Random Running Questions

Enduro

El Caballo wrote: »

Interestingly enough, I have read a bit about Noakes on Hydration and if you want to use Hyponatreamia as a reason as a reason to avoid all water on a 5 hour long run out of fear overhydration, be my guest but you missed the point. just because too much is bad doesn't mean don't take any. Moderation is the key.

Aww come on... did you not understand the key point of waterlogged... Drink to thirst! (not drink in moderation). If you're not thirsty you don't need to drink. It's a simple as that. I don't drink on my long runs for the simple reason that I generally don't need to. Not out of fear of Hyponatreamia, but simply because I'm not thirsty (and there's a training->adaptation rabbit hole to run down into with that one. Whether it's physical or physiological doesn't really matter too much).

Even if you think moderation, as opposed to 4 billion years of evolution, is the key, then what is the definition of moderation? And is there a solid basis for the definition?

I missed your edit about "the heart", and TBH I've no idea what "the heart" has to do with hydration. Are you implying that someone could have heart failure from not drinking during a training run?

El Caballo

Enduro wrote: »

Aww come on... did you not understand the key point of waterlogged... Drink to thirst! (not drink in moderation). If you're not thirsty you don't need to drink. It's a simple as that. I don't drink on my long runs for the simple reason that I generally don't need to. Not out of fear of Hyponatreamia, but simply because I'm not thirsty (and there's a training->adaptation rabbit hole to run down into with that one. Whether it's physical or physiological doesn't really matter too much).

I know what he meant, moderation is the word I choose t o define between you and overhydration which would be polar extremes. I find it extremely difficult to believe you do not get thirsty during a 5 hour run. I lose about 4lbs of water weight on a 2 and a half hour run which is about 3% of my bodyweight and I'm not even a heavy sweater. I would imagine you are probably more than double that on your 5 hour runs. 10lbs of water is about 4.5 litres of water. I find it extremely difficult to believe someone can lose that much water and not be thirsty especially someone who doesn't drink that much anyway given you don't feel thirsty during exercise(the most intense part of your day).

My point about the heart was that you should look out for the best interest of your health before a once in a blue moon race scenario.

Singer

Successful ultra marathoners probably aren't who most folks should be looking to for hydration info.

I get cranky and irritable after about 2 hours of running without something to drink, gulping down some water or whatever definitely keeps me running better for longer. I don't particularly train myself to not need fuel or hydration when running longer runs, it's not a priority for the distance/standard I'm running at, though the more I run the more it seems my body can do it without much to eat or drink in advance or during a long run. When racing the likes of 10 mile or a half some water definitely helps along the way (though as much to wash my mouth out and throw over my head than actual hydration).

TFBubendorfer

El Caballo wrote: »

Will you die without during a long run? probably not although....Will it affect performance and recovery? The answer is definetely yes to what extent will depend on how dehydrated you get.

Where do I start with this?

First of all, it's not "probable" that you survive a long run here if you don't drink water, your survival chances are exactly the same as if you took a water bottle with you. No need for bull****.

Secondly, a small level of dehydration during the run itself does not impact on your subsequent recovery. I'm certainly not advocating a constant state of dehydration. I drink water before my run and I drink water after the run, and most importantly I have a bottle of water beside me at my desk so I can drink whenever I want, letting thirst be my guidance, which means a couple of hours without water while running has no impact whatsoever. Your "definetely yes" is just plain wrong.

Enduro is the person with the single best rate of recovery I have ever known, including all the international runners I have ever met. His ability to recover just blows me away. The fact that have manages that despite not drinking during some very long runs should give you a a very big clue if not drinking while running is detrimental or not.

RayCun

When I was training for my first marathon, I used to stop at a shop almost every long run and buy a bottle of water - usually use it to wash down a gel!

Second marathon I stopped drinking water on runs (and more or less stopped taking gels in training).

I sometimes have a drink before going out in the morning, sometimes don't. I do make sure I have plenty to drink during the day after the run, and in general.

During a race, I take water whenever available, not so much to drink as to splash around to cool myself down, and I'll drink plenty afterwards.

OOnegative

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

Enduro is the person with the single best rate of recovery I have ever known, including all the international runners I have ever met. His ability to recover just blows me away. The fact that have manages that despite not drinking during some very long runs should give you a a very big clue if not drinking while running is detrimental or not.

Yeah but Enduro is a freak of nature(compliment not an insult) he is not the norm hence he is so successful at what he does. Some people will need water on a long run some won't, everyone is different. I for one need water after about 90 mins or so of running as I sweat considerably more than most regardless of weather conditions. Each to there own, the no water thing isn't for everyone.

TFBubendorfer

Singer wrote: »

Successful ultra marathoners probably aren't who most folks should be looking to for hydration info.

Maybe you're right but there's two ways of looking at this:

1: Successful ultra marathoners are freaks of nature who are just different and therefore their experiences are not applicable to the rest of us

2: Successful ultra marathoners have managed to figure out that a lot of generally accepted info is just plain wrong, be it hydration during running / if or how much you have eat before a run / how often you need to change your shoes / how to deal with injuries / and plenty more

Testosterscone

Singer wrote: »

. I don't particularly train myself to not need fuel or hydration when running longer runs, it's not a priority for the distance/standard I'm running at, though the more I run the more it seems my body can do it without much to eat or drink in advance or during a long run. When racing the likes of 10 mile or a half some water definitely helps along the way (though as much to wash my mouth out and throw over my head than actual hydration).

For me this post has hit the nail on the head and covers two key points, intensity and specificity

If you are for marathon or below you are dealing with Heart rates a higher rate where nutrient transport and blood viscosity could play a more important role (could being operative word as I haven't looked into the science behind this coming from this angle I think ever and haven't had my morning coffee yet to start looking)

The other thing is specificity in ultra runners and adapting to specific stress out on body (in particular gastrointestinal) where blood viscosity could actually be of benefit moreso that marathon runners or below who would not be running long enough to put they body under these particular stresses

This could also impact why some people see speed ultra running (events under 100 mile) as almost a completely different sport to the multi day events etc.

This however is just musing trying to take a different approach on this debate which can pop up frequent enough here.

Annie get your Run

Testosterscone wrote: »

and haven't had my morning coffee yet

I think you might not be the only one!!!!

This is a really interesting discussion. I was about to agree that both Enduro and Thomas are exceptional but this makes sense too.

2: Successful ultra marathoners have managed to figure out that a lot of generally accepted info is just plain wrong, be it hydration during running / if or how much you have eat before a run / how often you need to change your shoes / how to deal with injuries / and plenty more

I do think that as our running 'careers' go on we learn more about ourselves and what our bodies can handle and while advice here is often invaluable, many times the best way to learn is by your own trial and error (maybe taking that advice into account). I know if it's hot/humid I need to drink because I'm usually very thirsty, and I sweat a lot when I run too, but I don't worry too much about it and I certainly don't rely on water stations in a race any more as you just don't know if they'll have run out. I prefer to make sure I've hydrated properly in the run up to a race and that seems to work well.

Djoucer

A lot of successful ultra runners have also had to retire early or are now burnt out.

There's a long list of great ultra runners who burned bright for 2 years only to disappear.

Being successful at ultras doesn't necessarily mean you're right about everything else. There's an argument to be made that ultra runners are awful when it comes to looking after themselves.

For every Enduro, there's someone at home injured.

Tim Noakes is now seen (rightly probably) as an expert but let's not forget, he was wrong in the past.

The medical director of Kona has interesting things to say about hydration. He reckons performance plunges when you're just 2 per cent dehydrates.

There's also plenty of studies to show that thirst is not a reliable indicator.

TFBubendorfer

Djoucer wrote: »

A lot of successful ultra runners have also had to retire early or are now burnt out.

There's a long list of great ultra runners who burned bright for 2 years only to disappear.

Being successful at ultras doesn't necessarily mean you're right about everything else. There's an argument to be made that ultra runners are awful when it comes to looking after themselves.

For every Enduro, there's someone at home injured.

Tim Noakes is now seen (rightly probably) as an expert but let's not forget, he was wrong in the past.

The medical director of Kona has interesting things to say about hydration. He reckons performance plunges when you're just 2 per cent dehydrates.

There's also plenty of studies to show that thirst is not a reliable indicator.

A lot of successful athletes are burnt out after 2 years at the top. That includes marathoners, cyclists and plenty of other sports, including football. It's nothing to do with ultra running. It's to do with the fact that being at the very top of any sport is very, very hard and demanding.

As for the 2% dehydration thingy, I find it really hard to believe that this long-debunked myth is still doing the rounds. A very quick google comes back with

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2012/apr/18/how-much-water-drink-marathon:

'Some people can tolerate greater levels of dehydration than others and the oft-quoted 2% dehydration being the threshold for problems isn't borne out in evidence."

http://running.competitor.com/2014/05/nutrition/the-truth-about-dehydration-and-performance_76027:

— It was found that a reduction of body weight of 2.2 percent was not associated with a decrease in performance.
— It isn’t dehydration itself that is responsible for any decrease in performance, but rather not drinking in response to thirst.

http://www.mayonews.ie/living/nurturing/30040-the-hydration-myth:

Conventional wisdom has it that a loss of 2 percent of body weight through dehydration impairs performance. But the problem with conventional wisdom is that it’s often not wisdom at all, and research has shown that a loss of up to 4 percent of body weight is still unlikely to impair exercise performance in a real world scenario.

And that's just the top 3 results from my search.

TFBubendorfer

Just to add to the previous post, I guess that this one sentence

Some people can tolerate greater levels of dehydration than others

pretty much explains the entire discussion we're just having, and the differences in opinion

RasTa

No football player is burnt out after 2 years unless it's a career ending injury btw

TFBubendorfer

RasTa wrote: »

No football player is burnt out after 2 years unless it's a career ending injury btw

Michael Johnson was on my mind when I wrote that. It's not really the main point I was making, though

Testosterscone

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

Michael Johnson was on my mind when I wrote that. It's not really the main point I was making, though

???

Michael Johnson made his first Olympic team in 1988 and didn't retire till after his gold medal in 2000

jamule

Testosterscone wrote: »

???

Michael Johnson made his first Olympic team in 1988 and didn't retire till after his gold medal in 2000

That fast lad doesn't have a monopoly on the name. And a v good example, plenty of lads like him, into a first team for 2/3 yrs, body breaks down and the career just goes nowhere.

TFBubendorfer

Testosterscone wrote: »

???

Michael Johnson made his first Olympic team in 1988 and didn't retire till after his gold medal in 2000

The other Michael Johnson, of course. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Johnson_(footballer,_born_1988)

Lazare

I have a strange thing that happens my right leg from time to time, usually after about 10 miles or so.

It feels like it's locking up in a bent position and that I could trip over it. Not sure if that makes sense but it's the best way I can describe it.

A couple of butt kicks and a bit of shaking it out gets rid of it but still a little concerning nonetheless.

Anyone experience this?

El Caballo

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

Where do I start with this?

First of all, it's not "probable" that you survive a long run here if you don't drink water, your survival chances are exactly the same as if you took a water bottle with you. No need for bull****.

No need for this. I don't want to get into a tit for tat on the definition of words with you. I'll give one example here, Heatstroke. Would you say that you are at the same risk of that with or without water during your run?

All that aside as I really wasn't trying to take a survival approach in my post, genuinely. there are far more risks to performance and recovery from not taking water on than there are benefits to not. Outside of the mental aspect of what other benefits are there to not taking on water during the run?

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

Secondly, a small level of dehydration during the run itself does not impact on your subsequent recovery. I'm certainly not advocating a constant state of dehydration. I drink water before my run and I drink water after the run, and most importantly I have a bottle of water beside me at my desk so I can drink whenever I want, letting thirst be my guidance, which means a couple of hours without water while running has no impact whatsoever. Your "definetely yes" is just plain wrong.

I already addressed this point in my previous post.

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

Enduro is the person with the single best rate of recovery I have ever known, including all the international runners I have ever met. His ability to recover just blows me away. The fact that have manages that despite not drinking during some very long runs should give you a a very big clue if not drinking while running is detrimental or not.

Tom Hicks won the Olympic Marathon while taking rat poison and brandy. Did he win despite that or because of it? This is where I get riled up a bit during these debates. I am constantly asked to provide science but the opposite is rarely true as mental crutches and such are brought up. It's like when we have the LCHF diet debate and John Treacy is always brought up as never taking gels during the marathon by pro-LCHF advocates but mention that Kenyans eat a diet of 70% carbs(one of the heaviest carb rich diets on the planet) and take on a huge amount during the race and run almost 6 minutes faster than Treacy and that point is batted away. Different debate but the same trend always develops and there is no winning or fair debate when it comes down to these points because so and so recovers better than so and so etc. Someone could be doing 80% right and 20% wrong and getting by on that and nature vs nurture debate comes into too. The points are irrefutable in their lack of substance.

hot buttered scones

For some reason, I can't get the theme tune to "Different Strokes" out of my head.

El Caballo

hot buttered scones wrote: »

For some reason, I can't get the theme tune to "Different Strokes" out of my head.

That's applicable to every question ever asked in here so do we stop having debate on everything about training?

hot buttered scones

El Caballo wrote:

That's applicable to every question ever asked in here so do we stop having debate on everything about training?

True. It was just a poor attempt at being a bit light hearted. No offense meant.

ThebitterLemon

hot buttered scones wrote: »

For some reason, I can't get the theme tune to "Different Strokes" out of my head.

What you talkin about Willis

TbL

HigginsJ

The big problem I am facing in recent 5k & 10k races is that my quads struggle with the pace in the last 3rd of the race. They feel like they are tightening up.

Is this just lack of training at race pace or should I look to add strength training to focus on them?

El Caballo

HigginsJ wrote: »

The big problem I am facing in recent 5k & 10k races is that my quads struggle with the pace in the last 3rd of the race. They feel like they are tightening up.

Is this just lack of training at race pace or should I look to add strength training to focus on them?

Could be for a lot of reasons. If it's not injury pain and from reading your log, I'd say lack of endurance may be the key factor. This may be for a few reasons, I think you might be more speed biased in general as a few short sessions you have done made me think you might be suited to the shorter stuff more. I also think that the absence of a decent long run is a factor. Many runners think that a lot of their fade at the end of races are down to speedwork, for most though, this will not be the case and the lack of volume and long runs(aerobic stuff) is of much more importance when it comes to holding late in the race. Of Course, speedwork and strength training has it's place and is important but I feel you'd benefit much more from getting in a weekly long run and some more volume in midweek if you want to feel stronger and faster at the end of the race. The 5 and 10k are both over 85% aerobic, that means the major contributor to the endurance in the event the stimulus you get from running long and a lot from paces slower than Marathon pace.

Speedwork is the icing on the cake of good aerobically strong runner.

HigginsJ

Thanks El Caballo, it is interesting you bring up long runs. I have had an aversion to do anything over an hour since the whole marathon thing but am planning to kick this back in from tomorrow for the next 6-8 weeks to see what I can do to finish the year. Planning at between 1 hour 15 to 1 hour 30 so will see how this helps.

I dont think it is injury pain as it is one area I have had no problems with, so far.

Swashbuckler

HigginsJ wrote:

Thanks El Caballo, it is interesting you bring up long runs. I have had an aversion to do anything over an hour since the whole marathon thing but am planning to kick this back in from tomorrow for the next 6-8 weeks to see what I can do to finish the year. Planning at between 1 hour 15 to 1 hour 30 so will see how this helps.

El Caballo is spot on. Since upping my weekly mileage, increasing my aerobic runs in distance and adding a longer long run every week I've seen dramatic increases in my speed endurance and my 5k times in particular. Add up to a 90 minute long run every week. Plenty of slow general aerobic running and the sessions in between and you'll see a big improvement.

I have the Faster Road Running book by Pfitzinger. All of the 5k plans have long weekend run, medium long midweek, plenty of general aerobic and a mix of LT runs and interval training.

davedanon

Over the last couple of years, I've been doing 5k-specific training in the first few months of the year, and it has yielded some decent, sub-19 runs. In the second half of the year, though, I switch to marathon training, and have made it a habit to drop in a hard 5k run (not always a race, sometimes just a parkrun) a week or two before the marathon, and it always results in a really good run, not quite as quick, but not much off. Maybe just over 19, as opposed to just under. It's that top-end, 6 minute pace that's hard to sustain off the marathon, but all the strength is there.

Zipppy

had major surgery last week..won't be running for 6 to 8 weeks...how long till I regain my fitness?

Zipppy

had major surgery last week..won't be running for 6 to 8 weeks...how long till I regain my fitness?