Sports Science Update: Run Less To Run Younger?
by Matt Fitzgerald
February 11, 2010
Masters running phenom Kathryn Martin.
Photo: Photo Run.
A new study helps explain why late starters become the fastest older runners.
In Lore of Running, Tim Noakes makes the interesting observation that most of the best runners over age 45 are late starters. Your typical age-group record setter in the older masters divisions only started running in his or her late 20’s or early 30’s. A classic example of this phenomenon is Kathryn Martin, who started running at 30 and then rewrote the U.S. record book in the 50-54 and 55-59 age groups (she turns 60 this year and will undoubtedly set a new batch of records).
Runners who were the best in the world in their 20’s and who keep competing past middle-age are almost never the best in the world in the older age groups. Most are still very good, of course, but they slow down precipitously after age 45 and are eclipsed by later starters like Martin. Bill Rodgers was one of the fastest marathon runners in the world in his prime, but he says that between his 50th and 60th birthdays his 10K time slowed by a staggering 10 minutes. Now 62, Rodgers is decidedly not among the fastest 60-plus runners in America.
Tim Noakes speculates that long-term high-mileage training causes the muscles and tendons to lose elasticity. After a certain degenerative tipping point is passed, the legs can no longer capture and reuse as much “free energy” from ground impact and consequently running economy goes down the tubes. It’s not that high-mileage running is inherently bad. Up to a point it is not only good but even downright necessary for performance optimization. All training has both positive and negative physiological effects. It’s the balance that’s important. High-mileage training appears to create a very positive net balance of physiological adaptations for a while, but there comes a point when the positive effects diminish while the negative effects accumulate, and that may be why elite runners slow way down after 45.
A new study by Noakes’ colleagues at the University of Cape Town, South Africa, provides some insight into the nature of this phenomenon. Scientists often measure the length of DNA strands in cells to assess physiological age. Time and stress cause our DNA to progressively shorten. The Cape Town researchers measured the length of DNA strands extracted from the calf muscles of a bunch of experienced runners with an average age of 42 and from a group of sedentary controls with an average age of 39. They found no difference between the two groups, suggesting that years of running had not made the runners’ calf muscle cells physiologically older than those of non-runners. However, there was a significant inverse correlation between running experience and volume and DNA length. In other words, within the group of experienced middle-aged runners, those who had the fewest miles in their legs had the “youngest” DNA.
The practical implications of this study are unclear. I do not take it to suggest that young competitive runners should limit their mileage for the sake of running better when they are older, because doing so would likely make them worse now. Elite running coach Brad Hudson advises runners to transition from a high-mileage approach to a low-mileage cross-training approach when they hit their mid-30s. This makes sense to me, because it gives runners the opportunity to enjoy the full benefits of high mileage and the opportunity to make a speed-preserving change before the costs of high-mileage training really add up.
Written by: Matt Fitzgerald
I’m going to take the controversial side and say they are way off base here. I’ll use my running history as a prime example as to why this is just not true. I feel this does more harm to the sport than provide informative journalism. The harmful part is that it seems to say the longer you run, the slower you get. We already know that if you do the same thing you get the same results and if you don’t use it… you lose it. Most long time runners do not do anything different than they’ve done for years. I’m guilty of that. When I ran competitively, I was not willing to start all over again. My ego would not allow it. Instead people continue to do the same old stuff, even now, because “it works for them” and they either stay the same or gradually get worse. But runners can keep getting better, regardless of age if they focus on the “elements of running”, rather than simply running; and that’s our clinic’s very successful approach.
I had spaces in my running career where I just ran but didn’t train or race. When I eventually did get back to competitive training to race (well into my forties), I was faster than in my early twenties. I believe there were several reasons for that success. After every racing season, you need time off to heal. Not only from a muscular point of view but nutritionally and, more importantly, your nervous system has to heal as well. The combination of hard training and competitive racing will eventually take its toll on the body and you will break down. That’s why I don’t like people racing often. That’s why I avoid putting races into the program or only ‘approve’ specific times and days a person “should” race and how fast they should be racing. In other words, most races should be training races and not personal best efforts. The other neglected area of older runners is strength. They believe that they can get all their strength from simply running and that isn’t the case. You have to do the drills. I’ll use one long time runner as an example who came out for less than 3 weeks in our clinic, got injured and we haven’t seen him since. I’ll call him “Amy” (not his real name).
Amy had run over 75 marathons in her career to date and is very much on the competitive side. She came to us because she heard of our running success and is not too far off the world record for her age group and wanted to achieve it in Boston within the next 2 years. She had a realistic long term plan with training races and time trials along the way to check her fitness. It was a lot more planned out than most people and I suggested she come into our 201 Marathon Program and begin by slowly building up her strength. She could easily do the 203 or 204 Program because of the number of days she was training. Up until now she had been doing all the same stuff that everybody else does in the way of long runs, tempo runs, track work and hills. But there was nothing there to support the muscles that were doing all the work. She had a strong foundation, but it was like a concrete block on water and it wasn’t about to float. You’d think I’d asked her to go to the “kiddies pool”. Her response was, “No way… I’m an experienced marathoner. I’ve been running for years. I want to do your 401 Program.” I’m not about to try and convince people of anything because it’s usually futile and a waste of time. When people make up their mind they are going to do something, they usually do it whether I say it’s in their best interest or not. I explained to him… I mean her… Amy that she was welcome to try it but, please, really tone it down. Because you are going to be using muscles that have not been engaged for quite some time. My theory is… and it’s been working… when people do a full body workout they are utilizing and re-newing old muscle tissue and is therefore continually re-making their body. Let’s take Jack Lelanne (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_LaLanne) for example. If you attempted the feats he did well into his 90’s, you’d die trying. But, I bet his DNA was that of a young person’s because he was continually rebuilding his muscles. Where he could have gained some greater longevity is from more cardiovascular work and breathing exercises, but that’s another story. As for the article… First of all, we’d have to know whose DNA cells were used. Were they elite runners or a “bunch” of runners who have been doing the same thing for years? If they are in the latter category, I can see where the problem begins and the reason why progress is either limited or eliminated.
One of the biggest problems with a lot of people is a return to old behavioural patterns before really thinking things out. They look at the start of their career and say, “I did this and it worked, therefore if I go back to doing it, it will work again.” As one coach said, “If I told you to run 10KM a day to improve your bench-press, it would… for a while”. The problem becomes that doing anything in the beginning will improve your fitness. It doesn’t mean it was the right thing or that it was a good thing. It was “a thing”. The unfortunate side effect of training is that when you make rapid gains in the beginning you tend to associate what you did with those gains. When your gains slow down, which they inevitably will, you tend to naturally think that what you did when you started out was the “best” way for you to train and often revert back to those same workouts. We say if you want to improve your running, you have to run. What we are saying now is that by simply running, it will only take you so far and then you will have to do something different in order to get to the next level. The question becomes, what do you do and in what order should you do it? Don’t worry… That’s my job. Here’s a brief outline on how to “start” to improve your running from the beginning.
1) Walking
2) Walk - run
3) Run
4) Run - flexibility
5) Run – flexibility – strength
6) Run – increased flexibility (example: Yoga) – strength – speed
7) Run – increased flexibility – sports specific strength – speed
8) Run – increased flexibility – sports specific strength – plyometric exercises – speed
9) Run – increased flexibility – sports specific strength – plyometric exercises – speed – coordination drills
I could continue to add to the list, but you should be able to see that most novice runners get stuck on #3. Some of the more advanced runners get stuck on a modified version of #6: Run – flexibility (depending upon age as to whether they do anything or not) – strength (in the form of hill repeats) – speed (tempos and half mile repeats only), but very few get past that because they continue to say that it worked in the beginning and they don’t want to change. Then they can’t understand why they aren’t getting any better. The end result is they accept they are too old to get any better. RUBBISH!
I know… you are looking at the above examples and saying, “I don’t have that kind of time to add all that stuff in order to improve”. Who said you have to do all what you are doing now plus all the stuff that’s gradually being added on? Some of the stuff we are currently doing will be replaced by other activities and therefore it will take the same amount of time. The problem is, you have to do it in gradual and logical stages as your body adapts to the new activities. This adaptation process takes time. Amy went from a modified version of #6, which she had been doing for years (because it “works” for her) and ramped it up to #7. We suggested #5 to lay down the foundation for our program (as we do for all “experienced” runners) and she could not accept it. She didn’t want to “start with the newbies”.
Our 101 Half-Marathon and Marathon Programs are more advanced in nature than most running programs but people. don’t take it as a “critical” foundation, they see it as “beginner”. That’s really too bad. Everyone has so much potential and age has nothing to do with it nor does the length of time you’ve been running. It has to do with the quality of the workouts and recovery. If you are in one of our programs, stay on it if you want to improve. You don’t have to add anything into it in order to improve because we will be adding to it at the appropriate time. If you are not in our program, then you have to figure out what is missing in your program that is going to get you to the next step of your career!
I did a lecture the other day for a Vancouver Sun Run Clinic. We all went for our run after the talk. I was chatting with someone I knew from 20 years ago who hasn’t been running, but wants to run a 10Km or even a half marathon. She said she wanted to run the 10km in at least 48 minutes, but she thought that was too ambitious. I said she should be able to run 38 minutes and she was shocked. I said if she actually trained, she would be more in the 36 range and she thought I was crazy. What I left out was the length of time that it would take to to get there. She still feels as competitive as ever from her University sprinting days, but feels she’s “too old” to get faster than her current physical condition. I said if that is what she truly believes then it’s probably true and she wouldn’t be able to do it. But when she wants to, come and see us.
To your running success…
Russ & Lorne
0 comments:
Post a Comment