This overview covers a piece out of Greece from November’s Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research that gives an evaluation of different training methods used by 400m runners and their coaches. It compares the physiological effects of longer runs of 300m-500m and shorter intermittent runs of between 80m-200m.

The participant group consisted of 12 males aged 18.9 ± 0.7 yrs, each was physically active involved in recreational fitness activity or team sports. In preparation for the tests, each participant took part in 2 sessions per week for the 4 preceding weeks. These served to familiarise participants with pacing strategies, improve conditioning and to record times for 100m and 200m.

Testing took place over 4 sessions and consisted of a 40 minute warm up including a slow run, stretching, coordination drills and some 80m accelerations followed by the test. The 4 test sessions were a) 300m, b) 3x100m with 1min rests, c) 400m and d) 2x200m with 1 min rest. Blood was drawn pre and post exercise and analysed for measurements of glucose, lactate, creatinine and creatine kinase (CK) and velocity was measured every 100m and was averaged for each of the 4 tests.

The main finding was that the intermittent runs resulted in greater stimulation of the lactate system indicated by the higher levels of blood lactate post exercise. Further, average velocity during the intermittent runs was higher than that achieved during the continuous runs. They conclude that both the longer and shorter runs taxed the lactate system but the longer runs had more aerobic system contribution and that both have a role to play in periodised plan for 400m athletes. The final point was that CK concentrations were similar for each test and so no advantage in terms of reduced muscle damage exists for any of the methodologies.

Saraslanidis, P.J., Manetzis, C.G., Tsalis, G.A. & Zafeiridis, A.S. (2009). Biochemical evaluation of running workouts used in training for the 400m sprint. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 23(8) pp. 2266-2271

This is a question I’ve had asked of me on numerous occasions.  It is one aspect of the professional sportsperson’s life that has been well reported in the media and has resulted in uptake by many of the amateur sporting population.  Judging by the number of times it’s been mentioned, a large portion of those doing it aren’t really sure why they are and expect it to be a one stop shop for recovery post training.

First of all the theory behind cold water immersion.  It is thought that it reduces swelling and causes blood vessels to constrict and allow blood to pool around the previously active muscles. This allows the metabolic by-products of exercise to enter the pooled blood and be removed once peripheral blood flow continues after bathing.  Another method that may help is alternating a hot and cold stimulus (easily done with a shower), otherwise known as contrast water therapy.  The intermittent mix of cold and hot water effectively switches peripheral blood flow on and off helping to ‘pump’ lactic acid and other by-products away from the muscle enhancing recovery and reducing impact of damage to the muscle.  Both have shown reductions in muscle soreness post training and recovery of markers of strength and power.

Research is inconclusive as to which method is better, if either, and different individuals may find one preferable to the other which would perhaps indicate the importance of central fatigue (theorised that the brain acts as a protective mechanism to prevent excessive damage to muscles).  Most athletes I’ve worked with have found one of the two to be of benefit and it is worth trying both to find one that works for you.  The one point to note would be that it isn’t necessary to use an ice bath and that cold water immersion at around 15°C for 10 mins has been shown to work.  Contrast therapy has been used with different protocols and some experimentation will help individualise your preferences, but 1 minute at each temperature changing 4-5 times should be a decent starting point.

The main point on recovery strategies to note is that there is no one method of recovery in the literature that works for everyone and an individualised holistic approach will most likely bring about the best results.  Good quality nutritional intake consisting of a protein and carbohydrate heavy meal/drink, preferred passive recovery method (cold water immersion, contrast immersion and massage etc.) and/or active recovery (light jog or cycle post training etc), a sound 8 hours of sleep and a nap post training if possible will likely provide excellent results.  Keep checking for a new, more detailed, piece on recovery under we believe in the near future.

In this months’ NSCA strength and conditioning journal, one piece caught my eye because it discussed an injury I’ve heard self diagnosed by more people than any other.  I am of course talking about shin splints, or medial tibial stress syndrome (MTSS) to give it’s full name.  Below I’ll give you the highlights from Tolbert & Binkley’s article (reference below).

The condition will usually present with a dull ache following training/competition from the middle to the distal (bottom) of the posteromedial (rear/inside) border of the tibia.  Rest will usually alleviate pain but with continued training it will become more severe.  Hamstring and heel cord tightness as well as very high or very low foot arches have been shown to be predictors of MTSS.  Other associated causes include change in footwear or worn out footwear, training continually on very hard surfaces, progression to too high an exercise intensity, muscle imbalance and an over-pronated foot position.

The paper suggests static stretching as a rehabilitative and preventative measure.  The muscles targeted should include the hamstrings and gastrocnemius and soleus, or calf muscles.  Originally tibialis posterior was thought to be the site of pain and injury with MTSS but the irritation is now thought to be consistent with the medial soleus (the inside portion of the deeper calf muscle) hence the inclusion of the calf muscles in the prescribed stretching program.  As usual, the inclusion of certain targeted exercises and a well structured periodised training program can limit the chances of developing the syndrome…consult your strength and conditioning coach for details.

• Tolbert, T.A. & Binkley, H.M. (2009).  Treatment and prevention of shin splints.  Strength and conditioning Journal, 31(5) pp. 69-72.