Autumn/Winter Core and general strength challenge discussion forum

TFBubendorfer

If you are looking for new ideas, here's a document I "acquired" recently. It's the abs training from a strength training program called P90X, which got a fair amount of hype in various quarters recently.

I haven't tried it yet myself, but will do so soon, just for variety. The old planks and supermans are getting a bit old by now.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Q1yksVxpJNSaLLjJCF_NZ1ie4hgX37dqOXMHjJo7Xw4/edit?pli=1#

Slogger Jogger

Going to take a break from the challenge until after next Monday. Usually, the day after a strength session the muscles are stiff and take a bit of warming up on my run, so I'm taking no chances for Dublin.:)

Larry Brent

On core and general strength work...

A recent study looked at the effect of exercises on abnormal running mechanics. A common pattern of abnormal running mechanics is that of the hip collapsing a little on weight bearing. This is typically due to poor recruitment of some of the gluteal muscles. It is known that such abnormal mechanics and/or suboptimal gluteal muscle recruitment are implicated in a number of running related lower limb injuries e.g. anterior knee pain (knee cap or just below), shin splints, foot pain. It has also been shown that doing gluteal and other exercises can be beneficial in terms of pain relief for these conditions.

It might be assumed then that these exercises may have their effect by improving running mechanics and/or gluteal muscle recruitment. However the recent study showed that doing gluteal exercises (some floor I think and also some one-legged weight bearing ones such as single leg squats) had no effect on running mechanics. This may be disappointing, but not surprising. The conclusion was that the exercises are simply not specific enough. What we know about learning and specificity of training would allude to this anyhow. essentially it looks like to improve running mechanics, incorporating such muscle recruitment strategies has to be incorporated into running itself.

There may be a role for floor exercises and moreso things like squats and deadlifts (as these involve weight bearing so 'more' specific to running) as a bridge to get to the stage of being able to work on recruitment of the correct muscles in the correct strategy during running itself. But as an exercise on their own, they may lead to increases in gluteal strength and improved mechanics when squatting (as the recent study by Willy and Davis, JOSPT 2011). They may even lead to reduced pain in certain cases, but they will not alter running mechanics.

Just pointing this out as I think there are some people doing the challenge expecting an improvement in their running mechanics; doing more specific exercises might be more beneficial, failing that spending the time running instead of doing exercises might be a better use of time!

Finally, why do people do the plank, rather than push-ups? Surely doing push-ups you get the plank work out and a pecs/triceps etc. workout. Not to mention that it involves a more dynamic exercise, trunk still and arms moving more specific to running (albeit on the floor!) than the static plank exercise...

TFBubendorfer

Larry Brent wrote: »

Finally, why do people do the plank, rather than push-ups? Surely doing push-ups you get the plank work out and a pecs/triceps etc. workout. Not to mention that it involves a more dynamic exercise, trunk still and arms moving more specific to running (albeit on the floor!) than the static plank exercise...

I used to get splitting headaches from doing push-ups. I don't know why. But I don't get them when doing planks.

Besides, what good will a strong triceps do for my running? I don't buy the "more specific" argument, to be honest, as neither is very specific to running.

Krusty_Clown

Larry Brent wrote: »

On core and general strength work...

Hi Larry, if I'm interpreting your post correctly, you're saying Gluteal exercises may not improve running mechanics. What if you have very little flexibility in your gluteal muscles? Could your running mechanics be improved, just by increasing the range of gluteal muscle flexibility to 'normal'?

What if your focus is not improving running mechanics, but rather 'general strength and conditioning'. Is there still value to doing these exercises?

Finally (bet you're sorry you posted! ): any recommendations for a regime that might improve running mechanics, or just general strength and conditioning?

Larry Brent

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

I don't buy the "more specific" argument, to be honest, as neither is very specific to running.

Aah you're right there, I just wonder if the plank has got so popular largely because it's relatively new. Push-ups are a great exercise but maybe suffer from being old-fashioned at this stage!

Larry Brent

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

Hi Larry, if I'm interpreting your post correctly, you're saying Gluteal exercises may not improve running mechanics.

Yes, to improve running mechanics whatever the fault is would need to be practised, ultimately, during actual running to get transfer of the training to normal running due to specificity of training and neuroplasticity of learning etc.

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

What if you have very little flexibility in your gluteal muscles? Could your running mechanics be improved, just by increasing the range of gluteal muscle flexibility to 'normal'?

If poor gluteal flexibility was the reason behind poor running mechanics, exercises aimed at improving gluteal flexibility would....increase their flexibility! Damned specificity principle. To carry that improved flexibility into running, you'd have to run with more hip flexion (or whatever the tight gluteals were preventing) and practise that until it became second nature. i.e. you could have increased flexibility but still run stiff, if you didn't use the new range of motion during running. Of course to be able to run with increased flexibility you may well have to do those exercises initially to gain the flexibility and then progress to the stage of using that flexibility during running.

However, in the majority of cases altered running mechanics may be a case of suboptimal muscle recruitment rather than a flexibility issue - we don't need great flexibility to run, the ranges of motion needed are pretty small compared to other every day activities.

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

What if your focus is not improving running mechanics, but rather 'general strength and conditioning'. Is there still value to doing these exercises?

I imagine by increasing leg strength, perhaps you will get more bang for your buck with each stride and so have improved economy. This could occur in the absence of any change to running mechanics. Saying that, specificity of training might inform that increased leg strength during squatting may not transfer to improved leg strength during running...but I am inclined to think there would be some transfer. At least some highly acclaimed coaches are of the opinion that hill running and hill sprints are the best form of strengthening exercise to improve economy (as well as being about the best way to increase stroke volume by causing the heart to increase its contraction rate quicker than other forms of training) as they are more specific.

Secondly, purely by doing any exercise at all and burning calories, perhaps weight loss/improved body composition will be helpful to running? But I wonder whether until you are maxing out at 120+ miles per week would any extra time available for exercise be better off spent running (on hills!)?

Krusty_Clown wrote: »

any recommendations for a regime that might improve running mechanics, or just general strength and conditioning?

Firstly you'd need to find out what the individual's running mechanics problem was. This could vary from person to person (although there are common patterns of altered running mechanics). If the problem is that your hip is collapsing, you need to work on not allowing your hip to collapse when running. This is very common, but not always apparent to the naked eye, or untrained eye. Sometimes it is noticeable in that when the person lands on one leg, the hip 'drops' on the other side. In other cases it is only noticeable on video slow motion analysis or in the absence of such technology during more challenging activities (e.g. single leg squat with heavy weight) it becomes noticeable to the naked eye.

Recruitment of gluteal muscles on the weight bearing side would address this. So in that case I'd advise single leg squats, lunges and deadlifts, etc. always focusing on controlling that opposite side hip drop. But this would then need to be incorporated into running (this is the crux and where rehabilitation often falls down - it doesn't take it to the last, crucial step; why I don't have much time for floor exercises, too far removed from running). This is not easy and may need guidance form a trained eye. Maybe on easy runs just spending a minute every so often focusing on controlling the opposite hip (not letting it drop) when landing. Gradually do this more and more, then start it during faster running and you just have to do this more and more, over and over again till it becomes 2nd nature. Not particularly easy and may need instruction from a trained eye in how to do so correctly initially. Also feedback needed. Salazaar works a lot on this and some of Mo Farah's improvement has been put down to improved running style as had Radcliffes. I saw a video of Farah training and Salazaar was constantly 'let your right shoulder relax'....'don't lift your left knee so high' etc. etc. - practically constantly correcting him during an easy run.

There was a recent study where runners on a treadmill got feedback as to how much weight was going through each leg when running on a treadmill. These were people with stress fracture and the aim was to see if they could alter the amount of weight going through the legs and therefore reduce some of the stress. With feedback the runners could indeed 'land more lightly', so rather than just collapsing down they were probably using muscles as shock absorbers and alleviating some of that burden from the bones. Unfortunately in that study they did not investigate whether this had any effect on performance.

Of course if the running mechanics problem was due to a different cause, different exercises may be needed initially and then these carried through to the correct muscle recruitment strategy during running itself as in the hip example above. Something else that renders this more difficult is that there is not just one perfect way to run. If there was it would be a simple mechanical exercise 'land on your midfoot, stick your chest out, lift your hip higher' etc. But as we know, Makau may be a heel striker as is the lady who won Chicago recently and Nouredinne Morcelli may have been. And look at Michael Johnson...So it's a very difficult area, which has been oversimplified (a running biomechanics firm in the US claim with video analysis proof that Radcliffe could run 2:08 or something if she did what they hold her in relation to running style, can't remmeber the name of the site). The best thing might be to get a look at yourself running on video, or in a mirror on the treadmill (or the cheap version, when running past shop windows!) to see if anything jumps out at you (or get a friend to have a look) and take it from there trying to focus on doing that abnormal part of the run more correctly. But many people would need professional assistance to get started I think.

An interesting article about Darren Campbell I think in one of the English papers recently, talked about how a number of international footballers and rugby players are coming to him to be taught how to run. He commented that it's no wonder Michael Owen has so many hamstring injuries, he's fast but he doesn't know how to run... I suppose ideally running form should be addressed in the very early years of running, when the kids are still capable of learning a lot more readily than older athletes.

Bugsy2000

Larry Brent wrote: »

Firstly you'd need to find out what the individual's running mechanics problem was. This could vary from person to person (although there are common patterns of altered running mechanics). If the problem is that your hip is collapsing, you need to work on not allowing your hip to collapse when running. This is very common, but not always apparent to the naked eye, or untrained eye. Sometimes it is noticeable in that when the person lands on one leg, the hip 'drops' on the other side. In other cases it is only noticeable on video slow motion analysis or in the absence of such technology during more challenging activities (e.g. single leg squat with heavy weight) it becomes noticeable to the naked eye.

Recruitment of gluteal muscles on the weight bearing side would address this. So in that case I'd advise single leg squats, lunges and deadlifts, etc. always focusing on controlling that opposite side hip drop.

I'm glad you said this as it is exactly what I was diagnosed with plus the exact excercises I was advised to do to sort it out. After your first mail I was starting to wonder was there any benefit in the single leg squats etc. The physio diagnosed mine by standing behind me whilst I was running on a treadmill & she also placed her hands on my hips whilst I ran (weird sensation). My left hip was dropping when my right foot was landing.

Larry Brent wrote: »

Recruitment of gluteal muscles on the weight bearing side would address this. So in that case I'd advise single leg squats, lunges and deadlifts, etc. always focusing on controlling that opposite side hip drop. But this would then need to be incorporated into running (this is the crux and where rehabilitation often falls down - it doesn't take it to the last, crucial step; why I don't have much time for floor exercises, too far removed from running). This is not easy and may need guidance form a trained eye. Maybe on easy runs just spending a minute every so often focusing on controlling the opposite hip (not letting it drop) when landing. Gradually do this more and more, then start it during faster running and you just have to do this more and more, over and over again till it becomes 2nd nature. Not particularly easy and may need instruction from a trained eye in how to do so correctly initially. Also feedback needed. Salazaar works a lot on this and some of Mo Farah's improvement has been put down to improved running style as had Radcliffes. I saw a video of Farah training and Salazaar was constantly 'let your right shoulder relax'....'don't lift your left knee so high' etc. etc. - practically constantly correcting him during an easy run.

Even after being told my left hip is dropping I still wouldn't be aware of it whilst running & I wouldn't have a clue how to start addressing it whilst running.

Bugsy2000

First missed session chalked up, but its likely there'll be a few more. Fell out of an attic last week & my back is in bits. Went for a run yesterday to see if it would loosen up - complete opposite happened. I'm sore today & don't fancy trying any core exercises like this. A bit of stretching maybe but thats it.

GoHardOrGoHome

Missed another two last week but I was sick so it wasn't laziness!

T runner

Larry Brent wrote: »

On core and general strength work...

A recent study looked at the effect of exercises on abnormal running mechanics. A common pattern of abnormal running mechanics is that of the hip collapsing a little on weight bearing. This is typically due to poor recruitment of some of the gluteal muscles. It is known that such abnormal mechanics and/or suboptimal gluteal muscle recruitment are implicated in a number of running related lower limb injuries e.g. anterior knee pain (knee cap or just below), shin splints, foot pain. It has also been shown that doing gluteal and other exercises can be beneficial in terms of pain relief for these conditions.

......... essentially it looks like to improve running mechanics, incorporating such muscle recruitment strategies has to be incorporated into running itself.
Just pointing this out as I think there are some people doing the challenge expecting an improvement in their running mechanics; doing more specific exercises might be more beneficial, failing that spending the time running instead of doing exercises might be a better use of time![/

This argument indicates to me that form should be worked on in conjunction with strenght work rather than instead of it. Stronger glutes may not translate to better form. Stronger glutes + practicing form will be worth more to you than practicing form alone.

Form defects are largely eliminated in very high mileage runners with a history of speedwork.

For mid mileage runners, form defects are more serious. Strenght training with form training should in theory be of more significant benefit for us. The time better spent running argument only applies if the running mileage is pushed to a very high level where the body, through increased strenght and practice forces a more economical style.

For mid mileage runners, doing 45 minutes of strenght especially to the core
would be of far greater benefit than doing an extra 45 minuters easy running.

Finally, why do people do the plank, rather than push-ups? Surely doing push-ups you get the plank work out and a pecs/triceps etc. workout. Not to mention that it involves a more dynamic exercise, trunk still and arms moving more specific to running (albeit on the floor!) than the static plank exercise...

The plank is actually quite specific to running. You are engaging your core to keep your body alighned while it is fatiguing. Same excercise as running albeit with higher resistance. When you start moving your legs during the core excercises it is even more specific. The movement of teh arms in press ups is not the same as teh arm movement in running.
The limiting factor in press ups is arm strenght so the core is not adequately fatigued.

Doing pressups after your core excercises may help with fatiguing the core more.

Larry Brent

T runner wrote: »

For mid mileage runners, doing 45 minutes of strenght especially to the core
would be of far greater benefit than doing an extra 45 minuters easy running.

I'm talking about improved running performance, i.e. times as opposed to running form. Running an extra 45mins would be far more beneficial to improved race times than 45mins of exercises which have been shown not to lead to improve runing mechanics.

T runner wrote: »

You are engaging your core to keep your body alighned while it is fatiguing. Same excercise as running albeit with higher resistance.

The trouble is, in the plank the spine is still whereas when running it is moving - flexing, extending, rotating and side-bending. This small, dynamic spinal movement needs to be controlled, but holding the spine still in a plank won't train that.

The theory alone for core strength and improved performance is flawed and the practical evidence has yet to be found and probably won't be until more specific exercises/approaches are studied.

T runner

Larry Brent wrote: »

I'm talking about improved running performance, i.e. times as opposed to running form. Running an extra 45mins would be far more beneficial to improved race times than 45mins of exercises which have been shown not to lead to improve runing mechanics.

So am i. A strong core will eliminate the most common mid mileage form flaw which is leaning forward at the waist especially when fatigue sets in later in race. Eliminating this means that the runner is pushing parallel to the ground rather than into it which will improve efficiency with every stride and therefore running times.

45 minutes extra running wont get you the same bang for your buck for a mid mileage runner.

The trouble is, in the plank the spine is still whereas when running it is moving - flexing, extending, rotating and side-bending. This small, dynamic spinal movement needs to be controlled, but holding the spine still in a plank won't train that.

Gravity is also a force on the spine, as a forward lean late in races when the core is tired will testify. That is tested by the plank. Also if you look at most of the plank excercises that most of the runners here follow, you will see that there are dynamic leg movements.

These type of exercises seem to advocated by running coaches the world over who have access to empirical evidence.

The theory alone for core strength and improved performance is flawed and the practical evidence has yet to be found and probably won't be until more specific exercises/approaches are studied

Youll have to link to your study before I can take your word for that one! Exercises and results have been studied empirically by coaches. Always with the same conclusion: Core work is an essential part of a distance runners training.

Youll have to clarify there. Core strenght mixed with running will improve running performance better than the same amount of running.

As ive pointed out core work will be more valuable to mid mileage runners who have more serious form flaws and strenght deficits.

Most training principles work by concentrating on different aspects of the building blocks needed to achieve an optimum performance in a certain distance. Each boundary is pushed out in turn before they are coordinated as race time approaches.

Running at the same speed at all times will provide non optimal improvement. So we run at different speeds: each one pushing out a particular limiting phsiological system at taht speed/intsensity.

Everyone accepts that we need a strong stable core and trunk in distance running. This allows the core to absorb any movements so that the leg muscles can efficiently drive in a straight line forward. Obvioulsy if the core muscles are weak, movement is passed to other muscles: form is compromised and more energy is used to maintain the same pace especially in teh latter stages of an endurance race.

Can enough core strenght be achieved by running alone?

Lets look at an elite runner (180kpw) and a mid mileage (60 kpw) runner.

The elite runner is taking roughly three times more strides per week. He is lifting his thigh muscles slighly higher to accomodate a longer stride.

His core is strong and should give him reasonable stability through a half marathon and for most of a marathon. As a high mileage runner running twice a day his body tries desperately to become more efiicient so his form will be good: his body will naturally push his hips out as this is more efficient and thsi will be possible with a strong core.

The 60kpw runner is not running enough that his form significanly improves through running alone and his core is weak anyway. Unless he/she is a natural they will probably have a slight lean from the waist. This will be exacerbated late in a race as the core weakens, (meaning that a similar angle of lift of the leg (thigh extension) will yield a smaller stride lenght in distance, and reduced efficiency.

If core excercises (including dynamic plank exercises) are carried out before running then this encourages the spine to be held in teh correct position and with extra strenght to keep it there. The exercises are not identical to running but are similar enough that most of the strenght gains are transferred to running.

As ive alluded i feel midpackers gain most and i also feel that midpackers gain most (% wise) from form and rythm workouts.

Even elites do a lot of core work and coaches have used core work because empirical evidence has dictated so. Thats probably all the evidence i need, but youll at least need to link to your recent study to be in a position to validate your point for a mid mileage runner like me.

Larry Brent

T Runner,

There most certainly is not any empirical evidence that any form of core work improves running mechanics or more importantly performance. Certainly top coaches advocate these but this is not based on empirical evidence rather perhaps some seemingly logical yet flawed theory and maybe purely because everyone else is doing it. Similar to stretching a few years ago, or maybe push-ups and sit-ups before that.

It was hoped that more functional, specific (to running) exercises e.g. single leg squat as opposed to plank/gymball work prove effective but this is emerging not to be the case, see here:

The effect of a hip-strengthening program on mechanics during running and during a single-leg squat.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=willy%20AND%20running

Willy RW, Davis IS.
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN:
Block randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES:
To investigate whether a strengthening and movement education program, targeting the hip abductors and hip external rotators, alters hip mechanics during running and during a single-leg squat.

BACKGROUND:
Abnormal movement patterns during running and single-leg squatting have been associated with a number of running-related injuries in females. Therapeutic interventions for these aberrant movement patterns typically include hip strengthening. While these strengthening programs have been shown to improve symptoms, it is unknown if the underlying mechanics during functional movements is altered.

METHODS:
Twenty healthy females with excessive hip adduction during running, as determined by instrumented gait analysis, were recruited. The runners were matched by age and running distance, and randomized to either a training group or a control group. The training group completed a hip strengthening and movement education program 3 times per week for 6 weeks in addition to single-leg squat training with neuromuscular reeducation consisting of mirror and verbal feedback on proper mechanics. The control group did not receive an intervention but maintained the current running distance. Using a handheld dynamometer and standard motion capture procedures, hip strength and running and single-leg squat mechanics were compared before and after the strengthening and movement education program.

RESULTS:
While hip abductor and external rotation strength increased significantly (P<.005) in the training group, there were no significant changes in hip or knee mechanics during running. However, during the single-leg squat, hip adduction, hip internal rotation, and contralateral pelvic drop all decreased significantly (P = .006, P = .006, and P = .02, respectively). The control group exhibited no changes in hip strength, nor in the single-leg squat or running mechanics at the conclusion of the 6-week study.

CONCLUSION:
A training program that included hip strengthening and movement training specific to single-leg squatting did not alter running mechanics but did improve single-leg squat mechanics. These results suggest that hip strengthening and movement training, when not specific to running, do not alter abnormal running mechanics.

T runner

Larry Brent wrote: »

There most certainly is not any empirical evidence that any form of core work improves running mechanics or more importantly performance.

If a coach observes that his runners perform better when core work is added then this is empirical evidence.

Certainly top coaches advocate these but this is not based on empirical evidence rather perhaps some seemingly logical yet flawed theory and maybe purely because everyone else is doing it.

Have you any evidence that top coaches who are now coaching sub 2:04 marathon times are going about their work in this slip shod fashion?

Every great coach has used observation of his athletes to form his ideas. They now have the most advanced methods of observing and recording data.
A core program is tailored for each athlete and believe me if it did not improve an athletes performance it would not be done.

It was hoped that more functional, specific (to running) exercises e.g. single leg squat as opposed to plank/gymball work prove effective but this is emerging not to be the case, see here:

Is i have already pointed out dynamic plank exercises are very similar to how the core works during running.

The effect of a hip-strengthening program on mechanics during running and during a single-leg squat.

This is only a level 2b trial (a low quality randomized controlled trial).

The study suggests that hip strenghtening may not alter running mechanics in the hip: thats all.

It does not measure whether running performance is increased through this strenghtening exercise.

This is no evidence to conclude that core work is futile and time bettr spent at running itself.

A strong core will keep you tall and upright to teh derath in a marathon. A weak one wont and performance will suffer. Core strenghtening work enables this good posture and the endurance gained enables it for longer. So many coaches and athletes have observed it that theer is little mystery left.

The xperts in thse field are coaches who ahve observed the diferent affects of core work on performance. Not the proponents of a level 2b trial on hips. Have you any empirical evidence showing that core strenghtening exercises does NOT improve performance to contradict what every elite coach in the world seems to believe?

Larry Brent

T runner wrote: »

If a coach observes that his runners perform better when core work is added then this is empirical evidence.

Is this not anecdotal (and not placebo controlled) as opposed to empirical? Apologies if my terminology is incorrect.

T runner wrote: »

Have you any evidence that top coaches who are now coaching sub 2:04 marathon times are going about their work in this slip shod fashion?

No. But some years ago they'd have been advocating passive stretching, now they are advocating 'core'. This is not based on evidence of effect but rather it's the fad of the day.
I think Sonia O'Sullivan gave a good insight in her book to the mind of a top athlete, presumably working with top coaches when talking about ice baths. Basically said that she had no idea if they worked but if there was any tiny chance that they would she'd take it, particularly as it was difficult!

T runner wrote: »

A core program is tailored for each athlete and believe me if it did not improve an athletes performance it would not be done.

How can you explain passive stretching being advocated for years then? Similary to 'core' in that it was not evidence but theory based.

T runner wrote: »

This is only a level 2b trial (a low quality randomized controlled trial).

It does not measure whether running performance is increased through this strenghtening exercise.

This is no evidence to conclude that core work is futile and time bettr spent at running itself.

Fair point it's only level 2b, but it's a start. There's no evidence in the other direction (i.e. that it is beneficial). Surely we'd be better off doing stuff known to be beneficial (e.g. aerobic training) rather than doing stuff that may be beneficial but has yet to be shown to be? It is a pity that they didn't examine effect on performance, soething I lamented earlier.

T runner wrote: »

A strong core will keep you tall and upright to teh derath in a marathon. A weak one wont and performance will suffer. Core strenghtening work enables this good posture and the endurance gained enables it for longer.

With all due respect, this is layman theory and based on perhaps a poor understanding of the 'core'. With all that is known now about neuromuscular recruitment, specificity of training and transfer of training the field has moved on. Original proponents of these exercises as a means of rehabilitation are all running a mile from their original papers in the 90s. They rue the fact that the exercises they had recommended have been taken up by every therapist, gym worker and athlete out there.

T runner wrote: »

So many coaches and athletes have observed it that theer is little mystery left.

The xperts in thse field are coaches who ahve observed the diferent affects of core work on performance.

Look, like I said about stretching above...Reading great tomes such as Lore of Running and Peter Coe's book, I marvelled at the exercise physiology and coaching aspects. Then came to a chapter advocating stretching and pictures of Seb himself doing all the stretches and got a bit despondent. I don't have these books to hand, but while the preceding chapters were littered with references, I doubt the stretching chapters were.

T runner wrote: »

Have you any empirical evidence showing that core strenghtening exercises does NOT improve performance to contradict what every elite coach in the world seems to believe?

Can I turn it around, please? Can you provide any evidence (not theories or reference to coaches or top athletes doing it) that they DO improve performance?

I don't believe I'll change your view, so maybe not much point in going round and round and derailing the thread (sorry about that) but always good to have these discussions

Now I'm off to stretch my hamstrings - hang on a minute :P

T runner

Larry Brent wrote: »

Is this not anecdotal (and not placebo controlled) as opposed to empirical? Apologies if my terminology is incorrect.

Empirical means based on observation rather than theory.

No. But some years ago they'd have been advocating passive stretching, now they are advocating 'core'. This is not based on evidence of effect but rather it's the fad of the day.

No. Thats what you say. The theory of the day works on what evidence they have available and what observations they make. They observed that long supple muscles seemed to aid performance and prevent injury. They used static stretching to achive this. Now they use dynamic stretching as they reckon this is superior to static stretching. That does not mean static stretching is a fad: it just means it was the best fit within the overall training methods of the day.

Coaches also introduced, intervals, plyometrics, tempo runs, hard/easy days, advanced nutrition. Were thses also fads? As ive pointed out athletes have now being coached to such a degree that 9 finished under 2:10 in teh FRankfurt marathon last Sunday. Coaching isnt a lucky mixture of fads. It is an evolution of ideas based on empirical and scientific ideas.

I think Sonia O'Sullivan gave a good insight in her book to the mind of a top athlete, presumably working with top coaches when talking about ice baths. Basically said that she had no idea if they worked but if there was any tiny chance that they would she'd take it, particularly as it was difficult!

That just means that she trusted her coach, taht she did not need to burden herself with understanding every facet of their race preparation. If the coach had no idea if it worked or not you may have a point in this individual case relative to ice baths. Ice baths seem to be still common enough. Not a fad perhaps. Sonia did massive amounts of core work i believe. Did she give any insight into why she carried out this?

How can you explain passive stretching being advocated for years then?

Explained above.

Similary to 'core' in that it was not evidence but theory based.

Thats your opinion. If you read any of the books etc of the great coaches you will see taht tehir methods are almost always empirical. They do what works. Arthur Lydiard for example ran up to 500k per week himself until he settled on a figure (160kpw i think) that an athlete could run at a steady state every week sustaineably.

Percy cerutti was also a pioneer. Jack Daniels takes blood samples of all his top runners to analyse exactly their spectrum of thresholds and teh efefcts of various training on them. These are not men who are likely to coach by fads. All of them advocate core work: bar none.

Fair point it's only level 2b, but it's a start.

It is a level 2b theory about the effects on a certain defect by using single leg squats. The defect was observed. Running performance wasnt even mentioned.

Can I turn it around, please? Can you provide any evidence (not theories or reference to coaches or top athletes doing it) that they DO improve performance?

Heres a study i found with a quick google scholar search. Also the evidence that all great coaches advocate it.

Does Core Strength Training Influence Running Kinetics, Lower-Extremity Stability, and 5000-m Performance in Runners?

Sato, Kimitake; Mokha, Monique
AbstractSato, K and Mokha, M.

Does core strength training influence running kinetics, lower-extremity stability, and 5000-m performance in runners? J Strength Cond Res 23(1): 133-140, 2009-Although strong core muscles are believed to help athletic performance, few scientific studies have been conducted to identify the effectiveness of core strength training (CST) on improving athletic performance. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of 6 weeks of CST on ground reaction forces (GRFs), stability of the lower extremity, and overall running performance in recreational and competitive runners. After a screening process, 28 healthy adults (age, 36.9 ± 9.4 years; height, 168.4 ± 9.6 cm; mass, 70.1 ± 15.3 kg) volunteered and were divided randomly into 2 groups (n = 14 in each group). A test-retest design was used to assess the differences between CST (experimental) and no CST (control) on GRF measures, lower-extremity stability scores, and running performance. The GRF variables were determined by calculating peak impact, active vertical GRFs (vGRFs), and duration of the 2 horizontal GRFs (hGRFs), as measured while running across a force plate. Lower-extremity stability was assessed using the Star Excursion Balance Test. Running performance was determined by 5000-m run time measured on outdoor tracks. Six 2 (pre, post) × 2 (CST, control) mixed-design analyses of variance were used to determine the influence of CST on each dependent variable, p < 0.05. Twenty subjects completed the study (nexp = 12 and ncon = 8). A significant interaction occurred, with the CST group showing faster times in the 5000-m run after 6 weeks. However, CST did not significantly influence GRF variables and lower-leg stability. Core strength training may be an effective training method for improving performance in runners.

Your argument was that the work we have been doing is largely non-consequencial to running performance was based on a level2b study on single leg squats that did not even measure performance! It seems that it is your views that seem to be the ones not backed by weight of evidence. That might be worth considering before the next news flash.

Ill leave it with another abstarct from another scholarly article. It says start by isolating individual core muscles then make the movements more complex. Sounds like what weve been doing!

Core strengthening and stability exercises have become key components of training programs for athletes of all levels. The core muscles act as a bridge between upper and lower limbs, and force is transferred from the core, often called the powerhouse, to the limbs. Stability initially requires maintenance of a neutral spine but must progress beyond the neutral zone in a controlled manner. Some studies have demonstrated a relationship between core stability and increased incidence of injury. A training program should start with exercises that isolate specific core muscles but must progress to include complex movements and incorporate other training principles.

Larry Brent

T Runner, sent you a pm rather than derailing further.

TFBubendorfer

Say, has everyone else given up on the challenge? That's three updates in a row from me and not a beep from anyone else!

Krusty_Clown

TFBubendorfer wrote: »

Say, has everyone else given up on the challenge? That's three updates in a row from me and not a beep from anyone else!

[F5]. It's the button just above the [5] key.

T runner

Just updating once a week at the moment. Busy times and have been cramming my sessions towards the weekends. Next week will be more regular!

huskerdu

I am still keeping up the routine 3 times a week, but I am doing more short sessions (5/10 minutes) and they are getting easier, which may be a good sign.

But, I am worried that it is getting easier and a bit samey and I am losing the incentive as a result. Basically I should be pushing myself a bit more.

Anyone else feeling like this ?

Any suggestions ?

RoyMcC

huskerdu wrote: »

I am still keeping up the routine 3 times a week, but I am doing more short sessions (5/10 minutes) and they are getting easier, which may be a good sign.

But, I am worried that it is getting easier and a bit samey and I am losing the incentive as a result. Basically I should be pushing myself a bit more.

Anyone else feeling like this ?

Any suggestions ?

I could have posted exactly that! I've stuck to the same routine as it's doable in the apartment. But what I've done is extend the length of time on the planks and the number of reps of the other moves. Finally I've added a couple of extra bits (e.g. double leg raises, crunches). Although I feel I could/should be doing more I don't want it to turn into a chore I don't want to do.

Slogger Jogger

I'm happy to get 3 sessions in per week. I think if I did more I'd get bored and/or be moving the balance away from the running which is what I'd prefer to be doing. A delicate family / work / hobby balancing act.

T runner

Slogger Jogger wrote: »

I'm happy to get 3 sessions in per week. I think if I did more I'd get bored and/or be moving the balance away from the running which is what I'd prefer to be doing. A delicate family / work / hobby balancing act.

Ive been struggling to make the three for several weeks and my strenght has suffered. I have a plan which will counter this from now on. That said i would have stopped several weeks ago were it not for teh challenge.

Possible improvements ive noticed so far:

Stability.

I seem to be more stable for my runs. I noticed thsi especially with my recovery runs where my form would be poor (v tired). After several core workouts, i remained pretty upright for these. Ive noticed since ive been missing sessions that my form has dipped a bit. Im also noticing the improved stabilty later in long fast runs. All i have to think about is hips forward and keep the cadence and the body is able to keep a good posture late in a fast two hour run.

Body composition:

I havent been this light since 2006. I guess there are more working muscles looking to burn more glycogen/fat which is increasing my metabolism and reducing fat stores. Makes a significant difference to running speeds.

No injury:

Touch wood but so far so good.

Anyone else?

T runner

huskerdu wrote: »

I am still keeping up the routine 3 times a week, but I am doing more short sessions (5/10 minutes) and they are getting easier, which may be a good sign.

But, I am worried that it is getting easier and a bit samey and I am losing the incentive as a result. Basically I should be pushing myself a bit more.

Anyone else feeling like this ?

Any suggestions ?

RoyMcC wrote: »

I could have posted exactly that! I've stuck to the same routine as it's doable in the apartment. But what I've done is extend the length of time on the planks and the number of reps of the other moves. Finally I've added a couple of extra bits (e.g. double leg raises, crunches). Although I feel I could/should be doing more I don't want it to turn into a chore I don't want to do.

Slogger Jogger wrote: »

I'm happy to get 3 sessions in per week. I think if I did more I'd get bored and/or be moving the balance away from the running which is what I'd prefer to be doing. A delicate family / work / hobby balancing act.

Hi Folks..a potential remedy here...a change is as good as a rest....and it needs to be kept interesting and challenging... Some strenght endurance circuit exercises in this 2 week winter schedule. These will help the core as well as the legs but the leg strenght should help greatly. Tough doing this stuff but hopefully well reap rewards come the Spring. Uphill sprints after a run are a good way of getting strenght minutes in also.

https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=ddpx5gb6_5cjpgdzgr&hl=en

Slogger Jogger

@T. How does one get time to do morning and afternoon sessions at this time of year I'm all for trying something different to liven things up but with the short hours and torchlight evening runs its kinda difficult for me anyways.

T runner

Slogger Jogger wrote: »

@T. How does one get time to do morning and afternoon sessions at this time of year I'm all for trying something different to liven things up but with the short hours and torchlight evening runs its kinda difficult for me anyways.

The relevant parts of the schedule are the strenght exercises. i.e the squat jumps etc. Just something to naturally progress to when the core is strong.

I was too lazy to isolate them and paste them here!!!

However..im doing some doubles now. I live 12-13k from work so its cycle in: 40 mins lunch run, run home.
Run in, lunch run..cycle home. Dont do it everyday, but the lunch run is key.

I can do a threadmill session on saturday with baby observing and do a very early or late long run and sunday and thats a good lot of kilometers without too much disruption. I used to do the core stuff at lunch but this is problematic now as i need the mileage. Plan now is doing some of the leg exercises during 1 or two lunche runs and nipping upstairs for 15mins a couple of late evenings to maintain the core.

TFBubendorfer

Slogger Jogger wrote: »

I'm happy to get 3 sessions in per week. I think if I did more I'd get bored and/or be moving the balance away from the running which is what I'd prefer to be doing. A delicate family / work / hobby balancing act.

I do all my runs in the morning, when everyone is asleep. I usually do the core exercises in the evening, when I come home from work, every second day.

The core stuff only takes 20-30 minutes, significantly less than what a run would take, so it's not really disrupting the family life. In fact, sometimes my kids join in "the exercise" (which usually means my own workout suffers, but hey).

As for the exercises themselves, I started out doing a lot of planks but for variety's sake switched over to the P90X abs workout. That stuff is actually fun.

GoHardOrGoHome

I aim to come back to the strength challenge with renewed vigour. Soon. This weekend. Defo!