Sign up Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #1 
Here a nice topic  sent to me  by Stu.
  The critical reader may immediately understand  , why I have to smile, when I look at the conclusions  and discussion concerning efficiency o the interval  lenght and load.
a)  In non of this  studies they  had any information on the  metabolic reaction intramuscular. The  sets where all based on  physical loads  with no  information, whether  in all reps  the  same physical load  showed the same  physiological respond.
b)   Why do you think we have with MOXY  2  specific assessment protocol ls.
 5/1/5    as  for central limitation assessments   and  IPAHR  or  soon a   different name in games  sports  for the  all out short  HI   information.
It would be great, if future  studies  would   add to a  physical  repeated load  at least and observation on the physiological  reactions  or each of the loads.
  What you see on this forum is exactly that.
 c)  For  some of Marcel's  ideas  you can see, why we look at  a combination of physical load  and physiological reactions  so we  actually have a  load design, which  is  guided   with the bodies ability to react accordingly to our  goal.
Here to enjoy:
 

Short v. Long Intervals

Two sides of the same coin, or completely different workouts?

Published
October 30, 2013

Here's an interesting graph to consider:

[stepto_intervals]

It comes from a paper by Nigel Stepto and his colleagues, then at the University of Cape Town, back in 1999. This particular version of it is redrawn in a review on physiological adaptations to high-intensity interval training (HIT) by Martin Gibala in the Journal of Physiology last year -- Gibala mentioned this figure in a recent talk, and I thought it was interesting enough that it merited a blog post even though it's more than a decade old.

The study involved taking 20 cyclists, assigning each of them to one of five different interval training routines, twice a week for three weeks. The graph above shows how much each cyclist (represented by dots) improved in a 40-km time trial. The interval routines were:

(1) 12 x 30s @175% of peak sustained power (calculated in an incremental test to exhaustion), with 4:30 minutes rest

(2) 12 x 1:00 @100% with 4:00

(3) 12 x 2:00 @ 90% with 3:00

(4) 8 x 4:00 @85% with 1:30

(5) 4 x 8:00 @80% with 1:00

The result that jumps out is that the 30-second and the 4-minute intervals produced significant improvements, and the other ones didn't do that well. The success of the 4:00 intervals isn't surprising: that pace is very close to the 40-km time-trial pace, so it has the advantage of specificity. It's also consistent with findings that 3-5 minutes is a bit of a sweet spot for interval length in other studies.

The fact that the super-short and intense intervals with long rest were also effective (while the superficially similar 1:00 intervals weren't) is a bit more surprising. Stepto et al. speculate that this may indicate that a different mechanism for improved endurance performance is at work here, for example improved muscle buffering capacity instead of mitochondrial or central cardiovascular adaptations. This is an interesting idea (and certainly consistent with what many coaches and athletes do) -- that you should spend time doing what are often referred to as VO2max intervals, but also spend some time doing very short and intense work, because it offers a separate means of improvement.

There are some obvious caveats here. Maybe the 1:00 and 2:00 intervals weren't effective because the intensity chosen was too low, or the rest chosen was too long. I have a hard time believing that's not at least partly what explains that funny-looking curve. But at the same time, I'm open to the possibility that this graph is telling us something real. When I do short intervals, I often have the tendency to keep the rest very short too, so that the workout ends up being just another "flavor" of the stimulus offered by my usual longer intervals. This is a reminder that there may be benefits taking to a deliberately different approach to short intervals, where the long rests allow you to access a completely different range of intensity.

There are some obvious caveats here. Maybe the 1:00 and 2:00 intervals weren't effective because the intensity chosen was too low, or the rest chosen was too long.  

Now this is what I am talking about   due to the fact, that  they have  no information of  the  stimulation of the different time related loads  they  do not have a feedback whether they stimulated  Delivery"  utilization ,  blood flow  changes  and so on.
 With MOXY you get many of this answers  in  .



***

Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #2 
I like to shift some info  from the " what  do I do with it   part on here, as it fits   great into the questions " classical "  thinkers  have  and  MOXY users  may be able to help out  with some ideas. So short summary:
 Carson  sent us a great  workout.
  Here the SmO2   information and gain Carson  can add what the physical performance was   at this workout.
 We focus  for the moment  just on the  2 loads of each of 10 min  we clearly can identify on the SmO2   picture. Pic  1 SmO2  only.
 We can see  the   low SmO2  values  , indication a big demand in O2  and a great utilization of O2, but as well a fast drop in SmO2  as an immediate  delivery problem   at a start of the 10 min load. and  only a  reloading  at the end.
The load  he  choose  was able to  maintain a low SmO2  level over a very long time.. Indicating that somewhere during this 10 min he had  to have an opportunity  to  reload  sufficient  to load  again as well to maintain a decent H + balance.  So we did a closer look at the 2 x  10 min load  and PIC 2  shows  the overlap of both loads  and we see, what he did.
 He   did an "Interval"  workout..
 Questions:
 What would have happened if he would have loaded  15 seconds  and deloaded  30 seconds  .
 
What would have happened if he would have loaded   100 watt less and deloaded  100 watt more   but same  time units  ??
  You can see where I go with this.
 How can we in a study argue    the outcome , when we only have the wattage load  but no idea on how the physiological reactions was  or where in different people. Now this is when we only look at SmO2   so let's  push it  one step further. But first pic  2  as  an overlap.
 Now  as we push  hard we have  different options.
 We   argued, that if there is a central limitation like cardiac  and respiration  per see  we often may see a change in  tHb.
 Vasoconstriction in  a respiratory situation   due to metaboreflex  if the respiratory  system itself is in trouble. Vasoconstriction  with respiration  if the gas exchange  and the  coordination between TV  and RF  can be   in trouble  hypocapnia.
. Cardiac limitation with an initial   increase in tHb  due to mechanical contraction as you may loose  motor units.  followed by   muscular contraction  so we may see  a start of a venous  occlusion after an initial decompression. In short  let's look at the  change in tHb  if there  is or was one during the  load. 
Pic  three  overview  of tHb  and SmO2  Pic 4  overlap of  both loads  and just looking  at tHb


You can see  during the load  an increase in tHb.  Why ???
  now  look at the interval he added  after  the 2 x  10 min.
   see the tHb  and the SmO2  trend  and than let's  look at closer  at the tHb   in an actual load.   What you can see is the opposite . In the  10 min load   he  increased  tHb ,in this shorter loads  he decrease  during the load tHb. Which is a very different stimulus  for  the physiological systems    and just think on the cardiac  reaction but as well as possible reaction in the angiogenesis site'  look at this Pics
 Pic 5  shows the tHb  and SmO2  reaction in the   end  intervals  he did/ Pic 5   load in the  10 min interval closer look followed by a closer look at the  less intense   interval  Question:
 By using " classical" idea like HR  would you know   that in one case you actually  increase  tHb  and in the other  not  and therefor the   result this  may have on the  outcome of the  workout  in performance and  for what physiological system.
 Now  let's take  Wattage.  Would you know by  which load in wattage  and   what deload  you actually may shift  from decrease in Thb  during the load  to increase  and decrease   during rest to increase  and what   this would create   on stimulation on other systems.
 Now  combine HR and wattage  and  add even lactate. What do you honestly  know  out of this " classical " information  in a field test.
 No  go back to the study  and read  carefully the   " conclusion"    how sure  are we that  any of the  possible conclusion  is  even close, when we have no information on the physiological stimuli   a certain load actually may create.
  Lats  but not least, what happens  if during  an interval  the   physiological system may in fact  shift  so we may have  for the same  wattage first  at the start  a  decrease in tHb  an than  after 4  or  5 loads  the opposite. ??  Just critical questions  for all of us. Remember this is all the same Guy  at the same day in the same workout.  So at the end of the workout  what did  we really stimulated  and the result   of the is workouts  is based  due  to what stimuli  , the  once we set in the first 2 x 10 min or the once we set   during the follow up  loads ???

So it easy to understand  now, why I have a hard time to believe  that we can use a calculator   an based on  some test ideas  from a  few weeks back or even from yesterday calculate  % of a  tested  peak load  and believe we  understand  , what the  stimulation  may be without  looking at physiological information's.
 True   the majority of  coaches, centers  and  exercise physiologists  not yet know that there is a MOXY available  . So better get  your Christmas wish list going  and  replace    on the list the wattage   meter  with a  cheaper  MOXY  equipment.
 Smile  Santa  has well has to carry less weight.

Attached Images
Click image for larger version - Name: carson_micro_smo2.jpg, Views: 20, Size: 75.72 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: aaa_overlap_smo2.jpg, Views: 20, Size: 60.44 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: carson_thb_smo2_micro.jpg, Views: 19, Size: 67.86 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: aaa_thb_overalpp.jpg, Views: 17, Size: 62.26 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: hard_load.jpg, Views: 15, Size: 48.35 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: carson_easy_load.jpg, Views: 15, Size: 47.58 KB 

Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #3 
Here an example of a " beginner"  workout  with  walk  and  jog exchange.
 Always the same  walk speed and jog speed, in fact  it is always the same speed  just change  form walk to jog  back to walk.
 You can see ghat the same load   does not   produce  for a while the same physiological reaction and that the  time of  load  and de load  change as well physiological reactions.
 This is a case study  done   o many years back  before the affordable MOXY.

Attached Images
Click image for larger version - Name: complete_60_min_w_r.jpg, Views: 19, Size: 94.09 KB 

Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #4 
I like to add some more oil to the fire. I like to give very little info  as  many readers start to think alike  and we are well under way  to create a  MOXY expert team soon. (
 Here  a very practical  feedback from MATT.
 This is a real  workout  from a game sport so it applies to any game sport like Ice hockey  or Rugby  or  football or soccer  to name some of the sport , which  soon will all shift  over and use MOXY as the tool  for  training .
 Here  a compassion between  2   athletes.   look at the reactions  on tHb   and  SmO2  . Smo2  will drop where we see  O2Hb  red  line dropping.
 I just use this picture  based on  the discussion we  did with S.M  and the   way I can try o make a difference    on what may have caused  tHb  to go up. Is it a  " good" going up in the way that  ;load reduced like  in a recovery  normally or is it a less good up as a sign of  problems  s with  flow  due to  compression   - occlusion  possibilities.
 Remember there are different reason  besides  compression  who can    help to increase the risk of  occlusion. ( Cardiac  and respiration )  so here  as a Sunday evening dinner  for you  served  to you by Matt and his great data collection.  Now pic three is an overlap of the 2 guys to see how they react in tHb   And last pic a little bit   a hep  for directions   on one   of the 2 guys  and how  two loads  create a very different  reaction in tHb   as well as in the subsequent recovery. Recovery remember is  when O2 Hb red is  going up.  when Blue is above  red  we have a  much lower oxygenation. when blue and red in this graph overlap  we are at 50/50.

Attached Images
Click image for larger version - Name: sw_o2Hb_hhb_thb_bias.jpg, Views: 16, Size: 74.44 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: Nat_thb_O2Hb_HHb_biased.jpg, Views: 18, Size: 74.95 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: nat_sway_thb_very_close.jpg, Views: 19, Size: 52.02 KB  Click image for larger version - Name: thb_and_inverse_reaction.jpg, Views: 18, Size: 84.38 KB 

Juerg Feldmann

Fortiori Design LLC
Registered:
Posts: 1,530
 #5 
Now here  an " interval" workout   sent to me just now  from Brina.
 Brain will NOT tell what he did.  so this is a challenge  for   us.
  It is an incredible interesting workout he did here  and will blow many  " classical' Ideas over board just like that.

Attached Images
Click image for larger version - Name: hb.jpg, Views: 26, Size: 79.40 KB 

Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

HTML hit counter - Quick-counter.net