L S D Runs - The Thread, The Information, The Details.....

[Cadence Minge]

[Nello]

[Rooster]

Have been following this thread with interest

My story - this season (starting Jan 1st) I decided to take a more moderate approach and limit my HR in training for the first few months of the year. I use (Hellemans /Gordo / Newsome) zones - so all of my training has been in my 'easy' zone (Max HR - 50bpm, for me 150bpm so 75% on the run, and 140 on the bike) and I've simply used my HRM as a way to cap my effort. Each time my HR went above that, my HRM beeped at me and I backed off.

I decided to give this approach a try after reading the classic Mark Allen / Maffetone 'Max aerobic effort' article, and how Allen benefitted from it for three months every year

My experience - it was incredibly frustrating at first, I was going what I felt was so slowly - running faster than about 8.20 a mile was impossible and I'd often have to back right off to a walk, even going over little railway bridges. However, I stuck with it and gradually my pace has increased over the last 6-7 weeks, and continues to do so. Now my running pace at 150bpm is in the range of 7.45 a mile.

Over the last 2 weeks I've added a flat 9-12 mile (3 mile looped) run at constant pace in my 'steady' zone (150-165): week 1 was 7.18 a mile at 162 bpm, week 2 was 6.56 a mile at 161 bpm.
Not exactly scientific but it shows that I'm making progress with pace relative to HR.
Week three of the test is tonight - it would be lovely to see me taking another 25s a mile off my pace at the same HR but I'm not holding my breath!!

For me I think the benefit has been that I've always, in the past, fallen into the trap of not making my easy sessions easy enough, and as a consequence I've been really tired all the time - resulting in me being really ill this time last year. This year I feel like my body is 'absorbing' the volume a lot more and I'm recovering between sessions - and the focus of only having the one session a week where I am doing the steady effort has meant that I'm really up for it (not that its particularly a hard pace, but the hard part of it is the relentlessness of knowing you have to hold the same 'steady' pace for the whole duration, and it feels a lot harder at the same HR later on in the session!!)
_________________
"There are times when your body is saying, 'I don't want to do this,' and your mind says, 'Shut up, body, and do what I tell you!'" - Jens Voigt

[Cyanide Sabre]

Question: When ever I run slowly (or slower than my usual slowness) my form goes out the window. I end up sort of just jogging along with "baby steps" - if you know what I mean? Or is this just 'cos I'm sh1t at running?

Should LSD runs hold form as well as HR?
_________________
Youth & Talent are no match for Age & Treachery
http://www.supportunicef.org.uk/Malcs_Half_Ironman

[EnduranceUK.com]

When I was 20 I ran just under 3 hours for the marathon. I played rugby (Union for West Park Grammar on a Saturday, league for Widnes Tigers on a Sunday) and ran x-country and upto 5k for school and Merseyside. Basically, from an early age I ran at different levels of intensity every day – I trained long and slow and intervals without really knowing why, etc.

At 22 I damaged my right knee playing rugby (fell on base of a bottle) and for the next 8 years I could hardly run a bath. I did a couple of short triathlons at Crystal Palace, etc but could not run more than 5 miles.
After a series of operations on my knee I was able to start running again with a plan to run the London Marathon (lived in London for 10 years). I then ran London twice in 3:30 & 3:28.

In the summer of 1996 I read an article by Mark Allen in Triathlete where he explained why he had been able to break the Kona record in 1993, run a 2:40 IM marathon and basically win 6 Hawaii IM’s.

It was the complete opposite of what I did!

I was doing 30 minutes hard as hell, 30 minutes easy, 30 minutes hard as hell, 30 minutes easy – Just like rugby training but 30 minute “intervals” instead of 3 minutes, etc). No wonder I was completely fooked all of the time.

I was going to South Africa the following February to take part in the Surfers Marathon in East London and also running in London again in April. So I took a gamble – thought if it worked for MA then it may work for me and basically bought a heartmonitor, and ran everything at 155 bpm (I was 25 at the time). I had a couple of false starts though because I really could not believe that running so slow as I was at first would make me quicker.

The following February (after maybe 5 proper months of this training) I was the first overseas finisher in the Surfers Marathon (actually 15 miles! Along beaches and swimming a couple of rivers) in 1:24, and I ran London in 3:06.

It works – FULL STOP.

Ever since I started coaching (did BTF L1 in 1999) I have been a massive advocate of this type of training and use it with all of the people that I coach during the base phase of their training. Even athletes doing only Sprint and Olympic can benefit from it due to the fact that the greater the level of basic endurance, the better the bodies ability to deal with fatigue. Even for athletes only doing sprint races a block of 6 weeks of this LSD training will make a massive difference.
I get athletes to run a 3 mile loop at MAF HR (185 - age) every 3 weeks for 9 - 12 weeks and can guarantee that in over 30 athletes there has not been one that has not gone 15-20 secs a mile quicker after this time for the exact same HR.

Why does it work?

Working in the fat burning zone (read up on the Krebs cycle if you want to know full details) reduces the amount of lactic acid produced and built up in the body during exercise. It also reduces the amount of damaging free radicals produced as by products. The body, when working at this low intensity stimulates natural antioxidants to be produced which help reduce the stress on the energy systems.
However, the main benefits are the increase in number and density of mitochondria, and the increased sensitivity to insulin.
Mitochondria are the muscles energy factories. The more of them that you have, the more energy cells can produce. A muscle containing more, bigger mitochondria will not tire as quickly and can produce power at a higher level (after adaptation).
Increased insulin sensitivity means that the there is less risk of the body producing high levels of insulin due to stable blood sugar levels.
Therefore combined there is a higher level of energy produced for the same amount of effort (over time) and a much more stable body blood sugar state.
An increase in mitochondria will take 6 weeks from initial training so do not expect miracles – and you need to keep all sessions at or below your calculated HR.

For anybody looking to finish first IM or do an ultra for the first time – this type of training can be done for longer than 6 weeks (and remember to adjust the HR for biking accordingly, etc).

One further point worth mentioning is that on TT there are often posts about training “empty" and again, anybody that knows me will know that I am a great believer in this also (if done correctly).

Energy depletion actually helps in the stimulation of mitochondria growth. Training aerobically whilst depleting energy stores can help to call upon the maximum number of mitochondria (remember they are the energy factories) possible. This will put great stimulus on the mitochondria that, during recovery, will get bigger and stronger.
The danger though is that if taken too far there is muscle break down (after 60-90 mins of running/cycling on empty).

This is why it is good to train before eating in the morning, etc. A good indicator of when to stop is when power drops sharply. Remember to recover well with carbs and protein.

Calcium produced from the muscles also stimulates mitochondria growth so it is a good idea when in a heavy training period to take a calcium supplement to get maximum benefit.

Sorry if this has bored most of you rigid but I think when doing any type of training it is important to know why.
If you want to know more detail PM me – and let me know how you get on.

Brian


p.s

[Rooster]

EnduranceUK - brilliant post and a great, succinct way to describe the how and why of running 'easy' - to spend time teaching your body to use fat as fuel more efficiently.

My feeling is that if you go harder in training then you'll burn predominantly carbs, and although you feel you are getting a 'harder' or 'better' workout, you never teach your body to access the fat as fuel, or to make it more efficient.
Lots of 'easier' training means
1) you can get more volume in, and recover well day to day
2) you are fresher for the weekly 'faster' session that you do
(its worth pointing out that I'm finding that I can only do one 'faster' run a week - I'm running 7-8 hours a week at the moment in prep for London, with Mon Fri off running, Tue Thu as 1 hour easy (HR 75%), Wed as Steady run of moderate length, Sat as 30-60mins easy and sunday Long run 2.30 easy)

Just to piggyback on my earlier post about my aerobic run test results, I just got back from my week three Steady run

Week 1 - 10 miles in 73 mins, av HR 162, 7.18 min/mile
Week 2 - 11 miles in 78 mins, av HR 161, 6.56 min/mile
Week 3 - (slightly under)13 miles in 88 mins, av HR 163, 6.47 min/mile

Just for reference, my max HR is 200 so 165 is about 82% max, top of steady/ bottom of Mod-hard - and what I'm looking to run my marathon at HR wise.

I'm convinced about the benefits of training at easy HRs - I have to say I was very sceptical before trying it but hell, it seems to be working. Also another side benefit is that I am itching to do some fast running, intervals or hills as its been 8 weeks since a fast run - am actually looking forward to the intense work rather than dreading it!!
_________________
"There are times when your body is saying, 'I don't want to do this,' and your mind says, 'Shut up, body, and do what I tell you!'" - Jens Voigt

[lonestar]

ok,

most of the posters on this thread seem to be going long. That said an olympic could be classed as a long race in theory and compared to toher sports but obviously not to the same degree as 70.3 and beyond.

Anyway my point is, are LSD (whatever acronym you use!) useful in terms of sprint and olympic distance athletes?

I always thought so but not through experience more through advice and the fact (of limited experience) I always felt better after and nice cross country runjog.

I asked a coach why they didnt subscribe an LSD run in the plans they give to sprint/olympic distance athletes and the answer I got was as the longest distance run is 10k there was no need for an LSD run, all the workouts done ACROSS the three disciplines will increase endurance and the more specific sessions near the season will increase speed.

Yet does prescribe an LSD bike. Although I have heard from 'old' triathletes that keeping running up is easy, to get bike speed you need time in the saddle. But is that opinion or fact (for a scientific point beyond my reasoning?).

Just a thought
_________________
The question isn't who is going to let me, it's who is going to stop me

[gingeadams]

Great thread. I've just started doing more LSD running, as previously my training has been 'bang it out as long and as fast as you can'.

I'm looking forward to studying my numbers and hopefully seeing some improvement over the next month or two.

Sunday was a 13.5 mile run in Zone 2 - 146 BPM in 1hr 36mins.
First time I've ran that far and felt very fresh at the end of it.

I haven't ran a stand alone half marathon for over two years, although I have got a hell of a lot fitter since then.

I have a half marathon on March 15th, so I hope I'll see a bit of improvement still.
_________________
2007: Norseman
2008: Moving house
2009: Ironman UK
2010 Moved house (again!)
2011: Something big again

www.accelerace.co.uk

[TransitionTed]

[Rooster]

Lonestar

One thing to bear in mind is that the more volume we do in our winter/base phase (whatever you want to call it) the greater volume of intensity our bodies will be able to absorb as we get closer to race season

plus, theres only so much 'intensity' you can do in a week, even if you are a sprint athlete you'll benefit massively from a big 'easy volume' base - now whether you choose to do that on the run or on the bike is another story.

Personally, for most people Id think it makes sense to put that volume in on the bike as theres a much reduced risk of overuse injury, and your joints take much less hammering.

I'm only putting in all these LSD miles in as I'm building up for FLM, and then hoping to carry those volume benefits into the build for IMUK
_________________
"There are times when your body is saying, 'I don't want to do this,' and your mind says, 'Shut up, body, and do what I tell you!'" - Jens Voigt

[EnduranceUK.com]

[Rooster]

And purely anecdotal, but when I was 13/14 I got fed up with track work and spent the winter just out running every night because I enjoyed it(probably 40 miles a week) at this sort of pace and the next summer I was flying - which seemed to be at odds with the theory that you needed to be doing 2 track sessions a week plus hill intervals .

Mind you I did get my ankles messed up pretty good, and missed most of the next season with injury so caution there to any over keen teens!!
_________________
"There are times when your body is saying, 'I don't want to do this,' and your mind says, 'Shut up, body, and do what I tell you!'" - Jens Voigt

[lonestar]

[hammerer]

First of all Endurance UK, thats a great read. Its good to see the science behind the facts, and often its just do X at Y with no explanation. Somethign that Friel says in his books is about the pyramid, with the "BASE" leading up to the top which is speed. The wider the base the higher the pyramid can go..i.e. pace. A coach friend of mine also advocates lots of LSD even for sprint distance. He says anything over an hour is an endurance event and you should only stop doing base when you see no more returns. He said someone like me with limited experience will beneft more form doing LSD's rather than sprint / interval work. Reading Savaloy's blog has highlighted this too as his coach has had him doing lots of LSD work over the winter and hes running easier than ever...And he was quick anyway!

[nevans]

I'm quite supprised that TRI specific training plans I've seen, say unless training for an IM (and possibly a 70.2), there is no benifit in doing runs longer than 1 1/2 hours.

This is quite different to run specific training plans you see.