HMRRC Forum

twit · 2006-05-31 06:28:10 pm

What is the general consensus of the HMRRC running community these days on the subject of specificity of training? If you want to score a new PR, is it better to train almost exclusively with running, or is it better to train using all, or many types of training? Also, has one or the other of these general theories been discredited scientifically?

Without doing any research, the way I remember the opposing viewpoints is as follows:

One theory holds that the more you train your body to run, the more efficient it will become at that activity (within your physical limits). Time spent doing other activities may improve your all-around fitness, and may even help you run faster, but will not unlock your greatest running potential and allow you to run your very fastest.

The other theory (at least as I remember it) holds that strengthening and conditioning your entire body, provides more benefit to your running. By strengthening and conditioning muscles and systems that are secondary to running, those systems and muscles are better able to assist the primary running muscles, reducing the negative effects caused by fatigue in those primary muscles.

SumoRunner · 2006-06-01 10:53:03 am

You know, like everything else in life, the asnwer is "It depends". What you need to do is find a coach who can work out a plan. He/She'll start with where are you coming from, how did you get to where you are now and where do you want to go from here.

I'd say yes, if the one, the only thing you want to do is improve your 5k time or marathon time and to hell with anything else, then just run, run fast, run long and run some more. But if there are any other goals in mind other than short term time improvements, maybe you should think about a bit of cross training or yoga type exercises.

We do have a bunch of good coaches and training groups in the neighborhood. Ask around, look them up.

twit · 2006-06-01 07:33:14 pm

My question was more one of theory or science, though the advice you offer is good. If an individual's goal is to achieve his maximum performance in a given distance event, which approach would get him closer to his goal?

Obviously things are never this black and white. Different people respond to training approaches in different ways. What works for one, will not for another.

Many years ago when I was in college, I remember reading an article that discussed the pros and cons of cross training and event specific training. I was just wondering if science had decided that one method was more likely to produce the desired result than the other. I'm also curious what club members think.

cjchartree · 2006-06-06 04:02:31 pm

I personally think that the answer is YES, to both. Why would I say this, well it is because there are so many conflicting and compelling arguments for both. However, the more I read journal articles about training there are always benefits
from whatever training a person decides to utilize to reach a goal. Anyway, compelling arguments for both in this case would refer to either cross training or specificity training. I have also read articles on variable training, which is pretty
cool, because it allows for a variety of kinds or types of training. Now, if an individual has a long training period, BOTH would be great as it affords the athlete
to train, gain and also to be gentle with ones self. This reduces the risk of injury
that I believe hammering of one type of training to a body without a break could, can, and does cause.

Time as I had mentioned, if one has a long training period cross training is very valuable. A lot can be learned, and a lot can be gained in strength, and a lot can be lost like in pounds (moderate aerobics is a great way to burn calories) Flexibility training is very important to prevent injury, and helps in injury recovery. Exercise for balance and stability great too. It could mean the difference in a race between a fall and a near fall.

Short Time, well then its time to put away some activities and get down to the nitty - gritty. Specificity would be more beneficial at this point. I guess it comes dowm to a matter of what the need is. O Well . . .

cjchartree

HMRRC Forum

#1 2006-05-31 06:28:10 pm

cross training or specificity of training?

#2 2006-06-01 10:53:03 am

Re: cross training or specificity of training?

#3 2006-06-01 07:33:14 pm

Re: cross training or specificity of training?

#4 2006-06-06 04:02:31 pm

Re: cross training or specificity of training?

Board footer



	HMRRC Forum Index User list Search Register Login You are not logged in. The message board requires you to register and then login. Pages: 1 Index » Training Ideas » cross training or specificity of training? #1 2006-05-31 06:28:10 pm twit Member From: Scotia Registered: 2006-01-25 Posts: 124 cross training or specificity of training? What is the general consensus of the HMRRC running community these days on the subject of specificity of training? If you want to score a new PR, is it better to train almost exclusively with running, or is it better to train using all, or many types of training? Also, has one or the other of these general theories been discredited scientifically? Without doing any research, the way I remember the opposing viewpoints is as follows: One theory holds that the more you train your body to run, the more efficient it will become at that activity (within your physical limits). Time spent doing other activities may improve your all-around fitness, and may even help you run faster, but will not unlock your greatest running potential and allow you to run your very fastest. The other theory (at least as I remember it) holds that strengthening and conditioning your entire body, provides more benefit to your running. By strengthening and conditioning muscles and systems that are secondary to running, those systems and muscles are better able to assist the primary running muscles, reducing the negative effects caused by fatigue in those primary muscles. Offline #2 2006-06-01 10:53:03 am SumoRunner Member From: Latham Registered: 2006-01-23 Posts: 340 Website Re: cross training or specificity of training? You know, like everything else in life, the asnwer is "It depends". What you need to do is find a coach who can work out a plan. He/She'll start with where are you coming from, how did you get to where you are now and where do you want to go from here. I'd say yes, if the one, the only thing you want to do is improve your 5k time or marathon time and to hell with anything else, then just run, run fast, run long and run some more. But if there are any other goals in mind other than short term time improvements, maybe you should think about a bit of cross training or yoga type exercises. We do have a bunch of good coaches and training groups in the neighborhood. Ask around, look them up. Offline #3 2006-06-01 07:33:14 pm twit Member From: Scotia Registered: 2006-01-25 Posts: 124 Re: cross training or specificity of training? My question was more one of theory or science, though the advice you offer is good. If an individual's goal is to achieve his maximum performance in a given distance event, which approach would get him closer to his goal? Obviously things are never this black and white. Different people respond to training approaches in different ways. What works for one, will not for another. Many years ago when I was in college, I remember reading an article that discussed the pros and cons of cross training and event specific training. I was just wondering if science had decided that one method was more likely to produce the desired result than the other. I'm also curious what club members think. Offline #4 2006-06-06 04:02:31 pm cjchartree New member Registered: 2006-02-10 Posts: 7 Re: cross training or specificity of training? I personally think that the answer is YES, to both. Why would I say this, well it is because there are so many conflicting and compelling arguments for both. However, the more I read journal articles about training there are always benefits from whatever training a person decides to utilize to reach a goal. Anyway, compelling arguments for both in this case would refer to either cross training or specificity training. I have also read articles on variable training, which is pretty cool, because it allows for a variety of kinds or types of training. Now, if an individual has a long training period, BOTH would be great as it affords the athlete to train, gain and also to be gentle with ones self. This reduces the risk of injury that I believe hammering of one type of training to a body without a break could, can, and does cause. Time as I had mentioned, if one has a long training period cross training is very valuable. A lot can be learned, and a lot can be gained in strength, and a lot can be lost like in pounds (moderate aerobics is a great way to burn calories) Flexibility training is very important to prevent injury, and helps in injury recovery. Exercise for balance and stability great too. It could mean the difference in a race between a fall and a near fall. Short Time, well then its time to put away some activities and get down to the nitty - gritty. Specificity would be more beneficial at this point. I guess it comes dowm to a matter of what the need is. O Well . . . cjchartree Offline Pages: 1 Index » Training Ideas » cross training or specificity of training? Board footer Jump to Powered by PunBB © Copyright 2002–2005 Rickard Andersson