all posts post new thread

How have you benefited from Zone 2?

From what I read and hear a bit of the secret is in the volume. More volume gives more results (in terms of z2 training). Im guessing 3-5 hours will give good results for many of us. Unfortunately I dont want to spend that much time on just z2 training. When I do it, I do between 1-2 hours pr. week.
 
Because of the distinct biomechanics of trotting and proper running. The trainer how showed the difference is a German fella named "Sebastian Kaindl" Trotting is too much vertical force compared to the horizontal push.
Thank you for taking the time to reply. What does "too much vertical force" mean? Is this relative to "proper running" where more of the force is horizontal e.g. it is less efficient to run slower due to a larger percentage of the force resulting in vertical displacement and not horizontal displacement? Is related to force joints absorb? Is it related to some sort of injury risk?
Broadly applicable.
I'm curious what you are basing this on. Are you a trainer that has applied this and seen results from what you talk about? Are you mostly extending your personal experience? Someone who has read articles that support this? A mix?
 
From what I read and hear a bit of the secret is in the volume. More volume gives more results (in terms of z2 training). Im guessing 3-5 hours will give good results for many of us. Unfortunately I dont want to spend that much time on just z2 training. When I do it, I do between 1-2 hours pr. week.
From both my experience and my understanding, high volumes of Z2 can be reduced by repacing 1-2 of those long Z2 sessions with higher intensity sessions, e.g. Z4 or Z5. From my personal training, I can do 1-2 hours of Z2 work a week and then have a tempo or threshold session and an interval session and still see continuous improvements while still "only" having a total of 2-3 hrs of "cardio" a week.
 
From what I read and hear a bit of the secret is in the volume. More volume gives more results (in terms of z2 training). Im guessing 3-5 hours will give good results for many of us. Unfortunately I dont want to spend that much time on just z2 training. When I do it, I do between 1-2 hours pr. week.
The ‘secret’ as you call it is indeed in the volume. But then again so much of it comes back to what results or benefits one is looking for. The strategy that @John K just mentioned is certainly a good one for those time strapped, but might not be sufficient for a person training for some ultra event.

It’s no different to weight training, in the respect to the goals should dictate the modalities, volumes, frequencies, and other training parameters…
 
The ‘secret’ as you call it is indeed in the volume. But then again so much of it comes back to what results or benefits one is looking for. The strategy that @John K just mentioned is certainly a good one for those time strapped, but might not be sufficient for a person training for some ultra event.

It’s no different to weight training, in the respect to the goals should dictate the modalities, volumes, frequencies, and other training parameters…
100% agreed. That's why I like the training guide by @mprevost I like to hand out like candy, is it illustrates really well (and simply) the relevance for higher intensity training for different goal races/distances. The longer the distance you want to run, the less that higher intensity matters.

FREE PDF HERE FOR THOSE INTERESTED:
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1...st-Endurance-Training.pdf?6339936993263922246

accessed from:
 
100% agreed. That's why I like the training guide by @mprevost I like to hand out like candy, is it illustrates really well (and simply) the relevance for higher intensity training for different goal races/distances. The longer the distance you want to run, the less that higher intensity matters.

FREE PDF HERE FOR THOSE INTERESTED:
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1...st-Endurance-Training.pdf?6339936993263922246

accessed from:
This is phenomenal information!

I started scanning through it a bit and it seems to really distill things down into simple practical application for a variety of goals. I may be a bit biased but I tend to agree with the more pyramidal type approach for the "everyday athlete" as opposed to true polarized training and for similar reasons - you really need to be hammering high volumes for polarized training to be more effective than pyramidal as it would be hard to recover from very high volumes with a pyramidal approach.
 
Thank you for taking the time to reply. What does "too much vertical force" mean? Is this relative to "proper running" where more of the force is horizontal e.g. it is less efficient to run slower due to a larger percentage of the force resulting in vertical displacement and not horizontal displacement?
It is not about the efficiency per se. If you just have a bad ratio of vertical forces to horizontal forces, you would be just slower, but could have the same vertical force absorption. Similar to swimming: Being a bad swimmer doesn't make swimming a bad workout. You just get your stimulus with lower speed because of the inefficiency.

You move differently in a way that the force is worse absorbed. (I can't describe it properly without writing a novel) You can test it if you bounce in place as if you would be trotting. Then compare it with rope skipping. Then you get a rough glimpse on what I mean. (Not that rope skipping is a perfect model for proper running!)

After all, it is an informed subjective judgement as any risk to reward judgement. If I pull together all the knowledge on biomechanics, practical knowledge of runners, my experience with clients etc. I come to this conclusion.

Is related to force joints absorb? Is it related to some sort of injury risk?
This is the result of it that I try to avoid.

I'm curious what you are basing this on. Are you a trainer that has applied this and seen results from what you talk about? Are you mostly extending your personal experience? Someone who has read articles that support this? A mix?
I am a trainer and base my opinion on both my experience and the biomechanics of the human gait. However, Sebastian Kaindl (German Trainer) is responsible for drawing my attention to this phenomenon.

Ahhh I get you.

Basically a different word for glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity.

It is a bit more. :) It is your ability to switch between fuels. So, it is also your ability to burn fat at higher intensities, ability to avoid accumulation of intracellular diacylglycerides,...

But practically: Can go with carbs, and can you go without any food? And: How do you feel when you switch fuel.

To give you a practical example: My goal, for me and clients, is to be able to have a full blast cheat day without having any problems the day after other than perhaps a bit more hunger (which should be well tolerated).

What numbers do you shoot for? Eg if you eat 200g of white rice you want blood sugar to be below X at one and two hour mark.
I don't shoot for any number

1. with all measures in place, even high carb meals shouldn't push you into a problematic zone at all.
2. the marginal benefit of controlling for those metrics at the level that I operate is almost zero. It is like a marathon runner with single digit body fat using a DEXA scan once a month. It doesn't give you anything. So, even with clients on a low level, I don't care until all measures are put in place and problems persist (which is only the case if you have a medical issue).
 
You move differently in a way that the force is worse absorbed. (I can't describe it properly without writing a novel) You can test it if you bounce in place as if you would be trotting. Then compare it with rope skipping. Then you get a rough glimpse on what I mean. (Not that rope skipping is a perfect model for proper running!)
I'm not sure I'm understanding why this difference occurs or why it is bad. Perhaps there is a link to something you could send? My joints don't feel worse when I run a 12 min mile, 10 min mile, or 8 min mile, but I definitely feel my joints more when I run 10 miles vs 2 miles, but that to me is more about cumulative effects and not the pace per say (haha I'm not up to running 10 8 min miles ... yet ...). And when I returned to running after some pretty big injuries, running super slow (we're talking 12-15 min miles) was the only way that didn't hurt. Shoot, sometimes I still like going for a little 12 min mile run because it does feel good.
 
I'm not sure I'm understanding why this difference occurs or why it is bad. Perhaps there is a link to something you could send?

I am old school. I just have text books in my shelf. :/ But any good book on proper running mechanics should give you this difference between running and trotting.

My joints don't feel worse when I run a 12 min mile, 10 min mile, or 8 min mile, but I definitely feel my joints more when I run 10 miles vs 2 miles, but that to me is more about cumulative effects and not the pace per say (haha I'm not up to running 10 8 min miles ... yet ...).
This comparison is not fair, since the 10/12 is a bit more than 2/10. :)

It is also a long term thing to run with improper running mechanics. It also not set in stone. I have basically titanium ancles because of my boxing background, boxing with light feet and putting a lot of emphasis on developing strength and elasticity. I can run very slow and feel more like rope skipping.

The speed is a rough rule of thumb for orientation.

And when I returned to running after some pretty big injuries, running super slow (we're talking 12-15 min miles) was the only way that didn't hurt. Shoot, sometimes I still like going for a little 12 min mile run because it does feel good.
This is a different game. I also like slow running. But see my specific case above. Also: Slow running for low volume is something very different.
 
@sfast, I believe you're oversimplifying here. While it seems logical enough to relate a slower pace with greater vertical force, how much this happens, if it happens at all, is going to be highly individual, see @John K's comment about not feeling worse when running slower two posts above this one. I would even hazard that what you're suggesting may actually be the opposite of what happens for some people, namely that they subject their joints to greater vertical forces when they run more quickly - that also seems logical to me.

Daniels - in his book, Running Formula, which I recommend here all the time - makes a difference between one's easy running pace and so-called junk miles. At the risk of repeating myself, his book is very specific and there isn't a sliding scale, allowing all paces, but distinct pace zones to use on specific work:rest ratios, for specific distances, etc. His book is "what works" - we could debate why endlessly but I am not feeling the need.

Yessis' book, "Explosive Running" is a classic text worth reading about footstrike and other aspects of running biomechanics.

-S-
 
Back
Top Bottom