Some Thoughts on Training the Lactate System
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.
Patrick
patrick@optimumsportsperformance.com
30 comments
Another great post, Patrick.
I never understand where the idea that lactic capacity is king stems from. Most studies show lactic trainability peaks in a relatively short time. The aerobic system can be improved well over 200% baseline and given the fact that lactic pathways “take over” when your aerobic ability sucks, why would spend so much time buffering a system that is an “afterthought” once the aerobic system loses efficiency. Plus, a decent amount of literature shows buffering capacity during these “lactic baths” we experience in sport is much less improvable than commonly thought. So either way it seems our time is best spend on aerobic development.
Kind Regards,
Sam
I work in the private sector and I work with a lot of ice hockey athletes. I still believe that ice hockey is an alactic/aerobic sport. If soccer is (based on the recent study) then ice hockey sure as hell is alactic/aerobic. I find it extremely frustrating to have to prepare my college and NHL guys for 300 yard shuttles(dry land) and skate shuttle tests that are 40-50 secs in length. As is frequently said by hockey coaches and S&C Coaches, “A hockey shift lasts 42-45 sec on average. We need to be ready to go that hard and be able to repeat those efforts!”. Ahhh last time that I checked there’s a lot of stopping, coasting, and standing and the “sprinting” is all out not submaximal like lactic work. The icing on the cake is that one D1 ice hockey team that I know of was testing 8-10 300 yard shuttles. That is as worthwhile as Casey Hampton of the Steelers(420+ lbs DT) running 300 yard shuttles. None the less, if the players don’t pass the testing they don’t practice.
After that frustrating rant, I do have a point. So I what can do you from my standpoint as the coach? Try to deal with it which is Patrick’s point of this post speaks to that. I think that I’ve found a way to create a win-win for every party.
This summer I’ve done more aerobic work with my athletes than I ever have done. All of it with heart rate monitors. The results are awesome with the college ice hockey guys crushing their 300 yd shuttle tests. Sure the lactic work(practicing the shuttles) was a bitch for the first or two week but their bodies quickly adapted(like you discussed). I only had to make them familiar with the test to have them pass because of how well their aerobic system were developed. I didn’t have to do lactic focused blocks 4-6 weeks outs from camps so that they could pass and play which honestly would’ve detrained them for their sport(evenmore).
My athletes are in better shape and less beat up from constant lactic work. Don’t they get that enough incorrect training from their sport coaches?
Trust me, I’m not a lactic hater. All 5 of the MMA guys(3 pros 2 amateur) that I train need work on their lactic systems and we hammer it when applicable but the aerobic work is what dropped their resting heart rates.
It’s been said by much smarter than I and still holds true. “I don’t have to prepare my athletes to play their sport, I have to prepare them for camp.” Well, the aerobic work is a great way to do that and should maintain itself through camp.
Great post Patrick. Sorry about those Browns!
Great post Patrick! Would you say that this is also a highly variable energy system to train as there is a huge genetic factor that comes into play with the lactate system?
Great stuff Patrick! What do you use to check a client’s LT – Do you send them to a lab to get tested or use a handheld analyzer?
Great post, Sam.
Scott, excellent comments once again! Sounds like you have a really great system. Can’t wait to make it out that way eventually so that we can sit and talk shop. Don’t be sorry about the Browns, I am so used to this by now.
Jas, totally! There is a huge genetic factor with all this stuff. This is why some people are so darn good at endurance events or strength power events. Sure, we need to train and work our butts off to improve but the sport does pick the individual. Guys on the tour de france train like maniacs but they also have incredible genetics to have such high VO2max and lactate thresholds. They were born that way!!
Curb, I wish! That would cost more money than we could afford. I love to send them all to a lab. As it starts I have a few tests that we use and then I estimate the AnT from there based on HRmax. During their workouts I use my estimated AnT, their work output, and their RPE to help us gauge where we are at and if we need to adjust our numbers up or down.
patrick
Curb and Patrick,
If you had blood lactate testers on the field and had interns (all hypothetical) what would you use for tests? Anything specific?
Carl,
I work a lot with runners so LT is a good thing to know – great predictor of performance. The more we can push this to the right the faster the pace they should be able to maintain on race day.
If people are really keen I’ll send them to a local lab but more often I’ll have them do a field test (30 min time trial). I don’t use a hand analyzer as I’ve heard mixed reviews about them so to me not worth the investment. The field test is simple, pretty reliable and for the level of most athletes I work with good enough plus easy to re-test as much as we need or want.
I’ll base specific workouts on the LT pace and use pace or HR as the metric, though I like linking HR to RPE much as Patrick does (great minds think alike
. Really makes the training time efficient because the athletes are training at the correct intensity. And hopefully we’re getting the recovery periods right so minimizing risk of injury.
If anyone is really interested in how elite endurance athletes actually train here’s an excellent paper describing real-life training methods: http://www.sportsci.org/2009/ss.htm. Even if you don’t work with endurance types, it’s worth a read. Kind of shatters the Crossfit Endurance approach though
I’ve adopted a similar 3 zone HR system where we have an aerobic zone, a LT threshold zone and a VO2 Max zone.
BTW, a few years ago one of the head physiologists at the testing lab told me that one of Canada’s Olympic female rowers (multiple medals in multiple OG) had an LT above 95% of her max HR. Talk about pushing the LT curve to the right!
Great stuff, Curb. I have similar zones as you laid out.
Carl,
I have never had the lactate testers be an option for me so I really can’t say how I would use them for testing/training as I would need to play with it for a bit to gain some perspective. I think Curb’s idea of using them for tests and as performance indicators so that we can “see how far we can shift everything to the right” is really important. I do have a 20min time trial that I have used before and sometimes will use a modified cooper’s test (I was also using this to determine max aerobic speed for a period of time to play with some MAS intervals) so perhaps using the lactate analyzer during those tests would be helpful. But, in all honesty, it isn’t something I have ever had the opportunity to use so I would need to play with it and discuss ideas with someone more familiar with it such as Curb.
patrick
Patrick- great post.
Scott- I agree with you. In fact, I actually emailed Patrick not too long ago about what really happens in a hockey shift. The reality is that it is not 40-45 seconds of balls out work. I would be interested in seeing what you did specifically for your guys.
However, I am ok with some repeated sprint effort testing at camp. The reasons why are 1- we need to know how good we are a recovering from repeated bouts. In the professional setting, training camps are much shorter than in the past (most likely, they will be even shorter when this thing gets cleared up), the players have to be ready to go on that first day, 2- hockey has come along way since the days of 5-6 days of 45-60 + minutes on the bike. Not sure if measuring vo2 max on the bike is the way to go if you want to measure the aerobic system (not saying that you would, but just in case).
What would you prefer your players be tested in at training camps?
Thanks! Sean
Sean,
Great stuff. Thanks for chiming in. I agree with you about testing repeated sprint efforts. I think this would be important for the hockey strength coach to know and also to see how fit the athletes are in terms of their aerobic systems ability to reproduce high intensity efforts over a specific time domain (as well as to see how fast those first few sprints are to see what sort of power output they have).
Carl,
Not sure I am following your questions. The example I gave is not one I run into. My training principles are better then that I wouldn’t put a beginner under such heavy loading so I wouldn’t see them get broken down in that manner. That would be foolish program design.
patrick
Sean,
Could you share goal times for repeat sprints and shuttle times? Do you think the jump testing matches those performances?
Thanks,
CV
I would like all 150 yard shuttles to be completed in less than :30. We will do up to 12 in 1 session. I want our 300- yard shuttles in less than :60. We will do up to 3 in a session.
I can’t tell if vertical jump scores match shuttle runs because they aren’t max effort sprints. However, I will say that from pure observation, our better jumpers are our better accelerators both own and off the ice.
Perhaps the best repeat sprinters have some relationship with max power and jumping ability?
I would say so.
What do you see with your athletes?
Patrick-Awesome post. The preceding discussion has been equally insightful. Great to see so many bright coaches chiming in with their personal thoughts and experiences. As you know, like Scott and Sean, we work with a lot of hockey players at Endeavor. Hockey is a sport that has traditionally been considered lactic (well, from reading really old stuff, it seems like it was thought of as more aerobic in the past), and as Scott mentioned, more people are shifting toward the Alactic/Aerobic classification. I’ve always said that the simple idea that their shift lasts 40-60s is an inappropriate description of the player’s energy system needs. As Charlie Francis once said, “Watch the player, not the game.” All that said, I think watching the player’s movement velocity and time at velocity may underestimate the energetic demands associated with lugging around 20+ lbs of equipment and in maintaining some state of ankle/knee/hip flexion, even while gliding. I’m also curious what you and everyone else feels would classify a sport as lactic? If various studies have found that players regularly (but not necessarily always) have blood lactate values of 10-13 mmol/L after a shift, does that not qualify it? Or in other words, does that not justify doing SOME lactic work in preparation for the sport? I completely understand the importance of training other complimentary and supportive qualities/systems, the frustration in preparing kids for tests that may not be most suitable to their sport, and the potential benefits of avoiding an energy system in the off-season that an athlete spends over half the year competing in, but I’m wary of placing a sport like hockey in any definite energy system bucket, when it seems to rely on a fairly unique combination of multiple systems. Interested to hear your thoughts here.
Mr. Patrick,
Would you consider wrestling a lactic sport? For a match could last 20 seconds to 2 minutes. So, would this mean that focusing sorely on the aerobic system is better than say, doing explosive exercises for 2 minutes then letting the heart rate come back down to a 100-120 range and repeating for 2 more times?
P.S. I did not mean to post the 1st one so early.
Drake Taylor
Kevin,
Here are some my thoughts in specific to a few of your statements.
“I think watching the player’s movement velocity and time at velocity may underestimate the energetic demands associated with lugging around 20+ lbs of equipment and in maintaining some state of ankle/knee/hip flexion, even while gliding.”
Why watch? That is like the coach who says, “they look slow”. How about being more specific and trying to measure things so that you know exactly what is going on with players? This will help get a better understanding of the sport.
“I’m also curious what you and everyone else feels would classify a sport as lactic?”
I answered this in the article. When someone is in shape they rely less on their lactate system to produce energy. Even sports we consider to be “lactic” or less “lactic” for those that aer very fit and in a good position to prodivde sufficient energy to satisfy the sport demands. I would say that a 400m or 800m run or some of the short rowing races where you are doing to be going all out for 60sec – 5min could be classified as lactic (even though, again, those that are fit, in shape, and preparred will be less lactic then some of us would be). But, this is very different then a hockey shift, where you are not going all out, non-stop, for the entire shift. It doesn’t happen.
“If various studies have found that players regularly (but not necessarily always) have blood lactate values of 10-13 mmol/L after a shift, does that not qualify it?”
This is a poor classification. I can have someone run a max effort 100m and they will have very high levels of lactate in their blood (Pfaff has talked about this) but it isn’t “lactatic exercise”. They aren’t really relying on their glycolytic system to produce energy. Having high levels of lactate may not be that significant for someone who is in shape and can buffer those levels. This comes down to having a solid aerobic system and increased mitochondrial density and capillary number. It is simple physiology. We can’t just go by mmol of lactate as there seems to be a high variability. Some can tolerate more than others and usually those “some” are the ones that are fit.
“Or in other words, does that not justify doing SOME lactic work in preparation for the sport?”
Who is saying to do no work at or above lactate threshold? I am not and I suggested the importance of using methods that enhance the individuals buffering capacity and shift their lactate threshold to the right as far as possible. This comes down to understanding your training methods and how you sequence training. People often think this is an “either-or” debate – We either do aerobic work or we do glycolytic work – and the problem with this it isn’t a right vs. wrong debate.
The goal is to develop the energy systems necessary for sport and to do so in the right order and with the right amounts. I find a lot of people probably would do well if they sat down and read basic energy system literature (as in the chapters in an exercise physiology book) as most seem to be just training things without understanding the qualities they are trying to bring out or the intensities they are working at to better enhance those qualities.
patrick
Drake,
The aerobic system would be essential for a wrestler to sustain those rounds. How you develop that will depend on what the individuals needs are and where in the training program the athlete is. For some, you may need to focus more on aerobic development and for others (who are already fit) you may try and focus on more match simulation demands with various sets and series of explosive activities (the aerobic system would need to be highly developed to all the person to recover and support this type of work). Again, it just comes down to the training methods you use.
patrick
Mr. Patrick,
What do you consider a good goal for wrestlers looking for aerobic development then? A goal resting heart rate, of say 50-55 BPM? I know Joel Jamieson recommends something close to that for MMA atheltes, but then again MMA is a vastly different sport than folksytle wrestling.
Thank you for your time.
Drake Taylor
Drake,
The 50-55bpm resting HR just comes from the notion that those who are very fit often have a resting HR below 60bpm. This is not etched in stone though and I have also seen some who naturally have low resting HR who are very deconditioned. So only use that as a “general guideline” but not an absolute.
Whay I would do is put together a battery of tests that evaluate the physiological parameters of your wrestlers and then from there compare the results between each wrestler to see where they all measure up. This would be a great place for you to start understanding the fitness of uour athletes.
Patrick
Great discussion everyone! It seems the undertone of this talk keeps coming back to the same thing – it’s grey. http://samleahey.com/training-science-is-grey-thats-why-youre-confused/
Patrick, good post! I really like your comparison to the FMS grading scale and tests for progression reasoning as an example! Your post is very helpful for me to make sense of the different energy systems, I have been reading chapter 2 preparing for my CSCS exam. Thanks Bro!
Sean,
I see some correlation between jump tests and speed only intra athlete though.
Kevin/Patrick-
“Why watch? That is like the coach who says, “they look slow”. How about being more specific and trying to measure things so that you know exactly what is going on with players? This will help get a better understanding of the sport.”
For the record, Dan Pfaff does use lactate testers so I think if we are going to talk about lactate we should also talk about timing athletes as well, since that is arguably the most important aspect of conditioning. If we are going to quote Charlie Francis perhaps we should ask about getting fast before learning to sustain it!
A good measure of evidence is the following:
One- Have the workouts from the past few years and compare year to year of the program and see where the improvement. If someone has an annual program I would love to see it on slideshare of any athlete in any sport at any level.
Two- compare it to the norms. If Hockey is the sport of choice share what the average draft pick is able to do and use similar tests/workout methods and compare to the rest of the league and especially year to year changes.
My fear is that any discussion without specific workouts and data seems to have less clarity- a problem of needing to see what people are doing. I have no real insight with Hockey as I don’t train those athletes myself and 90% what I do is with athletes in track and field. But, if I am going to talk about conditioning in sport it’s best to share development of the athlete with what has happened. This should be easy since if people are writing workouts to begin with it should be easy just to do a quick file merge and upload.
So what would be the application? Even if LT is a by-product of aerobic capacity, incorporating long slow distance training on a regular basis is still notorious for making athletes slow, weak, less powerful, and less mobile, in addition to unfavorable changes in testosterone and cortisol levels.
Brian,
The application would fall in choosing methods that get you what you need. Some straight cardiac output may be necessary. Interval work set at specific intnsities with specific durations of work to rest are what I use also. From there is comea down to sequencing your week (see Scott’s post above).
Patrick
Patrick-Thank you for the in-depth reply! To follow up on your comments:
“Why watch? That is like the coach who says, “they look slow”. How about being more specific and trying to measure things so that you know exactly what is going on with players? This will help get a better understanding of the sport.”
-I guess this is what I was alluding to. When people simply say (he skated/ran for 20s, then rested for 5, then ran for 10, then rested for 10…) there is a lot lost in that message. I need to be better about finding ways to measure and track exercise intensity/volume from an energy system standpoint.
“When someone is in shape they rely less on their lactate system to produce energy. Even sports we consider to be “lactic” or less “lactic” for those that aer very fit and in a good position to prodivde sufficient energy to satisfy the sport demands.”
-My interpretation here is that there may not be “sports” that are lactic (or not) as much as people within sports that rely on that form of energy production, and that if the limiting factor in an individual’s ability to be successful in their sport (or if this is a main factor in their “performance gap”) is an over-reliance on glycolysis then aerobic work should be a priority. Fair?
“I can have someone run a max effort 100m and they will have very high levels of lactate in their blood (Pfaff has talked about this) but it isn’t “lactic exercise”. They aren’t really relying on their glycolytic system to produce energy.”
-Can you expand on this? I’m not sure I understand how someone would have high levels of lactate in their blood without relying on glycolysis.
“Who is saying to do no work at or above lactate threshold? I am not and I suggested the importance of using methods that enhance the individuals buffering capacity and shift their lactate threshold to the right as far as possible.”
-I read you loud and clear! Didn’t mean to imply you were painting a black and white picture, as I know your message (in massage and training) is to treat/train specific to the needs of the individual.
Thanks for your help in explaining these concepts. Your explanations clear a lot up for me.
Kevin,
No problem. To your second main point, yes, that is fair. Push the bar to the right and you will rely less on an inefficient energy system.
With regard to lactate levels, this is sort of explained by the above statement. Basically, all energy systems are kicking on to perform a task. If something is intense, lactate may be produced as a byproduct and sometimes in high amounts but the duration of the task (ie, 75yrd sprint vs a 300yrd shuttle) may not make all that lactate matter. All it means is that we did something intensely and hydrogen ions had to go somewhere (so they were taken up by pyruvate) but the mml at the end of the task might not matter if the length of the task is short enough or the individual has the ability to buffer the hydrogen ions (e.g., someone with a huge aerobic engine and someone with everything shifted to the right). Does that make more sense or clear it up a bit?
Yea, I for sure am not painting it back and white but others often do. The idea is to use intensity properly to.sequence training weeks and phases.
Hope that helps.
Patrick
Brian,
The fastest men in the world do tempo running that some field sports find challenging in terms of volumes. I would ask Patrick about his experiences with HRV if he sees any relationship between volumes he is prescribing and T:C ratios or other biomarkers. I find that a field sport athlete can do 2-3 fold what most would prescribe for a pure speed and power athlete provided they have a good power to weight ratio and are not spending all of their time activating glutes with bands or working on breathing on a table instead on the hills.
Leave a Comment