What about training smarter? Doesn’t it make sense that supplementary cardio machines allows them to get in a lot more aerobic work which is not a physically risky (from an injury perspective) as running, nor takes as long to recover from when compared to running?
That sounds plausible for maintaining fitness, not sure about gigantic running improvements? Wouldn't triathletes switching to track do a lot better?
You bring up a good point about ‘maintaining fitness’. Last winter, she broke her foot during the anchor leg of a DMR relay, in which she split 4:35 for the mile. That was after setting her 8:53 3000m PB earlier in the day. Plugging the 8:53 into Daniels’ Calculator gives an ‘equivalent’ 15:26 for the 5k, which is very close to the 15:20.1 she ran at Nationals.
Like I said, training “harder” is not always the best approach, especially if one is injury prone.
Nonetheless, absolutely the machines can definitely end up burning a lot more calories than just running, if one is willing to put in the work, for the reasons I mentioned earlier.
So why are so many runners wasting their time on the roads and the track every day of the week? Cross training is obviously superior. I wonder why no one else has figured that out over the last half century or so?
I thought Alberto did figure it out, when he put Galen to running on a treadmill in a swimming pool. It allowed him to get a lot more additional work in versus just running on land.
A huge advantage with cross training is you can push yourself harder than you can running. Because of the lack of impact stress, you can push a higher intensity without risk of injury. As a result, you can really push yourself hard, thereby allowing one to make greater aerobic gains than you can running.
Specificially, I can affirm with Valby that the ARC trainer is great machine for maintaining fitness while injured and for runners doing lower mileage combined with cross training. You can do extremely intense workouts on it to the point of very heavy breathing, legs burning and sweat saturating the floor. Get yourself a sweat towel and listen to good music to get you "in the zone".
A huge advantage with cross training is you can push yourself harder than you can running. Because of the lack of impact stress, you can push a higher intensity without risk of injury. As a result, you can really push yourself hard, thereby allowing one to make greater aerobic gains than you can running.
Specificially, I can affirm with Valby that the ARC trainer is great machine for maintaining fitness while injured and for runners doing lower mileage combined with cross training. You can do extremely intense workouts on it to the point of very heavy breathing, legs burning and sweat saturating the floor. Get yourself a sweat towel and listen to good music to get you "in the zone".
I find that very interesting about the Arc Trainer, because on the elliptical I don’t seem to get much above 75% max heart rate, though it is working my weak legs and I’m sweating in a gym. It’s the same for me on the indoor bike; maybe I set the resistance too high for my weak legs? Because I don’t get much above 75% max heart rate, but I find it unpleasant after 5mins.
A huge advantage with cross training is you can push yourself harder than you can running. Because of the lack of impact stress, you can push a higher intensity without risk of injury. As a result, you can really push yourself hard, thereby allowing one to make greater aerobic gains than you can running.
Which is why Bowerman Track Club, Ingebrigtsen, and Kipchoge rarely run anymore and mostly just do cross training?
Give me a break. You have no idea what you're talking about.
A huge advantage with cross training is you can push yourself harder than you can running. Because of the lack of impact stress, you can push a higher intensity without risk of injury. As a result, you can really push yourself hard, thereby allowing one to make greater aerobic gains than you can running.
Which is why Bowerman Track Club, Ingebrigtsen, and Kipchoge rarely run anymore and mostly just do cross training?
Give me a break. You have no idea what you're talking about.
Whoa Francis. Like I said, Alberto had the best runner in the country doing a lot of cross-training, obviously to improve his aerobic capacity with low impact activity.
And it’s obviously working for the two currently best cross country runners in the NCAA.
Just because I don’t like pushing myself hard on an indoor machine (I actually can on a treadmill) has no bearing on what good athletes can do them.
can't compare college girls to pros running 100-120 per week. The cross training isn't ideal, optimal training, but how about using it as a bridge to 120 miles per week, while your joints, tendons etc are only strong enough for 60 mpw.
This doesn't speak to what cook and valby are doing, but wouldn't 1 hour of run training everyday PLUS 1 hour of cross training be more effective than just 1 hour of run training?
12 pages is a lot, so this has probably already been discussed - it seems like training for running is trending towards maximizing recovery. Hard days hard, easy days easy, with the bulk of your mileage coming from very slow recovery runs. Wearing ultra-cushioned shoes designed to minimize beating up your legs. So why is it so outlandish to think that making your easy days even easier on your legs could be beneficial for at least certain types of runners?
So why are so many runners wasting their time on the roads and the track every day of the week? Cross training is obviously superior. I wonder why no one else has figured that out over the last half century or so?
I thought Alberto did figure it out, when he put Galen to running on a treadmill in a swimming pool. It allowed him to get a lot more additional work in versus just running on land.
can't compare college girls to pros running 100-120 per week. The cross training isn't ideal, optimal training, but how about using it as a bridge to 120 miles per week, while your joints, tendons etc are only strong enough for 60 mpw.
This doesn't speak to what cook and valby are doing, but wouldn't 1 hour of run training everyday PLUS 1 hour of cross training be more effective than just 1 hour of run training?
So a runner who is only strong enough to manage 60mpw is one of the best in the country? That follows.
So why are so many runners wasting their time on the roads and the track every day of the week? Cross training is obviously superior. I wonder why no one else has figured that out over the last half century or so?
I thought Alberto did figure it out, when he put Galen to running on a treadmill in a swimming pool. It allowed him to get a lot more additional work in versus just running on land.
You said "additional" - so it wasn't being used to reduce his training.
The first sentence talks about them being outliers. What do they lie outside of? If we aren't going to compare them to the other elite runners, there is no perspective.
Every kind of reason - and most of it simply conjecture - is being used to try to justify what is otherwise implausible: that you can make huge improvements and be a much better runner than your competitors while training less.
Every kind of reason - and most of it simply conjecture - is being used to try to justify what is otherwise implausible: that you can make huge improvements and be a much better runner than your competitors while training less.
When they weren't training less, before. That is the part I don't get.
Valby ran normal/ high miles and didn't show these gains. Cook ran normal miles for highschooler, and got too many injuries and switched to cross training (there have been articles about it). Then the massive improvements begin. Did they find secret to success by cutting mileage?
At least in the case of Cook, the cross training means she doesn't have to take an injury break and lose her base fitness. She gains by not having intermittent phases of going backwards.
Tuohy, Starliper, Dudek and Tynnismaa (and high school Cook) all show how long and difficult it is to return from a serious injury break.
That sounds plausible for maintaining fitness, not sure about gigantic running improvements? Wouldn't triathletes switching to track do a lot better?
You bring up a good point about ‘maintaining fitness’. Last winter, she broke her foot during the anchor leg of a DMR relay, in which she split 4:35 for the mile. That was after setting her 8:53 3000m PB earlier in the day. Plugging the 8:53 into Daniels’ Calculator gives an ‘equivalent’ 15:26 for the 5k, which is very close to the 15:20.1 she ran at Nationals.
Actually she ran the 4:35 on Friday and the 8:53 on Saturday. She ran the 3000 completely solo and finished on a broken foot so probably was already in 15:20 shape or better.
I think the way she improves in the future will show how valuable or not valuable this low mileage high cross training technique is
There is no way that Natalie Cook is going to be able to cross her way down to a 14:40 5k and make a US team.
Cross training has it's limits.
Makes sense. But, could a world class triathlete woman whose best event is running ever run a 14:40 5k while training for triathlon? If you are correct, the answer is “no”. I’m not so sure. I think it is possible.
At least in the case of Cook, the cross training means she doesn't have to take an injury break and lose her base fitness. She gains by not having intermittent phases of going backwards.
Tuohy, Starliper, Dudek and Tynnismaa (and high school Cook) all show how long and difficult it is to return from a serious injury break.
When did "High School Cook" have an injury break?
Only break in her extensive race schedule is during COVID when everything was shut down and even then flew to the Music City distance festival.
When they weren't training less, before. That is the part I don't get.
Valby ran normal/ high miles and didn't show these gains. Cook ran normal miles for highschooler, and got too many injuries and switched to cross training (there have been articles about it). Then the massive improvements begin. Did they find secret to success by cutting mileage?
The evidence does not agree with the bolded part. In the case of Valby, she’s shown phenomenal gains right from the beginning, since the time she started seriously running as a freshman in high school; i.e., until she got injured her Senior year (which possibly gave her body time to consolidate the gains.) I don’t know if she was cross-training back then, before her injury. Nonetheless, results show she kept getting aerobically fit with the cross-training. Same for Cook.
But in the early years, Valby was carrying around more body weight. I think her state championship didn’t happen until her Junior year. Maybe that two-year rocket-ship development for a high-school girl was too slow for you?