the double whammy

Charlie Pendejo said:

I just stumbled across this months-old discussion spurred by some claim
on lactate.com (which is also new to me), at

http://tinyurl.com/74lf2

Haven't gotten all that far, but what I find interesting is a premise
of the "double whammy" here, namely that at a given pace, you're
getting energy from both aerobic and anaerobic systems; and if your
anaerobic system ain't what it should be, your aerobic system is
getting stressed more than it ought to, which (especially in
combination with whammy numero dos, which I'll leave out here) can
lead to overtraining.

If anyone has comments, reactions, insights (I'm guessing mostly people
with "D" names, but I don't want to dissuade any of you R, A, T, or S
folks) I'd be interesting in reading your two cents, or thirty
barleycorns as the case may be.

Pendejo, whose anaerobic system is probably pretty lame

Short answer: what a load of [censored].

Longer answer: the high mileage guys on letsrun are doing a good job of giving
this the flogging it deserves.

Anaerobic training is useful, not so much to train the lactic acid system
itself, but because you need to go outside the aerobic range to train the
aerobic system effectively, and also to train your "running muscles" (via
running economy work) But aerobic training doesn't prevent that. And most of
the slowdown effects of things like high mileage etc can be avoided with a good
sharpening plan.

Cheers,
--
Donovan Rebbechi
http://pegasus.rutgers.edu/~elflord/

"Charlie Pendejo" <[email hidden]> wrote

Here's the double whammy:

Quoted message said:

First Consequence - lower anaerobic capacity leads to the utilization of
the aerobic system more at every effort level while the aerobic system has
not increased in capacity.

B does not imply A, and A does not imply B...perfectly incoherent!

Quoted message said:

...The athlete is not training any harder but is in danger of over-training
because he has changed the mixture of energy he is using during each
workout.

Burning more fat and being in less distress (below the LT) puts you in
danger of overtraining?

Quoted message said:

Second Consequence - lower anaerobic capacity leads to less perceived
stress at every effort level and most will assume that they are now
stronger and can handle increased training loads. This is the second
whammy. The athlete is in real danger of over-training because his
over-confidence has led to increased training loads that he cannot handle.

Oh, I get it. Getting in shape makes you overconfident. So it's better to
be out of shape.

Quoted message said:

And when declines come from this over stress of the aerobic system, a
typical reaction is to train harder.

....and when declines come from overstress of the anerobic system (LT and
above running), a typical reaction is *not* to train harder??

My take is that the overtrainers keep the intensity up when they should take
a break -- you can't train harder because you're too beat up. Although
enevlope pushers like Lance have tried other, more extreme approaches.

I'd say he's zero por dos.

-- Dan (that makes me the 2nd D)

"Charlie Pendejo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I just stumbled across this months-old discussion spurred by some claim
on lactate.com (which is also new to me), at

http://tinyurl.com/74lf2

I can't get to the web page - can you post the real one. I don't know
if it's possible to find the real page from one of those tinyurl
abbrevations.

-DF

Quoted message said:

"Charlie Pendejo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I just stumbled across this months-old discussion spurred by some claim
on lactate.com (which is also new to me), at

http://tinyurl.com/74lf2

I can't get to the web page - can you post the real one. I don't know
if it's possible to find the real page from one of those tinyurl
abbrevations.

It worked for me. Here's the full URL:
http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=149651&page=0

--
Phil M.

On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 11:39:08 GMT, "Doug Freese" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I can't get to the web page -

That's because you are too old.

animals take a nap one time a day..
so every 12 hours you sleep × amount.
if body recovers say every 24 hours...
if sleep every 12 hours.
12×2=(24) 36÷24= (12×2)
so why take recover time..
if you can just. double wammy...

I allways wonder were my other arm sleeve went too.....
Now I know...........
see...with earl arm sleve is cut at the elbow..with a pack of
cigs.....
He a donkey you know.....
and with rogers.......
well he got a really big.....allways to his skirt..........

Biking the year thru.

"Lowtuc Zow" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

animals take a nap one time a day..

so every 12 hours you sleep × amount.
if body recovers say every 24 hours...
if sleep every 12 hours.12×2=(24) 36÷24= (12×2)
so why take recover time..

Quoted message said:

I guess you have four legs and that suffices for rest.

I'm off to throw some cans on the side of the rode to help feed this guy
on a bike.

-DF

On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 20:58:34 GMT, "Doug Freese" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I guess you have four legs and that suffices for rest.

You HAD to ask? We really don't need to know.

Quoted message said:

I'm off to throw some cans on the side of the rode to help feed this guy
on a bike.

Your can is way too fat to throw on the road.