Posted: January 4, 2005

Running: An Overall View Of Training

Excerpt from Great Workouts for Popular Races by Owen Anderson

Chapter I

In preparing for events ranging in length from 800 to 100,000 meters, you should always emphasize the quality of your training over mere volume. That is, you should stress speed (and the development of a higher maximal running speed), instead of placing your primary focus on the accumulation of mileage.

Why is this so? If you had 100 middle- to long-distance runners standing before you and you wanted to figure out which ones would finish near the front in a race (regardless of whether that race covered 800 meters, 10K, a marathon, or 100K), one of the simplest and most effective forecasting techniques would be to time each runner in a 20-meter dash! The runners with the fastest 20-meter times would also be the individuals with the quickest clockings for 5K - and for the marathon! On the other hand, if you ranked the runners according to weekly average mileage, you would find no relationship at all between training distance per week and performance time!

While this linkage is surprising to runners and coaches, the majority of whom think that the 20-meter sprint is an "anaerobic" event and that running events like the 5K, 10K, and marathon are purely "aerobic" endeavors, the simple 20-meter test is very accurate. It has been verified in research carried out by Heikki Rusko, Leena Paavolainen, and Ari Nummela of the KIHU Research Institute for Olympic Sports in Jyvaskyla, Finland with 17 endurance runners (1). In this Finnish research, the connection between 20-meter and 5000-meter race velocities was extremely strong, even though the average 20-meter speed of 8.15 meters per second was roughly 76-percent faster than 5-K alacrity. As it turned out, 20-meter time was a better predictor of 5-K speed than that vaunted "aerobic" variable, VO2max, and 20-meter burning was almost as good as another big-name physiological characteristic - running economy.

Could the 20-meter, 5-K connection detected by the Finns be purely a fluke? If you think so, consider the research carried out at the University of Nebraska at Omaha, in which Aaron Sinnett, Kris Berg, and their colleagues determined that performance times for 10,000 meters can be predicted with a high degree of accuracy using two other attributes of speed and power - 300 meter sprint time and plyometric leaping distance (2). Sinnett, Berg, and co-workers also found significant correlations between 10-K performance and 50-meter sprint time, as well as vertical jumping ability.

Why are researchers finding that "anaerobic" physiological attributes are so important for success in almost purely "aerobic" events? To put it another way, why are exercise scientists discovering that measures of speed and explosiveness are great predictors of performance in races which seem to rely more on endurance than on power?

To understand this completely, let's take a close look at the Nebraska-Omaha study carried out by Sinnett, Berg, et al. In this fascinating work, the researchers examined 36 experienced runners (20 men and 16 women) whose 10-K times varied from 32:36 to 56:24. The age of these runners ranged from 19 to 35 years, and 27 of the athletes were preparing for a marathon as the research was conducted. The 36 subjects were running about 30 miles per week and had trained five times weekly for at least six months before the study started. Nineteen of the 36 subjects engaged in some form of strength training, and 27 had completed a marathon at some point in their running careers. They were not beginners!

Sinnett and Berg were smart to put all of the runners through a 50-meter sprint test. For one thing, Rusko and his Finnish co-workers had found predictive success for the 5K with the even-more abbreviated 20-meter sprint. In addition, essentially none of the power created for 50-meter sprinting from a standing start is derived aerobically; the energy for 50-meter blast-offs comes from the "phosphagen system" within muscle cells, i. e., from existing ATP within muscle fibers and from the high-energy phosphates which are donated by creatine phosphate to ADP inside muscles to make ATP (ATP is the true energy currency for muscle cells; its energy is used directly to produce muscle contractions; all other "fuels" for muscle contraction, including carbohydrate, fat, protein, and creatine phosphate, must first be converted to ATP before any muscular action can take place). Not even a single molecule of oxygen is required for the phosphagen system to work, and thus the 50-meter sprint is a true "anaerobic" test.

The 300-meter test was another good choice for the Nebraska researchers. Running all-out for 300 meters from a standing start puts little energetic demand on the aerobic system; it instead depletes the phosphagen system in about 10 seconds or so and then relies almost exclusively on the "glycolytic energy system," an oxygen-independent, intracellular, energy-producing mechanism which relies on the breakdown of glucose to pyruvate and lactate for the creation of immediately usable energy (in the form of our friend, ATP).

The 36 athletes also performed two vertical-jump tests, one with a dynamic counter-movement involved and the other from a static, flexed-knee beginning position. For these tests, each athlete's vertical reach was first assessed as he/she stood motionless next to a Vertec instrument. Every runner simply reached as high as possible with his/her dominant arm, without letting the heels rise off the floor. To determine actual jumping height, the loftiest reach in inches from this standing position was subtracted from the highest mark made on the Vertec instrument during the two jumps.

For the jump with counter-movement, the athletes started in a standing position next to the Vertec device, quickly descended into a semi-crouched, flexed-knee position, and then - without the slightest hesitation - jumped straight up with maximum power and attempted to touch the highest-possible point on the Vertec instrument. For the no-counter-movement vertical jump, the runners started from a static take-off position, with the knees locked at 90 degrees of flexion. Each athlete held this position for three seconds and then jumped as high as possible - straight up.

In the counter-movement jumps, the "snap-back" of muscles which have been quickly stretched provides a significant amount of the force required for vertical leaping without incurring the penalty of direct energetic cost. For the no-counter-movement jumps, the force is provided primarily by energy-costly, active contractions of propulsive muscles which are forced to work "from a standing start." As you might guess, athletes whose muscles can generate much work by means of energetically cheap, elastic reactions tend to be able to run quite efficiently, i. e., at relatively low percentages of their maximal rates of energy usage. Such athletes tend to find specific speeds of movement to be easier to sustain, compared with those athletes whose muscles have less-enhanced elastic properties. These athletes would also be capable of generating greater power (attaining higher maximal speeds), compared with elastically deficient runners, since the enhanced elastic forces would supplement the normal forces created by the costly breakdown of ATP. In other words, having ample elastic characteristics in the leg muscles is a good thing for a runner! Small wonder that one of the highest compliments an elite Kenyan runner can pay another competitor is to say, "You run as though you have springs for legs."

Note that muscle elasticity has nothing to do with a runner's aerobic prowess. A runner with great elasticity might have a high VO2max or a low VO2max; there is simply no direct connection.

The final test of "anaerobic" prowess - the plyometric leap test - was initiated from a standing position, from which the athletes performed three consecutive forward leaps by springing from one foot to the other; for the third and last leap, the athletes landed on both feet. In effect, the plyometric leap test was just like the triple jump performed in track and field, except that the leap exam was carried out from a standing rather than a running start. Actual plyometric-leap length was measured from the heel which was closer to the starting line after the third leap back to the starting line itself.

Sinnett, Berg, and their fellow researchers found that there were significant correlations between 10-K time and (1) 50-meter sprint time, (2) counter-movement jump height, (3) non-counter-movement jump height, and (4) percent body fat. The two best predictors of 10-K success were plyometric leap distance and 300-meter sprint performance. Just by itself, plyometric leap distance explained a whopping 74 percent of the variation in 10-K race times for the entire group of 36 runners. Together with 300-meter sprint performance, plyometric leap distance accounted for an incredible 78 percent of the variance!

To summarize, one "anaerobic" attribute - plyometric leap distance - was able to account for nearly three-fourths of the variation in performance times for this relatively large group of distance runners. "Aerobic" variables such as VO2max, lactate threshold, and running economy have been known to do worse than this in various studies of endurance-running performance (i. e., they have accounted for substantially less of the variation in performance). Two "anaerobic" attributes - plyometric leap length plus 300-meter run time - accounted for about four-fifths of the 10-K variation.

Should you begin carrying out daily three-jump plyometric training in order to improve your racing performances? No, not at all (although such effort can be profitably included in your overall program): What this Nebraska study simply means is that the power and elastic characteristics of your leg muscles will play a large role in determining how well you will perform in your races. Thus, you need to carry out the kind of training which will optimize such characteristics - the kind of effort described in detail in this book.

If you are somewhat shocked about the ability of "anaerobic" factors such as plyometric leaping distance, counter-movement jump height, 300-meter sprint time, 50-meter sprint performance, and 20-meter clocking to predict distance running performances, you shouldn't be. For one thing, it is readily apparent that the fundamental attributes which promote better sprint times, notably the ability to apply more force to the ground during foot strike and the ability to apply that greater force more quickly, can also be great for middle- and long-distance running, provided a runner can develop the ability to sustain such enhanced power outputs for the necessary amount of time. Greater force will translate to longer strides, and quicker force production will mean faster strides; the combination taken together can lead to major improvements in running velocity - and the ability to run faster in your chosen competitive distance. There are other fundamental reasons for this linkage between "anaerobic" and "aerobic" factors, which I will explain in a moment, and several other research studies also connect such apparent "opposites."

To purchase this e-book, which contains great workouts for competitive distances ranging from 800 meters all the way up to 100K, please go to www.rrnews.com.

To make inquiries about the book, please send an e-mail note to owen@rrnews.com.

To find out more about Running Research News, please go to www.rrnews.com.

Here is a recent review of Great Workouts for Popular Races:

"Owen Anderson's new book is a tremendous resource for coaches and runners at all levels; it is chock-full of practical and productive information about training for a wide variety of racing distances. When you read Great Workouts for Popular Races, you will be inspired to transform your training in a positive way - and you will have the tools you need to reach new peaks of performance."

- Robin Judice, CSCS, LPT, former Division-1 Cross Country Coach at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette

Posted with permission from Running Research News and Owen Anderson.

Subscribe to Running Research News now by clicking on this banner