ME workouts – struggling with recipe
- This topic has 11 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hi all,
I am training for general mountaineering objectives (using the stock 16 week gm plan) and am finding it pretty hard to nail down a configuration for the ME sessions that delivers what I think it is supposed to – an increase in local muscular endurance in the legs.
The guiding principals seem to be :
1. Prolonged effort – this is not a max strength workout
2. Limiting factor should be legs not breathing
As I understand it, if done right one can expect to have very tired (followed by sore) legs after this sessions.
My first attempts were with the method recommended in the plan – very steep hike with plenty of weight and if bretahing then adjust weight/steepness until legs become limit.
Trying on a reasonably steep hill (35% is best I had, uneven and a bit slippery terrain) and increasing weight up to 22kg in backpack (I weigh 63kg so it’s about 35%) I could definitely feel my legs working hard but the limit was definitely breathing and red lining heart rate. Had to stop occasionally to bend over knees and breath.
Super hard workout but legs weren’t the limit nor were they wrecked the next day.
Next attempt was to add even more weight (up to 30kg – thats nearly 50% of bodyweight) but it was becoming really tough on shoulders and neck and didn’t feel right
So then I thought of hitting the stair machine at the gym to experiment in a more controlled and steeper (and uphill only, my hill was only 90vm high so was doing repeats where as stair machine is only up).
Started again with 20kg backpack. Hard work, but maybe too fast as I was on my knees in 10mins.
Tried playing with speed, but it seemed really hard to find a (what felt like good) speed in which I am not going above my unaerobic threshold (175bpm) and so struggle to last more than 10-12 mins at a time.
Tried doing it in sets – go as hard as possible for 10 mins, recover for 2-3 mins and do another set. Works but seems different for what this should be – continous, prolonged legs are limit.
Then tried to find a speed in which I could actually stay within zone 3 (I.e. under my unaerobic threshold – note I only started to care about heart rate here becuase I was trying to get a read on what speed will spare me from exploding after 10mins).
Once I found that (pretty slow) I added some ankle weight to try and bring resistance up without adding stress on shoulders and found I could sustain longer sessions (25-30 min sets) but again the limit seemed to be general availablr power (and some shoulder soreness) rather then legs.
It’s notable that in none of these attempts to find the right recipe did I end up with wrecked legs. Certainly worked legs but nothing I felt strongly the next day – and its not as if I have particularly massive strong legs, I can definitely feel sore legs after a heavy gym session or even a strong leg-focused pilates workout.
So, I’m struggling to find my way here and would appreciate any insights someone might have and care to share.
Peace ✌️
Assaf:
Thanks for writing in with your questions about the ME workouts. You seem to understand the theory of ME training based on your listing of the 3 main principles.
Here are some random thoughts on your questions:
The weighted carry type of ME that you are doing for mountaineering will rarely give you sore legs. Whereas the gym ME will definitely make you sore. So wrecked legs may be too extreme a word to use. I doubt you’d be able to turn around and repeat that workout the next day, right?
Disregard HR for ME workouts. This is in the instructions.
You need to pace yourself since this is about sustained sub-max effort, not a 10min all-out effort. If you were on your knees after 1o minutes I think you are pushing too fast at the start on the stair machine.
The stair machine for 45-60min stair machine sessions will give a better effect than your shorter harder efforts and the less steep hill.
I’m unsure why you are seeing such a high heart rate and breathing. That is very unusual. Normally I would say the pack is too light, but 50% of BW is more than enough for almost anyone to achieve the leg limitation we strive for.
There is some possibility that your aerobic base is not yet as well developed as would be ideal, and this is causing the higher HR and breathing.
Regardless, the ME effect will be there even if you are breathing very hard.
If you use the machine, you should track the vertical distance in each session to see improvement. There should be marked improvement from session to session. If not then your recovery is insufficient.
I hope this helps.
Scott
Scott, thank you for the response and the tips.
It may indeed be that I’ve been running on an incorrect expectation of what this should feel like in the legs (compared to what I know really hard leg work feels like in the gym).
To clarify a bit further, I did not persist with a 50% of bw load as that felt too heavy on shoulders and neck, so more like 35% of bw + ankle weights.
I also wasn’t paying any attention to the HR – until the moment I realized I am really struggling to intuitively find the ‘highest pace I can sustain’ and wanted to have some non-subjective reference to ‘how hard I’m going’ that I can use to compare the different attempts to find the recipe.
In any case, I take your points and will try to approach the next ME sessions with a goal of just seeing how much vertical I can cover with this weight at a pace I can hold for the duration – without such a focus on ‘how are my legs feeling’ – and then pay attention to progression between sessions as you suggest.
I’ll try and update this thread in a week or two with my experience just in case it ends up being useful to someone else.
Thanks again ! Much appreciated
This is an interesting post to me because I’m hitting the ME phase of the 24 week mountaineering plan and am also having difficulty dialing in a pack weight versus speed on a stair machine for my ME workouts.
I first tried 20 Kg (23% BW) but felt like I had to move unreasonably slow to keep the effort sustainable and I also didn’t necessarily feel limited by leg fatigue. I backed down to 20% BW and could maintain that for 30 minutes. It probably doesn’t mean much for such a short workout, but this was a pre-breakfast morning workout for whatever that is worth.
I can manage the 3 ½ hours of hiking outdoors with 15% body weight in a pack while gaining around 2,700 feet so I found it odd that the extra 5% was so taxing.
I tried roughly estimating my vertical pace on the stair machine and comparing that to my outdoor vertical pace and I think I was trying to climb considerably faster on the machine. What I initially thought was unreasonably slow at first was probably just where I needed to be for the pack weight and greater incline of the stair machine.
I’m going to try the 20 Kg again this week at a slower pace, with some fuel in my system and see how that goes.
Assaf, I look forward to hearing how your new approach turns out for you.
Assaf:
Your final comment about trying to cover as much vert as you can in the time allotted is actually the goal. The feedback on the legs being the limitation is simply what nearly everyone I have ever had feedback from feels when doing this workout. Good Luck.
Scott
Just:
You say that you had to move unreasonably slow to keep the pace sustainable. Why? What was limiting your pace?
You can’t compare outdoor climbing speed to a stairmachine. Outdoors you will be hard pressed to find a slope over 50%. A stair master is close to 100% grade. Much, much steeper than outside making it harder. Plus the stairs are falling away from you as you step up on to the next one. You actually only raise your body about 1/2 of the step height. Otherwise, you would hike right up and off the end of the machine In short you just can’t compare these two.
Scott
Here’s an update on my experience over the past couple of weeks:
I think I’ve made good progress with figuring out the right configuration for these workouts.
The key for me was to change my focus from my legs (are they burning yet?) to the goal of trying to cover the maximum vert with a heavy weight at a pace I can sustain for at least 40 mins.
What threw me off initially was the expectation that my legs should be ‘limiting my speed’ quite literally and quickly, but it turned out that even when carrying almost 50% of my BW, I ran of of breath long before I ran out of legs. This was also because looking for the burn, I was going way too fast for what I’d be able to sustain. I was redlining.
Once the focus became ‘max vert with really heavy pack’ I started to play around with weight/speed combinations and ended up with a 35% BW backpack + 1 KG ankle weights (quite surprising how much of a difference the ankle weights make!) and then picking a speed I could sustain for the first 10 mins and once these minutes were up … just keep going until I really couldn’t anymore and then reduce the speed but keep going. (videos of climbers with huge bags hauling sleds up Denali seems to be a perfect entertainment for these workouts. I dislike the gym but at least the stair master has a screen with youtube ;-))
Occasionally, I’ve had to stop once to recover my breath about 25 or 30 minutes in, but only very briefly – under a minute.
I’ve yet to go over 40 minutes and may need some more tuning of the speed to keep energy for lasting longer. I guess it takes time to learn how to ‘go as hard as you can for x’ when there are many variables.
I can see (slow) progress in these sessions, but I feel like a lot of progress has happened in the long (3 or 4 hour) weighted and non-weighted hikes as a result of these higher intensity ME sessions.
Scott:
First of all, thank you for the guidance.
Secondly regarding the stair master, I know this is an old discussion with many voices but I do believe that physics say there is no material difference between climbing static or moving stairs. As long as your frame of reference is static, the stairs on the machine do not fall away from you anymore than the earth is rotating away from you. Its the same effect as running inside a moving train. Same mechanical effort regardless of which direction you run
That said, everything changes once you put your hands on the bars or hold on to anything that is not moving with the stairs. In this case, you do start to see differences in the force required. Same would apply to a treadmill etc.
Just:
I also found it quite surprising to note the impact taking on weight has on my sustainable pace. Comparing my weighted and non-weighted hikes (same hill, same duration) I can see that for the same target HR (AeT), taking on 15% BW means I have to slow down by about 20-25% (depends on duration – min 2hrs).
The fact there is an impact seems totally reasonable but what surprised me was just how much slower I have to go – as well as the difference between weight on the back and weight on the feet. I’m using 1 kg ankle weights in training (As a proxy for heavy boot + crampon) and it makes quite a notable difference. A lot more than an extra 2kg in the backpack.
Finally, having done almost all of my work fasted (my schedule favors early morning sessions) I found that the ME workouts (as well as the longer weighted hikes) really do need you to be fueled up properly if you want to make the most out of it. Otherwise I both run out juice early (in a very literal sense) and take a lot longer to recover. The first time I did this fasted I had to bail on all the rest of the proper work for the rest of that week and just do recovery sessions.
I’ll add some more notes here when/if I have any new insights or relevant experiences.
Assaf: That’s great news that you figured the ME out. You may have seen a YT video of me doing this workout years ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZI-_rcWcwiY You can clearly see that I am not going at a sprint effort. You might also have seen on our IG recently a Tuesday Training Tip by coach Seth Keena a short video of him doing this same workout. It is also very clear that he is not moving very fast.
With regard to the stair machine: Here is my understanding.
If work is force x distance the mass is moved, then the work done against gravity (energy expended) on the stair machine is a function of the distance your mass is raised. Your mass is not raised by the full height of each step when on a stair machine because as you step up, the step falls away beneath you. If your mass was raised to the full height of each step, you would quickly hike right off the top of the machine. It would seem to me that the frame of reference must include the earth and its gravity since that is what you are working against. With each step, your mass is oscillating up and then back down in relation to the center of the earth but not by the full step height. This is not the same as when running on a train, where the frame of reference does not need to include the earth because the runner is not working to overcome gravity.
IMO: The reason for high RPE on a stair machine, which gives the impression that this is just as hard if not harder than hiking steeply uphill, is that the gradient is something close to 100%, which is much steeper than almost any terrain you could hike on outside, combined with the step size being significantly greater than the step hight on, say a 30% grade.
But I am happy to hear a rebuttal to my argument.
Scott
Scott,
It seems everything is relative (no pun indented. Well… maybe a little bit).
I wasn’t trying to sprint when initially trying the right configuration for ME.
I had indeed seen your video beforehand, and while I noted the captions ‘note how Scott can speak easily and is not limited by breathing…’, I did struggle balancing this with ‘go hard’ which was the other directive for the workout. I most certainly did run out of breath.
Someone looking at me from the side, would have probably thought I’m not moving particularly fast, but it was still too fast for me (considering weight/slope/capacity). Relativity 😉
The upside of this meandering experiment is that I’m learning to have better self-awareness and developing my intuitions about not only effort and intensities but also about recovery – going too hard has really wore me out in ways that made it clear I have to very patient with recovery (I’m 49 and don’t have a long athletic history).
It also helped drive home just how hard it is to monitor yourself and how much I could benefit from having a coach. I hope to act on this very soon and with some luck maybe even get to work with you ?
As for the Physics discussion, first just to make sure we’re talking about the same thing, when I say stair master I mean an escalator type machine, not the one where your feet stay on the same two ‘steps’.
If indeed there was a misunderstanding about the type of machine used, then the following is not relevant.
But if we are both talking about escalators, then given such a machine, I believe that at the scale we’re talking about (mechanical forces) the principal that governs is the Galilean relativity principal (aka Galilean invariance) which states that:
… inertial frames exist, and that the same laws of physics apply in all inertial frames of reference, regardless of one frame’s straight-line, constant-speed motion relative to another.
Another way of putting it is that all inertial frames are created equal. We can say whether one inertial frame is in motion or at rest relative to another, but there is no privileged “rest frame”.
There is no experiment that comes out any different in laboratories in different inertial frames, so there is no experiment that could tell us which inertial frame is really, truly at rest.
This includes the force of gravity, which is why for example if you were to drop a ball from the same height, it would take the exact same time to hit the floor whether you do this on the surface of the earth, or inside an elevator rushing down (assuming constant-speed), or an elevator rushing up.
A useful way to frame the escalator scenario, is to imagine a static normal staircase (walls, ceiling and all) enclosed inside a giant elevator.
The elevator is descending and a person is climbing the staircase inside it.
Not only are the mechanical forces involved the same as if the elevator was at “rest” on the ground, but (according to the principal above), you cannot even design an experiment that could tell the two scenarios apart.
So, going back to our escalator, as long as you are not interacting with something outside the inertial frame (such as holding onto the handrails) there is no mechanical difference with the staircase in the elevator scenario, or with a staircase on the ground.
The escalator stair you are pushing off is indeed moving ‘down’ relative to the room the machine is in, but it is not moving at all relative to you and so the effort you need to raise your leg to the next step above is the same as if it was still.
I am not a physicist by any means, but that is how I understand it.
In any case, given that mountains do not include escalators (thank god) we can treat the distinction as anecdotal rather than meaningful.
Whatever gets the job done 😉
Thank you kindly for your attention
Asi
Asi;
I’m no physicist either. As an engineer, I have to dumb things down from the Fizziks level to the Engineer (people who drive trains) level.
This is fun and has caused me to spend some time on the interwebs. It turns out this is a subject (climbing a down escalator) that has a fair bit of discussion surrounding it. Let me start by saying: “You are correct” and I have been wrong all these years. Touche, and thank you! I love learning things.
I stumbled upon a Reddit post where a group of engineers were debating this very thing. Those engineers, like me, didn’t come to the same conclusion that you did by using the “frame of reference” argument. They and I came to it from the kinetic vs. potential energy argument.
Climbing fixed stairs involves increasing the potential energy of the person by the amount of kinetic energy it takes to move the mass vertically some distance.
In my now discarded model, I only considered that the person on the stair machine was not increasing their potential energy by moving farther from the surface of the earth. Thus the chemical energy needed to do the work of climbing the down escalator was less than climbing stairs.
What helped me see the error in my thinking is that the escalator climber stays stationary by doing work on the machine to make the stairs move. That work, instead of being converted into the potential energy of raising his mass, is instead converted into heat by the friction of the machine.
Using a thermodynamics (energy) viewpoint is what finally made the dim bulb in my brain flicker to life.
Thanks,
ScottScott,
It seems that everything is relative (no pun indented. Well… maybe a little bit).
I certainly wasn’t trying to sprint when initially trying the right configuration for ME. I had indeed seen your video before hand, and while I noted the captions ‘Scott can speak easily and is not limited by breathing…’, I did get lost for a good while trying to accommodate this together with ‘go hard’ which was the other directive for the workout. I most certainly did run out of breath.
Someone watching me from the side would have probably thought I’m not moving particularly fast, but it was still too fast for me (considering weight/slope/capacity).
The upside of this meandering experimentation is that I’m learning to have better self-awareness and developing my intuitions about not only effort and intensities but also about recovery – going too hard has really wore me out in ways that made it clear I have to very patient with recovery (I’m 49 and don’t have a long athletic history). It is also helping to drive home the fact that I would benefit a lot from having a coach. I intend to act on that very soon, Hopefully even with you.
As for the Physics discussion, first just to make sure we’re talking about the same thing, when I say stair master, I mean an escalator type machine, not the one where your feet stay on the same two ‘steps’.
If indeed there was a misunderstanding about the type of machine used, then the following is not relevant.
However, if we were both talking about escalators, then given such a machine, I believe that in the scale we’re talking about (mechanical forces) the principal that governs is the Galilean relativity principal (aka Galilean invariance) which states that inertial frames exist, and that the same laws of physics apply in all inertial frames of reference, regardless of one frame’s straight-line, constant-speed motion relative to another.
Another way of putting it is that all inertial frames are created equal. We can say whether one inertial frame is in motion or at rest relative to another, but there is no privileged “rest frame.”
There is no experiment that comes out any different in laboratories in different inertial frames, so there is no experiment that could tell us which inertial frame is really, truly at “rest”.
This includes the force of gravity, which is why for example if you were to drop a ball from the same height, it would take the exact same time to hit the floor if you are on the surface of the earth, or inside an elevator rushing down (assuming constant-speed), or an elevator rushing up.
A useful way to look at the stair problem, is to imagine a real staircase (walls and ceiling and all) enclosed in a giant elevator.
The elevator is descending and a person is climbing the staircase inside it.
Like with the ball, not only are the mechanical forces involved the same as if the elevator was at rest on the ground, but (according to the principal above), you cannot even design an experiment that could tell the two apart.
So, going back to the escalator, as long as you are not interacting with something outside the inertial frame (such as holding onto the handrails), then we’re dealing the exact same forces as with the staircase in the elevator scenario – or with a staircase on the ground.
The escalator stair you are pushing off is indeed moving ‘down’ relative to the room the machine is in, but it is not moving at all relative to you and so the effort you need to raise your leg to the next step above is the same as if it was “still”.
I am not a physicist by any means, but that is how I understand it.
In any case, given that mountains do not include escalators (thank god), we can treat the distinction as anecdotal rather than meaningful.
Whatever gets the job done …
Thank you kindly
Scott,
It seems everything is relative (no pun indented. Well… maybe a little bit).
I wasn’t trying to sprint when initially trying the right configuration for ME.
I had indeed seen your video beforehand, and while I noted the captions ‘note how Scott can speak easily and is not limited by breathing…’, I did struggle balancing this with ‘go hard’ which was the other directive for the workout. I most certainly did run out of breath.
Someone looking at me from the side, would have probably thought I’m not moving particularly fast, but it was still too fast for me (considering weight/slope/capacity). Relativity 😉
The upside of this meandering experiment is that I’m learning to have better self-awareness and developing my intuitions about not only effort and intensities but also about recovery – going too hard has really wore me out in ways that made it clear I have to very patient with recovery (I’m 49 and don’t have a long athletic history).
It also helped drive home just how hard it is to monitor yourself and how much I could benefit from having a coach. I hope to act on this very soon and with some luck maybe even get to work with you ?
As for the Physics discussion, first just to make sure we’re talking about the same thing, when I say stair master I mean an escalator type machine, not the one where your feet stay on the same two ‘steps’.
If indeed there was a misunderstanding about the type of machine used, then the following is not relevant.
But if we are both talking about escalators, then given such a machine, I believe that at the scale we’re talking about (mechanical forces) the principal that governs is the Galilean relativity principal (aka Galilean invariance) which states that:
… inertial frames exist, and that the same laws of physics apply in all inertial frames of reference, regardless of one frame’s straight-line, constant-speed motion relative to another.
Another way of putting it is that all inertial frames are created equal. We can say whether one inertial frame is in motion or at rest relative to another, but there is no privileged “rest frame”.
There is no experiment that comes out any different in laboratories in different inertial frames, so there is no experiment that could tell us which inertial frame is really, truly at rest.
This includes the force of gravity, which is why for example if you were to drop a ball from the same height, it would take the exact same time to hit the floor whether you do this on the surface of the earth, or inside an elevator rushing down (assuming constant-speed), or an elevator rushing up.
A useful way to frame the escalator scenario, is to imagine a static normal staircase (walls, ceiling and all) enclosed inside a giant elevator.
The elevator is descending and a person is climbing the staircase inside it.
Not only are the mechanical forces involved the same as if the elevator was at “rest” on the ground, but (according to the principal above), you cannot even design an experiment that could tell the two scenarios apart.
So, going back to our escalator, as long as you are not interacting with something outside the inertial frame (such as holding onto the handrails) there is no mechanical difference with the staircase in the elevator scenario, or with a staircase on the ground.
The escalator stair you are pushing off is indeed moving ‘down’ relative to the room the machine is in, but it is not moving at all relative to you and so the effort you need to raise your leg to the next step above is the same as if it was still.
I am not a physicist by any means, but that is how I understand it.
In any case, given that mountains do not include escalators (thank god) we can treat the distinction as anecdotal rather than meaningful.
Whatever gets the job done 😉
Thank you kindly for your attention
Asi
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
