Building the Aerobic Engine with Dr. Øyvind Sandbakk

Dr. Øivind Sandbakk: The most important thing you do with an athlete is to sit down, understand the athlete. The second most important leader is to not follow the training program 100%. Because you constantly need to adapt.

Steve House: Quick pause before we get back into this conversation. If you want the structure and accountability of working with coaches and other athletes, training groups is where a lot of people start. With training groups, you get your training plan, live workshops, live Q&A with our coaches, and a community of athletes, all training for similar objectives. Plus, you get the new uphill athlete dashboards. The dashboards are designed to explicitly answer three questions. What do you do next? What is the highest leverage improvement you can make to your training? and show you that you’re getting fitter by our continuous aerobic threshold measurements and monitoring. Join us at uphillathlete.com/training-groups. And now, let’s get back into this interesting conversation.

Steve: Welcome to “The Uphill Athlete Podcast.” I’m your host today, Steve House, and today’s conversation is one I’ve been looking forward to for a long time because my guest is someone whose work has deeply shaped my way of thinking about coaching and endurance training.

Dr. Øivind Sandbakk is a professor at the Norwegian School of Sports Sciences and the director of the School for Elite Sports, both in Oslo, Norway. He’s become one of the leading authorities in the world on endurance physiology, and his research has been central to the fact that the Norwegian cross-country skiers have been dominating their sport, especially in the last Olympics, but also in the last couple of decades.

His work is interesting ’cause it sits at the intersection of science and real world coaching, which is exactly the reason that it really caught my attention so, so intensely. I first came across Øivind’s research about 20 years ago. At that point, I was a young professional alpinist and searching for training models that were grounded in actual data and, and actual coaching experiences of elite endurance athletes.

And I had looked at a lot of different systems, but when I found the work coming out of the Norwegian endurance research community, it really clicked for me. These were scientists who were embedded with world-class coaches and athletes, and studying what actually worked and trying to tease out the, the why.

But the thing that really changed my relationship to this research was when I started coaching about 10 years ago and began building the training systems that eventually became Uphill Athlete, and I then went back to Øivind’s work and the Norwegian School’s work with kind of new eyes, ’cause I wasn’t reading it just as an athlete anymore.

I was reading it as someone trying to solve real world coaching problems, how to build aerobic capacity in mountain athletes, how to structure training volume for people who don’t have 25 hours a week, how to help athletes be patient with a process that sometimes take, well, most of the time takes years.

And his research gave me a framework for all of that. So today, I really want to get into hearing how he ha- thinks about these things, and hear it straight from the, the researcher’s mouth, as you will. Øivind, welcome to the show. It’s really an honor to have you here.

Dr. Sandbakk: Thank you. Thank you. And thanks for the nice introduction

Steve: How did you end up in endurance science and where, and specifically where you landed, which seems to be between kind of research and coaching? That’s a, a u- an unusual spot. Most people seem to go fully into the coaching direction or more into the pure research direction

Dr. Sandbakk: I was, um, you know, I, I grew up as an endurance athlete. I was doing first athletics and then, uh, running and then, uh, then cross-country skiing. So, um, so I tried my best to become the best cross-country skier in the world. That was my, dream. I didn’t achieve that, but I was, was allowed to compete, uh, on a high national and international, level.

So, so I could train with the, train with the best skiers in the world and, um, and learn from them and, uh, also try to reach that level myself, and I could compete against the best ones in the world. So, so I, I learned a lot, although I ne- I didn’t reach my dream. I became pretty good and, um, and, um, yeah.

Also, when I, when I finished, um, of my crew athletes wanted me to coach them, uh, when, uh, they were my training partners and then wanted me to become a coach and to help them reach their goals when I retired myself.

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: I went into the coaching world and was, was allowed to work and coach some of the best, some of our medal-winning skiers,

Steve: Mm-hmm

Dr. Sandbakk: another role that was, uh, I learnt a lot from.

And then, and then throughout that journey, uh, the Ski Federation and the Olympic Committee asked me to support with work where we, uh, looked into training and how the best athletes have been trained and tested in endurance sports over the, yeah, last 50 years. Uh, now this is 20, 20 years ago, but, uh, we started to dig into the past, but at the same time look into the future and see kind of where are we now, what can we learn from the past, and how can we try to, to meet future demands of endurance sports and, uh, and, um, and then, uh, train even better in the future.

So that, that was the start and at the same time, Federation and Olympic opened, challenged me to pursue a PhD.

Steve: Hmm?

Dr. Sandbakk: Uh, then we focused on sprint skiing,

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: which was physiologically quite interesting. Uh, repeated middle-distance races, uh, in skiing and, um, it was very little research done on it, so it was, uh, interesting to dig into the demands of sprint skiing and, uh, and how to train to a good skier.

So that was basically the start. So I kind of was rolled into being an athlete into coaching and then along the way doing some developmental work for the For the system and then doing a PhD at the same time. So I, um, as you understand, I, I had to work a lot the, uh, those times, but, uh, it was very, uh, interesting and, uh, and, uh, I felt that I could make a difference.

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: my way of contributing to, to make a difference in the world of sport

Steve: A little admission was I was a pretty, um, a fan. I, I was participating in cross-country ski racing in the US as a kid, as a teenager especially, and I had a poster of Gunde Svan, so I hope you don’t, uh, hold that against me, on my bedroom wall. But then I became a big Bjørn Dæhlie fan, so, uh, maybe I make up for it there following the, the Norwegians.

Dr. Sandbakk: Yeah, yeah. I’m, I’m a fan both of Gunde and Gunde and Bjorn, so I was,

Steve: Yeah, they are both amazing

Dr. Sandbakk: that we, we, uh… No, uh, Bjorn was one of the athletes that we, analyzed his training, his tests, and interviewed him and tried, tried to really understand the, the science behind his success

Steve: So what makes the Norwegian endurance training system different from how a lot of other people or countries have approached it? I’m thinking about the way you integrate the distribution of training intensity into long-term athlete development specifically. I think this training intensity distribution is, uh, something that really, um, confuses a lot of people

Dr. Sandbakk: Yeah, but I also think that people very often, uh, want to kind of– They ask me as, “What is the Norwegian method?” And I see that also some people write books and hold, uh, presentations about the Norwegian method and Norwegian model. And it’s kind of– And then it’s a typically it’s a training model. You have someone, a threshold-based system, and then you have someone who’s more the polarized training systems, which is very different, and both of them are Norwegian models with success. Um, but so I, I have a very different approach, um, to it. So if you ask me why, why have we done, good results on the endurance side in Norwegian sport? Um- I would start in a very different angle. I would say the first, uh, you have to do to, to, uh, build a good system, uh, for endurance sports is y- you need to, um, to, um, build knowledge.

You need to know what the best ones are doing because, uh, you can’t only look into intervention studies, eight, and 12-week intervention studies. You need als- i- in addition to understanding those mechanisms, you need to have an understanding of what has the successful one, what did they do?

Steve: Yeah

Dr. Sandbakk: and then not only one of them, but several of them, and how does it differ between sports so you can actually, um, have an, have an overall understanding of what have they done, and alongside the development of the sport, because the sport has changed a little bit, new demands comes in.

Steve: Mm-hmm

Dr. Sandbakk: to see how has the successful training changed. And if you get massive data of this, you can start looking at trends. So it’s not one… You don’t only look at the trends from one individual athlete, but from a system perspective, what they’ve done. So, order to do this, then you need a terminology because all…

I think one of the most smartest thing was, were done in the ’90s in Norwegian sport was to develop a terminology. zone system, there are hundreds of them out there,

Steve: Right

Dr. Sandbakk: in Norway there is only one, everyone has the same understanding of that intensity zone system. So

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: there is an intensity scale that everyone understands, and when the athletes start, um, uh, writing their training diaries, et cetera, they do it in the same way and with the same understanding, uh, basically.

So then you can actually trust the data. Then you can start having an understanding of what, what people trained. If, if you have seven different understandings of zone two, like there is out in the re- in the … If you look at Twitter, when they discuss zone two, they dif- they discuss seven different things. Um, but, but I think the advantage we have, we have this terminology, we have a intensity scale, we had a training diary system that was used across sports, and then you could start actually, uh, learning within sports and across sports, and then we also started to share that knowledge. So when cross-country skiing had success, with Christian Blumenfeld and these guys, they learned from skiing,

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: and built up their system, but then they wanted to push the limits further, so now- Now it goes all the way around that the skiers are then now learning and are inspired by, by Blumenfeld.

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: I, but I think 30 years of kind of, uh, this type of knowledge exchange with a common understanding of it takes, you start to both build up da- databases so you actually know it takes to succeed and the, uh, the, you share, constantly share and discuss, uh, knowledge around it.

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: for me the secret of Norwegian endurance sports and

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: at the studies we’ve done, they train very different in speed skating compared to triathlon or swimming or cross-country skiing. Even the, this intensity distribution is, is, um, is, uh, not the same. Um- Because, uh, and if you go in wi- within triathlon, for example, then in cycling and running, in cycling you have quite long, you, you, you do longer, uh, training sessions. In running a little bit shorter. that at low intensity you go a little bit higher in the zone in running compared to cycling when you can do longer because it’s less mechanical load. Uh, the, uh, quite threshold-based, I would say, uh, the, the more intensive training. But if you go to swimming, it’s, uh, is very little threshold. It’s more polarized. You go a little bit low and work on the technique, and you go quite high on the high intensity. That’s, and, and that’s, um, means that you have three different modes, and you train those three different modes in three different ways due to the constraints of the modes. Uh, and in swimming it’s because you need a fast start. You need to fight in the start. You can’t pace threshold in swimming,

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: or triathlete. You jump out in the water, you need to get into position, and it’s quite tough. It’s also quite short, and they’re not swimming enough to, to train a lot on threshold because their threshold zone is so narrow

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: compared to a swimmer who has a much broader threshold zone and can, can then train more safely, more threshold training. Um, so, so, then you see that you just need to analyze the demands of the sport, you l- including looking into how different, uh, exercise modes, uh, influence the way you can train in these modes. if you go into speed skating. The specific speed skating training on ice is, is only probably 15% of the training.

They do most of it cycling over. And, and when you are on ice, you need to sit so low because it’s high speed, you need to reduce drag, and you need to sit low. So on a muscular level, it’s impossible to do low in- low intensity and moderate intensity training. So you– almost everything you do is at quite high intensities just because of it will be high intensity for the muscles anyway when you sit low and reduce drag.

Steve: Yeah, yeah

Dr. Sandbakk: go on the bike and do the longer training. it’s the Norwegian model, the Norwegian system is, is not based on one type of intensity distribution, but it’s based on an understanding of the demands and then some common principles, because there are also some shared principles that you see, um, across sports that are interesting

Steve: Yeah. And I think, you know, one of the things that I was– I’ve done in the last years is try to translate these, what we know from conventional endurance sports that you’ve been talking about, and take those and, and look at mountain sports, which are, again, different, and look at the demands of those sports, whether it’s somebody climbing Everest without supplemental oxygen or somebody running the UTMB final.

Those are very different, uh, events from a, from a training perspective. And you, you know, once you start with those things. So it– That, that framework kind of, kind of clicks and, and, and makes sense. If we think about the long duration, um, athletes, ’cause that’s– we don’t have people out in the mountains, like crouching down to try to reduce their, uh, you know, their, their wind load on, uh, frontal wind load as they skate across the ice.

Uh, if we, if we kind of constrain ourselves to things like, I think cross-country skiing, especially the, the lo- not so much the sprint distances, but the classical long distances and the marathons, those are much more like most of the mountain sports that, that we work with. If we– I accept that, like, you know, you have to start with sort of the requirements of the s- the given sport.

And let’s just shift, like, kind of to this, um, the timeframe and the patience that is needed to build that con- build appropriate endurance and how you think about this. ‘Cause when you talk about 30 years or 20 years of, of this kind of institutional knowledge that is going throughout cy- cycling through the endurance community in Norway, it’s also a p- a different timeframe, this idea of years of development.

And this is something that connects directly to the first question we get from almost every new athlete that we onboard as, as a coaching organization, is a question about, like, h- you know, how long is it, how long do I need to train for X event that’s, you know, some months out or some years out?

Dr. Sandbakk: Yeah No, I think, think, uh, if we start on the top level on, on training, because that’s what I say, if– then you can see across sports and I think, uh, cross-country skiing and, uh, and, and running and, uh, and especially in the mountains is, it has many common principles. But we, we see that, of course, in, across, um, across all sports.

What we’ve seen in Norway is kind of like, um, when you come to the highest level, all, all athletes that had success in Norwegian system had quite high volume of low intensity training.

Steve: Mm-hmm

Dr. Sandbakk: so, uh, a- and an overall high training volume. And of course, that differs across sports. If you go to the sports that trains least volume is of course road running, because it’s so high mechanical loading that you will get injured if you run

Steve: Yeah

Dr. Sandbakk: 200 kilometers a week or so.

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: and then you have triathlon on the highest level, which is, I think Kristian Blummenfelt, I think trains to 1,500 training hours a year. But you have three different modes to train on. Swimming and, and, and cycling is quite, um, um, it’s possible to train a lot there due to low mechanic loading. Um, then it’s probably if you run in the mountains, you are somewhere in between, uh, skiing and, and road running. Um, so low, low intensity training is, is normally kind of the basis for it, and you push those volume quite high and then combine that with two to three weekly, uh, I would say key workout days. And then, uh, in some sports, you, when you or ski short, a little bit middle distance to long distance, let’s say to 10– 5,000, 10,000 meters, you, you see sometimes they do these double threshold sessions and these type of, uh, of, uh, of, of… That instead of having one long workout, kind of intensity workout, you have one, you have– you split it into two shorter ones.

Uh, um, to s- you find different patterns there. You have the, the doubled threshold days. In swimming, you have double intensive days. So you have some days that are focused on the intensive, but normally that’s two to three days, um, a week. And then the other ways are built around getting, uh, high volumes of, of the low, low intensity training.

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: that’s the key. And then people have asked me, “Should I do moderate inte- or kind of threshold-based, or should I do high intensity?” think mo- mostly in our sports, you see that that changes a bit throughout the year. you go from building capacities to being more and more competition specific towards, uh, towards the most important events.

Steve: Mm-hmm. Yeah, we absolutely follow this, this model with our mountain athletes that you’re describing. When you say, uh, threshold, what are you exactly talking about? Are you talking about aerobic threshold, anaerobic threshold? And what does that mean physiologically to you?

Dr. Sandbakk: yeah, mostly when we talk in a Norwegian language is basically you can say that you train at threshold is normally as close to kind of the anaerobic threshold or lactate threshold or whatever you call it as possible. Uh, but then threshold training is normally that you are, uh, not above, but you are at and slightly below, uh, um, the, the lactate threshold.

Um,

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: And then of course, if,

Steve: Mm-hmm

Dr. Sandbakk: on the sport, in– for a cross-country skier, you go up and down and up and down, so then it’s more you’re a little bit above, a little bit below. It’s kind of depending on the terrain.

Steve: Right. Of course

Dr. Sandbakk: but in running, you can find a sweet spot, and you can stay there for a longer time, so that’s different. But, um, so I think one of the key aspect here is to, to, uh, to really optimize, uh, the quality of the training session, which means that how you control intensity, for example, and how, um, high load each session should have. Because if you, if you go all out, if you, if you are– i- if key sessions are too intensive, costs too much, it will accumulate load too much.

So you need kind of to find the balance between having intensive sessions, uh, but still allowing to repeat those intensity sessions with high quality often enough, and also allow tr– hi- high training loads to accumulate. So I think intensity control and having control of the total load recovery balance, things you need to, to be very aware of in order to,

Steve: Yeah. And I think this is so much of what we do as coaches, right? Is, is find, help athletes find that sweet spot because it’s very hard to do objectively for yourself to, to, uh, to keep track of. ‘Cause everyone’s a little different, right? In what, what they can, what they can handle for, for various, for their training load and the d- the density of that intensity or those key workouts is, is highly variable in my experience

Dr. Sandbakk: No, I agree. I agree. I think that’s, um, probably the most important thing you do as a, a coach is to… Because if you, if you, if you think about it, what, what is a training session? A training session is the signal that you send to the body, uh, that tells the body to adapt to that specific signal, and then you need to send high-quality signals. Uh, you need to get the most out of each training session, so you’re really aware of what do I– what signal do I want to give the body today? So I think too many people, they set up a training program, and they are very into kind of just follow the training program. But I think a good coach helps their athletes to think for every training session, what is the intention of this training session?

Steve: Yeah.

Dr. Sandbakk: signal do I want to give my body today? And then you do whatever you ca- wha- everything you can to, to give the body exactly that signal, and then you need to be aware of kind of, okay, it doesn’t help to kind of just accumulate load. We also need to recover, so we need to find a load recovery balance.

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: the body as, as many sessions or signals as possible, the same time ensure that we can adapt to those signal and build the body stronger and stronger and stronger.

Steve: Yeah, exactly

Dr. Sandbakk: say that the most important thing you do with an athlete is to sit down and, uh, and, uh, understand the athlete and the demands of the sport and make a good training program. The second most important thing you do is to not follow, uh, the, the training program 100% because you constantly need to adapt. Because you need to constantly work to get that signal a little bit better and to balance the load recovery balance because they are not machines, they are humans of flesh and blood, emotions and challenges and good sleep and bad sleep and whatever it is.

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: optimize the adaptation from the signal, need to take the consequences. So without losing track of your goal, uh, you, you do these small adjustments and you take the consequences. So instead of having the goal of performing the training plan, you have the goal, you s- you move the goal to having the goal of optimizing the adaptation

Steve: Yeah. Yeah. I mean, this is the art of coaching in a nutshell, what you describe here. I think it would be useful to keep defining some of our terms. As you mentioned, you know, one of the great things that Norway did 20, 30 years ago was define the terms, everybody was consistent. So I wanna understand when you say aerobic base or aerobic capacity or, or building capacity, what you’re actually talking about physiologically.

What physical metabolic adaptations are those training states trying to build? Are we talking about slow twitch fiber development, mitochondrial density, f- fat oxidation? What, what is the– what is go- what are you– how are you thinking about the

Dr. Sandbakk: The physiology. Yeah, um, think you need to start in the right direction there because first I just, I normally start with asking what are the demands of the sport? And if you, i- if we can use cross-country skiing as an example there, what, what is that? Uh, that is basically, uh, going through a varied terrain.

You have an elevation profile, and then you ski with arms and legs. Uh, you, you, it’s whole body exercise. Um, and then sometimes you use the legs more, sometimes the upper body more, and sometimes kind is more full whole body exercise. Uh- And then, and then you, you go from speeds from, yeah, meters per second to 20 meters per second.

It’s got a s- large speed range. Uh, and there i- it’s also a fluctuating metabolic demand. So on average, in a 10 kilometer, you’re probably 95% of VO2 max, I will say, as a, as a, the oxygen demand, uh, on average throughout 10 kilometers. But then you fluctuate from 150, you have quite high anaerobic loads, uh, down to 40 in some downhills,

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: of VO2 max. Because what you do there is basically to recover and try to reduce drag and, and, uh, snow ski resist- resistance, um, uh, while skiing downhill. So it’s kind of, it’s a fluctuating sport. It’s, it’s a interval-based sport, so it’s from a speed perspective, from a power perspective, and from a metabolic perspective, a constant fluctuations and change in, in the demands. Um, and then you change between different sub techniques, which is technically challenging. Um, and then, then you can d- from there on, you can go in and say, “Okay, uh, when you work at close to VO2 max, uh, on average, it’s probably smart to have a quite high VO2 max in that sport.” So that’s something you just need to, have in order to, to ski fast.

But at the same time, when you, when you change terrain all the time, it’s the VO2 kinetics. You need, you, it changes. VO2 goes up and down and up and down, so, so the ability to quickly

Steve: Yeah

Dr. Sandbakk: changing demands, uh, is important, but also the ability to, uh, have a quite high lactate threshold where you kind of, uh, uh, avoid getting fatigued, um, uh, at least you delay it.

The higher it is, the more you delay. So the combination of these factors is, is important, and then the ability to combine that with, with anaerobic metabolic energy in the, in the, um, the uphills, especially in the uphills, uh, and then recover in the downhills. So you also have the ability to produce and recover energy metabolically.

Um, metabolically, yeah. So, so that’s, um- That’s the metabolic demands that you need to handle. And then of course, you need a good technique. You need to s- ski efficiently. It’s not enough with energy. You also need to transform that energy into speed, which means that work economy ef- efficiency i- is, is important.

And then of course, you have the fourth factor that we talk about, the, the resilience, the fatigue resistance, and the abi- it’s not enough to go fast in one uphill, but need to repeat that throughout the entire race and hopefully have the– If you have a, high VO2 max in the first uphill, you have the same VO2 max in the last uphill.

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: So, but this you see in all sports. In marathon, for example, we all know that, um, it’s, uh, you have probably, especially your economy will reduce throughout the race, whereas the best runners, they are able to maintain it, so they have a better resilience or fatigue resistance. So, so then balancing these factors, uh, I think are, are, uh, are, are key to, um, to succeed.

Steve: Mm-hmm. Yeah, so how do you think about that physiologically in, in terms of, you know, developing a capacity or a base for an athlete? What do you– Like let’s, let’s set aside technique and some of these things. You know, all these sports that we do in the mountains are, I think, quite analogous to cross-country skiing.

They’re just longer, you know, but they’re, they’re, they’re varied terrain. You’re carrying a backpack. There’s a high technique component for climbing and, and also for like descending as, as a trail runner. So I, I think there are a lot, enough parallels. So if we go to the commonalities, the physiology, um, that’s what I wanna understand, uh, how you think about that and hear your thoughts there.

Dr. Sandbakk: I, I normally, it’s kind of when I, when I analyze a cross-country skiing race, uh, I would normally go in and see where do you win time, where do you lose time compared to your competitors and compared to what we think is optimal. Um, and then, and then at the same time you have an overview of the capacity.

You know, the VO2 max, the thresholds and these things. So you both look… That’s why I started with saying that you need to look at the race because where are they losing and, and gaining time to compare to, uh, what is optimal, and at the same time having an understanding of these capacities. And then from there on you do some kind of gap analysis and then you prioritize, kind of.

We put a little bit– see that you lose quite a lot in the, the longer uphills. Uh, at the same time, your VO2 max, uh, it’s not optimal. It should be s- probably should be a little bit higher. Then let’s, okay, let’s try to prioritize that and then how can we… we know that at least you need, you need, um, enough stimuli at quite high intensities, and then we need to evaluate is it enough to, do you respond enough on typical threshold sessions?

Should we increase that a little bit, or do we also need to put in some extra high intensity sessions to, to target, uh, your VO2 max a little bit extra in the upcoming time? Um, and then at the same time, you need to be aware that you don’t lose anything because maybe the strength is to good on, on, uh, shorter, th- your kinetics and up and down and handle the anaerobic energy.

That’s your strength, so we need to kind of balance that out so that when we prioritize this VO2 max development a little bit extra, the ability to go fast and a little bit longer uphills, then we just need to ma-ma-make sure that we don’t lose your strengths, that we can also maintain those. But we tone it a little bit down because in the end, you, if you do more of something, you need to do less on something else. That’s the balance of training. Then you need to balance that out so that you maintain your strengths but still develop your weaknesses, and then we evaluate along the way. Then it comes in that you try to measure this, you control it. You, uh, you are in the lab now and then and see how things evolve, but you also have regular training sessions where you actually have standardized profiles of those sessions and you know exactly from a weekly basis how things are moving. You don’t have to wait three months to see if you improve. You can actually see the tendencies week by week. Then you have a good system. You use the physiology, you use the demo- the competition analysis, made some strategies that you believe in, and then you systematically track how they, how you progress.

And if you don’t progress, you need to make a change.

Steve: Yep

Dr. Sandbakk: so I think that’s, um, that’s a good way of working with it.

Steve: So h-how disciplined are the elite athletes that you’re working with about staying below their aerobic threshold heart rate when that’s what the training is prescribed? Do they also struggle with that and wanna bump it up into the higher intensities or is that just a recreational athlete problem?

Dr. Sandbakk: Oh, I think it’s a, you know, athletes, uh, are also humans like you and me. Uh, they… I think that’s what people, they often mystify and think that they do everything perfect. I think, you know, develop– What, what I say in, from a leader perspective, people say that development is messy, and it is. Uh, uh, it’s, uh, it’s, uh, they do mistakes, and need is to be close to them so that, um, you try to use every, every failure should be used to learn and to educate the athletes. And, uh, hopefully you have an honest discussion with them. So if they, if, if they fail, if things doesn’t go as planned, uh, if they do something stupid, they are honest with you and tell you exactly what they did. I think the worst thing is that athletes start telling the coach, uh, what they think the coach want to hear. Uh, what is important is that they are honest, and that as a coach, you also have a, you build a safe platform where they can, allowed to fail, they can be honest and say things as it is. And then, uh, then you have a platform for learning so that, um, you as a coach, you learn a little bit from success and from failure in the training process, and the athletes, um, uh, do the same

Steve: And the whole system you’re describing the last few minutes could, you know, you could take that template and apply it to, to running a small business like I do. You know, it’s like, you know, you want people to tell you the truth, not just what you wanna hear. How do they do that? They have to trust you.

They have to feel safe that they can voice a, a dissenting opinion or, or some– give you hard news or those kinds– or painful news, um, and that kind of thing. So, uh, there’s a lot of great parallels there. What tools are you typically using to determine aerobic threshold? Are you relying on lactate testing?

Uh, do you just, uh, look at doing analysis of their, their training data to figure it out, uh, where, where their, where their zones are on an ongoing basis? Um, tell me about that process.

Dr. Sandbakk: Yeah, it’s– I think you, you always, when you talk about testing, uh, need to start in the, in the, the right order. and you have some very simple things that you– For example, most athletes use a GPS watch and a, and um, and heart rate during their sessions, and that’s a continuous feedback that you get so you can see how you’re responding on a daily basis. Um, then you have a training diary. Uh, all athletes should have a good training analysis system, training diary, uh, which is, uh– for me, it has different purposes. Of course, it’s, it’s a daily debrief. So to sit down after every session to write down, okay, what did you do? What zones were you in? Ba, ba, ba. And how did it feel? How was kind of the, the perception of effort? How was, uh- Your, the quality of the session, uh, and you write some words of your, your, your feelings, uh, how you felt before, during, and after the session. This is a perfect debrief. It doesn’t take more than a minute or two, but it’s a very good debrief that you can do after each session, where it enables you to learn. it’s also a communication platform bec- because it allows your coach to f- to follow you closely, both what you write but also what you did.

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: and then in the, in the third, um, as a third factor, it’s a learning tool. If you– It’s, it’s easy to forget what you actually did, so you can learn from success, learn from failure, and also from a system perspective, you can of see the bigger picture.

Kind of, okay, here was a period of many athletes who didn’t succeed. Okay, what did we do then? Here was a period where we had a, yeah, progress, and what can we learn from that from a system perspective? So I think, that’s the basics. And then, of course, you, you, you track the medical conditions.

You have the daily bro- blood profiles. I think more and more endurance sports you should actually screen for both psychological factors, eating disorders, RED-S, these type of things, so you are sure that that is functioning. Have a yearly screening maybe. Viral infections, uh, how is your lung function? Uh, any tendencies towards asthma, which will limit you. So to have these… But then that’s more kind of an, as long as you’re healthy, it’s, it’s an annual thing, and then when you find something, of course, then you follow it closely. Um, and then, of course, you, you, from my point of view, you should, uh, you, you should have, um, have testing regularly, both on a mesocycle, uh, system where every second month or so you’re on the lab and you profile the athletes. Uh, but then on a daily basis or weekly basis, you have these standardized sessions where, where you can Yeah, as a warm-up and part of an interval session, you, you use the same treadmill or the same terrain so that you can see exactly how things are progressing during some specific sessions. And you can do that week by week, then you have quite good control over how things are evolving. And then, of course, you have these recovery and wellness measures like sleep and, uh, stress and, and, um, and, uh, recovery measures that, um, also, indicates how well you recover and respond to training. Um, so I think, yeah, this is kind of a, a system where you have some day-to-day parameters, quite simple, quite easy to track.

You do it every day as just– it’s just part of what you do. Uh, you don’t have to think about it. This is– should be normal. And then you have the mesocycle parameters that you track more regularly. And then, of course, the medical conditions you need to look at case– you have some yearly screenings or so, but then you track the things that are beneficial for that specific athlete

Steve: Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. How do you, uh, decide that the aerobic base building is for that season kind of complete for an athlete? Do you have some markers you look for or like a threshold or zo- you know, time and zone

Dr. Sandbakk: at your, to look at the overall picture.

Steve: Hmm

Dr. Sandbakk: then have some– of course, you have indications every day on training. In most sports, you, you, you actually see are they running faster on the intervals? How is the, is the heart rate and lactate levels at a certain, uh, intensity or speed? And then y- you get those… So as– if you’re close enough to the athlete as a coach, you can see that day by day how they are responding. And then you take them to the lab, and then I think in, in most cases, you look at the VO2 max, you have some kind of threshold indicator and maybe work economy. Uh, and if you’re interested also in, um, some strength measures, you might have, uh, one or two power tests. And it’s quite simple. Uh, but you need to integrate both what, what does the number from the lab say and what does, uh, what you see and observe and measure in training day to day, what does that say? So in, in total then you, you take, um, you have in- what I would call informed decision-making.

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: so, um, but then again, it’s, in my opinion, in the end, as a coach and athlete, you take, uh, most, uh, decisions by gut feeling.

Steve: Hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: it’s a very well-calibrated gut feeling, uh, because you have all these measures, and you have the tests, and you have these things. So when you take decisions, it is very well-calibrated. So

Steve: Yeah.

Dr. Sandbakk: it, and then you take a, uh, take, um, uh, decision together

Steve: Now we talk about the art and the science of coaching, right? And this is the, this is what you’re talking about, right? The integration of the, the hard signals, the numbers from the testing, and the, the, what’s it called, them soft signals, the, the, the comments, the tone of voice, the po- the athlete’s posture, like how their sleep was, all the other things, and, and us put that into, into something.

Something I’ve been working on and have developed and am working on getting it to athletes, um, our athletes don’t have access to testing very easily. Like, they don’t. They’re not professionals. Of course, there are labs, but it’s kind of, you know, not, not convenient to go to a lab. So we wrote some, some code and used our own internal dataset to build code that will look at their training and, uh, and suggest what their aerobic threshold is each we- each week.

So we get a once-a-week measure, and it just looks at their training, and doesn’t have to be all in the same, uh, terrain, or it could be in different terrain. And, uh, we’ll see, see how it works, uh, once we get it out in the wild with real athletes. But, uh, that’s been– that’s the kind of thing that, uh, it, this, this, this understanding where they’re at in their progression of aerobic development is a, a big, uh, pain point for, for our athletes because they’re mostly working professionals with jobs and families and kids, and then they also want to go, you know, do well in an ultra run or go climb a mountain in Himalaya or something like that.

So it’s

Dr. Sandbakk: I think this is, this is a good way of doing it. It’s, it’s exactly the same kind of just, like, uh, running myself. Uh, so I, I try to train a bit regularly both with the kids and myself. And, and of course I’m a, I’m a scientist, so I try to use my own principles. Uh, not because I have big ambitions because, but, but because it’s nice to get progression and results, uh, on what you, what you do.

And, uh, I have, uh, I, I, I’m basically testing myself at least twice a week. Uh, but it’s, is on my treadmill in the basement, uh, where I have different standardized sessions. And then based on those two sessions, I, I would say that I have a very good, uh, understanding of the progress or n- right now how much I, how much I lose. Uh, it’s simple, but it’s very systematic.

Steve: Yeah

Dr. Sandbakk: uh, and I think, um, I think, uh, it’s exactly the same pro- principles as a top athlete. Uh, the difference is I, I don’t go to the, to the– even though I have a lab, I could do it, but I don’t do it.

Steve: Right

Dr. Sandbakk: do it in my basement, uh, and it’s fun. Uh, so I think with simple measures you can work very well and systematic

Steve: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So interesting. So

I wanna talk a little bit about muscular endurance. I think one of the first places I understood m- muscular endurance was through the lens of cross-country skiing and double poling specifically, um, where the local muscular fatigue becomes a limiter before the cardiovascular capacity becomes a limiter.

And our athletes face something pretty similar in steep uphill terrain, whether they’re running or, or climbing. How do you see the mus- muscular endurance specific training interacting with aerobic capacity, and how do you, uh, think about the timing of adding muscular endurance type training, uh, within, within a program for an athlete?

How do you know they’re ready? And also, like, how do you know when it’s enough? Like, right, like, ’cause it’s muscular endurance, it can be a little addictive, and people wanna push it, and push it, push it, and keep going with it. But sometimes, you know, I mean, I think we both know that, you know, you can only kind of adapt to that for so long.

Um, how do you think about that as a coach,

Dr. Sandbakk: No,

Steve: as a scientist?

Dr. Sandbakk: I think it’s, it depends a bit on the sport, but I can, I can use some examples. Uh, for example, in, in cross-country skiing, uh, we of course know that, uh, uh, in, let’s say in skating, good leg work is really important. Uh,

Steve: Yeah

Dr. Sandbakk: a lot of the propulsion from the legs. And then, uh, but then you want to, you want to build that capacity, muscular capacity, uh, very specific. Um, and then And then, uh, what we, what we do there often is to, is to, uh, train, um, uh, without poles. You take away the poles and then you ski, uh, you go ski skating poles. So then the, your muscular or muscular load will be increased a bit. sometimes we work a little bit with lower frequency as well, so you just kind of push off, balance, push, balance, push, balance, push. And then you, you, you put quite a lot of load in different types of models, uh, uh, on the legs, uh, and you can work on it specifically. And I’ve also some on the higher level who kind of use a weight vest, uh, to do it, because then you can do it really specifically, uh, and you use different models. then before doing that, I think that type of training I would do anyway because it’s so important for the technique.

So skiing without poles is really technical

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: good thing. But, um, but if you put even more load on it, uh, and try to really kind of get muscular, uh, endurance out of it, then of course you need to be aware that it also costs a bit. So, so then, uh, if you put something on, you need to be aware of the costs and then see how you can, how you compensate it.

So, so, so that I would only do if I see that this is a limitation for this athlete. Uh, for another athlete it might be the upper body. So, so then I would rather take away, kind of not take away their skis, but, uh, make them double pole a bit more,

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: do double poling in uphills, for example. Um, or double poling with a bit lower frequency so that they can really have focus on the poling phase, a lower frequency. You can keep intensity a little bit down, but, uh, then, uh, then do different models where you, you work on, on, uh, on the upper body. So you do kind of a gap analysis. You see kind of what is needed and then, then you, do it, uh, s- specific to what you want to develop.

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: that, that’s how I think about it. So for me it’s, many people also in– It’s kind of is a typical question is that kind of do you, do you believe in low cadence cycling, for example? Now then you have, it’s one tool in the toolbox, but you use it when you need it.

Steve: Ja. Ja.

Dr. Sandbakk: Um, so you do ana–

Steve: Ja

Dr. Sandbakk: gap analysis, you see how well the athlete is responding to it, and then you use a certain tool trying to improve that factor

Steve: Putting on the lens of like talking to a motivated non-elite endurance athlete, you know, what is some– what is one piece of advice that, you know, I’m gonna put you on the spot here. What is one piece of advice about training and building aerobic base that you would give to somebody who’s a motivated non-elite?

I mean, we can use this lens of, of evaluation and, and, and, you know, what is the need of the athlete and where are their gaps and, and so forth, but most of them just want to get like fitter. What should they be thinking about? What, what are the, what are the basics that they need to cover?

Dr. Sandbakk: I think it’s, the basic is, of course, that, um, if you want to have better endurance, uh, the most important thing is you, is you train endurance. So,

Steve: Uphill

Dr. Sandbakk: And then it’s simple, simple, uh, uh, in, in my opinion, quite simple principles. Uh, if you want to improve your ability to, uh, to increase your, kind of, aerobic power, uh, you need to breathe a little bit and increase intensities.

You n- need to find some training sessions that can make you breathe quite a lot. Call them high intensity. Maybe, maybe you do a hybrid. You start on, well, on a threshold base, and then you build up intensity, and you have a good intensive session, a week. So I would, I would start with that, and then learn to do it. to build it up so that you get, get the right intensity, that you can it in a good way, and maybe stop, stop before you have to stop. Because then if you, if you, uh, s- you, you, you, uh, you could have done one or two intervals more but you don’t do them, then you recover much quicker than pushing the last ones or going all, all out on the last one.

But doing it har- comfortably hard, uh, uh, and then in a way that, um, where you want to do it again. You don’t, you don’t, uh, regret doing it, uh, and you don’t, uh, wait too long to next time to do it. So I think start with having some regular, uh, sessions where you breathe quite a lot, and then learning to do the more easy work, uh, easy, moderate, uh, intensity sessions where you can gradually increase the length of it. Um, maybe starting a little bit shorter trips, but then when you, kind of, get fitter, you can do them longer, you maintain the same, same internal intensity. then, and then throughout, let’s say, those two type of sessions and maybe a strength session where you have– are aware of so you don’t get injured, uh, injury prevention, and maybe you have some weaknesses that you want to strengthen, uh, in your technique. So then you build up the program around having, trying to have one or two more threshold high-intensity sessions where you can really breathe and have good, good, uh, good quality of them as the core. Then you build volume around these add, uh, strength and injury prevention– preventive sessions, uh, when it fits you.

And then it– of course, you need to balance the load so that you, all the time, ev- every, every week, you should be recovered and look forward to the next week. I think it’s, uh, you shouldn’t be on the limit. You should have some, uh, some, uh, energy th- that, um, allows you to To enjoy training and you look forward to the next training week because then it’s sustainable and if you do it over longer times, then you, you, uh, you, uh, will get the continuity and, and, uh, that’s what counts in the long run

Steve: Yeah. Yeah. And, you know, so how long does it take for– w- like, this is, this is always the, the question, like, how long does it take to fully develop aerobic dev? W- how long does aerobic development actually take when you– Are we talking years before the peak? Is it 10 years? I’ve heard different numbers thrown around.

How do you answer that question?

Dr. Sandbakk: no, yeah, it’s, it’s kind of, uh, I’ve seen data on, uh, endurance athletes who have peaked their VO2 max at the age of 30, 35. I’ve seen others who peak at 20, and then there’s other factors that develops. I think it depends a bit on how you train as a youth and, and how that goes. But uh, in all factors, you, at some point, things starts to plateau. That’s what we see on most training studies that you, you see in research is, is basically, uh, about, uh, it’s, it’s short term. Uh, you, I would say you, you optimize a certain factor and then you get progress for a few weeks on that factor, and if the studies continue longer, you would see a clear plateau on that factor. Uh, and then, and then, um, that’s why most training studies, you see an effect on what you train, uh, for a certain time period. But in the real world, you need to train all these different factors, and then you put more emphasis on, on low intensity for a period. You go more over to threshold-based focus, and maybe then you go take in the more high-intensity stuff. you just, you do, you, you do everything, but you take– a little bit more on that, and when you then change focus, you need to take a little bit down, but then you maintain that factor while developing that factor. So, so, uh, and if you do that, you can progress for quite a long time, until you Yeah, taken out your potential with that training model, but then maybe you should– th- then I would often, if I see that, ah, you don’t progress anymore, you’ve done the same for several years, it’s kind of development stopped, then I would start tweaking with the training and say, “Okay, we should then actually for a period just take down the high-intensity stuff quite a lot and increase volume and see if you just peak on volume, do you then get an extra, extra peak just by doing something a little bit extreme?”

But then I would wait until they start plateauing on kind of developing all factors. Or should we paradise the training a bit different? Should we, should we change the, training model? Instead of training more, uh, the same every week, maybe we should have a very easy week and then peak one week, so you can push the load and then take the volume down.

Then you push the load a bit more and take it down. Um, so you need to tweak a little bit around with training and see if you– if there is something extra that you can get, get out of it. And

Steve: Yeah

Dr. Sandbakk: some cases, if you trained a lot over many years, it might even be beneficial to train a bit less. So maybe if you trained on the limit for too long, actually taking training down with 20%, uh, and having more energy and, and, uh, you being more recovered for the session, then you increase the quality a little bit of the sessions and recovery, and that is what enables you to take the next step.

But then it’s, it’s the art of coaching. You just need to– And then at least I believe most athletes can have, uh, develop their ar- parts of their aerobic system until they’re 30. Uh, that’s my hypothesis.

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: uh, you– most athletes are not on top before they are 30, if, if they stay healthy and injury-free

Steve: Yeah, yeah. Yeah, and that was something that in– I was young in my, as a professional climber, and I’d been training for I think about a year and a half with a, like in a serious, like structured way. And then I learned that like, man, I, I could… I’m like eight and a half years away from my actual potential.

‘Cause I felt like a million bucks at that point, right? Like after the first one and a half years, I was like, “Wow, this is amazing. I’m like reach- I’m, I’m on a totally new level.” And then I, when I realized like, oh wow, I could, I could keep doing this for quite a long time, that was very eye-opening. And, uh, this long-term perspective is something I really talk to a lot of athletes about and try to engender in them.

Last question. What, what is next in your research or in your coaching that you’re excited about that’s, that’s coming up? What should, what should we watch for?

Dr. Sandbakk: I think, um, yeah, I think, uh, what we’re doing quite a lot on now is, um, looking more on, I would say, uh, developing of young athletes. Um, because I think it’s a lot of science on what the best ones are doing and how you train as a, as kind of a athlete. Uh, quite focused now on, uh, the upcoming generation and what kind of, what should you do as a youth and as a senior.

And also a little bit, only from a physiological perspective, but, um, but, um, also from kind of a psychological perspective because it’s, we’re basically developing hum- young humans. Uh, and, uh, in my philosophy it’s, um, of course, it’s nice if it comes a world champion out of it, but, uh, of all, you want, uh, to use sport as a tool to, so young people can champion their own lives. Uh, and hopefully if they champion their own lives, you can get, uh, one or two world champions in the long run. But I think that, that process of so many discussions on early specialization, late specialization, uh, multi-sport training, uh, specializing in one, uh, how high volume should you have? And then we have a society where maybe we need to train more, uh, at the young age because, because they are sitting on their mobile phones, uh, all the day instead of out playing, so you need to compensate that h- somehow.

And should that be more specific training in that sport, or should you kind of, do you need to facilitate more the, kind of the base training that, uh, happened spontaneously before?

Steve: Hmm

Dr. Sandbakk: I think it’s, in these type of areas, it’s so much also with the early specialization versus multi-sport. a physiological point of view, that is one thing. Uh, you can see the physiological development. You, you, you adapt specifically to what you give people, but in the end, you also need to make them stay injury-free for 20 years. You want them to have a good health and immune system throughout, uh, their career.

You want to build kind of a psychological, uh, capacity. Uh, so maybe multi-sport is good. Maybe doing some team sport in young age, uh, helps you to work closely with a coach and learn from coom- roommates. Being in a different endurance sports for a while,

Steve: Mm-hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: where you’ve maybe see, “Oh, shit, these, cyclists are doing this well,” and then you bring that competence into your, your other sport.

Steve: Hmm.

Dr. Sandbakk: um, I think there are, there are many aspects. It’s complex. I think doing diff- having different angles on young athlete development is, um, is really something, um, we need to, to get knowledge to a higher level.

Steve: Yeah, absolutely. I’ll look forward to learning more about it as your, as your work com- evolves and comes out. So thanks so much for your time. Your work has meant a lot to me as a coach. The principles that you’ve, you know, practiced and validated are the same ones we’re trying to teach every day here at Uphill Athlete.

Training below aerobic threshold, respecting aerobic base, trusting kind of this long arc of aerobic development, encouraging people to sometimes slow down so they can e-eventually go fast, and, and building for years, not weeks. These are the kinds of, uh, themes that we talk about all the time. So thank you for helping us get the science of endurance training right, and explaining how all this works for us, and really appreciate your time, and look forward to being in touch

Dr. Sandbakk: Thanks to you. And, um, good luck with your training, your coaching, and your business. So looking forward to following it

Steve: Yeah, likewise. Thanks so much.

Hey, real quick before you go. Everything we publish, the articles, new podcast episodes, and the live webinars are announced first in our newsletter. You can elect to receive between one and three newsletters a month. They’re written by myself and the coaching team. And if you want them, sign up at uphillathlete.com/letsgo. Thanks for listening and we’ll see you in the next one.