The easiest way to higher weekly mileage may be to add some two-a-day workouts.
Easiest way to low mileage is zero-mile days ...
Thursday, July 26, 2012
Saturday, July 14, 2012
Mike on metabolism and running
Everyone agrees that you can't do work without burning some fuel, but people have all sorts of ideas and working theories that explain how their bodies work. Here's how I think about my running energy supply, in a nutshell.
Fuel that provides the energy for your muscles to work can be stored in (and close to) your muscles. New fuel to replace what was used (and waste products from using that fuel) is carried by your respiratory and circulatory systems. This replacement fuel comes from food that you eat (your digestive system) and from metabolizing fat and protein stored in your body. That's pretty much it. Let's look at some examples of using fuel while running.
In a short, high-intensity effort, the muscle's immediate need for fuel is provided by that fuel most available to the muscle cell. It's really the only very near-term possibility for immediate use. The good news is it's readily available for immediate use, the bad news is it gets used up pretty fast. I'm thinking Usain Bolt primarily uses this source of fuel in 200 meters, and when that source is gone, a fuel shortage contributes to his starting to slow down.
In a longer, and necessarily lower intensity effort (like when running longer distances) new fuel can be supplied to the muscle via blood supply, and that fuel can in turn be resupplied by what the runner is eating, or from metabolizing fat and even protein stored in the body.
Since one goal of running is often to change your body's makeup (in terms of fat and muscle) we'd like to burn fat. Fat contains over 3,000 calories of energy per pound, and we can travel a mile on a little over 100 calories. The good news would seem to be that we can go amazing distances considering the amount of fat we're packing! The bad news is that while metabolizing fat can eventually provide us with a lot of energy, it is a fairly slow process - if in fact you burn through (use up) all the stored energy available for immediate use and haven't eaten anything, the energy you get from burning fat is only going to support relatively slow movement. I know I'm making broad statements here ... the optimal endurance runner is lower weight and very efficient, able to move faster and further while using less energy ... but ultimately he's dealing with the same metabolic processes you and I are.
We've all seen charts posted on exercise machines and gym walls showing lower intensity levels of effort as being "fat burning" exercise, and, after working long enough that's going to be true. On the other hand, calorie consumption is all about how hard you work for how long - a shorter high intensity workout will burn as much as a much longer low intensity workout. There are also benefits associated with the kinds of changes in your body (muscle development) that higher intensity efforts bring too.
Running long while trying to create a calorie shortfall (to lose weight) is not going to be pleasant. A constant challenge for me is coming to grips with the fact that running long creates a demand for replacement fuel. At some level of weekly mileage (>50 miles, which is pretty high for me) I do see a slow but steady weekly weight loss. The bad news is that I can only sustain the higher mileage for about 16 weeks, and then I always see some weight gain in the weeks after a 'goal-race'. It's all about finding a balancing point, and that's something I haven't learned to do very well ...
Fuel that provides the energy for your muscles to work can be stored in (and close to) your muscles. New fuel to replace what was used (and waste products from using that fuel) is carried by your respiratory and circulatory systems. This replacement fuel comes from food that you eat (your digestive system) and from metabolizing fat and protein stored in your body. That's pretty much it. Let's look at some examples of using fuel while running.
In a short, high-intensity effort, the muscle's immediate need for fuel is provided by that fuel most available to the muscle cell. It's really the only very near-term possibility for immediate use. The good news is it's readily available for immediate use, the bad news is it gets used up pretty fast. I'm thinking Usain Bolt primarily uses this source of fuel in 200 meters, and when that source is gone, a fuel shortage contributes to his starting to slow down.
In a longer, and necessarily lower intensity effort (like when running longer distances) new fuel can be supplied to the muscle via blood supply, and that fuel can in turn be resupplied by what the runner is eating, or from metabolizing fat and even protein stored in the body.
Since one goal of running is often to change your body's makeup (in terms of fat and muscle) we'd like to burn fat. Fat contains over 3,000 calories of energy per pound, and we can travel a mile on a little over 100 calories. The good news would seem to be that we can go amazing distances considering the amount of fat we're packing! The bad news is that while metabolizing fat can eventually provide us with a lot of energy, it is a fairly slow process - if in fact you burn through (use up) all the stored energy available for immediate use and haven't eaten anything, the energy you get from burning fat is only going to support relatively slow movement. I know I'm making broad statements here ... the optimal endurance runner is lower weight and very efficient, able to move faster and further while using less energy ... but ultimately he's dealing with the same metabolic processes you and I are.
We've all seen charts posted on exercise machines and gym walls showing lower intensity levels of effort as being "fat burning" exercise, and, after working long enough that's going to be true. On the other hand, calorie consumption is all about how hard you work for how long - a shorter high intensity workout will burn as much as a much longer low intensity workout. There are also benefits associated with the kinds of changes in your body (muscle development) that higher intensity efforts bring too.
Running long while trying to create a calorie shortfall (to lose weight) is not going to be pleasant. A constant challenge for me is coming to grips with the fact that running long creates a demand for replacement fuel. At some level of weekly mileage (>50 miles, which is pretty high for me) I do see a slow but steady weekly weight loss. The bad news is that I can only sustain the higher mileage for about 16 weeks, and then I always see some weight gain in the weeks after a 'goal-race'. It's all about finding a balancing point, and that's something I haven't learned to do very well ...
Thursday, July 12, 2012
Pimmit Run, Potomac Heritage Trail, Appalachian Trail runs
We finally got some rain, and the temps are back down in the 90's so it seems like a good time to get back on the trails. On Tuesday, my friend Jim and I set course for the Pimmit Run stream from where it passes my house on its way up to the Chain Bridge. There was some good trail (with the expected tree roots, ankle-scratching brush, and occasional downed tree in the way) for a good part of the trail. At other times, we would have been better off just getting down into the creek bed and splashing on through but we enjoyed making terrible time picking our way toward the bridge. From Chain Bridge, we followed the Potomac Heritage Trail into Rosslyn, then vectored up Wilson Blvd looking for someplace to eat (we wound up at Northside Social - one of my favorites spots).
Today (Thursday) I headed out to the section of the Appalachian Trail just outside of Boonsboro, MD. The tree canopy provides great shade on the trail. Any trees or branches that came down in the storm have been cleared - if anything, dragging stuff off the trail has left it clean swept. A couple of hikers were complaining of gnats (the bugs - the Nats are just fine) but all in all it was a good day to be on the trail.
Today (Thursday) I headed out to the section of the Appalachian Trail just outside of Boonsboro, MD. The tree canopy provides great shade on the trail. Any trees or branches that came down in the storm have been cleared - if anything, dragging stuff off the trail has left it clean swept. A couple of hikers were complaining of gnats (the bugs - the Nats are just fine) but all in all it was a good day to be on the trail.
running hot
We've had a string of days with 100'ish temperatures, making long runs hard. With all the heat warnings, people think I must be nuts to be out running. Here is what I think (remember, I'm just a crazy runner, not a doctor).
First, I always wear a heart rate monitor, which I think is a pretty good indicator for how much stress I'm under when running. I can't run long at my usual pace on a very hot day before I see my heart rate going higher than normal, so on hot days I have to run slower to keep my heart rate in the usual range. Even then, when it's really hot I slow down even further and take the heart rate down another 5 beats per minute. Finally, on hot days I just don't run as long or as far.
Bottom line: Keep the pace slow, keep the heart rate low, cut the runs a little shorter.
First, I always wear a heart rate monitor, which I think is a pretty good indicator for how much stress I'm under when running. I can't run long at my usual pace on a very hot day before I see my heart rate going higher than normal, so on hot days I have to run slower to keep my heart rate in the usual range. Even then, when it's really hot I slow down even further and take the heart rate down another 5 beats per minute. Finally, on hot days I just don't run as long or as far.
Bottom line: Keep the pace slow, keep the heart rate low, cut the runs a little shorter.
shoes again
Looking at statistics showing how people find this blog, I see one of the most common search terms bringing people here is "Brooks Cascadia 7" shoes. Obviously, I need to talk about my favorite shoes more!
The Brooks Cascadia 7's have been working great. When they get really dirty, I just pull the insoles out, drop them in the sink and wash them by hand with dish soap and hot water. A day drying on the deck, and they're ready to go again. I do pay attention to new shoes as they get reviewed, but most of the new shoes coming out aren't for me - I don't like change, and it's hard to find some of them in my size. I've got big feet, and I like some room in the toe box. I buy size 15 running shoes to get the extra room.. It's hard to find shoes in size 14 or 14 1/2 in a wide version. So shopping for size 15 (or 14 W) just doesn't leave me with a lot of choices. The current popularity of 'minimalist' shoes isn't helping matters, but I think for a 200 lb runner the Cascadia may be as minimalist as I want to go anyhow ...
The Brooks Cascadia 7's have been working great. When they get really dirty, I just pull the insoles out, drop them in the sink and wash them by hand with dish soap and hot water. A day drying on the deck, and they're ready to go again. I do pay attention to new shoes as they get reviewed, but most of the new shoes coming out aren't for me - I don't like change, and it's hard to find some of them in my size. I've got big feet, and I like some room in the toe box. I buy size 15 running shoes to get the extra room.. It's hard to find shoes in size 14 or 14 1/2 in a wide version. So shopping for size 15 (or 14 W) just doesn't leave me with a lot of choices. The current popularity of 'minimalist' shoes isn't helping matters, but I think for a 200 lb runner the Cascadia may be as minimalist as I want to go anyhow ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)