Things That are Important for
5ks and 10ks...
Some may surprise you!
By Owen Anderson (forwarded by Tim Uuksulainen)
Exercise scientists have identified a number of
factors which are important for success in 5- and 10-K races.
One of these elements, of course, is running speed at lactate
threshold. If your velocity at threshold is high, it means that
not much lactate appears in your blood at good-quality running
speeds. This is a very good thing, because it means that lactate
is "staying home" in your muscle cells, supplying
the energy you need to operate at a quicksilver pace. Lactate
is a tremendous fuel for endurance running, but it can't be
used for energy when it is floating around in the blood.
If your running speed at lactate threshold (RSLT)
improves, your 5- and 10-K race times will almost always get
better. Furthermore, if we lined up a large group of distance
runners in order, from the highest RSLT to the lowest, and then
lined them up in a different kind of order - from fastest to
slowest 10-K times, the two lines would be nearly identical!
Running speed at lactate threshold is a very powerful predictor
of performance in 5Ks and 10Ks.
Running economy (RE) is also highly correlated
with 5- and 10-K performances. RE is simply your "oxygen
cost" of running at a particular velocity, expressed in
milliliters of oxygen per kilogram of body weight per minute.
The lower this cost, the better it is for your performances,
partly because it means that you are farther away from your
maximal rate of oxygen usage. This gives you some "wiggle
room" to increase your running paces without outstripping
the ability of your cardiovascular system to supply your muscles
with oxygen.
The noted exercise physiologist Pietro Enrico
Di Prampero of the University of Udine in Italy (shown at far
right in the accompanying photo) found that a 5-percent decrease
in the energy cost of running (i. e., a 5-percent improvement
in running economy) generally produces about a 4-percent improvement
in performance (1). A bit of good news is that 5-percent enhancements
in economy are relatively easy to come by for distance runners
- when they focus on the right kinds of training (running-specific
strength training, hill work, vVO2max running, and race-specific
efforts, for example). A 41-minute 10-K runner would dip down
to 39:22 for the event - if he/she upgraded economy by 5 percent.
But if we try out the lactate-threshold-speed
"trick", lining up runners according to economy and
then according to 10-K finishing time, we would find that economy
does not do quite as well as lactate-threshold speed at replicating
the lines. The reason for this is that lactate-threshold speed
contains more physiological information than economy. In fact,
lactate-threshold velocity includes an economy element: If you
are uneconomical, you can't have a good lactate-threshold speed,
because you will be breaking down glucose at high rates and
thus blowing excess lactate out your muscles "portholes"
into the blood.
VO2max (maximal aerobic capacity) is a surprisingly
poor predictor of 5- and 10-K success. Although it is true that
if you elevate your VO2max from 45 to 65, for example, your
5- and 10-K performances will undoubtedly improve, we can't
be totally sanguine that less-generous VO2max upgrades will
always lead to faster running in races. In one recent study,
for example, a 5-percent augmentation of VO2max did not lead
to faster 5-K performances at all (2)! One problem with VO2max
is that it does not contain a lot of information. That is, you
might have a high VO2max but still have irksome economy and
a lousy lactate threshold. For this reason, when we line up
our runners again, the VO2max and performance lines look completely
different.
Weekly mileage is also a poor predictor of 5-
and 10-K success. Like VO2max, volume is terribly lacking in
performance-related information. You can run 70 - or 100 - miles
per week, for example, and still have a modest lactate threshold
and miserable running economy at high speeds. Yet, many runners
treat higher mileage as though it is the factor which can cause
their performances to soar.
In contrast, some rather non-traditional factors
do a very nice job of foretelling 5- and 10-K times. For example,
50- and 300-meter sprint times are highly correlated with 10-K
performances in distance runners (3). This doesn't mean that
world-class sprinters will eventually be our very best 10-K
harriers (their fast-twitch muscle-fiber composition wouldn't
permit it). What it tells us is that the factors which produce
very rapid 50- and 300-meter times (explosive contacts with
the ground, short foot-contact times, relatively long strides)
can also produce superior 5-K and 10-K performances. Being very
fast is an asset for distance running, not a liability, and
thus endurance runners should strive constantly to do things
which upgrade their max running velocities.
Other very non-traditional elements are also linked
with distance success. For example, five-jump tests (in which
runners attempt to cover as much ground as possible with five
consecutive jumps), static-jump exams (in which athletes jump
forward from a standing, erect posture), counter-movement jumps
(in which runners go into a squat before jumping), and plyometric-leap
tests (in which runners land on the ground and then explode
forward) all do a fine job of prognosticating 10-K success (ibid).
This doesn't tell us that high-jumpers would make great distance
runners. Rather, it informs us that the variables which produce
powerful jumps and leaps also create outstanding 10-K running
- and that we should train in ways which advance our explosive
attributes. This is true for elite runners - and for the rest
of us, the mere mortals who trod 5- and 10-K courses. Developing
the ability to get our feet on and off the ground more quickly
and advancing our capacity to push more forcefully on the ground
with each step will increase the quality of our training and
sharpen our race times, as well. We may not run as fast as elite
Kenyans, but we definitely can improve.
With these findings and observations in mind,
it is not surprising that a history of regular strength training
is a good predictor of endurance success, too (strength training
can heighten propulsive force and quickness). Plain-vanilla
strength training for running often upgrades running economy
by 3 percent, which should improve 5- and 10-K times by about
2 percent. Explosive-type strength training seems to work even
more powerfully: One inquiry found that nine weeks of explosive
strength training (with an emphasis on hops, bounds, leaps,
and various jumps) improved 5-K times by about 30 seconds, and
a second, separate investigation detected a 3-percent improvement
in 3-K performances after six weeks of plyometric training (4).
The bottom lines? You can make major improvements
in your 5- and 10-K running by emphasizing training which optimizes
running velocity at lactate threshold, running economy, and
max running speed. Furthermore, a consistent reliance on strength
training, with an emphasis on movements which mimic the mechanics
of running and a gradual progression toward quick-movement resistance
work, should put a big smile on your face as you cross the finish
lines of your 5- and 10-K races
References
(1) "Energetics of Best Performances in Middle-Distance
Running," Journal of Applied Physiology, Vol. 74 (5), pp.
2318-2324, 1993
(2) "Explosive Strength Training Improves 5-Km Running
Time by Improving Running Economy and Muscle Power," Journal
of Applied Physiology, Vol. 86 (5), pp. 1527-1533, 1999
(3) "The Relationship between Field Tests of Anaerobic
Power and 10-Km Run Performance," Journal of Strength &
Conditioning Research, Vol. 15 (4), pp. 405-412, 2001
(4) "The Effect of Plyometric Training on Distance Running
Performance," European Journal of Applied Physiology, Vol.
89 (1), pp. 1-7, 2003
Please visit our web site at www.runningresearchnews.com
to get the latest information about training, sports nutrition,
and injury prevention
