“Double Threshold” Workouts Vs Singles: Which Is Best?
Double threshold workouts are all the rage. They’re thought to be instrumental in the big successes of Norwegian runners like Jakob Ingebrigtsen, and also the country’s triathletes and nordic skiers.
Essentially, “double thresholds” mean two workouts (the same day) at/around tempo pace. They’re not easy runs, they’re not speed sessions. They’re in between--where athletes can gain a genuine fitness boost without the risking injury, excessive fatigue, and burnout.
But no one has tested this 2 vs 1 theory in a controlled trial. Until now. “This study represents the first attempt to compare acute physiological responses between different methods of organizing moderate-intensity endurance training, specifically contrasting one long session with the increasingly popular “double-threshold training” approach.”
The research subjects were 14 national class Norwegian skiers or runners, aged 18 to 35, who had been training hard for at least 5 years with at least 5 endurance workouts per week. In a cross-over design, each subject did both a single session of 6 x 10 minutes, or a double session of 3 x 10 minutes (one in the morning, another 6.5 hours later.) Both sessions were performed at the same intensity, roughly equal to the race pace they could maintain for one hour.
Main finding: The “one long” workout produced more stress (hence: more potential training gain) than “two short” workouts. On the other hand, it would also require more recovery, which must then be factored into upcoming workouts.
The stress came in measured amounts of things like heart rate, blood lactate and relative perceived exertion.
Also: “The lower cost of the two shorter sessions indicates that such organization could allow more accumulated time at this intensity.”
The researchers are astute enough to know that they answered several important questions, but can’t say which workout is better. That’s one for the coach and athlete to determine according to their priorities.
If you’re training for a marathon, for example, you might opt to focus on longer sessions. Or you could add extra time to both the morning and evening sessions without exceeding the stress of the one longer run. You might do 4 x 10 minutes in both the morning and evening, getting a total of 80 minutes at threshold pace with no more stress than a single 60 minute workout.
Or, if you’re aiming for shorter, faster races, you could run the double 3 x 10s at a faster pace than your 6 x 10s. This could improve your endurance speed without pushing you into true speedwork territory.
Conclusion: “These findings serve as a starting point to better understand the pros and cons of organizing moderate-intensity training as one long versus shorter sessions more frequently (“double threshold training”) in endurance athletes.” More at Frontiers in Physiology with free full text that’s well worth the read.
The 10 Worst Training Tips For Runners (Plus One Bonus)
It’s hard to resist a title like this. You pretty much have to check it out, and make sure you’re not committing any colossal training mistakes.
A bit of background: Megan and David Roche are top coaches in the ultra trail running community. Both are elite runners themselves. In fact, last weekend, David broke a long-standing course record in the Leadville Trail 100 Mile.
Both are very smart. Megan has an MD and PhD, and David a law degree. But he’d rather read physiology journals than legal case studies.
They’re also potty-mouthed, funny, mostly scientific, but also contrarian at times. On their popular Some Work, All Play podcast, they talk sexy, and eat lots of greasy hamburgers with fries.
They call this “food doping,” which is a joke, only it’s no laughing matter to them. Their strongest advice to runners? Eat more. Be sure to fully fuel your training.
That theme appears several times here in David’s list of 11 bad training ideas, including the emphatic, final one: “Don’t fuel your long runs.” Remember, he thinks this is a bad strategy.
I most like David’s bad tip # 3. It argues against the idea that there are certain “specific rules” you must follow in training. Not true. While there are important general principles, there are many different ways to train toward those principles. More at Run Outside.
What Shoes “Won” The Paris Olympic Marathon?
Who won the Paris Olympic Marathons? Yes, I know: Tamirat Tola and Sifan Hassan. Both broke the Olympic marathon on a super-challenging course.
And Hassan completed an amazing double-triple--the first ever in distance running. In Tokyo, she won medals in the 1500, 5000, and 10,000 (the latter two, golds). In Paris, she medalled in the 5000, 10,000, and marathon (gold).
But more interesting to many of us at home was the question: What shoes won the Olympic Marathons?
That title goes to the Adidas Adizero Adios Pro Evo 1 (whew, I’m in oxygen debt already), which retail for $500. The Adidas shoe took 3 of the 6 marathon medals, as well as a 4th and 5th.
The Nike Alphafly 3 placed second with a gold medal (Hassan) and a number of other top finishes.
I was most curious about the stack heights of the winning shoes, and their “drop” from heel to forefoot. Sure enough, all of the shoes pushed their stack height as high as the rules allow.
They stand from 39.5 to 40 mm high at the heel. Every company, it seems, wants to cram in the max amount of super foam. (World Athletics limits a shoe’s stack height to 40 mm.)
The drops ranged from 4 mm to 8 mm, with both the Adidas shoe and the Nike Alphafly 3 coming in at an 8 mm offset from heel to forefoot. Make of that what you will, understanding that the elites are paid to wear these shoes. Still, it’s instructive to learn what they put on their feet. More at Marathon Handbook.
“Bounding” Is Best Plyo For Ankles & Running Economy
A number of studies have shown that simple plyometric exercises (hops, skips) can improve running economy. They achieve this by increasing ankle power and leg stiffness. Here’s one such report.
A new paper aimed to determine which specific exercises would have the biggest effect on “foot and ankle biomechanics.” It did so by asking 17 long-distance runners to perform: normal running, A-skips, B-skips, bounding, and heel flicks.
While the runners did these exercises, the researchers measured a range of motions and power outputs at the feet and lower legs.
Result: The A-skip, B-skip, and heel flicks required less power than normal running. However, “bounding induced a higher positive ankle power than running.”
Conclusion: The findings from this paper could help runners and coaches to “select their running drills in an evidence-based manner.”
Note: New drills that might increase running power and economy could also increase risk of injury. If you’re new to plyometrics, especially “bounding,” start with the simpler, less-stressful stuff. Build up gradually. More at Sports Biomechanics.
Stay Injury Free With One Simple Guideline
Let’s face it: Runners get injured frequently, and no one totally understands why. Or what to do.
Fortunately, most running injuries are relatively minor muscle aches and pains that resolve quickly. Injured runners generally return soon to their preferred activity level.
Still, that doesn’t diminish the high number of running injuries, or the fact that some can turn serious. It’s the serious stuff that we all want to avoid.
Aiming to help, an Irish research team recently performed a “Scoping Review” (a broad overview) into the severity of running injuries. They believed this important because “The consequences of running-related injuries (RRIs) are far reaching, and can cause negative physical, psychological, and social outcomes; disruptions and time-loss from training; and significant financial cost (from time lost from work and the cost of medical treatments).” Indeed.
They reviewed studies that tracked 37,000 injured runners of average age 37, with a 55/45 male-female split. This effort revealed an unsurprising “lack of clarity on risk factors,” due to the “insidious nature” of injuries.”
Injury development often follows a pattern like this: “A runner sustains a lower severity injury to their knee; however, they continue to run. This lower severity injury causes a (subconscious) change in the runner's technique in an attempt to offload the injury at the knee. The runner subsequently develops a higher severity injury at their hip, forcing them to stop running.”
Sounds familiar? Me, too. So what can we do to change this disruptive behavior?
Recommendation: “Clinicians, coaches, and runners clearly need to consider lower severity injuries and their potential role in contributing to higher severity injuries.” Runners should stop “perceiving low severity injuries in a positive manner.” Pain and soreness are not an indication that you are conquering a tough training schedule. Rather, they indicate that you need to back off for a time.
Remember: These low severity problems “are true injuries with consequences that need to be addressed.” More at Scandinavian J of Medicine & Science in Sports with free full text.
Yes, You Should Consider Skin (And Hair) Cosmetics
Has anyone else noticed a new marketing trend in the running world? I’m talking about cosmetic products aimed mostly at female runners.
I first saw this at the Boston Marathon Expo in April. There, one of the biggest, most popular booths was selling hair tools for women. My wife tried the product, was dazzled, and is still using it 6 months later.
Olympians pay attention to their hair, too. Especially when they get free salon treatments in the Olympic Village.
During the Olympic TV broadcasts, we saw Neutrogena ads for Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone, and Olay ads featuring Sha'Carri Richardson. Last week the New York City Marathon announced that Maybelline would become its first “cosmetics partner.” The company’s senior vp of marketing said Maybelline was proud to champion “the endurance of our high-performance makeup.”
No, I’m not trying to promote cosmetics. Or to make fun of them. I’m simply introducing a new Run Outside article about “5 common skin problems” that runners encounter.
When I first started running in the 1960s, we only worried about blisters and jock rash. Now there’s much more to consider, and I suspect we’ll see more cosmetic products in the running marketplace. After all, healthy skin is part of a healthy body.
A recent scientific review of “dermatologic concerns” in runners focused on hazards of ultraviolet radiation, friction, and environmental conditions like heat/humidity that could increase blisters and runner’s nipples. More at Quality in Sport.
Want To Live Long? Try The Pole Vault
Many studies have shown that both elite athletes and recreationally-fit individuals enjoy longer, healthier lives vs the general population. A detailed new research project looked at the improved longevity of 95,000 “international athletes” (95% males) on a sport by sport basis.
And the winner is--surprise!--pole-vaulting. Close behind: gymnastics. These two sports led to the highest extension in lifespan--by 8.4 years and 8.2 years. The researchers believe the results may be attributed to “the aerobic and anaerobic characteristics of each sport, with mixed sports yielding the maximum benefits.”
Other sports clocked in as follows: mixed track & field, +5.7 yrs; sprinting, +5.3 yrs; rowing, +4.6 yrs; running, +4.4 yrs; cycling, +2.2 years; and swimming, +1.9 years.
Some sports had a negative effect on longevity. The worst was sumo wrestling at -9.8 yrs, followed by volleyball (-5.4), mountaineering (-3.8), and martial arts (-2.5).
U.S. football scored a +1.0, which was higher than soccer (+0.5) and boxing (-0.6).
Among females, more sports produced negative results than positive results. However, the sample size was small, so the researchers noted that results “should be cautiously interpreted.” More at GeroScience with free full text.
From Genes To Glory: How DNA Affects Your Performance
We all wonder if our endurance ability (or lack thereof) comes from our genes, our training, the altitude we were born at, or even our diet. When Alex Hutchinson looked at new twin-based research in this arena, he learned that flexibility had a higher genetic influence than other physical tests.
This didn’t surprise him. He remembered that, in third grade, he was the worst in his class at touching his toes. This early failure was clearly from genes--not from sloth.
A new twin study looked into the contribution of our DNA to specific physical performances. For example, genes contributed a lowish 52% to long jump ability. At the high end, genes explained 79% of success at a sit-reach flexibility test.
The 12 minute run-walk also came in high--at 75 percent. Happily for many of us, a low/modest score on one test doesn’t have much influence on others.
Hutchinson sucked at flexibility, but later in life almost broke 4 minutes in the mile. So don’t worry too much about your genetics. Do what you can with what you’ve got. And remember that you get many health benefits even if your half-marathon time isn’t what you’d like. More at Outside Online.
If you’re curious how your genes compare with some famous Olympians, Ancestry.com now claims to offer such a service. The company’s analysis showed that you need more than physical talent.
It says: “Mental toughness may be one of the most important factors in athletic success. AncestryDNA Traits showing likeliness to be competitive (88%) and have self-confidence (69%) showed up in the majority of champion athletes' DNA.” More at Ancestry.com
SHORT STUFF You Don’t Want To Miss
GREAT QUOTES Make Great Training Partners
After his DNF in the Paris Olympic Marathon, two-time gold medalist Eliud Kipchoge had his usual philosophical thoughts about life and running. He apparently thinks like both a boxer and a gardener. Impressive.
“Like a boxer, I have been knocked down, I have won, I have come second, eighth, 10th, fifth. Today I did not finish. That’s life. Sport is up and down--like a garden. When you plant seed, there is actually weeds and flowers. Today I harvested weeds.”
This reminded me of remarks made by Douglas Wakiihuri at the 1990 NYC Marathon, which he won. He compared the marathon to the beauty and prickly thorns of the rose bush: “The challenge of a marathon is like a rose flower. The flower is so beautiful but the sting from its thorn is so painful.” [Interpret as you will.]
That’s all for now. Thanks for reading. RLRH will not be published next week. You’ll receive your next edition on Sept. 5. See you then. Amby