or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ligety sets us straight on training!!! - Page 8

post #211 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by jzamp View Post
 

 

Therefore, if we agree that skiing is more anaerobic than aerobic and that too much aerobic training as a negative effect on key aspects of anaerobic performance (whereas the opposite doesn't happen) 
 

This line is incorrect though, as extensive anaerobic dominate training does have a negative effect on mitochondrial density, capillary density, aerobic enzyme activation and other such important factors in overall energy production!

post #212 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Condition View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jzamp View Post
 

what are you trying to get at? I think you are just looking to pick a fight...

It's quite obvious that a DH only athlete will have a different training regiment that a SL only one. Yet, the point remains that OVERALL the demands of skiing are more anaerobic than aerobic, albeit in different percentages depending on the event, and as such the training should reflect these demands. 

I will say it one last time, there are some benefits in training aerobically for an anaerobic sport. 

And IMHO mainly dealing with increasing energy stores in the muscle and and lactate removal, but too much aerobic training will have also have negative effects in a sport where quickness and power are fundamental.
Therefore, if we agree that skiing is more anaerobic than aerobic and that too much aerobic training as a negative effect on key aspects of anaerobic performance (whereas the opposite doesn't happen),  an athlete training for skiing should emphasizes anaerobic, interval training, over long session aerobic training. 
For recreational, untrained skiers it doesn't matter. Any training will bring some improvements, that will help with spending the day on the slopes.

 

http://www.webmedcentral.com/article_view/3284

 

 

Now tell me why you would prefer anaerobic training over interval training for skiing.

The key problem here, again I might add, is that you and others on here are assuming that when I speak about aerobic training I am speaking solely about Long, Slow, Distance work.........I am not!

 

Aerobic training across the full spectrum power to capacity is what I am talking about. Including the types of training mentioned/called SIT in that review you linked. Sprint interval training has a good effect on peripheral aerobic adaptations (sadly not central though as shown in the great interval training review by Buscheit et.al) because there is a large component of aerobic energy metabolism involved. Just because it is called "interval" or "sprint" doesn't mean that the aerobic system stays at home!

 

That's the main point I am trying to get across here. That Aerobic training is not long hours of slogging away and that a true aerobic powerhouse will always be the most effective, at least physically, athlete regardless of event. How you hope to achieve a worthwhile aerobic change in terms of methods is up to you. Like with my athletes a huge variety of interval and steady state methods are used depending on the individual.

 

I'm glad you brought me some science, OK review you linked although some of the studies they referenced their review from like the ones from Gibala and Billet are better reads on their own. Likewise as the conclusion points out the review has limitations, 6 weeks was the max study time, so clearly more longitudinal study would be needed and in reality we all know no athlete or coach is going to engage in a never ending cycle of SIT mainly due to the injury risk with the high neuromuscular load!

 

I think we'd agree on far more than we disagree on, but the "hard labels" of anaerobic VS aerobic need to be dropped and training for alpine and other similar sports needs to be seen and designed in the such a way that we use the best methods possible to make the physiological changes we want and then use the best methods possible to make the sport training possible at both large volumes and high intenisty. From there than integrating a mix of both in-season to achieve what we want. i.e results!! 

Yes.
I have to admit that I am much more black/white on forums than IRL. Also not knowing exactly who one is talking to makes it even worse.
When I read "aerobic" I see, as you said, long hours low intensity; as I tend to classify everything that relies on intervals to be "anaerobic". And that is probably where we are butting heads...
For me it is important that people understand spending long ours spent on a bike might not be the ideal training method, and that they should focus on something that relates closely to skiing.

 

Can we agree on a "general" training without getting into aerobic vs anaerobic?
I think that weight training is paramount for competitive skiers, both in regards to strength and endurance; for the recreational skiers interval training with some resistance training, may that be crossfit a combination of weight training and HIIT, SIT, etc
 

post #213 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Condition View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jzamp View Post
 

 

Therefore, if we agree that skiing is more anaerobic than aerobic and that too much aerobic training as a negative effect on key aspects of anaerobic performance (whereas the opposite doesn't happen) 
 

This line is incorrect though, as extensive anaerobic dominate training does have a negative effect on mitochondrial density, capillary density, aerobic enzyme activation and other such important factors in overall energy production!

You are correct.
Too much anaerobic does the negative effects you mentioned, what I wrote reads wrong. It should have been the positive effects of aerobic (as I intend it) training can be partially achieved through anaerobic means, and therefore still have a benefit. On the other hand one cannot achieve the same benefit of anaerobic training through aerobic training. 

It's getting late and i'm having troubles thinking straight :D this whole point I am trying to make is not that relevant.

post #214 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Condition View Post

Jesus, I sound like a broken record here replying to myself all on my own here!

But the old proverb "when the student is ready the teacher will appear" always pops up in my professional life! Was actually having a look over 2XU products for an athlete of mine and came across this article!

http://www.athlete2-0.com/5-Exercises-1-X-Secret-Tip-Improve-Skiing-Performance/

It's from Troy Flanagan, Ph.D. , High Performance Director, U.S. Ski and Snowboard Association (USSA). Yes the high perf, director of S and C for USSA, a doctor.

So some good info about the "slow" muscle contractions that skiing needs, but the crucial part is... 

 



The SECRET TIP:



Aerobic training for an anaerobic sport! 




Now I'd still argue that ski racing especailly the speed events is not anaerobic dominant, and I'd be confident in debating that position with anyone of any education. But the critical passage in the article is very relevant to this discussion!

'Now several studies have shown that in a two minute all-out exhaustive exercise bout, over half of your ATP energy produced in the muscles is done by the aerobic system.
Recently, we've really worked on aerobic fitness to complement our training. It’s not uncommon for athletes to gently cycle for at least an hour per day in order to build and maintain their aerobic base. The difference in our athletes’ abilities to finish off a race strongly and to recover very quickly between runs on training days was significant.
So what does this mean for the weekend warrior? If you want to improve your ability to last a long run and to back up for many runs in a day or even several days of skiing in a row, then aerobic training can really help out."


From the horses mouth so to speak!

Because there is still time for many to get started with some structured training for the season, including the aerobic work recommended by the USST, this bears repeating. As Troy Flanagan says, "...the last 30 seconds of a race is primarily aerobic.". That's one all out race effort, not one of many recreational ski runs.

It bears mention that downplaying the critical, lynchpin role of the aerobic system is a current fad. The reason the USST, the Austrians, the French, etc dont do this is that they need results. It is similar to the cosmetic gym focus on unstable surface training, where there is ample research that outside the confines of rehab and some very targeted proprioceptive work, that most unstable surface training is counterproductive. But, fads are fun to ne part of.
post #215 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTKook View Post

As Troy Flanagan says, "...the last 30 seconds of a race is primarily aerobic.". That's one all out race effort, not one of many recreational ski runs.

 

It is also true that most races that end anaerobically do so at the end of the race!  He's misleading to make his point.  The last 30 sec of a race, the end of the race... that's the hard part from a conditioning stand point for most competitors.

 

Not saying that they don't train aerobically, but also keep in mind that their training is varied.  They spend a lot of time on the hill, standing and gliding and not necessarily training hard.

post #216 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eagles Pdx View Post
 


But they are not emaciated at all and are very fit.

 

I think your definition of fit lacks one component or more.  Try strength.  Maybe they are the best in there sport, but if that defines fit then let them compete in something that requires explosive movement, speed, agility, and strength to name a few.  I have respect for what they do but I see great limitation from the stand point of fitness.

post #217 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Jones View Post
 

I think your definition of fit lacks one component or more.  Try strength.  Maybe they are the best in there sport, but if that defines fit then let them compete in something that requires explosive movement, speed, agility, and strength to name a few.  I have respect for what they do but I see great limitation from the stand point of fitness.


Interesting theory that world class track athletes are not fit, lack movement, speed, agility and strength.  I think reality would disagree ESPECIALLY in regard to fitness.

post #218 of 223

They are highly specialized machines, you wouldn't test a surgical drill by drilling holes into concrete, right? 

post #219 of 223

Yes, the are fit, but fit for what?

post #220 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghost View Post
 

Yes, the are fit, but fit for what?


For what they need to do? 

post #221 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eagles Pdx View Post
 


Interesting theory that world class track athletes are not fit, lack movement, speed, agility and strength.  I think reality would disagree ESPECIALLY in regard to fitness.


"Reality" omg

 

It's just the way I see it, not fact.  There are definitions of fit available to chose from. I thoroughly lean towards functional, broad range fitness (with or without the reality).

post #222 of 223
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Jones View Post

It is also true that most races that end anaerobically do so at the end of the race!  He's misleading to make his point.  The last 30 sec of a race, the end of the race... that's the hard part from a conditioning stand point for most competitors.

Not saying that they don't train aerobically, but also keep in mind that their training is varied.  They spend a lot of time on the hill, standing and gliding and not necessarily training hard.

He's not misleading at all. It is a factual statement about the primary source of energy for that period. The simple math is that there is a shift to aerobic system dominance. The last 30 seconds will also feel very hard, and that is entirely consistent with this. Dont confuse huffing and puffing with something being predominantly anaerobic.
post #223 of 223

Was talking about this in the context of juniors and bleepers/ shuttles not being a sufficient test, and what the French are doing came up.  In this regard, this http://undergroundathletics.co.uk/notes-pete-mcknight-strength-conditioning-french-alpine-ski-team/  comprised of notes from a talk by Pete McKnight, is relevant,

 

"[snip]

  • There is a significant correlation between aerobic power & sport ranking (Neumayr, 2003)
  • Oxidative system acts as a support & buffer to the Anaerobic processes
  • There are prolonged & multiple contractions at >50% of MVC
  • Aerobic training is important not only for the events but also to be able to withstand training
  • In training they can spend up to 5 hours on the course skiing anywhere from 4-14 runs that last from 1-10mins at altitudes up to 3,900m
  • Turns aren’t explosive or dynamic but produce huge forces – up to 3g
  • The knee angles plus vibration of the surface causes reduced blood flow which affect cardiovascular adaptations...[snip]"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav: