Something I should have added, are you still doing tri training and planning on swim team in summer? Consider your total volume of training and priorities. And if you're training for xc, why do you think weights would provide more benefits than just running lots of hilly courses (alternating with some flat) - or mountains? You may have a reason. I'm just asking.
(When I answered originally, I was thinking winter conditions with ice and strength training can be helpful to flesh out a program then and had forgotten about your swimming and tri's. Although core is almost always good for many.)
> On 2007-05-11, runsrealfast <runsrealf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On May 10, 8:24 pm, Gary <ghlu...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >> I'm 120lbs, 5'4, and a junior and I believe to do better I think I'm > >> going to have to do some weight training. What should I do and how > >> many reps etc. Also a friend recommended Kreatine (sorry on spelling) > >> to help fight fatigue. What do you think or reccomend?
> >> Thanks Gary
> > I would recommend doing the strength training but avoid any and all > > muscle building products. First of all many are a waste of money. > > Second, unless you run the 100m or 200m you don't want to get to big > > and the purpose behind those protein products is for you to get big.
> Some questions:
> Do you know what creatine is and why it is used ? (if not, why are you giving > advice about it ?)
> Is the fact that many products are a "waste of money" a sound basis for not > using any supplements ?
> What are your criteria for deciding whether or not a supplement is a "muscle > building product" ?
> Are you aware that "muscle building" substances ranging from protein > supplements all the way up to various steroids are used by endurance athletes > as recovery aids ?
> Cheers, > -- > Elflord
My friend recommend creatine because he said it helped your recovery is this true?
> On 2007-05-11, runsrealfast <runsrealf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On May 11, 11:14 am, Elflord <a...@aol.com> wrote:
> > re-read my original post, take it in context and then reply. I think
> I did. You said "avoid any and all muscle building products".
> This could plausibly include products like whey protein (which is primarily > marketted towards bodybuilders). I take whey supplements on a regular basis, > and I'm sure as hell not huge.
> Creatine would probably have zero effect either way, unless he's running 800m > or shorter.
> > if you actually think and then respond you will comprehend what i was > > trying to say to the guy. Your reading into this way to much.
> > one other point. You say that many endurance athletes the question I > > ask you is do they use it to "supplement" or to body build. This > > poster is wanting to use it in conjunction with weight lifting. If he > > walked into a gym and asked a training (and got help) he would end up > > stiff and over sized. Again look at the context.
> I don't agree. A high school kid with distance runners genetics is not going to > bulk up doing a minimal weights routine as cross-training, in conjunction with > high mileage training. Even pro athletes who take various steroids in > conjunction with weight routines are able to do so without "bulking up". The > main reasons they don't bulk up are (1) genetics, (2) they're not training for > hypertrophy, and (3) their primary activity (running high miles) makes bulking > up almost impossible.
> He should stay away from supplements that have substantial anabolic effects, > including both illegal steroids, and also legal over the counter "pro-hormones" > like andro, because they are nearly all banned substances.
> The others are largely recovery agents, and some, like whey protein are quite > useful. Yet others, like so-called "mass builders" are expensive for what they > are. And some others like creatine aren't known to be useful for endurance > athletes.
> Cheers, > -- > Elflord
I've tried bulking up a few years ago. I ate ice cream 3x a day for two straight weeks and didn't gain a pound. Someone else asked why I wanted to do strength training its because at districts and in other big races it gets a little muddy and I notice those with more mass to use tend to do better. I'm not looking to bulk up like a body builder I just want to get stronger.
> In article <1178850249.243637.267...@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>,
> Gary <ghlu...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >I'm 120lbs, 5'4, and a junior and I believe to do better I think I'm > >going to have to do some weight training. What should I do and how > >many reps etc. Also a friend recommended Kreatine (sorry on spelling) > >to help fight fatigue. What do you think or reccomend?
> Why do you think you need to do weight training? > (Straight question, not rhetorical. There are reasons why you might > have a need for it. Then again, a lot of folks get sucked in for > no good reason.)
> Creatine was oft-mentioned in the group here when I first arrived. > To the extent it was mentioned, it was mentioned for power/speed -- not > endurance. iow, to make you faster, not to be able to run farther. > As I recall the discussion, such as it was, there was little research > support (even from the manufacturers) for creatine use by distance > runners, and what little there was, came from the manufacturers.
> In your pursuit to compete with the elite, you're still early stages. > You have a ton to gain by straightforward taking care of your health > (eating a good diet, getting good sleep, perhaps some general purpose > cross-training, which might include weights) and putting in a steady > mileage base. If you hit a hard ceiling on your performances, and it's > sub-elite, _then_ would be the time to look in to ground wasp (which > was advertised a while back too) and assorted other supplements or > exotica.
> Between one guesstimator and another, just maturing in good health > and with continued sustained mileage base should be good enough to > get you under 10 for the 2 mile (in your early 20s, maybe not next > year). That's not elite, but it sure puts you out on the fast tail > of the nonelite. Note: SWAG involved, not precision formulae (even > to the limited extent that precision could be involved).
> -- > Robert Grumbinehttp://www.radix.net/~bobg/Science faqs and amateur activities notes and links. > Sagredo (Galileo Galilei) "You present these recondite matters with too much > evidence and ease; this great facility makes them less appreciated than they > would be had they been presented in a more abstruse manner." Two New Sciences
The staying healthy does not present a problem I eat and sleep regularly. I know I'm just scratching, but our cross country team is having a strong turnover and I'm the only returning top 5 runner from last season. (I usually run 3-5 on the team) and for next year I have to do a lot better to have a decent team and I want to do well. So will strength training off season help me at all?
> Donovan wrote: > > I take whey supplements on a regular basis, and I'm sure as > > hell not huge.
> Then again the odds are Gary's not a protein-deficient macrobiotic > vegan. ;-p
> > Even pro athletes who take various steroids in conjunction with > > weight routines are able to do so without "bulking up".
> Well, whatever a couple of my late thirty-something colleagues took a > year or two ago when they started hittin' the gym, Gary should > certainly avoid that. Man, those guys had software-guy builds before > they started, and within what seemed like just a few months they were > hulking from the chest up. I found it startling and kind of > disturbing, I guess due to the degree and the suddenness.
> They must've eventually backed off whatever the main bulk-producing > ingredient, as they've both shed some of this upper body bulk since > then. Maybe they found out most chicks aren't primarily looking for > nerdy guys whose upper reaches look like pro wrestlers and who cannot > turn their necks independently.
> To Gary: weights may or may not help you. Good runners and coaches > have different opinions and experiences. I have no strong opinion on > that, myself.
> But running more should definitely help you, as long as you don't go > so insane with it that you get injured or overtrain. You're just > starting to scratch the surface of what pure running training will do > for you. Keep doing the same thing for a few years, you'll get > better. Run more easy miles over the offseasons, you'll get better > faster.
> The body takes years to reach its potential. Look at the young > American stars of the sport, like Hall, Ritz, Webb, Teg... they didn't > even come close to maxing out in the middle of high school. They > continued to improve (though not always steady) through college and > for years afterward.
> This is in response to your "to do better I think I'm going to have to > do ..." which sounds like you think you're maxed out on the running > side. You're not.
So the consensus is strength training won't help even as a supplement to running miles?
> My friend recommend creatine because he said it helped your recovery > is this true?
I don't think it will help a whole lot. Strength athletes use it all the time, endurance athletes don't.
Whey protein might help, but not strictly necessary.
Others have already made good suggestions in terms of resistance training -- the common theme (see posts by Dot and Daniel in this thread) is to focus on sports-specific strengthening and eschew "traditional" weight training routines (that are heavily biased towards bodybuilding)
I agree with Chucky who says that strength training may or may not help, whereas you can be damn sure that a good base will help. Intelligent use of strength training may help, but it's much more important to work on endurance.
btw, Paul Tergat is 6ft and 130lb, and also the worlds best cross country runner before he got old and slow and did marathons.
On May 11, 2:04 pm, Dot <dot.h@#duh?att.net> wrote:
> I'll leave the chemical discussion to others, but you might google for > "creatine" in some medical-type pages (as opposed to > commercial-products-to-sell type pages for information.
In article <1178920252.175120.207...@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
Gary <ghlu...@hotmail.com> wrote: >So the consensus is strength training won't help even as a supplement >to running miles?
I think it's good for overall health but if you're concerned about your running performance upper body musculature is effectively dead weight. I think it was Kris Freeman (member of US nordic ski team) who said that his training plans for last summer included spending *less* time in the gym because he'd been developing muscles that he had to haul up hills that didn't help his skiing. And if you've ever seen an elite cyclist with his shirt off, you know they're not exactly rippling Adonises in that sport, either. And it's precisely because muscles are weight that has to be dragged around. -- Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - sh...@panix.com
Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community
> The staying healthy does not present a problem I eat and sleep > regularly. I know I'm just scratching, but our cross country team is > having a strong turnover and I'm the only returning top 5 runner from > last season. (I usually run 3-5 on the team) and for next year I have > to do a lot better to have a decent team and I want to do well.
Isn't the team scoring based on the top 5 (or something), so it's not how you alone do, but how well the top 5 do. ie. You can win, but if rest of team doesn't do well, the team doesn't do well. Should you be inspiring the other top runners (or those with potential) and getting them out there working on base? (I was pre-title IX, so "rules" and "scoring" other than getting from start to finish as best you can are outside my normal level of mis-information.)
> So > will strength training off season help me at all?
It all comes down to being experiment of one.
I also can't remember if you said you discussed any of this with your coach.
Just my take. At xc level, you aren't going up and down mountains, but some strength would help. Some of our top local runners seem to be (and look) stronger after college - probably a lot of it is body maturing. Some of that is just miles of running, esp. up and down mountains. (Mtn running is popular here and I think last year or year before we had 2 students on US team for World Mtn Trophy. xc running is what they do in school.) But it wouldn't surprise me if they've also done some strength and conditioning work at the college level, if not hs. The one guy I'm thinking of has done well in national xc skiing sprint championships and won one of the big local mtn races last year (about 24 mi, a few thousand feet vertical over some nasty terrain). He probably did some orienteering with his father when he was younger on some steep rolling terrain (same place where I train).
Many of our top xc runners, even at hs level, are top xc skiers. It also wouldn't surprise me if they do some strength and conditioning supervised by their coach, esp. for skiing - in periodization terms, you need to be strong to learn the skills properly. (One of the local xc ski coaches and fast trail runners helps with our winter xt class.)
FWIW, here's what some top mtn runners looked like at world championships a few years ago. 1st page is jr men (up to 19, iirc), sr women, sr men. Not sure where you fit in that scale of thin to bulky. http://home.att.net/%7Eakrunning/WMRT2003/index.html
But a lot of the increased size with age, I think just comes from growing and maturing and running - esp. running lots of hills, esp mtns with 30% slopes.
You may also find that you get better in mud as you get more experience with mud.
FWIW, I do find running-specific strength and power workouts have helped me, but I'm about 40+ yrs older than you. Most of my drills stem from some PT drills for some muscle imbalances and logical progressions. Most were targeted on small muscles (balance, proprioception, etc). And they are usually done in Nov-Jan time frame in early base with first races in mid May-early June time frame. My body can't handle strength training AND hills at the same time. Strength training gives me a good start to do the hills when the snow starts melting enough that I can actually run up the big hills. I then start adding the hill bounding or steep hill workouts, and those are what has given *me* the most direct benefits. However, the weighted lunges, weighted step-ups, and unweighted, but continuous plyometrics (jumping over mats in a line, not single depth jumps or weird things like that) provide a base for them.
YMMV since you're dealing with very different time lines within a year and a much younger body. Some studies have shown that people that don't respond to normal training may respond better if they have the strength training first. I think I'm one of those, but our seasons also have a lot to do with it.
In your case, I can't help but think that more hill running would help more - unless you had a strength / conditioning coach that might see particular weaknesses where targeted work would help. Again, just my uninformed, but observant of what's around me, $.02.
> My friend recommend creatine because he said it helped your recovery > is this true?
Why not use something less controversial for recovery - like chocolate milk? There's an entire thread on chocolate milk in another forum. That many trail runners can't be wrong. ;) And you can get it at your local grocery store, although some (like myself) seem to prefer the chocolate syrup additive to regular milk. Those carbs in the chocolate really make a difference.
>> To Gary: weights may or may not help you. Good runners and coaches >> have different opinions and experiences. I have no strong opinion on >> that, myself. ... >> But running more should definitely help you, as long as you don't go >> so insane with it that you get injured or overtrain. You're just >> starting to scratch the surface of what pure running training will do >> for you. Keep doing the same thing for a few years, you'll get >> better. Run more easy miles over the offseasons, you'll get better >> faster.
>> The body takes years to reach its potential. Look at the young >> American stars of the sport, like Hall, Ritz, Webb, Teg... they didn't >> even come close to maxing out in the middle of high school. They >> continued to improve (though not always steady) through college and >> for years afterward.
>> This is in response to your "to do better I think I'm going to have to >> do ..." which sounds like you think you're maxed out on the running >> side. You're not.
> So the consensus is strength training won't help even as a supplement > to running miles?
That's not what he said, and it's not the consensus. The consensus is that you'll get better by working on your base over time. Non-specific strength training *might or might not* work. The cumulative effect of specific training *certainly will* work. If I could find anyone in this forum to bet against me on this point (I can't, because it's a consensus!), I'd put good money on it!
I don't think many people would agree though that you *have to* lift weights to get to the next level. Some posters may be "for" general strength training (which may or may not include weights) but their endorsements are nuanced and come with the notion that the regimen must be carefully tailored to both the unique demands of the sport and the unique needs of the individual.
> On 2007-05-11, Gary <ghlu...@hotmail.com> wrote: > I don't think many people would agree though that you *have to* lift > weights > to get to the next level. Some posters may be "for" general strength > training > (which may or may not include weights) but their endorsements are nuanced > and > come with the notion that the regimen must be carefully tailored to both > the > unique demands of the sport and the unique needs of the individual.
It's interesting that the Stanford 800m to 5000 meter runners do a great deal of off season weight lifting (not to gain any size, just arm strength, specific leg strength, and core) and some strength training (weights) during the season. It seems that their arms get tired at the end of a race and that they run better with some strength training. Their distance runners do pretty well in the NCAA's BTW.
Gary wrote: > So the consensus is strength training won't help even as a > supplement to running miles?
Best I can tell there's not much of a consensus. As I said,
>> Good runners and coaches have different opinions and >> experiences. I have no strong opinion on that, myself.
Seriously, it's easy to find lots of top notch runners who never did strength training or did but it didn't help, and lots of others who say it helps them a lot. If most people agree on something, it's this: if your time is limited, spend it running, if you can do so without injury. An hour running will help you more than an hour of strength training. If you have extra time after you put in all the miles you care to (or think you can get away with), then worry about strength training if you want.
I'll add this: there's a chapter or two in the book _Run Strong_ (Kevin Beck, editor) which talk about strength training for runners and specific exercises. I'd give this type of thing better odds of helping running than some generic circuit with weights or machines.
Also wouldn't be surprised if whatever Dot tells you to do is about the same as, or if different then at least as good as, what's in that book. She seems knowledgeable about this stuff.
Daryl wrote: > It's interesting that the Stanford 800m to 5000 meter runners do a great > deal of off season weight lifting (not to gain any size, just arm strength, > specific leg strength, and core) and some strength training (weights) during > the season. It seems that their arms get tired at the end of a race and > that they run better with some strength training.
Yeah, I've heard this claim too. One fast guy who beats both Donovan and me in some local races, Joe McVeigh, says something similar.
But again, it's also easy to find people who succeed without that stuff. There's apparently more than one way to skin a lemur.
Do you know if the Stanford guys do the "low weight, high reps" you usually hear about, when people talk about wanting to strengthen without bulk? A few years ago I also read someone's argument that "really high weight, and just a few reps" was best for developing power without mass. I don't know much about this stuff, but if both of the foregoing are true then I guess there's something magic about moderate weights and 8-12 reps that stimulates growth in muscle size?
Anyhow my arms aren't notably tired at the end of races from a mile to at least a half marathon. Maybe if I had better, faster legs and lungs, then the arms would have more trouble keeping up and I'd need to pump some iron. Or if I carried a couple kilos of water in each hand like those nutty trail ultramarathoners...
>>So the consensus is strength training won't help even as a >>supplement to running miles?
> Best I can tell there's not much of a consensus. As I said,
>>>Good runners and coaches have different opinions and >>>experiences. I have no strong opinion on that, myself.
> Seriously, it's easy to find lots of top notch runners who never did > strength training or did but it didn't help, and lots of others who > say it helps them a lot. If most people agree on something, it's > this: if your time is limited, spend it running, if you can do so > without injury. An hour running will help you more than an hour of > strength training. If you have extra time after you put in all the > miles you care to (or think you can get away with), then worry about > strength training if you want.
> I'll add this: there's a chapter or two in the book _Run Strong_ > (Kevin Beck, editor) which talk about strength training for runners > and specific exercises. I'd give this type of thing better odds of > helping running than some generic circuit with weights or machines.
> Also wouldn't be surprised if whatever Dot tells you to do is about > the same as, or if different then at least as good as, what's in that > book. She seems knowledgeable about this stuff.
I read Beck's book about a year, maybe 2 yrs ago. While I don't think I've done anything specifically from it (and the cardio chapters are a little strange), it's in tune with what I'd been doing. As I mentioned in another post, most of my strength work started with my muscle imbalances and what my PT prescribed for *me*, which was actually some fairly standard stuff. My xt class, as it turned out, did some exercises that were logical progressions from what PT started me on. He was excited when I told him what I was doing there. At the very least, it keeps me running and uninjured most of the time. But in that context, we're dealing with a late 50s body with some muscle imbalances, weak small muscles, etc. Gary's body shouldn't have those problems.;) We do have some hs runners attend the class.
That said, I do feel like my running has improved as a result of it. I improve each winter from the drills and continue the improvement during the summer with my running and assorted drills, usually worked into my running in a painless manner. My instructor commented to me this past year how much my control over body has improved not just the last year, but over the several years since I've taken his class. But the first year I took the class was when I was just starting the PT after the 2nd bout of AT. (1st PT treated symptoms, this one treated cause.)
The concept of running-specific strength drills is fairly common in several places - web pages, runners on other forums, etc. The concept being that when you run, only one foot is on ground at one time and legs are usually in a split position - 1 forward, 1 back. The most common drills seem to be lunges (we do them with varying length steps - med, long, short - for about 40 ft/turnaround come back, then next length, which means we're doing about 2x as many of the short ones as the med = ouch), split squats, weighted step ups, single leg jumping the length of mat (forward, then backward), one-legged squats, etc.
Plyometrics are usually the submax kinds (see Chou) and we do them in a line, so keep moving or you get run over by the person behind you - skipping, carioca / grapevine, sideways stuff, backwards, high knee lifts, butt kicks, "sprint" - while we're snaking between the lines of mats. (We have a 4 x 5 rectangular setup of gray gym-type mats lined up on gymnastics floor exercise mat, which is the primary surface.) The hips get a major workout when doing those "U" turns at each end. Usually there's only a few people that can make it through all the jumps - usually 20 / lap, 6 laps (forward and each side, first jumping onto mats, then over them - or whatever you can do). I do about 1/2 of each lap, and only jump onto the mats (risk/benefit of missing when trying to go over isn't worth it). Lydiard's hill drills are submax forms of plyos - and they definitely help.
The first year he tried Olympic-level lifting with us, but I know I had problems with it (lack of flexibility in achilles, instability on the gymnastics mat in bare feet, etc). So I at least have a tiny feeling for free weights. That doesn't compare at all with the more running-specific workouts. Some folks enjoy lifting as an activity, and that's fine. I thought it might have some benefits and kinda wanted to learn, but I just don't think it compares for usefulness to the more running oriented workouts.
We also do a machine circuit for the last 34 min - 1 min per station, 20 sec to change - but the "change" time usually isn't enough to write our weight or reps or speed or whatever down, get to the next station, and get it set up for whatever, so we may only get 45-50 sec on some stations - which is sometimes enough to reach almost-puke stage if you dial up the speed enough. Because of the limited time to change, things like hacky squats usually get done with one weight for everyone (maybe 25 lb on each end), which is easy with two legs, but a little much for me with one leg to do more than about 1 rep. I think we have 2 or 3 strength stations (some upper, some lower body), then a cardio, which is usually varying incline tm (0, 5, 10, 15, -3, stepmill). It's a great fitness workout for general health, but I can't say that it's really affected my running. The worthwhile part of the class is the first hour with the barefoot drills on the gymnastics mats. While we do lots of intense drills for short times, we don't do anything for more than about 10-20 min at one time - so you build some cardio endurance but not the ability to do one thing for more than a few minutes.
I'd have to go back and look at Beck again to see some specifics, but gotta get my smorgasbord of drinks together for tomorrow.
On 2007-05-12, Charlie Pendejo <Charlie.Pend...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Daryl wrote: >> It's interesting that the Stanford 800m to 5000 meter runners do a great >> deal of off season weight lifting (not to gain any size, just arm strength, >> specific leg strength, and core) and some strength training (weights) during >> the season. It seems that their arms get tired at the end of a race and >> that they run better with some strength training.
> Yeah, I've heard this claim too. One fast guy who beats both Donovan > and me in some local races, Joe McVeigh, says something similar.
I can't believe that guy still beats me, because while he has a convincing lead on peripheral factors like aerobic power to weight, I think I've the upper hand on him in the more critical category of upper body strength.
> But again, it's also easy to find people who succeed without that > stuff. There's apparently more than one way to skin a lemur.
> Do you know if the Stanford guys do the "low weight, high reps" you > usually hear about, when people talk about wanting to strengthen > without bulk? A few years ago I also read someone's argument that > "really high weight, and just a few reps" was best for developing > power without mass. I don't know much about this stuff, but if both > of the foregoing are true then I guess there's something magic about > moderate weights and 8-12 reps that stimulates growth in muscle size?
That's supposed to be the optimal range for growth anyway. Mechanisms behind growth aren't that well understood, but it's generally believed that fast twitch hypertrophy (muscle fibers getting thicker) requires a combination of actual mechanical load (not to be confused, as many do, with perceived effort or "pain"!) and volume. You won't get very much of that from a set of 3 explosive reps, or a set of 20 on a light weight.
>> I don't think many people would agree though that you *have to* lift >> weights >> to get to the next level. Some posters may be "for" general strength >> training >> (which may or may not include weights) but their endorsements are nuanced >> and >> come with the notion that the regimen must be carefully tailored to both >> the >> unique demands of the sport and the unique needs of the individual.
> It's interesting that the Stanford 800m to 5000 meter runners do a great > deal of off season weight lifting (not to gain any size, just arm strength, > specific leg strength, and core) and some strength training (weights) during > the season. It seems that their arms get tired at the end of a race and > that they run better with some strength training. Their distance runners do > pretty well in the NCAA's BTW.
The interesting question is, what causes arm fatigue, and how can it be prevented ? Everyone has to solve this problem somehow, but not everyone solves it with upper body strength work. Some top runners do weights, some don't. All of them do quite a lot of running.
Based on what I've seen of Paul Tergat, I believe I have enough upper body strength to run a 2:04 marathon.
>> It's interesting that the Stanford 800m to 5000 meter runners do a great >> deal of off season weight lifting (not to gain any size, just arm >> strength, >> specific leg strength, and core) and some strength training (weights) >> during >> the season. It seems that their arms get tired at the end of a race and >> that they run better with some strength training. Their distance runners >> do >> pretty well in the NCAA's BTW.
> The interesting question is, what causes arm fatigue, and how can it be > prevented ? Everyone has to solve this problem somehow, but not everyone > solves > it with upper body strength work. Some top runners do weights, some don't. > All > of them do quite a lot of running.
> Based on what I've seen of Paul Tergat, I believe I have enough upper body > strength to run a 2:04 marathon.
Nice fallacy of individual instances. I know a guy that can break 3 hrs off three months of training and little running the rest of the year. Does that make it optimal?
Interesting that I point to a program (800m to 5000m) and you point to a person that you don't know about (I have no idea what workouts Tergat does for the MARATHON). There are real chances that some strengthening has benefit and we would only really know is to use it over large numbers of people. The fact is, many NCAA programs have substantial off season strengthening programs. Weights can't displace mileage but they can augment mileage if the runner has the extra 2 hrs a week.
> Something I should have added, are you still doing tri training and > planning on swim team in summer? Consider your total volume of training > and priorities. And if you're training for xc, why do you think weights > would provide more benefits than just running lots of hilly courses > (alternating with some flat) - or mountains? You may have a reason. I'm > just asking.
> (When I answered originally, I was thinking winter conditions with ice > and strength training can be helpful to flesh out a program then and had > forgotten about your swimming and tri's. Although core is almost always > good for many.)
I'm not doing a tri this summer, but I plan on biking and swimming along with running this summer. Would that effect what strength training I should do? I think I'd rather do those exercises you were talking about. Could you tell me what they are called or some of the exercises those might be more benefitical than strength training with weights. This summer I'll incorporate hills to help.
> On 2007-05-11, Gary <ghlu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > My friend recommend creatine because he said it helped your recovery > > is this true?
> I don't think it will help a whole lot. Strength athletes use it all the time, > endurance athletes don't.
> Whey protein might help, but not strictly necessary.
> Others have already made good suggestions in terms of resistance training -- > the common theme (see posts by Dot and Daniel in this thread) is to focus on > sports-specific strengthening and eschew "traditional" weight training routines > (that are heavily biased towards bodybuilding)
> I agree with Chucky who says that strength training may or may not help, whereas > you can be damn sure that a good base will help. Intelligent use of strength > training may help, but it's much more important to work on endurance.
> btw, Paul Tergat is 6ft and 130lb, and also the worlds best cross country > runner before he got old and slow and did marathons.
> Cheers, > -- > Elflord
With Daniel is this in his Running Formula book? My friend gave me creatine that is specifically for races and I did notice a difference during the first mile (He runs 800) but after that it didn't help so I'm scratching that.
> > My friend recommend creatine because he said it helped your recovery > > is this true?
> Why not use something less controversial for recovery - like chocolate > milk? There's an entire thread on chocolate milk in another forum. That > many trail runners can't be wrong. ;) And you can get it at your local > grocery store, although some (like myself) seem to prefer the chocolate > syrup additive to regular milk. Those carbs in the chocolate really make > a difference.
KK I'll do that instead I usually fry up a pound of ground pork after meets (I live on a farm) and it seems to help a lot. Mostly cooling down and stretching.
On 2007-05-12, Daryl <Daryl0...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Nice fallacy of individual instances.
I may have sounded dismissive with my smarty-pants comment, but it's more that I'm skeptical. It's not that I strongly believe that it doesn't work. It's just that I don't consider it a sure bet, whereas I do have confidence in mileage and interval workouts.
> I know a guy that can break 3 hrs off > three months of training and little running the rest of the year. Does that > make it optimal?
No, I'd say there's an alternative explanation -- maybe he's talented enough to run that fast with suboptimal training. But if he ran 2:04, it would be much harder for me to make that argument.
So in that sense, we're somewhat in agreement in that if you take an athlete who performs at a very high level (e.g. the NCAA athletes you mentioned), it's very hard to argue that what they're doing is just plain dumb (because they wouldn't survive at that level if that were the case)
> Interesting that I point to a program (800m to 5000m) and you point to a > person that you don't know about (I have no idea what workouts Tergat does > for the MARATHON).
I do. His book includes his training logs.
> There are real chances that some strengthening has > benefit and we would only really know is to use it over large numbers of > people.
I don't think our disagreement is as severe as I may have made it appear.
If I had extra time to devote to training and was already running a consistent 80mpw, I would certainly consider some sort of strength program. But I don't consider it a sure bet the way I consider mileage and interval work to be.
> On May 11, 5:52 pm, Elflord <a...@aol.com> wrote: >> On 2007-05-11, Gary <ghlu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> > My friend recommend creatine because he said it helped your recovery >> > is this true?
>> I don't think it will help a whole lot. Strength athletes use it all the time, >> endurance athletes don't.
>> Whey protein might help, but not strictly necessary.
>> Others have already made good suggestions in terms of resistance training -- >> the common theme (see posts by Dot and Daniel in this thread) is to focus on >> sports-specific strengthening and eschew "traditional" weight training routines >> (that are heavily biased towards bodybuilding)
>> I agree with Chucky who says that strength training may or may not help, whereas >> you can be damn sure that a good base will help. Intelligent use of strength >> training may help, but it's much more important to work on endurance.
>> btw, Paul Tergat is 6ft and 130lb, and also the worlds best cross country >> runner before he got old and slow and did marathons.
>> Cheers, >> -- >> Elflord
> With Daniel is this in his Running Formula book? My friend gave me
Yes. I also agree with Chucky's comments -- in the off-season, probably best to focus on base. The Daniels book does a good job at explaining how to put everything together.
> I'm not doing a tri this summer, but I plan on biking and swimming > along with running this summer. Would that effect what strength > training I should do? I think I'd rather do those exercises you were > talking about. Could you tell me what they are called or some of the > exercises those might be more benefitical than strength training with > weights. This summer I'll incorporate hills to help.
Short answer: The main non-hill ones *I* use are lunges of various flavors, split squat, single-leg balance squat, step ups, heel raises, toe raises. Most of these are strength and proprioception. For power, I generally depend on Lydiard-style hill workouts. (I already mentioned some of the stuff we do in my xt class in an earlier post in this thread on 5/11.)
But a person needs to have some basic strength before doing those hill drills. The toe-focused ones can be nasty for folks with weak achilles.
Unabridged answer (be forewarned ;) ) since I'm clueless as to what works for *you*, and you seem like you're searching for some basic information, and could probably benefit since you seem to be interested in putting your own program together or don't have a coach willing or able to help (I'm assuming you have discussed this with your coach.).
I couldn't find the web pages I was looking for, so you'll get my version plus a bunch of useful web pages with some useful information on each. (Keep in mind I'm late 50s woman who likes to play on trails and has had muscle imbalances, proprioception issues, etc. Much stems from my original PT. However, I've noticed that things working for me today also seem to be frequently mentioned by runners who may do some running-specific strength training for their running, not just because they like to do strength training. YMMV.)
I'm not gonna pretend to be able to give you any meaningful answers about the biking and swimming affecting what strength training you do. Just keep in mind that you've got one body that's going to be doing running, running-specific strength training, as well as biking and swimming. I'm assuming running is your focus and biking and swimming are "just there," but I might be wrong. Your body has a limited capacity, although at your age you may not realize it.;) It's about prioritizing your workouts. You might progress through the summer emphasizing first one thing then another or alternate weeks or whatever works.
Conceptually, I think of my workouts as providing strength, range of motion, proprioception (usually works small muscles used for balance), agility, and power - with running hilly trails for many hours as the goal. YMMV. Some drills hit more than one area.
Lunges - be sure to keep back straight Walking (hallways, gyms) - regular, long, and short strides work the muscles differently (spread the burn around) Standing (living-room size) - step forward leaving trailing leg in place, then pull the leading leg back. Switch legs (or do reps on 1 leg first). Also step to right, then back. Left then back. Step diagonally to rear while twisting body, then back. You can do reps on one kind before switching to the other directions.
Progressions - increase reps, use hand weights in hands (either dropped by your side or in opposition to legs) or backpack with weights, increase speed (with the standing ones, this could be made into small jumps), close eyes (careful when you do this the first time unless you do have good proprioception to start). We do them barefoot in class, in shoes at home. Note the different positioning of the weights (2 hand positions or back) make different workouts.
Split squat - at least the way I do it, is between a squat and lunge. Basically, I do a walking lunge, but stop with weight over leading leg and being sure to keep back straight, then just pump up and down like a piston in that position. For me, it gives me the advantage of walking lunge that I can do in living room or kitchen. It gives most of the advantages of a single-legged balance squat, but does have some additional stability (trailing leg) that allows me to work on larger muscles rather than my challenged smaller balance muscles (that limit how I work the big ones in a regular single-leg squat). That split position of the legs is more running specific than 2-legged squats. All of the progressions mentioned before can be done here.
One-legged balance squat. This doesn't go down as far as full-fledged one-legged squats, although I suppose it could, if you're really good. But for most conceivable running, I don't usually end up that far down (see pics in web pages), so am happy with a wimpy version. But with the balance squat, you hold the position partway down. Then reach leg forward as far as you can go, gently touch the toe down, but do NOT transfer weight (keep it on the standing leg), retract. This is done reaching forward, backward, sideways, and diagonally backward. Yes, this is good proprioception drill if you work on the balance stuff. Or you could limit the amount of holding time and make it faster, making it almost into a power workout. Progressions with weights can be used as well as the closed-eye form.
Step ups. I never really liked the traditional step ups since there's always that time to bring the leg back down, but they are most specific than what we do in class. In class, we have about an 8-inch high mat (or any kind of platform). We start with left leg on the mat, right leg to the right of it. Then push off / jump with right leg, while left leg goes to left side of mat (sideways jump to the left, in this case). Then repeat to the right. We usually do about 50 reps or until we die, whichever comes first. (We're usually doing these with hand weights and likely have done a bunch of jumping onto or over mats - see my other post - so, in general, something a little higher might be useful. The 8-in mats are just something convenient for us to use in grand scheme of the way the class is set up.) The nice thing about this is there is no down time. And of course you can get into almost a squat position on each one, resulting in a longer time lifting. There are sooo many ways to increase the burn.
Heel raises - we actually do these on a low (couple inches above floor) balance beam (envision a perch with runners lined up on it facing a higher balance beam (normal height) that we gently touch for balance. This allows us to lower heels below horizontal (like on a hill) then raise to our tippy toes - 30 times straight, 30 times pointed out, 30 times pointed in. (Most of us have found that if we do some during the week, it doesn't burn as much on Saturday.) The balance beams provide a firm surface (vs all the gym mats on most of the gym floor) and the range of motion.
Toe raises - same position, but just heels are on the beam. 30 straight, 30 in, 30 out. I find this really helps with any shin issues. At home, some people may have a setup where they lift buckets with their toes, and this may be a good progression.
We also do some other toe/heel related stuff shortly after the run warmup to be sure ankles are thoroughly warmed up before we get into the workouts proper.
Single leg hops - usually across the mat (about 40 ft) one leg forward, come back backwards same leg, then switch legs. This is obviously both some basic strength and balance.
Core work - mostly lower abs (position ourselves on edge of mat rather than on flat surface - seems to hit the abs closer to hips.
Upper body with hand weights. We do an assortment of arm exercises while walking around the mat - somewhere around 50-100 reps of each drill. 6 drills (biceps, triceps, pecs, and not sure what the other 3 hit, but at least one is very much like arm swing in running).
Diagonal stuff - diagonal jumping - usually puts some sponge blocks out as targets for us to try to jump toward. Each "lap" has about 4-6 jumps in each direction. Some other diagonal work, esp. to help strength achilles http://www.pponline.co.uk/encyc/0125b.htm
As you're aware, trail running (or start of large city marathon apparently, from descriptions) doesn't involve running in a straight line. The diagonal stuff is good for range of motion, jumping over puddles, etc.
Plyometrics: Don Chu's book is a good intro to them and designing a program with them. I would not use anything except the submaximal plyos unless you have someone knowledgeable to show you.
Miscellaneous (mostly submax plyos) - backward (many drills, including skipping can be done forward or backward), sideways, carioca, footwork drills, skipping, high knees, butt kicks, marching.
Terms you can google on: "functional strength", "running-specific strength" or things along those lines. Here's some of main concepts of functional strength: http://www.coolrunning.com/engine/2/2_1/a-new-approach-to-strengt.shtml " * Incorporate single leg training (e.g. one leg squat). * Train predominantly in a standing position. * Train in diagonal patterns – opposite hip to opposite shoulder – just like we run. * Emphasize the transverse (i.e. rotational) plane of motion – it dominates running. * Focus on
...
One other quick comment as to whether strength or weight training helps since I'm not sure where else to stick this - and other post was too long.
The studies I've seen seem to support the value of strength training of some type for newer and/or younger (college age and younger) running since they are still developing and it may help prevent injury. One study took the "non-responders" to traditional training (can't remember details of what the training was, but "non-responders" were the bottom 1/4 of the sample), and added some strength training to their program. Most (don't remember %) responded to that. Don't remember what metrics they were using as a "response."
More experienced runners may have less to gain, but I do know that both Matt Carpenter (quads, hams) and Scott Jurek (upper body, back) do strength of some sort, and I think weights. In many cases, it's what a runner can support *in addition to* their running. http://www.skyrunner.com/story/2005lt100.htm http://www.eliterunning.com/features/54/
I know some question direct effects of strength training on running times or other metrics, but many agree it seems to help with injury prevention. If a person can spend more time training, then likely they'll compete better. I can't believe so many colleges have strength and conditioning coaches if there's no benefits. Granted some of that is for other sports.
It wouldn't surprise me if a runner benefitted for a while, then not, then benefits again after volume / intensity alone aren't enough. But it's not enough to just go to the gym and do whatever. It needs to be targetted to your weaknesses or a particular purpose.
We're all experiments of one, and no one can tell whether you'll benefit until you try. And whether you benefit more from appropriate volume or strength is another matter.