What Is Base Building Training? (Page 2)

I tend to agree. It all seems to be a matter of degrees. Some advocate strictly staying in Z2, other say lean that way, but mix it varying amounts of additional intensity. What I don't see is anyone advocating all training at or above LT. Although if someone was just trying to lose weight with only 15 minutes a day, might be a good option.

Now I need to go do some strength training, I'm taking a walk. What? I'm using my muscles, so it's strength training, right?

feel free to do so, but that’s irrelevant for the discussion. As Rick/Fred mentioned above pretty much anything over 2 minutes relies on mainly the aerobic energy system because, hence doing VO2 max intervals (usually between 3 to 5 min in duration for most athletes) rely more on the aerobic system. But don’t take my word for it, you can grab a physiology book and learn this for yourself.

I agree, coaching is an art which IMO should balance anecdotal evidence (experience) and scientific evidence (knowledge) in particular on sport physiology. This will give the coach the tools to better advice/prepare his/her athletes. Anyway, injuries are not a based of volume (or intensity for that matter) in general most injuries relate to inappropriate management of training load. I bet you if coming of your off-season you go a bust a marathon even if you run it very slow you will be risking some sort of acute inury. OTOH just because you are getting back to training and doing most session easy, it doesn’t mean that by adding for instance 5x30 seconds strides (usually done at threshold to VO2 max pace) in one of your sessions you will be placing so much stress on your muscles/soft tissue that you will end up injured

again that would be your personal choice. Unless you are training like a pro (similar volume, i.e. 30+ hrs per week) IMO you are limiting the gains you could achieve in your performance. Look at Bryan, he trained efficiently and smart for 1 season doing a lot of his training at or above race pace (z3, z4) and he also got a KQ on the 1^st stab. Yes he has good genes and such but he trained so well his body to handle greater training loads that intensity he rode during IMAZ probably felt rather easy of what he was used to.

I know you didn’t hence I posed the question, If LT is the single most important training adaptation for performance for endurance athletes why would someone want to limit his improvement?

The idea is not to bust anyone’s chops, the point is to educate athletes about some of the myths and misinformation presented through different venues by Pros, coaches, etc. Mark Allen was a phenomenal athlete and that’s one thing but more often than just because and athlete is fast it doesn’t mean he/she has the understanding to teach not to coach and that has nothing to do with his racing credentials. I simple question his understanding about physiology given some of his articles. That I have a problem with because people tend to listen to these famous figures very close and believe what they said as gospel and when the information is inaccurate it makes a disservice to the listeners and the coaching profession.  

Again I am not debating whether the approach suggested by him or others works, it obviously does and I use it with some athletes. The point is simple, you can’t generalize and treat all athletes the same and also; to limit your training load to certain intensity through the general phase even when sports physiology exposes serious holes on that approach, to me the athlete is just limiting his/her potential for bigger improvements.   

I give up.  I can't remember much from Biochem now . . . what is it?  I'm sure it's something I'm supposed to know.

 anaerobic glycosis can occur over a longer time, minutes instead of seconds

Ok, since we're all being contrary.... 

Lactic acid isn't a waste product as it can be used as a substrate for purposes of metabolism, and it doesn't cause muscle burn.  That is from excess hydrogen ions.

It is a myth; the aerobic system will enjoy adapatations over a wide variety of intensities and "zone 3" is no different.  In fact, for most, a marathon would be run at this effort level so for an athlete training for a marathon, training around that intensity is going to be crucial.

I believe that the "grey zone" came about as a way to caution novice athletes when it comes to trying to push every workout.  For a novice athlete, if they push on their easy days they will go a little faster but not recover as well so if they have a fast day, they will not be able to push as hard and end up at the same pace.  As an athlete gains experience (and possibly starts to bump up against time limits in terms of building volume) they will be better able to recover and will have to continually increase training load to see improvements and will probably end up running more in their "grey zone."

Have a look at page 18 (table 2) for an idea of the training adaptations that occur at different training intensities.

Shane

Yep.  As I got closer to my marathon, a larger portion of my running migrated from Z2 to Z3.  Three of my last 6 long runs included increasing higher intensity portions, culminating with a 20-mile run with the last 10 at "marathon-pace" which was upper Z3.

I still think the problem here is that there is an argument about a term ("base training" that people assume has an accepted definition, whereas it does not seem to have such.

I think this is a part of the whole "periodization" discussion.  Here is a good read on that which might help at least get people on the same page when talking about this topic.  Note that "base" is never mentioned.