@Colin, I didn’t write that, but I tend to agree with it. As has been written above, there seems to be little value into trying to nail down an AeT. That’s different than saying lab testing isn’t as good as other methods, as it is probably the best. Again, I think if you’re looking at lactate testing to help you nail down training zones to the gnat’s kitten there are better uses of time, money and energy. JMO.
ConMan
Forum Replies Created
Viewing 12 replies - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
-
ParticipantParticipant
I own a bsx insight. Their little program basically calculated my HR zones to be the same is if I used the formulas in TFTNA. I also bought a handheld lactate meter and my HR when coming off my baseline lactate value (2mmol/l) was a good 15 bpm higher than the BSX ‘algorithm’ pooped out. If you want to see how to use the BSX during workouts, their competitor, moxy, has the best information. It is somewhat interesting, not sure how useful it is. If you want to look how much I have used my bsx in the last 2 months my behavior would tell you it is not useful at all. It is probably more useful to monitor your base SmO2 and compare while working out to see if your muscle O2 drops and work into a HR that opposed to their ‘proprietary,’ wonky and unknown formula.
I just can’t expend that much energy during a testing week to run it twice, so I’ve landed on the lactate testing, which I would recommend. It isn’t without it’s flaws (E-11 errors, but I think I have that licked now), but I feel the data is a lot more reliable and the lactate.com people have compiled some very good information on how to use it, some science behind it, testing protocols etc.
ParticipantIf you all will allow, let me walk back some of statements regarding V4 (or exertion at 4 mmol/l). Many consider it, as Scott Semple said, to be the “anaerobic threshold.” It is confusing, at least to me, as the anaerobic threshold is a floor, while the aerobic is a ceiling. V4 is also known to be the general maxlass point.
But, what is important, is V4 highly correlates to endurance performance. So, if one does not desire to derive an aerobic threshold heart rate, but rather to use their lactate testing to measure their training program. Here is a slide from “the secrets of lactate.”
Little is lost by using V4 as a measure of aerobic endurance.
A coach or sports scientist can judge the endurance progress of an athlete just as effectively using V4.
V4 is a much simpler measure to get than the MLSS or estimates of it.
It is also an extremely reliable measure. (See Hopkins et al. “Reliability of power in physical performance tests.” Sports Med. 2001 vol 31:211-234)
I still contend that lactate testing is best used as a tool to look at the last period’s training and not to set a training level. If one desires to do so, these are methods I know of to estimate an “aerobic threshold” using a “standard” testing protocol: 1) Dmax, modified Dmax, 2 mmol/l, inflection point from 2 mmol/l, V4. There may be others. One helpful tool I have is a muscle oxygenation (Smo2) sensor. When looking to “stretch” my AeT, I use it to ensure SmO2 isn’t dropping.
Participant@Scott Semple,
I think we’re saying the same thing. In other words, a lactate test in itself doesn’t give you a single deterministic point (or points), but rather is a measuring stick. A couple other considerations, however….
1) I believe it was Mader who uses V4 as a “marker” for aerobic fitness. I’ll try and dig up the paper, but it will take a few days.
2) Also don’t forget Olbrecht uses a 1 point test. He has enough data for swimmers where he can input age, height, weight etc and 1 test point within like 2.5 to 6 mmol/l and he can produce a V4 number for you with a small amount of error. He then uses that number to determine one’s overall fitness and can build a training plan around that. Pretty amazing actually!
3) frequency of testing, Olbrecht says no less than 6 weeks.How all this works in my crazy head seems to at least make sense to me. But, what I do know, even many of the labs at universities seem to not offer up a lot other than a lactate curve. But, describing how to use that curve is their downfall, IMO. I’m basing this only on one person’s experience, and the fact that people are here asking similar questions. I do agree with the lactate.com testing protocol – test for V4 and then an anaerobic test – unfortunately, I haven’t seen a lab offer such testing.
ParticipantWith lactate testing trumping all, I would suggest you ditch the breathing scale of exertion, or whatever you want to call it. As you become more fit with slow twitch muscles efficiency gains, you can go on the aerobic system longer and harder, but your breathing can somewhat change. Your heart carries o2 to the muscles, but you need o2 in the lungs to feed the blood stream.
As far as the 2 mmol/L mark, that is the baseline for most people at rest. It is common to see a dip from that number at lower intensities. I don’t think using the “inflection point” to mark aet is the best, especially since it can move based on testing parameters. If one is truly interested in finding their aet with lactate testing, they should run a maxlass test which is time consuming, tiring and most likely expensive in a lab setting. I would guess that the 2mmol/l point is about as good as it gets in terms of aet in what is common testing protocol.
The 4 mmol/L being a marker for Anaerobic threshold, I am not so sure about. In fact, mader documented 4 to be an indicator of the aerobic system. That is different than saying anything above 4 is Anaerobic work, I haven’t studied that out, but for those with strong Anaerobic systems it is probably light. But most of those working solely on their aerobic system will have a weak Anaerobic system, so perhaps 4 is a good number?
Personally, I do a 2 point test to get my pace and hr at 4 mmol/L through linear interpretation. I then rest for 30 mins and run an Anaerobic test. I then use this to judge the efficacy of my training over the past period and to set goals for my next period. I set my aet based on how I feel. I inch it up slowly, monitor hr during sleep, active recovery and how I am feeling in relation to the work load. The testing 6 weeks or so later then verifies the adjustments I’ve made.
Finally, one should expect their Anaerobic capacity to decrease when mainly working their aerobic system. The opposite is also true.
I’m interested to hear Johnstons take on all this, as I asked many of these questions a week or 2 ago. It’s a complex subject, misunderstood by many, mastered by few….I’m far from a master and only a novice, but I drink from the Olbrecht cup when it comes to lactate testing and I am still learning…
ParticipantI think this conversation should happen in the context of how fit you are. Certainly, anything is better than nothing, but if you’re having a hard time staying below your “threshold” hr number, the stroll will benefit your aerobic system more than if you’re able to pump out 15+ hrs of training to per week. But, I find the more in shape I get, the more I welcome these strolls. It helps on the recovery front, which I’m trying to sort out if the muscles’ clearance ability is a somewhat separate and trainable quality. Some say it is. If it is, do these strolls help train your body’s clearance ability?
That’s the long way of saying, it helps and depending on your fitness, it helps in different ways. I got my 3 yo to run the mile we walk together, not because I asked, but because she is a crazy girl. And now the 5 yo follows suit. And when it warms up, I’ll carry the 15 lb baby as well to “stress” the system a little more. If you don’t think it is that beneficial to you, maybe think of some ways to stress your body a bit more…
ParticipantScott, I hope you don’t see my comment as a jab. I would hate to be tasked with boiling down the physiology for everyone to understand. Certainly, your guys’ book has done more for the “sport” than anyone else will do in a lifetime.
BY the way, olbrechts book is available on Kindle via Amazon. I got my hard copy from lactate.com. But, I have found olbrechts book to be easy understand at times,.especislly the physiology part and how both systems work together, but training one alone will leave the other in tatters. Hence, the reason the lactate. Com testing protocol makes sense to me by doing both an aerobic test and an Anaerobic test. It is certainly interesting and I’m patiently awaiting your take on it.
ParticipantScott, I think that is great that you guys will more or less move on from the max HR and % zones in a future edition (at least that is how I read it). I know it is hard to completely ditch them, but there are much more sophisticated methods which I wouldn’t consider to be that expensive relative to the amount of time sunk into training, the cost of trips, equipment etc.
Assuming the above is hinting at lactate testing, I would also hope there would be some additional material in relation how to use lactate testing. I’ve found the spectrum to be wide from “freds” wanting to just know their “anaerobic threshold” and train above that, to people using 4 mmol/l as the aerobic cut off, to some using 2 mmol/l as the aerobic threshold to some labs suggesting HR below the 2 mmol/l HR number to Olbrecht mainly using it as a marker(s) for the efficacy of the training period (meaning, one test means nothing, you need multiple tests, and you need time to figure out what is working).
In other words, it would be nice to have your take on how to APPLY the testing results. I personally looked at a CU physiology lab report and found it leave a lot of questions (mainly posed from the person who shared his information with me). I think after reading Olbrecht’s book and the “secrets of lactate” material from lactate.com, they have much better information on how to apply the testing and its results.
ParticipantIt should be noted, when it is very cold and you take your first few breathes, it is quite common to choke or cough on that breath. Growing up in Minnesota, I would also feel the hairs in my nose “freeze.” But if it persists, that is something of concern. My symptoms were never being able to feel like I could take a deep breath (which I often attributed to being at altitude, or at least a bit higher than what I normally live at), a dry cough which I felt I needed to clear junk from lungs, but never could and in extreme cases, a wheeze even in a completely relaxed state.
I’m not a doctor nor do I pretend to be one, but as Scott pointed out above and after talking to many of my outdoor buddies, prolonged discomfort in the lungs (especially when trying to keep your HR down) is not typical and probably something worth having a conversation with a physician about.
ParticipantOne issue I had for years was I would get a wheez and a dry cough when it was cold. I started to first notice it after a day of skiing. Then, I noticed it during the summers when I would go up to altitude and it was cooler out. A year ago, after watching Brett Maune have another unsuccessful CO 14ers speed record attempt due to exercise induced asthma, I went into the DR. I also had just spent a day skiing about 45,000′ of vert and I was having a very difficult time breathing while laying on my living room floor. I was diagnosed with “bronchospasms” and given a script for albuterol. I’ve taken about 50 “hits” off the inhaler in about a year, so I use it very little. But, it makes a world of difference when I need it. I’ve found that I don’t really need it regardless of temp on my aerobic workouts. But, I only train at about 6000 ft. I hiked Pikes Peak last week, and started with some albuterol. Now it was cold at the top, and my HR was up, but I was also getting blown around.
That’s the long winded way of saying, if your lungs hurt when it is cold out and you’re exercising, a trip to see your physician is probably wise.
ParticipantI’m curious what you’re trying to achieve? Based on “the book,” muscular endurance refers to mainly training your anaerobic endurance. to me, this would mean some sort of interval training for your goals. In your case, I would run intervals of stairs, just to be able to control some things a bit better. Rest should be long and passive. Depending on what you want to do, you may eventually work up to that 3000′ slope where you burn up it in an hour or 2??? But, zone 2 is not where you want to train.
Another word of caution, over stimulating your anaerobic endurance will cause your aerobic pace to drop if you don’t bring your aerobic endurance along with the anaerobic training.
ParticipantConMan on December 24, 2016 at 8:27 am · in reply to: Overtraining is in sight….what to do now? #3738Many opinions are out there in the physiological exercise world, but one of the few unanimous points is that over training is a big no-no.
If one is benefiting from rest days or rest weeks, they are almost assuredly overtraining. If you’re overtraining, you should back off immediately. Certainly, you’re not harvesting any beneficial gains.
I monitor my heart rate 24/7, and I can usually tell based on increases in my resting heart rate, combined with how my body feels when I am overtraining. In fact, just last week I saw my resting HR climb significantly and I returned home from work after lunch ill, and went down for 2 more days after that. Any inkling that I am overtraining or becoming sick I immediately back off.
One final point about training “zones.” It’s been 1.5 – 2 years since I first read the House/Johnston book, and I finally just bought my first lactate testing unit. It’s silly to avoid the $400 based on what is spent on gear alone, but when you add in trips, it certainly pails in comparison. I know we all have different budgets and not all would look at it like I do, but adding in some quantitative data can only help your training program (assuming you can figure out how to correctly apply it, I would recommend Jan Olbrecht’s book as well). The point being, working off HR zones is better than perceived exertion, but if you find yourself questioning if you’re overtraining, I would back some things down.
Good luck.
Viewing 12 replies - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)