Category — Running
I have talked about my Physiological Buffer Zone concept a few times (in THIS article about movement capacity, in THIS article regarding stress and allostasis, and in my lecture during the Strength in Motion Seminar).
The concept is centered around three components of performance:
- Stress and Stress Resistance
- Movement Competency
- Fitness Level (both general and specific)
A recent study by Lisman and colleagues published in Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise (Functional Movement Screen and Aerobic Fitness Predict Injuries in Military Training) looked at two components of the Physiological Buffer Zone – Movement Competency and Fitness Level – to help understand the association between injury risk, fitness level, exercise and injury history, and Functional Movement Screen (FMS) scores in Marine Recruits.
Marine Corps Officer Candidates, ages 20-25, who were enrolled in either the six (n = 447) or ten (n = 427) week candidate training program. While both programs consist of similar training activities due to the shorter time frame the six week training program is considered to be the more intensive of the two.
The standardized Marine Corps Physical Fitness Test consists of (performed in this order):
- Pull ups to exhaustion
- Abdominal crunches completed in 2min
- 3 mile run for time
The seven test FMS was used to understand the candidates baseline movement competency:
- Overhead Squat
- Hurdle Step
- Inline Lunge
- Shoulder Mobility
- Active Straight Leg Raise
- Trunk Stability Push Up
- Rotary Stability
Each test is scored on a 0-3 scale. A “0″ is scored if the individual experiences pain during a movement. A “1″ is scored if the athlete is unable complete the movement properly. A score of a “2″ is awarded if the subject can complete the movement but has some level of compensation and a “3″ is scored if the subject performs the movement correctly without any compensation. The highest possible score an athlete can achieve is a “21″, which would be a “3″ on all seven tests.
Finally, a questionnaire was administered to the subjects to understand their previous injury history as well as their prior exercise routines (modalities and frequency) prior to entering candidate training school.
Some of the Key Findings
- Slower 3-mile run times (>/= 20.5min) indicated a higher risk of injury
- Lower FMS scores (</= 14) indicated a higher risk for injury
- The pull up test and abdominal crunch test were not significantly associated with injury risk
- Subjects where at a higher risk of injury if they reported a prior lower limb injury
- A lower general exercise frequency, as reported via the questionnaire, was associated with a higher risk of injury
Some Words on FMS Scoring
Kiesel and colleagues (2007) found that NFL athletes were 12 times more likely to suffer an injury when their scores were </= 14 compared to those who scored >14. Thus, it would appear that the cut off point on the FMS is a 14. However, Gray Cook and Lee Burton (two of the developers of the FMS) have stated that the number may not be as important as obtaining a score of symmetrical “2′s” on each of the 7 tests. Two of the FMS tests (Overhead Squat and Trunk Stability Push up) are performed bilaterally while the other 5 tests (Hurdle Step, Inline Lunge, Shoulder Mobility, Active Straight Leg Raise, and Rotary Stability) are performed in a unilateral fashion and the lower score between the two sides is factored into the overall score. An individual with movement asymmetry is often at a higher risk of injury (Note: The human body is inherently asymmetrical and several sports may have asymmetrical tendencies. That being said, there is a rather larger range of what a two can look like on the FMS tests allowing us to have some individual asymmetry but still have relatively symmetrical movement competency. In other words, it is very hard to score a “3″ and it is very hard to score a “1″ but it should not be that hard to score a “2″ if you have some basic levels of both mobility and stability). Therefore, an athlete may be able to score a “14″ by obtaining a “3″ on the trunk stability push up and a “1″ on one of the asymmetrical tests but this may still place that at a higher risk of injury. So, the goal should actually be to obtain at least a 14 with no asymmetries.
I think this study was a good first step at trying to understand the association between fitness and movement competency. When FMS scores were low (</= 14) and when 3-mile run times were slow (>/= 20.5min) the subjects were 4 times more likely to sustain an injury. These findings were similar to an earlier study by O’Connor and colleagues (2011) who also evaluated the FMS and fitness level as a model of injury prediction in officer candidates and found that those with a score of </= 14 were at higher risk of injury compared with those who scored >14 and that those with better physical fitness scores were significantly less likely to suffer injury compared to those who had poorer fitness scores.
Interestingly the pull up test and the abdominal crunch test were not associated with a higher risk of injury. I wonder how much this may have to do with the type of activity that the subjects participate in during officer candidate school? Obviously they use their upper body to do pull ups, push ups, and lift/carry things but the lower extremity seems to take the most punishment during this time period as the candidates would appear to always be running or on their feet (standing, lifting, or carrying things).
Together, some sort of fitness screen and some sort of movement screen appears to offer us, as fitness professionals and strength coaches, some valuable information to help not only understand our athletes but also program appropriately for them. A lower fitness score would indicate that our training program needs to focus more on general fitness and aerobic capacity. One of the difficult things about officer candidate school may be that there really isn’t time to develop an individual’s level of fitness. Everyone is supposed to show up fit, in shape, and ready to face whatever is thrown at them from a fitness standpoint. Unfortunately, this isn’t always the case, as evident by the fact that having a lower level of fitness and a lower frequency of general exercise training prior to officer candidate school led to a higher risk of injury. Essentially, the individual shows up unprepared to handle the stress that is placed upon them and they “break”.
Additionally, the FMS is not just a screen used to assess movement competency but it can also be used to influence program design and exercise selection. If you know what tests the individual is poor at or asymmetrical in and you understand the corrective exercise hierarchy (I talked a little bit about this in an article 3yrs ago on Developmental Kinesiology and Client Assessment and I encourage anyone interested in learning more about the FMS and the corrective hierarchy to attend one of the courses put on by Functional Movement Systems) then you can begin to develop a specific training program that not only meets that athlete’s needs but can also be re-tested and monitored to ensure you are moving in the right direction. Kiesel and colleagues (2009) found that a 7-week offseason training program, individualized for each athlete based on their FMS scores, improved the FMS scores of 62 NFL athletes with 41 of them being free from asymmetry at the end of the 7-weeks compared to 31 at the start of the study. Oftentimes people see the FMS and think it is a reason to be soft or not train hard. The FMS can tell you what not to do but it also can tell you what you can do and when you find things that the person can do you should be attacking those those things, loading them, and training hard while you concurrently improve upon their limitations (always keeping in mind that you must come back and re-test to ensure that you are improving the test and moving in the right direction).
When assessing individuals it is important to be holistic and take into account all aspects of the Physiological Buffer Zone. One part of the Physiological Buffer Zone is not more important than any other and I think, as professionals, we all have our biases towards subject areas we feel most comfortable – “I’m a movement guy” or “Fitness is the most important thing! Movement isn’t as important as getting guys fit” or “Strength is more important than anything. Just get them stronger and everything will be better.”
Rather than staying in our comfort zone (based on our previous experiences, education, etc) we should try and open up and be more aware of all things that may impact an athlete’s ability to appropriately adapt and tolerate the stresses that we, as coaches, apply to them in training (that stress resistance piece of the Physiological Buffer Zone is a really big piece and you can read more about it in my article on Allostasis and Physical Preparation).
Furthermore, the testing should in some way influence our training program. Don’t just test to test or do an FMS (or any other movement screen) just to say that you do it. Use these tests to provide you with information about the individual and then take that information and put together a program that reflects that individual’s needs and abilities. From their, the tests serve as a means of re-assessing to understand if your program is doing what you intend it to do or if you need to make some adjustments.
April 8, 2013 2 Comments
Discussions of energy system training have been raging as of late and with the importance of the aerobic system being talked about more and more many are getting confused about how to structure programming or how all the pieces fit together.
One of the biggest misunderstandings seems to come when discussing the lactate system as numerous coaches are under the belief that lactate training is the most important type of energy system training and that this is where many sports are played at. I have had numerous discussions with colleagues who call or email me asking me questions like, “But sport “x” is more of a lactate sport so we need to train with high intensity intervals to improve that and don’t need to do as much aerobic work, right?”
Now, I am not going to say that performing intervals that produce lactate is a bad thing or wrong (it’s not actually bad at all and it can be extremely beneficial and important to enhancing the individuals buffering capacity when used appropriately at the right time in the training program and in the right amount of volume/frequency). What I will say however, is that when an athlete is in shape and fit to play their sport and their aerobic system is well developed those same intervals or those same work to rest ratios of the sport should not require them to rely so much on the lactate system to produce energy as their lactate threshold will be at a higher percentage of their max HR.
There really aren’t any sports (that I can think of) that are truly “lactic”. Even sports that we often consider to be “lactic” events, such as a 400m sprint or some of the short duration rowing events in the Olympics, will have a lower contribution from the lactate system in those that are at a high level and fit to perform the event. The only reason they would ever be very “lactic” would be if you were out of shape to perform that event and thus you would rely more heavily on your lactate system for energy production and instead of running the race you would suffer through the race.
The key to improving an athletes sport specific work capacity or sport specific energy system is to understand what the requisite competencies of that energy system are. For example, many colleagues understand the Functional Movement Screen and its hierarchy as far as choosing exercises and correcting the tests. If an individual has a really poor Overhead Squat Test but they also have an asymmetrical Active Straight Leg Raise Test then you would not begin by attempting to “correct” the overhead squat without first spending time addressing the active straight leg raise and making sure that it is symmetrical and at the least a “2″ on the FMS grading scale.
The same concept could be applied for energy system training. If an athlete is unfit, has a lactate threshold that is relatively low compared to their max HR, and fatigues at a faster rate when playing the sport, you wouldn’t just start doing a ton of high intensity interval training (IE, high volumes and very frequently in the training week) right out of the gate to make them better as the requisite competency for improving the above qualities is to enhance the aerobic system and the individuals lactate threshold so that they can produce more high intensity efforts with less fatigue and without relying on the lactate system – a system which happens to be inefficient for energy production in the long term and also an energy system that requires the body a longer period of time post game, post practice, or post training to try and recover from as it can be pretty taxing stuff.
The goal in this situation really comes down to three key factors:
- How you sequence your training session/training qualities within the training week
- Applying your anaerobic training methods in the correct training phase
- Choosing the right amount of anaerobic work – the right aerobic to anaerobic ratio within each specific training phase - which would depend on the athletes fitness level, the sport, the goal of the phase, and where you are in your training program
When used appropriately some lactate intervals can be beneficial for raising the lactate threshold in a team sport athlete, however, that type of work should be chosen wisely and done at the correct time to ensure the requisite competencies are first developed and appropriate recovery time can take place between these workouts to allow the athlete to reap the biggest benefit.
Furthermore, when thinking about the sequencing of training within program design/planning it should be considered that having a sound lactic capacity is really a product of having a well developed aerobic system, which would allow you to work at higher percentages of your max HR (higher lactate threshold) and buffer hydrogen ions more efficiently.
September 17, 2012 30 Comments
With summer fast approaching (today will be the first day of the year over 90-degrees in Phoenix!) triathlon season is upon us.
In preparation for the season, I decided to speak with two great Strength Coaches – Justin Levine and Gary Ditsch – who work with triathletes, to give us some basic information that you should know in order to make this season not only successful but injury free.
Question #1: Aside from being well-accomplished strength coaches, you guys have both done several triathlons. What is the one thing that the recreational triathlete should know about preparing for a triathlon, and what is the one thing that you each feel they need to add to their training program?
Gary: The biggest lesson I end up teaching recreational triathletes is that recovery is also part of a successful training program. The type of individual that seeks coaching for triathlon is often motivated, successful outside of sport and very determined. They want to take the same work ethic and determination they have in their job and apply it to their triathlon training. This is great in terms of not having to be a constant cheerleader to get them out the door, quite the opposite, I often have to teach these triathletes that it is acceptable to back off on the total training load if their body is not capable of absorbing all the work they are trying to put in.
In relation to the lesson I just mentioned about recovery being a part of training, I would love to see more of the triathletes I coach use regular soft tissue recovery techniques. As a strength coach, if my athletes are local I try and get them using self massage and foam rollers to assist in their recovery, but I know that in my own training for Ironman and half Ironman races, I respond well to a professional massage when used as a preventive and recovery method. My wife Nikki, who is also an exercise physiologist and Ironman athlete has used ART and massage successfully. The hard part is convincing athletes to use these services prior to getting injured. Often they see it as a waste of time and/or money, until they have an overuse injury – then they will do anything and everything to get out on the road to bike or run.
Justin: Triathlon or any endurance sport for that matter takes time. I do not like to see people that commit to a long event (1/2 marathon or ½ Ironman or higher) with only 10 weeks or less to train. This is a recipe for failure and injury. Endurance takes years to improve. I usually recommend at least a 24-week training program for the above-mentioned races but that is the minimum. This is the minimum training time to just go out and finish the event and feel good. But if you rush through training and expect great results after just 10 weeks of training you could be in for a hurt body. Learn to be realistic with your goal setting. Start out by completing a few shorter distance races to help you progress through the sport. You need to have great time management and organizational skills in order to have this busy lifestyle. Schedule your workouts just like you would schedule a work meeting.
A training program needs balance. I like to coach my athletes on looking at their program as a pie graph. You need to balance the pie graph out. You have training, nutrition, rest/recovery, racing, personal/family and social time. If you are completely disregarding one of these aspects something or someone will suffer. You can train till you are blue in the face but if you are not recovering properly then this will eventually lead to injury or even worse burnout and quitting of the sport. Most people do not understand the implementation of rest days and rest weeks into their training program. This is a fundamental ingredient of a properly designed training program.
Question #2: I know you guys are big on strength training for endurance athletes. Can you please summarize why you feel this is important and how you implement it into a comprehensive training program for an endurance athlete preparing for a race?
Justin: A properly designed strength program for endurance athletes can be a huge assistance to the reduction of injury, increased performance, increased strength and power and overall functional movement. Running and biking are not “enough leg work”. You need to be in the gym to assist in balancing the body out to maximize performance. Swimming, biking and running are repetitive movements done over and over. We need to create symmetry throughout the body to enhance your athleticism in the sport and reduce overuse injury. This can be done with the correct movements in the gym.
To be honest I am not much of a fan of an exact periodized strength-training program for triathletes. There are too many factors that can alter with the “perfectly designed program”. I feel endurance athletes need to be in the gym all year round. Whether it is for a strength day or an active recovery day it needs to be implemented into the weekly schedule. When you are in your “off-season” this is the time to build strength and power and focus on a good lifting program. Implement basic strength movements: pulling, pressing, squatting variations, lunging variations, dead lifting patterns and core stability work. I use an undulating periodization for endurance athletes. During the week I plan a high rep, medium rep and low repetition lifting days. However, when I know they have a big workout planned for the weekend I will modify the routine in the gym. As the race season approaches the focus needs to be on soft tissue enhancement, flexibility/mobility, good movement, increased stability and active recovery. I also use metabolic circuits to tax the anaerobic system for triathletes. Endurance athletes spend the majority of their time in the aerobic zone so I will use these circuits to challenge the system in a different way. This will aide in enhancing VO2 max. I implement these routines 6-10 weeks leading up to the race season.
Gary: The biggest reason I try and get my athletes to include strength training is to prevent injury. As I mentioned, overuse injuries are a major issue with runners and triathletes. The interesting part about being a coach and trainer that works with endurance athletes is the demographic of our population. Unlike someone working with football, baseball, basketball, swimming or the more traditional sports, our athletes are much older. When training someone for football, the athlete may be 14 to 24 years old. As an endurance coach it’s more likely that I will be working with someone that is 54 than I am to work with someone that is 14. Therefore, in addition to preventing injuries, the right kind of program will allow us to help maintain that athlete’s general athletic ability and function.
I like to implement the strength programs based upon the athletes preferred racing schedule and the time of year. Right now we are blessed in Kentucky with the beginning of a beautiful spring season. This generally means that our triathletes are going to be cycling a lot and possibly running a bit more too. It also means that racing season starts soon (actually next weekend). This is the time of year that I start to pull back on the strength programs and allow the work we did in the gym during the winter start to transition into specific strength and power on the bike or run. Using the winter months to work on power or strength limitations often works well. The exception to this type of seasonal pullback is with athletes that are severely strength limited, consistently face overuse injuries or are competing masters athletes. Those athletes benefit from having a maintenance program even during the racing season. There was a strength coach podcast awhile back with Darcy Norman. I remember listening to the podcast and thinking that the way he implemented gym work into a cyclist’s program is similar to how I try to implement our programs with triathletes, at least from a in-season and out-of-season perspective.
Question #3: Triathlon training can be extremely time consuming, as athletes need to prepare for three different events (swim, bike, run) simultaneously. Is there a way that athletes can make their training more streamlined and focused, in order to save time? Obviously having a busy life doesn’t easily lend itself to training for an event like this. What advice can you give those who want to do triathlons, in terms of time conservation strategies?
Gary: That is a pretty tough question! The best advice that I have for all my athletes is that they need to simplify. They also need to make sure they get all of their family’s support on board with their goals and ambitions. I actually sat down and wrote a blog post earlier this year about this idea of having a balanced life and being successful at everything we do. It often doesn’t work that way. I say this because when I sit down and talk to an athlete that wants to do their first triathlon or train for an Ironman, sometimes it becomes clear that they haven’t thought through the impact it will have on their life. I really don’t try and sell people the equivalent of triathlon’s 6-minute abs. It doesn’t work.
That being said, I do think that some triathletes get consumed by filling up their training logs full of mega rides, long runs and huge weekly totals. They often sacrifice the benefit of training at proper intensities for their event in order to have a training log they can brag about. Many triathletes I see would be better off if they cut some of their training out, make the hours they had left count for something other than a check mark in their training log and spent that extra time with family or recovering.
Justin: Training is time consuming. And that is why I mentioned above that you have to have good time management in order to balance your life priorities. But too many endurance athletes focus on outrageous amounts of volume. They think this is the recipe for success in their sport. This is not the case. In all actuality high amounts of volume can lead to overuse and ultimately injury. You can fully prepare for long events (1/2 Ironman – Full Ironman) with less than 12 hours a week of training. The question is what will those hours consist of? If you have focused training you will make your training time more efficient. Intervals and efficient training must be implemented into the schedule. There needs to be a base of fitness, yes, but that doesn’t mean hours and hours of “junk mileage”.
Also, one of the best things a triathlete could do is hire a coach. A coach can assist in this time management and design of the program. This can take the brainwork out of creating your own training regimen. Having a coach can tremendously improve performance.
Question #4: Race day nutrition is very important for endurance athletes. Do you have any basic guidelines that you give your clients?
Justin: Do not ever try anything new on race day. You must practice your nutrition during training because there is a strategy you will need to execute on race day to maximize your performance. You can have the best training program and be in fantastic shape come race day but if you do not carry out your nutrition plan you could have a bad experience. Here are a few important basic guidelines I advise my athletes with:
- Eat between 200-400 calories 2-4 hours before your event. This depends on the length of the event and what individual needs you may have. Eat a 4 to 1 ratio of carbohydrates to protein. Limit foods high in fiber the morning before a race.
- Sip on an electrolyte/water mix leading up to the race. And nibble on a cliff bar or powerbar.
- During your race, sip on your water/electrolyte drink every 5-8 minutes. Consume a gel or other product of choice every 45 minutes. If you are competing in a short race do not overeat and drink. During longer races (over 2 hours) focus on getting in 200-300 calories per hour. These calories can come from the form of liquid or solid food.
Gary: You are right about this. It amazes me how many athletes will train so hard only to completely miss the mark with their nutrition on race day. The nutrition guidelines really depend upon the distance of the event. The past four years I have personally focused on Ironman so the needs for an event like that are very different for someone doing a sprint or olympic distance race.
Looking at the shorter distance events that can last anywhere from 1 hour (fast sprint) to 4 hours (slower olympic) the biggest mistake that I see is people under consuming the calories and electrolytes they need to stay properly fueled. This often is the result of not practicing their nutrition plans at intensities that match the race effort. Once an athlete gets into a situation where they are not absorbing any nutrition because of their intensity level, the race is becomes survival on what they have already absorbed. I think many athletes assume that what they are able to consume on their average brick (bike-to-run) workout is what they’ll do in a race, which is a big mistake.
As the race duration and distance gets longer, it becomes more of an issue of just being able to continually consume calories and electrolytes. I have had success the past couple years using Infinit Nutrition which is a product that let’s you customize your sports drink and then supplement that with other products like eGel, honey bun and Ale8, then once on the run I go strictly to Coke, water and salt tablets. It’s a highly individual mixture at the ultra endurance distance because I’ve had athletes go with more solid foods like peanut butter and jelly sandwiches and bananas on the bike and gatorade on the run to those that use mostly Hammer Nutrition products the whole race.
The best guideline I have is for athletes to match their anticipated intensity and duration of the event to their ability to absorb nutrition. The only way to learn this is testing it through race simulation workouts. I have reports from all of my race simulation workouts over the years on my website if folks are interested.
The other key is for people to have a solid understanding of their personal sweat rate and electrolyte needs, not just their caloric needs. You had a great post on dehydration last month, endurance athletes really need to understand this information.
Question #5: Guys, thanks a lot for your time. It was a pleasure to pick your brains. Can you please tell my readers where they can find out more about you and your services?
Gary: The best place to find me is on our website, www.endurancebasecamp.com. We have a facebook fan page and a podcast on itunes also, they can find those by searching for Endurance Base Camp. If they would like to follow me personally on twitter, my twitter name is @ditschfitness.
April 15, 2010 1 Comment
With the Boston Marathon only about a month away, the number of clients coming into my training/massage facility has doubled.
Because these happen to be runners who are preparing for the Boston Marathon and are looking for quick solutions to the annoying aches and pains in their hips and knees.
This always happens without fail! I always know when the next big marathon is coming up by the number of runners coming into the facility with complaints. The crazy thing is that when asking them about what they feel, they almost always comment, “It has been feeling this way for the past 5-months”.
While I certainly appreciate the OCD that comes with being an endurance athlete, this can be an incredibly frustrating bunch to work with, as they typically don’t do a good job of regulating both training volume and intensity. This ends up getting them in trouble as they reach what I call, “The Fork In The Road”.
Endurance athletes reach this fork when their aerobic capacity exceeds their bodies ability to tolerate the volume of training they are putting it through. The common trend amongst these runners is how incredibly weak they are, and not just in their legs – I mean all over! From head to toe, they have very little strength. I am amazed that they can handle any running at all sometimes!
Realistically, these runners should have been in the facility training 7 or 8-months before the marathon, to ensure that their body is strong enough to tolerate the high training mileage needed to prepare for a marathon.
Avoiding The Fork
The best way to avoid the fork is to have a training program which addresses your needs and weaknesses. The program should be comprehensive and not just consist of running. Rather, some resistance training should be used to help develop a fundamental level of strength. In fact, research supports the fact that REPLACING some of your endurance work with resistance training can prove to be beneficial. The word “replacing” is emphasized because this does not mean adding more training on top of your running schedule, but rather, taking some of the running out of the weekly training program and replacing it with some low-volume strength work.
My good friend and colleague Carson Boddicker has written some excellent pieces on the importance of strength training for runners over the past week in his blog at BoddickerPerformance.com. If you are a runner or endurance athlete, I highly suggest checking it out.
March 22, 2010 No Comments
Endurance based athletes (marathon runners, distance bikers, ultra-distance runners, Ironman athletes, etc.) are notorious for avoiding resistance training as part of their training program. The common excuse is that “their legs get enough training during their running/cycling”. In reality, these athletes may be holding themselves back from hitting their full potential in their desired sport because they are avoiding resistance training!
Endurance athletes that perform strength training as part of their exercise program can have the potential to increase their endurance capabilities due to increases in anaerobic power, increases lactate threshold as well as enhanced exercise economy. Hoff, et al., concluded that even maximal strength training increased work economy in the control group of a study focused on work capacity of female cross-country skiers, as well as increasing endurance through greater work economy and rate of force development in male skiers. Marcinik, et. al., found that while there was no changes in VO2max, endurance performance was improved through increases in lactate threshold and leg strength in 18 untrained males, during a cycling test.
Another type of training that appears to show some benefit to the endurance athlete is explosive training. The improvement in endurance from explosive training appears to be due to increased exercise economy, increased motor unit recruitment, and an increase in lactate threshold. Paavolainen L, et. al, concluded that training consisting of both endurance and explosive exercise, enhanced running performance through improvements in neuromuscular characteristics, leading to greater maximal velocity. Stone, et al, discovered that olympic style weightlifting alone can produces changes in some cardiovascular parameters; such as, increased VO2 max and decreased resting heart rate.
In order to take advantage of the potential benefits that strength training has to offer, athletes that compete in endurance based sports need to divide their training up to include a variety of energy systems and have a more well rounded approach. This type of training has been referred to as concurrent training or “simultaneous training”. Concurrent training has been shown to be effective for increasing maximal strength, endurance and exercise economy. As the competition nears, it might be advised that endurance athletes focus more of their attention on the actual event, while backing off of the strength training, but still maintaining strength levels by training one to two times a week.
For information on how Optimum Sports Performance can help you with your training program call 602-377-3362 or email email@example.com
1) Bulbulian R, Wilcox AR, Darabos BL., Anaerobic contribution to distance running performance of trained cross-country athletes., Medicine and science in sports and exercise., vol. 18, no. 1, pg. 107-13, 1986.
2) Tabata I, Nishimura K, Kouzaki M, Hirai Y, Ogita F, Miyachi M, Yamamoto K., Effects of moderate-intensity endurance and high-intensity intermittent training on anaerobic capacity and VO2max., Medicine and science in sports and exercise., vol. 28, no. 10, pg 1327-30, 1996.
3) Hickson RC, Dvorak BA, Gorostiaga EM, Kurowski TT, Foster C., Potential for strength and endurance training to amplify endurance performance., Journal of Applied Physiology, vol. 65, no. 5, pg. 2285-90, 1988.
4) Paavolainen L, Hakkinen K, Hamalainen I, Nummela A, Rusko H., Explosive-strength training improves 5-km running time by improving running economy and muscle power., Journal of Applied Physiology, vol. 85, no. 5, pg. 1527-33, 1999.
5) Marcinik EJ, Potts J, Schlabach G, Will S, Dawson P, Hurley BF., Effects of strength training on lactate threshold and endurance performance., Medicine and science in sports and exercise., vol. 23, no. 6, pg. 739-43, 1991.
6) Bastiaans JJ, van Diemen AB, Veneberg T, Jeukendrup AE., The effects of replacing a portion of endurance training by explosive strength training on performance in trained cyclists., European Journal of Applied Physiology, vol. 86, no. 1, pg 79-84, 2001.
7) Stone MH, Wilson GD, Blessing D, Rozenek R., Cardiovascular responses to short-term olympic style weight-training in young men., Canadian Journal of Applied Sports Sciences, vol. 8, no. 3, pg. 134-9, 1983.
8 ) Hoff J, Helgerud J, Wisloff U., Maximal strength training improves work economy in trained female cross-country skiers., Medicine and science in sports and exercise., vol. 31, no. 6, pg. 870-7, 1999.
9) Millet GP, Jaouen B, Borrani F, Candau R., Effects of concurrent endurance and strength training on running economy and .VO(2) kinetics., Medicine and science in sports and exercise., vol. 34, no. 8, pg 1351-9, 2002.
10) Bell GJ, Syrotuik DG, Attwood K, Quinney HA., Maintenance of strength gains while performing endurance training in oarswomen., Canadian Journal of Applied Physiology, vol. 18, no. 1, pg. 104-15, 1993.
11) Zatsiorsky PhD, Vladimir M., Science and Practice of Strength Training, Human Kinetics, pg. 126-127, 1995.
12) Siff PhD, Mel C., Supertraining, 6th editition, Supertraining Institute, pg. 290, 2003.
13) Paton CD, Hopkins WG., Combining explosive and high-resistance training improves performance in competitive cyclists., Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, vol. 19, no. 4, pg. 826-30, 2005.
14) Creer AR, Ricard MD, Conlee RK, Hoyt GL, Parcell AC., Neural, metabolic, and performance adaptations to four weeks of high intensity sprint-interval training in trained cyclists., International Journal of Sports Medicine, vol. 25, no. 2, pg. 92-8, 2004.
15) Hoff J, Gran A, Helgerud J., Maximal strength training improves aerobic endurance performance., Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports, vol. 12, no. 5, pg. 288-295, 2002.
16) McCarthy JP, Pozniak MA, Agre JC., Neuromuscular adaptations to concurrent strength and endurance training., Medicine and science in sports and exercise., vol. 34, no. 3, pg. 511-9, 2002.
17) McCarthy JP, Agre JC, Graf BK, Pozniak MA, Vailas AC., Compatibility of adaptive responses with combining strength and endurance training., Medicine and science in sports and exercise., vol. 27, no. 3, pg. 429-36, 1995.
October 13, 2009 1 Comment