state point) at LT.

46

*Does it do a better job of predicting future performance than a field test or past performances? Probably not. *

Yes it does, Vo2Max is an excellent indicator of potential

“Does it let you do a better job of prescribing training intensity? Probably not. So your training prescription is off by a couple bpm, watts, or sec per mile… Who cares? Even if you nail down some mythical ‘lactate threshold’ your still relying on some arbitrary system to use that ‘threshold’ in the real world to prescribe workload.”

Again, Finding AT through Vslope I can prescribe very accurate training zones that I already told you that coincide with JAck Daniel’s training Vdot tables. If the zones I get from Vslope jive with those tables, then I am doing something correct. And I never said I am relying on an arbitrary threshold, that was you who keeps talking about that. Yet at the same time when anyone asked you for something more than what you “think” or “feel” or “believe” the best you came up with was running reaserch.

*“Just because you can measure something does not prove it’s either valid or worth doing. *”

Actually yes, because I have a machine that can measure Vo2 Max, oxygen consumption and calorie consumption it is in fact very worth doing. I have been talking about my metabolic cart since the other thread, and how I use the Accusport in conjunction with it. I never said it is the basis of my testing, I said it is a supplement. But for some reason, you forget that I have a metabolic cart, which is what I refer to when I post, but you keep going back to the accusport, ignoring the fact that the cardiocoach is an extrodinary tool, and I still extend to you if you are in the NYC area to come and do testing free of charge.

47

Does it do a better job of predicting future performance than a field test or past performances? Probably not.

Yes it does, Vo2Max is an excellent indicator of potential

From my swimming days, my coach always told me that based on my vo2 that he can estimate what he expects of me during the season. I would much rather have a vo2 test done in the begining of the year to show me what my potential is. I agree with Jason on that point

Does it let you do a better job of prescribing training intensity? Probably not. So your training prescription is off by a couple bpm, watts, or sec per mile… Who cares? Even if you nail down some mythical ‘lactate threshold’ your still relying on some arbitrary system to use that ‘threshold’ in the real world to prescribe workload."

Again, Finding AT through Vslope I can prescribe very accurate training zones that I already told you that coincide with JAck Daniel’s training Vdot tables. If the zones I get from Vslope jive with those tables, then I am doing something correct. And I never said I am relying on an arbitrary threshold, that was you who keeps talking about that. Yet at the same time when anyone asked you for something more than what you “think” or “feel” or “believe” the best you came up with was running reaserch

From whatI read about anaerobic threshold, and I think that is what Jason is talking about here, I can see why knowing what your zone is clinically can make sense. It makes sense to me, a lab you can reproduce everything, outside you cannot. I would feel better doing testing when all of the elements can be reproduced. Plus From whatI have read about Jack Daniels, and if Jason can match your zones for you compared to what Jack Daniels prescribes, then he might have something there. Also, I didnt read in any of his threads about an arbitrary threshold, but a threshold that is different in everyone. Now correct me if I am wrong. if you have a certain # for say LT or ATand it was found using proper scientific methods, and you follow a training plan, and you retest, and you dont see an improvement, then your program is off, and there needs to be changes made, if you do see an improvement, then you are doing something correct, and the coach is doing his job. What does it matter to you justcurious how a coach works? If you are correct, then many college coaches, pro-coaches and training programs a wrong as well. Should they all listen to your thoughts, feelings or beliefs, or continue doing what works for them?

*“Just because you can measure something does not prove it’s either valid or worth doing. *”

WHy do you say that?Do you see the validity on vo2max, resting HR max HR? Why should we measure those things? IF your argument is correct, then where is the validity behind those measurements? I have found over the past few days many journals, books and studies about LT AT and VO2 they show the benefits of testing.

48

Over the past few years, I have done power testing on my self and other racers. The test is done on a computrainer, which is used to control the amount of power the rider is exerting. The test is run by increasing the wattage in 10-watt increments every 60 seconds. A data point is taken at the end of each 60 seconds recording wattage and Heartrate. Notes are also kept on how hard the person is breathing. The test ends when the rider can no longer continue.

By plotting the data and comparing it to the breathing notes, the point of aerobic threshold can be projected (This is not an exact science).

While VO2 max and lactic acid quantities may be useful to coaches trying to project who has potential, knowing your VO2 max really doesn’t help you much. What is really important is trying to increase the amount of power you can generate for a given heartrate.

The following are observation I have made from this testing Base training, lifting, and pedaling drills help to increase the amount of power you can generate at a given heart rate (my power output at aerobic threshold has been slowly increasing). Intensity training increases how long you can ride near or at your aerobic threshold. My gut feel is that intensity training increases your lactic threshold and can make your lactic threshold be very close to your aerobic threshold. Intensity training does not increase the amount of power you can generate at a give HR. Many beginner riders that I test often stop the test prior to reaching aerobic threshold. This may be because their lactic threshold is very far from their aerobic threshold, or mentally they have not learned to push themselves hard enough. Over the past 3 years that I have focussed on getting lots of easy base miles. I use my HR monitor to keep me from riding too hard. During intensity training I observe my breathing to gauge when I am at my aerobic threshold. It is the point where you go from breathing hard, to gasping for breath. I then observe my HR. I use the HR to let me know that my body is rested enough to be doing that hard of a workout. When I am fatigued, I find that my HR at Aerobic Threshold is much lower than what I know it should be. This then tells me to stop the workout. Because of this, the amount of hard training I do has actually decreased over the past few years, while my race results have gotten better (train smarter, not harder). By comparing my power at aerobic threshold and power to weight ratios, it make sense why some riders beat me in flatter races, and other beat me in hilly races. It alway amazed me that after my winter base training how painful a 30 second aeobic threshold effort was (when I can ride at that level for extended periods of time when in race form). My guess is that after my base training, my lactic threshold is low, and as I do intensity training in the spring and summer my lactic threshold goes up. So your latic threshold HR in january probably will not be valid when in race in the summer. Mean while my aerobic threshold stays realatively constant no matter the state of my training.

Note: while I got into cycling racing through duathlons, I now focus on mountain bike and some road racing.

49

*Does it do a better job of predicting future performance than a field test or past performances? Probably not. *

Yes it does, Vo2Max is an excellent indicator of potential

“Does it let you do a better job of prescribing training intensity? Probably not. So your training prescription is off by a couple bpm, watts, or sec per mile… Who cares? Even if you nail down some mythical ‘lactate threshold’ your still relying on some arbitrary system to use that ‘threshold’ in the real world to prescribe workload.”

Again, Finding AT through Vslope I can prescribe very accurate training zones that I already told you that coincide with JAck Daniel’s training Vdot tables. If the zones I get from Vslope jive with those tables, then I am doing something correct. And I never said I am relying on an arbitrary threshold, that was you who keeps talking about that. Yet at the same time when anyone asked you for something more than what you “think” or “feel” or “believe” the best you came up with was running reaserch.

*“Just because you can measure something does not prove it’s either valid or worth doing. *”

Actually yes, because I have a machine that can measure Vo2 Max, oxygen consumption and calorie consumption it is in fact very worth doing. I have been talking about my metabolic cart since the other thread, and how I use the Accusport in conjunction with it. I never said it is the basis of my testing, I said it is a supplement. But for some reason, you forget that I have a metabolic cart, which is what I refer to when I post, but you keep going back to the accusport, ignoring the fact that the cardiocoach is an extrodinary tool, and I still extend to you if you are in the NYC area to come and do testing free of charge.

Two comments:

First, my bad, I thought we were talking about measuring lactate levels and using that data to establish ‘lactate threshold’. I do see the value in being able to establish VO2max, running velocity at VO2max, power at VO2max, etc. With VO2max you’re not making a guesstimate, you’re measuring something concrete.

Second, accurate zones? How important is zone ‘accuracy’ in the real world?