Is it beneficial to train at altitude but then return home where the elevation is a lot different? I have the opportunity to train at about 4000 feet with only a 45 minute drive. I live at about 1200 feet. Will it be beneficial for me to do so or is the altitude not high enough to get a benefit? If it is high enough, how long would I have to train at that altitude to see benefit and how often? Thanks.
I believe the prevailing theory is to live high and train low.
If you’re training for a low-altitude event, its silly to go to higher altitude to train. You can’t produce as much force at the higher altitude… so you’re getting a lower quality workout and you fatigue quicker.
If you’re training for a high altitude event, then some high altitude training is good mainly for the sake of learning how to pace yourself at the altitude. From what I’ve learned, there is no physiological benefit to this.
Basically the altitude training model that has the best results is train low & sleep high… or even better is train ‘low-low’ and sleep high.
Check out Randy Wilbur’s book “Altitude Training and Athletic Performance.”
ditto what johnphillips said
.
Brian and JohnPhillips
So in the Train Low and Sleep High model, how low is Low and how high is High? Some examples would be great.
How about sleep at 8500 and train at 5000?
Thanks
DB
High enough to get an adaptation depends on the individual… but the optimal range is 2100m (6890 ft) to 2500m (8200 ft) .
How low? That is usually ideally sub 3000 feet. Stray-Gundersen & Levine called Colorado Springs (~6200 feet) the worst of both worlds: not high enough to get an altitude response and not low enough to train with enough intensity. Its especially important to do your high intensity training at the low altitude. They’ve had many OTC athletes sleeping in Woodland Park (~8000 ft?) with all the training in Colorado Springs. Park City (8000 ft) and Salt Lake City (~4000 ft??) also work great for this.
Yes, sleeping at 8500 ft and training at 5000 ft would work well.
Yes, sleeping at 8500 ft and training at 5000 ft would work well.
Which do you think is better for an athlete whose primary events last from 1 minute to 300 minutes?
Sleep at 8500, train as low as 5000.
or
Sleep at 6250, train as low as sea level.
You’ll get a better benefit from doing the training at sea level (especially the intense sessions) than you get from sleeping high. So the 6250/0 numbers you gave would be the best. I could be wrong. That’s why I recommend Randy’s book for a more in-depth answer.
You’ll get a better benefit from doing the training at sea level (especially the intense sessions) than you get from sleeping high. So the 6250/0 numbers you gave would be the best. I could be wrong. That’s why I recommend Randy’s book for a more in-depth answer.
Is there any mention in his book of those already at moderate altitude, like myself, sleeping in tents to simulate higher altitudes. It seems that once you are adjusted to a moderate altitude, you could up your “dosage”.
I don’t remember exactly… but they generally say the fatigue you cause by sleeping super high isn’t worth the gain in red blood cell mass. I need to re-read the book.