|
Run-Down Forums
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Guest
|
Posted: Wed Aug 25, 1999 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hey Guys,
I couldn't help but read that bit of advice on carboloading and I would like to offer my two cents. It can be argued that carbo-loading is very important for races as short as 5k-10k. The reason being is that glycogen depletion rate increases exponentialy with pace. So for example 3 miles at 5k race pace could have that same depletion rates as 10 miles slow.
Yes, I too always thought it didn't matter for short races but it does! Owen Anderson recently illustrated this point in his June-July Issue of Running Research News. A study illustrated the effect of carbo loading on short workout bouts(5 x 60sec). Three groups were in the study: A high carbo, medium carbo, and low carbo group. After 5 weeks the hi carbo group improved performances 5.6 percent. The medium carbo group improves performances 2.3 percent. The low carbo group decreased work by 5.4 percent!!(European journal of Applied Physiology vol 67, 1993). There were many other studies cited in his article too.
Understand these main points:
The logic that you don't need to carbo load is because on the fact that marathon pace is much slower than 5k-10K pace. Thus depletion doesn't become a factor until 10-15 miles at marathon pace.
Carbo loading can positively affect power(speed) not only pure endurance
You will gain water weight when you carbo load
A speed workout can Glycogen Deplete you more than a long easy run. This is why you can overtrain on relatively low mileage!
Adding hills to your run drastically increases glycogen depletion.
What we have always been taught handed down from running circles and coaches is not necessarily true!!!
-T
[Anonymously Posted by: 'Tyrone Goldstein'] |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Dan Chief Pontificator
Joined: 22 Mar 1999 Posts: 9334 Location: Salem, OR
|
Posted: Wed Aug 25, 1999 4:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting. This sounds quite similar to the intensity vs. LSD (long, slow distance) metabolism debate. 5.6 percent vs. 5.4 percent at the extremes, looks like it sucks to be in the middle! Guess that's one more knock against the 40/30/30...
Did Owen say what he regarded as carbo-loading?
Dan |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|