Athlete Login
Scott Johnston
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Great question. Thanks for asking.
Ski touring is great aerobic base training…….provided the gear is not too heavy or trail-breaking too deep to make every workout into an ME session. You’ll know this if your legs are too shot to do again today what you did tomorrow. 1-2 of these a week, even if they slip more to the ME end of the endurance scale, is fine if you have adequate easy aerobic base between.
I hope this helps,
Scott
Thanks for writing in with your question.
I’m not a doc, but I am 69 and have undergone many significant medical set back and surgeries, mostly orthopedic repairs for injuries. All of them required a lot of sedentary recovery time with the concomitant loss of fitness. The first of these took place at 26yrs and the last one at 65. The most important observation is that the older I got, the harder the recovery became, the more fitness I lost and the slower I was to return to the same level as pre-surgery.
I do not know how the anxiety factors in other than to say: It sure didn’t help the physical stress side of things. But on the physical side: The single biggest hit to fitness during bed rest is to aerobic metabolism. Studies I put in the first book, Training for the New Alpinism, showed a 50% drop in the aerobic enzyme Cytochrome-C after five days of bed rest. In both books, I recommend 1 day of easy aerobic work for every lost day of training due to illness or injury. It takes a lot of energy to heal, and you’ve been through a major traumatic experience. Be patient, be consistent, be gentle, and your fitness will return. The time frame will be months to years, not days to weeks. Four years after my second knee replacement, I am still seeing fitness/strength gains in that leg.
I hope this helps.
ScottHi Bill;
Thanks for your questions. This is actually a pretty common dilemma for both people returning after a long break and those just getting started in climbing.
Focus on just climbing and let the fitness return from the actual time spent moving while climbing and the approach/descent time. That’ll get you a bit of a base of general fitness will you re-hone those movement skills. Later you’ll be better positioned to assess what is holding you back from performing better.
Bouldering I track TSS like strength training (which TSS is not designed for). Assess your fatigue from a session. Chances are a hard bouldering session will be like max strength and leave you tired for 2-3 days. Then 80TSS/hr is in the ball park. Similarly, for sport routes that feel hard. Easy climbing I track more like aerobic work.
Welcome back to climbing.
Scott
@LCB: Great questions.
@Andrew Bollard: Good feedback and analysis.
So I don’t have anything of significance to offer because Andrew did a good job with his reply.
The last time I did this was at age 52, and I was pretty bodily broken then as well. So, I can relate. At 69 I’m not sure I could pull off those times again. You do not want to have to go at a max effort for this portion of the climb because going full out for 6-10 hours at that altitude will completely trash you for a few days. So it needs to be a controlled aerobic effort. It also depends on how well you do at altitude and how well-acclimated you are. The only real way to know is to try it. As a test, you might consider a car-to-car on Rainier’s Disappointment Cleaver or Ingrahm Glacier routes. If you can do that 3000m in under 12 hours, you’d probably have a very good chance of pulling off the 14-summit on Deanli in about the same time.
Like most things in life, the answer depends on so many things.
Scott
Great conversation going on here. I don’t have much to add but a couple to thoughts come to mind.
A max strength protocol ( ~90% 1RM low reps/set for several sets) won’t add mass, will increase strength (unless you are all already very strong), won’t make you sore, does not take much energy, and can speed recovery from your aerobic sessions. To do it at home: Pull-ups, Push-ups with a vest, and/0r elevated feet. Single leg exercises. SL movements like decline squat, pistol squat, Bulgarian Split Squat, SL Romanian DL do not require nearly as much resistance (heavy bar or dumbbell) to get an adequate strength training effect, and they are more specific to running, skiing, hiking where you people yourself one leg at a time and need hip stabilization.
I hope this helps,
Scott
SteelT:
Thanks for your questions. They’re great. Comments below.
During the discussion on intensity and recovery, the comment was made that a rough gauge of intensity is that any workout you do you should be able to repeat day after day and recover from it. Can some clarification be made on how you apply progressive overload in context of this gauge? Sorry if I was not clear enough. What I had intended to say was for aerobic base training, that is, Z1-2, you should be able to recover within 24 hours to repeat the same workout. This idea does not apply to high-intensity training as recovery well be longer. It is one way to tell if you are training in the aerobic realm. It it takes you more than 24 hours, you either went too hard of perhaps too long for your given work capacity.
Additionally, we have the 10% rule to provide general guidance on volume and this seems to contradict the aforementioned recovery gauge. E.g., in my current fitness state I could probably manage 5 miles a day every day of the week. By doing this however, mileage would be up 200-300% from last year and wouldn’t be a wise approach. How does the interplay between recovery feeling and volume work and does one take precedence in planning? I thought I said that 10% would be a big annual increase for some with significant training history. Those just getting going can expect to make bigger increases in the early stages. If last year was just beginning training and you felt like you were nowhere near your limit from a recovery/energy standpoint, then a big jump is not out of the question. 200-300% seems extreme to me, but I don’t know you or your history. If 35 miles/wk is what you think you can manage now, I assume you were training about 10-15 miles/wk last year. For many, this would not be a problem. The biggest risk is an overuse injury. That depends so much on your running form. I do think my 100-mile rule is useful here at the start of most folks running season post winter. You need 100 miles in your legs before you are really ready to train by running. This needs to be gradual to condition the connective tissue, especially in the lower legs, to the repetitive impact loading of running to give your self the best change of avoiding injury. The overall message I had hoped to convey is that gradualness if the key to longevity. Given adequate, not excessive stimulus with adequate rest your body will adapt. No formula can describe this for every individual. Hence my message to pay attention to the feedback your body is giving you. You will have to find these limits on your own by testing.
Additionally, we have the 10% rule to provide general guidance on volume and this seems to contradict the aforementioned recovery gauge. E.g., in my current fitness state I could probably manage 5 miles a day every day of the week. By doing this however, mileage would be up 200-300% from last year and wouldn’t be a wise approach. How does the interplay between recovery feeling and volume work and does one take precedence in planning? The fatigue mechanisms will be mixed and highly individual. Fatigue is a fairly obvious and immediate feedback. Whereas overuse injury tends to creep up and pounce on you unexpectedly, especially in running. So this is a more important concern than fatigue for increasing running volume or intensity.
REDS and energy deficiency; for weight loss, you have to be in a caloric deficit that’s going to involve negative symptoms. Where is the balance between under fueling to the point of harming recovery versus a manageable deficit and how does one read that balance on their own? You can use the bathroom scale to monitor weight combined with a simple pinch test a few times a week. Short-term weight loss or gain will be mostly water, but in the summer, this is a good way to be sure you are staying hydrated after a sweaty run. The pinch test of adipose fat is a cheap and pretty good way to monitor body fat changes. But these need to be combined with your perception of recovery status. If you see weight loss over weeks, reduced adipose fat, and lower energy, you are dipping into REDS. Again there is no formula that can work for everyone. I’m not a fan of counting calories (both in and out) as a way to monitor energy intake and use. I don’t think the chemistry of indirect calorimetry, where they oxidize, by combustion, food to determine how much energy it contains, translates well to the chemical processes our body uses to produce ATP. We don’t combust our food. We don’t even oxidize all our food. A significant portion of our ATP is produced via the non-oxidative glycolytic pathway. Anyway, that’s another discussion. Don’t try finding a formula to answer your question. There is none.
OTS vs under fueling vs deficit fueling; they seem to have many overlapping symptoms. Is there anything in particular to distinguish them other than severity of the issue? They do, which makes them hard to diagnose and treat. The easiest way I know is if eating more makes your energy return you are not eating enough. Fairly immediate feedback and is so easy to try. If resting a few days does not make you feel better even when eating plenty, you’re probably looking at OTS.
I hope this helps, Scott
Michael:
I think the point John was making is that you are likely to have a different AeT for different training modalities and my need to test each. This is vry hard to do skinning or XC skiing (without a roller ski treadmill). I have found that uphill ski striding with poles on a treadmill gives very close results to classic skiing and skimo. Heavy backcountry gear……not so much.
Scott
Silpa;
My responses below.
2.After my 24 week plan I only do ME work last 6-8 wks before my planned trips on Stairmaster. Can I do them on a regular basis once every 10 days? Yes. I have never done Hill sprints, I am a little lost on the concept on how to, Will read the book again. I don’t have access to any hill or tall building stairs, best I have is 4 flights of regular stairs (would that work?) These sprints are no more than 15 seconds long so 4 flights is more than enough. I detail in some depth how to do these in both books. Don’t try these sprints while injured.
3. I meant to say 3% Drift on my initial message. I did feel borderline hard at my AeT . I try to get about 4-5 hrs of Zone 2 in a week and my recovery has been good. Looks like I will do better with below 145. From my understanding, training gets more polarized as you get fitter but, Since I am unable to do Zone 4-5 at this time while recovering from injury, Should I continue to train in Zone 2 or keep it below 145 ? Maybe 1-2 Z2 hikes or bikes/week and the rest in Z1. since training at 155 is too much stress on the body. I work really hard on building my aerobic base and hate to lose it to an injury. I strength train with low weight high reps once a week (exercises from the book) and do Cham fit once a week.
One big question I have is, If I continue just Zone 1 and low Zone 2 and ME training (without any zone 3/4) would I always be slower in the mountains? True speed is directly related to strength/power. The ability to maintain sub-max speed is much more related to endurance. As a mountaineer, pure speed is not as much of a limiter……… But, if you can’t move fast for a short distance, you will never move fast for a long distance. First, you need to increase your max speed with things like max strength training (not high rep low weight, that’s endurance training. Ref Training for the New Alpinism). Next….. you need to develop the endurance to maintain I high percentage of the max speed for a long time. That’s what ME and aerobic base training do. You can improve sub-max speed with hit intensity interval training, but without a base of at least some pure speed work, you will always be limited in speed.
I hope this helps,
Scott
Silpa:
I do think you need to add some spice to your training. Just doing aerobic base training with no hill sprints, no muscular endurance, no pick ups and no strength work is probably the reason you feel slow.
A few thoughts:
1) when you switched to the bike did you redo the HR drift test to find you biking AeT? It is most likely different from running which is also probably different from AeT on a stair master. Usually biking AeT will be lower and that might be why you felt like it was too much stress to train at 155 on the bike.
2) Adding interval training like Z4-5 without proper preparation with the hill sprints and ME could be why you injured yourself.
3) When I look at your test I select from about 25 minutes because that is here your HR stopped climbing so fastened began to stabilize. I select the next 26 minutes and see an average HR of 159. Selecting the last 26 minutes of the test gives and average HR of 164. 164/150= 1.03 or a 3 % drift. I would say that your starting HR of 157 is probably a good estimate of your AeT. What was your perceived exertion during this test? If it felt hard then yes, you need to do most of your base training at a lower HR, maybe around 135-145 range.
As to whether you should use one of our coaches: You will get your best results that way and you have a partner to help you decide what to do when and explain why so you can learn in real time. You’ve already done a pretty good job with the aerobic base training. But some elements do seem to be missing. Maybe dive back into one of our books and read about hill sprints, muscular endurance and pick ups.
I hope this helps.
ScottLCB:
You are correct. Done in sufficient quantity (sets and reps) with minimal rest all those exercises will produce an ME effect. Many other exercises can be used to elicit a similar effect. I think I mentioned this in the ME article .
I’m really glad the ME work has given you more confidence for your upcoming Denali trip. It has worked for hundreds if not thousands of others so you’re in good company.
Scott
Great questions. Thanks for asking. Nose breathing is not a surefire method for everyone to establish their aerobic threshold. Some people struggle to breathe through their nose, even at rest, due to congestion and swollen nasal tissue in the nose. It sounds like when you redid the test starting at 135; you got a more reasonable drift. I’d stick with that as the top of Z2 till you see some improvement in pace at that HR. Your HR is the result of the tug-of-war between your sympathetic (fight or flight) and parasympathetic (rest and digest) nervous systems. In your game, your excitement causes your sympathetic nervous system to overpower the parasympathetic. Your brain can’t tell the difference between VR and reality, so is preparing you for a fight or flight. When exercising, your sympathetic system jacks up HR in response to increased oxygen demand in the working muscles.
- Cold will affect your ability to nose breathe 40F is probably not cold enough to have much, if any, effect.
- Temps would need to be to the point of making your mucus membranes sting or burn to have much effect. Forget nose breathing.
- Go with 135 for now.
- See the above explanation.
I hope this helps.
Scott
Like most things in life….It depends.
The degree or absence of DOMS seems to depend on muscle fiber type composition and athlete strength. This is from my observations of hundreds of athletes who have used this program. FT dominate athletes often get no soreness at all. Super ST athletes can be super sore for up to 3-4 days if they overdo it. Hence my warnings about not going full out for the first few workouts until you understand how it affects you. I do see that athletes have less trouble with DOMS when they have done cycles of to before. So, your experience this time with minimal soreness on the second time through an ME cycle is in line with most others see. If DOMS is severe, low muscle load activities are in order until you feel better. Running might be out of the question for a day or two.
In the end, the response is very individual. But the more you do this, the less painful it will be, and the long-term benefits are worth the short-term pain. I don’t think there is a way to alleviate DOMS.
I hope this helps,
ScottChristian:
This is a great and very deep question. You always ask challenging ones. I’m sorry I didn’t see this earlier but……
This has been the age old problem for coaches and athletes. How to quantify the training load and the fatigue that coes with it. Training load is a term that, while vague and defined in several different ways, is a concept that captures all the things you speak about: duration of individual workouts, intensity, frequency, and total volume. The best method for capturing training load that I am familiar with are incorporated in the metrics that Training Peaks uses. These are based on TSS (training stress score). The TSS is calculated using an algorithm which involves power output (running or cycling), pace (running or simming) or heart rate (as a last resort when these others are not available. The TSS is a function of duration and intensity and the time spent above and below what we call AnT (TP calls this Threshold or FPT-functional threshold pace or power). So now you have this single number, TSS that is a proxy for training load. The power and pace baed TSS is much more accurate that heart rate based TSS.
From other algorithms TP comes up with CTL= chronic training load which is a proxy for fitness or work capacity. ATL= accute training load which is a proxy for fatigue and TSB=training stress balance which is an approximation of your form on any given day if you need to perform well.
These were all developed by Andrew Coggan PhD.
Like all algorithms, though; they need good data to give good results. That is why power and pace give more accurate TSS numbers than heart rate does.
I should do one of our book club sessions on TP metrics.
Watch for an a couple of upcoming podcasts on using power meters for running and hiking. I think you will enjoy them.
Scott
No concerns at all. It is a very well-designed, long-term progression of training load that has gotten rave reviews from the military crowd. The only undesirable side effect might be saluting your wife or your boss.
Scott
Joe: Great questions. Have you done an AnT test to see the spread between AeT and AnT? With a 9:30 pace at AeT it is possible that this spread might be less than 10%, in which case you might want to be doing more of your aerobic base training down in Zone 1 or around 125-135. That’s not far off your suggested 124 starting HR. Pacing on longer runs is always tricky. Have you tried that strategy of starting in the 102s? If so did you feel better at the end than if you start in Z2?
The bigger question is how do you feel the next day after longer runs done with these two strategies? It sounds like you blow up if starting in Z2. That in itself tells you the answer. Z2 is unsustainable for you for more than 2 hours right now. It will improve with time but the best route to accomplishing that is to do more easier volume.
I hope the helps,
Scott
