New methods of torture

treadmill torture

I tried a variation of a workout i'd given my brother and the Yogaslackers adventure racing team (they are the guinea pigs i guess) the last week, just to make sure i was pushing them properly.

No worries there.

It's a combination pyramid/negative split arrangement on the treadmill, and its pretty nasty.  Here's how you do it - given in minutes, and for the sake of using numbers, my pacing.

1. flat at 9 mph
2. 1% at 9 mph
3. 2% at 9 mph
4. 3% at 9 mph
5. 4% at 9 mph
6. 4% at 9.3 mph
7. 3% at 9.3 mph
8. 2% at 9.3 mph
9. 1% at 9.3 mph
10. 0% at 9.3 mph

you need to choose a starting pace that feels fast - so fast in fact that the fifth minute will feel really tough - so tough that you should be wishing that you not only didn't have to speed up, but that you didn't have another minute at the 4% incline, period.  And then when you do speed up, its one of those minutes where you're desperately counting every second and can feel actual physical failure starting to approach rather quickly.  The beauty is that although that 6th minute is the peak in terms of physical intensity - it won't feel like it.  the 1% reduction of incline - at best - is barely enough to allow you to keep going.  During my first stab at this workout i wasn't sure i was going to be able to finish it until sometime during the 9th minute - 3 whole minutes were spent in that glorious state of running through jello - full uncertainty as to whether body or mind would prove to be the master.  

Good luck.  You're going to need it!

The Long Run - a one hour a week marathon training program.

One of the criticisms that i find reasonable of a super low volume approach to endurance racing - particularly for someone getting into the sport - is the concern that it doesn't provide adequate opportunity for physiological adaptations of connective tissues such as ligaments and tendons.  These tissues are brutalized during long events involving repetitive stresses. If they are stronger, injury is less likely.  Research during my morning cup of coffee found little in the way of easily accessible information regarding how the adaptation of these tissues occurs - but i did find one powerpoint from the University of Massachusetts (with some textbook sources cited) that seemed to suggest that it is changes in collagen fibrils that are responsible for these adaptations.  It further suggested that exercise of low to moderate intensity did little to drive this process.

That being said, there is a pretty heavy dose of conventional wisdom out in cyberspace beating the drums to a tune of "volume = necessary adaptations" and so i thought that in absence of more substantial evidence* i should work towards figuring out a way to include some longer workouts in the mix, just in case.  The added benefit of this is that for someone trying to take the low volume approach as an entrance into endurance efforts, longer efforts will help provide some of the required mental confidence.

Here's how it might work for a marathon.

• week 1 (40 min) - 2 x 10 minute high intensity runs**, 1 x 20 minute tempo run
• week 2 (50 min) - 2 x 10 minute high intensity runs, 1 x 30 min. tempo run
• week 3 (1 hour) - 2 x 10 minute high intensity runs, 1 x 40 min. tempo run
• week 4 (1 hr. 10 min) - 2 x 10 min high intensity runs, 1 x 50 min. tempo run
• week 5 (1 hr 20 min) - 2 x 10 min high intensity runs, 1 x 1 hour tempo run
• week 6 (20 min) - 2 x 10 min high intensity runs (later in week)
• week 7 (50 min) - 2 x 10 min high intensity runs, 1 x 30 minute tempo run
• week 8 (1 hr 50 min) - 2 x 10 minutes high intensity runs, 1 x 90 min. tempo run.
• week 9 (20 min) - 2 x 10 minute high intensity run (later in week)
• week 10 (2 hr. 20 min) - 2 x 10 minute high intensity runs, 1 x 2 hour tempo run
• week 11 (20 min) - 2 x 10 min high intensity run (later in week)
• week 12 (1 hr) - 40 min tempo run (early in week), 2 x 10 min easy runs.  RACE

12 weeks and 12 total training hours.  While it  might seem like the proposed marathon would be tough mentally (being up to twice the duration of the longest training run), i think it wouldn't be too bad for someone who'd been able to actually get through the program with genuinely high intensity efforts.  The marathon pace would be substantially easier than nearly ALL the training and it seems unlikely that the additional running time at these lower intensities would prove to be a significant mental challenge for someone who'd been able to consistently pour themselves into the 10 minute efforts week after week.  

Alright - who's gonna take the bait and be the guinea pig?

*I'm going to keep looking.  Honestly i'm not sure i'll find anything substantiating a strong connection between training volume exclusively being necessary for any sort of adaptation... it seems more likely, in my opinion, rather that consistent application of stresses above a certain threshold are the requirements for physiological changes.  There is already a good body of evidence along these lines in terms of aerobic adaptation, and i'm guessing that the same will hold true here.  This post provides some good context as to why these drums might still be sounding though.

** I'll provide details on what constitutes a 'high intensity effort' and give some example running workouts that fit the bill in a later post - or if you're interested in finding out more before i get to it, just leave a comment.

80/20 principle (AKA the Pareto Principle)

From Wikipedia:

The Pareto principle (also known as the 80–20 rule, the law of the vital few, and the principle of factor sparsity) states that, for many events, roughly 80% of the effects come from 20% of the causes.^[1][2]

Some version of this 'rule', which seems to have a rough equivalent in sectors from business to agriculture to social media (80% of your facebook interactions come from 20% of your friends), is foundational to my training methodology.  In my love of complexity, i'm going to suggest that in truth the principle as applied to fitness is actually recursive and can be applied iteratively (only in terms of time invested) as one approaches their athletic goals.

In terms of fitness the principle goes something like - 80% of your fitness potential** comes from 20% of your training time.  The second iteration means that 80% of that 80% comes from 20% of that 20% - creating a 64/4 principle.  Now keep in mind that this really only applies in theory, and to someone following an 'ideal' training program with a proper mix of intensities.  But thus applied - it is basically sound:  80% of the fitness potential realizable on that program comes from 20% of the training time.  And i bet you already know what that training time is spent on - yep - high intensity work.

So as a thought experiment, lets consider that I might (barring likely injury) be able to train to run a 9-10 hour ironman triathlon if i could mentally and physically follow through on a traditional training program pedaled to elite athletes.  It'd likely require about 16-20 hours of effort (on average) per week, and would (in theory) get pretty close to my physical potential.  The Pareto principle suggests that by training around 3-4 hours a week and focusing on the workouts with the highest 'return on investment', i can get to about an 80% level.  Apply it again and you're at about 64% of your potential on under 1 hour a week.  And while 64% might seem pretty low to some folks (and it should) - i'm going to suggest that the majority of recreational 'athletes' - the ones whose goals and ambitions support the entire 'health and fitness' sector of the economy - are working at levels below this*.

*Quantification of fitness is messy as there are too many variables - but i think the basic structure of what you'd see using just about any metric would substantiate these ideas.  For running endurance, you might measure percentage of potential based on marathon time for example.  If I trained exclusively for a marathon and tailored my life to support my efforts, what time could i aim for?  Probably somewhere in the sub 3 hour range.  My idealized training would probably consume about 4-5 hours a week. Using the above logic, this would mean that I ought to be able to train for about 1 hour a week and turn in a respectable time of sub 3:45 (0.8*3 Hrs). My own experience corroborates this.

**Of course working out/training serves many purposes in peoples lives beyond working to reach their physical potential - stress relief, general health and well being, camaraderie, and just good old plain fun.  

minimum maintenance roads

END-SPAR minimum maint. road

My journey down this road started a few weeks ago in mid April when I helped take our youth climbing team down to Minneapolis for their first 'away game'. It was awesome, but the long travel days meant that i missed both my friday and sunday workouts.  The following week i was in the throes of last minute planning for END-SPAR and had to make Sunday after the race a family day as they'd been rather neglected as of late.  And finally, training this last week was hampered by a 'too good to miss' trip to Pembina (little south pembina river during flood stage!) in addition to race director duties for the family adventure race.

So long story short, three weeks in a row with only my 3 10 minute workouts done.  Surprisingly, i'm feeling good about it.  probably partly because i was getting outside to hang checkpoints rather than sitting in front of a computer. And although i was super busy and each of my 10 minute sessions felt squeezed in and almost an after thought, i still managed to match or better my best ever efforts on every one of them.  Sweet.

Maybe if i modify my schedule to be somewhat periodized - limiting it to the 3 sessions (for a total of 30 min) for three weeks with a 90 minute super 'effort' at the end i'd have a three week cycle where i was getting in some long enough efforts with enough frequency to cause some adaptation of the connective tissues, etc - which is one of the major limitations (as far as my research has shown) of using an exclusively high intensity approach to endurance.

ND whitewater

If nothing else, the last three weeks have shown me that, for what it's worth, even just the 3 weekly workouts are enough to keep my stimulated and feeling pretty damn fit - in a minimum maintenance kind of way.

N=2

One of the biggest problems i've faced in trying to discuss the path that low volume, high intensity training provides as a potential alternative to ambitious (but time crunched) amateur athletes looking to take on serious endurance challenges (other than the lonely factor) is the N=1 argument.  When the only one following my training program and having success is me - the project is more case study than experiment.  Interesting, perhaps, but hardly evidence.

But i can happily say the days of N=1 seem to be behind me.

Subject number 2

Meet Ryan Wagner - a 35 year old father of 5 whom i met about a year and a half ago.  He's a fit guy with the physique of a greek hero who has a real passion for exercise.   When he was introduced to what I was doing (and the crazy events ENDracing offered) he was just getting into endurance sports, and most of his exercise consisted of a steady diet of standard fare lifting and 'cardio'.  He'd run one marathon in 3:43 following a more traditional training program back in September of 2008.  But between his wife's heavy law school load, his own full time student status, and all the kids, he was fitting in training at 4 a.m. obviously at the sacrifice of sleep.

When i convinced him to try some long events (a 6 hour adventure race for starters) he got super excited and, not surprisingly, upped his training.  After all, longer races meant more training, right? Simply put, he didn't feel he was doing enough.  Long story short - he developed a slight injury leading up to the event that forced him to DNF after 2 hours.

But he healed.  And I started inviting him to workout with me.  It took him a while to 'let go' of the junk miles.  He tried to rationalize a need for them - that it gave him something more - that it relaxed him or kept him sane.  But i suspected differently.  What he needed was sleep.  And i felt that what he really wanted was just to feel like he could go out and do crazy long super hard stuff -that he was fit enough - and that how he got there really wasn't as important.  So for a while he was tagging along with me on my gut wrenching 10 minute workouts and trying to squeeze in all the other stuff too.  He put in a one or two longer runs leading up to the 50 Kilometer winter ultra we did together in March.  We did really well at that event and i think he was convinced.

It was in the let down from the 50K that we decided to add a 50 miler to our racing calendar on May 11th.  He agreed to follow my training program more or less (he still gets to lift - i've been there - hard to give that up) and see how it goes.  I'm nervous but confident.  We'll run together which means i can talk him through the low points that will undoubtedly come.  And he's demonstrated that he is very capable of producing the genuine level of extreme effort required for the truncated program to yield good results (something i'm starting to think that few people are able to and/or interested in doing in the first place).

And granted, N=2 is hardly evidence either.  But it is a 100% increase in numbers, and that has one other important benefit - it fixes the lonely factor.  Suffering side by side, even in breathless silence, is - at least for me - better than suffering alone.  Thanks for being along for the ride, Ryan.

Running through Jello

I feel like I'm back on top of things and fully recovered.  I can always tell when i get there because as crazy as it sounds, when i'm not fully recovered (i.e. in the week or two following a bigger effort) i start thinking i should cut my already ridiculously low training volume down even lower - say to 30 minutes a week.  I'm tapped out of motivation after my three 10 minute jaunts and the idea of that single half hour session on the weekend just seems too much.

But this last week has been awesome.  It's only three weeks since the 8+ hour winter 50K run and i'm already at my 'high-water' marks for the super intense sessions - this week I managed to match my best past efforts on the bike and run and exceed it slightly during my rowing workout.  All were brutal and it took nearly as much time for the feelings of agony to subside immediately post workout as it had to create them.

But it was the run this week was particularly fascinating. It was my progressive interval day which called for a constant speed of 8.2 mph (7:19 pace) starting with a 0% incline and increasing 2% every 2 minutes.  The first three intervals reach a 4% grade but never demand an intensity i can't 'wrap my mind' around.  6% is a different story - and by the end of the 2 minutes i'm usually above Lactate Threshold - the point where i'm maxed out my cardio system and increased efforts come with time limits.  It feels hard enough where if i placed too much stock in 'feelings' i'd be convinced that i should just stick at 6% for the final 2 minutes and hope i could make it.

But instead, i make it harder.  The only way to go into this last 2 minutes at 8% is with guns blazing.  I usually roar internally (i tried doing it externally once but this is apparently frowned upon?) and charge up a simulated hill toward a mentally simulated finish line.  It's only 2 minutes, right?  I can do this.

Unfortunately, that bravado and fake finish line only get me through about 45 seconds.  With over a minute to go it really becomes interesting.  I start counting down from 100 every time my right foot hits the spinning belt.  Even though i'm sure i don't actually close my eyes, the optic nerve impulses must not make it past the Cerebellum, being used to keep me on my feet but never making it into my active consciousness.  My focus is entirely abstract  - nothing but numbers (55, 54, 53, 52.....) and an odd and heightened awareness of the approaching end of my ability to continue performing coordinated movement.

you want me to run through there?

I start to feel like i'm running through jello or some other viscous fluid.  It's not purley a cardiovascular difficulty, or a lactic acid/muscular difficulty one like i often get on hard biking intervals - its this beautiful whole body sort of thing.  Arms, legs, chest, gut, skin, lungs - messages being sent from all remote outposts simultaneously declaring that actual war is about to be lost.  Defeat is on the horizon.

I think maybe if i'd actually had a gun to my head i could have pulled out another 30 seconds or so.  Maybe.

I thought it was pretty sweet to come that close to actual physical failure on purpose.

Loose Threads

I joined a listserve a couple of days ago on Ultra running (www.ultrunr.com), participated in a couple of conversations and then started my own regarding low volume training.  In general I found the response to be far more cordial than what i'd experienced on similar triathlon type forums.  Maybe ultra-runners are to the athletic world what long-boarders are to the surf-o-sphere (and triathletes are the short-boarders).  Analogies and/or metaphors aside (too lazy to figure out which it was), i was pleasantly surprised.

Ultra-runners.  Long-boarders of the running world.

What was the most interesting was that there were a number of very smart posters that seemed to corroborate some of my ideas regarding human capabilities towards what are usually thought to be super extreme distances.

I believe very strongly that most people don't approach their actual physical potential, myself included.  This isn't a negative judgement - it just means that there are so many 'stop mechanisms' in place that are designed to convince us that we have reached that potential that removing all of them becomes a practical impossibility in almost all race situations.  Some people can get very close, but most never do.  What this means is that barring cutoffs, most people not suffering from chronic health conditions (obesity, etc) could go out tomorrow and complete a 50 mile distance if they could over-rule these mental mechanisms.  Yeah, maybe it wouldn't be a great idea - maybe it wouldn't add anything to their lives - but the physical potential is there.  It isn't the issue.  And a based on the thread that was generated from my post on Ultrunr, I'm not the only one who thinks so: 

Sure you can do almost anything without out any training...How well you do it RELATIVE TO YOUR ability is the question....

And

I agree with Mr. Price and a couple others who've posted that anyone reasonably healthy can complete an ultra, particularly a 50K or even 50 miler on low volume training. It just depends on how much individual discomfort to personal suffering you are willing to undergo to get to the finish line. 

In my mind there's no benefit necessarily to one training method vs the other in terms of developing the required physical potential to complete ultra endurance events.  I can do it on one brutal hour a week.  Most choose to spend much longer than this.  If you like training/running/biking whatever, great, do it.  Being in good shape is awesome.  My challenge is simply with the idea that volume and distance are requirements for doing these events.  Volume and distance can certainly provide needed ammunition for the inner mental debate with one's own central governor that is a foregone conclusion of these big efforts. But if this ammunition is already available I think that the main pre-requisites for ultra endurance events have already been met. 

Happy training.