all posts post new thread

Old Forum Glycolytic Power build mitochondria?

Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)

Train2Train

Level 5 Valued Member
Might be an ignorant question but just wondering if the glycolytic power routine (20-50 sec of max effort work followed by 4-6 times that amount of rest) builds mitochondria like the goal of the A+A routines do or just helps with the buffering. I know Pavel says that research has showed that a lot of the very deep glycolytic capacity (HIIT) destroys the very thing you are trying to build (mitochondria). Just trying to understand the energy systems better and how the body responds to certain routines.
 
My exercise phys is a little rusty so I'll spare waxing eloquent but here is a practical experiment: Put on a HR monitor, sprint for a minute, then rest for 5. Do 2 intervals for 12 minutes total of exercise (5 minutes of rest after the second sprint is included in the workout time). See how low your HR drops when resting for 5 minutes. See how low your heart rate gets during rest intervals and also get the average heart rate for the workout.

Do the same experiment with 10 second sprints and 50 seconds rest for 12 intervals. See if your heart rate stays above the 55% HR percentage mark, how low it drops compared to the first experiment, and the heart rate average for the entire workout.
 
Joel Jamieson does as a good a job as anyone explaining the energy systems and how to train them in his book Ultimate MMA Conditioning and on his website www.8weeksout.com.

This series of videos from him should help you out.

http://breakingmuscle.com/strength-conditioning/energy-system-optimization-with-joel-jamieson
 
Dustin... yes, though 20sec is a bit too short. As you suggested, keep the dosing low and infrequent or you will end up burning up mitochondria in the acid bath. Creating more mitochondria is what increases intracellular buffering.

Richard... relative to the question, what are you expecting that experiment to show?

Ryan... from what I have seen, I don't disagree with Jamieson, in theory; but understand that he works with a very narrow and specific population.
 
Even though the total work to rest ratios are the same:

The 1 minute anaerobic glycolysis intervals will likely yield a lower overall average heart rate because the absolute recovery time is so long. The maximum heart rate achieved may be higher than the second experiment, but not by much and not enough to offset the drop in HR from the long 5 minute rests.

The 10 second ATP-PC intervals with 50 second rests should yield a more steady overall HR, likely with a higher HR average. HR will peak after a few intervals and not have enough time to drop below 55% maximum because absolute rest time is only 50 seconds. The aerobic system will be running to recover the ATP-PC system before the next interval

That's the best I've got without diving into a text
 
I should conclude: I doubt anaerobic glycolytic training with long rests will work the aerobic systems (and build mitochondria) as well as ATP-PC training with the same work:rest ratios over the same amount of training time.
 
Al,

His main clients are MMA fighters, but he does work with athletes from different sports. I wrote an article awhile ago for eliteFTS detailing my results using his cardiac output protocol and the adaptations to my heart from it using echocardiography to look at left venticle changes including a significant increase in stroke volume in a relatively short time period.

http://www.elitefts.com/education/training/echocardiography-evidence-of-cardiac-output-training/
 
Richard,

Research supports that glycolytic training as you described above, with the exception of 30-50s of work/same rest ratio, increases mitochondrial mass in FT fibers; so indirectly, it supports improved aerobic metabolism.

Moreover, your description of PCr training is likely too little rest for most people to receive an aerobic benefit. HR and systemic acidity would be too high in the volume necessary to train the aerobic system via PCr recovery.

Much research has been published since most editions of the textbooks were written.
 
Al, could you please help clarify this to me? How does this fit into the context of improving aerobic endurance via your conditioning program as outlined in the article, "where do I go after simple?" 10 kettlebell swings at the top of each minute seems very much alactacid with aerobic recovery at a 1:4ish work to rest ratio.

I should clarify my quote above, which may have been a cause of confusion:

"I should conclude: I doubt anaerobic glycolytic training with long rests will work the aerobic systems (and build mitochondria) as well as ATP-PC training with the same work:rest ratios over the same amount of training time."

IN the above comment "same work:rest ratios" was meant to coincide with my above experiment of 1:5 work to rest ratios using both glycolytic and then ATP-PC systems, not 1:1.

Does this change the context correctly or was I still offbase?
Thanks
 
Al,

In rereading and noticing a general lack of clarity in my explanation, I have decided to simplify. My intent was:

1:5 work:rest ratio with 1 minute work and 5 minutes rest aka glycolytic intervals

Vs.

1:5 work:rest ratio with 10 seconds work and 50 seconds rest aka ATP-PC intervals

Those ratios being the same aka both are 1:5

1:5 work:rest ratio with 10 seconds work and 50 seconds rest would produce superior aerobic gains

Glycolytic intervals at 1:5 work:rest ratio would also increase aerobic capacity, but probably not as much

that is what I meant to say. Feedback?
Thanks
 
Richard,

I would agree with your conclusion in your last, however, setting time boundaries does not capture energy systems training as well as working to a HR, and, both styles are likely needed... the former in small doses to increase mitochondrial mass of FT fibers above what the latter can do, and the latter needs to be taken out to a larger volume.

Testing has shown that the work/rest ratio used in my article (1:3) is too short on recovery for most to get a true aerobic benefit, unless using a very moderate-sized bell. I have since changed to using HR to capture the same effect in an individualized manner.

Great discussion.
 
My Google Fu is evidently weak. Can somebody link me to the studies referenced that discuss mitochondrial damage via glycolytic training?
 
Dustin, to stimulate mitochondrial development a fiber has to spend a lot of TOTAL time (volume) in a state of MILD acidosis.

The "long rests" protocol does that in intermediate fibers.

The A+A protocol with much shorter sets is superior because it hits the fast fibers as well—and because it allows much greater weekly volume—up to 14 sessions compared to 2 max for the "long rests" protocol.
 
Bill,

One more: "Myocardial mitochondrial oxidative stress and dysfunction in intense exercise: regulatory effects of quercetin" Chao Gao · Xiaoqian Chen · Juan Li · Yanyan Li · Yuhan Tang · Liang Liu · Shaodan Chen · Haiyan Yu · Liegang Liu · Ping Yao

It is pretty well known that mitochondria function degrades in low pH levels (this is why aerobic and anaerobic training are at odds); continued increases toward acidosis begin to break down the actual proteins, and not just degrade enzyme and mitochondrial function.
 
Bill, I first learned of mitochondrial damage here when Pavel and Al discussed the implications in an earlier thread. It isn't an issue wildly known, I think, and in fact, paraphrasing Pavel here, that a Russian scientist wasn't taken very seriously when the effects of glycolytic training impacted strength and was pushed aside. It is in part I think to do with the whole sports conditioning model of strength and conditioning....training the glycolytic pathways has upsides and downsides and its damaging effect on mitochondria absolutely a downside if you have worked so hard to gain strength. It is really dependent on if you and your sport needs the conditioning effects of glycolysis, or lactate threshold training. And if so the sessions need to be brief, pre-competition and to be left alone during the season as your sport will provide the conditioning it needs. And if you have a strong strength and aerobic base to start with, then the effects will be reduced compared to someone who is de or untrained. So push, push, push all the time, something has to give. Slow and steady training with a little dip into glycolysis now and then but not too much. This may help, it is running biased but:

So Long runs can be used to increase mitochondria in some FT fibers. While a variety of paces does need to be used, too much faster paced running above the Lactate Threshold can actually damage mitochondria. Some studies have shown that after high acidosis training sessions, mitochondria have been damaged beyond repair. High acidosis training includes hard sessions that lower the pH of the muscle. These are intense sessions that are above the Lactate Threshold. In my training session, both VO2max and anaerobic work such as Lactate Tolerance work can be considered high acidosis training. That's why this type of training should be used only so often and plenty of rest given afterwords for tissue repair.

from:http://magstraining.tripod.com/Physiology.html#Increase_in_size_and_number_of

I've learnt a great deal here on this forum that have changed a lot of my views and S&S - with its A&A conditioning focus - has been the biggest game changer for me.
 
Status
Closed Thread. (Continue Discussion of This Topic by Starting a New Thread.)
Back
Top Bottom