low glycogen stores vs low fitness levels
Replies
-
janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Yes, I think with people who are newer to endurance activities, there is a tendency to over-estimate the ability fuel has to boost performance/keep one going (I know I did when I was newer).
Now I've hit the wall in a long race due to insufficient fueling, so I know what it feels like. But a big chunk of the time, most of the answers (IMO) can be found with more training . . . more miles and more hours on your feet. A gel pack just isn't going to be a key factor during your typical half marathon.
This is a very good point.
I'd add to it a frequent "rookie mistake" and that is, just about everyone feels great on race day and that often leads to pacing problems among newer participants, specifically, going out too fast. Then, when the "crash" occurs, no amount of gel, shot blocks, gatorade, coke or pretzels are going to save the race.
You just perfectly described my first marathon! I went way too fast for the first twenty miles because I felt so great. The last six miles were agony. I finished, but barely. Fortunately, I knew exactly what the problem was, so I was able to fix it for future races.
I certainly fit that description more than once, especially when riding a bike on race day. Its SO tempting to find a group of riders who are holding a pace that is slightly faster than what you've trained for and think "I can stick with this group!" Trying to keep up with a faster bike group almost always makes the run that follows resemble a march to the gallows. Speaking from bitter personal experience, picking up 2 mph on the bike split led to a meltdown that caused me to limp across the finish line after walking most of the half marathon. I made that mistake twice before accepting reality.
I may have done that at one point... the lone DNF of my racing career.
I did it at the Timberman 70.3 in NH. Decided I could do the 56mile bike split at a 19mph pace, hills be damned.
The next year, I was only marginally better about it. I'm a slow learner.2 -
Agree with your observations about consistency and body awareness. Getting at least 90% of the workouts completed and managing training fatigue during high volume periods are the big keys to success IMO. BTW, the bike example I mentioned occurred during our build for the Lake Placid 70.3 race in September.
90% is that magical number. You've had a lot of coaching/training.
I'll be doing a camp in June, maybe May too. Excited. I've never been up there. Signed up for the full. Any tips?
Guilty as charged. I have a coach and love working with her. I was signed up for the full at LP, but succumbed to peer pressure and switched registration to the full at Mont Tremblant in August.
You will love Lake Placid. Spectacular beauty, and there's nothing like finishing in the Olympic Oval. Couple thoughts: 1) Training Camp is a VERY smart move. 2) The whole race hinges on how you manage the bike course.
Feel free to send pm with questions or to discuss further. Teaser from September:
0 -
Guilty as charged. I have a coach and love working with her. I was signed up for the full at LP, but succumbed to peer pressure and switched registration to the full at Mont Tremblant in August.
You will love Lake Placid. Spectacular beauty, and there's nothing like finishing in the Olympic Oval. Couple thoughts: 1) Training Camp is a VERY smart move. 2) The whole race hinges on how you manage the bike course.
Feel free to send pm with questions or to discuss further. Teaser from September:
I am sooooo giddy just looking at that picture! Seriously. Also, HOW did you get into MT at the last minute? Last minute must have been first minute for MT : )
This will be my first full. I had signed up for Santa Rosa last summer when I tore my calf 7.5 weeks out from the face (it was an old injury which I reinjured twice: once, January '17, during unnamed recreational activities with a friend; twice, May '17, on a 5-day cycling trip with my team through Italy's western Alps). The trip was amazing, and I was in beast mode.
Things come full circle...I actually have a pulled hammy now. I can bike, but I can't do a single standing hamstring lift with even 10 pounds. This year they'll be in Sardinia in April and I have to decide this week if I sign up. I'm afraid I'll make the same mistake: definitely don't have the discipline to hold back (just thinking about gorgeous hills and I want to hammer it). I must be a slow learner too. : )
Thank you for the gorgeous picture. I'm saving it. : ) And for the very kind invitation to PM you.0 -
FR accepted. Have some thoughts to consider regarding how to approach the bike course. Will send pm when I get a chance.0
-
No rush. Thanks:)0
-
Yes. There's a difference between having the fuel (glycogen) and athletic conditioning. Eg my first 100 mile ride (previous longest was 77). I still remember pedaling home at 12 mph (flat), with gu in my back pockets, feeling like death.
And around the neighborhood for 4 miles just to say I did it. Heh.
Just an addition: part of “athletic conditioning” is “having the fuel”. The ability to store, break down, process, deliver, and conserve glycogen are all part of the “training effect”.
3 -
Yes. There's a difference between having the fuel (glycogen) and athletic conditioning. Eg my first 100 mile ride (previous longest was 77). I still remember pedaling home at 12 mph (flat), with gu in my back pockets, feeling like death.
And around the neighborhood for 4 miles just to say I did it. Heh.
Just an addition: part of “athletic conditioning” is “having the fuel”. The ability to store, break down, process, deliver, and conserve glycogen are all part of the “training effect”.
Hmmm... Can you go a little further with this, or should I just Google "training effect"? I feel like the quality of info from that search would be iffy, at best.
I'm happy to do my own research, just need to be pointed in the right direction. Thanks.1 -
Guilty as charged. I have a coach and love working with her. I was signed up for the full at LP, but succumbed to peer pressure and switched registration to the full at Mont Tremblant in August.
You will love Lake Placid. Spectacular beauty, and there's nothing like finishing in the Olympic Oval. Couple thoughts: 1) Training Camp is a VERY smart move. 2) The whole race hinges on how you manage the bike course.
Feel free to send pm with questions or to discuss further. Teaser from September:
I am sooooo giddy just looking at that picture! Seriously. Also, HOW did you get into MT at the last minute? Last minute must have been first minute for MT : )
This will be my first full. I had signed up for Santa Rosa last summer when I tore my calf 7.5 weeks out from the face (it was an old injury which I reinjured twice: once, January '17, during unnamed recreational activities with a friend; twice, May '17, on a 5-day cycling trip with my team through Italy's western Alps). The trip was amazing, and I was in beast mode.
Things come full circle...I actually have a pulled hammy now. I can bike, but I can't do a single standing hamstring lift with even 10 pounds. This year they'll be in Sardinia in April and I have to decide this week if I sign up. I'm afraid I'll make the same mistake: definitely don't have the discipline to hold back (just thinking about gorgeous hills and I want to hammer it). I must be a slow learner too. : )
Thank you for the gorgeous picture. I'm saving it. : ) And for the very kind invitation to PM you.
i remember that site - Placid 70.3 kicked my *kitten* - whoever puts hills at mile 54 needs to be drawn and quartered!0 -
deannalfisher wrote: »
Guilty as charged. I have a coach and love working with her. I was signed up for the full at LP, but succumbed to peer pressure and switched registration to the full at Mont Tremblant in August.
You will love Lake Placid. Spectacular beauty, and there's nothing like finishing in the Olympic Oval. Couple thoughts: 1) Training Camp is a VERY smart move. 2) The whole race hinges on how you manage the bike course.
Feel free to send pm with questions or to discuss further. Teaser from September:
I am sooooo giddy just looking at that picture! Seriously. Also, HOW did you get into MT at the last minute? Last minute must have been first minute for MT : )
This will be my first full. I had signed up for Santa Rosa last summer when I tore my calf 7.5 weeks out from the face (it was an old injury which I reinjured twice: once, January '17, during unnamed recreational activities with a friend; twice, May '17, on a 5-day cycling trip with my team through Italy's western Alps). The trip was amazing, and I was in beast mode.
Things come full circle...I actually have a pulled hammy now. I can bike, but I can't do a single standing hamstring lift with even 10 pounds. This year they'll be in Sardinia in April and I have to decide this week if I sign up. I'm afraid I'll make the same mistake: definitely don't have the discipline to hold back (just thinking about gorgeous hills and I want to hammer it). I must be a slow learner too. : )
Thank you for the gorgeous picture. I'm saving it. : ) And for the very kind invitation to PM you.
i remember that site - Placid 70.3 kicked my *kitten* - whoever puts hills at mile 54 needs to be drawn and quartered!
@deannalfisher - That's why you have to register for either the REV3 Quassy Half or IMMT. You KNOW you secretly want another shot at those hills! And to be precise, the Hills start at mile 35 and end around mile 54.5
0 -
deannalfisher wrote: »
Guilty as charged. I have a coach and love working with her. I was signed up for the full at LP, but succumbed to peer pressure and switched registration to the full at Mont Tremblant in August.
You will love Lake Placid. Spectacular beauty, and there's nothing like finishing in the Olympic Oval. Couple thoughts: 1) Training Camp is a VERY smart move. 2) The whole race hinges on how you manage the bike course.
Feel free to send pm with questions or to discuss further. Teaser from September:
I am sooooo giddy just looking at that picture! Seriously. Also, HOW did you get into MT at the last minute? Last minute must have been first minute for MT : )
This will be my first full. I had signed up for Santa Rosa last summer when I tore my calf 7.5 weeks out from the face (it was an old injury which I reinjured twice: once, January '17, during unnamed recreational activities with a friend; twice, May '17, on a 5-day cycling trip with my team through Italy's western Alps). The trip was amazing, and I was in beast mode.
Things come full circle...I actually have a pulled hammy now. I can bike, but I can't do a single standing hamstring lift with even 10 pounds. This year they'll be in Sardinia in April and I have to decide this week if I sign up. I'm afraid I'll make the same mistake: definitely don't have the discipline to hold back (just thinking about gorgeous hills and I want to hammer it). I must be a slow learner too. : )
Thank you for the gorgeous picture. I'm saving it. : ) And for the very kind invitation to PM you.
i remember that site - Placid 70.3 kicked my *kitten* - whoever puts hills at mile 54 needs to be drawn and quartered!
@deannalfisher - That's why you have to register for either the REV3 Quassy Half or IMMT. You KNOW you secretly want another shot at those hills!
people who enjoy hills are sadistic! lol! I may do the Luray double (oly/sprint) in August...but yeah
(https://luraytriathlon.com/hawksbill-double-triathlon/)0 -
deannalfisher wrote: »[
people who enjoy hills are sadistic! lol! I may do the Luray double (oly/sprint) in August...but yeah
(https://luraytriathlon.com/hawksbill-double-triathlon/)
Now that race series sounds like a blast!! If it wasn't the same weekend as IMMT, I'd do it. Two days of triathlon plus free painkiller after the race! perfect.0 -
I've heard really good things about it and its one of the few that fits my navy reserves schedule and is during my summer break from my professional education course (that REALLY hampered my race planning this year)0
-
Yes. There's a difference between having the fuel (glycogen) and athletic conditioning. Eg my first 100 mile ride (previous longest was 77). I still remember pedaling home at 12 mph (flat), with gu in my back pockets, feeling like death.
And around the neighborhood for 4 miles just to say I did it. Heh.
Just an addition: part of “athletic conditioning” is “having the fuel”. The ability to store, break down, process, deliver, and conserve glycogen are all part of the “training effect”.
Hmmm... Can you go a little further with this, or should I just Google "training effect"? I feel like the quality of info from that search would be iffy, at best.
I'm happy to do my own research, just need to be pointed in the right direction. Thanks.
I’m not sure you’d find this on a website. This is more textbook stuff. If you looked at the better-known exercise physiology text books they would have more detailed listings of specific changes—although I’m not sure it would be all that instructive.
Suffice to say that if you observe any increase in physical/athletic performance, that performance and “fitness” improvement is the result of dozens of physiological adaptations to a training stimulus. From macro changes like increased stroke volume and plasma volume to microscopic changes in gene expression and cell membrane permeability. In response to any chronic stressor (e.g. training load), the body will always respond in every conceivable way to reestablish homeostasis.
I’m happy to try to answer any specific questions, but it’s kind of a broad topic to write about in totality.1 -
Yes. There's a difference between having the fuel (glycogen) and athletic conditioning. Eg my first 100 mile ride (previous longest was 77). I still remember pedaling home at 12 mph (flat), with gu in my back pockets, feeling like death.
And around the neighborhood for 4 miles just to say I did it. Heh.
Just an addition: part of “athletic conditioning” is “having the fuel”. The ability to store, break down, process, deliver, and conserve glycogen are all part of the “training effect”.
Hmmm... Can you go a little further with this, or should I just Google "training effect"? I feel like the quality of info from that search would be iffy, at best.
I'm happy to do my own research, just need to be pointed in the right direction. Thanks.
I’m not sure you’d find this on a website. This is more textbook stuff. If you looked at the better-known exercise physiology text books they would have more detailed listings of specific changes—although I’m not sure it would be all that instructive.
Suffice to say that if you observe any increase in physical/athletic performance, that performance and “fitness” improvement is the result of dozens of physiological adaptations to a training stimulus. From macro changes like increased stroke volume and plasma volume to microscopic changes in gene expression and cell membrane permeability. In response to any chronic stressor (e.g. training load), the body will always respond in every conceivable way to reestablish homeostasis.
I’m happy to try to answer any specific questions, but it’s kind of a broad topic to write about in totality.
No specific questions, really... just wanting a more complete understanding of things for my own use/benefit.
Full disclosure -
I used to be a fairly decent triathlete, and have a number of 70.3s under my belt. I took last year off to deal with some injuries and my conditioning seems to have suffered more than I had anticipated. I'm sure some of it is just my ego, but I suspect most of it ties back to a significant reduction in overall base/volume work. As I try to work back into something resembling decent shape, I'm having a harder than expected time. When you mentioned the ability to have/store/use fuel as a part of overall conditioning, it made me wonder if there was something else I might be missing. But I don't think that's the case... I think it's just wishful thinking, and that ultimately I just need to spend more time on the trainer.0 -
Yes. There's a difference between having the fuel (glycogen) and athletic conditioning. Eg my first 100 mile ride (previous longest was 77). I still remember pedaling home at 12 mph (flat), with gu in my back pockets, feeling like death.
And around the neighborhood for 4 miles just to say I did it. Heh.
Just an addition: part of “athletic conditioning” is “having the fuel”. The ability to store, break down, process, deliver, and conserve glycogen are all part of the “training effect”.
Hmmm... Can you go a little further with this, or should I just Google "training effect"? I feel like the quality of info from that search would be iffy, at best.
I'm happy to do my own research, just need to be pointed in the right direction. Thanks.
I’m not sure you’d find this on a website. This is more textbook stuff. If you looked at the better-known exercise physiology text books they would have more detailed listings of specific changes—although I’m not sure it would be all that instructive.
Suffice to say that if you observe any increase in physical/athletic performance, that performance and “fitness” improvement is the result of dozens of physiological adaptations to a training stimulus. From macro changes like increased stroke volume and plasma volume to microscopic changes in gene expression and cell membrane permeability. In response to any chronic stressor (e.g. training load), the body will always respond in every conceivable way to reestablish homeostasis.
I’m happy to try to answer any specific questions, but it’s kind of a broad topic to write about in totality.
No specific questions, really... just wanting a more complete understanding of things for my own use/benefit.
Full disclosure -
I used to be a fairly decent triathlete, and have a number of 70.3s under my belt. I took last year off to deal with some injuries and my conditioning seems to have suffered more than I had anticipated. I'm sure some of it is just my ego, but I suspect most of it ties back to a significant reduction in overall base/volume work. As I try to work back into something resembling decent shape, I'm having a harder than expected time. When you mentioned the ability to have/store/use fuel as a part of overall conditioning, it made me wonder if there was something else I might be missing. But I don't think that's the case... I think it's just wishful thinking, and that ultimately I just need to spend more time on the trainer.
As I’m sure you know from previous training, there are short-term and long-term training effects. When you are off for a longer time, you lose things like capillary density and mitochondrial structure that take time to get back—that’s the “base” part of aerobic training.
I have had several injuries in the last 5-6 years that kept me from running, but I could always do something else at a reasonably high level. Last year I developed horrible Achilles tendinosis that kept me literally on the couch for months-no dog walking, forced to take elevator at work, etc. I was able to do some modest stair master work at the beginning of the year, and have started trying to run a tiny bit in the last week—like 4x30 sec total. I am taken back at how poor by running conditioning is right now. It is super-discouraging, but the only choice is to push forward step by step.
3 -
Yes. There's a difference between having the fuel (glycogen) and athletic conditioning. Eg my first 100 mile ride (previous longest was 77). I still remember pedaling home at 12 mph (flat), with gu in my back pockets, feeling like death.
And around the neighborhood for 4 miles just to say I did it. Heh.
Just an addition: part of “athletic conditioning” is “having the fuel”. The ability to store, break down, process, deliver, and conserve glycogen are all part of the “training effect”.
This is an excellent point. I don't have experience with other endurance sports, but a big portion of what your body is doing during long runs is getting your body adjusted to breaking down and delivering the glycogen you need during longer activities. I have to assume it's the same during extended bike rides and other activities of that sort.
(At least according to what I've read about long runs).
3 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Yes. There's a difference between having the fuel (glycogen) and athletic conditioning. Eg my first 100 mile ride (previous longest was 77). I still remember pedaling home at 12 mph (flat), with gu in my back pockets, feeling like death.
And around the neighborhood for 4 miles just to say I did it. Heh.
Just an addition: part of “athletic conditioning” is “having the fuel”. The ability to store, break down, process, deliver, and conserve glycogen are all part of the “training effect”.
This is an excellent point. I don't have experience with other endurance sports, but a big portion of what your body is doing during long runs is getting your body adjusted to breaking down and delivering the glycogen you need during longer activities. I have to assume it's the same during extended bike rides and other activities of that sort.
(At least according to what I've read about long runs).
It never would have crossed my mind that your body has to learn/adjust to fueling itself... though I guess I can see how that's the key benefit to the long and slow training benefits. Interesting. It seems like such a basic, fundamental function, it's almost counter-intuitive to think that your body has to learn to do it. It stands to reason that a lack of base/volume would translate to decreased performance across the board - even in shorter/higher intensity work sessions.0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Yes. There's a difference between having the fuel (glycogen) and athletic conditioning. Eg my first 100 mile ride (previous longest was 77). I still remember pedaling home at 12 mph (flat), with gu in my back pockets, feeling like death.
And around the neighborhood for 4 miles just to say I did it. Heh.
Just an addition: part of “athletic conditioning” is “having the fuel”. The ability to store, break down, process, deliver, and conserve glycogen are all part of the “training effect”.
This is an excellent point. I don't have experience with other endurance sports, but a big portion of what your body is doing during long runs is getting your body adjusted to breaking down and delivering the glycogen you need during longer activities. I have to assume it's the same during extended bike rides and other activities of that sort.
(At least according to what I've read about long runs).
It never would have crossed my mind that your body has to learn/adjust to fueling itself... though I guess I can see how that's the key benefit to the long and slow training benefits. Interesting. It seems like such a basic, fundamental function, it's almost counter-intuitive to think that your body has to learn to do it. It stands to reason that a lack of base/volume would translate to decreased performance across the board - even in shorter/higher intensity work sessions.
This article doesn't have sources, but it was one of the things I read when I was learning about long runs and their importance: https://www.runnersworld.com/race-training/run-long-and-prosper
The specific claim is that by depleting your glycogen stores, you can prompt your body to store more. This, of course, will be very handy during longer events. I agree it seems weird that our bodies have to "learn" it.
0 -
Though this is a discussion of training and associated conditioning/deconditioning of athletes as we ramp up or reduce our volume, I couldn't help but notice another theme among participants in this thread.
My trainer mentioned recently that during her functional strength training certification, the instructor frequently mentioned the "training build up, overuse injury, rehabilitation" cycle that is so prevalent in distance runners and triathletes. The amount of overhead work required (stretching, foam rolling, yoga, strength work) to keep all the muscle groups functioning and synchronised is often neglected as training time increases. I think at least 4 or 5 posts in this thread noted injuries and rehab efforts underway (me included). For me, staying injury free is probably the most important factor in my race prep efforts and is no small effort at 60 years of age.
2 -
The primary reasonjanejellyroll wrote: »Yes. There's a difference between having the fuel (glycogen) and athletic conditioning. Eg my first 100 mile ride (previous longest was 77). I still remember pedaling home at 12 mph (flat), with gu in my back pockets, feeling like death.
And around the neighborhood for 4 miles just to say I did it. Heh.
Just an addition: part of “athletic conditioning” is “having the fuel”. The ability to store, break down, process, deliver, and conserve glycogen are all part of the “training effect”.
This is an excellent point. I don't have experience with other endurance sports, but a big portion of what your body is doing during long runs is getting your body adjusted to breaking down and delivering the glycogen you need during longer activities. I have to assume it's the same during extended bike rides and other activities of that sort.
(At least according to what I've read about long runs).
It never would have crossed my mind that your body has to learn/adjust to fueling itself... though I guess I can see how that's the key benefit to the long and slow training benefits. Interesting. It seems like such a basic, fundamental function, it's almost counter-intuitive to think that your body has to learn to do it. It stands to reason that a lack of base/volume would translate to decreased performance across the board - even in shorter/higher intensity work sessions.
It's important to remember, under normal training conditions for 99% of us, our bodies do NOT create muscle fibers. The fibers are scripted, and we have what we have. Slow twitch are slow twitch, fast twitch are fast twitch. BUT, there are some fibers which have a bit of an identity crisis, and those are the ones we can train. This is often described as mitochondrial biogenesis/density, capillary "growth" and by muscle fiber diameter. We know that slow twitch fibers are dense in capillaries and mitochondria, and have thin muscle fiber diameters. And lots of fat (think of the duck, who can fly long distances and have has greasy red meat). Fast twitch are pretty much the opposite (think of the chicken, flightless, white meat and not that much fat).
In terms of "training" your body to have enough glycogen (Without fueling), the primary mechanism is ketosis, which turns fat to sugar. I'm not so sure this mechanism is trainable in the sense that we can throw huge amounts of fast twitch muscle fibers and we can train our liver to keep up. But, we can train our muscle fibers, boiled down to just 2 types (fast and slow twitch) to do the work we need them to. So yes, the main ingredient missing for most endurance athletes is the aerobic base. It can take years to build an adequate aerobic base, but a month or 2 to do the fast twitch fiber adaptations one needs for an endurance event. So, relatively short. I would say most athletes tend to train in "no man's land" or predominately anaerobic (fast twitch) and miss much of the aerobic base.3 -
I didn't really read the whole thread. Just the OP's post.
I agree. It is very possible that people get "tired" into some X number of miles not just because they lost "energy" in the form of blood sugar, or glycogen, or xyz. If you can pinch an inch, you have more than enough energy to run 3 marathons. The matter becomes being able to access that energy.
It's very most likely that the person in question has plenty of blood sugar or glycogen. But, they are either running at a pace much faster than they should (beyond their lactate threshold) or their aerobic capacity just isn't built for the level of distance they are attempting (or as the OP stated, "a person just isn't trained to exercise that far, that long, that hard".
People that the OP is referring to most likely have not understood the concept that in order for energy to be used, not only do you need a substrate like sugar, but you also need oxygen in the muscle mitochondria. People who are not trained properly, have not developed the mechanism to get the oxygen in their breath to their muscles so that sugar (glucose specifically) or fatty acid can become oxidized so that ATP can be produced in order to allow muscle contractions to continue to occur at the same intensity so the person can continue running whatever distance they are trying to run. Eating a gel at mile 8 is not going to substitute a good aerobic mechanism. That's because the person who isn't trained well isn't lacking sugar, but oxygen.
As the OP correctly observed, "most people probably just need to log more miles and more hours, and be a bit more patient". But I will add, those added miles need to be ran at an aerobic level of effort not an anaerobic level. In normal speaking terms, you run at a pace that you can very easily carry a conversation, not at a pace that makes you huff and puff. If you can't say more than, "this hurts" as you're running because your breathing too hard, then you really need to slow down. Running at an anaerobic level basically means that you are running with too much intensity that you can no longer use oxygen to maintain most of the ATP production to sustain your running. You are now requiring your body to burn glucose inefficiently that creates a fermented byproduct called lactate along with loose ionized hydrogen atoms that causes your muscles and blood to be acidified. When that happens, a signal is sent to your brain which in turn your brain sends another signal back to your muscles to make them stop running. That is the real reason people don't have enough "energy" to run 8 miles at that unbelievable pace.6 -
I didn't really read the whole thread. Just the OP's post.
I agree. It is very possible that people get "tired" into some X number of miles not just because they lost "energy" in the form of blood sugar, or glycogen, or xyz. If you can pinch an inch, you have more than enough energy to run 3 marathons. The matter becomes being able to access that energy.
It's very most likely that the person in question has plenty of blood sugar or glycogen. But, they are either running at a pace much faster than they should (beyond their lactate threshold) or their aerobic capacity just isn't built for the level of distance they are attempting (or as the OP stated, "a person just isn't trained to exercise that far, that long, that hard".
People that the OP is referring to most likely have not understood the concept that in order for energy to be used, not only do you need a substrate like sugar, but you also need oxygen in the muscle mitochondria. People who are not trained properly, have not developed the mechanism to get the oxygen in their breath to their muscles so that sugar (glucose specifically) or fatty acid can become oxidized so that ATP can be produced in order to allow muscle contractions to continue to occur at the same intensity so the person can continue running whatever distance they are trying to run. Eating a gel at mile 8 is not going to substitute a good aerobic mechanism. That's because the person who isn't trained well isn't lacking sugar, but oxygen.
As the OP correctly observed, "most people probably just need to log more miles and more hours, and be a bit more patient". But I will add, those added miles need to be ran at an aerobic level of effort not an anaerobic level. In normal speaking terms, you run at a pace that you can very easily carry a conversation, not at a pace that makes you huff and puff. If you can't say more than, "this hurts" as you're running because your breathing too hard, then you really need to slow down. Running at an anaerobic level basically means that you are running with too much intensity that you can no longer use oxygen to maintain most of the ATP production to sustain your running. You are now requiring your body to burn glucose inefficiently that creates a fermented byproduct called lactate along with loose ionized hydrogen atoms that causes your muscles and blood to be acidified. When that happens, a signal is sent to your brain which in turn your brain sends another signal back to your muscles to make them stop running. That is the real reason people don't have enough "energy" to run 8 miles at that unbelievable pace.
Thank you for such a complete explanation. Much of this is the detail (or context) I've been missing in my years of training.3 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Yes. There's a difference between having the fuel (glycogen) and athletic conditioning. Eg my first 100 mile ride (previous longest was 77). I still remember pedaling home at 12 mph (flat), with gu in my back pockets, feeling like death.
And around the neighborhood for 4 miles just to say I did it. Heh.
Just an addition: part of “athletic conditioning” is “having the fuel”. The ability to store, break down, process, deliver, and conserve glycogen are all part of the “training effect”.
This is an excellent point. I don't have experience with other endurance sports, but a big portion of what your body is doing during long runs is getting your body adjusted to breaking down and delivering the glycogen you need during longer activities. I have to assume it's the same during extended bike rides and other activities of that sort.
(At least according to what I've read about long runs).
Actually, the purpose of the long run is to get your body adjusted to breaking down fatty acids that you need during longer activities.
I posted yesterday and mentioned substrates. Substrates could be glucose or fatty acids being oxidized to produce ATP. Getting a little deeper here now.
Your body (specifically your muscles) prefers to use glucose as the substrate. Your brain however craves glucose and can't really use fatty acids. In long term stress due to low carb diets, the body will start producing a glucose like substance out of your stored fat called ketones to fuel your brain and body. But that is a different topic altogether.
Your body under normal conditions will prefer to use glucose as a substrate because the process to break down glucose into pyruvate then into ATP is much simpler than the process to break down fatty acids into ATP. But you can store much more potential energy in fat than you can from sugar, and therefore your body prefers to store fat long term than sugar.
Sugar is first stored by chaining glucose molecules together and bounded by water molecules and is called glycogen. One gram of glycogen can yield about 3 calories of energy. One gram of fat can yield about 9 calories of energy. Your body will convert excess glucose and can store them as triglycerides (fat) for longer term use. But again, your body would much prefer to break down glycogen into glucose than to break down triglycerides into fatty acids.
The problem, because glycogen is stored by binding sugar with water, there is a limit as to how much your body will store carbs (sugar) in the form of glycogen. It stores a bit in your muscles cells and a whole bunch more in your liver. The most common stat that gets quoted is that your body has the capacity to store about as much glycogen to allow you to run 20 miles. This is a very rough stat, but very much quoted and probably the easiest to understand. Because of this, people say, the marathon is half done at 20 miles and the second half is the last 6.2 miles. Basically, if you want to run anything past 20 miles, you have to get your body to use fat as a substrate to produce ATP.
There are some rules. Your body can use glucose as a substrate to produce ATP without oxygen. It's an inefficient way but your body will go "anaerobic" to burn glucose to produce a small amount of ATP but yield a lot of lactate and Hydrogen ions as byproducts (which I mentioned yesterday will acidify your muscles and blood which causes fatigue). But in order to use a fatty acid as a substrate to produce ATP, your body must be able to oxidize it in the muscle mitochondria. In other words, it requires oxygen. The faster you run, the more you are forcing your body to use carbs over fat. So one of the rules to training your body to use fat is to pace yourself. You have to do your long run in an "aerobic" state and stay away from going "anaerobic". This means you try to do your long run in a conversational state. Talk in complete sentences with a running partner or sing a song out loud as you are running by yourself. If you can't, then you know to slow your pace down. If you get out of breath, then you are going anaerobic and forcing your body to continue to rely more on carbs.
The second rule is that in order to use a substrate, it must be broken down into it's simplest form. Glycogen must first be broken down into glucose (process called glycogenolysis) because certain enzymes are released to help enable that. Your body will also release other hormones to trigger this to happen. For example, your brain will tell the body to release epinephrine as the primary messenger signal to initiate glycogenolysis. Then there are secondary messengers and the process gets very complicated from there. There's a whole completely different process to do the same thing but with fat as opposed to sugar. With all these "chemicals" being released into your body, sometimes it takes a while for your body to chemically shift from sugar burning to fat burning. And your body has to learn to produce enough of these chemicals to support what it is your doing. If you never ran 15 miles before, there's a lot of things your body is just not used to doing. One of them is to adequately produce enough hormones and enzymes so they can be released. To know when to release one thing and not the other. The more you run long distances at an aerobic pace, you are training your body to now convert more to fat burning to fuel the running muscles (keep a bit of glucose burning for the brain and preserved to prevent bonking). For those that advocate low carb high fat diets and be fueled on ketones, it's the same concept. You have to train your body to do that. And you have to eat a certain way to do that as well.
Back to carb burners. The longer and further you run, the more of a shift from glucose burning to fat burning (as long as the pace is correct). The further you run at an anaerobic level, the closer you get to bonking (not good). The more you practice this process, the quicker your body will adjust from primary carb burning to primary fat burning. Another way to practice this in your long run is to run in an already carb depleted state. In other words fasted running (as opposed to fed running). You can also google "train low race high" as a training technique that explains this in more detail. The concept is basically, you can run a long time until your body sufficiently depletes enough glycogen in order to shift the carb burning to fat burning. But you can achieve a similar effect if you don't eat anything for a while (fasted running) - like run as soon as you get up and don't eat anything - your body is already in a glycogen depleted state and will make the shift to fat burning within a shorter period of time. The further you run in this depleted state, the more you stress your body to be better prepared the next time you do this type of workout.
6 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Yes. There's a difference between having the fuel (glycogen) and athletic conditioning. Eg my first 100 mile ride (previous longest was 77). I still remember pedaling home at 12 mph (flat), with gu in my back pockets, feeling like death.
And around the neighborhood for 4 miles just to say I did it. Heh.
Just an addition: part of “athletic conditioning” is “having the fuel”. The ability to store, break down, process, deliver, and conserve glycogen are all part of the “training effect”.
This is an excellent point. I don't have experience with other endurance sports, but a big portion of what your body is doing during long runs is getting your body adjusted to breaking down and delivering the glycogen you need during longer activities. I have to assume it's the same during extended bike rides and other activities of that sort.
(At least according to what I've read about long runs).
Actually, the purpose of the long run is to get your body adjusted to breaking down fatty acids that you need during longer activities.
I posted yesterday and mentioned substrates. Substrates could be glucose or fatty acids being oxidized to produce ATP. Getting a little deeper here now.
Your body (specifically your muscles) prefers to use glucose as the substrate. Your brain however craves glucose and can't really use fatty acids. In long term stress due to low carb diets, the body will start producing a glucose like substance out of your stored fat called ketones to fuel your brain and body. But that is a different topic altogether.
Your body under normal conditions will prefer to use glucose as a substrate because the process to break down glucose into pyruvate then into ATP is much simpler than the process to break down fatty acids into ATP. But you can store much more potential energy in fat than you can from sugar, and therefore your body prefers to store fat long term than sugar.
Sugar is first stored by chaining glucose molecules together and bounded by water molecules and is called glycogen. One gram of glycogen can yield about 3 calories of energy. One gram of fat can yield about 9 calories of energy. Your body will convert excess glucose and can store them as triglycerides (fat) for longer term use. But again, your body would much prefer to break down glycogen into glucose than to break down triglycerides into fatty acids.
The problem, because glycogen is stored by binding sugar with water, there is a limit as to how much your body will store carbs (sugar) in the form of glycogen. It stores a bit in your muscles cells and a whole bunch more in your liver. The most common stat that gets quoted is that your body has the capacity to store about as much glycogen to allow you to run 20 miles. This is a very rough stat, but very much quoted and probably the easiest to understand. Because of this, people say, the marathon is half done at 20 miles and the second half is the last 6.2 miles. Basically, if you want to run anything past 20 miles, you have to get your body to use fat as a substrate to produce ATP.
There are some rules. Your body can use glucose as a substrate to produce ATP without oxygen. It's an inefficient way but your body will go "anaerobic" to burn glucose to produce a small amount of ATP but yield a lot of lactate and Hydrogen ions as byproducts (which I mentioned yesterday will acidify your muscles and blood which causes fatigue). But in order to use a fatty acid as a substrate to produce ATP, your body must be able to oxidize it in the muscle mitochondria. In other words, it requires oxygen. The faster you run, the more you are forcing your body to use carbs over fat. So one of the rules to training your body to use fat is to pace yourself. You have to do your long run in an "aerobic" state and stay away from going "anaerobic". This means you try to do your long run in a conversational state. Talk in complete sentences with a running partner or sing a song out loud as you are running by yourself. If you can't, then you know to slow your pace down. If you get out of breath, then you are going anaerobic and forcing your body to continue to rely more on carbs.
The second rule is that in order to use a substrate, it must be broken down into it's simplest form. Glycogen must first be broken down into glucose (process called glycogenolysis) because certain enzymes are released to help enable that. Your body will also release other hormones to trigger this to happen. For example, your brain will tell the body to release epinephrine as the primary messenger signal to initiate glycogenolysis. Then there are secondary messengers and the process gets very complicated from there. There's a whole completely different process to do the same thing but with fat as opposed to sugar. With all these "chemicals" being released into your body, sometimes it takes a while for your body to chemically shift from sugar burning to fat burning. And your body has to learn to produce enough of these chemicals to support what it is your doing. If you never ran 15 miles before, there's a lot of things your body is just not used to doing. One of them is to adequately produce enough hormones and enzymes so they can be released. To know when to release one thing and not the other. The more you run long distances at an aerobic pace, you are training your body to now convert more to fat burning to fuel the running muscles (keep a bit of glucose burning for the brain and preserved to prevent bonking). For those that advocate low carb high fat diets and be fueled on ketones, it's the same concept. You have to train your body to do that. And you have to eat a certain way to do that as well.
Back to carb burners. The longer and further you run, the more of a shift from glucose burning to fat burning (as long as the pace is correct). The further you run at an anaerobic level, the closer you get to bonking (not good). The more you practice this process, the quicker your body will adjust from primary carb burning to primary fat burning. Another way to practice this in your long run is to run in an already carb depleted state. In other words fasted running (as opposed to fed running). You can also google "train low race high" as a training technique that explains this in more detail. The concept is basically, you can run a long time until your body sufficiently depletes enough glycogen in order to shift the carb burning to fat burning. But you can achieve a similar effect if you don't eat anything for a while (fasted running) - like run as soon as you get up and don't eat anything - your body is already in a glycogen depleted state and will make the shift to fat burning within a shorter period of time. The further you run in this depleted state, the more you stress your body to be better prepared the next time you do this type of workout.
Dude. Wow. Thank you so much for taking the time to type all that. Hugely hugely hugely helpful.3 -
-
janejellyroll wrote: »Yes. There's a difference between having the fuel (glycogen) and athletic conditioning. Eg my first 100 mile ride (previous longest was 77). I still remember pedaling home at 12 mph (flat), with gu in my back pockets, feeling like death.
And around the neighborhood for 4 miles just to say I did it. Heh.
Just an addition: part of “athletic conditioning” is “having the fuel”. The ability to store, break down, process, deliver, and conserve glycogen are all part of the “training effect”.
This is an excellent point. I don't have experience with other endurance sports, but a big portion of what your body is doing during long runs is getting your body adjusted to breaking down and delivering the glycogen you need during longer activities. I have to assume it's the same during extended bike rides and other activities of that sort.
(At least according to what I've read about long runs).
It never would have crossed my mind that your body has to learn/adjust to fueling itself... though I guess I can see how that's the key benefit to the long and slow training benefits. Interesting. It seems like such a basic, fundamental function, it's almost counter-intuitive to think that your body has to learn to do it. It stands to reason that a lack of base/volume would translate to decreased performance across the board - even in shorter/higher intensity work sessions.
Your body kind of knows how to do it all. It's just naturally "lazy". The body will only maintain enough to accomplish what it is it has to do. If all you do is sit behind a desk and work on a computer all day, then go home, watch tv, then to bed? Then your body will only maintain a fitness level to achieve that. Over time, muscles will break down that is not needed, bone structures become weaker cause it requires too much resources to maintain a higher level that's not required, hemoglobin count in the blood is lower, mitochondria size and count becomes lower, your heart will only pump at a certain intensity, and ect. As you begin an exercise regimen, you are now stressing your body to do more. The body didn't really forget to do anything, but it now needs to be doing "stuff" it hasn't been asked to do in a very long time. The body may even be unprepared to do that activity. The "do too much too soon" effect. It takes time to build back what your body needs. The body also needs the right nutrition. For example, if you don't get protein in your diet, your body doesn't have enough amino acids to build up muscle tissue. If you don't consume enough calcium, no way to make the bones stronger. Not enough iron in your diet, then your body has no way to produce red blood cells that contain hemoglobin. Ect. and ect. For this reason comes the phrase, "you can't run yourself out of a bad diet". So you wonder why people who have had really poor diets for so long and did very little physical activity, then all of a sudden and want to do really "hard things". I mean, I don't want to ever not persuade anyone to have big goals, but you have to be smart about it too. My aim is to educate, so people can be smarter about how to reach their goals and encourage them to keep doing the right things, not to talk anyone out of something.
EDIT: I opened up my post by saying that your body didn't really forget how to do something. That's kind of a falsehood. Someone who developed long term diabetes due to poor diet and lack of exercise? If it's irreversible, then I guess you could say that your body forgot how to do something.2 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Yes. There's a difference between having the fuel (glycogen) and athletic conditioning. Eg my first 100 mile ride (previous longest was 77). I still remember pedaling home at 12 mph (flat), with gu in my back pockets, feeling like death.
And around the neighborhood for 4 miles just to say I did it. Heh.
Just an addition: part of “athletic conditioning” is “having the fuel”. The ability to store, break down, process, deliver, and conserve glycogen are all part of the “training effect”.
This is an excellent point. I don't have experience with other endurance sports, but a big portion of what your body is doing during long runs is getting your body adjusted to breaking down and delivering the glycogen you need during longer activities. I have to assume it's the same during extended bike rides and other activities of that sort.
(At least according to what I've read about long runs).
It never would have crossed my mind that your body has to learn/adjust to fueling itself... though I guess I can see how that's the key benefit to the long and slow training benefits. Interesting. It seems like such a basic, fundamental function, it's almost counter-intuitive to think that your body has to learn to do it. It stands to reason that a lack of base/volume would translate to decreased performance across the board - even in shorter/higher intensity work sessions.
Your body kind of knows how to do it all. It's just naturally "lazy". The body will only maintain enough to accomplish what it is it has to do. If all you do is sit behind a desk and work on a computer all day, then go home, watch tv, then to bed? Then your body will only maintain a fitness level to achieve that. Over time, muscles will break down that is not needed, bone structures become weaker cause it requires too much resources to maintain a higher level that's not required, hemoglobin count in the blood is lower, mitochondria size and count becomes lower, your heart will only pump at a certain intensity, and ect. As you begin an exercise regimen, you are now stressing your body to do more. The body didn't really forget to do anything, but it now needs to be doing "stuff" it hasn't been asked to do in a very long time. The body may even be unprepared to do that activity. The "do too much too soon" effect. It takes time to build back what your body needs. The body also needs the right nutrition. For example, if you don't get protein in your diet, your body doesn't have enough amino acids to build up muscle tissue. If you don't consume enough calcium, no way to make the bones stronger. Not enough iron in your diet, then your body has no way to produce red blood cells that contain hemoglobin. Ect. and ect. For this reason comes the phrase, "you can't run yourself out of a bad diet". So you wonder why people who have had really poor diets for so long and did very little physical activity, then all of a sudden and want to do really "hard things". I mean, I don't want to ever not persuade anyone to have big goals, but you have to be smart about it too. My aim is to educate, so people can be smarter about how to reach their goals and encourage them to keep doing the right things, not to talk anyone out of something.
Thanks, that makes sense. There is a certain "use it or lose it" effect at play for me.1 -
It's also important to remember that everything works together as a system. If one takes a journey back to high school biology, the krebs cycle is all you really need to know. "sugar" is used in the anaerobic process, with the by product being ATP and pyruvate/lactate. In the aerobic process, "fat" and pyruvate/lactate combine with O2 to create ATP. The interesting point is the aerobic process uses the by product of the anaerobic process. You can't have all just one type of muscle fiber and get along, you need both but you need to train them separately to develop them correctly. Then on competition day, they come together. Jan olbrecht is the king of this type of training. You can pick up his book, which is highly technical or Maffetone, which is more on my level but covers the same theory. Olbrecht's book goes into excellent detail about training plans and how to affect a desired performance. Lactate.com also has an excellent slide deck which dumbs down Olbrecht's work....which is appreciated by people like me.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.9K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 429 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153.1K Motivation and Support
- 8.1K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 15 News and Announcements
- 1.2K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions