Science vs. Art of Coaching. http://www.ScienceofRunning.com

1. Steve Magness
Nike Oregon Project
stevemagness@gmail.com

2. Old School-
Anti Science
Science is God
Both are wrong

3.  This presentation will be different.
◦ The first part will be philosophical
◦ The 2nd part will be fun stuff- real world
examples and application
◦ The last part will be controversial

4.  Evidence based?
 only 13% of all treatments used by doctors have good
evidence
 an additional 21% of treatments that are “likely”
beneficial.
 What about the other 66%?
 Is Science Bad? No, but…
 You have to understand it’s limitations in
order to know how to use it.

5.  Science conforms to the individual:
 Average vs. Individual
 Research focuses on the average.
 Responder vs. non responder in coach speak is actually an
issue of applying the correct stimulus
 Do we really expect 4mi tempo at X pace to work for
everyone?
 Timmons et al.(2011) put it best when talking about the
non-responder phenomenon:
“It is also an observation that is largely ignored by the
majority of researchers interested in the health benefits
of exercise training, presumably because the focus has
been on the “average” health benefits within a population
and the desire to have a simple health promotion
message.”

6. ◦ Measurement
 We overemphasize the importance of what we can
measure.
 Science evolves based on what we can measure at the
time.
 VO2max
 Vollaard et al. (2009) “Moreover, we demonstrate that
VO2max and aerobic performance associate with distinct and
separate physiological and biochemical endpoints,
suggesting that proposed models for the determinants of
endurance performance may need to be revisited (pg. 1483)”.

7. Researchers=
No change
Coaches=WHY
the individual
differences?
 (i.e. If I’m that guy at 6%
increase I sure think it
works!)
J Appl Physiol. 2011 Oct 27. [Epub ahead of print]
"Live high - train low" using normobaric hypoxia: A double-blinded, placebo-
controlled study.

8.  The isolation approach:
 Scientist- break It down to isolate a variable
 X effects Y and Y is RELATED to performance so it
should work…
 Coach- Global approach
 X effects A,B,C,D, etc. How everything interacts is
more important
 All sorts of other crap
(population, equipment, study
length, long term vs. short term, etc.)

9. 1. Deciding whether something is
useful:
 Stool test
 1.Practical- Does it work in the
“real world.”
 2. Research- Is there scientific
research on it and does it confirm
that it works?
 3. Theory- Is there a legitimate,
non-pseudoscientific, theory for
why it might work?

10. 2. Using scientific Knowledge to formulate Real
world ideas
 Use knowledge of HOW body works and learn
how to apply that knowledge.

12.  Lactate Curve
◦ How?
◦ What it means?
◦ Missing variable- MAX Lactate
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
4:264:334:404:484:555:025:095:165:245:31
Lactate(mmol)
Mile pace
Lactate Levels
1st test
2nd test
3rd test
◦ Test 2- Sprint+ aerobic
◦ Test 3- overdid speed
side

13. 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
16.5 17 17.5 18 18.5 19 19.5
1/5/2012
test 1
MAX
Test 1:
61.8-13.7
Test 2:
59.8- 14.2

14. Watts Lactate HR
34 1.2 86
65 1.6 95
100 1.9 109
111 2.7 118
142 6 139
Pace Lactate
5:35 3.3
5:23 4.2
5:13 6.9
5:03 9.4
61-400m 13.7
•On bike-
•Muscles go before the HR/central components
•Strength Endurance
•Non-specific lactate work

15. 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
4:404:484:555:025:095:165:24
Lactate
Mile pace
Lactate changes
9/4/2006
11/2/2006
Max Lactate
1st test-
51.5 400m- 14.8
2nd test
51.2 400m- 15.4

16.  Data from Renato Canova
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 finish
Research
Elites
STEADY STATE!!

17.  Passive versus Active
◦ Stretch Reflex
◦ Inertial forces
 (i.e. Don’t use high knees as a cue)
 What it looks like versus what is actually going on are
different.
Casio Exilim (High speed cameras-$150)

18. 200 in 28.2sec
Ground
Contact Flight Time Stiffness
Galen Rupp 0.128 0.133 75.6
Mo Farah 0.153 0.152 67.5
GC Stiffness Reactivity Force
Galen Rupp .128 44.7 3.71 1572 N
5 hop plyo test:

19.  Fasted Runs
◦ Theory-low glycogen is signal for adaptation. Shifts fuel
usage towards more fat
◦ Research- Drust et al.(2009), Yeo et al. (2008)
◦ Practical-Lydiard, Cerutty, Van
Aaken,Kenyans, Canadians (!?)
 Practical- start with running before breakfast for
30min, slowly increase up to close to 2hrs for marathoners.
1-2x a week depending on goal/time. EASY training after
(RECOVER)
 Adapting the gut
◦ Can increase the amount of Carbohydrate our gut can
process=enhanced marathon performance with lower GI
stress
◦ Practical experience- eat dinner, go run- after a week
you’ll be fine with no GI problems.
Drust B, Morton JP. Promoting Endurance Training Adaptations with Nutritional
Interventions: The Potential Benefits of “Low Carbohydrate” Training. Kinesiology
2009; 41: 19–24.

20.  O2 saturation and EIAH
◦ If low at altitude
 Check HgB mass/ferritin levels
◦ If drops by ~15% during hard
workout, then limited diffusion
At lungs likely
 Resisted breathing?
◦ Use to screen for altitude
 HR/ HRV
◦ Morning HR- some people can notice trends
◦ HRV- gives a picture of Sympathetic vs.
parasympathetic Nervous System stress

21.  Using Smart Phones
◦ Data base
◦ Rate:
 Overall feeling
 Workout rating
 “Pop” in legs
 Injuries/Soreness
◦ Look for trends and correlate to training logs

22.  Enhancing your decision making skills
 Creating and applying models to help
decision making
◦ Simple fatigue models to determine workouts
 Simple fatigue models
 Muscle Fiber theory and application to kick
development

23.  Knowledge:
◦ Best 5k/10k runners can run with lower levels of lactate at
race pace but reach a very high level at the end of the race.
 Simple Lactate model:
◦ Decrease Lactate overall
 mileage, high end aerobic work, aerobic intervals
◦ Maintain/Increase lactate production abilities
 Pure speed work/ speed endurance
 Ex: Hill Sprints
◦ Decrease Lactate at Race Pace
 Alternations, Aerobic intervals at specific paces
 Combine specific work with aerobic work to teach how to utilize
lactate at race pace.
◦ Increase Lactate that can be accumulated over race
 Strength endurance work
 Specific Speed endurance (5k/1500 blends)

24.  Knowledge:
◦ “The greater the ability of the athlete to oppose fatigue (by maintaining
strength levels), the smaller the drop in speed and consequently the better the
performance.” Miguel et al. 2004
◦ 400m race- (Numella et al. 1992,1994)
 Force production drops 16% after 300m and 25% after 400m.
 Increase in muscle activity (measured by EMG) to compensate for
failure of muscle fibers that were doing the work.
 Kick development:
◦ 1.Increase maximum fibers recruited
 Flat Sprints, Hill Sprints, Power work
◦ 2. Improve ability to use for prolonged time
 Circuits, alternations, hills+flats
◦ 3. Learn to recruit them under high acidity
 fast workouts with bounding/hills
 2x500(200 at faster than 800 pace, 100m bound at near mile pace, 200m kick in)
full rest between
 Works by 1st part Increase lactate/fatigue, 2nd part increases fibers recruited, last part
teaches you to use those fibers while fatigued
 Circuits with fast speed running, max intensity bounding and exercises
 3-4x400m of 25sprint/25 cruise
Miguel, P. J. P. & Reis, V. M. M. (2004). Speed strength endurance and
400m performance. New Studies in Athletics

25.  Signal pathway
interactions
◦ Gives you the dose,
the timing, and the
interaction
Adaptation
Process
RBC
example
Altitude
Decrease
O2 levels
Hif-1a
EPO
RBC
increase

26. Messenger Signaling Pathways
initiated
Functional Results
Mechanical Stretch-
frequency and intensity
CaMK, MAPK and
IGF pathways
Hypertrophy, fast to slow
fiber type conversions,
Changes in Calcium
levels in the cell
CaMK, MAPK, protein
kinase C
Hypertrophy, slow twitch
fiber type conversion,
mitochondria
NAD: NADH ratio
Low muscle glycogen AMPK and MAPK Increased mitochondria
ATP:AMP ratio AMPK Increased mitochondria
Decreased blood Oxygen
levels
HIF-1 Increased EPO and Red
Blood cells
PI3-k and Akt mTOR Muscle Hypertrophy
MAPK=Mitogen activated protein kinase IGF-Insulin Like Growth Factor
PI3-k= Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase
CaMK=Calcium/Calmodulin pathway
Why care?
•Interactions matter:
•AMPK inhibits mTOR
•Do endurance work AFTER strength and you inhibit hypertrophy
•Knowledge of stimulus
•Explains why training does what:
•AMPK and CaMK can both Increase mitochondria.
•AMPK= activated through endurance.
•CaMK= activated through intense intervals.

27. Laursen, P. Training for Intense exercise performance: High
volume or high intensity. 2009

31. ◦ Antioxidants
 Free radicals
activate AMPK which increase
Mitochondria
◦ Ice baths
 Blocks inflammation
 Reduces Recovery
◦ Ibuprofen
 Can block satellite cell
 Reduce Recovery
Antioxidant Supplementation during Exercise Training: Beneficial or Detrimental?
Sports MedicineV olume 41 - Issue 12 - pp 1043-1069

32.  Don’t over recover.
 Periodize recovery so you use it when you
need it
◦ Base and Pre competition phase
 Damage is good
 Selectively use recovery modalities when athlete is on
“edge”
◦ Peaking
 Slight increase in recovery modalities because
emphasis shifts from training to racing

33.  Testosterone and muscle growth
◦ Elevated systemic hormones does not effect muscle
hypertrophy
 Chronically supraphysiological levels (i.e. drugs) aids muscle
growth, not what we get in regular acute exercise.
 Compression Socks
◦ Blood Flow not the issue
◦ Modulates muscle “tuning” (think vibrations)
 Stretching
◦ Static= reduced performance beforehand
 Hands over head
◦ Let your kids fall over
Elevations in ostensibly anabolic hormones with resistance exercise enhance neither
training2 induced muscle hypertrophy nor strength of the elbow flexors. J Appl Physiol (

34.  Cushioning and
Pronation= Broken
Paradigm
 Running surface-
◦ “hard” surfaces not evil
if they’re accustomed
to it.
 Individualization
◦ Feel most important

35. Pronatio
n-Left Right
Footstrik
e
Orthotics? Initial Max change Initial Max Change Degree GC
Flight
Time Footstrike
Lunar Fly NO 183 176 7 172 182 10 93.6 0.214 0.114whole
Lunar Fly YES 182 175 7 176 185 9
Katanas No 184 175 9 175 185 10 92 0.195 0.128midfoot
Lunar Racers No 184 175 9 173 186 13 93.4 0.2 0.123whole
Lunar Racers YES 185 176 9 174 185 11 98 0.209 0.119Heel
Pegasus No 181 173 8 178 188 10 100.7 0.214 0.104Heel
Pegasus yes 185 176 9 177 188 11 101.6 0.214 0.109Heel
Vomeros Yes 184 174 10 174 186 12 96.5 0.204 0.114heel
Barefoot No 0 0 93.8 0.195 0.119forefoot
0 0
*Footstrike
degree=90=
foot directly
under knee

36.  Use Science, don’t be married to it.
 Practical Application of ideas.
 Lab vs. Real World
 Average vs. Individuals
 Know what you’re testing for and what the
measurement means.

37.  www.Scienceofrunning.com
 For shoe stuff:
◦ www.Runblogger.com
◦ Benno Nigg’s Biomechanics of Sports Shoes
 Running related research briefs:
◦ www.Sweatscience.com
◦ Alex Hutchinson’s Which comes first Cardio or
Weights?
 Lactate
◦ Jan Olbrecht’s Science of Winning