Post Number: 3081
|Posted on Saturday, January 29, 2011 - 12:32 pm: |
In human middle distance running , the discussion pretty much is similar like in horse training.
Now what is even more interesting is the same problems as we seem to have in horse training.
The big discussion field is : How much high intensity workouts HIT can be done , without increasing the risk of injuries.
The other very interesting part is the fact, that with a few exceptions the "golden age " of middle distance running 800 / 1500 m with a cummulation of top athletes was in the early 1980 and many of the times produced in that area are still in the top 10 now this days.The " north american idea of HIT is a very exiting idea and shows initially very nice improvement but as it seems a lot of injuries and early " retirement" from high performance sport" See our discussion on metabolic acidosis not respiratoric acidosis takes Ca of from the body.
In that time with athletes like Coe, Ovett,Boit, Aouita ( to name just the once I had the privilege to see in action and personally work as a therapist ) the view on training started to change drammatically.
Than with the increase in African runners in that field the training ideas switched clearly towards base training and speed work.
Speed work as literally done with the word speed , rather than the word hard.
There is a great interview and overview on pponline website . Here a short insdie view in the discussion.
Coaches and runners are confused about how to train optimally for 800-metre racing, and with good reason. After all, there's a wealth of scientific information about training for 400 metres, 5000 metres, 10,000 metres, and the marathon, but almost no research has been done concerning 800-metre training. As a result, thoughts about 800 preparations tend to be long on philosophy and anecdote -and short on fact
In addition, the 800-metre distance itself presents a key paradox. The race is now considered to be an extended sprint -a contest for the truly fleet of foot. When Seb Coe set his world record of 1:41.73 in 1981, for example, he ran an astonishing first lap of 49.7 seconds. This suggests that fast-twitch muscle fibres and anaerobic energy production are dominant in the race, yet over 55 per cent of the energy actually needed to run 800 metres is generated aerobically, suggesting that aerobic ('endurance-type') training is absolutely essential for success
The importance of aerobic energy production puts 800-metre coaches in a dilemma, because endurance training can easily compromise raw muscle power and check running velocity in those who undertake it too rigorously. Endurance training for 800-metre athletes must somehow preserve anaerobic capacity and avoid transforming fast-twitch muscle fibres into intermediate- or slow-twitch cells which would generate less power. In short, finding an optimal balance between endurance and raw-power training is necessary to produce an athlete's best-possible 800-metre performances.
Study the best to find out
Since there's no scientific research concerning 800 training, how can one identify that balance? One answer is to study the top 800-metre people in the world, and there' s little doubt about who they are. While we tend to think of the Kenyans as long-distance-people who dominate the 5000- and 10,000-metre distances, the truth is that their grip on superlative 800-metre performances is far tighter than the hold created by runners from any other country
If you doubt that the Kenyans are great at 800 metres, consider these facts. Each year, the esteemed American publication,Track & Field News, ranks the world's 800-metre runners. In both 1993 and 1994, five of the top 10 800-metre athletes were Kenyans, and in each year the No. I runner was Kenyan (Nixon Kiprotich in 1993, Wilson Kipketer in 1994). In fact, since 1987 Kenya has produced the number-one man an incredible six times, with five different men
If you look at the 10 fastest 800-metre men of all time, four are Kenyans (Great Britain has three, Brazil two, and the U.S. -much more noted for its sprint athletes -just one). In contrast, only three of the 10 fastest 5000-metre runners of all time have been Kenyan. Kenyan men finished first and third at 800 metres in the 1993 World Championships in Stuttgart, and first and second at 800 metres in the '92 Olympics. In contrast, Kenyan men captured 'only' one medal at 5000 metres in the World Championships -and one at the Olympics.
What Kiprotich has to say
The Kenyan 800-metre men have shone so brightly that it's difficult to pick out a single-best performer, but Nixon Kiprotich would have to be very close to the top of the list. The willowy (6'1', I 49-pound), 32-year- old Kenyan won the IAAF/Mobil Grand Prix for 800 metres both in 1990 and 1992, snared a silver medal at the '92 Olympics in Barcelona, has garnered gold at both the East-African and African Championships, and was rated No. 1 800-metre runner in the world for 1993 by Track & Field News. His 800-metre PB is a not-too- shabby 1:43.31
Recently, PEAK PERFORMANCE had the good fortune to catch up with Kiprotich at his home in Eldoret, Kenya, and we found the Kenyan to be quite willing to share his ideas about optimal 800-metre training.
PP: Nixon, when do you begin preparing for the outdoor track season?
KIPROTICH: I really start in December. If I'm not going to run in any indoor track meets, I'll take a two month break October and November, during which I do very little training at all. Then, throughout December and January I'll train Monday through Friday, running about 15 kilometres at 10 a.m. and another eight kilometres at about 5 p.m. each day. It's all easy, aerobic running -at about four minutes per kilometre -with no speed work at all. Saturday and Sunday are rest days.
PP: There's been a lot of debate about the merits of that kind of aerobic-base training for 800-metre runners. You run about 115K per week during your base period. What is the value of this training for you?
KIPROTICH: I've found through trial and error that if I don't do my base work and build up my aerobic capacity properly, I have a very hard time maintaining my fitness during the competitive season. Without the base, I just can't sustain fast times for very long; I lose my 'peak' quickly
PP: That's very interesting. You know -exercise physiologists have pointed out that the first 400 metres of an 800-metre race is primarily anaerobic, while the second 400 metres is more aerobic. Do you think that your base training helps you consistently maintain a high- quality velocity during the second laps of your races? KIPROTICH: There's no doubt about it.
Now we are looking into some of the questions how and why certain workouts we did at that time worked and other workout seem to have less optimal effect. With the integration of the NIRS we have now the opportunity to actually see what lenght , speed and lenght of rest between the reps are stimmulating in the actuall working muscles. Here a printout from an interval sessions
The idea here was to see, whether certain recovery ideas actually show a difference in lactate trends. Than the next stage is to see, whether we can use that information to trigger MCT reactions. MCT are a very highly discussed topic in horse racing since the 1990 but as in human workouts , there was or is no tool here to actually see how we may influence lactate release or reload. The combination with NIRS and Lactate pro is the possibly best equipment on the market for the moment
You can see nicely looking at the lactate numbers , how we where able to maintain ( even increase ) lactate ) in once specific set up and the result was surprising in the third interval with the ability to maintain much longer load sessions.
So many of Leonies ideas really make sense and I will check her ideas with some of our human racers and may show printouts here and possible trends.
Post Number: 70
|Posted on Saturday, January 29, 2011 - 09:43 pm: |
Horses are different than humans. The biggest difference is that at the age of 2 when most begin race training - their skeletons are still developing and must be subjected to race specific paces in order to remodel correctly:
http://horsetrainingscience.blogspot.com /2010/08/ideal-2-year-old-training-progr am.html
This program advocated less slow gallops and more often speed work for the time period in question: from Jan-Apr of the 2 year old season. Doing the FACT style long slow gallops during this time may do more harm than good with skeletal development.
That being said, after you have given the skeleton and soft tissues adequate stimulus during this time period, LSD will surely improve race performance as Leonie and Binmar have demonstrated - and surely IT can contribute here as well.
Tom Ivers was a proponent of LSD at age 2, but I feel he may have reconsidered seeing the Nunamaker work at New Bolton on bucked shins. He also was accurate is stating that the more LSD accomplished during base building, the more IT the horse could later endure successfully.
However, if Leonie and Binmar say differently, I would be inclined to believe them and their practical experiences.
Post Number: 3083
|Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2011 - 02:53 am: |
Horses are different than humans. The biggest difference is that at the age of 2 when most begin race training - their skeletons are still developing and must be subjected to race specific paces in order to remodel correctly:
I could not disagree more with the above statement.
The only difference is "time " in the form of years.
When you look how long a top race horse is able to produce top results and when they start training with a human ,you have pretty much the same ratio..
The human racers are, as the horses, still far in their skeletal developpment, when they go out and race close to world class time as 15 / 16 and +- age racers at junior worlds and competitions in high schools.
This is exactly the reason why the developpment of this structures like bones , tendons , vital organs like respiration cardiac remodelling, but mainly muscle fiber developpment has to take place.
This is one of the major difference between African runners and european /north American runners.
. In the so called " developed " countries kids are driven by parents to the training facility . In kenya ( rift valley ) kids jog and walk 10 - 15 km to the trainig facility to do a fun workout and than jog back home. Same when they go to school and so on.
In humans we know , that the g forces and impact between jogging and running is extreme.
If we take walking as about double joint impact of the body weight than intense running and sprints create scors of 8 - 12 x of the body weight.
When we look joint problems in sports than we find the biggest injury problems in sports like kids gymnastics and figure skating, when not special care is taken to avoid impacts in landing exercises.
In human kids are naturally SLD athletes. In fact the heart quotient ( looking at body weight and cardiac volume ) has its biggest value in the age group 7 years old.
with a value in europe of 16.4 The human problme is, that we organice 400 m runs for kids even though we know that they have still a problme of buffering H+ properly. This must be very painfull ( mentally, but as well on the tissue ) Country kids in my home land walk ,jog in an average day between 10 - 15 km. City kids between 1 - 3 km. That will and already has some dramatical short term health issues ,but as well as long term health issues.
I can't believe the recommenadtaion the Canadian CSEP has given out a few weeks ago with the information on how little really kids should move. It is absurd to believe, that we can tackle kids and adults obesity by reducing the amount of recommended activity hours to 150 min / week
Smile , it seems they took that from horse trainers and the recommendaed hours for LSD.
One of the crucial organs, which has to develop ( systems ) is the respiratory system.
I strongly believe that in horses the respiratory system may be one of the limitations in many cases.
When you look the amount of air a horse will move in an all out race and than you look at the heart rate level ,you wonder about the O2 exchange area when even only looking at actual contact times in the exchange area.
I do not know, but I would not be surprised, when in many horses ,we would see actual blood in the sputum coming from overload in the respiratory area.
Back to heart quotient
The top 100 m runner at the time of the study had a quotient of 8.5. The top 5'000 m runner at that time had a quotient of 21.4 We wrote a book in 1985 with the titel : The road to be a world class athletes " as a review of a top world class runner, I worked together over many years.
My part was the section of training with kids and youth during the time of their muscular organic and skeletal developpment. Every single research at that time would confirm the need for basic controlled impact adjusted workouts for a healthy skeletal and ligament developpment.
I honestly ( I am not a horse person ) can't see, why nature would have created one single species , where this would not be true.
I will go for sure with what Leonie, as the specialist, comes up with, but in nature the young new born horse was more or less forced to run often and many miles with an amazing ability to follow the herd.
To be on the more "attacking " side.
I simply believe , that many horse owners and trainers are in that field for the money only. Where money is involved , time is costly, and it simply may take too many hours of work and people to go out and do this LSD basic workouts , if you own 5 - 10 horses .
It sounds to me , when listen to the different discussions, that horse racing is about like Ice Hockey player developpment in Canada.
You have so many , that you do not care too much about the individual and hope that you just get that genetic gifted one, who brings in the money and there is very little to do.The key is to get the genetic gifted one, and now not mess up ith the genetic but help with a great and healthy developpment program ,the kid or horse ,to use finally the great genetic, paired with a great program.Working only with genetics and taking less and less time for developpment
may explain the stagnation of time improvement in some horse racing disciplinas as all is simply fixed on genetic and blood line , when perhaps a smart addition of smart workouts may make the difference between a champion and a real champion.
Just some thoughts from the human side of things.
Post Number: 96
|Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2011 - 04:55 am: |
I have learned to combine the LSD with the bone modeling speed plays at the same time.
My development of 2 year old horses goes as follows:
From a late yearling time to the first part of their two year old year, by the calendar, not their birthdates, I will jog and gallop the horses in my horse exerciser, on my treadmill with a pony, or on a lunge line for about 30 days, using biting rigs so they are in a frame but no weight on their backs. Using a biting rig will help develop their top line muscles from their poll to their croup in order to prepare them for carrying weight. See photo.
Then I will start adding about 32 lbs. weight on their backs, using the Astride by Eponair. I will put the weight on them twice per week and the biting rig on them twice per week for the next 60 days. During this time I will add more weight in increments of 16 lbs. until I have about 100 to 120 lbs. on their backs and am using the biting rig in combination with the Astride.
They will be training between 3 to 4 miles by then. I have found that introducing young horses to weight slowly stops the degenerative joint disease problems that so many race horses suffer from as they get older and also will load their bones, joints, and suspensory systems slowly allowing for recovery from the stressors.
After 3 months, they are broke and learn to gallop on the racetrack. As soon as they will gallop a mile to two miles comfortably I will do a “speed play” for about 1/16th or 6 stride cycles at racing speed, during the slow miles. These strides will begin the process of bone modeling (osteoclasts demineralizing and osteoblast forming a denser bone). As the young horse goes farther in the LSD, I will do one, two or three “speed plays” at racing speed during a single long slow gallop which is also a great way to teach the young horses to rate.
I will do the majority of the” speed plays” in the turn as thoroughbreds have to develop their left front shins denser because they race one direction and their left front shin being the lead leg, receives more concussion than the non-lead leg, especially around the turns. Also the U.S. racetracks cannot maintain the banking steep enough in the turns which would be necessary to load the limbs equally.
Post Number: 7
|Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2011 - 05:56 am: |
So i have been looking at a lot of data on secretariat lately and seeing what I can do to come up with an equation or at least way toe evaluate power/weight. Without using LBP I can figure out the work done for each 400m of the Kentucky Derby. Now maybe i'm crazy, or this can't be measure accurately enough but I think we should be able to come up with a power to weight ratio like Lance Armstrong's 6.7 watts per kilo at LBP to win the tour.
How easy is it to control a horses weight? Can a horse lose or gain weight effectively for a race? I heard a mention of laxatives to get a horses weight down before a race. Seems like it would compromise performance. So really i'm asking that if you have maxed a horses power, can you drop its weight naturally to increase power to weight? From my history of training only LSD training will help to drop weight. High power work doesn't do this well.
Has anyone looked at power to weight ratio's for horses? Should it be overall or for each 400m (sorry for using metric, but i hate imperial and all my calculations were using metric). Has anyone tried to calculate this out? Lets hatch it out on here. Cyclists love power, and being able to calculate power and power to weight for a horse would allow us to predict if a horse is going to go fast or not.
My other thought was if the derby is 2km long and takes roughly 2min, should we not train the horses as we train 800m runners? And based on what Jeurg posted horses need a lot of base work for the second 1000m.
Silly question. What is scoring down to get a horse to dump its spleen.
I have more thoughts, but i appear to have lost focus. More later.
Post Number: 71
|Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2011 - 06:12 am: |
Juerg, do you have to worry about bone remodelling in your human subjects? That is what I mean by different. If you tell horsepeople that humans and horses can be trained the same, you will get pushback - Tom Ivers tried that. In my experience, humans that train through extreme fatigue get fitter, while many horses that do so get hurt.
Post Number: 473
|Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2011 - 06:27 am: |
I would have to say your final comment is interesting, but probably not correct. Humans that train through extreme fatigue DO NOT get fitter. They may, if they are lucky learn to survive, but there is clear evidence in human training of the value of recovery in improving performance. Hence, the incredibly high misuse of anabolic steroids, which sole purpose is to shorten the duration of recovery needed between intense exercise.
We will always have trouble with the definition of "fatigue". But the concept is fairly easy to understand if one uses objective assessments to measure whether a physiologic system is performing at a similar level after being stimulated in training. That is, after a training stimulus, one or more systems will be "fatigued" yielding a drop in performance. It is only after recovery, that these systems will see improvement. And we are constantly looking for ways to "train" one system, while allowing another system to fully recover, before stimulating it again.
I don;t think the issue is whether we should argue about whether horses should be trained the "same" as humans. In fact, we get lots of "pushback" from human coaches who disagree with our ideas on how to train our human athletes, which goes against much of what is currently considered "normal" in North America. Including the "no pain no gain" idea...
And to also respond to Adam's question regarding strength to weight ratio...I think the concept, both in cyclists and in the equine world does a great disservice to the concepts we are trying to teach, by attempting to place mathematical formulas onto the performance measures of the athletes involved. As Adam mentions, cyclists love numbers. But unfortunately, most of the numbers they "love" are the numbers that have very little to do with improving their systems in a meaningful way. They are numbers that reflect the overall performance (watts) and the overall weight (kg) rather than the numbers that reflect the physiologic situation that provided that performance (Stroke volume, SVR, Resp Rate, Tv etc.) and the state of the body that is reflected by the weight (intracellular volume, extracellular volume, phase angle etc.).
We have recorded watts/kg numbers in some of our athletes in the past, but we do this solely as a means of tracking changes to performance in terms of personal development, recognizing that the changes should occur in small increments in a healthy body, rather than comparing those results to others.
Post Number: 72
|Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2011 - 06:32 am: |
Horse are wild animals, when tired they can panic, lose neuromuscular coordination, and cause injury due to a misstep. More than a few equine sports have traced back causes of catastrophic incidents and blamed 'intense physiological fatigue' as the cause.
Again, you may be precisely right Andrew, but horse people like to hear that there are differences and Adam may have a better chance to market his services using such a pitch.
Post Number: 474
|Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2011 - 06:43 am: |
Excellent point Bill,
it is NOT that we think horses should be trained like humans, it is that all mammals will respond to the stimulus provided in a consistent and reliable manner. So, Adam has a fairly easy job to do...convince a horse owner that he understands the demands of the sport, and then suggest simple and effective stimulus for the athletes involved.
The LBP test and other ideas discussed at the FaCT Certification Courses provide some ideas on how to measure and consider the different stimuli. We move away from a dialogue that is full of misinformation (thresholds, oxygen debt, lactic acid, lactic tolerance etc.), and instead discuss the physiology required for performance. Hence my concern with trying to find the "best" watts/kg for comparison.
The change in coordination under fatigue is exactly why I would rely on a true horseman or horsewoman to help identify when the horse was beginning to fatigue during higher intensity sessions, or during long endurance sessions. In reviewing data from different training sessions last winter, it was clear the objective data (HR, speed etc.) was able to help reveal the difficulty the horse was having. The trouble was, the trainer was not willing to use the information at hand along with the visible cues the horse was giving. This led to a desire to "complete" a workout that clearly had achieved the goal of stimulus after just 2 or 3 of the "planned" 6 intervals. It takes an open mind to see that often the right decision is to stop, rather than to keep the stimulus going, believing that more is better.
Post Number: 8
|Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2011 - 06:46 am: |
I'm all for using physiological data to create meaningful changes in horses to increase performance. At the end of the day it is about increasing performance and being able to place a number on this will be useful correct? Using a power to weight ratio to track total output potential is basically ground zero. Yes look at heart physiology, and peripheral vascular changes, but all these little changes help to increase the final power to weight ratio. Correct? If you want to see if a horse is going fast or not you need this number correct? Using a horses performance in speed increase or decrease during a race will help to figure out what is the limiting factor. I do think power to weight ratio has a very valid place with horses. Work on all the little bits to increase power output.
I like to use cars as an example. You put on a new muffler, new intake, new cylinders, lighter wheels, better steering. This is like training or working on your structures. In the end though with all these changes all you care about is how much power goes to the wheels and what the car weighs. I don't mean to apply mathematics to this, but using power to track development and total potential performance is a good thing. Right?
Or have i totally missed the mark.
Post Number: 475
|Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2011 - 06:53 am: |
I think you have a good argument, but I think there is the possibility of misuse, and misunderstanding. Just as watts and LBP is a simple summary of what happens at the limit of one of the systems, it is not good predictor of overall race performance. One athlete can sustain LBP for 6 hours, while another for only 5 minutes.
And you will run into the same trouble with watts/kg. Watts measured over one mile or two? On a controlled treadmill, or on a hard track?
As many horse people will tell you, it is the speed of the horse in the race that is the only thing that matters. We would add that the health and long term enjoyment of those involved is equally important.
You are not off the mark. I am just cautious about using numbers that represent a summary to help make decisions about details of training.
Post Number: 9
|Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2011 - 07:02 am: |
Really its just a number for me to track how the horse is doing. I do understand that there are a lot of external variables to look at when applying this number. It's also a way to track if your training is working or not.
I see their argument that speed is the only thing that matters. But if we as trainers/consultants start to break down what makes this speed then brining weight and output is good to use. Bringing in more testing equipment will help to hone in on what structure needs to be worked on. For now all i have is speed, HR and hopefully lactate. Woodbine rules may make it difficult for us to use lactate. Still waiting to hear from them.
Maybe i will refrain from telling people that i can predict performance based on this number, but i would bet as i gain data on more horses, this will be a fairly predictive number. Use it as your baseline and go from there. All the numbers will be different based on track surface, distance run etc.
I've spent my sunday (only day off) in front of my computer using a calculator. I'm going to use my way of calculating power to weight and see how it applies to other derby winners.
Don't hold your breath, cause as Andrew said. I may be way off, as track surfaces and external stimuli may make my idea not relevant. I'll update tomorrow with what I find.
Post Number: 3085
|Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2011 - 08:27 am: |
"Juerg, do you have to worry about bone remodelling in your human subjects?"
First of all thanks for this great discussion. This is the way people and coaches can make progress by critically looking at all aspects on the table.
1. To the remodelling. Yes in humans, and for human coaches, the remodelling is the number one duty and key for success.(modelling of bone, tendon cardiac ability muscle fibers)
It dates back into the 19. century , where "remodelling " took place in schools of rich parents kids to specific remodelling therapies in kids with bone developpment due to ma nutrition and other reasons. ( Klapp'sches kriechen )The simple "sit straight " reminder from your parents are remodeling ideas of growing bone structures.
PE and sport education in europe has a very big part of the education in healthy bone and tissue developpment and the old school of weight lifting in eastern countries like Turkey and others put very string rules on how to load and unload vertebras and joints to be sure the kid can reach the athletic age for big competitions.
So my question back would be :
"Horse coaches, do you have to worry about bone remodelling in your horses ?
Discussion on watt/kg.
Welcome back to the early 1950 where watt/ kg was the key for the future and it turned out that most was working as long the medical comunity was there to help "recovery" and some other performance enhancing ideas.
The todays technology allows us now to measure watt very easy and affordable.The "wattage movement" with the different programs offered this days on many websites, is a copy of an already tried and failed attempt to compare the physiological system of a human with a car.
From that point the example by Adam from a car shows fundamentally the problme between physiological based exercise physiology and statistical / mathematical driven calculations of ratios and performance, which are great on cars and other one system objects, but unfortunately, unlikley can be applied in physiological systems.First was VO2 max , which returned with the smaller equipment and is now under big scrutiny.
The fact that the same wattge can be produced with very different involvements shows the problem of this ideas in humans.
What for sure is true is the ability to promote and sell an idea like this, as programming workouts will be easy, fast and can be done without even knowing the athlet as we only need body weight amnd maximal wattage.
The idea that L. Armstrong was winning the tour becuse of a wattage /Kg ratio of 6.7 is an interesting point which does not take in consideration the whole dynamic of a team event like the tour.
The watt/ kg ratio in the tour 2009 for two guys in the same team was in the clear favour of L.A but it did not workout that way.
I work for the moment with 2 athletes on that high level and have one , who rides in the Tour with a ratio of 7.4 ( tested independantly) and he was far back compared to the other athlete with a ratio of 6.4
It is in fact interesting to compare this numbers and see, that it does not add up in a prediction of performance , like we failed to be able to use VO2 as a prediction of performance.
Andrew made some great points, that in training the key is to see objective progress in an individual athlet and try to continue with this progress. Races are a different field and many more factores come into the playing field besides a ratio of watt/kg.
It is interesting that better and smaller technology as a clear progress, always brings up old ideas ( little progress ) , when in fact new technology could , if we are open enough, even create new ideas for training and recovery.
Here a first step of this ideas just started at a Swiss university .
"Institut fuer Sportwissenschaft der Universitaet Bern
Referent: Dr. Karen Zentgraf
Betreuerin: Dr. Karen Zentgraf
vorgelegt von Andri Feldmann Matrikel-Nr.: 10-114-338
Bern, Januar 2011
A COMPARISON OF THE RESPIRATORY METABOREFLEX AND A CARDIAC CENTRAL GOVERNOR 1
This purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the respiratory metaboreflex and the central governor theory in order to recognize similarities between the two. The two independent research groups have identified that performance limitation is not reserved merely to a classical model of peripheral limitations, but rather is mediated by a combination of feedback and feed forward loops that communicates a loss of homeostasis within any given physiological system. Thereby performance is very well limited by a self-protective mechanism that ensures the continued function of life vital systems, such as the respiratory or cardiovascular systems, during strenuous exercise where energy and oxygen delivery becomes compromised. Acknowledging the research of these groups a progression away from the classical physiological model must be made to accommodate the recent findings."
With this in mind the "term" fatigue has a very different general definition as ":
"Fatigue is the loss of homeostasis in any given system"
This opens a very different way of looking at training ideas and recovery recommendations.
So we are in the midst of a drammatical change in human physiological assessments and the ongoing discussion and confusion is a sign of a healthy developpment.
The problems emerge, that "classical " studies, which where or still are using % of VO2 max as the baseline to define performance, may have to be reviewed in the future as the conclusions may have to be re-discussed.
We will show soon on the "human" forum the ongoing discussion which started in Switzerland with some ongoing projects but the nice situation of a new openness towards some different ideas at my home university. So stay tuned on many different topics on this forum.
Thanks again for the lively and great discussion.
To move the flowers back to the "animal researchers."
In the field of sepsis and shock the animal doctores are far a head of the human caregivers, as lactate this days and using the Lactate Pro in vet medicin is pretty much well established and heavily used.
Even in cases with my goats or the neighbours horse, lactate is used to rule out extreme possibilities like sepsis and shock.
The simple ability to take a drop from the neck and immediatly have it in the lactate Pro, opens a very simple and easy and fast way to react preventative rather than just hope and wait. Have a great left over of a nice and sunny weekend .
Post Number: 3086
|Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2011 - 08:38 am: |
Horse are wild animals, when tired they can panic, lose neuromuscular coordination, and cause injury due to a misstep.
This is a nice section, as in many animals studies this is one of the problems.
There was a great study done on Cariboo herds and thanks to the Lactate Pro , they could see, what it meant o "stress " the animals over their protective CGM to the complete survival mode. One of the major problems they encountered was rhabdomyelosis.
Horses ar wild aniumals and if tired.
Humans may not be far off.
There are numereous studies done ( Liesen et all ) on icehockey players, that when tired they seem to loose the ability to actually think and react and will be engaged in fights rather than a game. The brain model by Mc Lean comes to mind
Post Number: 3087
|Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2011 - 09:01 am: |
"It's also a way to track if your training is working or not." Using watt or any physical performance.
That's again where I fundamentally would argue the opposite and we can back it up.
Short term tests with 3 min steps and pushing the same wattage does not tell you anything about the training and whether it is working.
As you may just have shifted from one system to another . You may have improved your high end performance but may have lost your low end ability.
This is eaxtly the point , where we as well see, that 75 % of VO2 max in two different athletes not end up with the same performance , when loading this % in a longer event or race.
In fact in human 800 m runners we have athletes , who show incredible great high end speed in a short step test or in biking in a MAP, but in a race like a 2000m pursuit or a 800 m race the one with the higher end results in the test is not always the winner. To see actually , whether the training is having an impact, we have to know what we target in the workout and how we test this goal instead of having a team result which tells us only the full team result but not the effect the workout had on the weak teammeber we target.
Example: You may target coordination , as you can see , that stride lenght or cadence is far off.
By doing that you may neglect the oxygen independent ATP production and you will loose some of its enzymatic ability.
Thanks to the great progress in coordination your end time is the same as before. ( better running effciency saved a lot of energy).
So your end time will suggest you , that you did not made any progress or you may be even a bit faster . Now you keep this idea going but in the next race the O2 independent system now really lost a lot and your end time may be worse.
So the fact, that the assessment based on a physical standard only tested the overall ability and not the single system progress or loss, shows you , that this way we are not actually gaining any better inside view in what we are doing
Post Number: 73
|Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2011 - 10:24 am: |
Look at it from this perspective:
We'll compare thoroughbred racing to human milers, just to keep things simple. Leonie, Binmar, others please correct me where I am wrong.
To further simplify, we will call a human 4 min mile the same as an equine 12 second furlong.
No human, with zero training, can run a 4 min mile at age 12. All horses, by age 1, can run a 12 second furlong, by comparison.
With training, humans first have to run and adapt physiologically to a 9 min mile, then 8, 7, and so on - over a period of years. They must naturally follow the rule of progressivity in their training.
Horses can run from 1-4 12 second furlongs immediately upon beginning exercise - but the task at hand is to not let them do so, until their insides are ready.
Young horses often take to any exercise like a human does when a car is on his kid, or when he has a gun to his head: massive adrenalin rushes in all cases - a housewife who lifts a car off her kid will accomplish the task, but injure herself in the process. But, what about Lou Ferrigno?
I often have horse trainers tell me they don't want me to train out of their horses that natural instinct to panic and take off - as they feel that is what wins them races. Specifically they believe repeated intervals at speed will do just that.
Not sure where I am going with this analogy of mixed metaphors - just illustrating what I mean when I call horses different from humans. Both have bones, muscles, and blood that reacts identically to exercise demands, but many other factors are at play.
Post Number: 3088
|Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2011 - 11:53 am: |
Not sure where I am going with this analogy of mixed metaphors - just illustrating what I mean when I call horses different from humans.
That's exactly what we always have to ask ourself.
The same is true in human training comparing human training.
This is what we try to show in nearly every single thread on this forum.
Even if we have two 800 m runners both human origins, the training will be different, as each is an individual athlete with very individual strenght and weaknesses.That's why we can't make a cookbook for our athletes and when I see that human coaches can write training plans in a Province newspaper on how to run a marathon in 90 days, than I wonder how much thoughts they really put into the idea and how much they really understand the physiological reactions in human beings.
The discussion we see here is the same. The idea to compare a middle distance runner with a horse race of similar end time is the same problem as we discuss.
We compare a physical number , Time and than believe we can make connection to the type of workout we should do.
I agree 100 % with the statement that horses are different than humans. That is ery clear and that's one point I was always surprised from the beginning of this thread, that we have horse coaches using 2 and 4 mmol lactate ideas ( from humans and in humans we know it does not work eve nwhen comparing human to human )
Than we see ideas of using actually VO2 max ideas watt/kg and so on.
This again are all absolute numbers with no inside information in actual physiological reactions.
I think that horse racing and horse coaches need excatly what we see here in this discussion developping . A new and different approach to the current classical system. This is not to throw all ideas out the window, but to reassess the effectivness and ideas we used to some possible new ideas and directions.
We see in the short and great summaries from Leonie , that this is done and possible. What we see as well is, that coaches like Leonie face the same scrutiny in their own field of coaches as many human coaches face, when assessing new opportunities to train and recover, as they evolve thanks to new technology.
Summary: The many great ideas we see in horse coaching are the way to go. It is fun to see, what is going on in other sports like human coaching or sleddog training and so on. I have to neighbours with 64 and 25 sleddogs and we have great discussion on how each dog and human is different and we never would actually look on using my ideas to actually coach the dogs , but what we look is what equipment and ideas we can use on humans and dogs alike to look at futher into the field of assessing and training.
That's where many ideas started out by trying to use lactate in horses. This is done succesfully now in many areas and we see that top coaches developp their own ideas specific for horses and or other compeating animals.
The first contact we had with a horse coach and different ideas on how to use lactate was T. Ivers. He was far ahead of many human coaches to understand , that lactate was a fuel rather a reason of fatigue and he had some fascinating emails and infos on our old forum on how he was using lactate in horses.
Post Number: 97
|Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2011 - 11:25 pm: |
Very well stated and right on the money. I have yet to ever have had two horses that trained alike or for that matter, behaved alike.
Tom Ivers and I were very good friends and I had the privilege to have had many interesting discussions and debates with him. He was my friend and mentor and got me thinking “outside the box”. Tom was the first person to write training plans for horses, which backfired on him personally, not because he did not know what he was talking about, but because the readers used his plans like a bible and forgot to check if their horses could accomplish these plans daily.
Tom passed away in 2005.
Post Number: 3089
|Posted on Monday, January 31, 2011 - 01:05 am: |
woww makes me feel better to be not alone out there, who believes and can see, that there is one person at a time.
That's why there is no such thing like a cook book but nevertheless many coaches and ideas work on cook books.
I make always teh comparison. to :
To run a Mc Donald restaurant you need money .
so you can buy the cook book.
To run a gourmet restaurant you need a Chef as each menu is prepared for each customer very special. Nice to see CHEF Leonie out there. The only restaurant I would go for a nice dinner. Smile