Originally Posted by Jamt
I agree that LT is very important. I'm a bit puzzled though, because LT is an anaerobic measure and it is usually trained at intensities higher than aerobic training, like HIIT. Vo2Max is an aerobic capacity measure and it is trained at lower intensities although it has been shown that the central part of oxygen uptake is also improved by HIIT.
It is true that HIIT alone is not enough, but the 80/20 arobic/hit rule than many professional athletes use is fine when you train 30+ hours per week, not so much for normal people.
Do you have any references backing up the claim that race skiing is "predominantly aerobic athletic efforts"?
My interpretation of a sport with "predominantly aerobic athletic efforts" is that you perform it primarily without lactic acid, like e.g. a marathon.
You've gotten a lot of things wrong here. To start with, LT is a measure of aerobic system efficiency, more or less. This is why it's important in sport with significant aerobic components, alpine skiing included. While heart rate zones are only approximations and not that useful for precise measurement, the HR associated with LT is well below HR at VO2 max. VO2 max training is done at higher intensities, not lower, than LT. VO2 max training has also been known for a long time to be a bit of dead end, because in highly trained athletes VO2 doesn't keep improving (without doping) though aerobic performance can and does.
As one example, way back in Maier's day when he was spending all that time on a bike and getting pricked constantly to measure lactate, that was a clue that he was training LT and not doing higher intensity, shorter intervals aimed at training VO2 max.
You are misrepresenting my plain words as regard something being predominantly aerobic. What I said was "[a] competitive bump run would clearly be predominantly anaerobic. Bumpers still spend hours on a bike for ski prep, but that is more to be able to last a full training day. A recreational skier sling long bump runs is doing multiple sustained bouts of predominantly aerobic exertion, and not surprisingly aerobic fitness helps a lot at doing well at predominantly aerobic athletic efforts." If you don't understand why a long bump run by a recreational skier is by definition going to be predominantly aerobic, you need to review basic physiology and other background research.
As for ski racing, let me quote Troy Flanagan, which I had done earlier in this thread as well: "Interestingly, although the sport is traditionally viewed as anaerobic, the last thirty seconds of a [sg or dh] race is primarily aerobic". http://my.ussa.org/sites/default/files/documents/athletics/freestyle/2014-15/documents/Summary%20Papers%202014%20SC%20Symposium.pdf He is talking one all-out race run, not multiple recreational runs at lower intensities and longer durations. I also note that the shift to aerobic system predominance happens fairly early in that race run, though sources of energy utilized for the run as a whole cross over later because the first 30 seconds are predominantly anaerobic.
FWIW, you also misunderstand the role of lactate. Many athletic events that are well over LT for their entire duration still rely predominantly on the aerobic system, and require very extensive aerobic training, at a range of intensities. The 800 and 1500 and even 5k in running are all good examples of this.