Short Is Long And Back Is Up
Just to recap a bit, Saturday’s post I presented:
Tenet #3: Paradoxically, the athlete’s ability to perform well in intermittent endurance-like events of multiple durations in competition will increase if he favors shorter, more intense efforts in training.
I also suggested the current research leads us to a proverbial fork in the road, where one path might lead us to the promised land and the other, may be the road to nowhere. We can:
- train the aerobic energy system to gain greater endurance OR,
- train for greater endurance performance regardless of energy system contribution.
source: CrossFit EadoFirst, let’s look at some (again, not nearly all) of the research and what it suggests:
Bogdanis et. al. (1996) evaluated two 30-second maximal efforts separated by four minutes of passive rest. They found that the aerobic system generated approximately 34% of the energy produced during the first 30-second sprint and increased to 49% for the second 30-second sprint.
Parolin et. al. (1999) evaluated three intervals of 30-seconds maximal effort separated by four minutes of passive rest. The total average aerobic contribution was 34% for the first interval and 58% for the third.
Gabala MJ et. al. (2008) found “approximately 15 min of very intense exercise can increase skeletal muscle oxidative capacity and endurance performance and alter metabolic control during aerobic-based exercise.”
Mendez-Villanueva, A. et. al. (2008). Fatigue in repeated-sprint exercise is related to muscle power factors and reduced neuromuscular activity.
Weyand PG et. al. (1999) found that “despite reductions in the aerobic energy available for sprinting under hypoxic conditions, subjects were able to run just as fast for sprints of up to 60 seconds and nearly as fast for sprints of up to 120 seconds. This was possible because rates of anaerobic energy release, estimated from oxygen deficits, increased by as much as 18%, and thus compensated for the reductions in aerobic power.” The authors concluded that maximal metabolic power outputs during sprinting are not limited by rates of anaerobic metabolism and that human speed is largely independent of aerobic power during all-out runs of 60 seconds or less.
Weyand PG et. al. (2006) concluded that “the duration-dependent decrements in sprinting performance are set by the fractional duration of the relevant muscular contractions.” In other words, reliance on the anaerobic metabolism for maximum force production causes muscle impairment, not a lack of fuel supply in the form of ATP.
Bundle et al (2006), stated: “We conclude that impaired muscular force production and compensatory neuromuscular activity during sprint locomotion are triggered by a reliance on anaerobic metabolism for force production.”
Bundle et al (2012). Prevailing physiological paradigms explain both sprint and endurance exercise performance in terms of the availability of metabolic energy. However, for all-out efforts of 60 s or less, the prevailing view is no longer viable. Contemporary evidence indicates that sprinting performance is determined by musculoskeletal force application, with a duration dependency explained by the intrinsically rapid rates at which skeletal muscle fatigues in vivo.
What I’ve presented here and on Friday is a lot to take in. But what does it all tell us? How does this information drive the design of this program? Here are the important points:
- increasing endurance event performance is more effectively accomplished by increasing musculoskeletal strength than by increasing cardiovascular capacity
- explosive (and maximal to a slightly lesser degree) strength training combined with endurance training in intrasession bouts is more effective at increasing endurance event performance than either method alone
- combined strength/endurance training has positive effects on slow-twitch muscle fiber size and strength and the oxidative capacity of fast-twitch muscle fiber, however, endurance training alone has an inhibiting effect on strength training
- short-duration maximal efforts (less than 60 seconds) and medium duration intermittent efforts are not as dependent on energy fuel supply as they are on the muscles’ ability or inability to withstand fatigue
- generally, efforts beyond 60 seconds are predominantly aerobic and repeated efforts of less than 60 seconds or more become predominately aerobic in successive bouts
- the aerobic system is as effectively trained with short high-intensity repeated efforts as with long-duration low-intensity efforts
The question we are really trying to answer here is as endurance athletes – as weightlifting, middle distance running, handstand walking, endurance athletes – that must perform in many different time domains, where do we spend our training time? We have to answer this to decide which way to take when we get to that fork in the road. To answer that we have to look at the events themselves and the research should point us in the right direction. From that, the answer should be self-evident… we take both roads, but we favor one over the other (you didn’t see that coming did you).
Our primary focus as athletes should be performance, by any training means necessary. Who cares what energy system we are using, as long as our wheel is in front. As the events themselves and the research tells us, we should focus on our strength development and our mid-range endurance capacity. Focusing on our long-range aerobic energy system will not get us the performance returns we need to improve in the sport. Particularly when research tells us we can achieve the same benefits through other methods (gettin’ strong and going hard).
Here’s the thing though. Don’t go crazy with this and take it to the extreme. It’s not like this research is new or some of you haven’t discovered it. But you’ve taken it too far and you’re only doing 3-minute met-cons. The sport of fitness has asked its participants to perform tasks within as little as a few seconds to over a few hours. And to perform tasks from lightly-loaded to heavy-as-hell elements all throughout. You can not rely solely on the carry-over effect of your training protocol. Although performing a sprint triathlon weekly is borderline insane, never performing one (or a workout that imitates one) is just as insane, particularly for Games level athletes. So while the CrossFit athlete should spend most of his time in shorter time domains and getting “a certain kind of strong”, he can’t spend all of his time there. He has to occasionally practice his craft under game conditions.
So what is a certain kind of strong? That’s the next post.
Strength
back squat: 1×5 @ 60%, 1×3 @ 70%, 1×2 @ 80%, 1×2 @ 90%, 1×1 @ 95%, rest up to 5 minutes
front squat: 1×5 @ 65%, 3×5 @ 75%, rest 1-2 minutes
rest > 3 hours
Conditioning
With a running clock:
On the initial minute, EMOM for 7 rounds:
2 hang snatch (below knee, full squat) @ as heavy as possible with good form
20 double unders
On the 10th minute, EMOM for 7 rounds:
2 hang clean (below knee, full squat) @ as heavy as possible with good form
20 double unders
On the 20th minute:
3-minute AMRAP
bar muscle-ups
Accessory
Practice one of the following skills for 10 minutes:
1a) handstand pushups on parallettes
1b) ring handstand pushups
1c) free-standing handstand pushups
then,
2) 5 x 3 Balboas (video), rest as needed