verkhoshhanksy vs TftUA

  • Creator
  • #33347


    In this book, Verkhoshhanksy states that “Interval training (should be) used after the preliminary preparation of slow twitch fiber through prolonged exercise at AnT.”

    See point 3 of page 6 at for the exact quote.

    However, in the TFtUA top of Z2 (eg. below AeT) is recommended for preliminary preparation instead of top of Z3 (the AnT).

    Could you help me understand why the recommendations are different ? Could that be because the two books focus on different distances ? eg. 10-20km vs. Ultra. Or maybe it has been found out that while training in Z3 works well to increase AeT, it has been later found out that too much fatigue is generated and people burn out ?



  • Inactive
    Anonymous on #33399

    Thanks for writing in and congratulations for being will int to dig in to Verk’s writings. They can be a challenge to pull all the pieces together. Something to keep in mind when reading the specific article you cite is that it is not the full picture. For a more complete description you should get a copy of his book “Block Training System for Middle Distance Runners

    In there you will find much more detail and depth of discussion. In it you will find a chart, part of which I have taken a screen shot of and attached below. In this screen shot the Left most box is labeled Block A, the middle box is Block B, and the right box is Block C.

    There you will see that he recommends that in Block A, the base building period he recommends training at the aerobic threshold to raise the running speed at AeT. This is the preparation block before moving on to the endurance training in Blocks B and C. Those are the block where he recommends adding extensive training at AnT.

    Why the discrepancy between these two documents?

    I have noticed this same thing before and can only surmise the following: This article is written in a Journal so was condensed. This article was aimed at elite running coaches who understand the role of aerobic base training for whose athletes have very well developed aerobic bases.

    If you read more of Verkoshansky you should pay special attention to his Anti-glycolytic Principle. In it he discusses the role of a huge aerobic base which reduces the role of the glycolytic metabolism to minimum. Recall form TftUA our description of the vacuum cleaner? Well that is describing this same principle.

    To fully grasp the training methodology that we, Verk, Canova, Magness and others propose you must understand that this aerobic base training is supportive training for the endurance training. This concept is explained at length in TftUA as well.

    I hope this helps.

    Anonymous on #33655

    Further to what Scott said, you may also want to check out Verk’s SST manual for coaches. Near the beginning of the book, he describes that the methods therein were developed because Soviet athletes had reached the maximum amount of base training that they could do. Without more hours in the day, there base building was capped, so other methods needed to be developed to continue their progress.

    What came after was on top of a huge base, not instead of it.

    l.tregan on #34383

    Thanks Scott & Scott for the clarifications.

    To add to the confusion, it seems AnT has been used inconsistenly in the past. In ‘lactate thresolds concepts’ (Sports Med 2009; 39 (6):469-490) it is said that:

    “In 1979, Kindermann et all. introduced the concept of aeroic-anerobic transition (…) and called it AnT. This term has since been used for varios LTs, particularly those with a different physiological background”.

    Verkhoshhanksy’s articles even sometimes use “ventilatory AnT” – which I guess is what we would call AeT today.

    Glad you guys went through all that and made an easy to read book ! 🙂


Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • The forum ‘General Training Discussion’ is closed to new topics and replies.