I've cut and pasted below part of an e-mail string on this topic

I've cut and pasted below part of an e-mail string on this topic. As usual, the old guys Neil Cook and Pete Stringer make a lot of sense. To me, the take away is simple: You'll race better f you run enough miles to keep the weight down, do serious interval workouts and allow ways to recover.

Steve
----------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:39:24 EDT
From: Gordon Cherr <Scam22@AOL.COM>
Subject: Improving VO2 max from Owen Anderson. For you training technogeeks...

WORKING THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE VO2MAX EQUATION

RESEARCH SAYS THAT HITTING 100 PERCENT OF VO2MAX IS KEY
As a runner's maximal aerobic capacity (VO2max) increases, his/her
performances generally improve. A novice runner can often enhance VO2max by 20 to 25
percent with as little as 12 weeks of running training; an experienced runner
might boost VO2max by 4 to 7 percent in the same time frame, given the right
workouts. Each 1-percent advance in VO2max can be linked with a one-half to
1 percent upgrade in race performances.
That sounds great, but there's a lot of debate about how to raise VO2max to
the greatest-possible extent. Some coaches and runners emphasize high
mileage, while others look for high intensity. Many mentors and runners hit
intervals at 5-K pace, while others look for even-higher-speed repeats in hopes of
adding loft to VO2max.
The first step in resolving this aerobic-capacity controversy is to remember
that VO2max is expressed by the following simple equation:
VO2max = HRmax X SVmax X (a-v O2 difference)max
In this equation, HRmax is maximal heart rate. SVmax is just maximal stroke
volume (the greatest amount of blood which can be pumped out of the left
side of the heart per beat).
(a-v O2 difference)max is "maximal arteriovenous oxygen difference," which
is nothing more than the difference in the oxygen content of the blood coming
into the muscles from the oxygen content of the venous blood flowing away
from the muscles. An increase in the (a-v O2 difference)max means that the
muscles are extracting more oxygen from incoming blood, thus driving
oxygen-consumption rate (and VO2max) upward.
The equation reminds us that there are only three fundamental ways to
increase VO2max - by upgrading maximal heart rate, by expanding stroke volume,
and/or by enhancing the arteriovenous difference (i. e., by "working" the right
side of the VO2max equation). There are no other possibilities. But we still
need to know: Which of these three variables should we be focused on?
Exactly how should a runner train to get the biggest VO2max take-off?
Science tells us that there is little difference in maximal heart rate
between the very best and very slowest runners. Yet the best runners have high
values of VO2max, and the slowest runners have poor VO2max readings. This
means that expanding max heart rate is not the key way to boost VO2max. Gains in
VO2max must be associated with expansions of stroke volume or advancements
of the arteriovenous difference.
Research reveals that about 50 percent of the increase in VO2max which
results from training is produced by an upswing in maximal stroke volume, with the
other 50 percent coming from an uptick in the arteriovenous difference.
Training can boost stroke volume in a variety of ways, but a key transformation
is that plasma volume increases - so that the heart can fill with more blood
between beats. This allows more blood to be ejected per beat (upping stroke
volume).
Advances in the arteriovenous difference occur mainly because running
stimulates an increase in the capillary density around muscle fibers in the legs.
This aggrandizes blood flow to the leg muscles and decreases the distance
across which oxygen must diffuse to get to the mitochondria inside muscle cells,
where aerobic metabolism actually takes place. Upswings in capillary
density exactly parallel increases in leg-muscle blood flow and whole-body VO2max.
But how can max stroke volume and arteriovenous difference be optimized?
Back in the day, the answer was to run tons of miles, but research paints a
quite-different picture. In one study, 12 individuals employed a training
intensity of close to 100 percent of VO2max over a seven-week period, while 12
other subjects worked out at a moderate, "aerobic" intensity of 60 percent of
VO2max (about 75 percent of max heart rate). The latter, "aerobic" group
actually trained for considerably longer periods of time - but achieved a
38-percent lower increase in VO2max after seven weeks, compared with the
100-percenters. This result prompted the researchers to conclude that training at an
intensity which elicits VO2max has the strongest, positive impact on VO2max
expansion.
In a separate investigation carried out with experienced runners, one group
ran about 100 kilometers per week at average intensities of 60 to 80 percent
of VO2max, while a second group trained only 50 kilometers per week while
emphasizing fast-paced intervals which ranged in distance from 60 to 1000
meters. After 14 weeks of training, the low-mileage, higher-intensity runners
improved VO2max by 7 percent, while the high-mileage, "aerobic" runners failed to
upgrade VO2max at all. Performance times improved by about 2.5 percent in
the high-intensity group but failed to budge for the "aerobic" harriers.
As Jack Daniels used to say, improving a physiological system requires
working at the limits of that system. In the case of stroke volume and
arteriovenous difference, that translates into working at intensities close to 100
percent of VO2max. For your training, such an intensity can be estimated with
the use of the six-minute test. Run as far as you can on the track in six
minutes (or have the runners you are coaching do the same), calculate your
average pace during this six-minute test, and you will instantly have a pace which
will elicit 100 percent of VO2max when utilized during interval training.
Begin with 200-meter intervals, and gradually work your way up to 800s or even
1000s. When you do this, VO2max will begin to take wings!

------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 12:54:51 -0700
From: mark swanson <runalong@CHARTER.NET>
Subject: Re: Improving VO2 max from Owen Anderson. For you training technogeeks...

Interesting though there doesn't seem to be much new here. My old
questions remain unanswered:

1. How much effect would increasing my VO2 max have on ultra
performance (all other things being equal) considering the relatively
slow pace of ultras? My guess is that it would help me go up hills
faster and otherwise have little effect, but I haven't seen any studies.

2. How does this relate to the older runners? Most of these studies
are conducted on college age or slightly older runners. Does
someone in their 50s have a greater or lesser capacity for increasing
VO2 via these kind of workouts?

3. What are the injury risks (short-term and long-term) associated
with incorporating these workouts? It is possible that they would
even be prophylactic against injury or they may increase risk, but
I've never seen any studies. Inquiring minds want to know.

mark
------------------------------------
>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 16:37:52 -0400
From: "Neil.L.Cook (Personal)" <neil.l.cook@MINDSPRING.COM>
Subject: Re: Improving VO2 max from Owen Anderson. For you training technogeeks...

By increasing your VO2 Max, and especially moving your Threshold HR closer
to your Max HR, you have more capacity to perform. So, there are two direct
benefits - first you can do more work, go faster, second - more important to
ultra runners, you are using less of your capacity at a given pace. So,
running 100 miles at 70% of max will produce more power and be easier to
hold.

Second, the physiology remains the same, regardless of age. Increase your
VO2 max and you'll have more capacity to work. Older runners - over 40 to
50 years old, have a lesser ability to recover from hard work, and if more
time isn't taken to recover, increased risk of injury. The amount of
increase has not been studied in this age group, but even if there is a
diminished capacity to improve, any improvement is valuable. The concept
and physiology are the same.

Third, pushing limits always has a risk of injury, every single time. The
real question should be, how much are you willing to risk and work to
improve? If you are satisfied with your performance, don't push your
limits. But, if you want your performance to improve, you need to push your
limits.

I think what is difficult to grasp, is that long run performance can be
improved by short intense efforts.

nlc

This e-mail has been scanned by an old runner and is assumed to be free of
junk miles.

Neil L. Cook
SLB Coaching & Training Systems
Asphalt Green Triathlon Training Institute
http://www.slb-coaching.com
http://www.agtri.com
neil.l.cook@mindspring.com
coach@SLB-Coaching.com
ncook@AsphaltGreen.org
coach@AGTri.com
New York City

212-472-9281 or 917-575-1901
For me Frailty is a lot harder to bear than dying.
-------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 20:03:11 -0700
From: Andy Jones-Wilkins <awilkins@HEADROYCE.ORG>
Subject: Re: Improving VO2 max from Owen Anderson. For you training technogeeks...

Folks (warning, this is purely one person's anecdotal data and not at all
verified by science),

I have four years of data on this notion of "how does speedwork prepare
you for an ultra" in my annual preparations for Western States. Since
2004 I have essentially run the same mileage between January and June
every year. Some years I have raced a bit more than others but, for the
most part, every year since 2004 I have run approximately 1600 miles from
Jan. 1st to race day. The one big thing I have done differently is
speedwork. Here is the breakdown:

2004 - WS finishing time - 18:26 -- Six weeks of speedwork from mid-April
to Memorial Day with a typical workout being 8x800 in 2:45 with 3 min jogs
between.

2005 - WS finishing time - 17:07 -- Eight weeks of speedwork from
early-April to early June with a typical workout being 8x800 in 2:40 with
3 min jogs between.

2006 - WS finishing time - 20:06 (in warmer than normal conditions) --
Three weeks of speedwork before I became injured on April 28th and did not
run a step until June 2nd. During the three weeks in April the typical
workout was 8x800 in 2:45 with 3 min jogs in between.

2007 - WS finishing time - 17:20 -- Ten weeks of speedwork from late March
to early June with a typical workout being 7x800 in 2:50 with 3 min jogs
between (these workouts were all done at 6,000 ft. above sea level. The
three previous years I lived at sea level)

For me, and probably only me, what this data suggests is that speedwork
helps. I don't know too much about the science of it but the way I feel
when I am in the latter stages of a 100 miler is the same way I feel in
the latter stages of a speed workout. So, again, for me, the speedwork
has a physical benefit and a mental benefit. If I can get to the track
once a week and get the feeling of intense suffering that I know I am
going to feel on the way up the hill after crossing Highway 49 then it
must be helping me to get ready for the specific issues I will face on
race day.

In essence, that is why I do speedwork. Of course, I also haven't been to
the track since June 12th and don't plan to return until late March (if
the snow is cleared by then)

AJW
----------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 09:10:54 +0000
From: Pete Stringer <pstringer@COMCAST.NET>
Subject: Re: Improving VO2 max from Owen Anderson. For you training technogeeks...

I loved this post by AJW offering his thoughts on his interval training for a highly challenging 100 mile TRAIL race. A very humble man. The fact that he has attained a level of ultra running that very few will reach gives credence to the importance of doing speed work. Too often some trail runner will think because he is running many many miles on the very course he is going to race on, that that is what can improve him the most -- why would he then go to a circular FLLAT track to sprint endless repeats, the very NON-event specific workout possible?
Well, because it works. It is the very lung-bursting, quadricep-burning physical feeling he is going to have climbing up the precipitous sides of the canyons come race day. And in that way, simulating exactly how the body feels when ultimately fatigued, he will reach the very zenith of the event-specific exhaustion one feels at Devil's Thumb, or one or another of the charming locales he is referring to here.
In coaching hundreds of runners over the past years, I have discovered very few who actually enjoyed doing speed work, the simple reason being that it hurts. Thus the unmotivated or non-competitive avoid them, preferring the long runs "because after all, that is what I am training for." They prefer long relaxed scenic runs because they are pleasantly slower, do not tax our limits.
At my age, I hear my older runner friends complain all the time about not making cutoffs, and when I ask them the two most pertinent questions, (1.) How is your bodyweight? and (2.) have you been doing intervals? they look at me as though I haven't just heard their usual littany of age-related complaints -- MANY of which are more weight-related than to do with age.

Pete Stringer
------------------------------------------------------------