![Researchers=
No change
Coaches=WHY
the individual
differences?
(i.e. If I’m that guy at 6%
increase I sure think it
works!)
J Appl Physiol. 2011 Oct 27. [Epub ahead of print]
"Live high - train low" using normobaric hypoxia: A double-blinded, placebo-
controlled study.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/scienceandperformance-130616181029-phpapp02/85/Science-and-performance-7-320.jpg)
Uploaded byStephen Magness
Science and performance
This document contains the slides from a presentation on applying science to coaching. The presentation discusses: 1. The limitations of science in understanding individual responses and applying average results to individuals. 2. How coaches take a more global, practical approach compared to scientists who isolate variables. 3. Examples of applying scientific concepts like lactate curves, heart rate, and muscle fiber recruitment to improve performance. 4. The importance of understanding signaling pathways and how different training stresses interact to drive adaptation. 5. Examples of periodizing recovery and questioning commonly held beliefs about topics like footwear, stretching, and supplements.
More Related Content
Similar to Science and performance
Science and performance
- 1. Steve Magness Nike OregonProject stevemagness@gmail.com
- 2. Old School- Anti Science Scienceis God Both are wrong
- 3. This presentationwill be different. ◦ The first part will be philosophical ◦ The 2nd part will be fun stuff- real world examples and application ◦ The last part will be controversial
- 4. Evidence based? only 13% of all treatments used by doctors have good evidence an additional 21% of treatments that are “likely” beneficial. What about the other 66%? Is Science Bad? No, but… You have to understand it’s limitations in order to know how to use it.
- 5. Science conformsto the individual: Average vs. Individual Research focuses on the average. Responder vs. non responder in coach speak is actually an issue of applying the correct stimulus Do we really expect 4mi tempo at X pace to work for everyone? Timmons et al.(2011) put it best when talking about the non-responder phenomenon: “It is also an observation that is largely ignored by the majority of researchers interested in the health benefits of exercise training, presumably because the focus has been on the “average” health benefits within a population and the desire to have a simple health promotion message.”
- 6. ◦ Measurement Weoveremphasize the importance of what we can measure. Science evolves based on what we can measure at the time. VO2max Vollaard et al. (2009) “Moreover, we demonstrate that VO2max and aerobic performance associate with distinct and separate physiological and biochemical endpoints, suggesting that proposed models for the determinants of endurance performance may need to be revisited (pg. 1483)”.
- 7. Researchers= No change Coaches=WHY the individual differences? (i.e. If I’m that guy at 6% increase I sure think it works!) J Appl Physiol. 2011 Oct 27. [Epub ahead of print] "Live high - train low" using normobaric hypoxia: A double-blinded, placebo- controlled study.
- 8. The isolationapproach: Scientist- break It down to isolate a variable X effects Y and Y is RELATED to performance so it should work… Coach- Global approach X effects A,B,C,D, etc. How everything interacts is more important All sorts of other crap (population, equipment, study length, long term vs. short term, etc.)
- 9. 1. Deciding whethersomething is useful: Stool test 1.Practical- Does it work in the “real world.” 2. Research- Is there scientific research on it and does it confirm that it works? 3. Theory- Is there a legitimate, non-pseudoscientific, theory for why it might work?
- 10. 2. Using scientificKnowledge to formulate Real world ideas Use knowledge of HOW body works and learn how to apply that knowledge.
- 12. Lactate Curve ◦How? ◦ What it means? ◦ Missing variable- MAX Lactate 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 4:264:334:404:484:555:025:095:165:245:31 Lactate(mmol) Mile pace Lactate Levels 1st test 2nd test 3rd test ◦ Test 2- Sprint+ aerobic ◦ Test 3- overdid speed side
- 13. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 16.5 17 17.518 18.5 19 19.5 1/5/2012 test 1 MAX Test 1: 61.8-13.7 Test 2: 59.8- 14.2
- 14. Watts Lactate HR 341.2 86 65 1.6 95 100 1.9 109 111 2.7 118 142 6 139 Pace Lactate 5:35 3.3 5:23 4.2 5:13 6.9 5:03 9.4 61-400m 13.7 •On bike- •Muscles go before the HR/central components •Strength Endurance •Non-specific lactate work
- 15. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 4:404:484:555:025:095:165:24 Lactate Mile pace Lactate changes 9/4/2006 11/2/2006 MaxLactate 1st test- 51.5 400m- 14.8 2nd test 51.2 400m- 15.4
- 16. Data fromRenato Canova 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 finish Research Elites STEADY STATE!!
- 17. Passive versusActive ◦ Stretch Reflex ◦ Inertial forces (i.e. Don’t use high knees as a cue) What it looks like versus what is actually going on are different. Casio Exilim (High speed cameras-$150)
- 18. 200 in 28.2sec Ground ContactFlight Time Stiffness Galen Rupp 0.128 0.133 75.6 Mo Farah 0.153 0.152 67.5 GC Stiffness Reactivity Force Galen Rupp .128 44.7 3.71 1572 N 5 hop plyo test:
- 19. Fasted Runs ◦Theory-low glycogen is signal for adaptation. Shifts fuel usage towards more fat ◦ Research- Drust et al.(2009), Yeo et al. (2008) ◦ Practical-Lydiard, Cerutty, Van Aaken,Kenyans, Canadians (!?) Practical- start with running before breakfast for 30min, slowly increase up to close to 2hrs for marathoners. 1-2x a week depending on goal/time. EASY training after (RECOVER) Adapting the gut ◦ Can increase the amount of Carbohydrate our gut can process=enhanced marathon performance with lower GI stress ◦ Practical experience- eat dinner, go run- after a week you’ll be fine with no GI problems. Drust B, Morton JP. Promoting Endurance Training Adaptations with Nutritional Interventions: The Potential Benefits of “Low Carbohydrate” Training. Kinesiology 2009; 41: 19–24.
- 20. O2 saturationand EIAH ◦ If low at altitude Check HgB mass/ferritin levels ◦ If drops by ~15% during hard workout, then limited diffusion At lungs likely Resisted breathing? ◦ Use to screen for altitude HR/ HRV ◦ Morning HR- some people can notice trends ◦ HRV- gives a picture of Sympathetic vs. parasympathetic Nervous System stress
- 21. Using SmartPhones ◦ Data base ◦ Rate: Overall feeling Workout rating “Pop” in legs Injuries/Soreness ◦ Look for trends and correlate to training logs
- 22. Enhancing yourdecision making skills Creating and applying models to help decision making ◦ Simple fatigue models to determine workouts Simple fatigue models Muscle Fiber theory and application to kick development
- 23. Knowledge: ◦ Best5k/10k runners can run with lower levels of lactate at race pace but reach a very high level at the end of the race. Simple Lactate model: ◦ Decrease Lactate overall mileage, high end aerobic work, aerobic intervals ◦ Maintain/Increase lactate production abilities Pure speed work/ speed endurance Ex: Hill Sprints ◦ Decrease Lactate at Race Pace Alternations, Aerobic intervals at specific paces Combine specific work with aerobic work to teach how to utilize lactate at race pace. ◦ Increase Lactate that can be accumulated over race Strength endurance work Specific Speed endurance (5k/1500 blends)
- 24. Knowledge: ◦ “Thegreater the ability of the athlete to oppose fatigue (by maintaining strength levels), the smaller the drop in speed and consequently the better the performance.” Miguel et al. 2004 ◦ 400m race- (Numella et al. 1992,1994) Force production drops 16% after 300m and 25% after 400m. Increase in muscle activity (measured by EMG) to compensate for failure of muscle fibers that were doing the work. Kick development: ◦ 1.Increase maximum fibers recruited Flat Sprints, Hill Sprints, Power work ◦ 2. Improve ability to use for prolonged time Circuits, alternations, hills+flats ◦ 3. Learn to recruit them under high acidity fast workouts with bounding/hills 2x500(200 at faster than 800 pace, 100m bound at near mile pace, 200m kick in) full rest between Works by 1st part Increase lactate/fatigue, 2nd part increases fibers recruited, last part teaches you to use those fibers while fatigued Circuits with fast speed running, max intensity bounding and exercises 3-4x400m of 25sprint/25 cruise Miguel, P. J. P. & Reis, V. M. M. (2004). Speed strength endurance and 400m performance. New Studies in Athletics
- 25. Signal pathway interactions ◦Gives you the dose, the timing, and the interaction Adaptation Process RBC example Altitude Decrease O2 levels Hif-1a EPO RBC increase
- 26. Messenger Signaling Pathways initiated FunctionalResults Mechanical Stretch- frequency and intensity CaMK, MAPK and IGF pathways Hypertrophy, fast to slow fiber type conversions, Changes in Calcium levels in the cell CaMK, MAPK, protein kinase C Hypertrophy, slow twitch fiber type conversion, mitochondria NAD: NADH ratio Low muscle glycogen AMPK and MAPK Increased mitochondria ATP:AMP ratio AMPK Increased mitochondria Decreased blood Oxygen levels HIF-1 Increased EPO and Red Blood cells PI3-k and Akt mTOR Muscle Hypertrophy MAPK=Mitogen activated protein kinase IGF-Insulin Like Growth Factor PI3-k= Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase CaMK=Calcium/Calmodulin pathway Why care? •Interactions matter: •AMPK inhibits mTOR •Do endurance work AFTER strength and you inhibit hypertrophy •Knowledge of stimulus •Explains why training does what: •AMPK and CaMK can both Increase mitochondria. •AMPK= activated through endurance. •CaMK= activated through intense intervals.
- 27. Laursen, P. Trainingfor Intense exercise performance: High volume or high intensity. 2009
- 31. ◦ Antioxidants Freeradicals activate AMPK which increase Mitochondria ◦ Ice baths Blocks inflammation Reduces Recovery ◦ Ibuprofen Can block satellite cell Reduce Recovery Antioxidant Supplementation during Exercise Training: Beneficial or Detrimental? Sports MedicineV olume 41 - Issue 12 - pp 1043-1069
- 32. Don’t overrecover. Periodize recovery so you use it when you need it ◦ Base and Pre competition phase Damage is good Selectively use recovery modalities when athlete is on “edge” ◦ Peaking Slight increase in recovery modalities because emphasis shifts from training to racing
- 33. Testosterone andmuscle growth ◦ Elevated systemic hormones does not effect muscle hypertrophy Chronically supraphysiological levels (i.e. drugs) aids muscle growth, not what we get in regular acute exercise. Compression Socks ◦ Blood Flow not the issue ◦ Modulates muscle “tuning” (think vibrations) Stretching ◦ Static= reduced performance beforehand Hands over head ◦ Let your kids fall over Elevations in ostensibly anabolic hormones with resistance exercise enhance neither training2 induced muscle hypertrophy nor strength of the elbow flexors. J Appl Physiol (
- 34. Cushioning and Pronation=Broken Paradigm Running surface- ◦ “hard” surfaces not evil if they’re accustomed to it. Individualization ◦ Feel most important
- 35. Pronatio n-Left Right Footstrik e Orthotics? InitialMax change Initial Max Change Degree GC Flight Time Footstrike Lunar Fly NO 183 176 7 172 182 10 93.6 0.214 0.114whole Lunar Fly YES 182 175 7 176 185 9 Katanas No 184 175 9 175 185 10 92 0.195 0.128midfoot Lunar Racers No 184 175 9 173 186 13 93.4 0.2 0.123whole Lunar Racers YES 185 176 9 174 185 11 98 0.209 0.119Heel Pegasus No 181 173 8 178 188 10 100.7 0.214 0.104Heel Pegasus yes 185 176 9 177 188 11 101.6 0.214 0.109Heel Vomeros Yes 184 174 10 174 186 12 96.5 0.204 0.114heel Barefoot No 0 0 93.8 0.195 0.119forefoot 0 0 *Footstrike degree=90= foot directly under knee
- 36. Use Science,don’t be married to it. Practical Application of ideas. Lab vs. Real World Average vs. Individuals Know what you’re testing for and what the measurement means.
- 37. www.Scienceofrunning.com Forshoe stuff: ◦ www.Runblogger.com ◦ Benno Nigg’s Biomechanics of Sports Shoes Running related research briefs: ◦ www.Sweatscience.com ◦ Alex Hutchinson’s Which comes first Cardio or Weights? Lactate ◦ Jan Olbrecht’s Science of Winning