November 16, 2023

Agreement at last! Everyone swears by this great half-marathon workout

A training question on Reddit yielded a flurry of eager answers. But that’s not what makes this link interesting.

It’s the fact that most of the respondents largely agreed with each other. Instead of favoring dozens of different workouts, they seemed unified in their approach. That says a lot, I think. A simple key workout is producing good results for a lot of runners. 

Okay, enough beating about the bush. Here’s the question: “What’s your favorite half-marathon workout?” That’s a good one, as the half-marathon is such a popular race distance, and the universal stepping stone to a top marathon.

To assess the full range of responses, you should read the below link. But if you only want my executive summary,  here it is: Run 3 x 2 miles at half-marathon pace with several minutes of recovery walk/jog between the 2-mile repeats.

Why is this workout so successful? Because it’s tough but do-able. It will definitely help you prepare for an upcoming half marathon. It’s also a great one to include in your training arsenal as you get ready for any race distance. More at Reddit Advanced Running.

Are super gels more important than super shoes? 

The sodium bicarbonate story has been simmering just below the news headlines for a year or longer, nearly invisible against all the super shoes buzz. But it exploded last week with an excellent, deep story by Jonathan Gault at LetsRun.com. At the same time, I’ve heard other marathon experts say they believe the revolution in super gels is boosting marathon performance more than super shoes.

Gault reported that a Maurten sodium bicarb mix has been widely used by elite runners at the On Athletic Club--it’s a legal mix, to be clear--by Kelvin Kiptum in his 2:00:35 marathon world record, and possibly for several years by Norwegian middle distance ace Jakob Ingebrigtsen. (The Ingebrigtsen camp refuses to confirm or deny the rumors.)

Maurten itself claims that two-thirds of all medalists from the 800 through 10,000 meters at the 2023 Worlds used the new product (not including steeplechase runners). Maurten’s hydrogel formula was earlier supported for its ability to allow runners to consume more carbs without gut distress. (See next item). Now the company is suggesting the same for hydrogel and sodium bicarbonate. 

When Gault questioned a number of athletes, he received distinctly mixed responses. Almost everyone said they felt some kind of “weird” when using the bicarb, but sometimes the weird seemed to help them run fast. Several mentioned the well-known stomach distress, but said, given the coming Olympic year, they would probably keep experimenting. 

On Athletic’s coach, Dathan Ritzenhein, and coach agent Stephen Hass said most international mid distance runners have tried the bicarb system, which is believed most effective for racing efforts of 2 to 5 minutes. There’s no clear biological reason why a marathoner would benefit from it, but Molly Seidel also supposedly used it at Chicago, where she ran a personal best. 

Scientists like Canadian endurance nutritionist Trent Stellingwerff say they aren’t ready to back a bicarb approach, because there’s no solid research to date that supports it. Here’s the full LetsRun story.

Alex Hutchinson got into the discussion back in March in a story at Outside Online. Like the LetsRun article, it notes the use of Maurten’s bicarb product by Jonas Vingegaard, winner of the last two Tour de France events. That certainly points toward an endurance application.  

Lastly, here’s an auto-generated transcription of a 72 minute podcast with Dr. Jason Siegler, who seems to be the leading research expert in the field. I’ve put it on a website I’m calling RLRH Notes.

The secret of fast marathon running: Consuming mega carbs en route

Sodium bicarbonate might be the next new thing, but so is basic in-race fueling with carbohydrates. Not so long ago, runners were advised to consume at most 30 grams (120 calories) of carbs/hour of running. More than that, and you risked upsetting your GI tract.

This advice has changed dramatically in the last handful of years. One reason: An accumulation of evidence like the paper below that mathematically analyzes what Paula Radcliffe would have needed during her 2:15:25 of 2003. Answer: as much as 150 grams/hour.

The math is based on Andrew Jones’s famous report (with free full text) detailing how Radcliffe improved her vo2 max and running economy over an 11-year period from 1992. There’s a problem with 150 grams/hour, however: “This exceeds maximal reported rates of exogenous carbohydrate oxidation,” which is 120 grams/hour. Take in more, and you likely develop stomach sickness.

So the paper backs off a bit. It suggests: “Carbohydrate supplementation at a rate of at least 90 grams/hour is recommended to maintain exercise intensity.” Of course, if you run slower, you don’t need as much energy/hour. 

Still, midrace carbs are the key to a top marathon performance, as they’re essential to keep you humming along at your chosen pace. More at Research Gate/SportsPerfSci with free full text.

Save yourself: Modestly hard short sprints are good enough

Speedwork doesn’t have to involve all-out sprinting to be effective and performance-enhancing. In fact, a new study has shown that 10-second sprints at 80% effort improve performance as much as the same sprints at 100%.

This occurred because “training at 80 percent of one's maximum still gets the heart rate up significantly higher than a runner's typical training,” noted the senior author.

In this trial, a group of veteran runners deviated from their normal training for 6 weeks. During that time, they ran 30-20-10 intervals 3 times a week for 15 to 20 minutes per workout. Here’s what this means: The runners ran slow for 30 seconds, then moderate for 20 seconds, then fast for 10 seconds (for a total of 60 seconds). They repeated this routine 5 times (5 minutes), then took a several minute rest period.

After the rest period, they repeated the 5-minute “block” and rest period again. In total, they did 3 to 5 blocks per workout. Roughly half of the subjects ran their 10-second sprints at 80 percent effort; the other half ran 100%. 

“Before” and “After” this training, the 2 groups completed a 5K time trial. Both improved by the same amount, about 3%, though the 80% sprinters actually trended a bit higher than the 100% group.

Conclusion: “Lack of time is a common barrier to regular physical activity, and 30-20-10 training has been identified as a time-efficient exercise strategy to improve performance and health.” Also, non-maximal 30-20-10 training is associated with “a lower perceived effort” than other interval training.” 

Thus, 30-20-10 training is “specifically applicable to people who are not highly motivated or able to do maximal-intensity training.” More at Scandinavian J of Medicine & Science in Sports with free full text. Also, a very complete press release here at Science Daily.

Best running headlamps for dealing with winter darkness

This is not my area of expertise, and I try to avoid running in the dark. But I realize that’s not possible for many, particularly those who have to rise early to train in the winter months. All I really care about is safety on the run. For everybody.

As for product reviews, I trust the runner-tested ones at “I Run Far” more than most. (They do receive an affiliate commission, which they acknowledge.)

The name of the game here is safety--not just being seen by vehicles, but being able to see various road hazards from sticks and stones to patches of ice. One of the top rated headlamps costs just $35, which looks like a great value. Others are pricier, but come with lamps that double as a detachable flashlight. That seems a very hand approach. 

The reviewers note that: “Battery and lighting technology improvements have made headlamps brighter, lighter, and longer lasting.” Good. Also, one of the products they tried is “the Most Ridiculously Bright Running Headlamp We’ve Seen.” Well, there’s a place for everything. 

The “Comments” section includes additional advice from well-informed readers. Stay safe this winter. Be seen. Be able to see the road/trail in front of you. More at I Run Far.

Wim Hof Method gets a “thumbs down” from research experiment

One of the most-discussed research papers of the week delved into the Wim Hof health practice. You know--the “multi-disciplinary approach to physical and mental well-being combining cold exposure, breathing exercises, and meditation.” The paper investigated the Wim Hof practice, and its effect on heart function, blood pressure, artery health, and even “different psychological parameters.”

If you’re not familiar with Wim Hof, he’s a Dutch extreme athlete who preaches a health-fitness practice that combines cold exposure, breathing exercises, and mindfulness meditation. It’s the cold part--particularly cold water showers, or winter bathing in frigid lakes--that has attracted the most attention.

The research involved 42 adults who were randomized into two groups that followed the Wim Hof method, or didn’t, for 15 consecutive days. Conclusion: “Contrary to the claim by Wim Hof, performing the WHM on a daily basis for 15 days did not exert positive effects on cardiovascular parameters, perceived stress, affect, and vitality in this study.” 

Therefore: “In a group of healthy individuals, the short-term application of this method did not exert any positive effects.” More at Nature with free full text, and also an excellent summary at Substack/Brady Holmer.

[Please note: This was not an exploration of the pros and cons of ice/cold water soaking as a post-workout recovery routine for a runner’s legs. On that question, the debate continues. Here’s a short article on the subject by a marathon-running physical therapist.

Which is more difficult--The Boston Marathon or New York City?

Here’s an article on a topic that runners love to debate, even though there’s nothing we can do about it.

We all agree that flat marathon courses like Berlin, Chicago, and London are faster than hilly courses like Boston and New York. But which of those two U.S East Coast events is actually tougher?

This is one of those reports based on Strava data. And it poses the exact question above. Unfortunately, it then presents various bits and pieces of pacing data that do nothing to answer the question.

So here’s some additional info to inform a decision. According to MarathonGuide’s excellent marathon finishers database, Boston has a much faster average finish time: 3:42 vs 4:40 at New York [in 2023]. Of course, Boston also has strict qualifying standards, so only fast runners can enter. In other words, we’re comparing apples and oranges here, and these results aren’t helpful in answering the basic question.

How about the course records? Both Boston and New York attract world class fields every year. How fast have the fastest winners run? The course records at Boston are 2:03:02 and 2:19:59 vs 2:04:58 and 2:22:31 at New York.

So New York looks slightly more difficult.

But the Boston course follows a more or less straight line from West to East, meaning that runners get an assist from a tailwind in some years. Whereas anyone who has run New York knows that the course shim shams through the 5 boroughs. On the same day, you get a tailwind at some points, and a pesky headwind at others.

The best analysis was done by Ken Young, founder and big kahuna at the Association of Road Racing Statisticians (ARRS). Before his death in 2018, Young compared times of elite men and women who had run both Boston or New York, and other major marathons. He then devised a “Race Time Bias” for marathon courses. It was designed to precisely answer the headline question at the top of this summary.

Young found that Paris and Berlin were the two fastest courses in his database at the time. At the other end of the scale, Boston and New York were among the two slowest. They were almost equally tough, with ratings of +82.8 seconds (Boston) and +91.3.

Young didn’t believe in rounding off numbers--not if he had precise information to base his analyses on. So that’s the best answer to our question: Between Boston and New York, it’s close to a tie-game on marathon difficulty.

Here’s what I tell runners headed to either of these marathons. New York is great fun, but tough. Enjoy it; don’t expect a fast time. Boston has a “small window” for fast times if you get good weather, and run smart. It has a “big window” for slow times if you get bad weather, and run stupid. 

You get to choose. You get to reap the benefits or suffer the consequences. Weigh your decision carefully. More at Outside Online.

Are marathon shoes faster than track shoes? 

World Athletics, the governing body of track and field including the Olympic Games, has established different rules for the allowable thickness (stack height) of road running shoes vs track running shoes. The former can be 40 mm thick but the track shoes only 25 mm. Does this make a difference?

According to a new paper, the answer is … sometimes. Researchers gathered 14 “highly trained athletes” and asked them to do 2 time-trials in each of 2 shoes--the Nike ZoomX Dragonfly with a 25 mm stack height and the Nike ZoomX Vaporfly Next % 2” with a 40 mm height.

The first time trial lasted 3 minutes, or about ¾ of a mile. The second trial lasted 9 minutes, or roughly 2 miles. 

Results? “There was a small worthwhile improvement” [of 0.97%] of the marathon shoe over the track shoe in the 3-minute trial, with no such difference in the 9-minute test. The extra thickness seemed to help in the shorter distance but not the longer one. A bit strange, as I would have expected the opposite.

Conclusion: “The use of legal and illegal running shoes altered the runners form, which only influenced the mid-distance performance.” More at J of Strength & Conditioning Research.

SHORT STUFF you don’t want to miss

>>> Lower is better: A low resting heart rate is linked to better heart health and longer life.  Graphic.

>>> Physics goes physical: Harvard physics prof sets a female record for the U.S. TransCon run.

>>> Podium pride: Here are the shoes that “won” the New York City Marathon.

GREAT QUOTES make great training partners

Since Thanksgiving is the most popular road racing day of the year … 

"Let gratitude be the pillow upon which you lay your head each night." 

--Ralph Waldo Emerson

That’s all for now. Thanks for reading. RLRH won’t be published next week, Nov. 23. The next edition will come out on Nov. 30. Happy Thanksgiving. Amby 

 

November 2, 2023

Stuck in a rut? Here’s how to break through

We’ve all been there. After some period of training--whether months or years--you seem to keep producing the same results in your big efforts. Maybe you run 3 marathons in succession in 3:33, 3:35, and 3:32.

Those are strong finish times, but what you really want is a sub-3:30 marathon. How to get there? Alex Hutchinson dissected a recent paper on the limits of strength training to look for answers. You might not be interested in all the microcellular elements, but Hutchinson’s personal conclusion offers good insight.

“In practice, I’m pretty sure that most training plateaus, whether in muscle size, marathon time, or other fitness goals, don’t actually reflect some immutable biological law. We slip into comfortable routines, repeating the same workouts even though our bodies have already adapted to them. We settle for incremental goals instead of dreaming of quantum leaps.” More at Outside Online.

Big dreams are important, and also breaking out of a rut. The NY Times noted that “workout plateaus are an inevitable part of any fitness journey.” One expert suggested: “It’s a chance to listen to your body, figure out what it needs to improve, and reconnect to what you love about running.” More at NY Times.

This often requires moving away from your target for a time. Switch from road marathons to the mile, or to trail running, for 6 to 12 months. Then jump back on that sub-3:30 goal. You might be surprised by how quickly your fitness returns, and even exceeds what it was previously.

Why you should consider run-walk training

You’d be hard pressed to find a bigger supporter of run-walk training than me. In fact, I consider it synonymous with “interval training.”

On long run days, I do “repeats” of 4 to 9 minutes before taking a walk break. On “up tempo” days, I do the last 2 miles of a typical 6-mile run with a 2:1 ratio that includes 60 seconds easy running, 60 seconds at 1-mile to 5K pace, and 60 seconds walking for recovery.

My point: Run-walk training is infinitely flexible, and fun, and can be productive in many different ways. Even if you don’t want to do it when you’re running your best, you should keep it in mind. Because you’ll eventually hit a time when it comes in handy.

The below article makes a strong case for run walk training. I especially agree with the runner who summarizes things like this: “Benefits include delayed fatigue, conservation of resources, quicker recovery, mentally breaking down the race into digestible bites, [and] less stress on ‘weak’ links.” 

Another often overlooked factor: You can consume fluids and other soft or hard calories more easily during a planned, relaxed walk break. More at Inside Hook.

Time magazine picks several running products as “Best Inventions 2023”

The fabled weekly magazine gave that accolade to Coros’s new heart-rate armband with optical sensors. Similar sensors are used at the wrist of many watches, but with unreliable results due to the “lack of deep tissue at the wrist.” 

The arm’s bicep muscle provides plenty of tissue and blood flow, so no problem. Users who disliked the tight chest straps of other HR monitors find the armband simple and comfortable. More at Time Best New Inventions.

Another 7 products were named best new inventions in the “Fitness” category. They included: a lightweight Nike running jacket that knows when to repel rain and when to open its pores so your sweat can evaporate, and a drinking bottle (that has been viewed more than 270 million times on TikTok) that lets you guzzle fluids or use a straw. 

And, of course, those brand-spanking-new $500 Adidas marathon shoes that Tigst Assefa used to run a 2:11:53 world record (by more than 2 minutes) in the recent Berlin Marathon. More at Time Best New Inventions Fitness.

Healthy feet, faster times: Why you need to rotate your shoes

Many runners, when they find a favorite, most-comfortable pair of running shoes, stick with those shoes for years. Some even buy a half-dozen pairs of a particular model once they have identified it as their chosen shoe.

This could be a mistake. 

Running injuries are often caused by “overuse.” Translation: You repeat the same motion (your running stride) over and over until a given muscle grows fatigued, and breaks down. Such overuse is magnified when you always run in the same pair of shoes, with the same construction, same midsole, and same fit.

Using different shoes, on the other hand, reduces overuse. Your leg muscles must make slight adaptations for each run in different footwear. For example, you could do your shorter, easy-day runs in a pair of minimalist shoes rather than the thicker shoes you use when logging more distance. You could also alternate between shoes with a significant heel-toe “drop,” and others with zero-drop. 

Some runners choose to run in shoes made by different companies--say New Balance and Brooks--figuring that even this simple tactic should produce variations in the forces their legs encounter while running. And indeed it should.

A 2015 study investigated this “mix ‘em up” strategy to see if it would prove effective. It did, finding that the “parallel use of more than one pair of running shoes was a protective factor.” In fact, mixing up shoes resulted in a 39% drop in running injuries.”

Research has also found that certain shoes, often with low heel drops, can reduce knee injuries. Or, if you’ve got Achilles or calf problems, you could try thicker shoes with more dramatic heel to toe drops. 

The following article summarizes much of this information, as it argues the case for rotating your running shoes. Somewhat strangely, it quotes an apparent injury expert who is never fully identified. More at Training Peaks. 

Wait!!!??? There’s a time for decreased carb intake?

Camille Herron is already one of the planet’s best ultra (as in, seriously ultra) distance runners. She seems to get better as the distance increases. Last spring, for example, she set a world record for the 48-hour run when she logged 270 miles. That also surpassed the American men’s record for the distance, making her the first female runner to establish the overall American record at any distance. 

So you wouldn’t expect her to mess with such proven success. That would be a little like Eliud Kipchoge deciding to switch to minimalist running shoes. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Right?

However, Herron is both science oriented and open minded. She’s willing to learn and change. A few months back she visited well known Canadian sports nutrition expert Trent Stellingwerff to run in his lab and see what she could learn about her inner workings. (Stellingwerff’s wife, Hilary, twice represented Canada in the Olympic 1500 meters.)

The results of that visit indicated that Herron is naturally a high-fat burner, which could account for her ultra-running success. When she consumes too many carbs, that apparently lowers her fat-burning. So Stellingwerff suggested she ease off a bit on her mid-race carb consumption, which Herron had been trying to push ever-higher, as is the general advice these days for marathon-and-beyond runners. 

The tactic seemed to work at the early October 153-mile Spartathlon event in Greece, where Herron broke the women’s course record by more than 2 hours. “We learned my body is naturally wired for fat oxidation, so I ended up backing off my carbohydrate intake, and it paid off later in the race,” she said.

Of course, the same tactic wouldn’t necessarily work for someone who’s not a genetic high-fat burner. So always test various nutritional strategies in training before trying them in races.

Herron, Stellingwerff, and others are working on a major Lululemon project called “Further” that will end with a 6-day women-only race next March. They hope to learn more about women and ultra endurance. Details are scarce at this point, and Stellingwerff’s research hasn’t been published. But it will be, and I’ll fill you in quickly at that time. More at Outside Online. 

How PEACE and LOVE can reduce muscle pains

Most running injuries are soft-tissue muscle injuries that heal quickly with proper care and recovery. That’s the good news about running injuries. The bad news? Runners get lots of these pesky aches and pains.

In the old days, we were advised to treat such insults with RICE--you know, Rest, Ice, Compression, Elevation. But that was then, and this is now. Now, physical therapists and physicians have devised new acronyms and treatments. Sometimes you suspect these folks have been spending too much time playing Wordle..

Still, it’s hard not to appreciate this healing system: PEACE and LOVE. Follow the link to learn what it means. (And maybe shorten the length of your next sore-muscle injury). More at Twitter/Scott Carlin.

The ultimate marathon warm up? Very little at all

There are those who believe that a modest amount of pre-race warm up, including an acceleration or two, is always a good thing. It loosens you up for the jarring start of your race, prepares the muscles for the stress to come, gets your heart pumping, and so on.

Then, there are those like me who believe this is generally a good approach . . . except when the race in question is a marathon. In that case, the best warmup up is the least warmup. Maybe you walk around a little, and do some light skipping exercises. But then you look for a chair, floor, or the most restful place you can find. 

After all, the marathon is a looong distance. And you should start a little slower than goal pace to avoid burning off precious glycogen in the first mile or two. To accomplish this, you should not be overly primed on the start line.

This systematic review and meta-analysis agrees . Conclusion: “We found no support to recommend PAPE strategies to improve endurance exercise performance.” (PAPE is basically a warm up with several sprints.) More at Medicine & Science in Sports and Exercise.

High aerobic fitness can reduce flu deaths by 50%

We in the northern hemisphere are edging into flu season, so it’s a good time for a study on exercise and flu. Here a big report looked for possible links between aerobic exercise and/or strength training, and risks of mortality from influenza and pneumonia

It included more than 577,000 subjects who were followed for over 9 years. Result: Those meeting guidelines (150 minutes/week of moderate cardio, plus 2 strength workouts/week) “had a 48% lower adjusted risk of influenza and pneumonia mortality.”

 

When looking at aerobic exercise alone, the risk of death was lowest (minus 50%) for those logging 301 to 600 minutes/week. That’s equivalent to 30 to 60 miles/week of running if you’re running your miles at about 10:00 minute pace. Those exercising over 600 minutes per week still had a 41% lower mortality rate. The lowest exercise group (10 to 149 minutes/week) enjoyed a 21% lower risk.

With strength training, 2 sessions a week produced good results, but 7 or more workouts/week increased mortality risk by 41 percent. Conclusion: “Aerobic physical activity, even at quantities below the recommended level, may be associated with lower influenza and pneumonia mortality while muscle-strengthening activity demonstrated a J-shaped relationship.” More at British J of Sports Medicine with free full text.

SHORT STUFF you don’t want to miss

>>> Amazing bicycle gizmo: Here’s a new bicycle balancing device that can prevent falls, especially at slow speeds.

>>> Drafting is dramatic: Kelvin Kiptum could have run a 1:57 marathon if he had a pacer.

>>> Running away from breast cancer: Fitness associated with lower risk of breast cancer, particularly in the overweight 

GREAT QUOTES make great training partners

 "Women who knew only that the first race of its kind ever held in this country was nearing a finish waved their handker-chiefs and fairly screamed with excitement. There was a pandemonium of joy." 

--The New York Times describing the first U.S. marathon race, Stamford CT to New York City, on September 19, 1896--7 months before the first Boston Marathon

That’s all for now. Thanks for reading. See you again next week. Amby