Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #1 
Here a nice email  question I like to share. The  question as well motivates  me  to  make a   short summary  on physiological   base ideas  which are often forgotten in the performance  world  of  coaching . I will make it on the section  theories. Once we  understand the difference between  physiological response  , physiological assessments  and physiological  training    compared  to  performance based  calculation   than it is so much easier  to follow  our interpretations  and ideas.

So here the great   mail.

One of my athletes has posed a question that probably does not have a definitive answer...

 

He is a cyclist training indoors in a room that is too hot (not enough air circulation also). As a result for a workout such as 2x20 minutes he is unable to hit the same power output that he would otherwise in a room with better climate control. Say a drop from 240 to 220 watts.

 

Is there anything that can be said for this situation in general. Does this mean training is less effective with respect to the typical goal of a 2x20? If 220 watts requires >180 HR in hot room but 240 around 220 then what? The circulation is being stressed more or equally at a lower wattage but the local musculature is not utilizing as much O2. So decreased training effect on legs? However, it is not so much less wattage, is the physiological signal for adaptation weakened?

 

This is  where   performance based training intensity  will open some questions. The question is the same   just  180  degrees  around  how    when we  try to defend performance based training we    use  physiological markers  as a weak  idea.

 One of the most common points  form performance users  is  why HR  does not work.
 HR is  far to much  variable    depending on   temperatures  ,  altitude  and so on.

Therefor if  we like  to   have a proper  zoning int6ensity we have to  take wattage  as  200 watt is always 200 watt !!

 Absolutely  true  200 watt is always 200 watt but  physiological systems may be different  stress  to  try to produce  200 watt  depending on temperature  and  altitude  and so on.
 So is  200 watt always the same  physiological stimulation. That may be a  question as well.

20 watt difference is  how much  % . In a  7  zoning  cookbook  how much is 10 - 15  % in a  zoning level ?

 Now here some fun points  to look over  so you  can give yourself  an answer to this  question.


 

ecgm  tempertaur.jpg

Followed  by a  calculation  how  FTP  zones  would change  when   working out  at  20  degrees  and a  warmer  temperature . Study  from  Australia .  and when working out   with different glucose  levels.  study  done in house.
FTP and heat and sugar.jpg 


Below some more physiological feedbacks   on the  reactions heat   or cold can have on  the physiological systems  , which than create the  difference in performance  and not the other way around.

FTP and heat.jpg


Same idea  but looking on    glucose  supply.   below

Glucose and FTP.jpg 




Kotinos

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 29
 #2 
A question on the slide. 

294 is FTP, and both carb loaded and carb depleted lower FTP?

? Does carb loaded imply

a. diminished short performances <20 minutes, 
and
b. extended long performances >100 minutes say.

My reasoning is the cost of carrying extra water. Costs of: extra weight, decrease in intramuscular coordination for example

a. not justified in short events but
b. extra glycogen available means able to hold pace longer before quality fuel depleted.

Is diminished for 60 minutes simply 60 minutes is steady state and extra carbs only come with negative effects. That is, extra carbs do not get used in 60 minutes.

Thoughts?


__________________
Be Water, My Friend.
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #3 
Nor  sure, whether I understand  the  question  FTP  294.
 The graph  is in color  so  green is  all carb related  so  loaded  FTP   270  depleted  FTP 230  Red is the Australian  study  so    cold FTP  294  warm FTP 257.  The  heat study  was a  different  athlete than the  carb study  so no connection on FTP  at all. Heat study  from Australia  and  carb  from in hours   of  us.

- diminished short performances <20 minutes, 
and
b. extended long performances >100 minutes say.


Not  convinced  that  time is  an issue  but rather individual limitation in physiological reactions.

That is, extra carbs do not get used in 60 minutes.  

I am not  sure,whether  physiology  as a  simple  answer on  here  you us  fat  , here you us e carbs  and so on.
 The body  will use  what is need  and what is available  at the specific performance to a  specific  time. The  question is  , what is extra  carbs.  Where is the extra  carbs   and how  would we  access extra  carbs. ?
Kotinos

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 29
 #4 
I think I understand the chart better now. I read it as

FTP 294 normally. Then after carb loaded it becomes 270. That is,

I thought the 294 means an effort after normal recovery, and then
if "carb loaded" (as opposed to normal amount of glycogen in legs and liver) the ftp drops to 270.

? The correct way to read the chart is

1. ftp 294 normal temp then 257 with high temp.
2. ftp normal carbs is 270, depleted 230

right?

My comments on carb loading (getting more carbs stored than normal) are with the following ideas in mind:

1. Most athletes cannot produce enough watts to deplete normal glycogen stores in 60 minutes, there are other limiting factors. So,
2. the disadvantages to extra stored glycogen (than normal) means stiffer legs and higher body weight (due to extra water stored in body with glycogen) are not compensated for in shorter bouts.

__________________
Be Water, My Friend.
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #5 
The correct way to read the chart is

1. ftp 294 normal temp then 257 with high temp.
2. ftp normal carbs is 270, depleted 230

right?
 Yes by  20 degree  he was able to create 294 FTP  and by  warmer  temp  he was able to create 257 FTP  wattage So  if we  discuss  HR as a value  for intensity  control marker  and  argue  that it is dependent on  too many   factors like heat  or  altitude  or  low  glucose level. Than we  have as well ask the  question  why   we have this difference in FTP. In fact  HR  at leads gives us an indication  that something is out of balance  where using  blind wattage  will create a very different  physiological stress, when ever  we have  changing conditions. So perhaps using a combination of  watt and HR  may be a  step  forward . Adding RF  and  SmO2  and tHb  may be even a nicer step  forward. Accepting that wattage is NOT a physiological guided   marker  but the end result of a team  which may one day struggle to create  2294  as it is too hot    so  the  adjustment feedback may have to come over a bio feedback. Just a  thought.

2. Most athletes cannot produce enough watts to deplete normal glycogen stores in 60 minutes

 Question :  how much glycogen  can we store in the body  approximately.? 
How much  calories can wee  burn in 60 min.?
   This is  an interesting  topic  and diets hope a  dietician may  take  aim.
 Remember   we have two main areas  of storage    liver and muscle. Than the interesting discussion  whether the muscle  stored glycogen  can be shuttled  to other areas or not  or  whether only  liver glycogen  can do that. How many  we  can store in liver and how many in muscle. Water  storage in   muscle glycogen ?
 and  than  the  question :
  Can we use lactate testing  for  control of liver storage    and  can we use  the lactate shuttle  to actually move  glycogen (  convert to lactate ) from one  body area, where we  do not use it into  an area  where we  use  it.
 Small fun test. Make a  hard workout  with one  athlete and an easy  with another . Take morning lactate with both.
 Give the one  with the hard   workout a  Coke   after you tested   lactate  and the other  walkes  aroundd. Than take  5 - 10 min later again  samples of each of them. Than  show it  here .
sandor

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 61
 #6 
how much glycogen?

300-400 grams in muscle
50-100 grams in the liver

endurance race pace, 1-2 grams/min, i've read research with test groups averaging 8 grams/min



my problem with the idea of "giant bowl of pasta" style carb loading is that once your stores are full, the overflow of carbs is turned to fat. 
Kotinos

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 29
 #7 
I've read there's about 400 grams of glycogen (normally) available in trained amateur athlete of 70kg. Using proper loading techniques (not big pasta meal, that's not loading) it can almost be doubled. Loaded an athlete can take on an additional ~2kg of mass (the glycogen brings water with it).

Back of the envelope calculation. Let's say the hour cycling record is near 420 watts for the hour. That's ~1.5 kiloJoules of work (420*60*60). At an efficiency of 24% (most reports are 20-25%) that means 1500kcal of energy. 400 grams of glycogen gives 1600kcal. Some energy will also be pulled from fat during such an effort.

There's enough glycogen for a normally loaded athlete to fuel an hour effort.

It'd be a mistake to carb load for a half marathon run. The extra weight alone is not worth it. I hypothesize that it would be a disadvantage for an hour cycling effort as well (weight issue can be more or less overlooked). Yes, I'm suggesting there would be other issues, see previous post. 

Bergström J, et al. Diet, muscle glycogen and physical performance. Acta Physiol Scand. 1967 Oct-Nov;71(2):140-50.

__________________
Be Water, My Friend.
juergfeldmann

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,501
 #8 
Thanks  for the great feedback. A  very fun section as mentioned  is the lactate  test you have to try. As well the interesting  part   on how LT  can  change  ( if there is s such a thing like LT  with a)   nutrition,
 b )  with  athletes  different abilities  to utilize glucogen.. There is  possibly a way  we can sue  NIRS  during longer events  to see, whether we may in a fact shift  more toward s fat metabolic    trends  or  the opposite  when    applying  carbs again. I  do no have enough data's  to  really put a finger down  but trends. As usual we need  at lest 500  samples  to be sure we have a decent   value  to come up  to discuss  and we  are  still short of this in this  research direction.


lactate hotmannn blau.jpg
Now  for NIRS user  do the below  idea  and combine  lactate and NIRS  and you end up with a fun  picture  show  it on here and we  can discuss some interesting points.

3 kurven reichert graz lactate and diet.jpg

and here  the  Great study from Graz, where they show the different ability  to  either use   or store  glycogen.


glucogen speicher.jpg
3 test in a  row  with some  biking in between.
 We did   with  Portamon this as one of the  first  case studies  to see,whether we had  the same problem  with NIRS  and the   energy  storage in the body.

What LT  cob concept  do we use. where is LT 1 and  LT 2   in this three test  and which one is  the " real Lt 1 and LT 2 and  the speed  accordingly to it ?


sandor

Development Team Member
Registered:
Posts: 61
 #9 
Quote:
Thanks  for the great feedback. A  very fun section as mentioned  is the lactate  test you have to try. As well the interesting  part   on how LT  can  change  ( if there is s such a thing like LT  with a)   nutrition,
 b )  with  athletes  different abilities  to utilize glucogen..


moving glycogen specifically from inactive muscles to active muscles cannot happen - muscle cells lack the ability to "give up" glycogen.

but for sure lactate can shuttle energy around - mitochondria will gladly use lactate as fuel to feed the muscle. and as glycogen stores diminish day-over-day in training, lactate #'s will actually decrease, as more is used to fuel the muscles (there was a publication a long while about about this. i think 5 guys running 16 km a day for a few days. muscle biopsies, V02 after every run, the whole laboratory run down [smile]

i love the complexity (and sheer brilliance) of the human body and its systems. as well the ability we have to train different parts to different levels & exploit the benefits for human performance.


the biggest part about questioning carb loading is how are we measuring this? does it work because the athletes are working with depleted reserves to begin with?
once extra carbs flow around in the blood long enough, and the muscles are full, and the liver is full, the liver turns it to fat. my understanding is that there is simply no place to put it.

now if athletes are training & not adhering to a proper diet in regards to carb/protien/fat intake (and proper *timing* as well) then i could see a pointed protocol could help them return to maximum levels.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

HTML hit counter - Quick-counter.net