Ultra Discussion Thread

Myles Splitz

kit3 wrote: »

I have a question about nutrition if ye don't mind. A friend of mine (not on Boards, hence me asking the question) is doing 100k in June. He's done a few 50K and two/three 39.3 races before but is looking a bit more closely at nutrition with the step up to 100k. Up to now in terms of fat burning his approach would be to do some long runs on 'empty' and that seems to work well for him. He's been reading, however, about an approach whereby you fast for 24/48 regularly during training to teach the body to burn fat. Anyone have any experience of this approach as opposed to training on empty ? Is there any merit in it ? Thanks

If he is making the step up in distance more than likely his training volume will increase and as such recovery will be a factor as well as the fueling.

My advice would be to weigh up the pro's and cons of changes to diet with regards to whether the fueling or his aerobic capacity and training volume will hold him back more. By changing the diet too much he may actually be hampering his recovery due to elevated cortisol levels which could be a recipe for disaster it is being combined with increase in training volume.

Here are a few articles which may help in terms of helping your friend make informed decisions

http://firstendurance.com/how-cortisol-effects-performance/

http://chriskresser.com/intermittent-fasting-cortisol-and-blood-sugar/

Much like I wouldn't advocate increasing intensity and volume concurrently for shorter distance races, similarly here I would say that training volume and fueling shouldn't be manipulated concurrently here.

TFBubendorfer

I very much concur with Myles here.

Intermittent fasting may well be beneficial and cause some positive adaptations, but if given the choice between doing more training and therefore eating more food on the one side and fasting for fat adaption on the other side, I'd go for the first approach as it's the less risky choice.

I definitely would not increase training and start fasting at the same time!

Once he is a more experienced runner and has a better understanding on what amount of training and subsequent recovery his body can handle, he can then start introducing intermittent fasting if he still wishes to do so.

My own approach is to run in the morning without a breakfast, which is a (very mild in comparison) form of intermittent fasting all by itself (basically just as Enduro has suggested), but to ensure plenty of good quality food afterwards.

Cabaal

Connemara 100 is now open for registrations for anyone interested www.connemara100.com

Clearlier

Am seeing on strava that Steve Way ran 3:54:55 for a 40 mile track race. He ran it progressively moving from 5:50's at the start to 5:30's at the finish. Apparently it's a V40 world best although I can't imagine that it's a very popular distance.

kit3

kit3 wrote: »

I have a question about nutrition if ye don't mind. A friend of mine (not on Boards, hence me asking the question) is doing 100k in June. He's done a few 50K and two/three 39.3 races before but is looking a bit more closely at nutrition with the step up to 100k. Up to now in terms of fat burning his approach would be to do some long runs on 'empty' and that seems to work well for him. He's been reading, however, about an approach whereby you fast for 24/48 regularly during training to teach the body to burn fat. Anyone have any experience of this approach as opposed to training on empty ? Is there any merit in it ? Thanks

Just a quick response on this - thanks a million for all the responses which were very useful. Having read the responses from experienced people here my mate has decided to concentrate on building mileage and to be sensible about diet. Agrees with the views that it would be silly to mess with diet while increasing the workload. Turns out that the articles/discussion he was reading were about Intermittent Fasting and something called Optimized Fat Metabolism - something about avocados and butter ?? (presume this means something to regulars on this thread). Think he finally made up his mind when the person advocating this announced that he was going to win the world championships in 2017 (not sure what distance :rolleyes:) and he could find no record of the person even completing races. Just shows how you have to be careful what you read online. Anyway, thanks again guys - will let ye know how it goes for him

RacoonQueen

I do pretty much all my long runs on empty. Fueling before a run simply doesn't work for me. I did a 'long' run the weekend before last about 3 or 4 hours after breakfast and I felt awful during it. I've always done the running on empty thing for long or early morning runs, before the paleo/IF thing became cool it was something I adopted anyway through chopping and changing and it just worked better for me. Even if I wait till 11am for a run, I prefer to do it without breakfast, anytime I do run, even long and slow while fueled up I feel rotten during it - this is partly due to other physiological issues I have I'd say.
Not sure how this would equate to longer distances though, it is different for everyone but it's not something I'd try to mess around with if running while fueled already worked well for me, especially while building distance or doing more intense short fast sessions. Diet and performance go hand in hand, but unless I had a terrible diet I wouldn't be too concerned about changing things around.

Diet and running is not something I'd really mess around with too much unless I needed to lose weight or if I'd exhausted all other avenues to get faster and had plateaued with improving through training alone (in which case it would probably be weight/fat loss anyway) or if it was medically required (IBS etc)

I'd done numerous interval sessions etc on empty too if I've done them in the morning, an evening session I'd be doing 5/6 hours after lunch with maybe a couple of pieces of fruit/tea/water in between but I'd never fuel up within the couple of hours beforehand - though coaches would recommend it, it doesn't work for me.

Enduro

Clearlier wrote: »

Am seeing on strava that Steve Way ran 3:54:55 for a 40 mile track race. He ran it progressively moving from 5:50's at the start to 5:30's at the finish..

Just properly processing that info in my head. That progression is true class. Outstanding pacing and control.

davedanon

RacoonQueen wrote: »

I do pretty much all my long runs on empty. Fueling before a run simply doesn't work for me. I did a 'long' run the weekend before last about 3 or 4 hours after breakfast and I felt awful during it. I've always done the running on empty thing for long or early morning runs, before the paleo/IF thing became cool it was something I adopted anyway through chopping and changing and it just worked better for me. Even if I wait till 11am for a run, I prefer to do it without breakfast, anytime I do run, even long and slow while fueled up I feel rotten during it - this is partly due to other physiological issues I have I'd say.
Not sure how this would equate to longer distances though, it is different for everyone but it's not something I'd try to mess around with if running while fueled already worked well for me, especially while building distance or doing more intense short fast sessions. Diet and performance go hand in hand, but unless I had a terrible diet I wouldn't be too concerned about changing things around.

Diet and running is not something I'd really mess around with too much unless I needed to lose weight or if I'd exhausted all other avenues to get faster and had plateaued with improving through training alone (in which case it would probably be weight/fat loss anyway) or if it was medically required (IBS etc)

I'd done numerous interval sessions etc on empty too if I've done them in the morning, an evening session I'd be doing 5/6 hours after lunch with maybe a couple of pieces of fruit/tea/water in between but I'd never fuel up within the couple of hours beforehand - though coaches would recommend it, it doesn't work for me.

I'm exactly the same. If I eat within about 2 hours of a run I typically feel restricted in my breathing. I think what's happening is that a full stomach pushes up on the diaphragm, which limits expansion for the lungs. Of late I have been eating less and less before long runs as well. The ideal state for running, as far as I'm concerned, is with nothing inside. No feeling of 'fullness', no other issues such as heartburn, or wind etc. On the other hand, there are people in my club who physically can't run without having eaten. One guy has to have some sort of a dinner after work, typically within an hour or running, or he will actually feel faint and be unable to perform.

Really amazing, how many different strokes there are.

kit3

davedanon wrote: »

I'm exactly the same. If I eat within about 2 hours of a run I typically feel restricted in my breathing. I think what's happening is that a full stomach pushes up on the diaphragm, which limits expansion for the lungs. Of late I have been eating less and less before long runs as well. The ideal state for running, as far as I'm concerned, is with nothing inside. No feeling of 'fullness', no other issues such as heartburn, or wind etc. On the other hand, there are people in my club who physically can't run without having eaten. One guy has to have some sort of a dinner after work, typically within an hour or running, or he will actually feel faint and be unable to perform.

Really amazing, how many different strokes there are.

I'd be the same as you - never eat in the mornings if going out early & often might not have eaten before my lunchtime runs although I'd be up at about 6.30.

Wild Garlic

kit3 wrote: »

I'd be the same as you - never eat in the mornings if going out early & often might not have eaten before my lunchtime runs although I'd be up at about 6.30.

In other words, intermittent fasting.

kit3

Wild Garlic wrote: »

In other words, intermittent fasting.

Not at all - I just eat at various different times of the day depending on what other pressures are on my time. From what I see, Intermittent Fasting is structured & deliberate. Anytime I find myself running at lunchtime without eating I'm generally annoyed with myself that I let it happen. It's certainly not an approach I would advocate for myself (if that makes any sense).

davedanon

Just to clarify. I would never deliberately go without food for any extended period. If it's 12 noon, and I'm running at 6pm, and I'm not hungry, I will make sure to eat something by 2pm, or thereabouts. I never find myself running while actually hungry. I don't think I would perform well.

Enduro

davedanon wrote: »

I never find myself running while actually hungry. I don't think I would perform well.

One defeinite advantage of being reasonably fat adapted is that even in fairly extreme race conditions you (Well, to be more acccurate, in my experience) don't ever get to a point where hunger impedes performance. Sleep deprivation or thirst are much more likely to get you long before hunger is likely to become an issue.

Myles Splitz

davedanon wrote: »

. I never find myself running while actually hungry. I don't think I would perform well.

Given that you are training for shorter distances (i.e sub marathon distance) there is some decent research to back up your reservations

http://jap.physiology.org/content/100/1/7.long

Meanwhile, it is important to consider the potential for side effects arising from ‘‘train low’’ strategies. There is already evidence that ‘‘training low’’ reduces the ability to train – increasing the perception of effort and reducing power outputs. […] Indeed, in our extensive work on another dietary periodization strategy for athletes – adaptation to high-fat diets before carbohydrate loading for endurance and ultra-endurance events – we found evidence that the adaptations that we had considered glycogen ‘‘sparing’’ during exercise were, in fact, glycogen ‘‘impairing’’ (for review, see Burke & Kiens, 2006). These fat adaptation protocols enhanced the pathways for fat utilization, at the expense of the activity of pyruvate dehydrogenase, a rate-limiting enzyme in carbohydrate utilization (Stellingwerff et al., 2006). Here again, we could find no evidence of an expected improvement in exercise performance, but instead, a reduction in the ability to perform high-intensity exercise (Havermann et al., 2006). This is an important consideration because the outcome-defining activities in most sports are conducted at high intensity. Finally, the effect of repeated training with low carbohydrate status on the risk of illness (Gleeson et al., 2004), injury (Brouns et al., 1986) and overtraining (Petibois et al., 2003) need to be considered.”

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20840562

davedanon

Myles Splitz wrote: »

Given that you are training for shorter distances (i.e sub marathon distance) there is some decent research to back up your reservations

http://jap.physiology.org/content/100/1/7.long



http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20840562

Interesting research, even more so that it dates from 2006. All this was known back then? Or has the research pushed on since then? I'm sure it must have in some respect.

Myles Splitz

davedanon wrote: »

Interesting research, even more so that it dates from 2006. All this was known back then? Or has the research pushed on since then? I'm sure it must have in some respect.

Plenty of research on the matter.

Phiney 1983 is usually the starting point for most pro LCHF advocates (however the results from this were severely misleading due to sample size and he has come out and referenced this limitation since regarding sprint capability in cyclists from his study)

This paper actually weighs up ketogenic vs non ketogenic diets from a weight loss standpoint however given the implications ketones can have on mood one could argue that despite both being similar non ketogenic diets would be more favourable for general wellbeing beyond simple metabolism

There was actually a great meta analysis done on Low-Carbohydrate Diets Versus Low-Fat Diets here

Most recently was the Volek paper released at the end of last year (Actually posted here a while back)

As mentioned personally I have my reservations on this (and many of his studies to be honest. From a metabolic stand point there is some research coming out that lends itself to the idea that fat adaptation could from a metabolic standpoint be of some benefit but the problem is that most of this research is done in isolation of other factors (mood, sleep even terrain) as factors of performance.

I think that this sort of science is in such early stages for ultra runners that it is very hard to draw any conclusion from the research to be honest. Similar to training of ultra marathoners in general it seems to be an experiment of one that works best.

PaulieC

Wild Garlic wrote: »

In other words, intermittent fasting.

I'm intermittent fasting at the moment - I've not eaten since lunchtime :rolleyes:

Wild Garlic

PaulieC wrote: »

I'm intermittent fasting at the moment - I've not eaten since lunchtime :rolleyes:

What did you have?

PaulieC

Wild Garlic wrote: »

What did you have?

Alan Shearer special - chicken and beans.

Wild Garlic

PaulieC wrote: »

Alan Shearer special - chicken and beans.

Nice. Not much carbs though. Was that intentional?

davedanon

Plenty of carbs in beans, no?

Myles Splitz

Wild Garlic

davedanon wrote: »

Plenty of carbs in beans, no?

Define plenty dude.

Stablemaster

my coach from another forum has me on the banting diet

davedanon

Wild Garlic wrote: »

Define plenty dude.

you don't know what 'plenty' means?


In any case, what does it matter? Maybe he had lots and lots of beans.

BeepBeep67

davedanon wrote: »

Plenty of carbs in beans, no?

60% typically, but then it depends how many you have

davedanon

What I said.

Wild Garlic

davedanon wrote: »

you don't know what 'plenty' means?


In any case, what does it matter? Maybe he had lots and lots of beans.

Ah David you seem a little stressed. Try and include some avocados in your diet, I hear they have a calming effect.

kit3

BeepBeep67 wrote: »

60% typically, but then it depends how many you have

In fairness, would it not depend on the type of beans & how they were served (any special sauces etc)

PaulieC

Wild Garlic wrote: »

Nice. Not much carbs though. Was that intentional?

the chicken was southern fried in breadcrumbs - there's carbs and fats right there.
And there were plenty of beans - kidney and navy.

Wild Garlic

PaulieC wrote: »

the chicken was southern fried in breadcrumbs - there's carbs and fats right there.
And there were plenty of beans - kidney and navy.

I like your style

Wild Garlic

Stablemaster wrote: »

my coach from another forum has me on the banting diet

You mean baiting...

runnter

Paddy,

stop giving the secrets away. Next thing you'll be telling them bout Friday gift

kit3

Stablemaster wrote: »

my coach from another forum has me on the banting diet

Hadn't heard of this one so went to my friend google. Had to laugh at the introduction:

'William Banting was a British undertaker who was very obese and desperately wanted to loose weight.....'

Is this a weight loss diet for you or is it performance linked ?

PaulieC

Wild Garlic wrote: »

I like your style

I missed breakfast. Actually since the main topic of discussion at the moment here is diet and fasting and stuff, while walking to the canteen today I mentioned to a colleague that I was starving because I forgot to have breakfast. He was amazed that I was able to cycle the whole 6 miles to work on an empty stomach. I told him I was fat adapted.

kit3

PaulieC wrote: »

the chicken was southern fried in breadcrumbs - there's carbs and fats right there.
And there were plenty of beans - kidney and navy.

Hmm, can we expect an extra fast, wind assisted cycle this evening then ?

PaulieC

kit3 wrote: »

Hmm, can we expect an extra fast, wind assisted cycle this evening then ?

fo' shizzle. All Downhill too...

Wild Garlic

runnter wrote: »

Paddy,

stop giving the secrets away. Next thing you'll be telling them bout Friday gift

Them?

BeepBeep67

kit3 wrote: »

In fairness, would it not depend on the type of beans & how they were served (any special sauces etc)

You don't need to over think it, pick dark beans and add a simple dressing and you pack a lot of carbs in. Part of my staple diet for lunch.
Kidney beans, tuna, red onion, olive oil and some parsley and black pepper with a sprinkle of curry powder is a cracker :cool:

Enduro

kit3 wrote: »

Hadn't heard of this one so went to my friend google. Had to laugh at the introduction:

'William Banting was a British undertaker who was very obese and desperately wanted to loose weight.....'

Is this a weight loss diet for you or is it performance linked ?

Tim Noakes uses the term a lot for his HFLC dietry guidlines. And being Tim Noakes it is very much performance related. Add performance to the google search terms!

Ron Gomall

BeepBeep67 wrote: »

You don't need to over think it, pick dark beans and add a simple dressing and you pack a lot of carbs in. Part of my staple diet for lunch.
Kidney beans, tuna, red onion, olive oil and some parsley and black pepper with a sprinkle of curry powder is a cracker :cool:

Some walnuts and avocados are great to add in for good fats even almonds or cashews if you have them. Try IF, Lydiard and almonds for great results.

Stablemaster

Wild Garlic wrote: »

Them?

P. If I had a secret sauce, I wouldn't want to give out the recipe to the general public .

One thing I can say however is that I don't like leaks in my sauce. I hope you are not a leak man

davedanon

Wild Garlic wrote: »

Ah David you seem a little stressed. Try and include some avocados in your diet, I hear they have a calming effect.

Trying too hard, Barry.

Stablemaster

P. We can discuss it in the private place later. After I deconstruct Andrew's training and map out how to build him into a running machine (just like I did with the youngfella )

Of course if you don't see it you'll know why!!!

runnter

I'm confused here

Myles Splitz

Enduro wrote: »

Tim Noakes uses the term a lot for his HFLC dietry guidlines. And being Tim Noakes it is very much performance related. Add performance to the google search terms!

Is his research recently performance related? I know he is a friend of Phinney and Volek now but I thought that most of his views related to carb resistancy and general health over the past four years? I know he has mentioned weight of runners being a limiter but I haven't come across any of his research looking solely at performance markers (would be interested in reading as I was a big fan of his earlier work prior to his area of focus shifting however I have seen a few back and forths pop up but for the most part have avoided his research as of late so could well have missed any performance related papers)

I know Noakes has come under criticism over the years from a wide range of sources (most notably )

This lead to arguments and counter arguments

UM1

Good top end for Raw100 tomorrow night,few italian heads capable of 13/14 hrs,keith whyte,think last years winner is back again...shud be good

Enduro

UM1 wrote: »

Good top end for Raw100 tomorrow night,few italian heads capable of 13/14 hrs,keith whyte,think last years winner is back again...shud be good

And of course at least 5 or 6 Irish international ultra runners racing in Ireland's oldest ultra tomorrow, the newly renamed Maurice Mullins Ultra! Shame they clash.

Preume 100 miles will be a new experience for the Italians. Very few countries bother with non-standard Imperial distance races.

Enduro

Myles Splitz wrote: »

Is his research recently performance related? I know he is a friend of Phinney and Volek now but I thought that most of his views related to carb resistancy and general health over the past four years? I know he has mentioned weight of runners being a limiter but I haven't come across any of his research looking solely at performance markers (would be interested in reading as I was a big fan of his earlier work prior to his area of focus shifting however I have seen a few back and forths pop up but for the most part have avoided his research as of late so could well have missed any performance related papers)

I know Noakes has come under criticism over the years from a wide range of sources (most notably )

This lead to arguments and counter arguments

I'd be pretty sure he is still very much involved in performance related research. He was a keynote speaker at the RCSI's FSEM conference last year

TFBubendorfer

Enduro wrote: »

Preume 100 miles will be a new experience for the Italians. Very few countries bother with non-standard Imperial distance races.

There are quite a few 100 mile races on the continent, sometimes billed as 160km