| Author | Message | |||
     Juerg New member Username: Juerg Post Number: 419 Registered: 04-2006 |
I like to use a specific case study from a triathlete on this Forum and like to discuss his specific situations with test results as they come in as well as race results. It is not (NOT) a cookbook to copy but a critical view on myself and a discussion point for the coach of this athlete as well a critical check up on our developping FaCT IRIS idea. There will be much more questions , than answers and a lot of try and error messages as we may go along in this interesting case. I will give you first some infos and results as I get them in and than will show , how I would like to try to make sense out of the race results and the test results and how we would apply that for a short term functional improvement or a longer term structural change. Here how all started out. Letter with the question : summary : what is going wrong. Triathlon race. Very good swim part followed by a very strong bike part and going as the leader into the run , which is his "strong" discipline. Run time for the 1/2 marathon in this 1/2 Ironman was 1h 34 min. He felt bad and empty. A few weeks later just to see what he can do he runs a 1/2 marathon and wins easy in 1h14 as he just relaxed cruises through the distance. 1/2 marathon times of 1h 12 minutes in the same year as well. Now we have to try to make some sense on what is happening before we simply try to "adjust " his training. How. Well they did a 3 x 2 mile interval a few days ago. times just under 12 min for each of them. So my first question to the team is: Do you have any test info from the bike and from the running and perhaps from swimming. Question: what do I like to see in this tests. What would you test and what numbers are interesting to see. What test would help us further a) we have now a FaCT IRIS from a bike test. and I will go through this next time. Next question was : what were your HR during swimming / biking and running. Here a first feed back: Swim was 138 average. Bike was 148 average but on the hills up to 165. The run was 145 average and in the hills 158 -160. Here a a short interesting point 1h 34 in the race and 1h14 single race. check what % he lost or was running at. let's take 1h14 as 100% race time ; So about 7 min 30 would be 15 % so 20 min slower would be close to 25 % difference so 75 % of his maximal race ability in running. Ask yourself about zoning as well about physical performance versus physiological challenge in this case. Now here the latest info I got today 3 x 2 miles intervall. I do not know the rest time in between the runs. Times that up and you get a 1/2 marathon time of ? Hmm interesting isn't it ? The lactate after the third interval was 8.8 mmol/L. Hmm what do we do with that. Okay here my question to the team today: I need a FaCT IRIS on the treadmill and I need a repeat of the 3 x 2 miles with lactate if they take lactate at the end of each 2 miles and at thye beginning of each 2 miles. Hmm why ? My other question is. Why would he train 3 x 2 miles, what is the goal behind and what would that change if , for his triathlon 1/2 marathon. Last question : what are you or where you "feeding " during the bike and run . ( and how much of the nutrients did you took in in gr.. So that's where we are for the moment. So next up will be an initital assessment on what we have on info from the Bike FaCT IRIS test and see what the result is based on thsi info. So stay tuned as I will go over with you , how the FaCT IRIS was done as well to explain you what we can try to read out of all this flood of infos. Juerg PS make for yourself a short summary on a paper on infos you think may be relevant for you . Ask yourself what a test you know would give you as a help for this specific case. Take a 2 and 4 mmol lactate test. Take an anaerobic threshold test. Take a conconi test or a Wingdam test. Now take the results and take any classical zoning based on % and use them to see what you can do with it. ( objectively ). Again I just like to show why we try to develop a FaCT IRIS as we may see the difference in help we may get from the different tests and test results. | |||
| Juerg New member Username: Juerg Post Number: 422 Registered: 04-2006 |
Okay here an additional info I got in today. My one question was : how long rest between the 3 x 2 mile runs. Answer: 90 sec. You remember the lactate at the end of the 3rd set . 8.8 His time were just under 12 min / 2 miles so this would add up to a 1h 14 - 1h15 1/2 marathon time, So now here the questions we may have to ask critically. 1. He can run 1/2 marathon in 1h14 +-. This is a run in a time frame of a needed energy production of oxygen dependent sources and possibly mainly in the glucose supply area ( glycogen tank ) ? A workout like 3 x 2 miles with the same speed as the full race and an accumulation of lactate as a sign of oxygen independent energy production involvement would use what energy sources ? What is this workout stimulating . And is this stimulation something he can use in his triathlon ? What can we say for the moment on the situation between the 1h14 time and the 1h34 time in connection with physiological energy supply ? Let's assume we could use speed on a flat run the same as wattage ( as physical performance). Do you think this 1h14 and 1h34 is really the same for his body resp. why can he not simply go 1h14 in the triathlon as well. Based on the philosophy of wattage users it should make no different. 240 wattage is always 240 wattage. The regular reader will understand what we are talking about. Trend. We may have to see what was going on prior to his run in the swim and bike section , as well we may have to assess his efficiency in running and by what intensity he may have to shift from one energy source to another. What are the limitation of teh new energy source.? So in this case we need. : a FaCT lactate swim test , A FaCT IRIS bike test and a FaCT IRIS run test and this is all underway and we will keep discussing this direction. 2 main ideas come in the mind : 1. Energy supply limitation ( Nutritional ) functional reason. 2. lack of basic STF ability to avoid an early introduction of glycogen storage into the energy production. ( training intervention /structural ) 3. ore a possibility of both of the above as a combination. Stay on here as we have the first result of a FaCT IRIS on the bike in and we will go though it over the next few days. Juerg. PS for all lactate users . See the lactate dynamic in the 3 x 2 mile run. I hope he can repeat that but offer us the lactate values in the following situation. 1. resting lactate. / lactate immediately after 2 mile run. Lactate just before the next run. and after 2nd 2 mile , before 3rd 2 mile / after 3rd 2 mile immediately than after 5 / 10 and 15 min therefor. Next idea would be to have a lactate and blood sugar taken after a 1/2 iron man and after a 1/2 marathon to see his metabolic reactions and you will see how we can draw some conclusions based on this informations. | |||
| Juerg New member Username: Juerg Post Number: 423 Registered: 04-2006 |
Here your initial infos the way I would use it to start out . It is a bike FaCT IRIS test. we will go though the info later today.
| |||
| Juerg New member Username: Juerg Post Number: 429 Registered: 04-2006 |
Okay; My first step in a situation like we discuss here is: What do we ask the body to do. There are always 2 parts. The mind is one the physiological body is the other. Why is that so important. Well let's take a very easy example. You have a friend , who decides to run in 2 weeks a marathon. He never did sport is healthy not overweight but never run before. He is a extreme successfull professional and if he get's his mind into a project he will finish it always. So here you go: His mind is ready to do the marathon. Question is his body ready to do it. ? Answer is easy as we did did in reality. Yes . The first thing is the mind set . Everybody with a healthy body can do it without training. The question is much more about , how he arrives at the finish line. 2 main limitation : a) energy production b) biomechanics. The a) can be easy solved with a FaCT IRIS. we will be able to show you , how he can find his speed ( slow ) so we have the absolute security , that energy delivery will be no problem at all. b) is the real challenge . . Why well this is a perfect example of functional usage and structural not existence. a) functionally his body can easy delivery energy over 4 - 5 hours and longer , as long we keep it in the FFA (STF) area so his only concern will be water ( hydration ) and potentially some electrolyte adjustments depending on the temp of the race. B) the biomechanic will be the problem. The pounding over this long time is extreme and unlikely there is not enough structural adjustments here to keep this going . It may start with blisters to muscle soreness to tendon overload to cartilage "feeling". He likely will be a customer for my office but mind over matter ( smile) Why this discussion. In our live case we have a very good athlete. so Biomechanic small problem. Mind No problem , actually a high risk. So interestingly we will end up discussing the metabolic needs to have his mind "goal" the fast run at the end of the triathlon getting to reality. I think his biggest enemy is his top performance in combination with his mind. He is fast , and he is fit. But he has possibly the not yet optimal structural ability to reach his mind goal and he is working on the wrong end of it. Start thinking what I mean with that. Take a formula 1 car and race the Kenya safari with it . So my first intention is to find his "physiological Zones " in at least biking and running. So here the plan you can start working on : 1. Assess his test. Check for the Zoning area. 2. Check for the energy needs in this zoning areas 3. check his race info and in which zoning he was actually racing in the bike part . 4. check the energy needs for this intensity . 5. Calculate what he used and what in teh best case he can get in. 6. Take an approximation on the 30 min swim and what he may have needed there. Now check the "tank " ( energy content ) he had at the start of his 1/2 marathon in the triathlon and than compare with the energy content he has probably at the start of his 1/2 marathon as a single event. Now in the test info you may see the efficiency as well use some moments in that area. Finally ask yourself about functional possibilities for a fast fix and structural changes he may need for a realistic fix. Come back after you made you own conclusions and I will show how I take the test numbers apart and try to make a bit sense of it. Mind of body as you will see is often a start for a not nice end result , depending how far the mind set is apart from the bodies ability. Juerg . | |||
| Juerg New member Username: Juerg Post Number: 434 Registered: 04-2006 |
Okay after a long weekend you had plenty of time to go though all the questions. I like to start with teh most simple part in this case. 1. Functional correction for the next race based on the info from a FaCT IRIS bike test we did. Here the summary of the summary of the test using the above "physiological " zones to show you the energy needs for this athlete. Zone HR kcal/h RI 123 and below 400 -500 BISTF 123 - 141 530 -650 BIFTF 140 - 151(LBP) 650- 800 Okay now taking the race he made with average HR above 145 and peaks up to 165 on the bike we have the following thoughts. Let's take a 3 hour bike ride ( including the swim part ) kcal needs for this time = app. 800/h so overall 2400 kcal /h. Now the problem is not , that he can't deliver this 2400kcal /h the question is , what does he needs as energy source to get this 2400 kcal produced.? Based on our "physiological zonings" he is mainly in the glycogen energy storage room. Now let's check the capacity in a very good situation. Liver = 100 - 130 gr Muscles = 300 - 400 gr ( very good ) So he has app. 500 gr of glycogen x 4 = 2000 kcal on this high energy delivery. True it never will be just glycogen only and he , if his nutritional assessment was done properly will be able to get app. 1/4 of the calories in during the event . so 2500 kcal would be the ability. Now take and leave some of this energy numbers and you will see after his running test , that the speed he was planning to run and the speed he was actually running will possibly show you exactly this situation. 1. There was not enough energy ( glycogen or glucose 0 left to go the speed he can run for a single half marathon and he has to go to finish the race down with the speed on the BISTF intensity. How could we "proof" that . We would take a lactate at the end in combination with a blood sugar assessment. Now think through this idea and try to find out what results you may see under what situations. This assessment at the end is another easy way to show , how lactate is not the reason of fatigue at all, and on the other side , how lactate is not a fixed number for certain intensities either. It is as we try to explain a very nice and effective marker to establish metabolic trends and physiological zones and again in combination with : HR / respiratory rate / performance like wattage or speed and other physiological information we can very nicely work on much more individual approaches than with % of max or any other zoning idea. Summary : 1. Short term correction for a better race in this case. Functional adjustment ) go slower to be faster, meaning the intensity on the bike has to stay in the BISTF zone and should not go over LBP on the bike. This would allow to spare glycogen and feed better during the bike and this would allow to go much faster in the run. Long term solution ( structural changes . Increase the mitochondrial density with again slower base workouts and reduce the BIFTF intensities by a lot over the coming winter. Last but not least we will check out other possible weak physiological systems next time . Okay this was the suggestion and let's wait for a respond from his USA duathlon champion ship. Juerg | |||
| Juerg New member Username: Juerg Post Number: 435 Registered: 04-2006 |
okay here the info from this morning Juerg, I followed your advice, on nutrition and not going so hard on the bike part. The result, I won the USA Duathlon National Championships on Sunday in Auburn CA. Very hard day, 3km run, 56 mile, 1/2 marathon. I didn't punsih the bike, but road well beneath LBP. I was able to keep fueled enough to run the 1/2 marathon all out until 800m when I was really hurting. But the run felt great! Thanks for your help. Cheers mate | |||
| Juerg New member Username: Juerg Post Number: 438 Registered: 04-2006 |
Fitmate TAV TV % of VC 33 1.1 27% 34 0.9 22% 35 0.9 22% 39 1.0 24% 40 1.2 29% 43 1.2 29% 56 1.5 37% 65 1.7 41% 73 1.8 44% 80 1.8 44% 79 1.9 46% You may remember this numbers. This information is out of the FaCT IRIS test with our triathlet and the case study. Problem : 1. we can very often with some short term functional adjustments produce a very nice result and a personal best. If the winning of a race is the ultimate goal this can be and often is a very nice way of feeling "success full" .We much more aim for improving personal bests over the long term with integration of "health" as the ultimate goal. I like to show you with the above numbers, where there may be lot's of room to improve the personal best in this case study. If you go through any VO2 testing numbers carefully , you will find some similar % of TV compared to VC ( titdal volume compared to vital capacity) This % numbers are in fact very "average numbers" we will find in nearly any person we test , whether it is a complete beginner over a COPD person to people n cardiac rehabilitation. In the average over the last 100 tests we did we see a % of TV to VC of 25 - 40 % , which is pretty much in accordance to the literature. Due to specific training we see on the other side in some case studies % of up to 65 +- % of TV to VC. How we measure VC to not get to expensive. We use a Spiro Pet, a very simple cheap device , who "under estimates " actually VC by 5 - 10 % , as it measures only a certain intensity of airflow due to the momentum of the small wind turbine. So we actually name the VC an active VC , because you need a minimal airflow to get the equipment going. Nevertheless you will see, that you can repeat the test result very nicely .\ So what has this all to do with our case study. A) his coach can do a Fit Mate test in the following way. He bikes with a fixed wattage he can go based on his FaCT IRIS test by his LBP HR and LBP wattage. As soon his HR is drifting up he checks his FeO2 ( extracted O2 from the air ) . Now we can apply 2 versions : 1. he will try to breath slower and deeper. and he can check that immediately over the screen on the Fit Mate. There are a few different reactions , which he may see. I just take one possible reaction: I think in his case we will see after he drops his respiration rate and increases his tidal volume a drop in FeO2 , resp. an increase in true O2 ( extracted O2 ). This will allow him to reduce a possible accumulation of lactate in the system due to the fact , that in his VO2 management he will improve his delivery system and therefor can work better and or longer in the oxygen dependent energy supply. Problem . This may be very short lived, as in case of a not very efficient trained respiratory system, the improved O2 delivery may get used in the bot efficient more work of his respiratory system. If this respiratory system is very inefficient, we may actually see in a short time a increase in heart rate again and a much faster increase in lactate accumulation. ( possible explanation is the ECGM extended central governor model with an input from the metaboreflex ( Dempsey ). Now try to make this thoughts different. If we believe that a CGM may exist or as we put it down an ECGM may exist, than we would see ., that a lot of this above reactions may be controlled over some hormonal reactions. So our search went into that direction and here is in a very short summary what we found . But first to end th thought. . If this case study could breath more efficient in any Zone , he could delivery O2 better and stay therefor longer in the oxygen dependent energy production zones and in his case in the BISTF zone.. Now there are certain stimuli and certain intervention, which may help together with the respiratory training to be more efficient in the BI STF zone. True the basic idea of more training hours, but as we know by now , there is only so many hours you can work out and than you have to let your body recover to make a positive anabolic response. So here an inside view in some "Hormonal " thoughts. During a workout, the energy you have to turn over will increase and this is for sure true if you increase as well the intensity of the workout. To be able to increase this energy turnover the so called adrenergic mechanisme will play a very important role. Now one of the signs of an increase in adrenergic activity is an increase in heart rate, and with this an enhanced force of myocardial contraction, but as well a vasoconstriction in the splancnic circulation ( like kidneys and non contracting muscles. Now this is in favor of the "surviving idea" as this circulatory changes favor a re-distribution of blood flow to exercising muscles, as well more important a security to the heart itself as it increases the cardiac output. An other feature of this adrenergic reaction is the stimulation of the sweat glands ( remember the thermo stat. as one of our ECGM ideas ) and thereby influences thermoregulation. Now 2 guys of interest inthis ideas are: norepinephrine and epinephrine. There are several studies done in this direction. Here some of the findings and ongoing directions. 1. Epinephrine is involved in metabolic reactions of fat and carbohydrate. it may play a minor role in liver glucose output and it will not increase in or during intense exercises.When epinephrine was infused glucose uptake was reduced, but it showed in humans an increase in lipolytic activity. In other words , when epinephrine was present the ability to produced energy oxygen dependent with Fat was much better. To be able to have enough O2 delivery , one of the possible limitation is the above discussed respiratory system. So if we can deliver better and more efficient O2 we can enhance possibly the epinephrine out put and therefor the basic endurance ability will improve.. In different tests it was shown , that top endurance athletes had a much higher and better epinephrine activity than sedentary people. There is one problem : There was no proof of this n any research done over 4 - 8 weeks , but there are long term findings that indicate that an improve secretion capacity of epinephrine is a result of training but will require several years of training. So we are back on the functional and structural ideas are we ?. Years and years of training will structurally change this CGM or ECGM situation , so that even short problems of health and other situation , who stopped you from regular workouts will be compensate fast and you will be back in "good shape". In cases where there is this structural base we can in a very short time stimulate this epinephrine response with intervention like hypoxia and hypercapnia, possible as well over caffein hypoglycemia and glucagon . This will lead to very surprising results as we had on the weekend. where we have one case of a c"classical " structural person with training over years 30 + years very structural and "stimulating" the above situation . 60 years plus racing a very hard stage race in a relay and "loosing only 2 min to a former ( nearly half his age ) olympian ( and canadian champion) in a nordic event. And this in altitude and through deep snow. Knowing some of the "basic " lactate numbers and tests done on this olympian , it was clear , that they had a very functional approach only and a very strange way of planning zones based on a very let's say interesting way of doing lactate testing. Functional changes as a part of survival have very little long term benefit , and as soon the "survival " stimulis are gone you will be back down to good performance but far away from your top performance. So if you put carefully the above ideas together you can see, how the respiratory idea may have a structural long term effect over the hormonal response and may create a much better personal performance in the upcoming years. So try to fit a program together for this case study with what we have for now and stay tuned for more ideas. Juerg A nice basic overview to read is: Adrenergic regulation of energy metabolism "Michael Kjoer and Kai Lange in : Sports endocrinology Edited by Michelle P. Warren MD ( Columbia University College of physicians and Surgeons New York and Naama W. Constantini MD : Ribstein Center for Sport Medicine Sciences and research, Wingate Institute Netanya Israel. 2000 Human Press Inc 999 Riverview Drive, Suite 208 Totowa, New Jersey 07512 |
